I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

On Aug 28, 8:57*am, stryped wrote:
I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

No allowance for room in the box (consumed volume for heat dissipation
maybe, and room for wiring) to run the feeds from bottom to top. Maybe
also insufficient room in the box to properly radius the bends.


Dave

stryped wrote:
I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.


Dave said it right--jes beat me to it!
Jerry

stryped fired this volley in news:47e3d947-8830-
:

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.


You've asked a lot of what we thought were dumb questions before,
Stryper.

This pretty much kicks it.

LLoyd

On Aug 28, 12:18*pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
stryped fired this volley in news:47e3d947-8830-
:

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

You've asked a lot of what we thought were dumb questions before,
Stryper.

This pretty much kicks it. *

LLoyd

To me, this is a question from a noob who realizes there is a reason,
does not know the reason, and would like to know the reason.
Dumb, to me, would be just ignoring the instructions and doing it the
wrong way.


Dave

In article , XR650L_Dave wrote:
On Aug 28, 12:18=A0pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
stryped fired this volley in news:47e3d947-8830-
:

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

You've asked a lot of what we thought were dumb questions before,
Stryper.

This pretty much kicks it.

To me, this is a question from a noob who realizes there is a reason,
does not know the reason, and would like to know the reason.
Dumb, to me, would be just ignoring the instructions and doing it the
wrong way.

True enough, as far as it goes -- but IMHO "dumb" also includes the inability
to figure things out on one's own. It should have been clear with even five
seconds' reflection that the farther the main breakers are from the point at
which the conductors enter the box, the more difficult it would be to install
them. The other considerations which Dave listed (bending space, etc) are less
obvious, but the difficulty of installation should have been plain had the OP
given the matter *any* thought at all.

XR650L_Dave fired this volley in
:

To me, this is a question from a noob who realizes there is a
reason,
does not know the reason, and would like to know the reason.
Dumb, to me, would be just ignoring the instructions and doing it
the
wrong way.


You obviously aren't familiar with Stryped and his questions.

Of course, by my giving it away ahead of time, he'll demurr, but the
next question he'd likely ask would be, "If I bottom feed it, but
don't invert the box, will I have to bend any wires?"... or some such.

This isn't Noobee stuff, it's "do my thinking for me, so I don't have
to" stuff.

I wish he were installing 4-0 mains; then he'd answer his own
question real quick!

LLoyd

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article
,
XR650L_Dave wrote:
On Aug 28, 12:18=A0pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
stryped fired this volley in news:47e3d947-8830-
:

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

You've asked a lot of what we thought were dumb questions before,
Stryper.

This pretty much kicks it.

To me, this is a question from a noob who realizes there is a reason,
does not know the reason, and would like to know the reason.
Dumb, to me, would be just ignoring the instructions and doing it the
wrong way.

True enough, as far as it goes -- but IMHO "dumb" also includes the
inability
to figure things out on one's own. It should have been clear with even
five
seconds' reflection that the farther the main breakers are from the point
at
which the conductors enter the box, the more difficult it would be to
install
them. The other considerations which Dave listed (bending space, etc) are
less
obvious, but the difficulty of installation should have been plain had the
OP
given the matter *any* thought at all.

Jeez guys, give the man a break. Stupid is not asking question because you
"think" you know all the answers. I have seen hundreds of panels fed from
the bottom with a top main. If someone sees instructions to the contrary,
there is no harm in them making sure they understand "all" the possible
reasons why, regardless of their level of experience.

"stryped" wrote in message
...
I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

Won't hurt a thing though.

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT), stryped
wrote:

I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

The new rules require that you don't have to bend the wires much
before landing them on the main lugs or main breaker "Line" side. They
want them to have a straight shot at the lugs.

As a practical matter, if you have enough wire in the can to bring
the feeders up and around to the line lugs at the top of the can,
install it right side up. If the feeder wires are going to end up
too short to get to the top of the new can, then you can go through
the hassle of inverting the guts.

But whether you invert the can or not you always want to find a way
to make a loop or S-turn wiggle to leave some working slack in the can
- You can cut that wire a dozen times, and it'll still be too short.

When a line lug or main breaker lug goes bad it inevitably overheats
the wire too, you always have a few inches of crispy wire that has to
be trimmed back. With conduit in the walls you can always re-run the
feeders when they get too short, but if you have Feeder Cable in the
walls re-running it to get some slack is a huge mess.

You NEVER want to make the wires banjo-tight just to save a foot or
two of wire, be nice and leave some slack in each can to work with -
because the next guy that has to work on it might be you.

-- Bruce --

In article , "Tim" wrote:

Jeez guys, give the man a break. Stupid is not asking question because you
"think" you know all the answers.

I refer you to Lloyd's response to Dave upthread: you obviously aren't
familiar with Stryped and his questions. We see the same sort of questions
over on rec.woodworking, too, from the same guy.

I have seen hundreds of panels fed from
the bottom with a top main.

And, presumably, they were listed for such use, and were not accompanied by
instructions to the contrary.

If someone sees instructions to the contrary,
there is no harm in them making sure they understand "all" the possible
reasons why, regardless of their level of experience.

Maybe I misread the original post, but it sure didn't read to me like he was
interested in finding out why. Looked more to me like he wanted someone to
tell him it was ok to mount it the way he wanted to, regardless of the
instructions.

In article , Bruce L. Bergman wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT), stryped
wrote:

I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

The new rules require that you don't have to bend the wires much
before landing them on the main lugs or main breaker "Line" side. They
want them to have a straight shot at the lugs.

As a practical matter, if you have enough wire in the can to bring
the feeders up and around to the line lugs at the top of the can,
install it right side up.

Wrong. Installing the equipment in a manner contrary to the manufacturer's
instructions is a Code violation. You have no idea if there's enough space in
that can to bend the wires for a bottom-feed, top-breaker installation. The
manufacturer *does*. And the manufacturer says don't do that.

If the feeder wires are going to end up
too short to get to the top of the new can, then you can go through
the hassle of inverting the guts.

Wrong. Altering the equipment in any manner not explicitly provided for in the
manufacturer's instructions is a Code violation.

Please post your question he

alt.engineering.electrical

On Aug 28, 5:57*am, stryped wrote:
I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

In Canada, panels are split by a divider into the main breaker and the
branch circuit sections. It is against code to run the main feed
through the branch circuit section or vice versa, so unless you want
to bring the cable up the side and over and down you must invert the
panel.

In the US, local codes may vary.

However in Canada, you may mount the panel sideways which is much more
sensible. This is against code in the US (so far).

So, check your local codes.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article , "Tim"
wrote:

Jeez guys, give the man a break. Stupid is not asking question because you
"think" you know all the answers.

I refer you to Lloyd's response to Dave upthread: you obviously aren't
familiar with Stryped and his questions. We see the same sort of questions
over on rec.woodworking, too, from the same guy.

I have seen hundreds of panels fed from
the bottom with a top main.

And, presumably, they were listed for such use, and were not accompanied
by
instructions to the contrary.

If someone sees instructions to the contrary,
there is no harm in them making sure they understand "all" the possible
reasons why, regardless of their level of experience.

Maybe I misread the original post, but it sure didn't read to me like he
was
interested in finding out why. Looked more to me like he wanted someone to
tell him it was ok to mount it the way he wanted to, regardless of the
instructions.

I'm familiar with Stryped's questions. His is building a shop and attempting
to do a lot of things himself. So what?

If you don't want to answer his questions, just skip it, like all the
political nonsense posted here. At least it's a question, and not a
statement, and everyone that reads the discussion can benefit from it, if
they don't already know all the answers.

In article , "Tim" wrote:

I'm familiar with Stryped's questions. His is building a shop and attempting
to do a lot of things himself. So what?

The one thing he's *not* attempting to do himself is *think*.

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:19:40 -0400, "nobody" wrote:

Please post your question he

alt.engineering.electrical

plink

Away into the turd file


Gunner

Whenever a Liberal utters the term "Common Sense approach"....grab your
wallet, your ass, and your guns because the sombitch is about to do
something damned nasty to all three of them.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article
,
XR650L_Dave wrote:
On Aug 28, 12:18=A0pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
stryped fired this volley in news:47e3d947-8830-
:

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

You've asked a lot of what we thought were dumb questions before,
Stryper.

This pretty much kicks it.

To me, this is a question from a noob who realizes there is a reason,
does not know the reason, and would like to know the reason.
Dumb, to me, would be just ignoring the instructions and doing it the
wrong way.

True enough, as far as it goes -- but IMHO "dumb" also includes the
inability
to figure things out on one's own. It should have been clear with even
five
seconds' reflection that the farther the main breakers are from the point
at
which the conductors enter the box, the more difficult it would be to
install
them. The other considerations which Dave listed (bending space, etc) are
less
obvious, but the difficulty of installation should have been plain had the
OP
given the matter *any* thought at all.

What's the problem, Doug? Did somebody **** on your Cheerios today?

You appear to have a great deal of trouble treating others with respect.
If you can't say something nice about others, maybe you should learn to keep
your yap shut.

Harold

In article , "Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article
,
XR650L_Dave wrote:
On Aug 28, 12:18=A0pm, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
stryped fired this volley in news:47e3d947-8830-
:

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

You've asked a lot of what we thought were dumb questions before,
Stryper.

This pretty much kicks it.

To me, this is a question from a noob who realizes there is a reason,
does not know the reason, and would like to know the reason.
Dumb, to me, would be just ignoring the instructions and doing it the
wrong way.

True enough, as far as it goes -- but IMHO "dumb" also includes the inability
to figure things out on one's own. It should have been clear with even five
seconds' reflection that the farther the main breakers are from the point at
which the conductors enter the box, the more difficult it would be to install
them. The other considerations which Dave listed (bending space, etc) are less
obvious, but the difficulty of installation should have been plain had the OP
given the matter *any* thought at all.

What's the problem, Doug? Did somebody **** on your Cheerios today?

You appear to have a great deal of trouble treating others with respect.

Nope, just people who expect others to do all their thinking for them. Review
Stryped's posting history here and in rec.woodworking for multiple examples.

Lloyd has been even less kind to Stryped than I was -- I'm waiting for you to
direct similar comments to him too.

(Doug Miller) fired this volley in news:h7dqk9$ai5
:

Lloyd has been even less kind to Stryped than I was

True. I spent hours of thought and typing trying early-on to help
him, only to discover he didn't want _help_, he wanted us to _do_
every job for him by remote control.

So, call it an earned right to criticize.

I wish him every failure. Before you condemn me for writing that,
consider: That's how we all learned to do things right. He's not
going to ever learn anything unless he jumps off his crutches (us),
and starts making some mistakes on his own.

LLoyd

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:03:27 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:
In article , Bruce L. Bergman wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT), stryped
wrote:

I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

The new rules require that you don't have to bend the wires much
before landing them on the main lugs or main breaker "Line" side. They
want them to have a straight shot at the lugs.

As a practical matter, if you have enough wire in the can to bring
the feeders up and around to the line lugs at the top of the can,
install it right side up.

Wrong. Installing the equipment in a manner contrary to the manufacturer's
instructions is a Code violation. You have no idea if there's enough space in
that can to bend the wires for a bottom-feed, top-breaker installation. The
manufacturer *does*. And the manufacturer says don't do that.

The same manufacturer who likes to stencil "No User Serviceable
Parts Inside, Do Not Open" just to get you to throw it out and buy
another?

Some days you can do it exactly like they say and go home. But
there are the times you have to read the instructions and understand
what they want and why they want it - then ignore parts of the
instructions and do your work in a Safe and Workmanlike Manner. And
be prepared to defend your logic and decisions.

Often because the customer isn't going to pay you to rip out the
entire panel and start over just to make it look like the ideal pretty
picture on the cover of the instructions.

That instruction sheet can be a valuable resource - but a lot of the
stuff they print is in there solely for Lawsuit Immunity and nothing
else.

Sunshade instructions printed on the back side: "Remove from your
car windshield before driving the car." You say "Well, Duh!" but they
have been sued for far stupider stuff before - and lost.

Example: Do you always shut off power to the entire building just to
work on a branch circuit? The first paragraphs of the instruction
sheet are inevitably a whole laundry list of Shall Nots, and the top
of the list is "Never Work On Any Electrical Equipment Hot" - and the
customer is running an office with 50 computers.

If you shut off the main or start killing branch circuits at random
during the day without a Real Good Reason (usually involving flames)
they're going to be carrying you out the front door in a pine box,
toes first.

And your customer is not paying extra for night work either, so
you'll just have to eat it when you come back. IF you can even get
access after hours at all - the customer doesn't want to pay an
employee or a security guard to let you in and babysit the site.

If the feeder wires are going to end up
too short to get to the top of the new can, then you can go through
the hassle of inverting the guts.

Wrong. Altering the equipment in any manner not explicitly provided for in the
manufacturer's instructions is a Code violation.

What color is the sun on your homeworld? Theoretically, you are
correct. Practically...

A proper installation with a fused disconnect switch should not have
the Line and Load leads crossing inside the can, just in case things
get hot and they short against each other. Practically, you aren't
going to rebuild an existing old power system just to avoid this.

You call it "Grandfathered" and move on. You do not have to bring
the entire1953 installation up to 2009 standards just because you
change a bad breaker.

Theoretically, you aren't allowed to modify any pieces inside the
panel, you have to replace with all new - but try to order piece
parts. For new panels they are not easily identified by part numbers,
prohibitively expensive and have a real long lead time. For old
panels they are flat out not going to be available, especially if the
maker has been out of business for thirty years.

Practically, you get a chunk of 1/8" x 3/4" radius edge copper bar
stock and make new main buss bars for that Zinsco panel. Done.

-- Bruce --

In article , Bruce L. Bergman wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:03:27 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:
In article , Bruce L. Bergman
wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT), stryped
wrote:

I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

The new rules require that you don't have to bend the wires much
before landing them on the main lugs or main breaker "Line" side. They
want them to have a straight shot at the lugs.

As a practical matter, if you have enough wire in the can to bring
the feeders up and around to the line lugs at the top of the can,
install it right side up.

Wrong. Installing the equipment in a manner contrary to the manufacturer's
instructions is a Code violation. You have no idea if there's enough space in
that can to bend the wires for a bottom-feed, top-breaker installation. The
manufacturer *does*. And the manufacturer says don't do that.

The same manufacturer who likes to stencil "No User Serviceable
Parts Inside, Do Not Open" just to get you to throw it out and buy
another?

I don't recall ever seeing that legend on a piece of electrical service
equipment. IME, instructions placed on such equipment are there for important
reasons, typically the prevention of fire and/or electrocution hazards.
Perhaps your experience differs.

Some days you can do it exactly like they say and go home. But
there are the times you have to read the instructions and understand
what they want and why they want it - then ignore parts of the
instructions and do your work in a Safe and Workmanlike Manner. And
be prepared to defend your logic and decisions.

Doesn't change the fact that it's a Code violation to install any piece of
electrical equipment contrary to instructions.

Often because the customer isn't going to pay you to rip out the
entire panel and start over just to make it look like the ideal pretty
picture on the cover of the instructions.

So if the customer wants you to violate Code just to make it look nice, you go
along with that?

That instruction sheet can be a valuable resource - but a lot of the
stuff they print is in there solely for Lawsuit Immunity and nothing
else.

In a typical consumer product, that's true. Electric service equipment is not
a typical consumer product.

Sunshade instructions printed on the back side: "Remove from your
car windshield before driving the car." You say "Well, Duh!" but they
have been sued for far stupider stuff before - and lost.

Example: Do you always shut off power to the entire building just to
work on a branch circuit?

Of course not. Nice straw man, though.

The first paragraphs of the instruction
sheet are inevitably a whole laundry list of Shall Nots, and the top
of the list is "Never Work On Any Electrical Equipment Hot" - and the
customer is running an office with 50 computers.

You're getting rather far afield from the original topic. In case you've
forgotten, that was installing service equipment in accordance with the
manufacturer's installation instructions -- instructions which typically don't
say anything at all about procedures for servicing branch circuits.

If you shut off the main or start killing branch circuits at random
during the day without a Real Good Reason (usually involving flames)
they're going to be carrying you out the front door in a pine box,
toes first.

And your customer is not paying extra for night work either, so
you'll just have to eat it when you come back. IF you can even get
access after hours at all - the customer doesn't want to pay an
employee or a security guard to let you in and babysit the site.

All of which is completely irrelevant to the question of whether the installer
should follow, or ignore, the installation instructions.

If the feeder wires are going to end up
too short to get to the top of the new can, then you can go through
the hassle of inverting the guts.

Wrong. Altering the equipment in any manner not explicitly provided for in the
manufacturer's instructions is a Code violation.

What color is the sun on your homeworld? Theoretically, you are
correct. Practically...

It's a Code violation both in theory and in practice.

A proper installation with a fused disconnect switch should not have
the Line and Load leads crossing inside the can, just in case things
get hot and they short against each other. Practically, you aren't
going to rebuild an existing old power system just to avoid this.

AFAIK, it's not a Code violation to do so.

You call it "Grandfathered" and move on. You do not have to bring
the entire1953 installation up to 2009 standards just because you
change a bad breaker.

Another straw man. Not a very good one, either.

Theoretically, you aren't allowed to modify any pieces inside the
panel,

Thank you -- that's exactly what I've been saying.

On Aug 30, 3:54*pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , Bruce L. Bergman wrote:





On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:03:27 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:
In article , Bruce L. Bergman
wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT), stryped
wrote:

I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

*The new rules require that you don't have to bend the wires much
before landing them on the main lugs or main breaker "Line" side. They
want them to have a straight shot at the lugs.

As a practical matter, if you have enough wire in the can to bring
the feeders up and around to the line lugs at the top of the can,
install it right side up. *

Wrong. Installing the equipment in a manner contrary to the manufacturer's
instructions is a Code violation. You have no idea if there's enough space in
that can to bend the wires for a bottom-feed, top-breaker installation. The
manufacturer *does*. And the manufacturer says don't do that.

* The same manufacturer who likes to stencil "No User Serviceable
Parts Inside, Do Not Open" just to get you to throw it out and buy
another?

I don't recall ever seeing that legend on a piece of electrical service
equipment. IME, instructions placed on such equipment are there for important
reasons, typically the prevention of fire and/or electrocution hazards.
Perhaps your experience differs.



*Some days you can do it exactly like they say and go home. *But
there are the times you have to read the instructions and understand
what they want and why they want it - then ignore parts of the
instructions and do your work in a Safe and Workmanlike Manner. *And
be prepared to defend your logic and decisions.

Doesn't change the fact that it's a Code violation to install any piece of
electrical equipment contrary to instructions.



* Often because the customer isn't going to pay you to rip out the
entire panel and start over just to make it look like the ideal pretty
picture on the cover of the instructions.

So if the customer wants you to violate Code just to make it look nice, you go
along with that?

*That instruction sheet can be a valuable resource - but a lot of the
stuff they print is in there solely for Lawsuit Immunity and nothing
else.

In a typical consumer product, that's true. Electric service equipment is not
a typical consumer product.



*Sunshade instructions printed on the back side: *"Remove from your
car windshield before driving the car." *You say "Well, Duh!" but they
have been sued for far stupider stuff before - and lost.

*Example: Do you always shut off power to the entire building just to
work on a branch circuit? *

Of course not. Nice straw man, though.

The first paragraphs of the instruction
sheet are inevitably a whole laundry list of Shall Nots, and the top
of the list is "Never Work On Any Electrical Equipment Hot" - and the
customer is running an office with 50 computers.

You're getting rather far afield from the original topic. In case you've
forgotten, that was installing service equipment in accordance with the
manufacturer's installation instructions -- instructions which typically don't
say anything at all about procedures for servicing branch circuits.



*If you shut off the main or start killing branch circuits at random
during the day without a Real Good Reason (usually involving flames)
they're going to be carrying you out the front door in a pine box,
toes first.

*And your customer is not paying extra for night work either, so
you'll just have to eat it when you come back. *IF you can even get
access after hours at all - the customer doesn't want to pay an
employee or a security guard to let you in and babysit the site.

All of which is completely irrelevant to the question of whether the installer
should follow, or ignore, the installation instructions.



If the feeder wires are going to end up
too short to get to the top of the new can, then you can go through
the hassle of inverting the guts.

Wrong. Altering the equipment in any manner not explicitly provided for in the
manufacturer's instructions is a Code violation.

What color is the sun on your homeworld? *Theoretically, you are
correct. *Practically...

It's a Code violation both in theory and in practice.



*A proper installation with a fused disconnect switch should not have
the Line and Load leads crossing inside the can, just in case things
get hot and they short against each other. *Practically, you aren't
going to rebuild an existing old power system just to avoid this. *

AFAIK, it's not a Code violation to do so.



*You call it "Grandfathered" and move on. *You do not have to bring
the entire1953 installation up to 2009 standards just because you
change a bad breaker. *

Another straw man. Not a very good one, either.



*Theoretically, you aren't allowed to modify any pieces inside the
panel,

Thank you -- that's exactly what I've been saying.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Geeze, I just wanted to understand why. For the record I mounted it
the way it said to, upside down.

In article , rangerssuck wrote:
On Aug 30, 4:54=A0pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , Bruce L. Bergman=
wrote:
[...]
=A0 The same manufacturer who likes to stencil "No User Serviceable
Parts Inside, Do Not Open" just to get you to throw it out and buy
another?

I don't recall ever seeing that legend on a piece of electrical service
equipment. IME, instructions placed on such equipment are there for important
reasons, typically the prevention of fire and/or electrocution hazards.
Perhaps your experience differs.

Google "no user serviceable parts inside" = 314,000 hits.

And how many of those are on electrical service equipment?

Within arm's
reach, it's on my telephone. It's on my monitor. It's on my printer.

But *not* on electrical service equipment.

It's bull****. I fix this stuff all the time.

Doesn't change the fact that it violates the electrical code to alter a piece
of service equipment in a manner that was not specified by the manufacturer
and listed for that purpose.

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT), stryped wrote:

I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

Ignoring all the arguments about code violations etc, The Square-D panel in my
(UK) workshop is mounted the normal way up (e.g. writing all the right way up)
and the isolator is at the bottom! That panel is fed from the top :-)


Mark Rand
RTFM

"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT), stryped
wrote:

I opened my main breaker General Electric 100 amp panel I bought. The
direction say to rotate the enclosure 180 degrees if it will be bottom
fed. (WHich mine will).

WHy is this? If I do that the main breaker will be at the bottom which
seems odd.

Ignoring all the arguments about code violations etc, The Square-D panel
in my
(UK) workshop is mounted the normal way up (e.g. writing all the right way
up)
and the isolator is at the bottom! That panel is fed from the top :-)


Mark Rand
RTFM

My panel in the house is mounted exactly opposite. Bottom fed, main breaker
at the top. It, too, is Square D (not the Homeline. It's a QO type). I
did the wiring. The main feed takes a bit of the room, but there's still
enough left for the circuits to be wired.

Harold

In article ,
"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote:

My panel in the house is mounted exactly opposite. Bottom fed, main breaker
at the top. It, too, is Square D (not the Homeline. It's a QO type). I
did the wiring. The main feed takes a bit of the room, but there's still
enough left for the circuits to be wired.

Harold

My electrician was inclined to sweep the feed wires up from where they
enter (external to the box) to top feed. I pointed out that the QO boxes
we have are happy to be inverted (instructions included, labels provided
to work both ways), and I'm happy having them inverted (no longer young,
but still flexible in brain), which minimizes the distance the feed
needs to go - straight into the bottom of the panels. Top main makes
sense in a basement, fed from above - not so much when the feed comes
through the wall at ~3.5 feet off the floor or lower.

Now I need to go screen more dirt in the hole around the conduit.
Glacier poop is better than clay, but it sure does have some chunks in
it.

--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by