residential generator installations

[GoldDigger]

...they simply wouldn't turn the larger loads on.

The code makes an explicit distinction between the case of ATS versus MTS.
If you have an MTS, the owner has the opportunity to control the load (either at the loads or at the breakers) before transferring to the generator.
If an ATS is used, the owner would have to shed load before the power outage, not just avoid turning on larger loads.

(what ceb58 said, but in more detail.)

The principle in play is that even if the unit is undersized, the owner will be forced to acknowledge that they are running on reduced power before they flip the transfer switch. There are also manual transfer switch units that transfer individual circuits and have built in ammeters to help the occupant make the choice of what can be turned on.

 

[iwire]

I'm not trying to "sling any bull" and I'd appreciate you not trying to bring it down to that level.

That's simply not true in all cases, especially when it comes to "residential generators" as we are discussing in this thread.

Much of today's load shedding in the application of this thread is for the purpose of adhering to the NEC. That's it, that's the only reason why we do it.

Before the 2008 code which required the generator to be sized to the connected load, load shedding was very rarely used. Certainly not to the extent it is used today. It was an expense that was added because the code required it.

It would help me understand you if you could let me know when you stop talking about the code section I was and move onto another section.

We had been talking about the table for reduced conductors sizes in 310 and now you have moved into 702. All my comments have been about 310.

Here is where we started

I love it. Back when you could put the whole house on an automatic generator you could use the smaller conductor. Now, you take that same house and shed many of the loads and you need a bigger conductor. Silly NEC.

Can you give any real life, practical examples of when the rules in 310 have required what you are saying above?


As far as the rule changes in 702 that require specific size generators to be used with an ATS, I think those rules are beyond silly, I think they go beyond the scope of the NEC and should never have been put in place.

There was no safety issue, this is simply a rule aimed at what some believe is 'the right thing to do'.

 

[HackElectric]

Can you give any real life, practical examples of when the rules in 310 have required what you are saying above?

I did already, in the post you quoted. I spelled it out very clearly. But you left that part out of your quote.