Split bolts on feeders

[chorty55]

Are split bolts on service feeders inside a main service panel allowed?

Someone added extensions, honestly its a good job, there's so much tape its nice and round, but just curious if split bolt connections were ever allowed on service feeders inside the main panel out to the poco meter.


Thanks.

 

[LarryFine]

Welcome to the forum.

Were and are allowed.

 

[chorty55]

Thanks.

Yeah, I just bought the house, and decided to look at the main and sub panel out of curiosity, and noticed the extensions. Just checking. Thanks.

 

[Greentagger]

No

Are split bolts on service feeders inside a main service panel allowed?

Someone added extensions, honestly its a good job, there's so much tape its nice and round, but just curious if split bolt connections were ever allowed on service feeders inside the main panel out to the poco meter.


Thanks.

Not if they are extending the service conductors. Starting in 2020, taps on service conductors to meet requirements of 230.46.
If they are actually feeders you are ok.

 

[Doc13067]

No

Not if they are extending the service conductors. Starting in 2020, taps on service conductors to meet requirements of 230.46.
If they are actually feeders you are ok.

This would apply if the install were completed after that code cycle and if that code cycle was adopted by the state. It’s probably fine.

 

[chorty55]

It is service conductors, not feeders to a sub panel. And your concern is exactly the reason I asked. I'm not taking the tape off to investigate.

2020 Code Language:

230.46 Spliced and Tapped Conductors. Service-entrance conductors shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped in accordance with 110.14, 300.5(E), 300.13, and 300.15. Power distribution blocks, pressure connectors, and devices for splices and taps shall be listed. Power distribution blocks installed on service conductors shall be marked “suitable for use on the line side of the service equipment” or equivalent.

Effective January 1, 2023, pressure connectors and devices for splices and taps installed on service conductors shall be marked “suitable for use on the line side of the service equipment” or equivalent.

 

[electrofelon]

It is service conductors, not feeders to a sub panel. And your concern is exactly the reason I asked. I'm not taking the tape off to investigate.

2020 Code Language:

230.46 Spliced and Tapped Conductors. Service-entrance conductors shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped in accordance with 110.14, 300.5(E), 300.13, and 300.15. Power distribution blocks, pressure connectors, and devices for splices and taps shall be listed. Power distribution blocks installed on service conductors shall be marked “suitable for use on the line side of the service equipment” or equivalent.

Effective January 1, 2023, pressure connectors and devices for splices and taps installed on service conductors shall be marked “suitable for use on the line side of the service equipment” or equivalent.

And that code rule is one of the dumbest things that come out of the CMP's in a while. IT has no basis on any history of problems or any science or logic for that matter. Personally I will be ignoring that rule.

 

[chorty55]

Naw, I'm sure there's even more dumb ones, but we'll probably start a flame thread.

 

[electrofelon]

Naw, I'm sure there's even more dumb ones, but we'll probably start a flame thread.

some say split bolts or so passe, but they are my go to for tapping large conductors in loadcenters where there isnt much room. IF I was just extending, I would probably use an inline mechanical splicer.

 

[chorty55]

True. Glad there's other electricians that think some of NEC was written by a cross-eyed monkey.


I just stumbled upon a late 60s house with mbwc in the entire kitchen, and installing gfci for new code is going to not fully utilize the split. Oh well. Wire nut and cap, unless they make a gfci to honor both hots on a shared neutral.

I did stagger, 2 on one phase, 3 on the other, best I can do really.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

True. Glad there's other electricians that think some of NEC was written by a cross-eyed monkey.


I just stumbled upon a late 60s house with mbwc in the entire kitchen, and installing gfci for new code is going to not fully utilize the split. Oh well. Wire nut and cap, unless they make a gfci to honor both hots on a shared neutral.

I did stagger, 2 on one phase, 3 on the other, best I can do really.

Two pole GFCI breakers do that, but you probably also need AFCI protection and I don't think there are two pole AFCIs.

 

[electrofelon]

Two pole GFCI breakers do that, but you probably also need AFCI protection and I don't think there are two pole AFCIs.

Depending on how it's wired, and if the panel brand he has offers the afci breakers that don't need a neutral, he could use AFCI breakers and GFCI revels

 

[mtnelect]

And that code rule is one of the dumbest things that come out of the CMP's in a while. IT has no basis on any history of problems or any science or logic for that matter. Personally I will be ignoring that rule.

I commend you for your voluntary confession, it's good for the sole !

 

[electrofelon]

I commend you for your voluntary confession, it's good for the sole !

I can imagine how the meeting with St Peter will go. He'll sot me down and open up his ledger:

So I see you violated some NFPA 70 rules.

Yes. Will that be a problem?

Oh hell no, we already sent all the CMP's down below for the AFCI debacle. I wouldn't follow most of the rules in the publication either. God outlawed that document up here decades ago.

 

[ggunn]

And that code rule is one of the dumbest things that come out of the CMP's in a while. IT has no basis on any history of problems or any science or logic for that matter. Personally I will be ignoring that rule.

But I am certain that you know that there are times that you wouldn't be able to get away with ignoring it. In the early days of that rule, before Polaris et al were catching up with it, around here there were AHJs that enforced it and AHJs that did not. Where it was being enforced we pretty much stopped doing supply side interconnections for resi PV systems.

 

[electrofelon]

But I am certain that you know that there are times that you wouldn't be able to get away with ignoring it. In the early days of that rule, before Polaris et al were catching up with it, around here there were AHJs that enforced it and AHJs that did not. Where it was being enforced we pretty much stopped doing supply side interconnections for resi PV systems.