Electricians wanted

Delmer said:

The neutral and ground are connected at the SERVICE ENTRANCE only (not on any sub panel). I've never seen a ground come from the transformer, just the neutral, you supply the ground to the panel and feed it to the meter socket. Maybe that's new, and I'm out of date.

Since 94? the new four prong dryer and stove cords are required in new construction, separate neutral and ground. It's been that way for way longer for mobile homes. Other 220 loads would have no neutral, or separate neutral and ground, not shared, even though they were connected to the same terminal (must be a separate terminal now apparently, first pic has a couple shared)

Click to expand...

Forever, a range, or dryer not originating in service equipment have been required to be four conductor. Service equipment ends at the enclosure where the service disconnect is. In some cases, this includes circuit breakers for branch circuits. In a mobile home, the service disconnect is outdoors. The breaker panel(s) are all sub panels.

From Post #14, Delmer "I don't see anything wrong with the photo in #10, the red and black on the same screw is allowed on QO breakers, and they're not overloading the neutral because they're on the same breaker. Looks bad, and no reason to have the two wires, but I'm not sure it's illegal."

That’s a good point there Delmer. Lets look at the scenario I presented in post 10 again.

When I look at these issues, the first and foremost points of concern;

Is it safe? Can the person using, or working on the circuit do so safely?

Is it a fire hazard?


As Delmer pointed out the having both hot wires in a multi wire branch circuit on the same single pole breaker is safe. In this case the breaker will limit the maximum amperage flow between the two hot wires to 15 amps. That’s not 15 amps each, that’s 15 amps total so the neutral current will be 15 amps max. So no, it is not a fire hazard. There is also a proper ground fault current path to protect the user and as long as a worker shuts off the breaker before performing any work, there is no chance of injury to the worker from shock.

But, from a design standpoint, the benefits associated with a 3 wire circuit (one less wire to run, reduced neutral current) are not realized and therefore it would have been better to just run a 2 wire romex from the start and branch off at the work boxes if the intention was to use a single pole breaker. I think that in this case they might have just run out of space in the panel and doubled up on the single pole breaker.

I stand by the fix of replacing the single pole breaker with a 2 pole breaker.

From Post #14 again, Delmer "A 240 motor is no different than any other 240 load, there is no neutral required. Like a water heater, or 240 baseboard heater, the ground is connected to the frame, and the hots go to the load. If the motor is able to be connected to either 120 or 240, then you can think of it as two 120v light bulbs, wired in series for 240, or parallel for 120. For 120, one lead from each winding will be connected to neutral."

Thanks for adding the '240' to 'motor'. That's what I meant in post #9, last paragraph. (I wish we had more freedom with editing our posts)

From Post #14 again, Delmer"For the record, NEVER fuse the neutral, OR GROUND."

This bears repeating. For the record, NEVER fuse the neutral, OR GROUND.

Thanks Delmer!

Steve Frazier said:

Every box I've ever been in looks like your original photo with shared neutral and ground. I've never seen one with a separate ground buss. I've only worked within the county that I've lived in all my life, could this be a regional thing? Also, on 220 circuits the neutral is the ground and vice versa. At least that's how it's done around here.

Click to expand...

I think it could be a regional thing, I've heard that up until recently there were still odd systems in place throughout the US. I think that states and municipalities accepting the National Electrical Code (NEC) that there is an effort to standardize everything. Also it could be a holdover from past practices. Are there still Electrical inspectors that have there own ways, sure. Are there still guys out there that say,"That's the way my daddy did it!" Sure.

Thanks for the comment Steve!

mitch504 said:

Tying those breakers together like in #13, is that best practice? I've always thought that was just jerry-rigging, but, some double breakers are only connected at the handles, though, aren't they?

What if one of those breakers was a center trip, and one tripped all the way off? Do they both have to be the same model?

Click to expand...

mitch, I would not call it best practice. I would call replacing the two single pole breakers with a single 2 pole breaker best practice. But, if NEC article 210.4b calls for "simultaneous disconnects" for all multi wire branch circuits and lists possible options as single pole breakers with handle ties, who defines handle ties? (Not me)

I'm sorry but I cannot answer your other questions. Maybe someone else....

Thanks mitch.

Willie B, that's gonna take me a while to digest...

Thanks for the input!

doublewide said:

Ct Farmer,

I appreciate your input.

What I've heard about bonding is that it's primary purpose is to protect against lightning strike and utility failure. When there is a lightning strike, a tremendous magnetic pulse can travel through the metal parts of a structure and it's contents. Bonding these items together allows that magnetic pulse to travel from one point to another. Without proper bonding the magnetic pulse can flash between items, causing fire, personal injury or death.

Cable ties - I appreciate your point.

Noalox on all aluminum connections - YES!

Thanks again.

Click to expand...

Bonding is 100% about equipotential.
Take a 9 volt battery. Hold one terminal to your tongue, (be sure it doesn't have Corona Virus on it). You feel no shock. You have to touch at least two conductive objects to feel electricity.

Now connect the terminals to each other, and repeat the test. You will feel no current. You stop being a path. That is the essence of bonding.

The electrical box CT Farmer posted looks like a lot of boxes I see. When I come across those my standard procedure is to pickup the phone and call a buddy of mine, tell him I have a rats nest that needs attention and take care of the issue.

I do enough of my own wiring to know when to call a professional or to ask questions from someone who does know. The biggest thing we have going on now is to replace the old fuse panels with circuit breaker panels. We don't mix white and green wires on the same strip, white wires go on one side and the green all go on the bottom set of screws, been told dozens of times why, but tomorrow I'd not remember all the technical terms anyhow, so we do as my electrician buddy advises.

Whoever invented those ground fault outlets should be in charge of keeping them working at no charge to the owner for as long as that law is on the books.

When my folks remodeled their house a while back, everything inside had to be up to code, for fire safety issues, so after a half dozen inspections it finally passed. But those that know me were not surprised I had words with the inspector over some of the things he wanted done. I was told it was for fire safety concerns involving wiring. Apparently to ask the inspector that since he's been on the job now [due to the law change at that time] from that day forward no house fire will ever be from the wiring or he'd be canned for not doing his job correctly isn't the thing to ask? The electrician told me maybe I shouldn't be around much till AFTER the house passes inspection.

If you are paying an electrician, and it takes 6 inspections to pass, be very worried. An inspector only has minutes to notice problems. Therefore, you NEED a qualified electrician.
No! An inspection can't be thorough enough to rule out all hazards.
A code book is several inches thick. Some amateurs it seems, figure out how to violate most articles.

Willie B said:

If you are paying an electrician, and it takes 6 inspections to pass, be very worried. An inspector only has minutes to notice problems. Therefore, you NEED a qualified electrician.
No! An inspection can't be thorough enough to rule out all hazards.
A code book is several inches thick. Some amateurs it seems, figure out how to violate most articles.

Click to expand...

Having worked on many job sites around the country I've seen a lot electricians and inspectors come and go. Every electrician knew exactly what the local inspector had for quirks beyond NEC. Every inspector is a little different but any electrician who requires 6 inspections scares me.

What really scares the crap out of me is the people in the big box stores buying electrical hardware for diy projects. How many fires are caused by these folks. If you need directions to put a plug on a cord you better just not try it.

How 'bout the guys in the big box stores that give you that dumbfounded look and say, "are you an electrician?"

"No sir, I just pretend to be one on the internet!"

Vermont first recognized a problem, and decided to license electricians effective 1968. There was a grandfather clause. You didn't have to have any knowledge, only $25 dollars every three years, you could buy a master electrician's license.
I was 12. I applied for mine. A thinking member of the electricians licensing board returned my application. I'd be able to receive a Master's License, or Vermont was about to embark on a State financed training program. Free of charge, I was eligible for a four year education.
In my case I knew everything, so I was annoyed. My father saw it differently. He saw opportunity.
I went through the program. It was a six year apprenticeship with education at night. I had the privilege of four of the most brilliant electrical minds I'll ever know. I was the kid awestruck with these brilliant, caring, generous people. They all seemed to enjoy a kid sucking up knowledge.
My first year teacher is still involved in teaching.

The down side of this is trained electricians weren't universal until those licensed in 1968 aged out.
Resistance from slum lords, and the governors they supported ruled out inspections of residential buildings. Even now, an unscrupulous landlord finds loopholes around inspection law.
Owner occupied single family homes are still exempt from inspections.
Years ago, a bill in VT Legislature nearly passed, requiring paid electricians to be licensed. You could still wire your brother in law's cousin's neighbor's rental for marijuana or beer. The Governor killed the bill. His biggest supporter was a slumlord.

When the house was remodeled, electrical inspections for remodel jobs was the first year it was required. The guy was a complete dick, every time he came, he got paid, so instead of telling us and the electrician, all the old dry wall needed to be removed so he could see the wiring, he'd tell us just this portion needed to be removed and since it was fine, he said, don't worry about the rest. But he required the sheet rock to be removed in precision cutting as to not damage the wires, which was no big deal, but since it wasn't done when he got there, he'd have stop back by. Took only a couple times to figure out we'd better remove all the sheet rock to the entire house so every wire could be seen.

Then he changed his through process, some wires "looked" too old, those had to be replaced, so again he'd have to come back. By the end we rewired the entire house top to bottom and the last two times he had to come, apparently there was a law change from the first time to the last time, so we had to tear all the new wiring out of the basement, [from where he told the electrician he wanted it put in the first place] to where he wanted it put for the final inspection.

My buddy didn't wire my folks house, so I called him to ask why he turned down the job, after about two visits with from the inspector and he asked, have you met the inspector yet, told him yes, he then asked, have you got the whole house rewired top to bottom twice yet with new, told him at that point, not yet, he said just wait, you will end up doing it, a few remodels have had to do it three or four times before they passed final inspection. He told me the guy's impossible to deal with, he's been tape recorded and video tapped on his walk through inspections to prove what he's said in the past and been reported for telling electricians several different things on the same issue, just so he can come back again due to forcing unneeded changes in wiring. My buddy works in a different inspectors area and at that time refused to come into this inspectors area at all, so he turned us down for the wiring job on the house. I'd later found out the inspector was fired and his certification pulled from my state.

There was nothing unsafe about any the wiring that had been in the house, but if it all needed to be new, no issues with me, just replace it with new, there was nothing wrong with how it was wired the first time in the new addition, due to being told by the inspector how it was supposed to be done, it certainly didn't need to be torn back out to redo it the second time and there certainly was no change in the code in two weeks time and each and every time he was there, there was nothing wrong ever, he just wanted to boss everyone around and treat all electricians like they were complete idiots and have the homeowner pay for it all in the end. It certainly wasn't the electricians fault because I was there for the first four or five inspections and I know what the inspector had said and how he wanted it done, the last couple times I refused to be there, thought I'd deck the guy, which is what someone should have done.

The theory behind inspections are fine, to have someone else besides the electricians look over the work, but when there is nobody above the inspector to make sure the inspector is doing his job correctly, there can be abuse of power, which is what was the case with this guy.

I'm almost always dealing with State Inspectors. They either last less than a month, or twenty years. My second year in school the instructor was also the State Inspector I had most often. In my early years their districts were separated by county. I live near the county line.
One inspector was a pleasure to work with/learn from. The other was AWFUL!
He allowed some terrible workmanship to pass that had been done by inexperienced employees of high roller electrical contractors. My work, he spent as much time as it took to find a minor violation, then he would fail the job. I believe he was taking bribes to sign off. I refuse to play that game.
A long time customer of mine bought a property with several units for small businesses. The former owner went bankrupt before the place was finished. On the wall in the big mechanical room was a certificate of approval signed by this inspector. Violations were numerous, and major. I took lots of pictures, and called him on it. He demanded I give him the certificate. I refused, "I'll give you a photocopy." He never again gave me a hard time on an inspection.

An inspector is a valuable ally in the event of a lawsuit. An expert signing off that all is correct in my work, available to go to court, and testify is good insurance. I wish all my work was inspected, along with all other electricians work.

I have one more issue that I want to cover regarding multi wire branch circuits.


For starters, let’s say that whomever initially wired the circuit attached the two hot wires to two single pole breakers without tying the handles together. Just like in the example above in post #12.

Then they used the wiring device at a junction box to provide neutral continuity. Kinda like this.

This is the remains of two temporary work boxes that an electrician set up for one of my jobs. He used 12/3 romex and GFCI receptacles, but he used one of the wiring devices to provide neutral continuity for both hot wires. In the event of a problem with the first work box, it is easy to see how an unsuspecting worker could turn off one breaker while others continued to use the second breaker, and then in an attempt to diagnose and repair a problem at the first workbox, inadvertently become part of the neutral return circuit. This could easily result in a life threatening shock.

For this reason, neutrals in a 3 wire circuit should be pigtailed together in the back of the box with a jumper to the wiring device(receptacle or switch).

This is a picture that I stole off the innernet. It's not truely indicative of our situation as it is not a 3 wire circuit but it does clearly show how to pigtail.

Nearly all equipment used must be "LISTED" as in example UL. Laboratory listing is contingent on following manufacturer's instructions. Those wire nuts are not tight enough to earn listing. Many manufacturers instruct tighten until two full spirals of twist are visible outside the wire nut.
Three wire circuits were once more common. Now in residences most circuits require ARC FAULT CIRCUIT PROTECTION. Until an AFCI unit is developed to look upstream, three wire circuits are a problem. There can still be three wire circuits installed where AFCI protection is not required.
Three wire circuits do not require internal common trip double pole breakers, but a "LISTED" handle tie is scarcer than hen's teeth. Internal common trip breakers are easy to find & cheap.
Pigtailing is required wherever neutral conductors are shared, by two, or more hots.
In post 13 the copper wire handle tie is not "LISTED" therefore not acceptable.

doublewide said:

This is the remains of two temporary work boxes that an electrician set up for one of my jobs. He used 12/3 romex and GFCI receptacles, but he used one of the wiring devices to provide neutral continuity for both hot wires. In the event of a problem with the first work box, it is easy to see how an unsuspecting worker could turn off one breaker while others continued to use the second breaker, and then in an attempt to diagnose and repair a problem at the first workbox, inadvertently become part of the neutral return circuit. This could easily result in a life threatening shock.


View attachment 215129

Click to expand...

Or fire anywhere in the circuit. The neutral is the device used to get 120 volts from a 240 volt source. In the event of neutral failure 240 volts will be divided unequally. 120 volt loads might get 200 volts, or 40 volts. 40 volts in a motor will give weak magnetic field, little magnetic impedance, very high amperage, likely the motor won't turn, locked rotor will make for high amperage and subsequent meltdown. High voltage ruins electronics, and lighting.