I am looking for code article on service conductors run thru a service disconnect. Homeowner has 360 amp meter base. 2 200 amp disconnects are mounted to the left of MB. MB and panels are all connected with 2” nipples. 2 sets of conductors From MB ,1set for each disconnect. The 2nd set pass through first panel. Is this allowed?
Unfused service conductors
- Thread starter PLR
- Start date
- Status
Family man
Member
- Location
- Oakes, North Dakota, USA
Trying to visualize what you are saying. If I understand you to mean that there is a 360 amp has got 2-2” nipples into a 200 amp disconnect then nippled to another 200 amp disconnect. Each set we’ll say is 4/0 one terminating in the disconnect then exiting into a panel say inside the house. The other service conductors using the disconnect as a raceway pass through into the next 200 amp disconnect. If the disconnect is indeed an extension of the raceway to contain the second 200 amp service conductors. It would violate 230.7 that says conductors other than service conductors cannot be installed in the same raceway or cable. The disconnect equaling raceway May be subject to definition but definitely no if ever in same conduit if one is fused and the other unfused. I would lean to it is not allowed and would need a separate raceway altogether from the meter to the individual panels.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
electrofelon
Senior Member
- Location
- Cherry Valley NY, Seattle, WA
- Occupation
- Electrician
A cabinet is not a raceway, or an extension of a raceway. A cabinet is a cabinet!
Family man
Member
- Location
- Oakes, North Dakota, USA
I guess my thoughts went to certain light fixtures I believe some to say that they can be used as a raceway while others do not.
If a panel is not a raceway or extension then I would fail to see a code reference offhand that would condemn the installation above.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
LarryFine
Master Electrician Electric Contractor Richmond VA
- Location
- Henrico County, VA
- Occupation
- Electrical Contractor
I would use the word "enclosure" to mean a disco housing.
electrofelon
Senior Member
- Location
- Cherry Valley NY, Seattle, WA
- Occupation
- Electrician
True. If they are indeed safety switches, then I believe they are not cabinets, but still not raceways.
- Location
- San Francisco Bay Area, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Electrical Engineer
But because these are SERVICE conductors, wouldn’t that violate 230.3?
(On my phone going from memory here...)
electrofelon
Senior Member
- Location
- Cherry Valley NY, Seattle, WA
- Occupation
- Electrician
service conductors serving one structure not to be supplied thru another? Im not seeing it.
- Location
- Placerville, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Retired PV System Designer
If it actually goes inside the building rather than staying on the outside surface of the wall, you probably fail on having the disconnect as close as possible to the point where it enters the first building.
They are still service conductors, even if not for that building.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
- Location
- San Francisco Bay Area, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Electrical Engineer
Yeah, now that I have my full PC in front of me and the code, I see I was wrong on that section.
The thing that still applies is that the fill of the wiring space in the cabinet that the conductors pass through cannot exceed 40% of the available space. (312.8). But I'm not sure how you would satisfy 312.8 (3) given that there is no disconnecting means for these feed-through conductors.
The thing that still applies is that the fill of the wiring space in the cabinet that the conductors pass through cannot exceed 40% of the available space. (312.8). But I'm not sure how you would satisfy 312.8 (3) given that there is no disconnecting means for these feed-through conductors.
- Status