What's up with Canada and horizontal electric panels?

[trader4]

Watching Holmes do his thing on TV, I've noticed that most of the electric service panels are installed horizontally instead of vertically. Must be some Canada thing? What's up with that? It looks nuts to me.

And on a recent episode where he had to fix a bay window, he wound up tearing out what appeared to me to be a perfectly fine electric panel. It was installed vertically. He bitched about some of the wires that went to the breakers entering the panel from the top and said that was not allowed, that only the mains could enter from the top. Mine enter from the top and I've seen new construction here in NJ where they enter that way. What's up with that? Seems perfectly safe to me and also, if it's not allowed, why would the panel manufacturer provide knockouts in the top?

And what's that Canadian fetish for putting the freaking panel sideways, which they did with the new panel?

[dennisgauge]

Holmes is in Canada. They have different rules than the USA. Maybe you can't run circuits into the top of the panel in Canada, but it's okay in the USA.

The holes are in the top because they market the same products in both countries.

He also likes to make himself sound like a hard-ass. Most of the "disasters" he finds, there's really nothing wrong. It just wasn't done *his* way.

[Tomsic]

Seems like it matters whether or not the panel is recessed or surface mounted. Vertical panels fit between the studs. Using a recessed horizontal panel would require some stud carpentry. I like the horizontal idea though because it would make threading all the wires through multiple vertical drops a bit easier than forcing them all into one.

Horizontal wireways and feeder channels have been used for years in commercial systems, but I don't recall seeing horizontal panels.

Congratulations, you've hit on a subject which will generate a massive rearrangement of electrons on the internet lines.

Tomsic

[J Burns]

I can imagine an advantage. You could use breakers where down was off.

[trader4]

It would only be off for breakers on one part of the panel, ie the top row or bottom row.

[krw]

...and the other half, up is off. Not so good.

[Stormin Mormon]

For half the panel....

Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus

.

I can imagine an advantage. You could use breakers where down was off.

[bud--]

What I have pieced together from comments on the show is that the top, with the hot service wires, has to remain enclosed when the trim is off and that other wires can not go through that area. If the panel is vertical the wires come in the lower sides. If the panel is horizontal the wires travel a shorter distance to get to the same area.

It seems rather odd to have the panels horizontal since it is not allowed in the US. Breakers must be off in the down position.

I have not understood why they replaced some panels. Or why some other work was done. Given some of the major disasters Holmes finds I sometimes wonder if quality of construction can be much lower in Canada. Some interesting shows though.

[Tegger]

" [e-mail]" wrote in news:157bbc32- [e-mail]:

Mine is vertical. The breakers switch left-to-right.

[Duesenberg]

I'm in Canada and my panel was installed sideways because the existing wiring was too SHORT to run down to the bottom of the new panel if mounted vertically. So it's mounted sideways to allow all existing wiring a chance to connect without using sub-panels

New panel was a Siemens 32/64 and it replaced a 20 circuit vertical fuse panel that was half the size if not smaller. All new wiring will connect to the bottom of the new horizontal because it's freshly run wire and allowances are made for length of wire, and all the existing circuit are at the top because there is no slack or additional length to run.

[trader4]

Umm, where do you buy those? When I go to look for a breaker for a panel, they come in a variety of flavorrs. But I've yet to see a choice as to whether off is towards one side or the other.

[DD_BobK]

Depends on the age of the panel or subpanel.

Back in the 70's, in panels with two rows of breakers, toggled towards the space between the rows is "off" ( think....too lazy to walk out to the garage)

Electrical code was changed (some time between now & then) and now requires new panels adhere to: Up - on Down - off

[krw]

All the wires would have to penetrate the entire header over the (sideways) panel, though, no? Sounds like a PITA.

Not one electron was harmed in the composition of this post.

[krw]

That's normal, though depending on how the breakers are made, the opposite would be easy to imagine.

That's got to make the panel a lot more complicated. It requires two independent busses, rather than the alternating bus down the center.

[trader4]

I just looked at a Siemens panel that is about 6 years old. Looks just like panels have always looked to me. Two rows of breakers and toggled towards the center space between them they are ON. Even the panels in Canada on Holmes shows appear to be the same. So, if there is some new panel design of which you speak, A it sure isn't common and B I haven't seen it yet.

[dpb]

On 3/21/2012 10:16 PM, DD_BobK wrote: ...

_WHICH_ code do you think does/has this requirement?

Certainly not the US NEC (unless nothing on the market now complies which would seem unlikely).

I'd be surprised if NEC even proscribed the direction (horizontal or vertical) for the main disconnect inside a box altho that at least would have some chance of possibly having been done. But there's no way the NEC requires branch breakers to all point the same direction.

--

[bud--]

The NEC requires up to be on _if_ the breaker handle operates vertically. Probably also apples to switches in general (404.7).

For that reason large panels can not be mounted horizontally.

All the circuit breakers I can think of are on-toward-the-center except FPE

[bud--]

I don't know of any US panels that have that. Seems like it would not be that hard to substantially guard just the service lugs with plastic. There are 'touch safe' terminal bars for control wiring now.

You probably could build one but it is not likely practical. The spaces would be cramped. Limited KOs in the top. Service wires may come in the sides.

You also wind up with more wires in the top gutter space. I wonder if Canada has the same limits as the US for gutter wire fill.

[DD_BobK]

Bub-

Thanks for correcting my mis-impression.

When I was told that Up had to be ON & Down had to be off, I mistakenly thought that Up & Down were the only directions allowed.... my mistake.

dpb-

What was I thinking?

cheers Bob

[bud--]

"Up" does have to be "on" irregardless. I assume you are saying breakers are not required to be mounted vertically. Most of them are horizontal in most panels, which is fine.

The reference in 240.33 is to 240.81, which is essentially the same as

404.7: "Where circuit breaker handles are operated vertically ... the 'up' position of the handle shall be the 'on' position." "Up" as "on" (if vertical) applies to _all_ the breakers, not just the main breaker.

You could mount a small panel with a single row of a few breakers 'horizontally'. For example a subpanel with 8 breakers in a single row.

For a "large panel", like a service panel with 2 columns of breakers, mounting horizontally will result in one column/row of breakers having "on" in the down position - not allowed. The common practice shown on Holmes is not allowed under the NEC. It is real bizarre when I see it.