quadraplex for a 3 phase branch circuit

[wmthompson90]

i am tapping off a 200 amp 480/277 over head branch circuit that has been installed using quadraplex. at the main disconnect the neutral from the three cans branches off to the quadraplex bare conductor but does not travel down to the main disconnect. the main disconnect is bonded to the grounding electrode conductor that travels separately down the pole from the neutral taps via a bonding jumper. Is the bare conductor in the quad considered an egc or a neutral?

 

[wmthompson90]

secondly. The reason for tapping off is to install a 600v disconnect and riser on one of the wooden poles with a 480 v flood light. I was Told it is not a good idea to install the egc in the conduit/riser going down the pole due to lighting but rather have it stapled down the pole separately then attach to ground rod and then install a bonding jumper from disconnect to it. not seeing anything in code covering this.

 

[augie47]

It should be an equipment grounding conductor. Not installing it in a conduit with the other conductors would be a violation of 300.3(B)

 

[jaggedben]

If it's a branch circuit with a bare neutral that's a code violation. I'm really having trouble understanding the rest of your description.

 

[augie47]

If it's a branch circuit with a bare neutral that's a code violation. I'm really having trouble understanding the rest of your description.

Code reference ?? (agree, a bare grounded conductor would be unusual but can't place my finger on the Code violation.)

 

[jaggedben]

Code reference ?? (agree, a bare grounded conductor would be unusual but can't place my finger on the Code violation.)

I actually didn't know and had to look. But see the reference to 250.184(B)(7) in 396.30(B).
Also could easily violate 250.24(B).

 

[augie47]

I actually didn't know and had to look. But see the reference to 250.184(B)(7) in 396.30(B).
Also could easily violate 250.24(B).

Not to be obstinate but I don't see where any of those references apply. Most are for systems >1000v

In addition, if the conductor is an equipment grounding conductor... 250.118 states:
(1) A copper, aluminum, or copper-clad aluminum conductor. This conductor shall be solid or stranded; insulated, covered, or bare; and in the form of a wire or a busbar of any shape

sidebar: Please see my IM

 

[jaggedben]

Not to be obstinate but I don't see where any of those references apply. Most are for systems >1000v

...

They apply because they're invoked by 396.30(B). I agree that with a different wiring method under 1000V they wouldn't apply, but 396 says they apply to a messenger used as a neutral, without any qualification regarding voltage. Weird way to write the code if you ask me, but that's how I read it.

 

[augie47]

Sorry, still not convinced....
396.30(B) Neutral Conductor. Where the messenger is used as a neutral conductor, it shall comply with the requirements of 225.4, 250.184(A), 250.184(B)(7), and 250.187(B).
225.4 ......... "Exception: Equipment grounding conductors and grounded circuit conductors shall be permitted to be bare or covered as specically permit‐ ted elsewhere in this Code. "
250.184(A), 250.184(B) and 250.87 all are >1,000 volt

We may just have to agree to disagree rather than belabor it

 

[jaggedben]

I see your point but then why call out specifically 250.184(B)(7)? That's specifically the part of 250.184 that requires insulation, while other parts of 250 Part X allow a bare multi-grounded neutral. (In fact all the sections called out in 396.30(B) require insulation, exceptions aside.

I don't need to belabor it either. As I said, I find 396.30(B) to be a weird way to write the code, and I'm admittedly unsure what the intention was.

 

[wmthompson90]

If it's a branch circuit with a bare neutral that's a code violation. I'm really having trouble understanding the rest of your description.

its a 200 amp disconnect and riser on a pole beneath the transformer cans. they only brought the line and load side conductors down the conduit. no neutral in conduit. there is a #6 stapled down the pole that is connected to the messenger cable of the quadraplex, the neutral taps of the transformer and the line side utility neutral. the #6 terminates at a ground rod at the bottom of the pole. a jumper is installed from the disconnect to the #6. My main question was, should i consider the messenger cable on the load side of the disconnect a neutral or a egc? the second question was if it was ok to install the egc on the second disconnect that we are installing outside of the conduit to route lighting away from my disconnect with a riser going 20' in the air. my second question was answered above.

 

[augie47]

Is this an agricultural installation ??

 

[wmthompson90]

Is this an agricultural installation ??

no. this is how they are feeding several warehouses at a distillery.

 

[augie47]

(wondered as it matches the requirements of Art 547)

In any event, IMO, the bare conductor is an equipment grounding conductor. I can't find any situation where an EGC would not be required to be installed along with the phase (power) conductors.

 

[wmthompson90]

(wondered as it matches the requirements of Art 547)

In any event, IMO, the bare conductor is an equipment grounding conductor. I can't find any situation where an EGC would not be required to be installed along with the phase (power) conductors.

ill buy that. Now, for another group of warehouses they have done the same thing. only these transformers are 3 phase 240 with the high leg. so there is a neutral needed for theses warehouses for the lighting. ( the previously mentioned had transformers on the warehouse). so the ware houses fed from the 240v 3 phase service are essentially using a egc as they're neutral?

 

[augie47]

ill buy that. Now, for another group of warehouses they have done the same thing. only these transformers are 3 phase 240 with the high leg. so there is a neutral needed for theses warehouses for the lighting. ( the previously mentioned had transformers on the warehouse). so the ware houses fed from the 240v 3 phase service are essentially using a egc as they're neutral?

Is there a service disconnect ahead of the OH conductors ??

 

[wmthompson90]

Is there a service disconnect ahead of the OH conductors ??

yes

 

[augie47]

Seemingly they are using that neutral conductor as an equipment ground also.
Is the pole disconnect fusible ??
In the event that pole disconnect does not have over-current protection it id not a "service disconnect" but more of an isolation device and that might change the scenario. I will be interested in what others say in that event.

 

[jaggedben]

Sure sounds to me like a bare neutral without a separate EGC.

 

[augie47]

Sure sounds to me like a bare neutral without a separate EGC.

Agree, and if that's a feeder, I would think a violation.
IF the pole disconnect is non-fusible, therefore; not a 'service disconnect', but the wiring is beyond the service point, is an EGC required ??