sub panel or not

[physis]

Re: sub panel or not

Well, that's kind of my question. Do the two panelboards become one? And, if not, what do you do about the MBJ?

Can I really put it in the "subpanel", I know, you're saying it's not a sub. Just asking.

[ April 25, 2005, 08:57 PM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[suemarkp]

Re: sub panel or not

Originally posted by physis:
Alright, I know you're no slouch Rog. And I'm sure you've looked at this rather closely (you have brought it up before). But I will find where it doesn't work.

How bout 408.3(C) "Each switchboard or panelboard used as service equipment, shall be provided with a "main bonding jumper"".

250.28 "main bonding jumper shall be used to connect the equipment grounding conductor(s) and the service disconnect enclosure".

Not "service disconnect(s) enclosure(s)".

Can we have two main bonding jumpers?

Yes, when you have multiple service disconnects. Each service equipment panel will have a MBJ. If 250.28 had a plural for enclosures, someone may thing you need to run a separate wire from one MBJ to all the others, then you'd have a spaghetti mess.

Putting a second panel next to the meter main with the feed through lugs could be done one of two ways. If you split bolt from the main service conductors and run them to that second panel, then you'd have a grouped service and both panels would be service equipment. If the meter main feed throughs are disconnected by the 200A breaker, then the wires coming from that feed through would have to go to a non-service (sub)panel.

The conductors in a raceway are either feeders or service conductors. Which one they are determines if the adjacent panel is a sub or a service.

 

[physis]

Re: sub panel or not

Putting a second panel next to the meter main with the feed through lugs could be done one of two ways. If you split bolt from the main service conductors and run them to that second panel, then you'd have a grouped service and both panels would be service equipment

I disagree.

The conductors in a raceway are either feeders or service conductors.

I agree.

Which one they are determines if the adjacent panel is a sub or a service

I disagree.

 

[iwire]

Re: sub panel or not

Originally posted by physis:
[QB]

Putting a second panel next to the meter main with the feed through lugs could be done one of two ways. If you split bolt from the main service conductors and run them to that second panel, then you'd have a grouped service and both panels would be service equipment

I disagree.

About what?

 

[roger]

Re: sub panel or not

Sam, why couldn't two panels (one being a feed through buss) nippled together be treated as one as far as grounding? Let's try to leave code reasons out for this conversation.

Roger

 

[roger]

Re: sub panel or not

OK, I know we can't leave code reasons out, so forget I said that.

Roger

 

[physis]

Re: sub panel or not

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by physis:
[QB]

Putting a second panel next to the meter main with the feed through lugs could be done one of two ways. If you split bolt from the main service conductors and run them to that second panel, then you'd have a grouped service and both panels would be service equipment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree.

About what?

That is exactly what you would have as long as each had a service disconnect, MBJ and GECs.

First: Bob, I'm considering the installation in the context of the original question. One service, not multiple.

Roger, I don't know yet.

 

[iwire]

Re: sub panel or not

Sam maybe we are just misunderstanding each other.

I could have up six service panels in my cellar feeding my house and yet this would still be one service.

It is common in large houses to use one 400 amp meter socket feeding into two - 200 amp main breaker panels, each with MBJs, GECs and service disconnects.

I could be mistaken in what you where disagreeing with.

 

[physis]

Re: sub panel or not

Well, I'm saying you can't have two services if you only have one service.

Edit: No, I'm saying a subpanel isn't a service panel.

[ April 26, 2005, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: physis ]

 

[iwire]

Re: sub panel or not

Originally posted by physis:
Well, I'm saying you can't have two services if you only have one service.

Edit: No, I'm saying a subpanel isn't a service panel.

Oh a subpanel, why didn't you say so?

Figure 14-2. Conning tower torpedo firing panel

[ April 26, 2005, 07:43 PM: Message edited by: iwire ]

 

[physis]

Re: sub panel or not

Hey, those gyros look misaligned.

Edit: Sub--Panel,

[ April 26, 2005, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: physis ]