My dad owned in the 1950s a 1951 Chevy. In that car, there was a fuse under the dashboard. Remove the fuse or have it "blow" and nothing in the car worked at all until you replaced the fuse.
Are cars still like that today?
My dad owned in the 1950s a 1951 Chevy. In that car, there was a fuse under the dashboard. Remove the fuse or have it "blow" and nothing in the car worked at all until you replaced the fuse.
Are cars still like that today?
Are cars still like that today?
Yes, my 2015 Ford F150 has fuses. As far as I know, there has been no effort to move cars off fuses and on to circuit breakers.
As far as I know, there has been no effort to move cars off fuses and on to circuit breakers.
There has been an ongoing effort. Some manufacturers have begun moving towards that end but at the moment, it's more aftermarket refit than the OEM rule.
https://www.wiringproducts.com/automotive-circuit-breakers
I've switched over my vehicles using their products, but they are just one example of many.
There has been an ongoing effort. Some manufacturers have begun moving towards that end but at the moment, it's more aftermarket refit than the OEM rule.
Sorry, I don't consider something that is after market refit only to qualify as an effort to move cars off fuses and on to circuit breakers.
It's not moving the manufacturers at all.
It's not moving the manufacturers at all.
You would be wrong in that statement.
https://parts.toyota.com/p/Toyota__Prius/Circuit-Breaker-Sensor--Circuit-Breaker/63450107/G484547010.html?clickSource=relatedProduct
They've been in many production electric and hybrid cars since ~2005. Their use is expanding slowly but surely.
They've been in many production electric and hybrid cars since ~2005. Their use is expanding slowly but surely.
A circuit breaker makes sense for currents over 30A. High current fuses tend to be large, so of a similar size to the same rating of circuit breaker. For 30A and less, a fuse takes up a lot less physical space, and when you've got a lot of them fuses make even more sense.
And don't forget the cost of a fuse v the cost of a breaker times however many are needed.
A circuit breaker makes sense for currents over 30A. High current fuses tend to be large, so of a similar size to the same rating of circuit breaker. For 30A and less, a fuse takes up a lot less physical space, and when you've got a lot of them fuses make even more sense.
And don't forget the cost of a fuse v the cost of a breaker times however many are needed.
The cost, more than the size of them is the primary reason they are not already widespread. The size of them has been dropping proportionally with advances in the materials used to produce them.
The push for electric vehicles is also pushing the materials science advancement.
Like anything else, the first generation devices are almost always far more expensive. For the time being, fuses will remain king due to those cost. However, that will change in the not so distant future.
Whichever way it's looked at, the statement made by DS is wrong. The "never gonna happen" mentality, is very often proven wrong.
Whichever way it's looked at, the statement made by DS is wrong. The "never gonna happen" mentality, is very often proven wrong.
I did not say (or even come remotely close to implying) it was never going to happen.
What I said wast that your first comment and the cite you included in it wasn't evidence that it was happening.
And I stand by that, despite your more recent cite regarding the Toyota Prius.
The cost, more than the size of them is the primary reason they are not already widespread. The size of them has been dropping proportionally with advances in the materials used to produce them.
It's still weight. The two fuse boxes in a typical Subaru Outback contain 24 fuses under the hood, another 20 in the little compartment under the dash, and in a nice, tight box that can centralize relays. You can't do that with circuit breakers.
The push for electric vehicles is also pushing the materials science advancement.
It's not clear to me from this discussion. Do electric and/or hybrid cars still have fuses?
https://fuse-box.info/toyota/toyota-prius-xw50-2016-2019-fuses-and-relay
I'd say at least some still have fuses.
I've done a bit of searching on-line. From what I can find, the Toyota Prius (the first specific model mentioned on the thread) has a single circuit breaker on the inverter that boosts the voltage coming off the battery pack for the drive train.
The rest is still all fuses.
Do electric and/or hybrid cars still have fuses?
Other than MAYBE one breaker, yes. Fuses and fusible links are still cheaper and more stable, especially since hybrid cars have engines under the hood that generate heat.
It's not clear to me from this discussion. Do electric and/or hybrid cars still have fuses?
I believe all of them are mixed, but more so the hybrids.
They've been in many production electric and hybrid cars since ~2005.
Okay. You should have led with that rather than with the after market retrofit crap.
Are cars still like that today?
Just a lot more fuses.
I haven't actually counted them, but my basic Hyundai Accent Sport would have to have close to 50 fuses.
A friend used to have an older Lexus Celstor and with it's active suspension, heated & fully electric seats etc it must had had close to 100 (or it seemed that way when trying to find the one that was blown).
Of course the other option is no fuses, and then the battery dies or the car catches fire from wiring overheating when something shorts out.
It's the lesser of 2 evils.
Most vehicles I have owned have a solid non-glass covered fuse near the battery. Normally on one of the cables in a black plastic case.
Those little plug-in fuses are super cheap. Pennies, compared to dollars for circuit breakers. And fuses are foolproof. The fool can't hold them in and prevent them from doing what they are there to do - cut off the power before something starts smoking.
The fool can't hold them in and prevent them from doing what they are there to do - cut off the power before something starts smoking.
I don't know about really, really old circuit breakers, but for decades now even if you hold the lever, it will still trip. Then you have to manually reset it.
Most cars have at least one fuse box with a number of fuses. During the 1980s they started putting in 2 fuse boxes to reduce on the wiring. The one in the engine well dealt solely with the circuit related to the engine and the one in the cabin dealt with the other circuits.
some cars today also have what they call a 'fuseable link' which is expensive to replace and you don't get a spar with the car when you buy it. This is supposedly a last stand fuse for if you have a major short. The only time I had one go was a major hassle getting the car shifted and getting the replacement.
In my first attempt at repairing my car, I replaced the alternator. In the process I managed to invert the wires going out of it and blew an in-line fuse between the alternator and the battery.
Clearly car circuit breakers are a product in search of a market that isn't demanding it.
If blown fuses were a big problem, cars would all be equipped with circuit breakers already. Most aren't.
Have you seen advertisements extolling the virtues of the the new "WhatMobile" with circuit breakers!? I haven't. People wouldn't be impressed.
Secondly, circuit breakers aren't a cure for what's really wrong, and since fixing almost anything that goes wrong in a modern vehicle is beyond the capabilities of 99% of the motoring public, making things easier for them to burn out even more expensive circuitry isn't in the best interests of the owners or the manufacturers.
Clearly car circuit breakers are a product in search of a market that isn't demanding it.
The hybrids and electrics did in fact demand them. So 'clearly' that is not the case.
I watch the materials science advancements closely. The research is being done, the materials advancing, and the usage is rising. The money being put into that is not just a few dollars either.
I don't personally care what anyone else believes on the subject nor should anyone else care about mine. They are free to believe as they wish. What I do care about are trends that will affect my portfolio in the future, along with my son's. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right, but the trends I see all point towards a near future spike in their use.
but the trends I see all point towards a near future spike in their use.
Given the push for non-petroleum powered transport, and hydrogen/electric powered being the leading replacement options, i think it's a pretty safe bet at this stage.
The hybrids and electrics did in fact demand them. So 'clearly' that is not the case.
There are many reasons why they are generally not used in cars. The largest is temperature.
Breakers are designed to be used in a relatively small window. And they mostly work by thermo-magnetics. More current goes through them, they get hot. The temperature breaks down the effectiveness of the magnet inside, and it then "trips" and cuts off power. And they are generally made to work in the range of 40-90 degrees F.
Depending on where you live, temperatures will often be above or below those temperatures. If it is 110+ in your car during the summer, then you risk having the breaker trip almost as soon as you start your car. There is no excess current at all, but the temperature makes it react like it is. Or the inverse, excess current is indeed going through the circuit, but it is 10 degrees outside, so that is preventing it from being tripped.
I know in the summer in the Middle East, we were always having problems with circuit breakers. With an outside temperature of 130 in the summer, it was just a fact of life. When we lived in a tent for our few weeks before going home we even assigned a guy to "breaker duty", who's job it was for 8 hours to go outside if the breaker popped and the AC started blowing hot air.
I know in the summer in the Middle East, we were always having problems with circuit breakers. With an outside temperature of 130 in the summer, it was just a fact of life. When we lived in a tent for our few weeks before going home we even assigned a guy to "breaker duty", who's job it was for 8 hours to go outside if the breaker popped and the AC started blowing hot air.
Why was the breaker panel outside? In the US homes, the breaker box is generally inside.
In the US homes, the breaker box is generally inside.
Here in Australia the main panel is always outside so the fire fighters etc can get at it with ease. The older houses only had a few fuses so they were put on the same board, but the newer houses tend to have a lot more circuits and have a sub-board for the circuit breakers inside the house with the main house wide ones still on the outside main panel.
Here in Australia the main panel is always outside so the fire fighters etc can get at it with ease.
If emergency responders need to cut power to a house, they can disconnect the service drop at the transformer.
If emergency responders need to cut power to a house, they can disconnect the service drop at the transformer.
Doing that takes out a the whole neighbourhood and can be several streets away. In many areas the transformer can be a few miles away. While the mian panel is on the outside of the house at the front or the front of the side and easy to reach, even if the house is on fire.
Doing that takes out a the whole neighbourhood and can be several streets away.
I didn't say disconnect the transformer.
I said disconnect the service drop at the transformer (or at the secondary line). A service drop by definition is for a single meter.
In overhead service, you'll have a secondary line running out from the transformer that the service drops connect to. However, in underground service, generally each service drop connects directly to the transformer and the transform is rarely very far away.
I said disconnect the service drop at the transformer (or at the secondary line). A service drop by definition is for a single meter.
don't work that way here. There are no individual transformers, each transformer does a number of houses. Want to cut off the power for a house prior to the house board you need to go back up the line and turn off the area or you cut the incoming line with huge wire cutters.
don't work that way here. There are no individual transformers, each transformer does a number of houses.
Same here.
However, with underground service, which is most new construction these days, in my area, there is no secondary line and there will be several pad mounted transformers in a sub-division each serving no more than 8 houses and all the service drops connect directly to the transformer.
ETA: I do IT work, as a contractor, for a utility company (mostly electric). I work on the application that is used to map the company's distribution facilities.
However, with underground service, which is most new construction these days, in my area, there is no secondary line and there will be several pad mounted transformers in a sub-division each serving no more than 8 houses and all the service drops connect directly to the transformer.
This once again is where our ages and experiences can matter. I grew up in a neighborhood built in the 1940's, with utility lines running behind each house. But I also remember moving to a neighborhood built in the mid 1970's, where every 5 or 6 houses there was a transformer on the ground and the houses were run to that.
And to this day, each of those neighborhoods are powered the same way. You normally only saw older systems updated and moved underground in places like inside of a major city.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_currents#/media/File:Blizzard_1888_01.jpg
And a major problem was that there was not even a standard yet. So a phone lineman may think he was tracing a phone line, and in reality it was a high voltage DC line.
Over 100 years ago, most cities looked like that. But as decades passed, the utilities were moved underground. Myself, I have long been fascinated with those turn of the century systems. An era where you had a large variety of different utility systems in use at the same time.
Gas was mostly for lighting. Electricity came in both AC and DC. Phone systems were mostly manual, where an operator at a switchboard manually plugged you into the line you wanted to connect to. And a lot of people actually did have telegraph systems installed in their house. And early forms of "radio", where programs came in from telephone lines for entertainment. And a great many cities still operated steam plants (and a few used geothermal water) for heating.
One unique thing about being in the military, I have seen many of these technologies used into the modern era. I remember being on Camp Lejeune, which had it's own power and steam plants, in addition to it's own sewage and water plants. Literally a self-contained city with no need for outside utilities. And seeing the steam rising from the pipes and dealing with radiators in each of the buildings was just how things were. The old steam plant was actually used until 2017, and was only torn down this year.
Something I thought was a shame, as when the push to make all bases "green" all of the military steam and power plants were retired and demolished. Where as instead going to a modern cogeneration system would actually have been a far better solution.
However, with underground service, which is most new construction these days, in my area, there is no secondary line and there will be several pad mounted transformers in a sub-division each serving no more than 8 houses and all the service drops connect directly to the transformer.
As I said before, here in Australia we're a bit different. I now live in a rural town with about 500 people in it. There's about 5 pole mounted sub-transformers spread through town which handle about 80-120 houses each, and a transformer a few miles out of town. About 15 years ago I lived in a new development with underground power where there was a power distribution box for about every 50 to 60 houses. In each case the houses have the main box on the outside of the house on the front or near the front of the house so emergency services can turn off the house power. If they want to turn off the power before that panel they have to back up to the distribution box, the pole transformer, or the local transformer and turn off power to a fair sized area. Once that's done they can cut the house out of the system by disconnecting or cutting the house line then turn everyone else back on. In short, once you back up the power line from the house panel you're taking out a whole neighbourhood or more.
In the modern houses the outside box has the main fuses and a major circuit breaker or fuse for the house circuits - i.e. one for all power and one for all lights, and inside is a circuit breaker box for each individual circuit within the house.
If emergency responders need to cut power to a house, they can disconnect the service drop at the transformer.
No, they simply disconnect at the fused cutout at the power pole. Almost all lines that run from a pole to a structure use what is known as a "fused cutout". In short, a very simple open air switch, with a large handle on the end. They are placed so that a worker with a long wooden pole can hook the handle, and either open it (disconnect power), or close it (reconnect power).
That is what is done when they want to kill power to a structure prior to demolishing it. They open that cutout, and all current is dead from that point.
No, they simply disconnect at the fused cutout at the power pole.
For overhead service, yes. Underground service is built differently, and the transformers are more frequent.
With underground service, they generally don't run a secondary line. All the service drops go straight back to the transformer itself. This is the way newer subdivisions with underground service are being built.
They are placed so that a worker with a long wooden pole can hook the handle, and either open it (disconnect power), or close it (reconnect power).
Heard a loud BOOM! one day outside the back door, and the power went off. Found 1 fried squirrel some distance away from an opened cutout on the power pole.
Witnessed the human version of that at the Peruvian Santa Rosa power station. Operator error = two dead workers in the yard.
Operator error = two dead workers in the yard.
You sure it was error? Maybe someone didn't like those two?
You sure it was error? Maybe someone didn't like those two?
Couldn't say for certain. The report I read after the fact stated operator error. Only thing I'm certain of there, was that they went from standing to lechon immediately after the boom. I doubt they lived long enough to even twig to what was happening.
Heard a loud BOOM! one day outside the back door, and the power went off. Found 1 fried squirrel some distance away from an opened cutout on the power pole.
That is why a lot of power lines got "modified" starting in the 1970's. Instead of side by side, the lines were put with one well above the other. This is because large birds of prey would contact 2 at once and get fried.
Why was the breaker panel outside? In the US homes, the breaker box is generally inside.
In Arizona, they are outside the house. All my houses in the Phoenix area had it outside and my mountain house in Pinetop also had it on the outside.
As to heat inside a car, when I moved to AZ from NYC I had a Camaro with black vinyl seats and no tinted windows. I draped white towels on the driver's seat and cracked the window when I went into the office for the day. One summer day I returned to my car and opened the door. Three dead flies lay on the white towel covering the seat. They flew in through the space in the window and, ZAP!, the heat killed them.
Why was the breaker panel outside? In the US homes, the breaker box is generally inside.
It varies. In Cali. the new house in a high-end neighborhood had outside breakers. I was concerned that it was a safety hazard - anyone could cut off the power at night, and wait for you to come outside to see what was wrong. Baseball bat meets head, or someone gets kidnapped. But it was required by law.
But it was required by law.
Was it just the main power breaker, and not the full breaker panel that was required to be outside? If so, there's pretty much no reason for any homeowner to flip that. It's more so emergency services can cut power to the building. As such, I would hope that it be locked shut, and only keys available to emergency services, by law.
Was it just the main power breaker, and not the full breaker panel that was required to be outside?
In AZ it's the full panel.
I actually have two panels. I had to add a second panel because our third car garage (a golf cart garage) is my wife's fused glass art studio. With the kiln, separate air conditioner, and all the power equipment, we needed a second panel.
I actually have two panels. I had to add a second panel because our third car garage (a golf cart garage) is my wife's fused glass art studio. With the kiln, separate air conditioner, and all the power equipment, we needed a second panel.
Just curious, does your wife still make dichroic glass?
I had an advantage with my house in Indiana. My next door neighbor was an electrician. So, pole to the house. Then off that, into the main, 200A panel. Off of that, we ran a 100 A sub panel for my laser room, and a second 100 A sub panel for the back garage.
House had a two car attached, and a five car detached. The previous owner had simply ran a simple line out to the second garage, because he just used it as a garage. Off that 100 A sub panel in the house, we ran wire through conduit to a full 100 A box for the garage. I had a full woodshop out there, fully insulated, heat (propane forced air), and air conditioning. Wife had a small kiln in another room for doing fusible glass.
And yes, we did have high electric bills, but when you're actually using the power that way, it's expected. (Laser is an Epilog 60 watt. I still have that, and still use it today.)
Just curious, does your wife still make dichroic glass?
She doesn't make the glass. She buys glass and cuts it and fuses it and shapes it to make sculptures, bowls, coasters, etc.
I believe dichroic glass is the shiny stuff and very expensive. Also, different colors of glass are different prices because of what's in them. For example, red and purple are quite expensive because there's gold in them.
As to high electric bills, the kiln is 14,000 watts and can run almost 24 hours for a firing (and a piece requires multiple firings).
She buys glass and cuts it and fuses it and shapes it to make sculptures, bowls, coasters, etc.
I believe dichroic glass is the shiny stuff and very expensive.
The dichroic glass is taking one layer of glass, putting a film with the sparkly stuff in it on top of that layer, then putting another layer of glass on top of that and melting them together.
It varies. In Cali. the new house in a high-end neighborhood had outside breakers.
I live in Wisconsin, where due to frost line issues almost every home has a full basement*
The breaker box is generally in the basement. The electric meter is usually outside and there's a locked cut-off (a switch, not a circuit breaker) there and usually some kind of disconnect where the service drop connects into the the secondary electrical lines and/or the transformer.
There are plenty of ways for emergency services to cut power if needed without having the breaker box outside.
*They have to dig the foundation down to at least 6 feet below ground anyway to be blow the frost line, so the added cost of a full basement is minimal.
They have to dig the foundation down to at least 6 feet below ground anyway to be blow the frost line,
My summer home in AZ was in the White Mountains. It was around 7,000 feet above sea level so it got plenty of snow and was cold. The house was built with a crawl space under the house where the furnace and other stuff was. So the foundation was above ground. No basement.
White Mountains. It was around 7,000 feet above sea level so it got plenty of snow and was cold.
The deep foundation is not about snow. It's about the ground itself freezing, thawing, and refreezing and that causing the ground to heave.
In the mountains, bedrock is shallow, no worries about the frost line and the ground heaving from seasonal freeze/thaw cycles.
Here bedrock is deep, 50 feet or more. Local building codes require foundations to be below the frost line*.
*The frost line is the maximum depth to which the ground will freeze even in the coldest weather. Locally, the frost line is around 6-7 feet below ground.
The deep foundation is not about snow. It's about the ground itself freezing, thawing, and refreezing and that causing the ground to heave.
It is about local codes and conditions.
In most of the country, the "slab foundation" is still the most common used. This is perfect when the ground is stable. In cold areas, the raised foundation is more common. If you are in an area where liquifaction is a concern, then you see deep pile foundations.
Age of construction is also a major factor. Go through most urban neighborhoods in LA, and you will see 2 styles. Those built prior to the 1970's will generally have a simple raised foundation with a crawlspace under. Then in the 1970's, advances in routing plumbing and fixtures through solid slabs advanced to where the solid slab took over in most new construction (after building codes changed).
I remember in 1987 buying my first house in North Carolina, and being shocked to see it had a concrete slab. There are advantages and disadvantages to both kinds, but ultimately I think the slab is faster and cheaper.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both kinds, but ultimately I think the slab is faster and cheaper.
Personally, I prefer basements. If for nothing else than being far more comfortable in summer.
Why was the breaker panel outside? In the US homes, the breaker box is generally inside.
Because it was military, and a "temporary" base which did not pull power off of the grid. Powered by generators, cables all run along the ground from the generators to power distribution boxes. The boxes then lead into tents or metal buildings erected, and may then have their own circuit panel.
https://api.army.mil/e2/c/images/2011/09/16/220228/size0.jpg
Or in the case of the tent, the AC unit is a completely contained unit built onto a pallet, and placed outside the tent. There really is no "breaker box" as you would think of it. Just a bunch of those boxes like above, strung to each other and each with their own breakers.
Why was the breaker panel outside? In the US homes, the breaker box is generally inside.
Both electrical and fire codes have changed in your lifetime, so what you knew as a kid is no longer valid.
Firemen don't have time to fuck around with a long wooden pole, and in areas with underground utilities, there's nothing they can do because who the hell knows where the house cut-off is. NEC code now says it has to be as close as practical to the service entrance. That's NOT the door to the house - that's where the meter is.
Now that we have weatherproof breaker boxes, it doesn't hurt a damned thing to have them out there. Having boxes stuck inside closets and hidden out of the way is a pain in the ass when you're having to work on the house, too. (Speaking from WAY too much experience doing that.)
Of course, the house I grew up in didn't HAVE a breaker box. Three 20 amp fuses, for the whole house. It was a whole lot like in Green Acres. If we turned the microwave on, we couldn't turn the coffee pot on. (And don't get me going on some of those 'historic' houses I've been in, with knob and tube.)
Both electrical and fire codes have changed in your lifetime, so what you knew as a kid is no longer valid.
I have attempted to verify for my self what you claim regarding circuit breaker box location, and I can't.
I did find this:
https://www.hunker.com/12553432/are-there-restrictions-on-where-to-mount-a-residential-circuit-breaker-box
Circuit Breaker Box Location
The NEC specifies that the location of the breaker box "must be as close as practical" to the service entrance. This allows some leeway in the location of the breaker box, but also restricts it. You should not locate a box on the opposite side of the home from the meter. In general, this restriction in the NEC encourages you to determine the circuit breaker box location and from that determine the service entrance equipment location. The service entrance equipment includes the meter, meter base, outside disconnect and the mast extending up through the roof. For example, don't run the service wiring 30 feet inside the house before you connect it to the main circuit breaker box.
As I read that, there has to be an outside shutoff with the meter, but no, the entire circuit breaker panel is not required to be outside.
Carl has the right of this.
Both electrical and fire codes have changed in your lifetime, so what you knew as a kid is no longer valid
We had numerous code books at our firm. The library also had out of date series for reference. The last count was a bit over 2,200 volumes comprising ASME, NFPA, NEC, AWS, ad nauseam codes. Then we get to the electronic subscriptions which expanded that by several orders of magnitude.
There is no code that doesn't change. Engineering and material changes alone ensure this, much less other factors.
Carl has the right of this.
He's right that codes change. That doesn't mean he's right about what current codes require.
That doesn't mean he's right about what current codes require.
I'll quote myself from two places earlier in this thread.
I've seen outdoor, indoor, and hybrid breaker setups in various states and countries. It has all the consistency of a soup sandwich. I've heard a multitude of reasons for any given setup as well.
Modern codes are trending to outdoor setups for stand alone home structures, but even then, soup sandwiches. The only aspect of updated codes that has any consistency, is that the feed lines are buried rather than hanging. Even that depends on the country.
We had numerous code books at our firm. The library also had out of date series for reference. The last count was a bit over 2,200 volumes comprising ASME, NFPA, NEC, AWS, ad nauseam codes. Then we get to the electronic subscriptions which expanded that by several orders of magnitude.
There is no code that doesn't change. Engineering and material changes alone ensure this, much less other factors.
Even state by state the codes change. Picking your local area and assuming it's the same everywhere is a mistake.
As I read that, there has to be an outside shutoff with the meter, but no, the entire circuit breaker panel is not required to be outside.
Do they specifically REQUIRE them to be outside? No.
Do they specifically ALLOW them to be outside? Yes.
This is not for existing construction. You have a house that was built in 1990 and haven't made any big changes to it, you're going to find the box inside. This is for NEW construction, REMODELING construction, and (the big one!) pre-existing home SALES during inspection.
Keep in mind here's what the code DOES require:
1: Breaker panel must be at least 4 feet off the ground, but no higher than 6 feet.
2: The panel door must be able to open at least 90 degrees.
3: Working space around the breaker panel must be at least 30 inches wide and 72 inches from the ground up.
4: Furniture and other large objects cannot be blocking these clearances — in case of emergency, the breaker panel should be easily accessible without moving obstructions.
5: For one- and two-family dwelling units, all service conductors shall terminate in disconnecting means having a short-circuit current rating equal to or greater than the available fault current, installed in a readily accessible outdoor location.
Number 1 is easy, no one wants to work on a panel that's low.
Number 2 again is fairly easy. Panel door can swing wide.
Number 3 okay, not in the closet. Fine, it's in the laundry room, them - but only if the access path is completely clear.
Number 4 yep - panel is easily open, we don't have anything in front of it. (Yeah, right.)
Number 5 - Oh, wait, what's this? National Electrical Code 203.85? Well, can I still put my breaker box inside? Yes, you can. But your MAIN now MUST be outside of the house, and labeled Emergency Services Disconnect. Now, which makes more sense? Paying for TWO breaker panels, or paying for one?
These are NATIONAL codes - there are LOCAL codes that override the NEC, such as many localities DO require ALL breaker panels on new construction to be outside, not just the main circuit disconnect.
Number 1 is easy, no one wants to work on a panel that's low.
Most times, I've seen breaker panels actually below ground. Basements are usually considered better locations for them. (Mainly because people don't want to see them until they need them.)
Basements are usually considered better locations for them.
Rubbish - they're put in creepy basements for the benefit of horror movies!
AJ
Rubbish - they're put in creepy basements for the benefit of horror movies!
Ah, but typically, having the panel obscured by a curtain of hanging chainsaws is a violation of code anyhow.
Besides, it's much better to have finished basements. Especially to have a decent bar, a large screen TV for watching sports and playing video games on, and maybe a snooker table. The darts board is optional.
Do they specifically REQUIRE them to be outside? No.
Do they specifically ALLOW them to be outside? Yes.
And it makes sense for the breaker box to be outside never.
If you have breakers pop in extremely cold or otherwise sever weather, going outside to reset breakers could be dangerous for the homeowner.
And it makes sense for the breaker box to be outside never.
No. If you're in a temperate area that never gets extreme weather, it really doesn't matter much. Although you'd want to ensure that nobody could get onto your property to maliciously shut your power off.
And it makes sense for the breaker box to be outside never.
On behalf of electricians around the country, I sincerely apologize that the people who wrote the National Electrical Code and that are actually writing local building codes didn't bother to consult with you before they made a rational decision based upon safety (meaning the main breaker WILL be outside, period) and common sense (the parts of the country where you actually DO see breaker boxes outside tend to not get the type extreme cold you're referencing).
I sincerely apologize that the people who wrote the National Electrical Code
Your earliest posts on this claimed that the NEC REQUIRED the box to be out side.
You've admitted that that was wrong. It's not the NEC you might want to apologize for.
the parts of the country where you actually DO see breaker boxes outside tend to not get the type extreme cold you're referencing
It's not just cold that could be a safety issue, high winds, heavy rain..., there is potentially dangerous weather everywhere.
Your earliest posts on this claimed that the NEC REQUIRED the box to be out side.
I'm so sorry that you're incapable of actually reading what was written. Did you hurt yourself jumping to your own conclusions?
Read and parse EXACTLY what I said - and I've made no corrections to it.
Both electrical and fire codes have changed in your lifetime, so what you knew as a kid is no longer valid.
Yep - this is exactly correct.
Firemen don't have time to fuck around with a long wooden pole, and in areas with underground utilities, there's nothing they can do because who the hell knows where the house cut-off is. NEC code now says it has to be as close as practical to the service entrance.
Again, that's how the code reads.
That's NOT the door to the house - that's where the meter is. Now that we have weatherproof breaker boxes, it doesn't hurt a damned thing to have them out there.
Personal opinion, of course. But ...
National Electrical Code 203.85? Well, can I still put my breaker box inside? Yes, you can. But your MAIN now MUST be outside of the house, and labeled Emergency Services Disconnect.
That means your MAIN BREAKER BOX must be outside. Everything else - including what YOU'RE calling a main panel - isn't. Those are now sub-panels.
sub-panels.
Submissive panels. Do they submit to the main panel or is there some other dominant they sub to? Electrical BDSM, how appropriate for SOL.
That means your MAIN BREAKER BOX must be outside. Everything else - including what YOU'RE calling a main panel - isn't. Those are now sub-panels.
Hence, my use of terms like "cut-off sw2itch".
Most people are amazingly ignorant of how electricity actually works. I remember getting into a major fight with a GH over if the electricity from the pole is AC or DC. And most do not even realize there is a difference between the two.
Or that you can put your hand safely on a Van de Graffe Generator with over 1 million volts, and laugh. Or why people can wear simple suits and throw around huge amounts of amps safely.
And it makes sense for the breaker box to be outside never.
It makes a hell of a lot of sense to me.
Try living in Alabama or Alaska, when a circuit pops. Especially if say when I lived in North Carolina, and where my electric meter often saw 6 foot tall snowdrifts.
There is a reason why all houses have cut-off circuits outside of the house. There is always one inside the electrical panel, and often a secondary one apart from that. But do not confuse that with the circuit breaker panel.
I have lived all over the country. And I always hated when the breaker panel itself was outside. The last time I did, it was in Texas. 110+ in the summer, sometimes -10 in the winter. Having to get fully dressed and go out at 2 in the morning because you realized the circuit broke on your heater in the middle of a sub=zero snowfall is not fun at all.
The simple alternative is to just pull the meter I out. That takes about 20 seconds to cut all the electricity to the house.
The simple alternative is to just pull the meter I out. That takes about 20 seconds to cut all the electricity to the house.
You don't realize the hazards associated with "just pulling the meter out". You can get arc burns, flash blindness, and sometimes red-hot pieces of the contacts can fly out. That's why protective equipment is worn when pulling a meter that is powered up.
Yes I do and have done it dozens of times. If you're careful, it's safe.
As to protective equipment - who has more than the fire department?
As to protective equipment - who has more than the fire department?
CDC emergency response team?
Army EOD?
As to protective equipment - who has more than the fire department?
It's not the same kind of equipment.
I don't see what benefit breakers have over fuses in a car. Weight reduction is the major issue for car manufacturers. Cutting a few ounces where possible is the goal. I can't see how breakers will ever beat fuses in weight.
Yesterday I bought a package of microfuses (24) and it weighed less than an ounce.
I don't see what benefit breakers have over fuses in a car.
They probably need at least some breakers in a all electric or hybrid. The cheap blade fuses used in gas cars probably can't handle the loads in an electric drive train.
By the time you get up to fuses that can take those loads there's probably not much cost/weight difference.
I don't see breakers becoming the norm in gas cars and I don't see electric/hybrid being anything more than a niche market in our lifetimes.
Battery life, battery density, and safety are the primary reasons electric and hybrid cars haven't sold anymore than they have already. Those are all trending north as well.
Back when cars were first fitted with internal combustion engines, a lot of people were saying it was a niche market. The same applies to the PC, planes, microwaves, refrigerators, frozen veggies, ad nauseam. It did not take a lifetime for any of them to go past niche into mainstream.
When cars were first fitted with internal combustion engines, there were other vehicles with steam powerplants and yet others that were battery powered... and all of them were more expensive than most people could really justify spending. So really, all vehicles were a 'niche market' and only one of them succeeded. Betamax was a niche market - it was better than VHS, but failed. LDs were technologically superior to DVDs, but remained a niche product.
Eventually, the performance and cost of electric vehicles will be competitive with traditional automobiles, and at that point will gain equal market share. But that's a way off yet.
Eventually, the performance and cost of electric vehicles will be competitive with traditional automobiles, and at that point will gain equal market share. But that's a way off yet.
There is the political wild card to take into account as well. That aside, based on the trends I'm watching, they are inside fifteen years of being competitive.
Both performance and cost are currently held back by current battery technology. As said before, it's battery life, battery density, and safety. Two out of three can be obtained at this point in time, but it will take all three.
The first two can be obtained at the cost of the third.
The first and third can be obtained at the cost of the second.
The second and third can be obtained at the cost of the first.
The science for the trifecta is ~5 years out.
The engineering and build out to mass produce them is likely the long lead item at 12-15 years.
The science for the trifecta is ~5 years out.
The science for that trifecta has been ~5 years out for the last couple of decades.
The science for that trifecta has been ~5 years out for the last couple of decades.
Can you cite a source for that? There has been speculation aplenty, but I don't recall anything giving a specific target date over the last two decades.
Eventually, the performance and cost of electric vehicles will be competitive with traditional automobiles, and at that point will gain equal market share. But that's a way off yet.
In the UK, you can buy a conventionally powered small family car that will get you from London to Glasgow non-stop for £10,000.
Or for £30,000 (including state subsidy), you can buy a similar sized award-winning electric car that will get you from London to Glasgow with only a couple of recharging stops. Except that you won't own the batteries, cited as having a ten year longevity.
In an opinion piece, a motor industry columnist said that solid state batteries will be a game changer, but they're not ready yet.
Oh well, it provides employment for Congolese child miners. :-(
AJ
Or for £30,000 (including state subsidy), you can buy a similar sized award-winning electric car that will get you from London to Glasgow with only a couple of recharging stops.
The auto industry has pretty much said (and this is from way too many decades (!) in it) that the electric car is the next best thing - and always will be. In urban and highly concentrated areas, all is good. Once you get out of those areas - it's effectively a ridiculous idea.
I went home to Indiana for my 40th high school reunion last year. 700 miles one way. 11 hours of driving, one way, with wife and I switching off. Started with a full tank.
Stopped once near St. Louis for gas. On the way home, started with a full tank, stopped near St. Louis for gas, and that was it. Our bladders and the dogs had us stop a couple of more times, maximum time off the road the whole trip was less than an hour, total.
I'm LIVING the perfect example right now - OKC got hit with an ice storm last week. I'm not going to have power at home until Tuesday. Gas station, running on one medium sized generator, can fill up 100 cars in an hour. (10 pumps, less than 5 minutes to fill up.) EV charging station, running on the same medium generator, can do 4 cars in 2 hours. You do the math. We still have, a week later, 157,000 people without power.
In an opinion piece, a motor industry columnist said that solid state batteries will be a game changer, but they're not ready yet.
Give it five years and they will be.
Give it five years and they will be.
Flying cars
Fusion power
.
.
.
The list of game changing technologies that have been "five years away" for decades is kind of long.
As I said before, you don't have to believe any given thing. However, the proof is in the pudding as they say. Which in my view, is being made as we speak.
Flying cars
Fusion power
Why don't you go back and read up on the articles for those again. Cite me one article from two decades ago that says either was five years out and I'll desist.
Flying cars
Fusion power
.
.
.
The list of game changing technologies that have been "five years away" for decades is kind of long.
The Dutch Pal-V.
Recently the first test car is approved for testing on public roads (not for flying yet). I see it as a gadget for the very rich but is reality.
The problem with flying cars isn't really technological, it's regulatory.
Governments around the world insist on regulating them as aircraft.
It has to be licensed as a plane.
You need a pilots license which is harder to get than a driver's license and include physical fitness requirements that a drivers license doesn't have.
You can only take off from approved runways (and helipads if it has VTO capability).
They will never be economically viable as long as governments insist on treating them like more traditional aircraft.
Eventually, the performance and cost of electric vehicles will be competitive with traditional automobiles, and at that point will gain equal market share. But that's a way off yet.
There is another factor to account for here. The existing electric grid can't handle that many electric cars.
That would be a major spike in electric demand and the electric utilities are already spending lots of $$$ to get people to use less electricity because (mostly for regulatory reasons) they can't build power plants and distribution infrastructure fast enough to stay ahead of increases in demand.
Also, the more grid scale wind and solar you put on the grid, the less capable the grid is of handling large numbers of electric cars.
Yeah, well... tons of coal plants here could be reopened easily enough. And I know one hydro dam that the turbines only turned during testing - demand has never been sufficient to actually use it.
But more wind and solar means higher costs, which gets back to the original point that it'll be quite a while before the costs are competitive.
Battery life, battery density, and safety are the primary reasons electric and hybrid cars haven't sold anymore than they have already.
You forgot to mention that some people don't like to be followed wherever they go by the manufacturer.
It's the reason I will never buy a Tesla or any other car where this happens. Would you like to have a car that can be stopped remotely by the manufacturer? I find the idea totally ridiculous and yet it can be done.
Yep. By most car manufacturers.
GM started building their 'OnStar' capacity into base vehicles... and even if it's not active, they could remotely shut down any vehicle that has it.
It's the reason I will never buy a Tesla or any other car where this happens. Would you like to have a car that can be stopped remotely by the manufacturer?
Are you saying that in theory? Or are you saying the Tesla already can be stopped remotely by the manufacturer?
Also:
https://www.tesla.com/support/software-updates
Tesla can update the software in their cars remotely. Technology wise, everything they would need to remotely shut down one of their cars is already in place.
Are you saying that in theory? Or are you saying the Tesla already can be stopped remotely by the manufacturer?
Why would you doubt it? Other car manufacturers have similar capabilities. Cops occasionally end pursuits by having the vehicle shut down remotely by the manufacturer. And if a hacker somehow managed to put a backdoor into the manufacturer's network, and had the needed info, the same could possibly be done to cop cars. (Not sure if they have the capability to disable such remote control. Or if they'd want to, since it would allow them to quickly reclaim a stolen patrol vehicle.)
This one I'd have to give Bob. He's not alone in doubting it. The majority of folks doubt it until they read up on it. It's not something a person would normally wake up wondering about.
Other car manufacturers have similar capabilities.
Any vehicle that has an app so that it can call for help automatically in the event of an accident also had remote shutdown capability. Period. Whether it's Ford Sync, GM OnStar, or any other manufacturer. Subaru specifically mentions in their STARLINK that it's a built in Lo-Jak system, so if your car is stolen, the police can track it and use the remote immobilizer so once they shut the car off, it's not restarting.
Are you saying that in theory? Or are you saying the Tesla already can be stopped remotely by the manufacturer?
I think you already have your answer from others.
In short there are 3 ways:
1 - Remote signaling to stop
2 - Remote software update (an update which stops the car)
3 - 'Safety' measure: when you don't keep up maintenance it will simply stop or not start.
It needs to be kept in mind that the oldest grid in the world is America's. Europe will not require the build out/refit America's will, nor will China, Japan, Australia, and others.
America has a binary solution ahead of it. Get with the program or be left behind.
(Yippee, SOL's back! Damn ruskies, trying to fix the election by hacking SOL.)
Are cars with short fuses the cause of road rage?
AJ
Fuses cost pennies.
Circuit breakers cost dollars.
Corporate cost cutters get the final say in car design, if it saves the manufacturer 5 cents per car that is how they do it.
The other problem with circuit breakers in cars is the early attempts used automatically resetting breakers, not a good thing when the short is still there.
Fuses cost pennies.
Circuit breakers cost dollars.
Corporate cost cutters get the final say in car design, if it saves the manufacturer 5 cents per car that is how they do it.
Or they make the upgrade 'optional' and charge a order of magnitude of dollars more. Then eventually phase out the 'base' model and boost the base price. (But this assumes they can get people to actually take the option package including the 'upgrade'.)
Fuses cost pennies.
Circuit breakers cost dollars.
Corporate cost cutters get the final say in car design, if it saves the manufacturer 5 cents per car that is how they do it.
Read the above.
If there was a reliable breaker that worked in all temperatures and conditions, the car companies would be all over it. And sell it as a feature to the customers. No more having to worry about having spare fuses, and keeping more in your glovebox.
The problem with that thinking, is that it has been dead in the automotive industry for over 30 years. That is when things like hand crank windows, cars without AC, and AM only radios vanished. The companies simply realized that people will pay more, if those features are even needed or not.
But the issue is not money at all, it ultimately is the reliability of technology. It is possible to make a completely electronic breaker, that actually measures the current., But those would be large, expensive, and themselves be a draw on the electrical system. Which kind of defeats the purpose of a simple metal strip fuse.
Fused or refused.
Oddly, refused does not mean to be fused again.
"To refuse is to decline, deny, reject, or resist. If a stranger offers you candy, you should politely refuse. As a noun, refuse (pronounced REF-yooss) is food waste, scraps, or garbage. As a verb, refuse (pronounced ree-FYOOZ) means to reject.
Oddly, refused does not mean to be fused again.
I had to look away from the nauseating sight as the six demigods refused into the single supreme being.
AJ
I've seen outdoor, indoor, and hybrid breaker setups in various states and countries. It has all the consistency of a soup sandwich. I've heard a multitude of reasons for any given setup as well.
Modern codes are trending to outdoor setups for stand alone home structures, but even then, soup sandwiches. The only aspect of updated codes that has any consistency, is that the feed lines are buried rather than hanging. Even that depends on the country.
Even the all electric Tesla model S is mostly fuses outside of the drive train itself.
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/fuse-box-diagrams-model-s-12-v-center-console-outlet-fuse-location.160596/
What about Rolls-Royce's prototype electric plane? My guess would be fuses because of the weight saving.
AJ
What about Rolls-Royce's prototype electric plane? My guess would be fuses because of the weight saving.
Actually, I would guess the opposite. Because a more complex circuit breaker can reroute power in other ways. And it only makes sense to put the breakers close to the pilot so they can quickly reset them in an emergency.
Part of the training for the Apollo astronauts was knowing where each breaker was, and which of the crew was responsible for resetting them. More than one tripped during those missions, and each member quickly reset them.
It would be4 stupid to use fuses in an electric plane. There is absolutely no way a pilot could replace one in flight if there was a failure of a key component. Especially since they are relatively stupid-simple devices (on or off). Where as a breaker can be designed with "If current stops flowing from here, automatically route power to there".
Anybody who has seen lights that activate in the event of a power failure should understand this concept.
What about Rolls-Royce's prototype electric plane? My guess would be fuses because of the weight saving.
Based on the fact current planes use breakers (most likely because it's instantly apparent when a breaker has tripped, and generally aircrews need to speed up diagnosis of problems as much as possible) I'd suspect they'd stick with the breakers.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/25.1357
Some things cannot be avoided by law. Above is the CFR related to transport aircraft circuit protective devices. The latter being what the aeronautical industry calls a circuit breaker. You will note in reading that link, fuses are allowed with specific requirements for them. For the most part, they are all CPD's.
Of course, the latest generation of smart meters give the utility companies the ability to remotely shut off power at the meter.
With that, all it would take for emergency responders is a phone call.
Of course, the latest generation of smart meters give the utility companies the ability to remotely shut off power at the meter.
In the UK, power companies deny they have that ability. But in a case reported in the newspaper, someone's new smart meter didn't work. Their power company told them how to activate it over the internet. It you can switch an electricity supply on over the internet, you can surely switch it off. And what's the betting the website is hackable.
Power companies know that unless something radical happens soon, the UK may be subject to rolling blackouts. But if enough people don't have smart meters, the power companies will be unable to make them discriminatingly.
AJ
With that, all it would take for emergency responders is a phone call.
Just remember, when seconds count, it only takes minutes to make that phone call!
I mentioned this change to the code to a friend of mine from high school, and how we were discussing it.
He's the Fire Chief for a medium-sized town in Indiana. 65,000 population, and is in charge of 144 Firefighters men and women, 8 Fire Stations, 6 Engines, 2 Trucks, 1 Tanker, 1 Support/Rescue Unit, 3 full time Paramedic Ambulances and a Hazardous Materials Special Response Team.
They have had emergency responders injured and had additional damage done to residences and facilities because of delays in being able to terminate power. Some of the houses they respond to are so old, they still have knob and tube wiring.
His comment back to me was, "Carl, these codes aren't designed to make things necessarily easier for the homeowner, they're to make the house safer. If you're tripping a breaker, then you need to figure out WHY that breaker tripped, not just go reset it. So many times we get to a house that's involved due to electrical issues, and if we're trying to knock it down, we've GOT to cut the power to that place, because we have no clue where the panel in the house is, and it's not safe for us to pull a meter."
Just remember, when seconds count, it only takes minutes to make that phone call!
After it took the fire department 20-30 minutes just to arrive on scene.
Emergency dispatchers could check with the utility and make the shut-off request while the fire department is in transit.
Emergency dispatchers could check with the utility and make the shut-off request while the fire department is in transit.
Oh, "swatters" would have a field day with that.
Emergency dispatchers could check with the utility and make the shut-off request while the fire department is in transit.
As Mushroom said, you CAN'T do that. 'Swatting' means that you do something like call in a police report that there's somebody screaming and you heard shots fired at an address. Doesn't mean there was, just you're reporting it. Possibly because you hate the person, or because you're trying to cause trouble for them.
Which means the SWAT team shows up in full force, ready to break down your door. People have been KILLED because of stuff like this.
Now, I'm not sure where you specifically live that you have such a wonderful response time from the fire department, but from the time you make the call, we typically have a 7 minute or less response time here. (Data is from FY 2015, but here locally, over 67,000 emergency responses, with less than 7 minutes 60% of the time. Which is faster than the Police Department or EMSA.)
When seconds count - someone's breaking into my house - with the police being (on average) a 10 minute response time, my personal response time is between 1,000 and 3,200 feet per second.
From a fire and safety perspective, I think you're pretty much just arguing for the sake of arguing now, because the actual facts don't fit your agenda.
Oh, and the other minor detail that in a wildfire type situation like they're dealing with in California (courtesy of the stupidity of their own government) means one guy can run and get the power shut-off to a whole bunch of houses pretty quickly.
I have seen a fire department take 20 minutes to get to a building that was next door to the fire station.
I have seen a fire department take 20 minutes to get to a building that was next door to the fire station.
What type of fire station was it ? 20 min is an excellent time if it is like where I live as our fire station is all volunteers and no one actually mans the station. When some one calls for fire support the dispatcher sounds an alarm/siren and all available drive from their homes to the station. Volunteer firemen can join the department if they live within 10 miles of the station and pass the exams. response times can get even worse if there is no one available to respond to the call out and the dispatcher then has to call in support from out of township.
So the station could be right next door but if it isn't a manned station then there is the added response time of just waiting for the personal to get to the station to be dispatched is added.
Plus things could get worse a few years back London Township in our area has the same set-up as Ida Township where I live responded to their fire call to then have to stand outside and watch as their very own fire station burned to the ground while they waited for neighboring townships and cities to respond to the call for help.
Could be that the home owner hadn't donated to that volunteer fire department. It happens.
I have seen a fire department take 20 minutes to get to a building that was next door to the fire station.
Was that a professional group with a full crews of full-time staff at the station all the time, or one of the groups where most are part-time volunteers who have to get to the station and aren't allowed to go to the fire until a full crew has assembled and got ready with all of their protective gear for they can take the engine anywhere?
All full time professional fire crew, station fully manned. It is one of the central ones in the city.
If they were volunteers that would be a decent response time, but paid professionals just sitting around waiting for a fire not so much.
If they were volunteers that would be a decent response time, but paid professionals just sitting around waiting for a fire not so much.
true.
If they were volunteers that would be a decent response time, but paid professionals just sitting around waiting for a fire not so much.
Well, unless that station had everyone else out on another call, and only after putting out the previous fire could they return to deal with the other... although I think in a case like that, there'd be a crew from another station sent.