Breaker slots per amperage rating

[Chad Fabry]

I accept the definition as it pertains to the code and what's allowed.

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the terminology though.

Jerry said: there's one beginning. There's one breaker, but two beginnings.

If it's one circuit, what about the fact that the current carrying conductors and grounded conductors parallel, is that allowed?There's also that bit that says all conductors in a circuit must be run together.

If that one wire is six inches long and then is spliced to two wires that serve different devices, is it one circuit or two?

Jim, I get what you're saying, but in my mind it's two circuits...there are two grounded conductors, two separate paths back. Two separate hots, two separate neutrals and it's one circuit? It just doesn't make for a logical argument.

Space saver breakers... are they feeding one circuit or two? If the definition of a circuit relies solely on the OCPD then I disagree with the definition.

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by kurt

Excellent example. Definitely one circuit.

But, I'm still trying to wrap my head around a double tap being a single circuit. (that is, if each tap supplies a completely separate wiring group.)

If we can have sub panels why not sub circuits?

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Brian G]

Originally posted by Jim Katen

If that one wire is six inches long and then is spliced to two wires that serve different devices, is it one circuit or two?

Assuming we're talking about common household devices like switches and outlets, collectively within the limits the code allows, it's one. More than one device isn't the issue, unless it's a device that should have a dedicated circuit.

One of my concerns with these double-tap breakers is that they make it way to easy to turn a 40 circuit panel into an 80 circuit panel (or some other odd number well above the intended, proven-safe limit). While that could also be done by the method you described, it would be hard to claim the manufacturer's blessing while doing it.

Another is that you have to kill both circuits to take either wire loose. Will Average Joe, the DIY king, understand that and make sure there are no serious consequences before flipping the handle? What happens when Joe is working on loop A in the attic and Betty kicks the breaker back on because something she wants to use is on loop B, but she thought it just tripped?

If that one wire leads to a 4-gang box and is split off to control two different switch loops, is it one circuit or two?

Same as above, since it's essentially the same question.

Suppose someone connects two fully-loaded wires, from two entirely independent loops, to that one breaker? Is it still one circuit? And if it is, why not have 45, 63, or even 80 fully-loaded, independent loops?

The bottom line for me is that I believe these breakers make residential wiring less safe, overall. The only benefit they offer the homeowner is the ability to expand a smaller panel to the maximum, which could already be done with tandems (etc.) without getting away from "one circuit on one breaker". In other words, we gained nothing and added another new wrinkle for unsophistocated homeowners to stumble over (IMHO).

Brian G.

All Worth the Price Charged []

[kurt]

Originally posted by Jim Katen

If we can have sub panels why not sub circuits?

- Jim Katen, Oregon

I have no idea, so if you can explain what that means and make sense @ the same time, I'm happy to believe you.

Hey, wait a minute.....the NEC doesn't reference anything as a subpanel!?!

If this was the ASHI board, I'd complain to the moderator that you're making fun of me.

Hey, wait a minute.....You're the moderator......

[Erby]

I refuse to pull my hair out. I refuse to let my head explode.

I look at this one kinda like I looked at college algebra. I don't need to fully understand it, I just need to pass the class to get my degree.

In this case, I don't need to fully understand it (while I want to I also like having hair and an intact head).

I just need to believe in Jim.