Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Status
Not open for further replies.

electron

Member
Has the term "neutral" been defined yet?

I was told that the 2005 NEC will include a new definition for a: "Neutral"

I think that that term, where used now in the NEC should be replaced with the term "grounded" where it relates to a conductor.

I would appreciate hearing from anyone who is aware of the reason why the term has never been defined!
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Because the word neutral when applied to electrical science is an adjective, not a noun. You don't need to define a definition.
 

websparky

Senior Member
Location
Cleveland, Ohio
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

NEC 2005 Draft
Neutral Conductor. A conductor, other than a grounding conductor, that is connected to the common point of a wye connection in a polyphase system or the point of a symmetrical system that is normally at zero voltage.
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

You are exactly correct in the phrasing. The word "neutral" describes conductor. Neutral can not be used alone, it is as I stated an adjective.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

If that definition is adopted, what will the grounded conductor of a 120/240 volt 3 phase high leg delta system be called. The proposed definition excludes that conductor?
Don
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

I'm with you Don. I can't believe this is at the draft stage. This is voodoo baloney. The wording is not true. The term "neutral conductor", is self defining and anyone who has a problem understanding this, please read any dictionary.

When AC was first adopted over DC, the return wire was called the negative. L-1 was called the positive. There is still outlet boxes with the marking P and N on the entrance holes.

The problem developed when trying to identify, L-1, L-N and L-2, on a singlephase system, and L-3 on a 3 phase system.

Email me the name of the submitter.
 

joe tedesco

Senior Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Everyone should note that public comments on any proposal are encouraged by NFPA, and the 2005 NEC proposals can be downloaded from:

www.nfpa.org

See the proposal and panel action below.

[ July 27, 2003, 07:50 AM: Message edited by: joe tedesco ]
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

The definition of the word neutral is in the Websters dictionary. I have never heard of a law suit to overturn the definition.

Start creating definitions prepare to defend them.

I don't think dictionary contradiction is within the scope of the NEC.

This is not an important issue anyway, I personally don't care what persons determine is the definition of a neutral. This whole subject is not worth wasting time addressing.
 

russellroberts

Senior Member
Location
Georgia
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Just a humble electrician's opinion amongst the heavyweights,but aren't we supposed to know what a neutral is even before we read the NEC? :confused:

Russell
 

jxofaltrds

Inspector Mike®
Location
Mike P. Columbus Ohio
Occupation
ESI, PI, RBO
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Here I go again.

Neutral: adj. 1.) How officals act when confronted by their ignorance. org. Ohio also see pass the buck

Mike P.
 

Ed MacLaren

Senior Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Consider this definition and see if you think it accurately describes the conductor we are talking about, and if it includes all the possible circuit configurations.

"Neutral means that conductor (when one exists) of a polyphase circuit, or a single phase 3-wire circuit, which is intended to have a voltage such that the voltage differences between it and two or more ungrounded conductors are approximately equal in magnitude and equally spaced in phase."

Ed
 

joe tedesco

Senior Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Here's the proposal and panel action, if you disagree send in a comment to NFPA.

1-122 Log #2457 NEC-P01
(100?Neutral Conductor (New) )
Final Action: Accept in Principle

TCC Action:

It was the action of the Technical Correlating Committee that this Proposal be referred to Code-Making Panels 2, 4, 5, and 13 for
comment.

Submitter: Paul Dobrowsky Holley, NY

Recommendation:

Add a new definition as follows:

Neutral Conductor. A conductor that is connected to the neutral point of a system and is intended for carrying current during normal
conditions.


Substantiation:

The terms "grounded conductor" and "neutral" are frequently interchanged and misused.

The term "neutral" is used extensively in product standards, product literature and other documents (identified, as white or gray) - even where only two current carrying conductors are present.

This definition would allow that a conductor to be called a neutral even when a two-wire extension is connected to a system that has a neutral.

IEC 60204-1 contains the following definition: neutral conductor (symbol N) conductor connected to the neutral point of a system and capable of contributing to the transmission of electrical energy [IEV 826-01-03]

Panel Meeting Action: Accept in Principle

Revise proposed text as follows:

Neutral Conductor. A conductor, other than a grounding conductor, that is connected to the common point of a wye connection in a polyphase system or the point of a symmetrical system which is normally at zero voltage.

Panel Statement:

This defined term is based on the definition of neutral conductor in IEEE Std. 100-1992 and the term "neutral point" from IEEE Std. 100-1992. The panel believes this action meets the intent of the submitter. Refer to CMPs 2, 4, 5, and 13 for comment.

Number Eligible to Vote: 12
Affirmative: 9 Negative: 3 Ballot Results:
Explanation of Negative:

BARRIOS: The proposed definition as modified by the panel is too complex and is not needed.

The common "wye" point as referenced in the definition only applies to three-phase systems, not all polyphase systems, and it is not clear what "zero voltage" is referenced to in "symmetrical systems".

MCMAHILL: The definition Panel 1 proposed will only cause confusion in the use of the term "neutral." The submitter of the proposal has a valid concern in that the terms "grounded conductor" and "neutral" are frequently interchanged and misused.

This is a standard practice in the electrical industry. Instead of adding a new definition, it is reasonable to simply add the word "neutral" to the definition of "grounded conductor" (i.e., Grounded (neutral) conductor). This will keep things simple. After all, it is fair to say that not all grounded conductors are neutrals, but it is also fair to say that all neutrals are grounded conductors.

MINICK:Because of the word "or", the suggested definition does not appear to take into account that a wye system is also a symmetrical system. The use of the term "symmetrical system" appears to include a single-phase system but not the symmetrical phase of a three-phase delta as a "delta system" is not a symmetrical system.

In addition, any definition accepted by CMP 1 should aid the reader in the application and in understanding of the requirements of the NEC. The accepted definition does neither.

The term neutral appears to be well understood by the users of the NEC in that conductors may be neutral at a given point in time and then simply current supply or return conductors at other times within the same installed electrical scheme without alteration of the installation in any way.

In this way, a "neutral" is somewhat of a moving target that is recognized when present. No real substantiation was submitted citing specific instances where any alluded misuse occurred.
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

What a sad situation. All of this time and energy for a proposal submitted by a Camera Co. executive. I have a feeling he is just the front man.

I won't oppose this, due to lack of interest, and maybe let it happen so this ridiculous idea will die.

American's are laughed at all over the world, due to the strange statements in the NEC, this will add to the humor and ridicule.
 

electron

Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

bennie:

How will the dictionary definition of "neutral" apply to the term used in the NEC?

[ July 28, 2003, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: electron ]
 

electron

Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Can a Code Scholar explain the following code rule in Article 690 please:

690.62 Ampacity of Neutral Conductor.

If a single-phase, 2-wire inverter output is connected to the neutral and one ungrounded conductor (only) of a 3-wire system or of a 3-phase, 4-wire wye-connected system, the maximum load connected between the neutral and any one ungrounded conductor plus the inverter output rating shall not exceed the ampacity of the neutral conductor.
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Electron: The definition in the dictionary applies in all cases where the word "neutral" appears. The word "neutral" is not a thing. It is a word describing a thing, namely conductor. Conductor is the noun, neutral is the adjective.

In places where only the word "neutral" appears, it is a given, the reader knows this refers to the neutral conductor.

Your other question, 690.62

The answer to this is also a given, not for a code expert, but for a technician of electrical science.

When the city power dumps, the inverter will carry all the single phase load on the phase. The neutral conductor, of the normal power, is likely reduced in size, based on multi-wire systems. Go to 690.10(C) for a clue.
 

electron

Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Electron: The definition in the dictionary applies in all cases where the word "neutral" appears. The word "neutral" is not a thing. It is a word describing a thing, namely conductor. Conductor is the noun, neutral is the adjective.

In places where only the word "neutral" appears, it is a given, the reader knows this refers to the neutral conductor.

Your other question, 690.62

The answer to this is also a given, not for a code expert, but for a technician of electrical science.

When the city power dumps, the inverter will carry all the single phase load on the phase. The neutral conductor, of the normal power, is likely reduced in size, based on multi-wire systems. Go to 690.10(C) for a clue.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=8&q=neutral

Tis is what I found for "neutral" in the dictionary, is this waht you mean?

Physics.

Of or relating to a particle, an object, or a system that has neither positive nor negative electric charge.

Of or relating to a particle, object, or system that has a net electric charge of zero.
Gee, thanks alot bennie for all of your help on this subject! I always read all of your comments and you have an answer for almost every question.

How do you do it and how do you keep up with technology!

Are you available for private tutoring or consulting or teaching assignments on the NEC and can you travel, and do 5-day seminars covering the NEC for the electrical industry?
 

bennie

Esteemed Member
Re: Will the term Neutral be defined in the 2005 NEC?

Electron: I am flattered thank you I need that.

I am 73 years old and living off of an oxygen bottle, this is why I have so many posts, I have nothing but time.

I don't get out much anymore. I have improved lately, I am now on 500MG of steriods each day.

I am financially comfortable due to a good union pension and some investments.

I will continue on this forum as long as Mike Holt let's me.

Best of luck in your seminars.

Regards: Bennie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top