Five and Seven are listed as the main disconnect and are 60 amp breakers. Called out for evaluation by sparky, mostly due to my ignorance I’ll admit, because of load and apparent lack of service amps. Yes, I am taking the electrical online course and anything I can find here as well. My first inspection a little over a week ago gave me two Zinco panels and a bit of an inferiority complex. I’ll keep tryin’ and learnin’. Thanks
Randie
Randie,
What you are looking at here is a “split bus” panel, where disconnecting the top twin breakers (4 I believe) disconnects the whole supply, note that the conductors fron the twin breaker (5 & 7) feed the lower part of the panels.
As there is no single service disconnecting breaker the available amperage can only be based on the size of the SEC’s and the rating of the panel enclosure.
BTW not sure if I understood you but those are not Zinscos
Regards
Gerry
Randie,
As gerry said…it appears to be a Split-Buss setup…however maybe I am dating myself but I do not recall the type of setup to the lower termination point…and then have the one terminate to the middle point as well…
Gerry’s advice is excellent as usual…
Gerry- I think he was stating that he inspected some Zinsco’s a week earlier and they left him confused and concerned so when he came across this panel…he figured he would come to us for advice…not that these were zinscos…
on a personal note…i dont like the bend on the SE going into the terminals…but again thats me…
Anyway…anytime you need some assistance Randie…you go right on ahead and ask…
and the GEC needs a connector on it…
Thanks, again!
You guys rock. and the reference to the Zinco was about a previous inspection from the week before.
Paul, Where do you stand on the whole weephole vs hole (the 1/4" hole) for the GEC in the bottom of most panels. Joe brought it up here a few weeks ago, but I don’t remeber if you weighed in on the issue. Can it be used for the GEC or is it just a weephole?
The bottom breaker in the last picture looks very loose.
Steve,
interesting debate as I did not see it and could not find it. Now, my thoughts on this are sometimes in controversy to others opinions but here is my take…and how I apply it and in MY world it is all that matters…lol
1.) In most panels the smaller KO near the SE KO is is designed for the purpose of the GEC to enter through the opening…I would simply want it supported within 12" of entering in my view.
2.) Weep holes are designed for just that…they would NOT be blocked up like the example listed above…on ALL new panels the smaller GEC hole has to be removed…the manufacturer listed the intent for this opening and we install to the manufacturers specs.
IF it is a truly a WEEP hole in an environment where the WEEP hole is part of the systems design…NO WAY…should not be used…
In all cases if the wire enters into the panel through a normal KO (1/2" for example) the wire would need to be installed in a connector…mainly for protection…being LOOSE in an oversized hole can allow the wire to move 9 its possibly ) and have damage made to it.
So…their is a large difference in my mind between APPROVED holes and weep holes…for example many 4 x 4 boxes have weep holes and mounting holes…that is their purpose and no other purpose…
But in a panel that is for interior only installations…and it MUST be removed to be used as indicated by the MAN-U…I dont have a problem with it.
Did that explain my stance…let me know if i was not clear…
Hey…not all will agree…but in regards to the 1/4" hole at the bottom of the panel near the SE opening…is intended for GEC…not WEEPING…otherwise you would not have to REMOVE the tab from it…
"OK, Be kind. Newbie with alot to learn."
Randie - dont be afraid to post and ask questions. It is the only way to learn. Those that don’t help you - ingnore. Those that do help - thank them and keep asking questions. No question is too trivial. Everyone needs to learn and this is a great place to start.
Paul,
Thanks for the reply. I fully agree with you. Joe Tedesco asked this question on one of the forums that I frequent and there was quite a bit of discussion. Joe’s opinion was that it was a weep hole and not to be used fro the GEC, as best I remember.
And my opinion still stands!
http://electrical-contractor.net/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001686.html
[size=3]"110.14(A)
NECH Commentary:
The phrase [/size]*unused cable or raceway openings *clarifies that openings used for normal operation, such as weep holes, are not required to be closed up.
See 408.7 for requirements on unused openings in switchboard and panelboard enclosures."
Also, see [FONT=Times-Roman]ARTICLE 555— MARINAS AND BOATYARDS
555.11 for more specific reasons for a WEEP HOLE[/FONT]
****"555.11 Circuit Breakers, Switches, Panelboards, and Marine Power Outlets.
**
Circuit breakers and switches installed in gasketed enclosures shall be arranged to permit required manual operation without exposing the interior of [FONT=Times-Roman]the enclosure. All such enclosures shall be arranged with a weep hole to discharge condensation."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times-Roman]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Times-Roman]
[/FONT]**
**[size=3]Ask the NEMA field representative www.nema.org John Minnick (who is also the Chairman of CMP 1) about WEEP HOLES! **[/size]
2008 nec proposal first go around in the rop
1-202 Log #3606 NEC-P01
**(
**110.12(A) )
**Note: The Technical Correlating Committee directs that this Comment
**
and Proposal 1-160 be reported as “Hold” in conformance with 4-4.6.2.2
and 4-4.6.2.3 of the Regulations Governing Committee Projects.
**Submitter: **
Lanny G. McMahill Phoenix, AZ
**Comment on Proposal No:
**1-160
**Recommendation:
**Reject this proposal and revise the section to read as follows:
“(A) Unused Openings. Unused cable or raceway openings in boxes,
raceways, auxiliary gutters, cabinets, cutout boxes, meter socket enclosures,
and equipment cases, or housings shall be effectively closed…”.
**Substantiation:
**Reject this proposal based on the submitterʼs substantiation
that states “By addressing only cable and raceway openings, other unused
openings that also require closing appear to be left out of the 2002 edition.”
Adding the words “circuit breaker” does not change that concern. In theory, if
the list continues to expand, only the specific openings listed are required to be
closed. For example, if a voltmeter, switch or pilot light were removed from
the front door of an enclosure, what code section requires the openings to be
closed? A list is always limiting. Generally, there should be no unused openings
in electrical enclosures, raceways and equipment except for those that are
required for the normal operation or function of the equipment or installation.
Instead of adding items to a list, delete the words “cable or raceway”, “meter
socket”, and “case, or housings” from the existing definition. The remaining
terms are clearly defined in Article 100. Using these terms eliminates the need
to continue to expand the list of “unused openings” that must be closed and
allows for a realistic enforcement practice.
**Panel Meeting Action: Accept
**
**Number Eligible to Vote: **
12
**Ballot Results:
**Affirmative: 11 Negative: 1
**Explanation of Negative:
**
MINICK: The present language should have been retained. There is no substantiation
to include all openings in this requirement. Many enclosures have
weep or drain holes, which must not be closed. Additionally, many unused
mounting holes are not required to be closed to maintain the enclosure integrity.
Additionally, this would preclude ventilated enclosures.
joe,
Have no idea why you went into that…I said NOTHING of weep holes other than if they are their you can’t use them to pass wire through them…anyway…WHAT I said was the smaller hole near the SE opening is designed for use with a GEC and thus can be used…which was what was asked…
Here is MY quote on weep holes and other holes
or
Ahhh…where was any statement made about closing up weep holes…?
Sorry…I did not see the original debate…only can comment on my stance…on the 1/4" GEC Hole…which I am CORRECT about and still stands…
http://users.stargate.net/~vkkelly/weephole1.jpg
This image shows an approved GEC KO…if it HAS to be knocked out it is defined for it’s use…here is also a chart showing it’s use…The use of a weep hole " which are the smaller holes to the far LEFT is not allowed…BUT the 1/4" hole that MUST be knocked out next to the SE is allowed…
here is a link to a panel hole chart…
http://users.stargate.net/~vkkelly/GEC-KO.jpg
Now…as for the bonding…it takes place at the Buss Bar and will bond the enclosure…not so worried about the connection to the enclosure on this…but again…if bought through a larger KO…i want to see a connector for its use.
Paul:
My name was mentioned by:
http://www.nachi.org/forum/showpost.php?p=123845&postcount=9
so I wanted to add to this conversation, this reply didn’t have anything to do with your “personal opinions” based upon your experiences in the trade and as an electrical educator, which you are always entitled to give.
Maybe you should contact UL sometimes before you post publicly, and here is a new source for that procedure.
Joe,
I have no NEED to contact UL…for one I let the manufacturers do that when they have their products evaluated. My job is to CORRECTLY provide knowledge to the INTENT of the use of the approved product.
Again…While I really do not care in others opinions when forming my own…I will say this…I simply replied with my opinion…and do not know your stance on it because I did not see the original post on Nachi in regards to it…
Trust me Joe…I don’t need to LOOK everything up at UL…it is MY JOB to know the practicle use and intentions of the products I work with everyday…day in and day out…it is my JOB to know my product as we again must know…I am a working electrician…:)…and the 1/4" KO in these images are for the GEC…not weeping…thats about ALL i said.
Now…where did I publically DO anything to you…i stated very CLEAR…my answer was based on the small 1/4" KO only…I stated my opinion on weep holes…which these are NOT…again here is what I said…before you took it personally…
Again…my response said nothing about you…and i DO EVERYTHING in public…not BEHIND anyones back…know what i mean…
consider that a source and remember it…
FYI…QUOTE from the website you posted a link too…
So…it is the MANUFACTURERS WILL…and it is perfectly fine…the smaller Ko’s…NOT WEEP HOLES…if thats what we are talking about.
SO…I am PUBLICALLY making this statement…I AM CORRECT…
Teehehe…Correct in my view of the small KO…not weep holes,who in their right mind would stick a wire in a weep hole…dang yankee’s…thehehehehe:mrgreen:
Paul,
I’ll publically agree with you. Sorry, Joe, I think you’re wrong on this one.
So then, you are saying that we can use the “weep hole” for the GEC, or are we talking about two different items?
I was talking about the “weep hole” and I mentioned it because you called it out as it related to another post.
I think this may be where we differ in our opinions, and opinion is all it is on my part, I ‘m of the opinion that the 1/4" hole that comes sealed from the mfg. with a knockout is not a weephole and therefore acceptable as an entrance for the GEC without a fitting. However, the open holes generally found in the corners of the box are weepholes and are just for that purpose and no other and should never be used as an entrance for the GEC or anything else, because to do so would defeat their intended purpose and be a code violation.
I have for years, in many jurisdictions and many different AHJs, knocked out the 1/4’’ hole and used it for the GEC and have never been called on it. But, with that said, if using it is a code violation, I will cease.
My only reason for reading and posting on this or any other forum is education. I think these discussions and the inevitable differences of opinion are very educational and to that end of great value to all who visit and post here.
Thank you Joe and Paul for your contribution to my education.
