|
Home > Archive > Home Repair forum > February 2008 > Overkill???
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
| I'm switching from a 100 to a 200 amp service. I'm going to lay new cable
from the meter, 185 feet, underground, to the entrance of the house. I have
a retired city electrical inspector (I'm out in the county where no
inspections are required) that is going to do the connections and some
inside work. He told me the other day that I needed to use #2 copper cable
unless it was over 200 feet and then would have to go to #3 (or vice
versa -- that's not the question) in schedule 80 EIGHTY!!! pipe. The
question is, why copper instead of aluminum and why in the world he call for
schedule 80??? I have cattle trucks, loaded 18 wheelers, run over schedule
40 all day long and never have a crack. The original wire is not in any pipe
at all.
If left to my own devices I'd just run 185 feet of whatever size cable
required with no pipe. Is this guy doing some overkill here just to be on
the safe side?
--
The doctors have narrowed my condition
down to two ailments. They say I either
have arthritis or rigor mortis.
JC
www.cellphonesforsoldiers.com
| |
|
| Ask him what he's basing this on. Ask him how he's figuring his wire size as
well
"JC" <dontbother@imouttatown.net> wrote in message
news:75Iuj.229725$ST4.97960@fe07.news.easynews.com...
> I'm switching from a 100 to a 200 amp service. I'm going to lay new cable
> from the meter, 185 feet, underground, to the entrance of the house. I
> have a retired city electrical inspector (I'm out in the county where no
> inspections are required) that is going to do the connections and some
> inside work. He told me the other day that I needed to use #2 copper cable
> unless it was over 200 feet and then would have to go to #3 (or vice
> versa -- that's not the question) in schedule 80 EIGHTY!!! pipe. The
> question is, why copper instead of aluminum and why in the world he call
> for schedule 80??? I have cattle trucks, loaded 18 wheelers, run over
> schedule 40 all day long and never have a crack. The original wire is not
> in any pipe at all.
>
> If left to my own devices I'd just run 185 feet of whatever size cable
> required with no pipe. Is this guy doing some overkill here just to be on
> the safe side?
>
>
> --
> The doctors have narrowed my condition
> down to two ailments. They say I either
> have arthritis or rigor mortis.
>
> JC
>
> www.cellphonesforsoldiers.com
| |
| Blattus Slafaly £ ¥ ‰ :) 2008-02-19, 5:25 pm |
| JC wrote:
> I'm switching from a 100 to a 200 amp service. I'm going to lay new
> cable from the meter, 185 feet, underground, to the entrance of the
> house. I have a retired city electrical inspector (I'm out in the county
> where no inspections are required) that is going to do the connections
> and some inside work. He told me the other day that I needed to use #2
> copper cable unless it was over 200 feet and then would have to go to #3
> (or vice versa -- that's not the question) in schedule 80 EIGHTY!!!
> pipe. The question is, why copper instead of aluminum and why in the
> world he call for schedule 80??? I have cattle trucks, loaded 18
> wheelers, run over schedule 40 all day long and never have a crack. The
> original wire is not in any pipe at all.
>
> If left to my own devices I'd just run 185 feet of whatever size cable
> required with no pipe. Is this guy doing some overkill here just to be
> on the safe side?
>
>
Use the calculator at the bottom of this web page and see if you need
copper or aluminum. http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm
The pipe is up to you and weather or not the wire is made to be buried
with or without.
--
Blattus Slafaly ? 3  7/8
| |
| Blattus Slafaly £ ¥ ‰ :) 2008-02-19, 5:25 pm |
| JC wrote:
> I'm switching from a 100 to a 200 amp service. I'm going to lay new
> cable from the meter, 185 feet, underground, to the entrance of the
> house. I have a retired city electrical inspector (I'm out in the county
> where no inspections are required) that is going to do the connections
> and some inside work. He told me the other day that I needed to use #2
> copper cable unless it was over 200 feet and then would have to go to #3
> (or vice versa -- that's not the question) in schedule 80 EIGHTY!!!
> pipe. The question is, why copper instead of aluminum and why in the
> world he call for schedule 80??? I have cattle trucks, loaded 18
> wheelers, run over schedule 40 all day long and never have a crack. The
> original wire is not in any pipe at all.
>
> If left to my own devices I'd just run 185 feet of whatever size cable
> required with no pipe. Is this guy doing some overkill here just to be
> on the safe side?
>
>
Here is another handy little chart.
http://www.worldchat.com/~sva-sales...zing_chart.html
--
Blattus Slafaly ? 3 7/8
| |
| marson 2008-02-19, 8:25 pm |
| On Feb 19, 5:22 pm, "Blattus Slafaly =A3 =A5 =89 "
<boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> JC wrote:
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
>
>
> Here is another handy little chart.http://www.worldchat.com/~sva-sales/htm=
l/wire_sizing_chart.html
>
> --
> Blattus Slafaly ? 3 7/8
sounds like overkill to me.
| |
| John Grabowski 2008-02-19, 8:25 pm |
|
"JC" <dontbother@imouttatown.net> wrote in message
news:75Iuj.229725$ST4.97960@fe07.news.easynews.com...
> I'm switching from a 100 to a 200 amp service. I'm going to lay new cable
> from the meter, 185 feet, underground, to the entrance of the house. I
> have a retired city electrical inspector (I'm out in the county where no
> inspections are required) that is going to do the connections and some
> inside work. He told me the other day that I needed to use #2 copper cable
> unless it was over 200 feet and then would have to go to #3 (or vice
> versa -- that's not the question) in schedule 80 EIGHTY!!! pipe. The
> question is, why copper instead of aluminum and why in the world he call
> for schedule 80??? I have cattle trucks, loaded 18 wheelers, run over
> schedule 40 all day long and never have a crack. The original wire is not
> in any pipe at all.
>
> If left to my own devices I'd just run 185 feet of whatever size cable
> required with no pipe. Is this guy doing some overkill here just to be on
> the safe side?
Will there be a main circuit breaker protecting this service feeder from the
meter to the house? In NJ one power company requires that the underground
conduit from the pole to the meter be schedule 80. After the meter if there
is fuse or circuit breaker protection you can change to cable or schedule
40. If you are going under a driveway the conduit should be at least 24"
deep.
For a 200 amp service (310.15(B)(6) 2/0 copper or 4/0 aluminum is required.
Considering the distance of your service you will probably be better off
with an oversized copper feed to compensate for voltage drop.
| |
|
| On Feb 19, 4:44=A0pm, "JC" <dontbot...@imouttatown.net> wrote:
> I'm switching from a 100 to a 200 amp service. I'm going to lay new cable
> from the meter, 185 feet, underground, to the entrance of the house. I hav=
e
> a retired city electrical inspector (I'm out in the county where no
> inspections are required) that is going to do the connections and some
> inside work. He told me the other day that I needed to use #2 copper cable=
> unless it was over 200 feet and then would have to go to #3 (or vice
> versa -- that's not the question) in schedule 80 EIGHTY!!! pipe. The
> question is, why copper instead of aluminum and why in the world he call f=
or
> schedule 80??? I have cattle trucks, loaded 18 wheelers, run over schedule=
> 40 all day long and never have a crack. The original wire is not in any pi=
pe
> at all.
>
> If left to my own devices I'd just run 185 feet of whatever size cable
> required with no pipe. Is this guy doing some overkill here just to be on
> the safe side?
>
> --
> The doctors have narrowed my condition
> down to two ailments. They say I either
> have arthritis or rigor mortis.
>
> JC
>
> www.cellphonesforsoldiers.com
We just put in Schedule 80 for our 600 amp service. Phone went in
schedule 40 (6" for no apparent reason). Cable went down as a cable/
conduit combo wire. Then, under our driveway they required 6" of
concrete on top of the conduit. Personally, I think the concrete was
overkill.
Then they required conduit to within 3" of the transformer on the
pole.
| |
| Edwin Pawlowski 2008-02-19, 9:25 pm |
|
"JC" <dontbother@imouttatown.net> wrote in message
news:75Iuj.229725$ST4.97960@fe07.news.easynews.com...
> I'm switching from a 100 to a 200 amp service. I'm going to lay new cable
> from the meter, 185 feet, underground, to the entrance of the house. I
> have a retired city electrical inspector (I'm out in the county where no
> inspections are required) that is going to do the connections and some
> inside work. He told me the other day that I needed to use #2 copper cable
> unless it was over 200 feet and then would have to go to #3 (or vice
> versa -- that's not the question) in schedule 80 EIGHTY!!! pipe. The
> question is, why copper instead of aluminum and why in the world he call
> for schedule 80??? I have cattle trucks, loaded 18 wheelers, run over
> schedule 40 all day long and never have a crack. The original wire is not
> in any pipe at all.
>
> If left to my own devices I'd just run 185 feet of whatever size cable
> required with no pipe. Is this guy doing some overkill here just to be on
> the safe side?
Copper that size is probably $2.50 a foot or so
As for the schedule 80, if he is talking steel, he is nuts. If he is
talking pvc, maybe. Code would not allow plain wire unless it is made for
burial.
| |
|
|
"Edwin Pawlowski" <esp@snet.net> wrote in message
news:jTMuj.8370$5K1.3910@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "JC" <dontbother@imouttatown.net> wrote in message
> news:75Iuj.229725$ST4.97960@fe07.news.easynews.com...
>
> Copper that size is probably $2.50 a foot or so
>
> As for the schedule 80, if he is talking steel, he is nuts. If he is
> talking pvc, maybe. Code would not allow plain wire unless it is made for
> burial.
>
Thanks to all for the responses. I have the 2005 NEC and some parts of it
seem to be typical governmental gobbeldy goop. For instance, on page 70-140,
right hand column #3 it says "Bare or Covered Conductors. Where bare or
covered conductors are used with insulated conductors, their allowable
ampacities shall be limited to those permitted for the adjacent insulated
conductors." Huh? What other type of conductors are there besides "bare" or
"covered"?
--
The doctors have narrowed my condition
down to two ailments. They say I either
have arthritis or rigor mortis.
JC
www.cellphonesforsoldiers.com
|
|
|
|
|