Every versión NEC becomes more obsesive and paranoid.
@TheFacilityguy
Жыл бұрын
Excellent video and explanation, exactly what I needed right now.
@ronbonick4265
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks Ryan - I wish you would put out a book and or videos on just math...
@marvinrubio7635
4 жыл бұрын
Me too
@Darenator1
2 жыл бұрын
Your double oven unit should only have one tap circuit going to it. There is only one input one the unit. I hadn't ever heard of tapping conductors for kitchen loads before. I wired my house under 2008 code. I put in full gas range on 20a 120v but also put in 50A circuit for future proof for gas range with electric oven. I also put in electric wall oven. Appliance store told me it needed 40A. Just looked up install manual. 4.8 Kw & below 20A circuit. Guess I'd better change breaker.
@tonyhddodge4282
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the video.
@lopezoscari
3 жыл бұрын
THis video was so great!! I love it!!
@marvinrubio7635
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you are the best
@ucanliv4ever
3 жыл бұрын
Hi... you're a great teacher ! I have a question though. You still run #8 copper ( good for 40 amps ) from the panel to the junction box ? After that you split off into number 10 and 12 ? Also in your calculation you multiply 8 times 1.1.... what is the 1.1 ? Thanks
@ucanliv4ever
3 жыл бұрын
Oops, I reviewed you video and you answered my question already in the video, my bad.
@ucanliv4ever
3 жыл бұрын
At 5:40 you said " you can bring a 40 or 50 amp circuit to a junction box."
@ucanliv4ever
3 жыл бұрын
Okay, now I get it ! Multiplying by 1.1 is the same as adding 10 %....
@TheKevinbabineaux
4 жыл бұрын
Good stuff.
@hangngoaigiare
3 жыл бұрын
thanks ryan
@artcamera5514
4 жыл бұрын
Great video!
@jolyonwelsh9834
3 жыл бұрын
I agree. He, by the way is Mike Holt's successor.
@Darenator1
2 жыл бұрын
On a second note from my other comment. The install manual from factory states "Models rated 7.3 to 9.6 KW require separate 40A circuit.". I would read that you can't tap a circuit in that instance correct?
@bryantjenks3598
Жыл бұрын
Are these taps only allowed for pigtail connected appliances or can it include a NEMA plug outlet. Example a 40A breaker going to j-box that taps to a 30A oven plug and a 20A 5-20/15 receptacle. Owner would then plug their loads into it instead of hardwired. Concerned the outlets are not UL listed for the higher current breaker or that the code only mentioned leads and conductors, plug ever exhibit or graphic only shows a j-box with metal conduit going to the loads.
@RyanJacksonElectrical
Жыл бұрын
You'd still have to comply with 210.21 for receptacle ratings, so this would only be allowed for hard-wired.
@armandocepeda7533
4 жыл бұрын
No ocpd needed for the tap conductors? So, in the example, the 10 AWG and12 AWG are fine on the 40 amp breaker?
@RyanJacksonElectrical
4 жыл бұрын
Correct.
@armandocepeda7533
4 жыл бұрын
Ryan Jackson 😮, good to know. Any cap on distance?
@wim0104
4 жыл бұрын
I think this is a good example of how the code is about minimum requirements. I'm a big fan of "over"-engineering, but that doesn't help in the exam :-P
@obertosiciliano1243
3 жыл бұрын
What about t rating factors it seems to using the 90C column but not taking into account any derating factors. Mike Holt peaches anything under a hundred amps should use the 60C column automatically
@artz9643
3 жыл бұрын
@@obertosiciliano1243 If the terminals are marked 75 deg that's what you follow. If the terminals are unmarked or unknown then you'd revert to the 60 deg column.
@AndrewConway
2 жыл бұрын
I want to tank you but does this mean I'm "old/old- school" by putting anything 240V item, on a Dual-Pole because I think it's more ethical.
@rynocop7958
4 жыл бұрын
While we're on article 210, 210.4 (C) must be deleted in future codes. We would never be prohibited from serving other than line-to-neutral loads with a multiwire branch circuit if the legal installation of said circuit requires a means to simultaneously disconnect all ungrounded circuit conductors. 100% of the time we would fall under exception 2 of 210.4 (C). I am eager to hear anyone's thoughts on this. I submitted a proposal for change or clarification just after the deadline for 2020 code cycle.
@RyanJacksonElectrical
4 жыл бұрын
That exception requires a multi-pole breaker instead of just the handle tie required by 210.4(B). It correlates with 240.15.
@rynocop7958
4 жыл бұрын
@@RyanJacksonElectrical Wow. That is the best answer I have received. Thank you. It becomes more evident after reading 240.15(B)(1) and comparing the 2 articles. However, 210.4(C) ex. 2 still leaves open for interpretation the impression that handle ties would open all ungrounded conductors simultaneously. The fact they don't make overcurrent device plural suggests it has to be 1 multi-pole breaker.
@truthbebold4009
4 жыл бұрын
@@rynocop7958 hey, newbie electrician here. Just trying to understand the codes being discussed. Couldn't the handle ties be utilized and still be in compliance with exception 2 of 210.4(C) since 240.15(B)(1) permits handle ties in that scenario? Other question is should they specify 1θ in the same exception 2 since the 240.15(B)(1) permission is for circuits that serve only 1θ line-to-neutral loads? Hope that makes sense and I appreciate your time. I'll send this to both of you. Thanks!
@truthbebold4009
4 жыл бұрын
@@RyanJacksonElectrical hey, newbie electrician here. Just trying to understand the codes being discussed. Couldn't the handle ties be utilized and still be in compliance with exception 2 of 210.4(C) since 240.15(B)(1) permits handle ties in that scenario? Other question is should they specify 1θ in the same exception (no. 2) since the 240.15(B)(1) permission is for circuits that serve only 1θ line-to-neutral loads? Hope that makes sense and I appreciate your time. I'll send this to both of you. Thanks!
@rynocop7958
4 жыл бұрын
@@truthbebold4009 Regarding handle ties, your statement was my original contention on why a code change is necessary. Looking at that one code section, exception 2 in 210.4C, the only challenge to our contention is the fact they that it says "overcurrent device" in the singular and not the plural. A multi-pole breaker is one overcurrent device and handle ties would be multiple overcurrent devices. Now, as Ryan Jackson stated, 240.15b1 makes it a lot clearer on several levels and states we can use handle ties, but if we do, then those circuits may only serve line to neutral loads. A clarification of the exception in 210.4c at a minimum should be undertaken in the next code cycle, so that the distinction between multi-pole and handle ties is more apparent if an electrician is reading that one article for guidance. For instance, something as simple as adding the wording "by a single" before "overcurrent device".
@alexandrpomortsev1474
3 жыл бұрын
Time 4:29. I think we have to count: 8+5%=8.4 kW, then increase again 8.4+5% . Total 8.82 kW
Пікірлер: 38