# Hots moved to subpanel without their neutrals



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Wow, that installer was even lazier than I am!


----------



## cmcissell (Feb 1, 2013)

Lazy is OK if not bringing the neutrals along is permitted. Have an insight as to whether it is OK lazy or not?


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Violations of 300.3(B) and 408.41.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

cmcissell said:


> Lazy is OK if not bringing the neutrals along is permitted. Have an insight as to whether it is OK lazy or not?


I am not sure. Forget what article it is, but there is something that says you have to have both the neutral and hot in the same enclosure entrance if it's metal or else you have to cut vent holes or some such nonsense. I'm sitting on the throne right now and I'll be here for a while so someone else will probably help.


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

cmcissell said:


> Is this allowed?


Nope.



> *300.3 Conductors.*
> 
> *(B) Conductors of the Same Circuit.* All conductors of
> the same circuit and, where used, the grounded conductor
> ...


----------



## backstay (Feb 3, 2011)

Jrzy said:


> I am not sure. Forget what article it is, but there is something that says you have to have both the neutral and hot in the same enclosure entrance if it's metal or else you have to cut vent holes or some such nonsense. I'm sitting on the throne right now and I'll be here for a while so someone else will probably help.


You sit on the pot with your phone?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

don_resqcapt19 said:


> Violations of 300.3(B) and 408.41.


Where is the 408.41 violation?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

backstay said:


> You sit on the pot with your phone?


iPad. And everyone does. You have any idea how many people ask for receptacles next to the toilet?


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

Jrzy said:


> Where is the 408.41 violation?



I don't see it either. 



> 408.41 Grounded Conductor Terminations. Each grounded conductor shall terminate within the panelboard in an individual terminal that is not also used for another conductor.
> Exception:  Grounded conductors of circuits with parallel conductors shall be permitted to terminate in a single terminal if the terminal is identified for connection of more than one conductor.


Edit: Maybe the word 'within'?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

We have a similar rule to 300.3 up here in the north. basically, if putting a 
clamp meter around a group wires would result in a current being indicated,
that group of conductors shouldn't pass through anything which current will 
be induced into, such as an EMT conduit or metal connector or locknut, or...
you get the idea. 
Neatly wired though.:thumbup:
P&L


----------



## cmcissell (Feb 1, 2013)

Thanks to everyone. I think I understand now.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Barjack said:


> I don't see it either.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I know what you're saying about "within". But it doesn't specify which panelboard.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

There is an exception in the NEC for INDUSTRIAL panel boards -- that allows the neutral bar to stay in a gutter above the narrow body of the panel board.

This specific design permitted said panels to nestle within the channel of major I beam verticals. 

ONLY said listed panel boards are permitted this exemption.

( BTW the gutter above is connected to the panel board by a vertical gutter -- Tee style -- such that the hot feeders and the returning branch hots are passing right by each other. Hence, there is no Ohmic heating// unbalanced flux. )

It's the ONLY exception I know of.

Since this is a residence, it's against the Code... even though this fella followed in the spirit of the industrial scheme. 

( Smells like an industrial electrician whipped this together. )

Think of the follow on confusion as the DIYer // handy man can't begin to figure out what's up.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

telsa said:


> There is an exception in the NEC for INDUSTRIAL panel boards -- that allows the neutral bar to stay in a gutter above the narrow body of the panel board.
> 
> This specific design permitted said panels to nestle within the channel of major I beam verticals.
> 
> ...


I don't see all of those provisions necessary:

300.3(B)(4) Enclosures. Where an auxiliary gutter runs between a
column-width panelboard and a pull box, and the pull box
includes neutral terminations, the neutral conductors of circuits
supplied from the panelboard shall be permitted to
originate in the pull box.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

Work on it.

It'll come to you.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

telsa said:


> Work on it.
> 
> It'll come to you.


Are you serious? :laughing:


----------



## Switched (Dec 23, 2012)

Jrzy said:


> iPad. And everyone does. You have any idea how many people ask for receptacles next to the toilet?


Perhaps a code proposal? 











Just make sure it's AFCI protected!


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

telsa said:


> ------------------stuff deleted-------------
> ( BTW the gutter above is connected to the panel board by a vertical gutter -- Tee style -- such that the hot feeders and the returning branch hots are passing right by each other. Hence, there is no Ohmic heating// unbalanced flux. )
> -------------more stuff deleted-------------


There's 2 hots and a neutral feeding the sub-panel. These will cancel
each other. How can currents that have already cancelled each other 
also cancel the current in the branch hots? 
P&L


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

PlugsAndLights said:


> There's 2 hots and a neutral feeding the sub-panel. These will cancel
> each other. How can currents that have already cancelled each other
> also cancel the current in the branch hots?
> P&L


As an Electrician -- you may be proud.

As a reader of English -- you are challenged.

The install was flatly REJECTED -- see up thread.

It's wholly unacceptable in a residential situation. PERIOD.

:whistling2:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

telsa said:


> As an Electrician -- you may be proud.
> 
> As a reader of English -- you are challenged.
> 
> ...


I don't think you should be talking down to anyone. You should delete all that bologna you posted in post #14. As I showed you in the code article, at least 3 things in your post are incorrect.


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

telsa said:


> As an Electrician -- you may be proud.
> 
> As a reader of English -- you are challenged.
> 
> ...


I realise(d) that it does not meet code, and, did not say otherwise.
Nice try on the diversion. 
P&L


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Jrzy said:


> Where is the 408.41 violation?


I read the "within the panel board" to mean the same panel board as the ungrounded conductor is terminated in.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

PlugsAndLights said:


> I realise(d) that it does not meet code, and, did not say otherwise.
> Nice try on the diversion.
> P&L


Were you ever invited to join your high school's debate club ? :whistling2:


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

Jrzy said:


> I don't think you should be talking down to anyone. You should delete all that bologna you posted in post #14. As I showed you in the code article, at least 3 things in your post are incorrect.


Your rep as a debate-troll is affirmed. :thumbsup:

Perfectionist: one who takes great pains -- and gives them to others.

No doubt you think you're polishing my wayward thinking -- 

a habit you've managed to inflict on others over the years.

This can't be just a recent tic.

Where's the payoff ? 

Your counter points are unsubstantial.

Column mounted panel assemblies as described are universally deemed 'industrial' in nature.

The NEC Handbook illustrates the style -- and is where my language largely comes from. These are not cobbled up assemblies in the field -- rather they are NEMA products sold as assemblies -- very much like any I-line MDB -- factory built -- custom for you.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

telsa, it seems like very few people actually read your posts here. Myself and one other gentleman did, we both found that it was very inaccurate. I even posted the code article showing that you were wrong on multiple accounts, but in a polite way. 

Since then, all you have done is attacked myself and the other gentleman. 

What you posted is wrong, the code I posted is straight from the NEC and clearly shows why. What more needs to be said?


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Jrzy said:


> telsa, it seems like very few people actually read your posts here. Myself and one other gentleman did, we both found that it was very inaccurate. I even posted the code article showing that you were wrong on multiple accounts, but in a polite way.
> 
> Since then, all you have done is attacked myself and the other gentleman.
> 
> What you posted is wrong, the code I posted is straight from the NEC and clearly shows why. What more needs to be said?


Check out this thread. 

www.electriciantalk.com/f30/what-can-cause-all-lights-circuit-fry-119010/


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

As for the OP's situation, I've done the very same thing. It may be a code violation but I don't care. It's no different than a switch loop, electrically speaking. As for it confusing DIYers or handy-hacks - :laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## dawgs (Dec 1, 2007)

MTW said:


> As for the OP's situation, I've done the very same thing. It may be a code violation but I don't care. It's no different than a switch loop, electrically speaking. As for it confusing DIYers or handy-hacks - :laughing::laughing::laughing:


I did it installing a generator subpanel at my house.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Thanks for the link, that was awesome :laughing:

So have you taken college level quantum physics???

:thumbup:


MTW said:


> As for the OP's situation, I've done the very same thing. It may be a code violation but I don't care. It's no different than a switch loop, electrically speaking. As for it confusing DIYers or handy-hacks - :laughing::laughing::laughing:


"It's no different than a switch loop, electrically speaking."

In a switch loop you don't need the neutral because the current is flowing back on the other leg of the loop (as it normally would with a neutral) and therefore canceling out whatever effect heats the metal.



dawgs said:


> I did it installing a generator subpanel at my house.


Those are switch loops so what I said above applies. You won't have the heating in that situation either.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Jrzy said:


> Thanks for the link, that was awesome :laughing:
> 
> So have you taken college level quantum physics???
> 
> :thumbup:


It's definitely a forum classic now. :laughing:



> "It's no different than a switch loop, electrically speaking."
> 
> In a switch loop you don't need the neutral because the current is flowing back on the other leg of the loop (as it normally would with a neutral) and therefore canceling out whatever effect heats the metal.
> 
> ...


Right, so we agree? This seems like something you would have no issue doing. It's just another stupid NEC rule.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

MTW said:


> It's definitely a forum classic now. :laughing:
> 
> 
> 
> Right, so we agree? This seems like something you would have no issue doing. It's just another stupid NEC rule.


I don't agree that switch loops are electrically the same as what the OP posted.

What the OP posted will heat the metal because the electricity is only flowing in one direction. With a switch loop, the electricity flows both ways, so the heating doesn't happen.


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

Jrzy said:


> I don't agree that switch loops are electrically the same as what the OP posted.
> 
> 
> 
> What the OP posted will heat the metal because the electricity is only flowing in one direction. With a switch loop, the electricity flows both ways, so the heating doesn't happen.



I agree it's possible, but I doubt you would even notice any heating, especially since it's in a residential application. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Jrzy said:


> I don't agree that switch loops are electrically the same as what the OP posted.
> 
> What the OP posted will heat the metal because the electricity is only flowing in one direction. With a switch loop, the electricity flows both ways, so the heating doesn't happen.


In the picture, the feed for subpanel is in the same offset nipple as the branch circuits. So, if there's 5 amps on Branch Circuit 1, connected to L1 or A phase of the subpanel, 5 amps will enter on L1, and 5 amps leave on BC1 back to the main panel where they are spliced, effectively cancelling each other out. I know it's not a typical switch loop since it's split up among 2 legs and branch circuits, but if you actually follow what's happening with the current, it's the same.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

I wonder if Telsa will come back to admit he was wrong.


----------



## zac (May 11, 2009)

MTW said:


> I wonder if Telsa will come back to admit he was wrong.


Have you ever came back an admitted you were wrong? Just a question. Most people will not admit it! 


Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

zac said:


> Have you ever came back an admitted you were wrong? Just a question. Most people will not admit it!


Plenty of times. I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again. My point is that Telsa has a history of saying completely outrageous and inaccurate things, which is usually almost immediately pointed out to him by multiple people. He is never seen again after that happens, or he doubles down and starts telling us how dumb we are and how smart he is.


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

telsa said:


> Were you ever invited to join your high school's debate club ? :whistling2:


You have no class. 
P&L


----------



## dawgs (Dec 1, 2007)

zac said:


> Have you ever came back an admitted you were wrong? Just a question. Most people will not admit it! Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


I thought I was wrong once... But I was wrong.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Jrzy said:


> I know what you're saying about "within". But it doesn't specify which panelboard.


"within" ... ya think mebbe they should spec a street address ?
Like, maybe 'within' an area code ?



Jrzy said:


> I don't see all of those provisions necessary:
> 
> 300.3(B)(4) Enclosures. Where an auxiliary gutter runs between a
> column-width panelboard and a pull box, and the pull box
> ...


Guys posts a sub panel, and your stuck on an aux gutter because... ??:blink:



telsa said:


> Work on it.
> 
> It'll come to you.


Reading the thread ... not likely




don_resqcapt19 said:


> I read the "within the panel board" to mean the same panel board as the ungrounded conductor is terminated in.






Jrzy said:


> telsa, it seems like very few people actually read your posts here. Myself and one other gentleman did, we both found that it was very inaccurate. I even posted the code article showing that you were wrong on multiple accounts, but in a polite way.
> 
> Since then, all you have done is attacked myself and the other gentleman.
> 
> What you posted is wrong, the code I posted is straight from the NEC and clearly shows why. What more needs to be said?


I pay attention to his posts more than yours 



MTW said:


> Check out this thread.
> 
> www.electriciantalk.com/f30/what-can-cause-all-lights-circuit-fry-119010/


Hey MTW ... I really thought all you could do was post 2 pictures of emoticon eyes looking up  ... Nice to see you can do a search too:thumbsup:



MTW said:


> As for the OP's situation, I've done the very same thing. It may be a code violation but I don't care. It's no different than a switch loop, electrically speaking. As for it confusing DIYers or handy-hacks -


I've done hacks too ... We all have .... hidden any splices today ?



MTW said:


> I wonder if Telsa will come back to admit he was wrong.


:blink:



dawgs said:


> I thought I was wrong once... But I was wrong.


:no:


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Why not .. It's late ...

I would be nice to see the little boys following Jersy around, actually say something for themselves 

Night Nancy


----------



## Jhellwig (Jun 18, 2014)

backstay said:


> You sit on the pot with your phone?


That is what makes ptp time so awesome.


Jrzy said:


> I don't see all of those provisions necessary:
> 
> 300.3(B)(4) Enclosures. Where an auxiliary gutter runs between a
> column-width panelboard and a pull box, and the pull box
> ...


I am confused as to how he is wrong. I must be missing something. There are panels designed to be like that.


telsa said:


> As an Electrician -- you may be proud.
> 
> As a reader of English -- you are challenged.
> 
> ...


You need to learn how to structure paragraphs.


----------



## Cl906um (Jul 21, 2012)

I believe that the neutral is to originate in the same panel that the circuit originates. The article explaining slots being cut crossways on panel knockout is for the magnetic effect on ferrous pipe runs where parallel conductors of one phase are run in one conduit. Usually only done on a humongous service where it makes it easier to keep parallel wires the same identical length. I can also say I have seen factory wired panels for residential generator backed circûits where they have you splice in the original panel.i know most people don't splice the neutral as well. Fast and dirty they make these generator installs. I believe that it's a violation as well. The magnetic effect is only an issue when you have one phase in one pipe. Kind of like a transformer winding ratio on the conduit.


----------



## MHElectric (Oct 14, 2011)

Funny, I have run into this type of installation on several occasions, and I don't think the thought of whether it was code or not ever crossed my mind. I just thought it was a different way to skin the cat.

Thanks to Don for showing up with the actual code article. Otherwise I would have just continued on like always.


----------

