FVEAA Forums
September 20, 2017, 03:24:44 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: SMF - Just Installed!
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 on: September 05, 2017, 07:10:41 PM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by jeffrey.miller

first i have seen

 on: August 20, 2017, 08:34:34 PM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by jeffrey.miller
Cut hole for the first breaker box and all was really good, in fact I had lots of space right to left.  Cut the next hole and discovered why.  The stud between the two boxes is slightly to far to the left giving more an excess of room for one box and a shortage for the other.  Less than 1/4 of an inch, just enough that I need to go pick up another tool to shave it down a touch.  Such is life.

Holes into the basement are both drilled and looking good.  Path from the breaker boxes to the holes are looking good.

Bought 1.5 inch conduit, and tossed it into the conduit bender I bought for the job in the winter, and discovered the key difference between EMT and Rigid benders.  The one I bought was for rigid and allows the slightly narrower EMT to crush.  I checked Craigslist and no benders for sale at this time for this size, which is to bad because a couple of months ago someone was selling a bunch of them.  Rigid is way more expensive than EMT (thin wall) so I have already purchased a pile of angles and what not to do the job without it.  It would have been nice, but that is life. 

I still have a valid 1 inch bender for the really big job of running the conduit to the charging stations. 

Such is life! 

 on: August 18, 2017, 10:53:00 AM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by ted.lowe
Great to hear of your progress Jeff!

i am entertained that you, like a computer guy, start your numbering with zero.

i'm glad your charging project lead to some Spitfire work too  Cheesy

Wow... 1.5" conduit!

i heard there is a new app that works even better than a dedicated stud-finder instrument.

 on: August 17, 2017, 08:13:33 PM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by jeffrey.miller
Step 0.1 is complete!
0.1: Fix the Spitfire's brakes, charge the batteries and relocate it to the other end of the garage.  It had a warning sensor that physically detected differential pressure between the front and rear brake circuits.  Since the idiot light was previously removed anyway, I removed the device from the car because it was leaking brake fluid almost as fast as I could pour it in.  It has a set of orings inside that I could have replaced and so forth, but since it was an extraneous part, I replaced it with brake line couplers that fit the lines going into the old device.  That warning device was one of the few original looking parts in the braking system, everything else looks new.  Nothing was permanently altered as part of this so this is easily reversed if I ever wish to rebuild the part and reinstall it. 

I now have easy access to the wall that I intend to put the big stuff in. 

Various 1.5inch conduit couplings arrived recently for the runs to the subpanels. 

Next stop is to cut open the garage drywall, drill down into the basement and confirm my theory is correct about the space for conduit. 

I won't have this done for tomorrow's meeting Sad

 on: August 02, 2017, 11:10:33 AM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by jeffrey.miller
The code of 210.8 is very clear that a 240V 50A outlet in the garage doesn't require GFCI, only 125 volt, 15 or 20 amp outlets require it.  

EVSE incorporates GFCI in all cases that I am aware of, so no real risk to the actual humans.  

So every time I install a charging station I would have to perform a load calculation to show that enough is available, both at the mains and the branch.  Most likely in that scenario I would just install and permit all at once.  The view is that this permit is just for the build leading up to a final design which will be submitted, reviewed, and approved at a future date.  This is what I am trying to avoid, but will take up when the lead guy is back and caught up on his work.  

One of the good things that they have accepted is that I am installing 150 AMP breakers to provide service to the subpanels.  I was initially worried that they might challenge this decision, but that wasn't a problem.  So I am happy about that. 

 on: August 02, 2017, 06:26:17 AM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by simon.gibson
Maybe the lighting circuits are all run with #14 on 15A breakers. If you demonstrate that they can all be run on a 10A; maybe that will reduce load. But the actual usage will demonstrate what is needed. The main thing is to ensure the conductors are protected against overload.
Also the EVSE stations are set to deliver to the vehicle what is available as opposed to tripping breakers when they call for all 50A!.
If you include cut sheets for all the EVSE equipment, that would imply that is the equipment being installed and they'd want to see it. But if all the EVSE is 'plugged in', they wouldn't need to see that. WRT to GFCI, The range and clothes dryers don't call for it. Presumably the EVSE falls into the same UL listing - Maybe a question to some of the EVSE vendors - They might shed some light on what is current code?

 on: August 02, 2017, 05:47:18 AM 
Started by john.emde - Last post by john.emde
I no longer have these motors in my possession. 
Their owner has picked them up. 
They are probably still for sale and at what price I don't know.
If you are serious, give me a call and I can give you his phone #.

 on: August 01, 2017, 06:08:26 PM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by jeffrey.miller
I couldn't help myself, so I dug into it.

Just found this in the code.  Since I have a smart meter, and can go back and look at the stats from it for the entire time I have had it, I might be able to use that data.  If not I guess I get to set up that current monitoring system I have always wanted Smiley to collect data over 30 days.
My previous measurements show that 125% of my current load is not an issue. 

NEC code:
220.87 Determining Existing Loads. The calculation of a
feeder or service load for existing installations shall be
permitted to use actual maximum demand to determine the
existing load under all of the following conditions:
(1) The maximum demand data is available for a I-year
Exception: If the maximum demand data for a 1-year period
is not available, the calculated load shall be permitted
to be based on the maximum demand (measure of average
power demand over a 15-minute period) continuously recorded
over a minimum 30-day period using a recording
ammeter or power meter connected to the highest loaded
phase of the feeder or service, based on the initial loading
at the start of the recording. The recording shall reflect the
maximum demand of the feeder or service by being taken
when the building or space is occupied and shall include by
measurement or calculation the larger of the heating or
cooling equipment load, and other loads that may be periodic
in nature due to seasonal or similar conditions.
(2) The maximum demand at 125 percent plus the new
load does not exceed the ampacity of the feeder or
rating of the service.
(3) The feeder has overcurrent protection in accordance
with 240.4, and the service has overload protection in
accordance with 230.90.

 on: August 01, 2017, 05:26:46 PM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by jeffrey.miller
The inspector also advised that I needed to follow 210.8 GFI, but said "as required".  Speaking to him, he wasn't certain if 50A 240 volt outlets in the garage require GFI, and volunteered to look it up.  It says as required so I volunteered to look it up later.  We are on NEC 2005 here, and conveniently someone posted the PDF of that.  http://dsps.wi.gov/Documents/Industry%20Services/Forms/Elevator/HistoricalCodes/2005%20NEC.pdf

210.8 only calls out 125 volt single phase 15 or 20 amp outlets in various places including the garage.  So I am fine for putting in the 50 amp outlets without GFI. 

Probably tomorrow I will tackle the load calculation section of the NEC 2005 code to see if there is something about using actual vs calculated.   

 on: August 01, 2017, 04:21:11 PM 
Started by jeffrey.miller - Last post by jeffrey.miller
The permit is in!  The person doing the review was the backup to the main electrical guy, so I might be able to shift things somewhat by speaking to the primary electrical inspector when he returns from vacation.   

The reviewer didn't bite on my idea that they should certify this setup and never hear from me again.  They want me to permit each charging station that is wired to a disconnect, and provide a load calculation each time I add a charging station, where I was hoping to deal with that all in one pass.  I may still get that done under this permit, but his opinion is I would need to have a spec sheet for the charging stations and put that in to the load calculation and provide them that. 

There are at least two ways to do load calcs, but since I can measure actual loads I was hoping to avoid that, as they can work out unfavorably compared to modern loads.  The load calcs assume all incandescent light bulbs for lighting.  I can't imagine my house with all incandescent lighting, my power bill would be massive (this house has at least 119 light bulbs totaling about 11kw the way it was when I moved in).    I have seen discussion along the lines of using actual loads compared to calculated, but I don't yet know for certain if I can get that approved here. 

The lighting in this place used to cost twice as much to run as the AC compressor and oven combined!   

Good news, I can get started!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!