Single Strand Copper as Service Cable

[Nick Ostrowski]

I looked at a condo unit yesterday that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure. The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect.

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

[Nick Ostrowski]

I just looked at a zoomed shot of the breaker and the stamped specs from the manufacturer say it is rated for CU/AL AWG #4-3/0.

Assuming I'm interpreting this correction, as long as this feeder cable is a 4 gauge, it may be alright. Is this correct?

[James Duffin]

If you are sure it is #4 you should be ok. #4 is rated at 100 amps for a service.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Not picking up what you're putting down!

Snipped closeup pics aren't helpful.SOLID or STRANDED - not "single strand"!

Not a SERIVCE panel - NOPE, not the same as a main power feeder.

Pulled in conduit or cable not both (not cable pulled in conduit drops to 60C).

Can't use NM for this purpose (60 C max).

Distance and ampacity. Wrong Temp Column.

It wouldn't be a service. It would be a main power feeder to a lighting and appliance panel board (2005 NEC and prior), there would be another disconnect way ahead.Permissible max ampacity drops way down - this isn't SEC.

You do not make mention of what is functioning as a GEC for the FEEDER, nor if (likely if multi-unit) 208 or 240 (poly-phase neutral is current carrying).

What might fly at 100 amps for a SERVICE only hits about 70A max as a feeder, distance, temp, derating.

Get back with acurate details, OCPD at the actual service disconnect, correct specifics on the feeder conductors and complete photo images.;)

[Nick Ostrowski]

Please forgive me for my erroneous use of terminology.

The info I provided is what I've got HG. I got nothing else for you. This was in a 5th story condo and I had no access to other areas of the building for the inspection. What you see in the pics is what I saw. ;)

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

This is not the SERVICE.

The service, most likely is in a grouped area.

You should/could have had access (possibly via building managment/control) to a most likely common area or closet where the unit's SERVICE was located. If individually metered consumption - either by private or POCO metering, there; if electricity included via condo fees, etc. there would still be a disconnect ahead of this FEEDER.

Most likely SERVICE to the building itself is exterior transformer or vault.

I'm quite certain YOU would have SEEN more than the telescopic view of the posted picture regards to the panel itself, and the condo unit you inspected (if you inspected?), unless you're inspecting with blinders on and through a telescope.:rolleyes:

Not picking up what you're putting down regards to conductor(s) description or size either.

The fused disconnect or OCPD line side of this panel is what protects the main power FEEDER to this panel. The OCPD at this panel acts as the accessible disconnect for the occupancy - the main power feeder pictured is not sufficient for providing 100 amps to this occupancy. You need to identify where the protection is for this feeder and what it is rated for.

You then NEED to be precise, as to a cable assembly (such as NM) having been pulled through metalic flexible conduit, a metal clad cable assembly, or individual conductors pulled through conduit, etc. Distinctions with differences TOO.

The entirety of which may be via a trough, chase, shaft, riser, raceway, cable tray, limited common, shared with others, etc. all effects ampacity.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

You don't even give us a full view of the panel or where the conductors/cable enters.

Not the latest, but the first that searched up on the ol' hard drive.

UL wire and cable marking guide, this one is July 2005.

HTH.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Mm hmmmm.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Mmmm Hmmm whatever N.O.

If you don't get it, going into further detail regarding Article 220 esp. parts III and IV isn't going to help you.

If the concept of multi-family occupancy feeders is too complicated for you to comprehend the distinctions, I suggest you defer to an electrician.

It would be improper to identify as you have. Even if it were as you have described, it would still not be correct. 5th floor residential condo.

[Nick Ostrowski]

I don't understand your combative and condescending tone HG. I simply asked a question. Did I offend you in some way? James didn't seem offended. Did I miss something?

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Mmmm Hmmmm, Yes you did, NOW! Do not inject your own "issues" and project them as though they are my "tone".

James was also wrong.

I've told you now more than twice, and explained why your identifications and your assumptions are wrong for "your inspection" of this "5th floor condo" "single strand copper as service cable" panel topic title, discussion, and pictures.

You've presented more than one question on this topic string and repeated erroneous information, apparently still missing the POINT. You have also made disingenous remarks more than once. The latest is most offensive.

Thread title: Single Strand Copper as Service Cable



I looked at a condo unit yesterday that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure. The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect.

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?



Assuming I'm interpreting this correction, as long as this feeder cable is a 4 gauge, it may be alright. Is this correct?


Please forgive me for my erroneous use of terminology.

The info I provided is what I've got HG. I got nothing else for you. This was in a 5th story condo and I had no access to other areas of the building for the inspection. What you see in the pics is what I saw.


Mm hmmmm.


I don't understand your combative and condescending tone HG. I simply asked a question. Did I offend you in some way? James didn't seem offended. Did I miss something?

[Nick Ostrowski]

I don't know what you mean by me having issues HG. Like I said, all I did was ask a question. You'll really seem upset and are taking it out on me but I'm not sure why.

Your explanations are rather verbose at times HG. Perhaps you could condense your posts a bit. It may make them readable.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Goodness HG. I just saw the edits to your post. You're really getting upset here. Thanks but I'll look elsewhere for help. You seem more interested in jabbing at me now than helping.

I don't know how you feel you can judge whether or not somebody is being ingenuous over the computer. Like I said, I was just looking for help. I hope you have a better rest of your day.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Nick, its obviously OVER YOUR HEAD! If you bothered to go back and READ the FIRST reponse I made and you "had a clue" you "might" just GET "some of it"!

A multi-family building. 5th floor Condo, doesn't have a SERVICE cable to the panel IN the unit.

Ampacity ratings for feeder, N & G are calculated DIFFERENTLY then those for a single family home. No 70% adjustments N & G, and certainly NOT using ampacity ratings for supplying SERVICE EQUIPMENT. You have NOT provided or shared the minimal necessary information regarding the EQUIPMENT which is AHEAD (upstream, line side) of this panel.

Your identifications are incorrect. Your assumptions are incorrect. :rolleyes:

[Nick Ostrowski]

???????

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

I don't know how you feel you can judge whether or not somebody is being ingenuous over the computer.


What you see in the pics is what I saw. ;)

NOPE.:rolleyes:


The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit.


:rolleyes:


Did I offend you in some way? ...
Did I miss something?


???????

!!!!!!:rolleyes:

disingenous:

not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness; "an ambitious, disingenuous, philistine, and hypocritical operator, who...exemplified...the most disagreeable traits of his time"- David Cannadine; "a disingenuous excuse"

Not noble; unbecoming true honor or dignity; mean; unworthy; fake or deceptive; Not ingenuous; not frank or open; uncandid; unworthily or meanly artful; Assuming a pose of naivete to make a point or for deception

disingenuously - in a disingenuous manner; "disingenuously, he asked leading questions abut his opponent's work"

disingenuousness - the quality of being disingenuous and lacking candor

[Nick Ostrowski]

HG, I don't see why you feel the need to take a thread that was about nothing more than something I observed during an inspection and turn it into a condescending attack on somebody's character and typos....somebody you've never met. All I did was ask for help.

It's personal attacks like these that will keep newer home inspectors in the shadows on this board and deter them from contributing.

[Jim Port]

I looked at a condo unit yesterday that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure. The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect.

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

I will make some corrections to your post Nick so you can see the difference.

First, the service runs between the meter and the first means of disconnect. Between the first disconnect and the downstream panel would be a feeder. Services for the condos should be grouped together. Remote panels would be in each unit.

If the feeder carries the entire load of the unit it could be sized the same as the service. Most likely the service is set for the building and each unit is tapped off in a trough.

Cables are an assembly of conductors with an overall jacket or sheath. NM-B is a cable.

Individual conductors are run in a raceway like conduit.

I looked at a condo unit yesterday that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The conductors feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was individual copper conductors that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure. The conductors above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect.

If individual copper conductors are used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

[Nick Ostrowski]

Thank you Jim for the well laid out explanation. I know my terminology was off a bit but I didn't think it was exceptionally egregious. However, you didn't seem to have a problem deciphering it. Thanks for your patience.

All this said, is a 4 gauge solid copper conductor acceptable as a feed to the 100 amp disconnect in the remote panel I observed in this condo? Like I mentioned earlier, I had no access to other areas of the building so what I could see inside the inspected panel when I removed the deadfront cover was all I had to work with. Or is there not enough information available to make a proper assessment?

[James Duffin]

Nick....

Your question had enough info for an answer. Here is the title of the table used for this application. It didn't matter if it was a service or a feeder.


Table 310.15(B)(6) Conductor Types and Sizes for
120/240-Volt, 3-Wire, Single-Phase Dwelling Services and
Feeders. Conductor Types RHH, RHW, RHW-2, THHN,
THHW, THW, THW-2, THWN, THWN-2, XHHW,
XHHW-2, SE, USE, USE-2

[Jerry Peck]

Picking up where Jim Port left off ... at "conductors" instead of "cable".

With the presumption that you are "conductors" in a raceway and not "cable" as NM cable for the feeders to the panel in the condo unit, then this would apply:
- 310.3 Stranded Conductors.
- - Where installed in raceways, conductors of size 8 AWG and larger shall be stranded.
- - - Exception: As permitted or required elsewhere in this Code.

I would need to look through the code to check out the "Exception: As permitted or required elsewhere in this Code." to see if those feeders would have been allowed to be solid instead of stranded.

As Jim said (I believe it was Jim who said it) - #4 AWG copper is rated for 100 amps for service entrance conductors AND feeder conductors if they supply ALL loads with the dwelling unit.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Thanks Jerry, Jim, and James. I appreciate your willingness to share and educate in a tone that is conducive to learning.

[Jim Port]

Yes proper terminolgy is correct and the use of incorrect terms can dramatically change the answer. However chastising someone instead of helping to further their knowledge is not the correct way to deal with the situation. Simply repeating "You are wrong" without explaining the whys or hows adds nothing to the situation. If the explanation was not understood the first time perhaps it should be explained another way. This is how a true teacher can reach out to all the students in the room, not just the easy to reach ones. However, the teacher must be secure in their knowledge of the subject to be able to understand what is actually being asked and being able to adapt the knowledge to the problem.

Table 310.15(B)(6) from the NEC allows #4 copper to be used for 100 amp services and feeders for single phase 120/240 volt dwelling services and feeders. The entire load must be served to utilize this table. If only a portion of the load is served Table 310.16 would need to be used to size the conductors.

[Jim Port]

- 310.3 Stranded Conductors.
- - Where installed in raceways, conductors of size 8 AWG and larger shall be stranded.
- - - Exception: As permitted or required elsewhere in this Code.

I would need to look through the code to check out the "Exception: As permitted or required elsewhere in this Code." to see if those feeders would have been allowed to be solid instead of stranded.


I believe the only exception would be #6 or #4 grounding or bonding conductors.

It would be too impractical for the larger size conductors to the solid instead of stranded. They would be too hard to bend and you would not have the surface area required to conduct the required ampacity. The electrons flow on the outer surface of the conductors. Multiple smaller strands allow greater surface area to the conductor.

[Jerry Peck]

I believe the only exception would be #6 or #4 grounding or bonding conductors.

Jim,

Thanks - I knew the grounding and bonding conductors were an exception, but I did not want to stick my foot out there for easy eating and say they were the only exceptions, thus my "I would need to look through the code to check out the "Exception ... " wording.


It would be too impractical for the larger size conductors to the solid instead of stranded. They would be too hard to bend and you would not have the surface area required to conduct the required ampacity. The electrons flow on the outer surface of the conductors. Multiple smaller strands allow greater surface area to the conductor.

Correct to all of the above.

[Corn Walker]

It would be too impractical for the larger size conductors to the solid instead of stranded. They would be too hard to bend and you would not have the surface area required to conduct the required ampacity. The electrons flow on the outer surface of the conductors. Multiple smaller strands allow greater surface area to the conductor.

This so-called "skin effect" that you are referring to is not applicable to most solid conductors you're likely to see. At 60Hz, the skin depth of copper conductors is approximately 8.5mm. This means a solid conductor with a diameter of 17mm will conduct through to the core of the wire. For reference, 4/0 AWG wire has a diameter of 11.7mm, well within the skin depth of the material. Solid copper conductors are therefore fully utilized up to 450 kcmil. Even if the size of the conductor exceeds the skin depth of the material, it just means you are wasting the material at the center.

[Roger Frazee]

I gotta know what wire that is ....:)

I have never seen #4 awg insulated solid in building wire.

I have seen #4 solid transformer black insulated riser wire.

there used to be #4 NM-b but I'm not sure it was soild conductors.

[James Duffin]

About the only time skin effect comes into play is in high voltage transmission lines. With low voltages it is not usually a problem.

[Corn Walker]

Correct to all of the above.

I don't know if the NFPA actually lists skin effect as being the reason for using stranded at sizes greater than 8 AWG, but if they do it's bogus. There is no skin effect for copper wire sizes less than 450 kcmil.

Now maintaining proper bending radius I would agree with. I've wired a transformer with 2 AWG solid copper and it was definitely a pain to bend.

[matt faust]

To Mr. H.G. Watson...........Sr.

I've been on this board for 10 minutes and you have already
proved that there is a moron on each and every bulletin board.

Your response to the questioner - is inappropriately esoteric,
badgering, bullying, and sophomoric.

If I were the monitor on this board - you'd be gone.

mf:cool:

[Roger Frazee]

Nick

This is a 5 story condo and we do need a few more details about the service in order to answer accurately. A big help would be if you could tell us if the building service was 3 phase or Single Phase. I ask this because the table that allows #4 copper to carry 100 amps for a main power feeder is for 3 wire 120/240 volt single phase. There is a good chance that the feeder to the condo unit is 120/208 single phase taken from a 4 wire wye 3 phase service. In which case the #4 goes out the window for 100 amps.

There will also be a ocpd (main breaker) in the service equipment for this condo unit probably located out at the meter bank. The size of that OCPD is important (necessary) in answering your question. The 100 amp breaker in the panel that is in the unit (your photo) is not protecting that feeder.... the 'main' breaker in the service equipment is protecting that feeder.

These are all points that Hg brought up. I can't speak to his tone but what he is asking is relevant to getting a correct answer for you.

If you cannot find out the actual size of the feeder conductors (no guessing) then we can only tell you what the minimum size is going to be.

[Rollie Meyers]

I thought I would post from the 2008 NEC the section pertaining to the discussion.......


(6) 120/240-Volt, 3-Wire, Single-Phase Dwelling Services
and Feeders. For individual dwelling units of onefamily,
two-family, and multifamily dwellings, conductors,
as listed in Table 310.15(B)(6), shall be permitted as
120/240-volt, 3-wire, single-phase service-entrance conductors,
service-lateral conductors, and feeder conductors
that serve as the main power feeder to each dwelling unit
and are installed in raceway or cable with or without an
equipment grounding conductor. For application of this section,
the main power feeder shall be the feeder between the main disconnect and the panelboard that supplies, either by
branch circuits or by feeders, or both, all loads that are part
or associated with the dwelling unit. The feeder conductors
to a dwelling unit shall not be required to have an allowable
ampacity rating greater than their service-entrance conductors.
The grounded conductor shall be permitted to be
smaller than the ungrounded conductors, provided the requirements
of 215.2, 220.61, and 230.42 are met.

Bold by me.

[kenny martin]

Sorry but had to give a quick defense to H.G. in reference to Matt Fausts comment.. (not that he needs it)
Matt, you appear to have the same ability to make offensive remarks,

I'm sure somebody, however not me, would be offended by your comment posted below and you barely have posted anything. I'm sure of ONLY one thing concerning you.. you will likely NEVER have the vast knowledge H.G. does and I for one as many others are more than willing to put up with his old school atitude (along w/ J.P.) towards wanting accurate and informative information when posting here. He just wants inspectors to stand up alot straiter in this profession and be accurate in both reporting and seeking knowledge..


Re: 10,000 Inspections .... and more
Do the math................
All inflated inspection numbers are bogus.

Even highly reputable - very educated inspectors inflate their numbers.
It's human nature.

mf.:cool:
__________________
Matt Faust
Real Estate Inspector

Sometimes you just have to sit back and listen, especially when the other knows FAR more than you will likely ever know..

[kenny martin]

Oh yea! and Nick too.. some are laughing at you now...

"It takes a big man to cry. It takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man". - Jack Handey

... sorry, couldn't resist that one, :) the quote is just so stupid!! :confused: I like to smack around the idiots who laugh at the weak. :D

[Nick Ostrowski]

Nick

This is a 5 story condo and we do need a few more details about the service in order to answer accurately. A big help would be if you could tell us if the building service was 3 phase or Single Phase. I ask this because the table that allows #4 copper to carry 100 amps for a main power feeder is for 3 wire 120/240 volt single phase. There is a good chance that the feeder to the condo unit is 120/208 single phase taken from a 4 wire wye 3 phase service. In which case the #4 goes out the window for 100 amps.

There will also be a ocpd (main breaker) in the service equipment for this condo unit probably located out at the meter bank. The size of that OCPD is important (necessary) in answering your question. The 100 amp breaker in the panel that is in the unit (your photo) is not protecting that feeder.... the 'main' breaker in the service equipment is protecting that feeder.

These are all points that Hg brought up. I can't speak to his tone but what he is asking is relevant to getting a correct answer for you.

If you cannot find out the actual size of the feeder conductors (no guessing) then we can only tell you what the minimum size is going to be.

I'm not debating the info and questions HG posed. And I now understand far more info is needed to provide an accurate answer but like I said above, I had access to no other areas of the building. No utility rooms, basements, storage areas, nothing. If I don't have enough info, then that is all that needs to be said.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Oh yea! and Nick too.. some are laughing at you now...

"It takes a big man to cry. It takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man". - Jack Handey

... sorry, couldn't resist that one, :) the quote is just so stupid!! :confused: I like to smack around the idiots who laugh at the weak. :D

So Kenny, you're one of those types who likes standing on the fringes of a fight and getting in your cheap shots from afar. You have two posts in this thread and neither is of any good use.

[Gary Bottomley]

I just looked at a zoomed shot of the breaker and the stamped specs from the manufacturer say it is rated for CU/AL AWG #4-3/0.

Assuming I'm interpreting this correction, as long as this feeder cable is a 4 gauge, it may be alright. Is this correct?
Nick:
After reading all of the replies following this amended post it would be my response to address the underlined portions of the above posts as follows in the inspection report: (assuming SOP of most basic HI standards)
The #4AWG conductors to the 100amp breaker in the panel may be undersized without further complete knowledge of the main service to the building and the method of routing the conductors to the unit panel. These areas were not accessible and the evaluation this condition would be outside the scope of this inspection. The building management or HOA should provide a certification to the safety of this installation by a qualified, licensed electrician or the Electrical Engineer of Record.
IMO :rolleyes:

[Nick Ostrowski]

Makes sense. Thanks for the input Gary.

[James Duffin]

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

How did that one simple statement turn into a CF? Amazing....

[kenny martin]

Maybe not to you Nick, I wasn't even being hateful towards you anyway just poking fun at the "stupid" saying at the bottom of your posts. And I didn't post anything else due to the fact that much more intelligent than I have already answered and are answering. I've learned somewhat that when those who know more than you speak, shut up, listen and learn.. as for the post directed at MF it was completely appropriate. ;)

[Corn Walker]

Oh yea! and Nick too.. some are laughing at you now...

"It takes a big man to cry. It takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man". - Jack Handey

... sorry, couldn't resist that one, :) the quote is just so stupid!! :confused: I like to smack around the idiots who laugh at the weak. :D

All of the Jack Handey quotes are stupid; that was the point. Are you unfamiliar with the regular Saturday Night Live segment "Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handey" from which these were borne? Check out his website: Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handey (http://www.deepthoughtsbyjackhandey.com/index.html)

[Roger Frazee]

How did that one simple statement turn into a CF? Amazing....

Yeah I've been wondering the same thing James....:)

However in defense of HG he did not become upset or combative ... in my opinion he was trying to extract the correct information to answer the question. After being put on hold ... by the OP ... he lost his patience ....:D

[neal lewis]

I'm quite certain YOU would have SEEN more than the telescopic view of the posted picture regards to the panel itself, and the condo unit you inspected (if you inspected?), unless you're inspecting with blinders on and through a telescope.:rolleyes:Maybe so, Roger, but it comes out in such a dickhead sort of way.

[Nick Ostrowski]

I'll respectfully disagree Roger. I mentioned early on in my first reply "This was in a 5th story condo and I had no access to other areas of the building for the inspection. What you see in the pics is what I saw." I literally had no other info to provide so there was nothing to hold back.

No, I did not provide a pic of the entire panel and I could have/should have. But again, I had no access to any other area of the building. I mentioned this very early on.

[John Arnold]

Maybe so, Roger, but it comes out in such a dickhead sort of way.

How true.

"Bloviating" is one of my favorite words.

[Roger Frazee]

Maybe so, Roger, but it comes out in such a dickhead sort of way.

Actually I think he is just being sarcastic in that comment. I think you expect a professional reply to your question(s) and all to often you do not get one. Some people handle that differently than others... :)

If you follow the thread Hg made 4 or 5 posts, before things went south, requesting NIck to get focused on what needed to be explained so his question would be answered. IMO it was Nick who responded with Ummmm Hmmmmm that caused the thread to deteriorate. That response is rather insulting ...no??

[Nick Ostrowski]

Roger, my reply (ummm hmmmm) which you feel got the ball rolling was in response to the very quote Neal picked out. You feel it was just sarcasm, Neal saw it differently. I saw it as a bit a both.....and unnecessary. If you want to talk about professional responses to questions, that goes both ways. Rolling eye emoticons, typing in all caps which can be taken by some people in typed format as yelling, and making references to inspecting with blinders on do not fit that bill.

[Roger Frazee]

Roger, my reply (ummm hmmmm) which you feel got the ball rolling was in response to the very quote Neal picked out. You feel it was just sarcasm, Neal saw it differently. I saw it as a bit a both.....and unnecessary. If you want to talk about professional responses to questions, that goes both ways. Rolling eye emoticons, typing in all caps which can be taken by some people in typed format as yelling, and making references to inspecting with blinders on do not fit that bill.


Nick

As I said I think he was just being sarcastic. I do agree with you about the use of !! CAPS and emoticons .. those are easily misunderstood and care should be used when trying to communicate with them.

[James Duffin]

If you have a specific question about more information then just ask the question without insulting someones intelligence in the process. It's not hard to do if all you really want is information.

[Roger Frazee]

If you have a specific question about more information then just ask the question without insulting someones intelligence in the process. It's not hard to do if all you really want is information.

I agree ...there is no reason it cannot be that simple.

[Bruce Adams]

Nick
Really all that needed to be said on this is that it needs to be looked at by a Licensed Master Electrician. Is it a Murrey box or a Siemens box. Are the wires correct. That is questionable. Anything else can't be seen by you pictures.
I thank those that took the time to give you some training and understanding. I condemn those on this site that tried to put themselves above others and to try to put you down. Keep asking your questions.
Bruce

[bob smit]

Enuf w/the bickering already. Suggestion; if U don't like or appreciate the assumed tone of a particular post, ignore it.
Not responding will keep the info flowing without clogging up the wheels with useless dirt.
If U don't like what I just stated.......ignor it!

Thanks to those who saved me from responding to the skin effect issue and that the exception allowing the reduced SE conductors in residential use, also apply to the remote feeder if it supplies the entire load.

J.P., I'm also racking my pea brain to recall if solids of a certain size other than what's stated can be used (exceptions). Post em if U find.

[Stuart Brooks]

Perhaps the "snowbird" is bored and needs a life outside of this group. I don't think it anyone responding to this group can "TELL" anyone else what to do or expect everyone to agree with his comments or opinions. I now expect to to be thoroughly castigated for this comment. Bring it ON! I'll just ignore it.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

This equipment came set up for use as service equipment from the factory.

If you have improperly identified it as service equipment, and a "service cable" have you then overlooked the required use of a neutral insulation/isolation bar kit?

The bus posts and the nut securing the terminals for the "mains" are 1/4", 1/4-20 actually to be precise.

This should give you a HINT as to why both the tenor of the response to the statement indicating all that the OP saw was pictured (which as the OP expanded on the supposed "armored conduit" - no such thing and the feeder conductors not pictured - obviously as later admitted he has pictures showing the greater entirety of the panelboard but for whatever reason has chosen to first deny their existance, then after admitting their existance, refused to share them - it was both THAT sarcastic comment early on claiming that what I saw in the pictures he supplied was both as he indicated, and all that HE saw, and the Hmmmmm post AND the ?????? post that I KNEW the sarcasm and the DISingenuous-ness of the post and the topic string was present.

Shall we beat to death the 4 AWG solid CU conductor counter-position, when the OP doesn't know the difference between a cable and a condutor, or service equipment from a power feeder panelboard?

I responded to wit, as I was clear, concise, and not the least verbose to the "faking ignorance" had hit the high-wader mark. Pictured are NOT No. 4 AWG CU solid feeder conductors. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to compare INSULATED conductors against a gauge of 1/4" which is 0.25 and see that in no way what is pictured could possibly be (insulated as it is) 0.20 insulated let alone 0.20 bare - 4 AWG bare (uninsulated) would be GREATER than 0.20".

Now we're supposed to believe that this "proposed" 4 AWG (no way) conductor is solid copper!

If you think a power feeder to a condo on the 5th floor condo is a service, and have already misidentified as same, how are we supposed to believe you have then verified or even checked for the required INSULATED neutral kit?

If you're wondering, that's most likely WHY no further pictures were forthcoming.

BTDT with this frequent poster.

He'll claim he knows, but that doesn't excuse the title or the content of the OP or subsequent posts. When caught in the headlights divert attention and claim someone was out of line when you play games after realizing you posted with foot-in-mouth syndrome. Been there with your "drywall inspection" fiasco, most recently. Totally ignoring the obvious and caught with pants down.

It is not a mistake, it is an embarassment. Obtuse, then blaming others, diversion crying foul. Projecting and claiming some sort of wounding by others. You posted, you titled, you missed the obvious, then tried diverting claiming a #4 solid CU was in the picture.

Its not simple semantics, it is critical. Its 101. Service vs. feeder.

Borrowing a bit from the more recent UL marking guide for panelboards....
" Most installers recongnize the importance of bonding the neutral to the enclosure at the service. Many do not realize, however, that it is just as important to OMIT the bonding and provide a fully insulated neutral when the panelboard is used in non-service applications.If neutrals are bonded at distribution points on the load side of the serivce disconnecting means, the neutral currents take parallel paths through neutral conductoers and the grounding conductor (which may include metal raceways). If neutral conductors open, the full neutral current flows over the grounding conductor system (which may include metal racways). As a result of this loss of the neutral connection, stel raceway joints and box connections overheat, creating a potential fire hazard."

Now, if you knew a bit about Siemens and Murray panelboards...May not be a photoshop wiz, but I can establish a grid reference and know that insulated there is no way that is a 4AWG insulated solid CU conductor in that terminal.

Get it? got it? good.

P.S. Nick, I see you somewhat like the dualality character Jim Carey played in "Me, Myself and Irene", that evil twin alter-personality side, always asking, "Wanna dance???" off-the-wall demanding a fight and being VERY crude and a bit out of whack!

Refresher: Not picking up what you're putting down!:D Three is usually the limit....throwin' in five, is over the top.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Here you go HG. My only other pic of the panel. If you have something to offer, great.

Personally, I would never berate, admonish, or try to demean somebody who used improper terminology or may be off in an assessment. This type of behavior keeps other people lurking in the shadows and deters them from contributing.

[Benjamin Thompson]

HG, were you abused as a child?
Or did you eat paint chips?
Gotta be one or the other.

[Corn Walker]

The feeder may not be 4 awg, it might be 8 awg. But would it matter if the OCPD upstream of the feeder is sized correctly? Unfortunately Nick says he did not have access to the common equipment.

Access to common areas is important. I was helping a friend once with his electrical and discovered his service had been mislabeled. I was searching for a j box somewhere because his feeder left the service panel with a black cable jacket and entered his subpanel (since it was a basement condo unit it's technically subterranean :p ) with a grey cable jacket. Turns out he had been paying for his neighbor's usage and vice versa for three years.

[LEO304E CARR]

I looked at a condo unit yesterday that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure. The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect.

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

Nick ,those wires in the 100 breaker are #8 solid

Any thing larger than # 8 would be special order from the supply house and very costly

[Larry Morrison]

HG, were you abused as a child?
Or did you eat paint chips?
Gotta be one or the other.

I think someone dropped a house on his sister.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Ah yes, three plus trolls contributing, par for the course.

Now you've had at least five additional parties, three of which self-proclaimed electricians, addressing what I've been pointing out now from the beginning.
Two of which jumping on board when I pointed out the size of the bus stub and securing nut.

As far as service vs. feeder, again that's 101.



Personally, I would never berate, admonish, or try to demean somebody who used improper terminology or may be off in an assessment. This type of behavior keeps other people lurking in the shadows and deters them from contributing.

You would never...? Well you have.

Berating originally? ME? Nope. Demeaning? Nope, not me. Explanations, follow-up questions to your first two posts, and gentle requests for further photos and explanations as to your use of identifications/terms/descriptions were ignored, responded to caliously, sarcastically, etc. and without critical thinking. Admonishing? Sure, I pointed out your errors in both the identification of the equipment and its application. Highlighting for emphasis absolutely. I do and will use capital letters to highlight KEY words where the person addressed has missed the mark, especially critical distinctions. Often a bug in the vb script hangs up certain formatting functions of the comment editor. Capitals are for emphasis, and sure, if you'd like, a LOUDER or STRONGER "voice".

It was your responses to explanations as to why your identifications of the pictured equipment and your gross assumptions were incorrect, and request for more complete photos and explanations were indeed: berating, complaining, sarcastic, and disingenuous. You missed the distinctions, made erroneous identifications, continued in an unsupportable vain, then complain when they (your critical errors) are highlighted with emphasis, and yet you still miss the information.

Apparently, as often has been the case of late, your own embarassment and shame at having missed the mark on so many levels (yet again), you bring on personal attacks, and blame the messenger because your ego was bruised; and insisting and demanding support for your #4 AWG solid CU conductor theory/identification/"question" led to further self-inflicted wounding of your ego/pride and embarassment.

[John Arnold]

Ah yes, three plus trolls...

Don't forget, folks, that Brian has provided a nice big red REPORT button because he wants us to use it.

[Roger Frazee]

HG

Not going to get into the other stuff but liked your grid work as to determining the conductor size. I also was comparing that 1/4 20 to the wire insulation and had the same thoughts... But.. also had a red flag immediately as you just don't see 4 awg solid used as a feeder in that situation (5 story condo) or any I can think of in my experience.

NICK

Too bad about this thread but in hind sight Hg made a straight forward attempt in the early posts to see if maybe you saw more than you were saying and just maybe by answering his questions the forum responders could organize your question so that it could be correctly addressed. IMO and not being condescending your knowledge of electrical needs to improve and this is a good place to improve that knowledge.

I remain confused as to how Hg can be the villain as he was obviously the most knowledgable person responding for your question on the feeder size for this 5 story condo panelboard. Perhaps considering your CE on electrical you could pose your question as


" What information do I need to supply to the forum to determine if the feeder, in shown panel, is sized correctly? " And forget about what you think the wire size maybe. Then that sets up a question that shows your strong point may not be electrical and becomes more of a learning type question. IMO that is all Hg was trying to get from you with his posts. Responses like "thats all I have for you" is this photo and I had 'no access' were somewhat confusing to understand as being the case.

The last comment I'll make is in the form of questions ... In my experience if I needed access to determine a correct installation or a feeder size because I was concerned ... be it service equipment or a locked electrical room ..whatever.. that access has always been granted if I so asked building maintenance authority....someone has the keys...:eek:

Was this denied to you ? Or was determining the feeder size not really necessary and this thread is more of a curiosity question?

Dare I suggest you start another thread and we can start over ...:)

[Nick Ostrowski]

I don't know how many other ways I can say it. Where does the confusion come in when I said "This was in a 5th story condo and I had no access to other areas of the building for the inspection". I really meant I had no access to other areas. No basement, no roof, no utility areas, nothing. The inside of the inspected unit was all I had to work with. That's it. With this in mind, why were the same questions still being asked when I already said I couldn't answer them?

The point of this thread was to try and determine the adequacy of the feeder size. And again, all that needed to be said was I wasn't providing enough information to make a full assessment. And.......since I said I had no access to other areas of the building (like I said very early on), I don't know how I can be expected to answer questions I do not have answers for. You can ask the same question 10 different ways but at the end of the day, the answers were not going to change. I believe someone famous once said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different outcome.

Should I have tried to push for additional access to a utility area? It appears so. But I had asked the realtor at the beginning of the inspection about other areas of the building such as the roof and she said we did not have access to any other areas.

Do I need to be accurate with my terminology? Yes. And I was not. It's funny because as I typed the opening post to this thread, I thought some of my terminology might be off but didn't think it was so egregious and muddy that anybody with reasonable patience and intellect would not be able to make heads or tails of it. Apparently this is not the case which is confusing because some people were able to figure out what I was asking despite my terminology.

[James Duffin]

Nick's orignal question was:

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

My answer in #3 answered his question. The stuff from #4 on down was not really necessary. He never said it was #4.

[Roger Frazee]

Nick's orignal question was:

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

My answer in #3 answered his question. The stuff from #4 on down was not really necessary. He never said it was #4.

Hi James

I do not remember him saying it was # 4 either only that it looked like it might be #4. Your answer could be correct if this situation is a 3 wire 120/240 service or main power feeder ... common if a single family dwelling or duplex. However .. table 310.15 b6 may not apply in this situation. Minimum size for a main power feeder takes on a whole new meaning if 3 phase 4 wire 120/208Y and 5 story condo building. Not enough information to answer the question as presented ... as we have already established.

I am not even going to try to figure out how this thread ended up the way it did.

[James Duffin]

Since the picture showed a single phase panel....three phase was not a consideration in my answer.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Not enough information to answer the question as presented ... as we have already established.

I am not even going to try to figure out how this thread ended up the way it did.

And that's all that needed to be said Roger.

We know how this thread ended up the way it did.

[Roger Frazee]

Since the picture showed a single phase panel....three phase was not a consideration in my answer.

Perhaps I should say the building service is 208Y120 3 phase with single phase metering.

Does that explain my point better and why there is a single phase panel in the condo unit? ... Only it is single phase 120/208 not 120/240.

The meter bank will get all three phases and each meter in the group of meters gets different pairs of phases. If a meter bank has 6 meters, 2 will have A and B, 2 will hve B and C, and 2 will be C and A phases. I hope that makes sense.

This way the phases are balanced and the condo units receive a normal single phase 3 wire with ground supply on the feeders to the units panelboard only the high voltage is 208 volts single phase not 240 volts single phase.

Table 310.15b6 will not apply in this situation

[James Duffin]

That's a lot of assuming going on there to be based on the picture in the first post! :)

[Roger Frazee]

That's a lot of assuming going on there to be based on the picture in the first post! :)

Maybe so .. but it is a 5 story condo ... anyway I'm moving on from this ... time to let it go..... :)

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Ampacity: The current in amperes a conductor can carry continuously under the conditions of use without exceeding its temperature rating.

Determining allowable ampacity doesn't stop with James' citation when it comes to such a dwelling, in a 5th floor condo.

I'd say its safe to assume there are at least four other feeders in a 5-floor building (fair to say at least four other occupancies and a common area feed~!). Its more likely than not to be an elevator (at least 5 floors, assuming at least four of them are at or above grade). Reasonble to presume some riser/lifter pumps for water supply. Fair to reasonable assume some fire sprinkling or suppression system and exit lighting at least in common areas.

That's at least now how many other conductors in some common wireway, trough, tapped off, etc. It matters what is required (allowable ampacity) at the service disconnect to provide the 80 percent continuous without exceeding the allowable ampacity (i.e. temperature rating of the conductor(s), etc.

James' citation tells you the feeder from the disconnect doesn't have to exceed the allowable ampacity of what is brought Load side to the service disconnect. That doesn't mean there aren't possibly required adjustments for the allowable ampacity at that service disconnect. That citation does not exclude adjustments to the allowable ampacity due to number of conductors in a raceway, or load diversity of those shared raceway conductors for large multi-family occupancies, and does not apply to buildings which have other than 120/240 single-phase service.

Then we have to consider the path and what other current carrying conductors ride IN that path, and the character of those loads (diversity).

Is there a 4 awg solid copper conductor that may be used for this feeder to this equipment? No, I do not believe so.

Would 4awg stranded copper be sufficient for an allowable ampacity 100 amp feeder with a planned 80 amp continuous (3 hr. or more) design use, to the 5th floor condo? Perhaps, but more likely not, it depends. Is there any other form of occupancy in the building itself or load, other than purely residential and straight 120/240 single phase building service? If so you cannot use James' citation no matter what.

Are the pictured conductors sufficient for this eqiupment? No, I do not believe so, even if the ahead disconnect is a lesser ampacity (see closing paragraphs regarding wire size and the mains having been photographed and described.

Access may have to be arranged, but it must be available, just may not have been arranged or available at the timing of your "inspection", or perhaps was or would be refused to anything/anyone less than an electrician working under a bonded/insured electrical contractor, fully trained, qualified, and adorned with the correct PPE, safety tools, inspection equipment and training to do so. Access by qualified persons, perhaps in the company of the building engineer, maintenance, management, whatever, would/should be available to the qualified party who can be contracted to investigate this on behalf of the future purchaser, tenant, or present owner or occupant. There may be a fee related to reasonable costs/supervision/attendance involved in this access, that's a matter of state/local rules/laws, condo law, controlling documents, rules & regulations, etc.

125 A or less is also required to know if the mains CB for the panelboard and that which preceeds it is marked for 60, 60/75 or 75 C.

Armored conduit, no, doesn't exist. Armored cable, not for 100 amps allowable ampacity. Flexible metallic conduit - not more than six feet in total in the path load side.

Then one wonders the AGE of the building, size, the service equipment, etc. and vintage of condo/residential status, history of mixed occupancy, and if the pictured panelboard was a replacement to a pre-existing split bus...and if there is or was a delta breaker ahead.

Panelboards suitable for use as service equipment with the appropriate main terminal provisions can be used with reduced wire sizes indicated in Section 310.15(B)(6) and Table 310.15(B)(6) of the NEC if the wire connectors are also suitable for the reduced wire size.

So, in summary and conclusion:

If your real question is from what is pictured, is there a legitimate concern to call for a qualified electrical contractor/electrician to come in and evaluate the appropriateness of the equipment and supplying feeder thereto, based solely upon the first pictures you submitted and described the conditions, the answer is yes. A full evaluation needs to include access to the origin of this feeder and the disconnect line side. However by itself, as pictured and indicated, you're "covered" or justified making this referral, due to the listed/classified terminal/connector size (in relation to the feeder conductor size, or rather lack thereof). The language panel wiring diagram and labeling would be further supportive regarding use as other than service equipment.

The mains terminals connectors pictured and described are not suitable for the reduced wire size of the pictured conductors. I believe we have proven there to be a concensus that those pictured are too small to possibly be #4 AWG. IOW the connectors are too big for the conductors.

As I recall you indicated earlier it was indicated a #4 AWG to a 3/0 on the breaker, although the usual terminal lugs supplied and/or availble for this panel category (siemens/murray) for use with a 100 amp main CB would range #4 - 2/0 AWG (2/0 being the threshold for next level/increase for wire bending space),

Perhaps you've learned some things with this thread, one of which might be things to consider documenting having asked about, and disclaimer language, such as location of service disconnect, and accessibility, and arrangment or coordination of access to same, adding to the list of things such as utilites being on, etc. when coordinating inspections of such properties, and taking more and/or better pictures when encountering such concerns. Most, if not all, of the necessary "backup" and researchable detail information would be included in the panel labeling.

[Chad Fabry]

Been away for a year or so, I swear to God this is the first thread I picked to review. There's 15 minutes I can't get back.

The feeders look no larger than 8AWG, but as has been discussed, they may be fed from a 40 amp breaker.

I'm having flashbacks to crazy Al Austin the "engineer"

[John Arnold]

Been away for a year or so, I swear to God this is the first thread I picked to review. There's 15 minutes I can't get back...

You must be a speed reader.
Welcome back!

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Panelboards suitable for use as service equipment with the appropriate main terminal provisions can be used with reduced wire sizes indicated in Section 310.15(B)(6) and Table 310.15(B)(6) of the NEC if the wire connectors are also suitable for the reduced wire size.

So, in summary and conclusion:

If your real question is from what is pictured, is there a legitimate concern to call for a qualified electrical contractor/electrician to come in and evaluate the appropriateness of the equipment and supplying feeder thereto, based solely upon the first pictures you submitted and described the conditions, the answer is yes. A full evaluation needs to include access to the origin of this feeder and the disconnect line side. However by itself, as pictured and indicated, you're "covered" or justified making this referral, due to the listed/classified terminal/connector size (in relation to the feeder conductor size, or rather lack thereof). The language panel wiring diagram and labeling would be further supportive regarding use as other than service equipment.

The mains terminals connectors pictured and described are not suitable for the reduced wire size of the pictured conductors. I believe we have proven there to be a concensus that those pictured are too small to possibly be #4 AWG. IOW the connectors are too big for the conductors.

As I recall you indicated earlier it was indicated a #4 AWG to a 3/0 on the breaker, although the usual terminal lugs supplied and/or availble for this panel category (siemens/murray) for use with a 100 amp main CB would range #4 - 2/0 AWG (2/0 being the threshold for next level/increase for wire bending space), Conductors smaller than #4 AWG are not allowed to be used in those terminals.

Perhaps you've learned some things with this thread, one of which might be things to consider documenting having asked about, and disclaimer language, such as location of service disconnect, and accessibility, and arrangment or coordination of access to same, adding to the list of things such as utilites being on, etc. when coordinating inspections of such properties, and taking more and/or better pictures when encountering such concerns. Most, if not all, of the necessary "backup" and researchable detail information would be included in the panel labeling.

Sometimes the obvious deficiency, defect, safety issue, violation, in and of ITSELF, the other questions MOOT - or irrelevant regards the HI. Pin down the ISSUE ITSELF - OBSERVE, REPORT and REFER to those QUALIFED.

This installation is OBVIOUSLY defective - regardless of what may be line side - the conductors pictured are too small for the lug terminals, they are NOT #4 AWG.:rolleyes: It doesn't MATTER if there is lower OCPD/disconnect ahead of this installation - the safety/defect pictured is improper and a use outside of the listing/certification and has no field evaluation certification.

Get it? Got it? Good!

[Roger Frazee]

As I recall you indicated earlier it was indicated a #4 AWG to a 3/0 on the breaker, although the usual terminal lugs supplied and/or availble for this panel category (siemens/murray) for use with a 100 amp main CB would range #4 - 2/0 AWG (2/0 being the threshold for next level/increase for wire bending space), Conductors smaller than #4 AWG are not allowed to be used in those terminals.Working in photoshop the main breaker in the posted picture is specified as


75C only cu/al AWG #4 - 3/0


So I agree no point in going any farther. The feeder conductors terminated are too small for the main breaker lug wire range.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Working in photoshop the main breaker in the posted picture is specified as


75C cu/al only AWG #4 - 3/0


So I agree no point in going any farther. The feeder conductors terminated are too small for the lug wire range.

Yes, thank you for the 75C breaker info. As mentioned earlier that lug terminal kit is usually restricted to AWG #4 min. to 2/0 max.


"If you feed a hungry man a fish, you feed him for a day. If you teach a hungry man to fish, you feed him for a lifetime."

IOW, if you're asking the wrong questions, basing the questions on improper identifications, or asking an improper or irrelevant question; don't get upset if you don't immediately get "fed a fish" (or a piece of candy or garbage), i.e. get the answers you're demanding, but instead get clarification "questions" which are by design, to clarify your TRUE question - to either answer it correctly and immediately satiate; and/or when you fail to grasp the distinctions/nuances/errors; you are lead to a "fishing lesson".

[Brian Hannigan]

To all,

If your next reply is anything other than on topic and helpful it could be your last post. It's your choice.

[Nick Ostrowski]

My apologies Brian. I thought this thread was dead but somebody resurrected it and a couple people just can't can't seem to let things go. I reacted because I'm getting tired of the crap the same people keep dishing.

This board is unfortunately becoming very frustrating to use as a resource despite your efforts to straghten it out.

[Rich Goeken]

Here you go HG. My only other pic of the panel. If you have something to offer, great.

Personally, I would never berate, admonish, or try to demean somebody who used improper terminology or may be off in an assessment. This type of behavior keeps other people lurking in the shadows and deters them from contributing.


Hmm... and you said that you had only one picture of the panel. Why didn't you post this in place of any of your other posts? It would have been helpful and less stressful on others. Also, was the panel label intact or missing? Could have found some info there.

Rich

[Guy W Opie]

Thiere several items that need to be looked at with this situation.
Most have been covered. ie close up og breaker states wire range, which if this is #8 would be wrong.
Did you try to read the writing on the cconductor?
single phase or 3 phase service. Loof at the service coming into the building, many times it can be determined if 1 phase or 3 phase.
anel

[Nick Ostrowski]

Hmm... and you said that you had only one picture of the panel. Why didn't you post this in place of any of your other posts? It would have been helpful and less stressful on others. Also, was the panel label intact or missing? Could have found some info there.

Rich

I didn't post it because I knew it wasn't a great pic and I felt it was too far away to provide any detail. I fail to see how not posting that pic initially was a cause of stress for anybody.

There was no printing on the limited exposed sections of the conductors. They were inside armored conduit above their entry point into the panel.

We're going back about a month on this one. My recollection of any labels on the panel cover is foggy at best.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

I didn't post it because I knew it wasn't a great pic and I felt it was too far away to provide any detail. I fail to see how not posting that pic initially was a cause of stress for anybody.

There was no printing on the limited exposed sections of the conductors. They were inside armored conduit above their entry point into the panel.

We're going back about a month on this one. My recollection of any labels on the panel cover is foggy at best.

Armored conduit?!? :eek: :rolleyes:

Please pick up on the distinctions with significance & difference.

Try Grounding vs Bonding - Part 8 of 12 (http://ecmweb.com/grounding/electric_grounding_vs_bonding_8/)

Which will outline some of the differences between FMC, FMT, LFMC, AC, Type MC (and differences between Type MC "types").

Conduit is not cable, and vice versa.

In so far as bonding, Ampacity, limitations, and usage; and in the case of main power feeder these are critical distinctions for effective ground-fault current pathway, use limitations for allowable ampacity, etc., etc.!

[Nick Ostrowski]

This is what the conductors were in......armored conduit.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

In the words of "Charlie Brown": Arghhhhhh!!! <insert moving jpeg of charlie brown rolling backwards>.

Note you have posted a photo which includes the emergence of a green insulated conductor amongst an identified (white insulated) conductor along with a black and red insulated conductor.

It is teeny tiny photo, and difficult to enlarge with its low resolution and see anything clearly; but does not appear interlocked, but corregated. However, is obviously a stock photo borrowed from somewhere, and not one of the installation.

P.S. If it comes/sold from the manufacturer with conductors therein, it is NOT conduit, therefore your borrowed "stock" photo has to be that of a cable assembly.

[Nick Ostrowski]

However, is obviously a stock photo borrowed from somewhere, and not one of the installation.



Congrats HG. You win the cupie doll.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Nick,

Apparently a glutton for punishment, I'm still endeavoring to be helpful.

I am challenged that after all which has been said and explained on this post, you continue to refer to something in this installation as "Armored Conduit".

Thank you for reconsidering and removing the post.

I'm going to link to and upload the specifications for southwire's "Armorlite (R)" Type MC Cable This Cable assembly has aluminum interlocked armor and is regularly available with up to size 2 AWG conductors.

Type MC Cable is addressed in NEC Art. 334.

Please note ampacities are limited as your circuit rating is 100A or less/to the the 60 degrees C column.

You'll see that even 4/3 & 4/4 are down to 70A at 60C applications (lowest common demoninator due to circuit rating equal to or less than 100A). Please pay attention to footnotes at the bottom of page 2 of 3.

You will also likely note that Southwire's Armorlite Type MC Cable is not available with larger than 10AWG SOLID conductors.

"Armor" is not conduit, it is a componant of a cable assembly.

Link: http://www.southwire.com/ProductCatalog/XTEInterfaceServlet?contentKey=prodcatsheet66

[Nick Ostrowski]

OK, not trying to be a smartass here but can you please explain (in your words) as to when armored conduit is an applicable term and why my use of such term here is so egregious and the cause of such exasperation? The pic I posted above is just a quick cut and paste. I was not expecting insulation color on the conductors to be such an issue.

No links or attachments please. Just a straight concise explanation. If you can do that for me, I thank you in advance.

[Jerry Peck]

Nick,

A couple of pointers on terms here to help out:
- flexible metal conduit is the spiral wound conduit which is flexible and comes without conductors in it, this is what I think you are referring to when you say 'armored conduit'
- AC cable, which is armored cable, has the conductors manufactured in the cable, the flexible metal spiral wound covering provides the equipment ground path
- MC cable, which is metal clad cable, has the conductors manufactured in the cable, this looks similar to AC cable but has an insulated equipment ground conductor inside it

With flexible metal conduit the wires can be pulled out and replaced, and (sometimes) another wire or two may be able to be pulled in through the flexible metal conduit.

With AC or MC cable, the outer spiral wrap is wrapped around the conductors, there is no pulling them out or putting another in there.

However, this part of the discussion has digressed from your original question.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Thank you Jerry. Clear and concise.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

OK, not trying to be a smartass here but can you please explain (in your words) as to when armored conduit is an applicable term and why my use of such term here is so egregious and the cause of such exasperation? The pic I posted above is just a quick cut and paste. I was not expecting insulation color on the conductors to be such an issue.

No links or attachments please. Just a straight concise explanation. If you can do that for me, I thank you in advance.


Nick,

Jerry Peck, and before him Jim Port have already explained the difference between conductors and a cable assembly. Both times you've indicated you've understood and thanked them for their explanations.

Now, let us go back to the first few posts on this topic string.

I know you are aware, from prior discussion, as to, for example, the Ampacity limitations to for example, let us use NM cable, as I referenced early on. Although the actual conductors within the cable assembly (in this example we're referring to the more modern NM cable with THHN conductors, not older TW for example. The conductors themselves may have a higher temperature rating, but when using the overall cable assembly encased as it is in a sheath, we are further limited to using the 60C or in some cases the 75C temperature column in determining the overall (forgive the caps here they are for emphasis) ALLOWABLE AMPACITY for the overall cable assembly has to be within the temperature rating for the overall CABLE, NOT the individual conductors.

I know you understand the "weakest link in the chain" concept referring to an actual literal chain.

We apply the same regards to temperature limitations and ALLOWABLE ampacity regarding temperature limitations in electrical equipment.

I do hope I'm not being to wordy for you here and you are following along and haven't lost you yet...

When we discuss as in the instant case - the main power feeder to the condo - and address your question as to the allowable ampacity for the feeder - in this case we do NOT break down to componants of an ASSEMBLY. We have to consider the overall application of the assembly. The feeder conductors are not individual conductors pulled through a raceway (as you have referenced one of which might be "conduit") -- but an overall group of conductors which is a part of an overall assembly, namely CABLE, which that cable is further influenced by having been routed through possibly a trough, a raceway, etc. and is interconnected with other equipment. In this case we presume a lower ampere limiting OCPD line side, and as pictured a 100 amp OCPD at the condo.

If you go back and review the first few posts I made on this topic string you will find I made reference to the allowable ampacity being reduced due to a cable assembly employed, and not individual conductors pulled through raceway. I (and later Roger) also expanded on the distinctions and differences between other than 120/240 single phase BUILDING service. Just because an apparent THHN conductor as a componant of an Type MC cable is present - does not mean that you can consider it an individual THHN conductor - it is not. It is a componant of a cable assembly - if that is the case, and it is treated (and its allowable amacity is) different.

individual conductors pulled through conduit is significantly different than conductors as a part of a cable, which is also significantly different than cables through a common raceway.

Identifying conduit with a cable nomenclature is apples and oranges; and vice versa.

What flies as a conductor at 75 or 90 C does not when it is encorporated as a componant of a cable assembly which must not be applied above 60C in its pictured application.

this is due to (partially) lack of space/air within the cable assembly for the metal "conductors" to put-off the heat, the insulation around the indivual conductors, and the overall teflon/thermoplastic/poly jacket which surrounds the conductors which insulates, reflects and prevents the off-puting of the heat.

Its kind of like the difference between "Rocky" running the streets of Philly in a 100% cotton fleece "jogging" outfit and doing the same wrapped in saran wrap and polyester fleece. If you're wearing a plastic, fleece lined sweat suit you're body core temperature will rise because whatever is covered can't efficiently "put-off" the heat to the air, and Rocky would ll be swimming in sweat under all that plastic and VERY HOT (and likely lost a few MORE pounds of sweat then if he ran the route in just a regular 100% cotton fleece jogging outfit - as some of that sweat would have evaporated along the way serving to cool him, and his core temperature would have been better regulated and not so likely to have gone overboard an caused a heat stroke!).

Metal jackets to free air conduct HEAT. Thermoplastic tends to not only insulate conductivity of electricity but also insulate/prevent ready transfer of HEAT to the air surrounding it.

Does that make some sense?

As usual, I likely failed to keep it simple enough, and likely wandered too far and lost you yet again.

I'll try to sum up with a simple statement. Cable assemblies are distinctly different then individual conductors pulled through conduit or other raceway. It is important to know the difference - it is not just pure semantics, their applications are unique, especially when it comes to allowable ampacity in various installation situations, such as the not so simple 5th floor condo main power feeder and occupancy accessible mains and distribution panel.

There is no conduit which is "armored" the words do not belong together ("armored conduit" = does not compute!).

"armored cable" or type AC is limited in ampacity applications. Apparently you have "Type MC Cable". Cable is determined and limited in temperature applications overall as an assembly - we do not identify it by its individual componants. Type MC can get further confusing. We can have steel or aluminum, we can have interlocked, corregated or tube.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Good info HG.....but.......I was hoping for concise. We're performing home inspections here. We're not professional electricians. We are generalists. We're not breaking down the intricacies of an installation and giving our clients a tutorial on electrical terminology. We inspect and defer as needed.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Good info HG.....but.......I was hoping for concise. We're performing home inspections here. We're not professional electricians. We are generalists. We're not breaking down the intricacies of an installation and giving our clients a tutorial on electrical terminology. We inspect and defer as needed.

Nick!

It was you who posed the question and created the topic string, and directed the question to be one of case for solid 4 AWG conductors, and posed what was sufficient to provide an allowable ampacity of 100 Amp supply to this condo panel. You called it a "service" and called a cable assembly component "conduit".



If you're happy calling a "toilet" a "turd-let" so be it. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at you or with you.

[Ted Menelly]

If it says anything as to if it is right or wrong or got rewired at a later date.....The panel certainly does not look like the original as the wires in it have over spray on them and the inside of that new panel does not.

I think a lot may have been changed around from the original over time.

[Nick Ostrowski]

Nick!

It was you who posed the question and created the topic string, and directed the question to be one of case for solid 4 AWG conductors, and posed what was sufficient to provide an allowable ampacity of 100 Amp supply to this condo panel. You called it a "service" and called a cable assembly component "conduit".



If you're happy calling a "toilet" a "turd-let" so be it. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at you or with you.

I feel the same about you bud. A simple question turns in a 90+ post diatribe where verbiage is sliced and diced and disected and bisected when my original question really was not that complicated. I hung in and continued to ask for feedback because I wanted to see what was so uproarious and egregious about my post, question, and terminology. The only person who seems to find all this so appalling is you.

Please bury this and move on.

[James Duffin]

Here is the original question from Nick:

"If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?"

The answer is #4 as I said in post #3. Pretty simple question and answer it seems.

[Bruce Adams]

Nick,

A couple of pointers on terms here to help out:
- flexible metal conduit is the spiral wound conduit which is flexible and comes without conductors in it, this is what I think you are referring to when you say 'armored conduit'
- AC cable, which is armored cable, has the conductors manufactured in the cable, the flexible metal spiral wound covering provides the equipment ground path
- MC cable, which is metal clad cable, has the conductors manufactured in the cable, this looks similar to AC cable but has an insulated equipment ground conductor inside it

With flexible metal conduit the wires can be pulled out and replaced, and (sometimes) another wire or two may be able to be pulled in through the flexible metal conduit.

With AC or MC cable, the outer spiral wrap is wrapped around the conductors, there is no pulling them out or putting another in there.

However, this part of the discussion has digressed from your original question.

Jerry
Very good post concise and to the point. Not wordy nor is it putting someone down. Hope to see more posts like this one. I understood what Nick was saying. He may not have had the nomenclature correct. But he did know that the wires were in a metal flexible conduit. I think your post was helpful to Nick and others on here.
Thank You
Bruce Adams

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Here is the original question from Nick:

"If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?"

The answer is #4 as I said in post #3. Pretty simple question and answer it seems.

Nope. That answer is WRONG, it is concisely and completely WRONG for the panel as installed, where installed, pictured and described by the OP.

If solid copper conductor cable assembly is used as the feeder, the maximum size permitted is #10 AWG. This, of course would not provide a 100A rated feeder, but a much lower allowable ampacity.

The conductors for the cable assembly would have to be stranded if equal to or in excess of size 8 AWG.

The mains OCPD in the pictured panel requires minimum #4 AWG Cu Conductor(s) for its connection point(s). The mains OCPD pictured requires a properly rated 75C supply. The terminal lugs pictured are not listed/classified to be used for anything less than a single #4 AWG Copper termination.

Armor means cable. Cables are armored, conduit is not "armored".

The section Mr. Duffin relies upon is not applicable to the installation (5th floor condo).

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

I just looked at a zoomed shot of the breaker and the stamped specs from the manufacturer say it is rated for CU/AL AWG #4-3/0.

Assuming I'm interpreting this correction, as long as this feeder cable is a 4 gauge, it may be alright. Is this correct?

No, your assumptions are not correct since you are again basing the question upon a feeder (main power feeder circuit though it may be) to be RATED at allowable ampacity of 100A.

For a LOWER circuit (feeder circuit, main power feeder circuit) allowable ampacity, perhaps, but no where near 100A.

The "weakest link" in the chain.

NEC 110.14(C), a pesky little rule regarding temperature ratings and circuits equal to or less than 100A that showed up about circa 1993.

Without evidence to the contrary, we must presume the OCPD protecting the feeder, the equipment ratings, and therefore the feeder circuit itself is limited to rating its allowable ampacity at 60 degrees C; however due to the equipment in the Condo, we must ASSURE that it is 75C insulated and permitted use.

We further have no information on bundling, pathways, distance, ambient temperatures, etc.

I've never heard anyone ever complain that Charlie Trout was ever less than concise or that he was ever verbose.

Try: Electrical Contractor: Blast from the Past (http://www.ecmag.com/?fa=article&articleID=8547)

Next I'll borrow a bit from a technical bulletin from a respected manufacturer:




Caution on using lug ratings: When terminations are inside equipment such as panelboards, motor control centers, switchboards, enclosed circuit breakers, safety switches, etc., follow the temperature rating identified on the equipment labeling instead of the rating of the lug itself. Manufacturers commonly use 90C-rated lugs (il.e., marked AL9CU) on equipment rated only 60C or 75C. The use of the 90C-rated lug in this type of equipment does not allow the installer to use 90C wire at the 90C ampacity. The Underwriters Laboratories General Information on Electrical Equipment Directory states the following about terminations: "A 75C or 90C temperature marking on a terminal (e.g. AL7, CU7AL, AL7CU or AL9, CU9AL, AL9CU) does not in itself indicate that a 75C or 90C insulated wire can be used unless the equipment in which the terminals are installed is marked for 75C or 90C".

Review the labeling of ALL devices and EQUIPMENT for installation guidelines and possible restrictions.

Available Equipment Terminations:

Remember that a conductor has TWO ENDS, and that the termination on EACH END must be considered when applying the sizing rules. For example, consider a conductor wired to a 75C termination on a circuit breaker at one end, and a 60C termination on a receptacle at the other end. This circuit must be wired with a conductor that has an insulation rating of at least 75C (due to the circuit breaker) and SIZED based on the AMPACITY OF 60-degrees C (due to the receptacle).

In conclusion, Garbage in-garbage out.

[ray jackson]

I stumbled upon this thread today. It looks to me that from the beginning HG was more concerned with letting Nick know how much more he knows than actually trying to give some direction.

[Bruce Adams]

I stumbled upon this thread today. It looks to me that from the beginning HG was more concerned with letting Nick know how much more he knows than actually trying to give some direction.


Thank you Ray. I feel the same way. He seems to do that quite often
Bruce Adams

[Jerry Peck]

Let's see if we can clear this up and put an end to this thread within 100 posts, ... and we are almost there! :eek:

Nick asked:

I looked at a condo unit yesterday that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure. The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect.

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

James replied:

If you are sure it is #4 you should be ok. #4 is rated at 100 amps for a service.

James restated:

Here is the original question from Nick:

"If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?"

The answer is #4 as I said in post #3. Pretty simple question and answer it seems.

I'll go through Nick's original post in sections, highlighting what is important and why James was, and is, correct.

"I looked at a condo unit yesterday ... "

Nick inspected a CONDO, and that means that it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that there is but one panel in the condo (yes, I have inspected many condos which had two or three panels, but those were 7,000 to 10,000 sf condos, not what I think Nick inspected).

I.e., that panel is serving *all* the loads of the dwelling unit.

" ... that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure."

Okay, a 100 amp overcurrent device can be fed with #4 AWG copper and be code compliant *as long as* "For application of this section, the main power feeder shall be the feeder between the main disconnect and the panelboard that supplies, either by branch circuits or by feeders, or both, all loads that are part or associated with the dwelling unit." - which I believe that panel meets.

Now, the NEC says this about the use of stranded conductors:
- 310.3 Stranded Conductors.
- - Where installed in raceways, conductors of size 8 AWG and larger shall be stranded.
- - - Exception: As permitted or required elsewhere in this Code.

"The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect."

Nick tells us in the above that "the cable" (i.e., no raceway) ... therefore the conductors 'may be' solid and are not required to be stranded.

"If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?"

The NEC says, with the qualification I noted above for the panel serving *all* the loads of the dwelling unit, that #4 copper may be used for that 100 amp disconnect.

DANG! While I was typing someone posted post #100, making mine #101.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Let's see if we can clear this up and put an end to this thread within 100 posts, ... and we are almost there! :eek:

Nick asked:


James replied:


James restated:


I'll go through Nick's original post in sections, highlighting what is important and why James was, and is, correct.

"I looked at a condo unit yesterday ... "

Nick inspected a CONDO, and that means that it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that there is but one panel in the condo (yes, I have inspected many condos which had two or three panels, but those were 7,000 to 10,000 sf condos, not what I think Nick inspected).

I.e., that panel is serving *all* the loads of the dwelling unit.

" ... that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure."

Okay, a 100 amp overcurrent device can be fed with #4 AWG copper and be code compliant *as long as* "For application of this section, the main power feeder shall be the feeder between the main disconnect and the panelboard that supplies, either by branch circuits or by feeders, or both, all loads that are part or associated with the dwelling unit." - which I believe that panel meets.

Now, the NEC says this about the use of stranded conductors:
- 310.3 Stranded Conductors.
- - Where installed in raceways, conductors of size 8 AWG and larger shall be stranded.
- - - Exception: As permitted or required elsewhere in this Code.

"The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect."

Nick tells us in the above that "the cable" (i.e., no raceway) ... therefore the conductors 'may be' solid and are not required to be stranded.

"If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?"

The NEC says, with the qualification I noted above for the panel serving *all* the loads of the dwelling unit, that #4 copper may be used for that 100 amp disconnect.

DANG! While I was typing someone posted post #100, making mine #101.

Well Jerry Peck you've managed to both contradict the NEC and yourself multiple times in that summary and conclusion statement post.

Conduit is one of many types of raceway. Either there is or is not a raceway somewhere, anywhere between the origination and termination. If you're going to accept an oxymoron "armored conduit" and keep using the word conduit then conduit is a RACEWAY. Cable can be in conduit or another raceway, but there is no such thing as "armored conduit". Neither you nor Nick has any idea what the conductors are in from the meter to this panel, if cables are stacked, in close proximity for 24" or more, the ambient temperature where they run (next to steam pipes for all we know), whatever.

Next, the section you and Mr. Duffin before you attempt to employ does not fit the circumstances of a 5th floor condo. Next, if you refer to the conductors permitted in that section you'll be hard-pressed to find a 4AWG solid conductor amongst them.

Next you have a 100 A or lower ampacity OCPD line side of this feeder, which has not been visualized or identified as being anything other than 60 degrees C, and without any proof to the contrary it MUST be presumed to be 60C.

Good luck finding a 75C insulated 4AWG SOLID not STRANDED CU conductor named in the section you rely upon that provides 100 A allowable ampacity at 60C.

However, its all moot as the POCO service to the BUILDING for a five(plus) story condo building wouldn't be 120/240 split single phase, so you still can't use the section you both rely upon.

That electrical room or area with the occupancy meters and common area meters which was off limits to Nick at the time of the inspection, supposedly not located in an accessible common area, is likely under restricted management/maintenance/supervision. Why would that be? hmmmm. Raceway/wireway bonding perhaps amongst may other likely considerations.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Shall we play Sesame Street's "One of these things is not like the other" between the two photos, and consider the "no access" to the line side of the panel:eek: ? Or discuss what is and is not seen on the left and right sides of the panel in the second picture;) ?

http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/attachments/electrical-systems-home-inspection-commercial-inspection/20259d1289737959-single-strand-copper-service-cable-dscn3901.jpg

http://www.inspectionnews.net/home_inspection/attachments/electrical-systems-home-inspection-commercial-inspection/20300d1289955876-single-strand-copper-service-cable-panel.jpg

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Jerry
Very good post concise and to the point. Not wordy nor is it putting someone down. Hope to see more posts like this one. I understood what Nick was saying. He may not have had the nomenclature correct. But he did know that the wires were in a metal flexible conduit. I think your post was helpful to Nick and others on here.
Thank You
Bruce Adams


Interesting...

There seems to be some disagreement on what was or was not present - as the poster you're complimenting (Jerry Peck) - has taken a position that there was NO RACEWAY (conduit or otherwise) present at all, including flex.

Also interesting that the OP has posted a stock photo of a cable assembly, apparently type MC and calls this "armored conduit".

[Jerry Peck]

Anyone else wondering what Watson is smoking?

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Anyone else wondering what Watson is smoking?

ME ... SMOKING? What am I smoking? :confused: :eek:

Look Mr. Peck: You explain to ME how you're going to even begin to apply a section {310.15(B)(6) and Table 310.15(B)(6)} which doesn't apply to a 5th floor condo, and Explain how you are going to get those Art. 310 conductor wires comprising that feeder up to that 5th floor condo panel without using a raceway?

And explain it to me how you are going to get a feeder set comprised of one of eleven types of wires/conductors (Art. 310) {five types of Thermoset insulated individual conductors/wires or one of six types of Thermoplastic insulated individual conductors/wires } up to that 5th floor condo panel without using a raceway or similar. Or are you saying that SE, USE, or USE-2 Service Cable (Art. 338) is available in an "armored" version?

Otherwise get off 310.15(B)(6)and get back to where this belongs.

Then you tell ME what the heck "armored conduit" is supposed to be!!! It sure ain't "Type MV Type MC"!

Dare we get into raceways that are not technically "conduit"?

You're the one that stated up at post 101 above that there was NO RACEWAY, right after claiming it was a CABLE. Hmmm. An Armored Cable apparently.

Show me SE, or USE, with armor please, then show me one with #4 AWG solid CU condutors, and then please show me that armored SE or USE with solid Copper #4 AWG with 100A allowable ampacity at 60C.

[Jim Port]

Since there is OCPD of an unknown size ahead of this panel the 100 amp breaker could just be acting as a local disconnect if properly sized to the conductor. As such there would be no need the 100 amp breaker to match the conductor ampacity. It would just a a convenience for the occupant.

This would not relieve the other issues like the size range on the lug.

How was it determined from a picture of part of a panel that this feeder did not serve the entire load and that 310.15(B)(6) could not be used? How do we know the voltage is not 120/240 1P?

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Since there is OCPD of an unknown size ahead of this panel the 100 amp breaker could just be acting as a local disconnect if properly sized to the conductor. As such there would be no need the 100 amp breaker to match the conductor ampacity. It would just a a convenience for the occupant.

This would not relieve the other issues like the size range on the lug.

How was it determined from a picture of part of a panel that this feeder did not serve the entire load and that 310.15(B)(6) could not be used? How do we know the voltage is not 120/240 1P?

That wasn't the OP's "corrected" question. Apparently you missed the second post.

His question was regarding a sufficient feeder to provide 100 A to this panel - and then he continued with it being done with solid CU conductors.

The OP, who has most recently posted a stock photo of a Cable assembly with armor - has from the beginning referred to the feeder as Cable. There are only three cables referenced in 310.15(B)(6), and they are all service cable.

Yes, I know Mr. Peck recently opined that the OP meant FMC with conductors therein, as to his "armored conduit" statement. He then went on however in his summary re-buttressing Mr. Duffin that the feeder was a cable and that the feeder was in NO WAY contained in a raceway (which negates the possibility then of FMC now doesn't it?). Of course for FMC "Armored Conduit" to be used there would have to be an insulated EGC.

The service to the BUILDING has to be other than 120/240 service. There are at least five floors of occupied space.

It has already been covered, and you are overlooking Chapter 1 and what is missing and present in the poor quality overall panel picture.

I guess for clarity, I should say that it seemed to me quite apparent with all the OP has said regarding his limited access within the building - that the feeder originates inside the condo building.

[Jerry Peck]

I'm curious ... is it just me or do others also see that H. G. appears to have slipped back into his less-than-helpful and holier-than-thou stance from his high horse the last few weeks?

[Bruce Adams]

I'm curious ... is it just me or do others also see that H. G. appears to have slipped back into his less-than-helpful and holier-than-thou stance from his high horse the last few weeks?


I do not think he has ever gotten out of it. To bad he can not use his knowledge to be helpful instead of seeing how much he can put someone down. And make himself look so small.

[Corn Walker]

Here's what seems obvious to me... a lot of you guys are plain crazy. :p

So what if Nick's question had improper terminology. There's the "helpful" way of both correcting the terminology and answering his questions, and then there's the "denigrating" way. There's actually two questions there: can single stranded (solid) wire be used for a 100A feeder and if so, what is the minimum size it would need to be? Here's what I would consider a more "helpful" way of addressing his questions.


I looked at a condo unit yesterday that had a 100 amp main disconnect in the panel. The cable feeding the box and attached to the 100 amp disconnect was a single strand copper cable that looked to be no better than 4 gauge but I couldn't be sure. The cable above the box before entering it was enclosed in armored conduit. It appears undersized to be me for a 100 amp disconnect.

If single stranded copper could be used as the main feed to a 100 amp panel, what would the minimum required gauge size?

The minimum size for a solid conductor used as a feeder for a 100A distribution panel is 4awg, however it can only be used under certain circumstances. Regardless of whether this installation fits those circumstances (doesn't appear to based on the limited information you've given), looking at your picture those conductors appear to be smaller than 4awg - probably 8awg which has a limit of 50A at best (40A typical) in your situation.

Now it's entirely possible (but not likely) that the distribution panel upstream of this unit has an over-current protection device limiting the feeder to 50A. If the panel was replaced, it may have had a stock 100A disconnect that wasn't sized for the feeder. Even if this was the case, however, the terminals in the distribution panel pictured have a minimum conductor size of 4awg, which disqualifies this feeder.

The feeder itself is very unlikely to be an armored cable; more likely the conductors are pulled through some type of flexible conduit which has a similar appearance to armored cable (AC) or metal clad cable (MC). Common AC and MC cables use solid conductors for 14awg through 10awg, 7-strand for 8awg through 2awg, 19-strand for 1awg through 4/0, and 37-strand for 250 through 500 kcmil. There are some industrial armored cables with 8awg solid but they're usually more expensive (read: less profit for electrician) and not found in residential settings.


Would that have been so hard to do?

[brian schmitt]

I'm curious ... is it just me or do others also see that H. G. appears to have slipped back into his less-than-helpful and holier-than-thou stance from his high horse the last few weeks?
jp,
yup, he has been on the ignore list for a long time now. what ever happened to elliot franson? he was as much fun as aaron miller!:D