Post on these posts

[Gibsonguy]

Hi Guys,

I am writing up a panel for an inspection I just finished that's not secured well to the wall. The humidifier connection for the forced air furnace is right above the panel, and I have water stains inside. No brainer there, but please let me know what you think about the posts on the dual pole breakers. Is it possible that these won't both trip together if the circuit is overloaded? Maybe I'm nit picking here...

Thanks again

Click to Enlarge

57.82 KB

[Garet]

Maybe I'm nit picking here...

No, you're not. Those are not approved handle ties.

[John Kogel]

"Improvised Handle Ties" or tiebars. I would report them.

If you don't, the sparky will say you were a dumbass for missing them. []

Depending on what those breakers serve, it may not be important safety-wise for them to trip together, such as split-duplex kitchen receptacles (he's in Canada, y'all). I often find one side of those tripped, even with the factory tiebar in place.

[Marc]

Hi Guys,

I am writing up a panel for an inspection I just finished that's not secured well to the wall. The humidifier connection for the forced air furnace is right above the panel, and I have water stains inside. No brainer there, but please let me know what you think about the posts on the dual pole breakers. Is it possible that these won't both trip together if the circuit is overloaded? Maybe I'm nit picking here...

Thanks again

Click to Enlarge

57.82?KB

It may be permissible as a disconnecting means if those pieces of copper wire on the handles are 'identified' for the purpose but I doubt it.

As a common trip mechanism, no, the little copper wires don't guarantee that a trip on one breaker will trip the other. If this is a 240 V circuit, they need a common trip.

Marc

[Jim Katen]

. . . Is it possible that these won't both trip together if the circuit is overloaded? Maybe I'm nit picking here...

I'm not familiar with the Canadian code, but under the NEC, they would not be required to trip together.

They are supposed to be disconnected together, though, and the improvised wire ties won't achieve that. As everyone else has said, there are supposed to be listed breaker handle ties there, not improvised copper wires.

[Douglas Hansen]

These breakers allow two branch circuits in the space that would only take on QO breaker. There may be a problem with this type of breaker not being listed for a class CTL panel. The side-by-side version that Square D makes today has a warning label on it that it can only be used in non-CTL assemblies. If the panel was completely full this could be a situation where they should have installed another panel instead of adding these.

[Gibsonguy]

These breakers allow two branch circuits in the space that would only take on QO breaker. There may be a problem with this type of breaker not being listed for a class CTL panel. The side-by-side version that Square D makes today has a warning label on it that it can only be used in non-CTL assemblies. If the panel was completely full this could be a situation where they should have installed another panel instead of adding these.

Thanks Douglas,

No the panel wasn't full at all. There are 2 panels actually. The home has a 400 amp installation. The other is an older Commander panel. I called out the wire clips as "improper".

Thanks everyone for your help. I kind of knew all along, I just needed a little guidance.