Residential two sevice drops one building. Grounding

Status
Not open for further replies.
ritelec

ritelec

Senior Member
Location
Jersey
I'll be swapping out a panel , There are two right next to each other.(maybe the other in the future)
The current house has two drops, two meters two panels (two family)

I'm planing on grounding the one I replace as per what I need to do.
both panels have separate water grounds.
I will be putting two ground rods in for the panel being replaced.

Question.

would these two panels be treated as two separate services (grounding)?

4 ground rods, two water grounds.

Or should/could they be grounded together? 2 rods ,one water ground sized to the conductor size of both drops ?

Thank you
 
You still have one service, with permitted one to six disconnecting means. Don't let the second meter cloud your judgement of what you have there, it is just an additional point in service conductors.

As for grounding electrodes, you can make taps from each disconnect to a common GEC or you can connect GEC to a common point ahead of the disconnecting means.
 
ActionDave said:
One water pipe connects to both dwellings?? Probably yes.

If so, two ground rods, one connection to the water pipe and rods and taps to each meter can would be compliant.
Click to expand...

Thank you

kwired said:
You still have one service, with permitted one to six disconnecting means. Don't let the second meter cloud your judgement of what you have there, it is just an additional point in service conductors.

As for grounding electrodes, you can make taps from each disconnect to a common GEC or you can connect GEC to a common point ahead of the disconnecting means.
Click to expand...

Nice.
Thank you.
It probably is and still may be non-compliant with one panel change..
The panels are the older "split" buss type. The type where one two pole brk feeds lighting/power busses at bottom of panel...and the top has spots for feeder(circuit) outs.


Just to add,
This original panel is nutty.
Never sean one like this before.
It's Cutler Hammer...30 or 40 years old I would guess. The inspector (construction) wants the panel changed because of a flood we had here last year.

The panel looks intact so I suggested changing the breakers instead.
The Cutler Hammer panel is one of those split ones. Unlike the current single phase panels, it has copper busses with bolts (round like a bolt but not threaded, more like posts/studs) sticking out of the buss where the breaker (which look like the everyday ch that clip/push on the flat buss fin) pushes breaker jaws (like the current CH brks) onto "round" posts.
These breakers look type CH except that the back part that hold to the rail is more of a metal clip than the current black plastic.

In looking for rated breakers for this panel, the panel only reads N1 and the breakers read N1.

I called Eaton and the guy never heard of such a panel............Which is ok.......cause I've never seen such a panel :)

So.........rather than play games, I'm going to change the panel out...
Anyone ever seen such a panelboard.??
just curious.

Thanks again for the replies..
Rich
 
Last edited:
ritelec said:
Thank you



Nice.
Thank you.
It probably is and still may be non-compliant with one panel change..
The panels are the older "split" buss type. The type where one two pole brk feeds lighting/power busses at bottom of panel...and the top has spots for feeder(circuit) outs.


Just to add,
This original panel is nutty.
Never sean one like this before.
It's Cutler Hammer...30 or 40 years old I would guess. The inspector (construction) wants the panel changed because of a flood we had here last year.

The panel looks intact so I suggested changing the breakers instead.
The Cutler Hammer panel is one of those split ones. Unlike the current single phase panels, it has copper busses with bolts (round like a bolt but not threaded, more like posts/studs) sticking out of the buss where the breaker (which look like the everyday ch that clip on the buss fin) pushes on to.
These breakers look type CH except that the back part that hold to the rail is more of a metal clip than the current black plastic.

In looking for rated breakers for this panel, the panel only reads N1 and the breakers read N1.

I called Eaton and the guy never heard of such a panel............Which is ok.......cause I've never seen such a panel :)

So.........rather than play games, I'm going to change the panel out...
Anyone ever seen such a panelboard.??
just curious.

Thanks again for the replies..
Rich


breaker jaws push onto (like the current CH brks)
Click to expand...

Apparently the guy you talked to know's little history on some of their older product. What you described sounds exactly like what I have seen of their CH series breakers and panelboards from that era. Todays CH series breakers should be listed to use in that panel.

I have not seen too many of the panels with the "nubs" like you describe but have seen some, The metal rail clips are not anything unusual at all. That is how they were all made until the current design with rail clip molded into the main frame of the unit, which maybe started in mid 1980's
 
kwired said:
Apparently the guy you talked to know's little history on some of their older product. What you described sounds exactly like what I have seen of their CH series breakers and panelboards from that era. Todays CH series breakers should be listed to use in that panel.

I have not seen too many of the panels with the "nubs" like you describe but have seen some, The metal rail clips are not anything unusual at all. That is how they were all made until the current design with rail clip molded into the main frame of the unit, which maybe started in mid 1980's
Click to expand...

thank you.

Yes, I remember the metal rail clips from long ago before they changed there design to plastic.
Again, never seen that panel.
Maybe the CH is "rated" for that panel.....like you said?
Since the CH isn't physically labelled in the panel, I reckon if I were to replace the breakers I would have to get approved documentation from Eaton about that right?

Lets see......get in touch from someone from Eaton who knows the history of this panel and breaker... Have them find documentation of the rating of this CH breaker
and get it to me......talk to the inspector to see if he would go for swapping out breakers......and show documentation..........change a few breakers out if all go's well.

or......

Pick up a new panel and some breakers, do a panel change and make a couple of bucks...

:)

Thanks kwired.
 
ritelec said:
thank you.

Yes, I remember the metal rail clips from long ago before they changed there design to plastic.
Again, never seen that panel.
Maybe the CH is "rated" for that panel.....like you said?
Since the CH isn't physically labelled in the panel, I reckon if I were to replace the breakers I would have to get approved documentation from Eaton about that right?

Lets see......get in touch from someone from Eaton who knows the history of this panel and breaker... Have them find documentation of the rating of this CH breaker
and get it to me......talk to the inspector to see if he would go for swapping out breakers......and show documentation..........change a few breakers out if all go's well.

or......

Pick up a new panel and some breakers, do a panel change and make a couple of bucks...

:)

Thanks kwired.
Click to expand...
I look at it this way, slap inspector up the side of head if he doesn't think a CH breaker is listed for a CH panel. :lol:

I don't know of any panel/breaker manufacturers or even those that have acquired other brands over the years that don't have backward compatibility within same product line.

And in this case we don't even have a product line that has changed ownership over the years, not much reason to suspect they are not compatible with todays breakers from that same product line.
 
They went for the "free" estimate.......for two new 100 amp panels.

For the 2- 100a single phase panels, I will bring one #4 to the water meter, And one #6 to the ground rods........
Should there be any issue jumping from one panel to the other with these grounds?
Instead of grounding to the "neutral bar" in the first panel I bring the ground to (mainly the #4)........can I put a one hole two barrel lug to the panel for the 4's to ground to the next panel?



Thank you...
 
The verdict.........

Crimp connection for one common ground for both panels or two seperate grounds...one from each panel to water, one from each panel to rods.............

Looked high and low.... where was it stated 100 amp (service conductor size) that the ground of #8 had to have the armor around it.....I'll be using #6 green thhn, but was looking for that
#8 with armor statement and couldn't locate it...

Thank you.
 
ritelec said:
The verdict.........

Crimp connection for one common ground for both panels or two seperate grounds...one from each panel to water, one from each panel to rods.............

Looked high and low.... where was it stated 100 amp (service conductor size) that the ground of #8 had to have the armor around it.....I'll be using #6 green thhn, but was looking for that
#8 with armor statement and couldn't locate it...

Thank you.
Click to expand...
You were probably looking for 250.64(B).
 
Thanks kwired......
Yes I saw that .......... #6 "without metal covering"............

Wasn't there a article that said 8 cu wire had to be covered and solid? Was it an older book, and now the way that article reads is that if you use 8 cu.
you must assume it has to be solid and have armor around it????

Thanks again.......It's not there anymore, guess I'm not going bonkers.


ok. maybe alittle.
 
ritelec said:
Thanks kwired......
Yes I saw that .......... #6 "without metal covering"............

Wasn't there a article that said 8 cu wire had to be covered and solid? Was it an older book, and now the way that article reads is that if you use 8 cu.
you must assume it has to be solid and have armor around it????

Thanks again.......It's not there anymore, guess I'm not going bonkers.


ok. maybe alittle.
Click to expand...

Been a requirement for physical protection of some sort for as long as I can remember, but don't ever recall restrictions on having it being covered or solid.
 
Thanks kwired......
So I'm not completely bonkers..

I looked for a newer dated book and found a 1996...
250-92 (a) Grounding Electrode Conductor mentions............."Grounding conductors smaller than No. 6 shall be in rigid metal conduit, intermediate metal conduit, rigid nonmetallic conduit, electrical metallic tubing, or cable armor".

Thought I saw "solid" along the way but I guess it's here or there now as that article went the way of the dinosaur...

At least they spelled it out for you mentioning smaller than 6.......... but a reckon the current article mentions the same thing without mentioning it... :blink:


Wonder why all these 60 or 100 amp services I see are/where grounded with 8 and armor have solid 8???

Let it go Rich, Move on... :D
 
kwired said:
You still have one service, with permitted one to six disconnecting means. Don't let the second meter cloud your judgement of what you have there, it is just an additional point in service conductors.
Click to expand...

Didnt he say "two drops" in the OP? Ritelec, are there two service drops or we you referring to the service entrance conductors on the line side of the meter?
 
electrofelon said:
Didnt he say "two drops" in the OP? Ritelec, are there two service drops or we you referring to the service entrance conductors on the line side of the meter?
Click to expand...

It really sounds like two separate aerial wire sets back to POCO, rather than one drop feeding two meters. Not clear whether POCO considers it one service or not. If two services, is there a code cycle where that was allowed?
 
GoldDigger said:
It really sounds like two separate aerial wire sets back to POCO, rather than one drop feeding two meters. Not clear whether POCO considers it one service or not. If two services, is there a code cycle where that was allowed?
Click to expand...

If same voltage/phase/frequency.... a single drop, for quite some time anyway according to NEC. I've seen POCO parallel drop conductors many times - but if paralleled is that one drop or two? Besides, if it is on the POCO side of the service point it is their problem not ours.
 
Hold on..........got me thinking...............I just googled it with the little yellow guy...............it may be two service laterals (ariel)???
 
Last edited:
ritelec said:
Hold on..........got me thinking...............I just googled it with the little yellow guy...............it may be two service laterals (ariel)???
Click to expand...


Again, where is the "service point"?

If the aerial conductors are on the supply side of the service point, they belong to the POCO and are not subject to the NEC.

BTW "laterals" are underground.

One service drop or lateral can supply one to six service disconnecting means grouped in one location and is still called one service, with exceptions for some items - like a fire pump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top