Tap the primary inside of a XFMR

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

T's C6

Member
I have been asked the question, can I tap the primary inside of a XFMR to feed a motor. I thought that a tap cap can should be used in lieu of tapping from the inside of the XFMR.

Thanks
 
You didn't mention the size of the transformer, but it was one with studs/lugs for connections, I believe I would just add a lug or change to double-lug.
 
augie47 said:
You didn't mention the size of the transformer, but it was one with studs/lugs for connections, I believe I would just add a lug or change to double-lug.
Click to expand...

The question was can I use the XFMR as a tap can?
 
T's C6 said:
The question was can I use the XFMR as a tap can?
Click to expand...
240.21(C) Transformer Secondary Conductors. A set of conductors feeding a single load, or each set of conductors feeding separate loads, shall be permitted to be connected to a transformer secondary, without overcurrent protection at the secondary, as specified in 240.21(C)(1) through (C)(6). The provisions of 240.4(B) shall not be permitted for transformer secondary conductors.

The answer is yes. :smile:
 
charlie said:
240.21(C) Transformer Secondary Conductors. A set of conductors feeding a single load, or each set of conductors feeding separate loads, shall be permitted to be connected to a transformer secondary, without overcurrent protection at the secondary, as specified in 240.21(C)(1) through (C)(6). The provisions of 240.4(B) shall not be permitted for transformer secondary conductors.

The answer is yes. :smile:
Click to expand...

Does the same code section apply to the primary's as in the op's question ?
 
acrwc10 said:
Does the same code section apply to the primary's as in the op's question?
Click to expand...
OOPS.
icon11.gif
No, the quoted section does not. However, the code is permissive and if it does not prohibit something, then it is permitted. In my opinion, the answer is still yes because nothing prohibits a tap as long as all the other rules of the code are followed (wiring room, manufacturer's directions, etc.) :smile:
 
charlie said:
OOPS.
icon11.gif
No, the quoted section does not. However, the code is permissive and if it does not prohibit something, then it is permitted. In my opinion, the answer is still yes because nothing prohibits a tap as long as all the other rules of the code are followed (wiring room, manufacturer's directions, etc.) :smile:
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same the if it is not "dis-allowed" then it is OK to do.
I was not sure if there was a restriction on the input load, like on a branch circuit where you could only have one motor load unless you are 50% or less of the circuit capacity.
 
acrwc10 said:
I was thinking the same the if it is not "dis-allowed" then it is OK to do.
I was not sure if there was a restriction on the input load, like on a branch circuit where you could only have one motor load unless you are 50% or less of the circuit capacity.
Click to expand...

Thank you, that is what I thought, if it does not say it cannot be done then I assume that it can be done. Thanks for the confirmation "experts";)
 
T's C6 said:
. . . Thanks for the confirmation "experts" . . .
Click to expand...
Some of us are considered to be experts. My definition of an expert is someone who knows what he doesn't know about a particular subject, I meet that definition and there is a lot that I don't know about the NEC. I also know that there are many on this forum that have knowledge that far exceeds mine. Keep in mind though, "It should be noted that any comments made in this forum are personal opinions and represent personal responses as requested. Any opinion must not be considered as a Formal Interpretation of the NEC? . . ." :smile:
 
T's C6 said:
Thank you, that is what I thought, if it does not say it cannot be done then I assume that it can be done. Thanks for the confirmation "experts";)
Click to expand...

I was never a member of the "Perts" so I can't be an "ex-pert".:smile:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top