That is not a 4 pole breaker, it's 2 pole that uses 4 pole spaces. ITE Imperial Corp., a predecessor of the company Siemens bought was the first to introduce those mains way back in the 1970's, Cutler-Hammer, & GE, followed in doing so.
-
Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades
An average day
- Thread starter ICE
- Start date
That is not a 4 pole breaker, it's 2 pole that uses 4 pole spaces. ITE Imperial Corp., a predecessor of the company Siemens bought was the first to introduce those mains way back in the 1970's, Cutler-Hammer, & GE, followed in doing so.
ICE
Oh Well
Probably forty times.
Last edited:
ICE
Oh Well
Last edited:
ICE
Oh Well
There shouldn’t be daylight showing.
Last edited:
ICE
Oh Well
Some are good, some are great, most are middling and then there’s the worthless.
ICE
Oh Well
That is daylight. The claim is that the re-identified white wire is a #4 and the others are # 1. I have asked for pictures of the markings.
If daylight can get through, so can water.
steveray
SAWHORSE
It doesn't rain in SoCal....
ICE
Oh Well
About a size 9.
linnrg
Sawhorse
Darn if you ever see size 11.5 you will have answered my question!
I was told you can walk on them when they submitted plans without access to some roof skylights? hummm
ICE, you'll have to advise us, should we let the solar installers do visual inspections, just got a sheet telling me how to set that up!
Not gonna do it...not gonna do it!
ICE, you'll have to advise us, should we let the solar installers do visual inspections, just got a sheet telling me how to set that up!
Not gonna do it...not gonna do it!
ICE
Oh Well
No panel manufacturer allows walking on the panels. I have witnessed it hundreds of times. When solar was in it's infancy a shaded or damaged panel would kill the entire array. Now there is technology that would isolate a shaded or damaged panel. The array will still generate power but at a lessor amount. So if walking on the panels causes damage, it is less likely to be found out.
I have been performing virtual solar inspections for six months.
I have been performing virtual solar inspections for six months.
Kearney.200
Silver Member
Is'n there a song about that ?
TheCommish
Registered User
can you hum a few bars to see if remember the tune?
ICE
Oh Well
This is what it looks like when conductors are fed through the stucco wall from a surface mount panel.
This is what it looks like if the didn't restore the wall.
This is what it looks like if the didn't restore the wall.
ICE
Oh Well
The setup prior to the solar contractor messing with it had two circuit breakers that powered a swimming pool. Being at the end of the busbar, they had to be relocated. 
The problem that I have with it is there is no pair of breakers labeled swimming pool. The solar breaker took the place of the swimming pool breakers and the guy that handled the virtual inspection is clueless. The correction states that GFCI protection is required.
This how I wrote that correction:
The previous circuit labeling had two breaker slots identified as "Swimming" "Pool". Those slots are at the bottom of the busbar. The solar breakers have been placed at the bottom and there is no pair of breakers labeled swimming pool. Please explain this and label the circuits correctly.
Furthermore, I must assume that the missing swimming pool breakers were GFCI. And therefore will be replaced with GFCI. I could also assume that the previous breakers were not GFCI. In that case, because they were removed from the busbar they shall not be reused and GFCI protection is required.
I bet that I hear about this one.
The problem that I have with it is there is no pair of breakers labeled swimming pool. The solar breaker took the place of the swimming pool breakers and the guy that handled the virtual inspection is clueless. The correction states that GFCI protection is required.
This how I wrote that correction:
The previous circuit labeling had two breaker slots identified as "Swimming" "Pool". Those slots are at the bottom of the busbar. The solar breakers have been placed at the bottom and there is no pair of breakers labeled swimming pool. Please explain this and label the circuits correctly.
Furthermore, I must assume that the missing swimming pool breakers were GFCI. And therefore will be replaced with GFCI. I could also assume that the previous breakers were not GFCI. In that case, because they were removed from the busbar they shall not be reused and GFCI protection is required.
I bet that I hear about this one.
Mech
Registered User
What does it mean when the red warning sticker in the above photo states the solar electric circuit breaker is backfired? Is that the same as back fed? Or does that mean the installation was not done properly?
ICE
Oh Well
Good catch Mech. I didn't notice that.
Last edited:
fatboy
Administrator
ICE
Oh Well
I wrote a correction stating that a sleeve crimp is not allowed. The contractor stated that he used a c-tap. I said that this absolutely looks like a crimp sleeve. He explained that it is one half of a c-tap. When asked why he did that he said that it's just the way he has always done it.
This is another thing that I've never seen done before. That solid copper wire is a GEC to an auxiliary grounding electrode. Rather than run it across the roof and down the side of the house he took it into the attic and out to the rod.
This is another thing that I've never seen done before. That solid copper wire is a GEC to an auxiliary grounding electrode. Rather than run it across the roof and down the side of the house he took it into the attic and out to the rod.