310.4 nec

Status
Not open for further replies.

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Since the 7 sets are underground can you use the ambient temperature correction factor of 1.05 for less than 78??

285 * 7 *1.05 = 2095 amps.

As an inspector I would accept this.
Given the shortness of this run, I would expect that more than 10% of the run is not underground and you would be required to use the ampacity of the above ground portion of the run.
 

don_resqcapt19

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Illinois
Occupation
retired electrician
Another option is likely 90 degree terminations, which would put you way over the top.
It doesn't work that way. The equipment also has to be listed for use with at 90?C. It is easy to find conductor termintions listed for 90?c, but not so easy to find equipment so listed.
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
PE (Retired) - Power Systems
I thought that 240.6(B) said that it would still be considered a 2000 amp rating unless you can meet the requirements of 240.6(C).
With todays 'electronic trip' breakers 240.6(C) is so easy to meet, it is a wonder it is even still in the code. All it takes is provisions for a wire tie to seal the adjustment access cover in order to provide a feel good sense of security. Past CMP comments indicate it believes that changing breaker settings is similar to replacing fuses which are less than the switch rating (i.e. 300A fuses in a 400A switch).
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
PE (Retired) - Power Systems
Would it be possible to have an engineer sign off on it?
How many AHJ allow an engineered system to be in non-compliance with the NEC? Maybe some localities allow anything with an 'engineering seal of approval' but this is not a generally accepted practice everywhere.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
How many AHJ allow an engineered system to be in non-compliance with the NEC? Maybe some localities allow anything with an 'engineering seal of approval' but this is not a generally accepted practice everywhere.

I would think it only happens in rare cases. Even then, the engineer is basically taking on liability by putting his approval on something that otherwise does not meet codes or other standards, so he is not likely to want to do such a thing except in very rare cases, and if that does happen, then watch out for what his seal of approval may end up costing.
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
PE (Retired) - Power Systems
I would think it only happens in rare cases. Even then, the engineer is basically taking on liability by putting his approval on something that otherwise does not meet codes or other standards, so he is not likely to want to do such a thing except in very rare cases, and if that does happen, then watch out for what his seal of approval may end up costing.
I know of no State licensing authority that would consider it proper practice for an engineer to ignore, if not blatantly go against, a national code.

It seems contractors like to think that engineering approval overrides applicable codes but doesn't. Only the AHJ can deem installations to be in compliance.
 

kwired

Electron manager
Location
NE Nebraska
I know of no State licensing authority that would consider it proper practice for an engineer to ignore, if not blatantly go against, a national code.

It seems contractors like to think that engineering approval overrides applicable codes but doesn't. Only the AHJ can deem installations to be in compliance.

That is probably correct. Sections like 310.15(C) maybe are misunderstood to mean an engineer can do whatever they want, when in fact there is still a guideline for the engineer to follow.

(C) Engineering Supervision. Under engineering supervision, conductor ampacities shall be permitted to be calculated by means of the following general equation:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top