Tandem Breaker Tie Bar

[iwire]

I just copied and pasted from the pdf file I have of the 2011 code.

Strange, I must have a bad PDF because when I just looked in my softcover 2011 it is there. :huh:

 

[KevFla2001]

Strange, I must have a bad PDF because when I just looked in my softcover 2011 it is there. :huh:

It's funny how one small typo can make a great big difference!

I think I'm good with that switch under 2011 which Florida uses for code. Some have responded about not being able to use it for more than one circuit, but if I went with a MWBC, according to code, it's still 2 circuits feeding 2 separate receptacles, even if they are in one box, so I I'll just stay with it using the 404.8(c) exclusion. I will tie bar the tandem breaker, and even though I didn't need to add any additional grounding (emt/metal boxes) I still ran the ground wire and pig tailed the boxes, switches, and receptacles anyway for safeties sake.

Kevin

 

[texie]

It's funny how one small typo can make a great big difference!

I think I'm good with that switch under 2011 which Florida uses for code. Some have responded about not being able to use it for more than one circuit, but if I went with a MWBC, according to code, it's still 2 circuits feeding 2 separate receptacles, even if they are in one box, so I I'll just stay with it using the 404.8(c) exclusion. I will tie bar the tandem breaker, and even though I didn't need to add any additional grounding (emt/metal boxes) I still ran the ground wire and pig tailed the boxes, switches, and receptacles anyway for safeties sake.

Kevin

404.8(C) is a struggle for me. This was new to the 2008 edition and continued in the 2011 edition. It was pointed out by some that the last part of the sentence after the coma was in conflict with the UL Standard. So, in the 2014 edition this last part of the sentence was deleted. That left things such that the switch had to be listed for 2 circuit or 3 circuit, period. In this context I believe that the use of a MWBC would not be allowed either, as the technical discussion seemed to be concerned about the line to line voltage. That begs a question, where would one use a 2 pole snap switch if the only ones available are not listed for 2 or 3 circuit?
As for your situation, I think it is a quandary, as 2008 and 2011 404.8(C) allows this but it would violate the listing and hence 110.3(B).

 

[iwire]

404.8(C) is a struggle for me. This was new to the 2008 edition and continued in the 2011 edition. It was pointed out by some that the last part of the sentence after the coma was in conflict with the UL Standard. So, in the 2014 edition this last part of the sentence was deleted.

Interesting thank you

That left things such that the switch had to be listed for 2 circuit or 3 circuit, period. In this context I believe that the use of a MWBC would not be allowed either, as the technical discussion seemed to be concerned about the line to line voltage.

Technical issues or not article 100 defines a MWBC as a single circuit.

 

[Smart $]

Kevin, I am not sure what is up but neither my 2011 or 2014 have the 'OR' you are showing us.

It is in my 2011 pdf.

Removed in 2014 pdf.

 

[electrofelon]

True but he's using a 4" square box so it might be as simple as changing the finished cover and maybe adding a collar box.

What is a collar box?

 

[qcroanoke]

What is a collar box?

Plaster ring is my guess. Some call them mud rings.

 

[infinity]

What is a collar box?

Collar box=extension ring. Sorry I should have avoided the local lingo.

 

[GoldDigger]

That begs a question, where would one use a 2 pole snap switch if the only ones available are not listed for 2 or 3 circuit?

I suppose you could use it in a parallel switch rather than 3-way configuration to allow independent control of two sets of loads. Or to control two sets of inductive loads where the two combined exceeded the switch rating.
Or for some wierd combinatorial logic?



Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[Smart $]

... That begs a question, where would one use a 2 pole snap switch if the only ones available are not listed for 2 or 3 circuit?
....

I suppose you could use it in a parallel switch rather than 3-way configuration to allow independent control of two sets of loads. Or to control two sets of inductive loads where the two combined exceeded the switch rating.
Or for some wierd combinatorial logic?

Same line-to-line circuits that use a 2- or 3-pole breaker.

 

[texie]

Same line-to-line circuits that use a 2- or 3-pole breaker.

I'm not so sure that is the case. The discussion around this seemed to imply that the line to line voltage was the issue. That's why I indicated that a MWBC may not be allowed either.

 

[Smart $]

I'm not so sure that is the case. The discussion around this seemed to imply that the line to line voltage was the issue. That's why I indicated that a MWBC may not be allowed either.

Well you obviously cannot use a switch that is not rated for the voltage that will be imposed upon it...

 

[Johnnybob]

It does not change the fact I can use a MWBC with a double pole switch that is for single circuit use.

I agree! it says "shall be permitted to be considered..." not "​shall be...."