ground rod for shed panel

[SGKent]

I have a shed 5' from the house. There is a sub-panel in it that has a 4 wire to it from the main panel which is conveniently next to the shed so the wire run is maybe 12' total (down, over and back up). It is the correct cable/wires for inside the underground conduit, and the panel rating. The shed panel has both legs for 220V which I use in the shed to run 2 compressors, a neutral and a ground. I also have a 120V receptacle and 2 lights in the shed. All stay dry. It has been awhile since I put it in, and I think that is one of the electrical additions the county signed off on when I also put a spa in. I also believe from memory that the ground might be a slightly larger gauge than the neutral. I remember something about the ground path has to be larger than the supply path. The breaker in the main panel that supplies the sub-panel is a GFI breaker too. The electrical books I followed when installing it said not to install a grounding rod so not to make a ground loop since the house is grounded and there is a dedicated ground wire. The electrical supply house staff confirmed that (for whatever it is worth). Later reading in other books now say always install a grounding rod to the panel regardless. Which is it? Now that I am retired and have the time, I want to be sure everything around here is done correctly to current thinking.

 

[pattenp]

There should be a ground rod for the subpanel since it's a separate structure. The ground rod is for lightning strikes not for clearing fault current.

 

[SGKent]

thanks - I will install one. What gauge ground wire would you use? I have to run about 10' to the end of the shed to be sure not to hit any underground utilities on the side of the shed where the power comes in to the house.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

Wow lots of bad incorrect info here.

First off, if you would've read the electrical FAQs thread, all your questions would've been answered.

See comment #4:

https://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=356460

I have a shed 5' from the house. There is a sub-panel in it that has a 4 wire to it from the main panel which is conveniently next to the shed so the wire run is maybe 12' total (down, over and back up). It is the correct cable/wires for inside the underground conduit, and the panel rating. The shed panel has both legs for 220V which I use in the shed to run 2 compressors, a neutral and a ground. I also have a 120V receptacle and 2 lights in the shed. All stay dry. It has been awhile since I put it in, and I think that is one of the electrical additions the county signed off on when I also put a spa in.

If the county signed off on it, then the inspector is either missed it or is incompetent.

Inspectors do miss a lot unfortunately.

Never assume that just because something was signed off, that it was done correctly.

You would be horrified if you saw all the major violations I saw on electrical systems, that were signed off by an inspector.

I also believe from memory that the ground might be a slightly larger gauge than the neutral. I remember something about the ground path has to be larger than the supply path.

there is no reason for the EGC to be larger than the neutral. The EGC can actually be reduced in size compared to the grounded(neutral) and ungrounded conductors(hot legs).

There is no code or reason that dictates the ground path needing to be larger than the supply path, whatever that means...

The breaker in the main panel that supplies the sub-panel is a GFCI breaker too.

Thats not a good idea. Why did you put in a GFCI breaker? Is it because of the spa? If so, you couldve put the GFCI breaker in the subpanel.

The electrical books I followed when installing it said not to install a grounding rod so not to make a ground loop since the house is grounded and there is a dedicated ground wire. The electrical supply house staff confirmed that (for whatever it is worth). Later reading in other books now say always install a grounding rod to the panel regardless. Which is it? Now that I am retired and have the time, I want to be sure everything around here is done correctly to current thinking.

which books did you read that said to not put in grounding electrodes and that it would cause a ground loop?

Those books are completely wrong. There would be no ground loops between rods next to each other connected on the same GEC.

Now, what NEC code requires 2 grounding electrodes spaced minimum 6' apart. They need to be in the earth a minimum of 8'.

Use solid #6 cu to connect them to the panel.

Is the neutral bus in your subpanel isolated?

 

[SGKent]

isolated as above the backplane ground on isolators? I would have to look. I believe that the main panel (1979) has the ground and neutral on the backplane but would have to look there too. I do remember buying some kind of bars that had to be installed at the time beyond what came with the panel but I will look.

I can put two rods in 8' each 6' apart with a hammer drill and run a #6 copper wire to the backplane.

Most likely at the time the books were the NEC at that time, documentation with the subpanel (Square D?), and an electricians handbook of some kind I would have gotten at the book store or electrical supplier. It has been about 20 to 25 years since it was installed.

 

[bczygan]

isolated as above the backplane ground on isolators? I would have to look. I believe that the main panel (1979) has the ground and neutral on the backplane but would have to look there too. I do remember buying some kind of bars that had to be installed at the time beyond what came with the panel but I will look.

I can put two rods in 8' each 6' apart with a hammer drill and run a #6 copper wire to the backplane.

Most likely at the time the books were the NEC at that time, documentation with the subpanel (Square D?), and an electricians handbook of some kind I would have gotten at the book store or electrical supplier. It has been about 20 to 25 years since it was installed.

Isolated, means the green bonding screw in the sub panel that connects them, is removed.

Bill

 

[Norcal]

The OP is in Citrus Heights,CA (Sacramento suburb) the service in this part of the country is usually on the outside of the home and neutral is permanently bonded to the enclosure as those panels are only suitable for service equipment, the OP should be able to confirm the type.

 

[SGKent]

The OP is in Citrus Heights,CA (Sacramento suburb) the service in this part of the country is usually on the outside of the home and neutral is permanently bonded to the enclosure as those panels are only suitable for service equipment, the OP should be able to confirm the type.

Edit.

On the main outside service panel, a 100 amp service installed in 1979 when the house was built, the neutral and ground bus are the same bar. The bar is permanently mounted directly onto the backplane.

The sub-panel in the Tuff shed is a Cutler-Hammer (not Square D). It has a 30 amp supply. 10 gauge wires (4 wire including the ground). The run is about 10' - 14' including the drop, run to the shed and rise. The neutral bus is mounted on nylon mounts and does not have a grounding screw from what I can see (photo below). It appears electrically above the backplane. The grounds are mounted directly to the bus on the backplane. The breakers at the main service, and at the sub-panel are non-GFI (the spa is GFI but it is gone now). Everything is in metal boxes, and metal conduit.

FWIW meaning no disrespect, not every electrician who does work in this area is someone you would trust. Some are great, others take lots of shortcuts. I've seen work done here that was below par. In addition one of the worst arguments, just short of a fist fight, I've seen here was between a contractor and an inspector over mostly electrical items. The police had to be called to quiet things down. An inspector came out to the business next door at work that was being built, and gave a list of items to the GC to do to get the final. The contractor did them. The next inspector was the head of Sac County Building and she changed many of the items back to the way they were and told the contractor that her inspector made an error. The contractor put things back the way they were. Then when the final inspection came again the first guy came back out and changed it all again back to what he wanted and said his boss, the lady, was wrong and stupid that the GC shouldn't have listened to her. Then when the GC called the head of the dept she said go with whatever the inspector there now wants and hung up. The inspector there made a snide comment and all hell broke loose. All I want now is to be sure this is done the best way possible to whatever current thinking and codes are in NorCal. This is California. It is a weird place at times. People don't have rights, the state and County do. Even the City here runs into problems with the state and county when they are following the law - things are politically driven. Electrons don't care about politics, they follow the path of least resistance every time.

View media item 16905
View media item 92741
View media item 92742
View media item 92743

 

[wyliesdiesels]

You said 10/3.

I assume this is NM.

Does it run outdoors?

If so then thats not code permissable.

The neutral in the main SHOULD be bonded.

The neutral in the sub should NOT be bonded.

Looks like your bonding is correct.

 

[SGKent]

You said 10/3.

I assume this is NM.

Does it run outdoors?

If so then thats not code permissable.

The neutral in the main SHOULD be bonded.

The neutral in the sub should NOT be bonded.

Looks like your bonding is correct.

Thank you - The sub-panel supply wires are four separate wires that were the rating and type designed to go into conduit underground. When I say 10/3 that is what I wrote on the box with a sharpy - actually it is 4 wires and not a romex style cable. My bad for not realizing that 10/3 to an electrician means a specific kind of supply.

View media item 92743

 

[Norcal]

That sub panel is Westinghouse/ Cutler-Hammer/Eaton BR or as I call it “Zinsco II” with Siemens breakers, doubt that the breakers are UL classified to be used in a BR panel.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

That sub panel is Westinghouse/ Cutler-Hammer/Eaton BR or as I call it “Zinsco II” with Siemens breakers, doubt that the breakers are UL classified to be used in a BR panel.

good catch

i hadnt even looked at the breakers yet.

yeah those siemens mp-T breakers need to be swapped out with some Eaton BR breakers.

 

[alfredeneuman]

Was that shelf in place before the panel was installed?
That's a HUGE violation of the working clearances in 110.26

 

[Norcal]

good catch

i hadnt even looked at the breakers yet.

yeah those siemens mp-T breakers need to be swapped out with some Eaton BR breakers.

Better yet keep the Siemens and scrap the BR.

 

[SGKent]

I was hesitant to post this thread at all because instead of getting just an answer to the question of grounding rods I knew the discussion would turn to 100 other things including the wrong nail type was used somewhere in the shed. 20 years ago that is what they handed me when I bought the items. There was no other place to put the panel in that shed and have it accessible and out of the way where it would not run the risk of being either unaccessible or damaged. Maybe someday I will shorten the shelf or move them, and yes, the shelf was there from when the shed was purchased. It is what it is. The original question was on grounding rods.

Norcal - appreciate your input. You said the breakers probably needed to be replaced then you said keep them. Which is it? The box has a Cutler-Hammer sticker and emblem on it. The breakers were the style that were designed at that time to fit that panel.

with Siemens breakers, doubt that the breakers are UL classified

Better yet keep the Siemens and scrap the BR.

as a footnote the sub-panel is NEVER energized when it is worked on because it gets turned off at the main service panel. 110.26 (1) is specific in that it applies to panels that are not de-energized. But, when I have time I will remove 3' of the shelf anyway.

 

[Norcal]

Your most economical choice is replace the Siemens breakers with Eaton BR, they are common and not expensive. The reason for my comments is the BR line is the bottom of the line panel, any other currently manufactured panel is a improvement, which is why I called it "Zinsco II" after a very reviled defunct brand of panel, but still better off replacing any brand of breaker not UL classified for that panel, there are a lot of breakers that will fit that panel but very few that are kosher to use, Siemens QP, Murray MP, SQ D HOM, GE , all fit but have not seen any paperwork allowing them in BR load centers.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

I was hesitant to post this thread at all because instead of getting just an answer to the question of grounding rods I knew the discussion would turn to 100 other things including the wrong nail type was used somewhere in the shed. 20 years ago that is what they handed me when I bought the items. There was no other place to put the panel in that shed and have it accessible and out of the way where it would not run the risk of being either inaccessible or damaged. Maybe someday I will shorten the shelf or move them, and yes, the shelf was there from when the shed was purchased. It is what it is. The original question was on grounding rods.

so you dont care about doing things correctly? hmmm then why bother even putting in the ground rods.

Norcal - appreciate your input. You said the breakers probably needed to be replaced then you said keep them. Which is it? The box has a Cutler-Hammer sticker and emblem on it. The breakers were the style that were designed at that time to fit that panel.

You misunderstood his comment.

He was meaning to get rid of the BR panel, keep the siemens breakers and use them in a siemens panel.

Those breakers were NEVER listed and labeled nor designed for use in a BR panel.

You should seriously reconsider where you get your information from as it is not correct.

as a footnote the sub-panel is NEVER energized when it is worked on because it gets turned off at the main service panel. 110.26 (1) is specific in that it applies to panels that are not de-energized. But, when I have time I will remove 3' of the shelf anyway.

you misread or misinterpreted that code. There is no exception for what you are claiming.

 

[SGKent]

so you dont care about doing things correctly? hmmm then why bother even putting in the ground rods.



You misunderstood his comment.

He was meaning to get rid of the BR panel, keep the siemens breakers and use them in a siemens panel.

Those breakers were NEVER listed and labeled nor designed for use in a BR panel.

You should seriously reconsider where you get your information from as it is not correct.



you misread or misinterpreted that code. There is no exception for what you are claiming.

I do thank you for your thoughts. That said, being gruff with me has never worked for anyone in the past. Present me with the solution.

Your most economical choice is replace the Siemens breakers with Eaton BR, they are common and not expensive. The reason for my comments is the BR line is the bottom of the line panel, any other currently manufactured panel is a improvement, which is why I called it "Zinsco II" after a very reviled defunct brand of panel, but still better off replacing any brand of breaker not UL classified for that panel, there are a lot of breakers that will fit that panel but very few that are kosher to use, Siemens QP, Murray MP, SQ D HOM, GE , all fit but have not seen any paperwork allowing them in BR load centers.

Thank you - I don't know if they were UL approved at that time 20 years ago. It is what the supply house sold to me with the panel. When I have time I will consider replacing the whole shed and do a new sub-panel at that time. Adding what I added seemed better than running extension cables to the shed like most folks do. I appreciate your input.

 

[alfredeneuman]

There was no other place to put the panel in that shed

What about on the outside? It would have freed up the entire inside for storage.
The inspector sure was lax (or incompetent) in his duties.

 

[SGKent]

What about on the outside? It would have freed up the entire inside for storage.
The inspector sure was lax (or incompetent) in his duties.

I didn't want it exposed to the weather. Will simply change how the shelf fits. That said I found an Eaton Cutler Hammer exchange list that classifies the Siemens MP series as an exchange for the Cutler Hammer breakers. Some of the ones I have in that box are Cutler Hammer anyway. When I get time I will replace all of them with the listed ones on the panel. Or maybe I will replace the panel. have to think it thru. According to UL classified is allowed in lieu of the listed breakers. One thread had a long letter from UL explaining the difference between classified and listed.

Thank you all for the help. My plan of action is simple. Add the ground rods although we rarely get lightning here. Swap the breakers so no one will have questions on what is classified for that panel, and move the shelves to give 3' clearance and 30" width.

 

[acer66]

I do thank you for your thoughts. That said, being gruff with me has never worked for anyone in the past. Present me with the solution.

He did, get the right panel for the existing breakers or get the right breakers for the existing panel
and ditch your source of misinformation or am I missing something?

 

[wyliesdiesels]

I didn't want it exposed to the weather. Will simply change how the shelf fits. That said I found an Eaton Cutler Hammer exchange list that classifies the Siemens MP series as an exchange for the Cutler Hammer breakers. Some of the ones I have in that box are Cutler Hammer anyway. When I get time I will replace all of them with the listed ones on the panel. Or maybe I will replace the panel. have to think it thru. According to UL classified is allowed in lieu of the listed breakers. One thread had a long letter from UL explaining the difference between classified and listed.

Thank you all for the help. My plan of action is simple. Add the ground rods although we rarely get lightning here. Swap the breakers so no one will have questions on what is classified for that panel, and move the shelves to give 3' clearance and 30" width.

Can you please provide the reference here?

 

[SGKent]

My intention in 1997-98 when I did it was to do it right. I followed instructions given by people in the electrical trade. Most permits when I have them signed off, whether plumbing, carpenter or electrical are done to blueprints and or what I am told is code. I didn't screw up, the people in the electrical trade whom I paid to advise me screwed up. I am in part pissed off by the fact I have to do it over. I'll get over it. I think highly of all of you. You all deserve a kudos for your help - that I am grateful.

Wylie - spent two to three hours researching it and found an Eaton-Cutler Hammer publication thru an electrical supply house. Not going to go back thru the research. When I have time I'll deal with this issue in a way you would approve. Until then it is what it is.

Nothing else to add other than over the years every time I have offered a tradesman in this area an opportunity to look over work they never show up because there isn't enough money in it to get rich on one job. No one around here wants to put in one hour work unless they are in a recession and starving. Last roof I put in thru a certified roofer I had to redo myself because they put the tar paper down top row to bottom row and it leaked. A $400 an hour specialist the Insurance company sent out couldn't figure it out either. I still have his 10 page report around here for comedy reading. Water has to flow over the paper when it gets under the sheets, not under the next layer then onto the wood. I could go on but I won't.

It never is a question of whether I want to do it right. It is a question of will you do it right if I pay you. Its a coin toss around here with many of the trades. People are more interested getting in and out than doing the job correctly regardless what they quote on a price.

 

[ddawg16]

I do thank you for your thoughts. That said, being gruff with me has never worked for anyone in the past. Present me with the solution.

Wow....just wow.

wylie and norcal are two of the most knowledgeable and experienced sparky's on this site....they are trying to help you.....and you think they are being 'gruff'? To have such arrogance.....but yet, not know what you are doing. Wow....just wow.

 

[SGKent]

Wow....just wow.

wylie and norcal are two of the most knowledgeable and experienced sparky's on this site....they are trying to help you.....and you think they are being 'gruff'? To have such arrogance.....but yet, not know what you are doing. Wow....just wow.

Thank you for sharing your opinion on life John. I did thank both of them or did you miss that?

 

[mm08822]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGKent View Post
I didn't want it exposed to the weather. Will simply change how the shelf fits. That said I found an Eaton Cutler Hammer exchange list that classifies the Siemens MP series as an exchange for the Cutler Hammer breakers. Some of the ones I have in that box are Cutler Hammer anyway. When I get time I will replace all of them with the listed ones on the panel. Or maybe I will replace the panel. have to think it thru. According to UL classified is allowed in lieu of the listed breakers. One thread had a long letter from UL explaining the difference between classified and listed.

Thank you all for the help. My plan of action is simple. Add the ground rods although we rarely get lightning here. Swap the breakers so no one will have questions on what is classified for that panel, and move the shelves to give 3' clearance and 30" width.
****************
If you are referring to the CH compatibility chart I found below, it is indicating which CH breakers can be used in other panels only. It is not bi-directional.

Other mfr's would have to get their own cb classified for use the other mfrs' panels.

****************
Can you please provide the reference here?

google: br circuit breaker interchangeability chart

 

[wyliesdiesels]

My intention in 1997-98 when I did it was to do it right. I followed instructions given by people in the electrical trade. Most permits when I have them signed off, whether plumbing, carpenter or electrical are done to blueprints and or what I am told is code. I didn't screw up, the people in the electrical trade whom I paid to advise me screwed up. I am in part pissed off by the fact I have to do it over. I'll get over it. I think highly of all of you. You all deserve a kudos for your help - that I am grateful.

Wylie - spent two to three hours researching it and found an Eaton-Cutler Hammer publication thru an electrical supply house. Not going to go back thru the research. When I have time I'll deal with this issue in a way you would approve. Until then it is what it is.

Nothing else to add other than over the years every time I have offered a tradesman in this area an opportunity to look over work they never show up because there isn't enough money in it to get rich on one job. No one around here wants to put in one hour work unless they are in a recession and starving. Last roof I put in thru a certified roofer I had to redo myself because they put the tar paper down top row to bottom row and it leaked. A $400 an hour specialist the Insurance company sent out couldn't figure it out either. I still have his 10 page report around here for comedy reading. Water has to flow over the paper when it gets under the sheets, not under the next layer then onto the wood. I could go on but I won't.

It never is a question of whether I want to do it right. It is a question of will you do it right if I pay you. Its a coin toss around here with many of the trades. People are more interested getting in and out than doing the job correctly regardless what they quote on a price.

In a way that I would approve? wow just wow lol

I could care less whether i approve of it. Im not the NEC.

What Im doing is giving you info on how to get it code permissible.

Is this the chart youre referencing?

https://www.eaton.com/content/dam/e...-replacement-circuit-breakers-sa00304001e.pdf

If so then you have completely misunderstood its information.

That chart tells you which eaton classified breakers can go in other panels.

It does NOT tell you which breakers of OTHER brands can go in eaton or cutler hammer panels.

BTW if your panel is a cutler hammer CH model, then it needs to have CH breakers(tan handle) and nothing else. I have never seen an classified breakers for CH panels.

If its an eaton BR, then it should have BR breakers. If bryant or westinghouse, then it can have those or eaton BR breakers...

 

[SGKent]

Wylie - your link failed.

Please list your gripes and we can address each one. Piling on won't be tolerated - John.

A. Wylie, I thanked you personally for your input although your way of commenting can be caustic. Maybe that is just how you like to address people. Maybe you misunderstood something said. I don't know and don't care. If you are by here I'd be glad to buy you lunch for your help.

B. Spent 3 hours looking for the document the first time - it was a waste of time because if it is that hidden it isn't important to the manufacturer. It was an EATON document and listed Eaton BR panels and some others, I was only looking for BR info because that is what is in the shed. It showed MP series breakers as CLASSIFIED in the named panels which included the BR, the breakers were not listed but classified. Until this thread I would not have known the difference. UL allows classified breakers in a panel according to their documentation.

C. I thought Norcal was quite polite and very helpful. If he is local and a licensed electrician I would hire him. If he is in another trade I am sure he is good at it and good with people.

D. Unfortunately my experience with licensed trades people in this area has been awful - almost every single job I have contracted for turned out substandard in some aspect because they focused too much on time and not enough on quality. You'll have to forgive me for thinking they are con artists as often as they are not. I do know from watching my younger brother deal with the trade people in his industry that there is a lot of fraud and mis-information, and that people are quite harsh sometimes. It isn't all pretty like they show on DIY programs. Customers obviously can be jerks too wanting $1000 worth of work for $25.

E. Wylie - I do appreciate your help. Really. Ordering me to read all the FAQ as your opening line didn't help this thread. Maybe a little sugar instead of vinegar for the next guy.

F. I listed the changes that would be made to simplfy things, especially if I sell. It was always my intention from 1998 on when I installed it to have it done right. People can assume otherwise but it ain't so. At this point I have other things to do today. Have a great day - hope everyone is in a safe and dry place since so much is going on in the weather these last few days.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

The link works fine on my end.

Its a pdf

Do a googe search for eaton classified breakers. Third search result will give you the same thing i posted in the link above.

It does sound like youre referencing the same thing i linked to.

It does NOT show any murray or siemens breakers as being classified for eaton BR panels.

Eaton doesnt make mureay or siemens breakers and would have no authority to say whether another brands breakers are classified for use in their panels. Nor would they want to. Theyre trying to sell their oen breakers.

Try the google search. If its a colorful 2 pg pdf with a chart on the second page, then its the same document i linked to and you are most definitely misinterpreting it.

Nowhere on that chart does it say that murray or siemens breakers are classified for use in an eaton br panel.

 

[SGKent]

View media item 92799
I think I also saw the one you are referring to. Yours has a list of Eaton breakers for other breaker types and is colored. This one was also colored but different. It had Eaton's logo on the top, also said something in smaller font Classified Breakers, and at the bottom said something like these panels are included for the above breakers. It listed a whole series of panel numbers and BR was one. The Siemens MP line was listed as one of the classified breakers. I read it three or four times and it clearly was saying that MP series as Ok in BR. There was a UL disclaimer on it also. I looked at so many sheets and forms yesterday I can't tell you more. There was also a wishy-washy sheet from Siemens on their breakers. Some threads I also read kept the Siemen's breakers and Murray breakers separate even though they both have the SA logo on them. One person who seemed knowledgeable in one electrician's thread indicated that it is very hard to keep up to date on these things because the manufactures both want to sell their own products, and many companies get absorbed then spun off later. Hence some parts get grandfathered in and some do not. At that point it seemed simpler just to replace them and not be bothered with this again. I am 68 and by the time this issue comes up again the next generation can deal with it. Besides, there won't be enough food to feed the next generation if the AOC and her friends win in pushing us all back to the stone age - in which case none of us will be using electricity so it will be a moot point. Gotta run. Thanks again for the help.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

View media item 92799
I think I also saw the one you are referring to. Yours has a list of Eaton breakers for other breaker types and is colored. This one was also colored but different. It had Eaton's logo on the top, also said something in smaller font Classified Breakers, and at the bottom said something like these panels are included for the above breakers. It listed a whole series of panel numbers and BR was one. The Siemens MP line was listed as one of the classified breakers. I read it three or four times and it clearly was saying that MP series as Ok in BR. There was a UL disclaimer on it also. I looked at so many sheets and forms yesterday I can't tell you more. There was also a wishy-washy sheet from Siemens on their breakers. Some threads I also read kept the Siemen's breakers and Murray breakers separate even though they both have the SA logo on them. One person who seemed knowledgeable in one electrician's thread indicated that it is very hard to keep up to date on these things because the manufactures both want to sell their own products, and many companies get absorbed then spun off later. Hence some parts get grandfathered in and some do not. At that point it seemed simpler just to replace them and not be bothered with this again. I am 68 and by the time this issue comes up again the next generation can deal with it. Besides, there won't be enough food to feed the next generation if the AOC and her friends win in pushing us all back to the stone age - in which case none of us will be using electricity so it will be a moot point. Gotta run. Thanks again for the help.

So whats the part number for these murray breakers classified for use in eaton panels??

It would have to be a different part number than the standard murray MP line like what you have in your panel.

Classified breakers have a different model number than their listed and labeled counterparts.

For instance, murray makes a classified breaker for sq d qo panels. The model number is msq...

 

[Norcal]

OEM breakers are listed for the same make of panel, UL does classify some competitive makes to fit other panels, Eaton is one, also they and Siemens make classified breakers for SQ D QO panels but the whole thing can be clear as mud.

 

[SGKent]

OEM breakers are listed for the same make of panel, UL does classify some competitive makes to fit other panels, Eaton is one, also they and Siemens make classified breakers for SQ D QO panels but the whole thing can be clear as mud.

yes, it is as clear as mud, and not worth any more time to pursue saving those breakers if they bother'd y'all. While out on errands an hour ago I took care of a client's computer and servers, and stopped by the store to pick up Eaton BR breakers. They are already replaced. I even used an inch pound torque wrench to torque them to the spec embossed on their sides. Someday later this year when I have more time I will get a Siemen's panel that fits the old breakers because they appear better made, and move it to somewhere in the shed that has the correct clearances just because it isn't worth arguing with anyone over it. I would have done that anyway when I had time. In fact I may replace the shed with a larger one to get more room. In the meantime I will also install grounding rods which was the original question. This would have been so much easier in 1998 had the supply house given correct info. Thank you all for your assistance.

 

[Scrivyscriv]

...It never is a question of whether I want to do it right. It is a question of will you do it right if I pay you...

It's hard to get anyone to come out and do a job, let alone do it well. I guess there's enough work going around that people aren't hungry

 

[wyliesdiesels]

yes, it is as clear as mud, and not worth any more time to pursue saving those breakers if they bother'd y'all. While out on errands an hour ago I took care of a client's computer and servers, and stopped by the store to pick up Eaton BR breakers. They are already replaced. I even used an inch pound torque wrench to torque them to the spec embossed on their sides. Someday later this year when I have more time I will get a Siemen's panel that fits the old breakers because they appear better made, and move it to somewhere in the shed that has the correct clearances just because it isn't worth arguing with anyone over it. I would have done that anyway when I had time. In fact I may replace the shed with a larger one to get more room. In the meantime I will also install grounding rods which was the original question. This would have been so much easier in 1998 had the supply house given correct info. Thank you all for your assistance.

you would need a murray panel not a siemens panel. there is nothing official in writing that allows murray MP breakers to be used in a siemens panel that calls for siemens QP breakers.

also, murray panels use aluminum busses and siemens panels use copper buses. that may have something to do with it...

 

[SGKent]

you would need a murray panel not a siemens panel. there is nothing official in writing that allows murray MP breakers to be used in a siemens panel that calls for siemens QP breakers.

also, murray panels use aluminum busses and siemens panels use copper buses. that may have something to do with it...

Thank You. Moving it when the shed is refurbished is on my to do list. Appreciate the help.

 

[alfredeneuman]

also, murray panels use aluminum busses and siemens panels use copper buses. that may have something to do with it...

Standard Siemens panels come with aluminum bussing, with copper optional.

 

[wyliesdiesels]

Standard Siemens panels come with aluminum bussing, with copper optional.

interesting

guess all the supply houses out here opt for copper bus

 

[SGKent]

Wylie if you are ever up in Citrus Heights, Roseville areas etc, let me know so I can buy you lunch.

 

[Norcal]

Standard Siemens panels come with aluminum bussing, with copper optional.

Siemens indoor single phase loadcenters are aluminum, copper is optional, 3R, and 3Ø panels, are copper as standard.