|
to John Galt6
Re: Why only 1 ground terminal and 2 hot/neutral on receptacles?said by John Galt6:The 'proper way' is to pigtail all conductors prior to connection to the device. Sorry, but this is NOT the "proper" way. It is one way. said by John Galt6:In my jurisdiction that is mandatory, even though the Code requires it only on MWBCs. Is this in writing somewhere? Or do they just like to see it? |
|
alkizmo join:2007-06-25 Pierrefonds, QC |
said by Speedy Petey:Sorry, but this is NOT the "proper" way. It is one way. What is the "proper" way? Or were you just saying that there is no one "proper" way? |
|
Zach Premium Member join:2006-11-26 Llano, CA 1 edit |
Zach
Premium Member
2012-Oct-7 8:56 pm
said by alkizmo:said by Speedy Petey:Sorry, but this is NOT the "proper" way. It is one way. What is the "proper" way? Or were you just saying that there is no one "proper" way? If the circuit in question is NOT a MWBC, either feeding through the device and pig-tailing is generally acceptable. Some AHJ's require and some ECs prefer to pig-tail. For MWBCs, feeding through the device isn't allowed on the grounded conductors. Obviously, in the case of GFCI receptacles, you have no choice but to feed through if you are also protecting loads down-stream. Edit to add: 300.13 Mechanical and Electrical Continuity - Conductors
(B) Device Removal. In multiwire branch circuits, the continuity of a grounded conductor shall not depend on device connections such as lampholders, receptacles, and so forth, where the removal of such devices would interrupt the continuity.
I always tail where possible. |
|
1 edit |
said by Zach:said by alkizmo:said by Speedy Petey:Sorry, but this is NOT the "proper" way. It is one way. What is the "proper" way? Or were you just saying that there is no one "proper" way? If the circuit in question is NOT a MWBC, either feeding through the device and pig-tailing is generally acceptable. Some AHJ's require and some ECs prefer to pig-tail. For MWBCs, feeding through the device isn't allowed. Obviously, in the case of GFCI receptacles, you have no choice but to feed through if you are also protecting loads down-stream. They don't have to be pigtailed on non MWBC circuits but: the neutrals must be pigtailed on MWBC installation. 300.13 Mechanical and Electrical Continuity Conductors (B) Device Removal In multiwire branch circuits, the continuity of a grounded conductor shall not depend on device connections such as lampholders, receptacles, and so forth, where the removal of such devices would interrupt the continuity. Losing a neutral on a MWBC |
|
Zach Premium Member join:2006-11-26 Llano, CA |
Zach
Premium Member
2012-Oct-7 9:19 pm
said by Jack_in_VA:They don't have to be pigtailed on non MWBC circuits but:
the neutrals must be pigtailed on MWBC installation.
300.13 Mechanical and Electrical Continuity Conductors (B) Device Removal In multiwire branch circuits, the continuity of a grounded conductor shall not depend on device connections such as lampholders, receptacles, and so forth, where the removal of such devices would interrupt the continuity. Posts and edits must have crossed. Since I don't usually feed-through, I had to find the text. |
|
|
I was doing an edit sorry |
|
|
to Jack_in_VA
I love that power point! |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to alkizmo
said by alkizmo:said by Speedy Petey:Sorry, but this is NOT the "proper" way. It is one way. What is the "proper" way? Or were you just saying that there is no one "proper" way? The 'proper' way is whatever code says in your jurisdiction. Canadian & US electrical codes differ in some areas of practice. |
|