Well pump

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bthielen

Guest
I have been reading article 430 regarding motor disconnect means and would be interested in some clarification. I have a submersible well at my residence with the pressure switch located inside my basement next to my pressure tank. The service entrance to my home is located in the same room and within sight about 10' away from the pressure switch. Does the circuit breaker in the service entrance satisfy the requirements of 430 or do I require a manually operated lockable disconnect switch in the vacinity of the pressure switch?

Please direct me to the appropriate articles as applicable.

Thanks, Bob
 
Re: Well pump

Your applicabel code sections are 430.102 A and B.
Is the disconnect within sight of the controller?
Can the disconnect be locked in the open position?
You are not required to have a disconnect with in sight of the motor as its a submersible.
Most likely you only need to install a lock out clip on the circuit breaker supplying the well pump.
 
Re: Well pump

I'm assuming the 2002 NEC.

First, is the Pressure switch the actual controller?
430.81(A) Definition. For the definition of Controller, see Article 100. For the purpose of this article, a controller is any switch or device that is normally used to start and stop a motor by making and breaking the motor circuit current.
Click to expand...
Does the switch actually, make/break motor current?

Second, if it does, is it "motor rated" per Sections 430.109 and 430.110; i.e., can you identify which "type" it is from 430.109? Does it meet the amp/interrupting req's of 430.110?

Assuming all the answers are affirmative, we proceed to 430.102(A). Neither exception applies, but the service entrance CB meets the basic rule for the "controller" disconnecting means.

Now for the 430.102(B). The service entrance CB does NOT meet the basic rule for the motor disconnecting means. It would be fairly reasonable to say the installation meets the ?impracticable? clause of subpart ?(a)? of the Exception. Therefore, a permanently installed provision for locking or adding a lock to the disconnecting means that also meets the requirements of 430.102(A) in necessary.
 
Re: Well pump

Where I'm confused is in 430.109(A)(2). Maybe I'm not quite sure I understand the definition of a "Molded Case" circuit breaker.

At any rate, 430.109(C)(1)or(2) seem to suggest that the ability to lock it in an open position may not necessarily be a requirement for 2hp or less.

What am I overlooking?

Bob
 
Re: Well pump

NEMA AB-3 can be downloaded here for free. It defines Molded Case Circuit Breaker (MCCB) as "A circuit breaker that is assembled as an integral unit in a supportive and enclosed housing of insulating material." (I wish they also added that it cannot be maintained since opening the housing destroys it.)

In any case, the pressure switch isn't a circuit breaker at all (by NEMA definition). The pressure switch MAY be the controller.

First read the Disconnecting Means "location" rules without the exceptions.

430.102 Location.
(A) Controller. An individual disconnecting means shall be provided for each controller and shall disconnect the controller. The disconnecting means shall be located in sight from the controller location.
...
(B) Motor. A disconnecting means shall be located in sight from the motor location and the driven machinery location. The disconnecting means required in accordance with 430.102(A) shall be permitted to serve as the disconnecting means for the motor if it is located in sight from the motor location and the driven machinery location.
Click to expand...
From this it is clear that the intent is that a disconnecting means be "in sight" from the motor, lockable or not. Second, the controller disconnecting means is permitted to have a dual function only if it is also "in sight" of the motor. Notice nothing requires the disconnecting means to be lockable in the basic rules, only that they be ?in sight? of whatever is being disconnected.

None of the items in 430.109 are required to be lockable within the text of the subparts; however, unless the motor?s disconnecting means is ?in sight? of the motor, it must be lockable if it is permitted to act as the disconnecting means under 430.102(B) Exception.
 
Re: Well pump

I've seen a fair number of homes with wells and can't recall a single one that had a disconnect switch on it out by the well head.

Besides, how would you meet the 50 feet rule if its 200 feet underground?
 
Re: Well pump

All: see the 430.102 (B) fpn:
FPN No. 1: Some examples of increased or additional hazards include, but are not limited to, motors rated in excess of 100 hp, multimotor equipment, submersible motors, motors associated with variable frequency drives, and motors located in hazardous (classified) location.
 
Re: Well pump

I'm fairly familiar with FPN No.1. I suggested 3 of the 5 examples to CMP 11 when I tried to get them to leave the previous text alone. I lobbied personally with five of the members.

As I said in my original reply, it would be reasonable to use "impracticable" as the basis for not having a "local" disconnecting means; however, that only means the "controller" disconnecting means may be used as an alternate and it must be lockable if it isn't "in sight."

There must be a "motor" disconnecting means, it MAY be the controller's also, but unless it is "in sight" of the motor it must be lockable.
 
Re: Well pump

Based on the responses I have been seeing this is my conclusion.

Since the motor itself is 200' from the house and 90' underground, it is impossible for the controller, disconnect, or circuit breaker to be "within sight" of the actual motor. Incidentally, the thermal protection is located within the motor housing. The pressure switch is the controller as it does open and close both ungrounded conductors to the motor. (240v motor) The circuit breaker is less than 10' from the controller and in sight, although it is located inside the service entrance panel so technically, is it truly "in sight"?

Does it sound reasonable then that (a)the circuit breaker does satisfy the requirements of the disconnecting means, (b)is not required to be within sight of the actual motor due to the motor's location, and (c)because it is in sight of the controller it is not required to have provisions for locking in an open position?


petersona,
I have heard something about a distance rule that determines "in sight". You mention 50'. I have not been able to locate that description. Where is that in the code? It would seem reasonable to assume there is a limited distance involved. It would be impractical to have a disconnecting means in sight if it was so far away it is of no benefit. I did find a reference to a maximum 25' tap conductor length but from the disconnecting means to the motor or controller I have not found.

Bob
 
Re: Well pump

Originally posted by bthielen:
petersona,
I have heard something about a distance rule that determines "in sight". You mention 50'. I have not been able to locate that description. Where is that in the code?
Bob
Click to expand...
Article 100

"In Sight From (Within Sight From, Within Sight).
Where this Code specifies that one equipment shall be ?in sight from,? ?within sight from,? or ?within sight,? and so forth, of another equipment, the specified equipment is to be visible and not more than 15 m (50 ft) distant from the other."
 
Re: Well pump

Okay, I am now sheepish :eek:

Never thought to look up the description of "in sight"
 
Re: Well pump

Originally posted by bthielen:
...
Does it sound reasonable then that (a)the circuit breaker does satisfy the requirements of the disconnecting means, (b)is not required to be within sight of the actual motor due to the motor's location, and (c)because it is in sight of the controller it is not required to have provisions for locking in an open position?

...

Bob
Click to expand...
(a) Yes
(b) Yes
(c) No, it must also be "in sight" of the motor to omit locking provisions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top