breaker tie needed?

[John Gromkoski]

This seems like a fairly straight yes in my mind, but wondering if there is reason it is not done in this case - 2 single pole breakers??? The panel is in an apartment building. The pic(s) are of the main panel in the basement - each apartment has a separate distribution panel. The bottom 40 amp breakers were labeled for the subject apartment. Notice the 60 amp breakers have breaker ties, while both the 40 amp breakers in the pic don't have ties. What's the reason?

[Michael Larson]

Not sure what you are seeing.

Both panels have two 2-pole breakers breakers.

And why does the appear to be green wire on some of the breakers?

[John Gromkoski]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Not sure what you are seeing.

Both panels have two 2-pole breakers breakers.

And why does the appear to be green wire on some of the breakers?

The way the panel was labeled, the two pairs of 40 amp single poles were for two different apartments, and the two 2 pole breakers were for two different apartments - 4 apartments total. I was thinking, some apartments have 40 amp service, and some have 60 amp.......Maybe......???

And I do not understand the Green wires on the 40 amp breakers.

[Michael Larson]

Is there possibly a remote distribution panel in each apartment?

[John Gromkoski]

Yes. Each apartment has a distribution panel located in the apartment. Why do you ask? If so, should the two single pole breakers have a breaker tie?

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by jgromkoski

Yes. Each apartment has a distribution panel located in the apartment. Why do you ask? If so, should the two single pole breakers have a breaker tie?

I think there is some misunderstanding on my part here.

See my photo and comment if it is correct.

I see 2 2-pole breakers in each panel with ties provided on all 4.

I can't make out the value of any of the breakers so maybe you could provide a photo that is marked up.

How where all the single pole breakers marked?

[John Gromkoski]

Originally Posted by mlarson

I think there is some misunderstanding on my part here.

See my photo and comment if it is correct.

I see 2 2-pole breakers in each panel with ties provided on all 4.

I can't make out the value of any of the breakers so maybe you could provide a photo that is marked up.

How where all the single pole breakers marked?

The two 2 pole breakers you identified in your photo were labeled as apartment 5E and 5G and were rated 60 AMP. The other breakers, all single pole, rated at 40 AMP each were labeled as apartment(s) 5F and 5H - see photo below. I am assuming the labeling is correct and these are the main breakers for the distribution panels in each of the apartments. I'm trying to figure out why there are no breaker ties on the 40 AMP circuits, and why they are single pole and not double pole. I'm also attaching a photo of the distribution panel in the apartment.

[Michael Larson]

Now it's clear.

Yes they should be tied.



The green wire does not appear in the apartment distribution panel.

Green wire cannot be used for load carrying conductors. So if it is really green call it out.

Would you want to be an electrician seeing a green wire and thinking it was at ground potential when really it wasn't?

[James L. Keilson]

The bottom line is IF any single ploe breakers are being used as a double pole breaker (22v) then YES they need to have a breaker tie.

[John Gromkoski]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Now it's clear.

Yes they should be tied.



The green wire does not appear in the apartment distribution panel.

Green wire cannot be used for load carrying conductors. So if it is really green call it out.

Would you want to be an electrician seeing a green wire and thinking it was at ground potential when really it wasn't?

I (knew) thought they should be tied but the thing that got me was that every single panel I looked at (there were lots of identical panels - each serving 4 different apartments) were all looking identical. All the 2 pole 60 amps had breaker ties, but none of the 40 amps had breaker ties, and I was wondering if there was some crazy reason for it.

And yes, I agree, the Green conductors need to be called out as well.

[Robert Meier]

A CB handle tie would not be permitted for this load if this is a 40 amp feeder to another panel. The requirement is that the CB open both ungrounded conductors automatically which translates to the breaker having an internal trip mechanism not a handle tie.

ARTICLE 215 Feeders

215.3 Overcurrent Protection.
Feeders shall be protected against overcurrent in accordance with the provisions of Part I of Article 240.

240.15 Ungrounded Conductors.
(A) Overcurrent Device Required. A fuse or an overcurrent trip unit of a circuit breaker shall be connected in series with each ungrounded conductor. A combination of a current transformer and overcurrent relay shall be considered equivalent to an overcurrent trip unit.
FPN: For motor circuits, see Parts III, IV, V, and XI of Article 430.
(B) Circuit Breaker as Overcurrent Device. Circuit breakers shall open all ungrounded conductors of the circuit both manually and automatically unless otherwise permitted in 240.15(B)(1), (B)(2), and (B)(3).
(1) Multiwire Branch Circuit. Except where limited by 210.4(B), individual single-pole circuit breakers, with or without identified handle ties, shall be permitted as the protection for each ungrounded conductor of multiwire branch circuits that serve only single-phase line-to-neutral loads.
(2) Grounded Single-Phase and 3-Wire dc Circuits. In grounded systems, individual single-pole circuit breakers with identified handle ties shall be permitted as the protection for each ungrounded conductor for line-to-line connected loads for single-phase circuits or 3-wire, direct-current circuits.
(3) 3-Phase and 2-Phase Systems. For line-to-line loads in 4-wire, 3-phase systems or 5-wire, 2-phase systems having a grounded neutral point and no conductor operating at a voltage greater than permitted in 210.6, individual single-pole circuit breakers with identified handle ties shall be permitted as the protection for each ungrounded conductor.

[Michael Larson]

Robert,

Wouldn't that be true only if there were 220V loads in the remote panel?

[Robert Meier]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Robert,

Wouldn't that be true only if there were 220V loads in the remote panel?

The general rule is that when using a CB for an OCPD ahead of a feeder that the opening of that CB is automatic (or internally tripped), that is unless it meets one of the three exceptions in 240.15(B). If it meets (1), (2) or (3) then it can be single pole CB's with handle ties. The only possible scenario here would be to consider the 40 amp feeder to the remote panel a multi-wire branch circuit as outlined in 240.15(B)(1) which according to the definition of a feeder and of a branch circuit it is not. 240.15(B)(2) would be OK using handle ties for a 240 volt load such as a water heater since it would be a line to line load.

[John Gromkoski]

Excellent stuff guys. Thanks Robert and Mike. I was sure there was a reason for no tie, I just didn't know what it was.

[Michael Larson]

Thanks Robert