InterNACHI


Go Back   InterNACHI Message Board > Specific Inspection Topics > Electrical

Electrical Contains discussions about electrical systems. This includes outlets, panels, wiring, et cetera.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 11/21/08, 12:25 AM
tallen tallen is offline
Active Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,146
tallen is generally well trusted
Please Note: tallen is a non-member guest and is in no way affiliated with InterNACHI or its members.
Default Re: I'm guessing this is a code violation???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy Petey View Post
Actually code says that is fine. It's neutrals that must be alone in each hole.
Most modern panels can accept up to three grounds of the same size per hole.
Thank you for the correction Speedy..

I guess I was thinking about different sized wires terminating under the same lug. It's been a while..

Last edited by tallen; 11/21/08 at 12:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11/21/08, 1:33 PM
Joseph M. Whitt Joseph M. Whitt is offline
InterNACHI Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 42
Joseph M. Whitt is generally well trusted
Default Re: I'm guessing this is a code violation???

Quote:
Originally Posted by dspencer1 View Post
...just not used as a junction. Junctions are not permitted.
Could you explain this a little for me please?

Are you saying that I couldn't have three wires under one wire nut?

Are you saying that I couldn't have a wire come from outside the panel, be joined under a wirenut in that panel and then leave the panel going somewhere else?

Either of the two mentioned above would be code compliant if they did not take up more than 75% of the cross sectional area of the panel.



Mike Whitt
Contractor/Instructor
Reply With Quote
Old 11/21/08, 4:27 PM
Jeffrey R. Wicklander
This message has been deleted by jwicklander. Reason: looking for info...
  #18  
Old 11/22/08, 9:54 AM
Joe Farsetta's Avatar
Joe Farsetta Joe Farsetta is offline
ESOP Committee Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pearl River, NY
Posts: 2,886
Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute Joe Farsetta has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: I'm guessing this is a code violation???

Quote:
Are you saying that I couldn't have a wire come from outside the panel, be joined under a wirenut in that panel and then leave the panel going somewhere else?
I thought that this was not permitted. The panel may not be used as a junction box, which is what you describe.

Old, dead panels are often used for this (an upgrade), but that's something different.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11/22/08, 10:33 AM
Joseph M. Whitt Joseph M. Whitt is offline
InterNACHI Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 42
Joseph M. Whitt is generally well trusted
Default Re: I'm guessing this is a code violation???

Old wives tells gets started and leads to so much confusion that it is a wonder how anyone knows what is allowed and what is not allowed.

Quote:
Enclosures for switches or overcurrent devices shall not be used as junction boxes, auxiliary gutters, or raceways for conductors feeding through or tapping off to other switches or overcurrent devices, unless adequate space for this purpose is provided. The conductors shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 40 percent of the cross-sectional area of the space, and the conductors, splices, and taps shall not fill the wiring space at any cross section to more than 75 percent of the cross-sectional area of that space.


The key word in this statement is “unless”.
If the cross sectional area is not filled more than 75% then taps are allowed in the panel enclosure.

Does it look pretty? NO
Is it allowed? Yes



Mike Whitt
Contractor/Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11/22/08, 2:06 PM
Marc D. Shunk's Avatar
Marc D. Shunk Marc D. Shunk is offline
Active Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central PA
Posts: 1,888
Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information Marc D. Shunk is very trusted source of information
Please Note: Marc D. Shunk is a non-member guest and is in no way affiliated with InterNACHI or its members.
Default Re: I'm guessing this is a code violation???

On a side note, the max of 75% fill is fuller than any panel any home inspector is ever likely to see in his or her lifetime. That's pretty cram-packed full. Electricians joke that the 75% gutter fill is as full as you can get a panel by smashing all the wires into the gutter with the butt of a hammer.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Garage/house fire door Steven C. Meyer General Inspection Discussion 15 2/5/08 8:06 AM
No "H" clips? jbreazeale Structural 7 5/17/07 3:28 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 5:33 PM.


Popular Sections

:

All Sections

Popular

Membership

Inspection Standards

Education

Chapters & Members

Articles & Links

Other Organizations

 

 

 

NACHI.ORG Statistics