Thread: 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?

Similar Threads:

• Copper Gas Line -
• Charred Copper wires in Main Panels
• Electrical service box located in closet
• Galvanizing Flaking Off Single Vent
• Welcome From F.I.R.E. Service

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Mm hmmmm.

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

???????

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

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

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

What you see in the pics is what I saw.

NOPE.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

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

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

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

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

???????

!!!!!!

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

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.

Originally Posted by 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?

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?

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?

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

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.

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

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.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

- 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.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Port

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.

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.

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

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

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.

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

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 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.

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.
__________________
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..

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!! I like to smack around the idiots who laugh at the weak.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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!! I like to smack around the idiots who laugh at the weak.

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.

Originally Posted by 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?

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

Makes sense. Thanks for the input Gary.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

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....

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.

Originally Posted by 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!! I like to smack around the idiots who laugh at the weak.

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

Originally Posted by James Duffin

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 ....

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

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.

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

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.

Originally Posted by neal lewis

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

How true.

"Bloviating" is one of my favorite words.

Originally Posted by neal lewis

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??

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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

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

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.

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.

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! Three is usually the limit....throwin' in five, is over the top.

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.

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

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 ) with a grey cable jacket. Turns out he had been paying for his neighbor's usage and vice versa for three years.

Originally Posted by 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 ,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

Originally Posted by Benjamin Thompson

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

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.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

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.

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...

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 ...

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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.