Panel lacks a nameplate label

[tonype]

Not sure if "nameplate label" is the appropriate term. What is the procedure for determining how a panel is supposed to be arranged if the nameplate sticker (showing model number, breaker arrangement, etc) is missing?

Does this pose a signficant problem? I thought I remember reading somewhere in the past (tried searching this site - can't find anything, though I may be using the wrong search words) that it would be easier to replace the panel than to got through a process to re-list the panel (again, maybe the wrong word)

 

[Smart $]

Not sure if "nameplate label" is the appropriate term. What is the procedure for determining how a panel is supposed to be arranged if the nameplate sticker (showing model number, breaker arrangement, etc) is missing?

Does this pose a signficant problem? I thought I remember reading somewhere in the past (tried searching this site - can't find anything, though I may be using the wrong search words) that it would be easier to replace the panel than to got through a process to re-list the panel (again, maybe the wrong word)

Depends on a lot of missing information...

Is it an existing panel, or one yet to be installed? In either case, can the purchase invoice be located? Can manufacturer be determined? What manufacturer and type of breakers are installed? How many [full] spaces? Bolt in or snap in breakers? Can it be determined if there are any dual breaker rejection features? ...or anything else that can possibly help determine the panel's model number.

Exactly where did you look? Some manufacturers use an enclosure and/or cover for several different panelboards (the guts). The pertinent information may be inside.

 

[tonype]

Panel is ca. 1984. I had the cover off - nothing on the cover door or on the back side of the cover. Nothing on the interior guts (side walls, etc). Pretty sure that it is ITE/Siemens, but that is all.

 

[chris kennedy]

No picture?

 

[tonype]

No picture?

Panel was in a tight basement closet - could not get back far enough to get a photo.

 

[Smart $]

Panel is ca. 1984. I had the cover off - nothing on the cover door or on the back side of the cover. Nothing on the interior guts (side walls, etc). Pretty sure that it is ITE/Siemens, but that is all.

Being that dated will make it hard (read: next to impossible) to retrieve the desired technical data.

Because it is an existing installation, I have to ask why the concern?

 

[tonype]

Being that dated will make it hard (read: next to impossible) to retrieve the desired technical data.

Because it is an existing installation, I have to ask why the concern?

Use of tandem breakers in areas that, from my experience, appear questionable. Breakers from a variety of manufacturers.

 

[Smart $]

Use of tandem breakers in areas that, from my experience, appear questionable. Breakers from a variety of manufacturers.

I see. And if I recall correctly, that's before CTL implementation.

While it may appear questionable, the ultimate question is whether it is safe. Does the enclosure feel excessively warm? Any signs of degradation?

For what purpose are you looking at it? Adding circuits? Just an evaluation? ...et cetera?

 

[tonype]

I see. And if I recall correctly, that's before CTL implementation.

While it may appear questionable, the ultimate question is whether it is safe. Does the enclosure feel excessively warm? Any signs of degradation?

For what purpose are you looking at it? Adding circuits? Just an evaluation? ...et cetera?

I do home inspections - just an overall evaluation for a client. Nothing felt warm (though the home was vacant). No signs of degradation.

 

[Smart $]

I do home inspections - just an overall evaluation for a client. Nothing felt warm (though the home was vacant). No signs of degradation.

With the home vacant there is likely little load on the panel... not enough to tell whether it gets overly warm.

That pretty much covers all I got to say on the matter. As for your evaluation, rely on your professional experience to dictate (i.e. go with your gut feeling )

 

[jim dungar]

I see. And if I recall correctly, that's before CTL implementation.

CTL was in existence back in the 60's. If it was designed to accept tandem breakers, there would be some sort of distinguishing feature on the bus bars or the mounting rail.

You said it contains breakers from several different manufacturers, do who know who actually built the panel?

 

[Volta]

CTL was in existence back in the 60's. If it was designed to accept tandem breakers, there would be some sort of distinguishing feature on the bus bars or the mounting rail.

You said it contains breakers from several different manufacturers, do who know who actually built the panel?

True, but there are some panels in which every space allows a tandem device. If so, might not be obvious that it is circuit limiting without another to compare to.

 

[jim dungar]

True, but there are some panels in which every space allows a tandem device. If so, might not be obvious that it is circuit limiting without another to compare to.

Which is why I was wondering who the manufacturer is, so we could tell the OP what to look for. When I hear here are multiple manufacturers breakers in a single panel I think of the bus bar design that is 'notched' for tandems.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

When I hear there are multiple manufacturers breakers in a single panel I think of the bus bar design that is 'notched' for tandems.

That is true of today's panels. The bus bar is designed to accept tandems, twins, piggybacks, etc only in certain space in the panel. However, years ago, the old SQ.D panels, I believe, would accept tandems anywhere. I remember that there were actually two styles of tandems. Ones that would work in the new panels and those that would work anywhere in an old style panel. I don't use Sq. D but I remember something odd about them.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Here are two styles

And here is the real old style that had push in connection-- no screws.

 

[Volta]

I forgot about those with the metal hooks.

The bottom picture I've not seen as a push wire, only with screws. Type 'R', I think.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

I forgot about those with the metal hooks.

The bottom picture I've not seen as a push wire, only with screws. Type 'R', I think.

The push in connector picture was from my basement. I have about 10 of them. Here is a picture from the web of the one with screws.

 

[jim dungar]

That is true of today's panels. The bus bar is designed to accept tandems, twins, piggybacks, etc only in certain space in the panel. However, years ago, the old SQ.D panels, I believe, would accept tandems anywhere. I remember that there were actually two styles of tandems. Ones that would work in the new panels and those that would work anywhere in an old style panel. I don't use Sq. D but I remember something odd about them.

Panels that accept tandem breakers have always had 'written' restrictions on the placement of those breakers. Because many people ignored the printed labels, Circuit Limiting (CTL) construction features were mandated, back in the 60's.

Yes, Square D does make two types of tandem breakers. Their QOTxxyy line is for CTL panels built since the 60's, their QOxxyy is 'intended' for older, pre 60's, non-CTL panels. Physically the non-CTL QOxxyy can be placed in any breaker locations, which leads to many misapplications.