On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 09:15:55 -0600, bud--
wrote:

On 10/31/2011 12:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 10:54:33 -0600,
wrote:

On 10/30/2011 4:07 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 00:15:24 -0500, "Pete
wrote:

The
"trough" makes good sense, because IF I put the panel onto the main
feed , the top of the panel is 4 inches lower than the old panel. If I
can have a trough 4 inches high and 3 1/3 inches deep, with knockout
holes made to match the knockouts on the panel at the bottom, and to
match the cable spacing at the top, I can enter my load cables into
the trough with the existing cable clamps, and either pass the wires
through the trough or splice them in the trough, then through to the
panel. If I match drill the trough to fit the panel and use plastic
bushings (made for the purpose - not hardware store grommets or any
such crap) in the holes to pass the wires through, I don't need any
other connectors between the trough and the panel, as long as the
trough is firmly connected to the panel??? I'd "gasket" the trough to
the panel or seal it on with Silicone, as well as bolting it.

I wouldn't seal the gutter to the panel.

Not sure what plastic bushings you are talking about. Might be perfectly
good.

For the closest connection I would use "chase nipples" from the gutter
into the panel through matching holes (as you plan to do).
If I use "chase nipples" I require the plastic "anti-short" bushing
if the nipple is metal. Not required with plastic. Not enough room to
use 2" nipple. Total difference in "height" between old and new panel
is 4 inches. The "stub of 2 inch conduit" would have to be basically
just the threads with a nut on either end.

Chase nipple:
http://electrical.hardwarestore.com/14-47-metal-conduit-connectors/conduit-chase-nipple-601921.aspx

The gutter and panel can be in contact. Plastic bushing not required. I
would run a ground wire to the gutter (IMHO chase nipples aren't a great
ground).

But your plastic bushings might work great.

Required if metal conduit or metal punch-outs up here.


Pete suggested a "stub of 2 inch conduit" to connect the gutter to the
panel. (Could also one or more 2" chase nipples.)

The panel only has provision for 1 2 incher in the load center end,
and one in the "Main" end.


One can punch holes where desired.

And other size holes would be fine. Part of the point was that derating
is not required (in the US). The number of wires is limited by the wire
fill for that size conduit.

Usually running a lot
of wires in conduit would be a problem because you have to derate the
current rating of the wire up to up to 65%. When the conduit is shorter
than 24" that does not apply. This may not be the code where you are. It
could make the installation much easier (may or may not require gutter
splices).

How about a 4 inch long conduit nipple in each knockout, with the
connector that normally gets screwed onto the panel screwed into the
end of the conduit instead - so I end up with 6 3/4" stubs and 2 1"
stubs sticking out of the top of the panel with the "romex" connected
to the top, the individual wires from the "romex" entering the panel
via the conduit??? Then I just make a metal sheild panel to fit over
top, hiding the "Rube Goldberg" setup from open view?????

Don't think so.

There are romex connectors that can take 2 cables each (12/2 or 14/2).
Not legal into the panel in Ontario, apparently - at least it appears
it won't pass in Waterloo

------------------------------
Do you actually have aluminum branch circuit wiring? It was only used in
the US from about 1965 to the early 1970s. Much earlier there was rubber
insulated tinned copper that can look like aluminum.


Yes, it is second generation aluminum wiring. The stuff that doesn't
crack every time you look at it the wrong way - used from about about
1973/74 'till about 1978, when aluminum wiring basically dissapeared
from the market. I believe it has more copper in it than the earlier
aluminum, but I'm not sure. The old crap was 1350 alloy. The good
stuff is 8000 series. HUGE difference. But to a home inspector or an
insurance company "it's all aluminum".

gfretwell has written that the new wire is harder, and not likely to
extrude, which was one of the problems with the old wire (connection got
hot, wire expanded more than screw connection is in, wire compresses,
connection looser next operating cycle and gets hotter....)

I would have switches/receptacles marked CO/ALR (in the US).

And it still has problems with surface oxidation when installed. I would
use the connection method recommendations in the link provided. Like
with connections for larger aluminum wire, the alumiconn connectors
deform the wire and probably don't have oxide problems.


The best information, based on extensive research, on branch circuit
aluminum connections I have seen is:
http://www.kinginnovation.com/pdfs/R...Fire070706.pdf
A relatively new splice device that appears to make good aluminum
connections is:
http://www.kinginnovation.com/produc...cts/alumiconn/

But that is the US. More questions for an inspector.


I would avoid stainless because it is, as I remember, much harder to
work with than steel.

No problem as mu buddy fabricates stainless steel enclosures as a
regular part of his job.

As long as he cuts all the holes.
(And the inspector OKs it.)
The "stripit" makes short work of making holes in stainless sheet.