220 wiring question for saw & dust collector

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:30:14 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<[email protected]> wrote:


>Something that is improper is something that one
>shouldn't do. Something that is undesirable is something that one
>shouldn't do. Regardless of the exact terminology you use, it appears that
>you believe that plugging one's desk lamp, answering machine, or other
>small, low powered device into a 20 amp socket is something that one
>shouldn't do. If you believe otherwise then you should clarify this rather
>than arguing that your words mean something other than most people will
>percieve them to mean.

Thank you. Someone else gets it.

- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

I have a Grizzly 2hp DC. Just for the hell of it, I clamped the amprobe
around one lead and turned it on. Looks like about 11 amps. Close
enought for government work.

(that's at 220 V)
bob g.

Wilson wrote:

>
> OOPS, is there a misunderstanding here? I think it's unlikely the DC draws
> 12A at 240V?? That's over three HP! The saw must be a two HP??
> Wilson
>
>

"toller"

> It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
> plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is undesirable.

This is why I wired my entire house with the same 4 ga wire coming in from
the utility pole. Using similar logic, one thing led to another. Works
great now, but I have yet to get to changing my lamp cords to 4 ga. I'll
get there, though. Safest house on the block.

- Nate

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:22:18 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>>
>> If you believe there is something improper about plugging a 5 A device
>> into a 30 A circuit, you should recuse yourself from dispensing any
>> further opinions in electrical threads.
>>
>"Your scheme will work fine and be perfectly legal".
>That sounds to you like I think it is improper?

From the text of your post to which I had responded:

>2) It is preferable not to have 20a components (cordsets, outlets, plugs) on
>a 30a circuit. It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
>plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is undesirable.

"Preferable not to have" and "undesirable," your words, are virtually
synonomous with "improper" in the context of your message. So, yes,
that sounds to me like you think it is improper.


- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

Excuse, short break. Be right back. Got to get the wife straightened
out. She's running the coffee maker and the mixer at the same time.
Darned radio is on same circuit (kitchen outlets) One breaker, one GFI
for the whole bunch. Be back shortly.

bob g.

Lew Hodgett wrote:

> "Jim" writes:
>
>>I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
>>question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
>>breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both
>
> of
>
>>them at the same time?
>
> <snip>
>
> NO.
>
> One load, one circuit protective device.
>
> HTH
>
>

I've never seen my fellow woodworkers get so pissy about any other
question/topic. What gives guys? Everybody's manhood dependent on his
ability to run an outlet to his table saw? Let's ease off.
Don't tel the guy to do something totally illegal or dangerous. There's
more than one way to skin a cat, though.

bob g.


[email protected] wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
>>question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
>>breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both of
>>them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I would
>>let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save the
>>other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is also
>>connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in the
>>process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new home.
>>Thank you all for your opinions.
>>
>
>
>
> you didn't give the draw of the tools.
>
> there's no reason they can't be on the same circuit, as long as it's
> sized appropriately.

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:28:37 -0600, "Nate B" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"toller"
>
>> It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
>> plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is undesirable.
>
>This is why I wired my entire house with the same 4 ga wire coming in from
>the utility pole. Using similar logic, one thing led to another. Works
>great now, but I have yet to get to changing my lamp cords to 4 ga. I'll
>get there, though. Safest house on the block.
>
>- Nate

Nate -- Well, for one, I liked the joke at this stage in the thread.

igor <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
> >question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
> >breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both of
> >them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I would
> >let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save the
> >other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is also
> >connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in the
> >process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new home.
> >Thank you all for your opinions.
> >
>
> If the issue is room, here is an idea you might consider: For the
> "standard" circuits (such as lights, hand tools, etc.), if your box is
> capable/proper for such things, consider using a couple of double-circuit
> breakers -- that is, 2 20 amp breakers in the space of a normal-sixed
> breaker. (RIght now, I cannot recall the name for these things.) That can
> help you with the space concern. I don't know why one cannot use as many
> as will actually fit in a box, but there is a limit as to how many
> circuits, not just breakers, one is supposed to have in a box. Maybe it
> has something to do with the amount of wire you can have in a box -- code
> talks about this.
>
> BTW, if you do go this route and use two sets of double breakers, I suggest
> (though I cannot tell you that the theory and/or code supports this) that
> you put them in the box so that they are on opposite sides of the 220 --
> for example, put one in right above the other (at least that is how it
> works in Square D boxes).
>
> [Warning: Digression.] HTH. Either way, this is an interesting thread you
> started. One of the things I love about this NG is that there is some real
> expertise around here on all sorts of subjects. I would not be surprised
> (notwithstanding all of the refs to SWMBO) that if someone asked what's a
> good snack to eat while working in the shop, there would be recipes flying
> about. Or, if someone asked whether Iran's nuclear program is a threat,


Among the smoke-and-mirror and fear-mongering innuendo, these are some
facts about Iran's nuclear program that aren't being mentioned:

1- The Bushehr reactor-which was started under the Shah with US
support-is not a weapons proliferation threat since it is a lightwater
reactor which is under IAEA safeguard. Even the IAEA itself admits
that much.

Proof:
UN clears Iran nuclear facility
The head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency has said
Russia's nuclear co-operation with Iran is no longer a matter of
concern.
(SOURCE: BBC Online Tuesday, 29 June, 2004)


2- Note how the articles confuse a nuclear "weapons" program with
a plain "nuclear program". In fact according to Article 4 of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has an "INALIENABLE RIGHT"
to possess nuclear technology, as does any othe country. Several other
nations use the same technology too, such as Brazil and Holland and
Japan. So a nuclear
program is not the same as a nuclear weapons program.

3- A common refrain is that Iran's nuclear program can't possibly be
for anything except weapons because Iran has so much oil and natural
gas. In fact Iran needs nuclear energy despite possessing extensive
oil and gas because of rising domestic consumption and the reliance on
the sale
oil and gas for earning hard currency. The Stanford Research
Institute advised the Shah's government that Iran could not rely on
oil and gas for energy way back in the mid 1970's. Other nations which
have extensive oil and gas resources also have nuclear energy - such
as Russia and the USA. Iran has also been experimenting with
geothermal energy and wind-turbines, as well as building its largest
hydroengery dam.

4- There is in fact no evidence of an actual nuclear WEAPONS program
in Iran, as admitted by the IAEA itself - there is only the INFERENCE
that Iran COULD ONE DAY POSSIBLY use the legitimate technology to
build a weapon of POSSIBLY desires to do so. Needless to say, ANY
TECHNOLOGY
"could" be used to make nukes, and so could any country. And the
reason why Iran would want to build nukes is to DEFEND ITSELF.

Proof:
"IAEA: No evidence of Iran nukes
VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency has found 'no
evidence' Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons...
SOURCE: AP Monday, November 10, 2003

" 'The United States has no concrete evidence of a nuclear-weapons
program,' Albright told me. 'It's just an inference. There's no
smoking gun.' "
SOURCE: New Yorker by SEYMOUR M. HERSH Issue of 2004-06-28


"One Vienna-based diplomat who follows the IAEA expressed concern that
hard-liners from the United States and some of its allies were
conducting a smear campaign against Iran that was similar to what it
did to Iraq before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam
Hussein...David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and
president of the Institute for Science and International Security
(ISIS) believes Tehran wants to keep the nuclear option open, but said
the United States had a weak case for its view that Tehran is rushing
to complete an atomic bomb. 'They have weak evidence. I think even
(the U.S. hard-liners) are worried they don't have a case," Albright
said, adding that the U.S. policy of confronting and isolating Iran
was 'bankrupt' and might push Iran to rush to get the bomb. 'The
hard-liners in the U.S. could really trigger Iran to race to get a
nuclear weapon,' he added."
SOURCE: REUTERS Mon Aug 23, 2004


5- Iran can't be compared to Iraq: The bombing of Iraq's Osirak
reactor did not signficantly affect Iraq's nuclear program, since the
centrifuge sites were not bombed. If anything, it encouraged them to
speed up the process. But in any case, Iran has signed the Additional
Protocol which permits IAEA inspections anywhere-anytime, and Iraq had
not. Iraq also used chemical weapons and invaded its neighbors- with
the
blessing and support of the USA, by the way.

6- In fact, according to the NonProliferation Treaty, not only is Iran
entitled to have nuclear technology, but other countries are required
to share their nuclear technology. That was the quid-pro-quo that the
nuclear-haves and have-nots agreed upon when they signed the NPT.
However, the nuclear-haves are not living up to their side of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty bargain.

7- Don't mix up Iran and North Korea either: Currently, Iran has
signed the Nonproliferation Treaty and its nuclear installations are
all under IAEA safeguards - unlike North Korea.

8- If Iran is attacked, Iran will withdraw from the Non-Proliferation
Treaty (as it is legally do pursuant to Article X) and will start
working on a nuclear weapons program in earnest. Centrifuge sites will
pop up like mushrooms all over the country - too many to be bombed -
and the IAEA inspectors will not be around to check them. Within 6
mos. the first nuclear test will occur, and within a year Iran's
missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads.

9- The people of Iran will rally to support their government if Iran
is attacked, as their nationalism is stirred by such an act. Iran's
decision to develop nuclear deterrence will occur with the full
support of the people of the government too, so changing governments
will not change the decision to build nukes. Iranians know that their
country has a right to nuclear technology, they are proud of their
nuclear accomplishments, and have a long history of resenting foreign
superpowers trying to deprive them of their rights.

10- Attacking Iran's nuclear installations will prove once and for all
to the people of Iran the necessity of obtaining nuclear weapons as a
deterrence. There are already many Iranians who believe that Iran
should withdraw from the NonProliferation Treaty since the US has
failed to abide by ITS OWN obligations under the same treaty (to share
nuclear technology,
and to get rid of its own nuclear weapons) Furthermore, Iran is
surrounded by nuclear-armed or nuclear-capable states that threaten
Iran's security.

So yes, by all means, go ahead and bomb or try to invade Iran and see
what happens.

"Jim" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<k2TWc.85128$TI1.56508@attbi_s52>...
> GET LOST THELASIAN THIS IS A WOODWORKERS NEWS GROUP, NOT A POLITICAL ONE
> DORK!


This thread became political.
Whazza matter, some fact too much for your brain?


> "Thelasian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > igor <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > > On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
> > > >question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp
> double
> > > >breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run
> both of
> > > >them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I
> would
> > > >let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save
> the
> > > >other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is
> also
> > > >connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in
> the
> > > >process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new
> home.
> > > >Thank you all for your opinions.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If the issue is room, here is an idea you might consider: For the
> > > "standard" circuits (such as lights, hand tools, etc.), if your box is
> > > capable/proper for such things, consider using a couple of
> double-circuit
> > > breakers -- that is, 2 20 amp breakers in the space of a normal-sixed
> > > breaker. (RIght now, I cannot recall the name for these things.) That
> can
> > > help you with the space concern. I don't know why one cannot use as
> many
> > > as will actually fit in a box, but there is a limit as to how many
> > > circuits, not just breakers, one is supposed to have in a box. Maybe it
> > > has something to do with the amount of wire you can have in a box --
> code
> > > talks about this.
> > >
> > > BTW, if you do go this route and use two sets of double breakers, I
> suggest
> > > (though I cannot tell you that the theory and/or code supports this)
> that
> > > you put them in the box so that they are on opposite sides of the 220 --
> > > for example, put one in right above the other (at least that is how it
> > > works in Square D boxes).
> > >
> > > [Warning: Digression.] HTH. Either way, this is an interesting thread
> you
> > > started. One of the things I love about this NG is that there is some
> real
> > > expertise around here on all sorts of subjects. I would not be
> surprised
> > > (notwithstanding all of the refs to SWMBO) that if someone asked what's
> a
> > > good snack to eat while working in the shop, there would be recipes
> flying
> > > about. Or, if someone asked whether Iran's nuclear program is a threat,
> >
> >
> > Among the smoke-and-mirror and fear-mongering innuendo, these are some
> > facts about Iran's nuclear program that aren't being mentioned:
> >
> > 1- The Bushehr reactor-which was started under the Shah with US
> > support-is not a weapons proliferation threat since it is a lightwater
> > reactor which is under IAEA safeguard. Even the IAEA itself admits
> > that much.
> >
> > Proof:
> > UN clears Iran nuclear facility
> > The head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency has said
> > Russia's nuclear co-operation with Iran is no longer a matter of
> > concern.
> > (SOURCE: BBC Online Tuesday, 29 June, 2004)
> >
> >
> > 2- Note how the articles confuse a nuclear "weapons" program with
> > a plain "nuclear program". In fact according to Article 4 of the
> > Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has an "INALIENABLE RIGHT"
> > to possess nuclear technology, as does any othe country. Several other
> > nations use the same technology too, such as Brazil and Holland and
> > Japan. So a nuclear
> > program is not the same as a nuclear weapons program.
> >
> > 3- A common refrain is that Iran's nuclear program can't possibly be
> > for anything except weapons because Iran has so much oil and natural
> > gas. In fact Iran needs nuclear energy despite possessing extensive
> > oil and gas because of rising domestic consumption and the reliance on
> > the sale
> > oil and gas for earning hard currency. The Stanford Research
> > Institute advised the Shah's government that Iran could not rely on
> > oil and gas for energy way back in the mid 1970's. Other nations which
> > have extensive oil and gas resources also have nuclear energy - such
> > as Russia and the USA. Iran has also been experimenting with
> > geothermal energy and wind-turbines, as well as building its largest
> > hydroengery dam.
> >
> > 4- There is in fact no evidence of an actual nuclear WEAPONS program
> > in Iran, as admitted by the IAEA itself - there is only the INFERENCE
> > that Iran COULD ONE DAY POSSIBLY use the legitimate technology to
> > build a weapon of POSSIBLY desires to do so. Needless to say, ANY
> > TECHNOLOGY
> > "could" be used to make nukes, and so could any country. And the
> > reason why Iran would want to build nukes is to DEFEND ITSELF.
> >
> > Proof:
> > "IAEA: No evidence of Iran nukes
> > VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency has found 'no
> > evidence' Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons...
> > SOURCE: AP Monday, November 10, 2003
> >
> > " 'The United States has no concrete evidence of a nuclear-weapons
> > program,' Albright told me. 'It's just an inference. There's no
> > smoking gun.' "
> > SOURCE: New Yorker by SEYMOUR M. HERSH Issue of 2004-06-28
> >
> >
> > "One Vienna-based diplomat who follows the IAEA expressed concern that
> > hard-liners from the United States and some of its allies were
> > conducting a smear campaign against Iran that was similar to what it
> > did to Iraq before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam
> > Hussein...David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and
> > president of the Institute for Science and International Security
> > (ISIS) believes Tehran wants to keep the nuclear option open, but said
> > the United States had a weak case for its view that Tehran is rushing
> > to complete an atomic bomb. 'They have weak evidence. I think even
> > (the U.S. hard-liners) are worried they don't have a case," Albright
> > said, adding that the U.S. policy of confronting and isolating Iran
> > was 'bankrupt' and might push Iran to rush to get the bomb. 'The
> > hard-liners in the U.S. could really trigger Iran to race to get a
> > nuclear weapon,' he added."
> > SOURCE: REUTERS Mon Aug 23, 2004
> >
> >
> > 5- Iran can't be compared to Iraq: The bombing of Iraq's Osirak
> > reactor did not signficantly affect Iraq's nuclear program, since the
> > centrifuge sites were not bombed. If anything, it encouraged them to
> > speed up the process. But in any case, Iran has signed the Additional
> > Protocol which permits IAEA inspections anywhere-anytime, and Iraq had
> > not. Iraq also used chemical weapons and invaded its neighbors- with
> > the
> > blessing and support of the USA, by the way.
> >
> > 6- In fact, according to the NonProliferation Treaty, not only is Iran
> > entitled to have nuclear technology, but other countries are required
> > to share their nuclear technology. That was the quid-pro-quo that the
> > nuclear-haves and have-nots agreed upon when they signed the NPT.
> > However, the nuclear-haves are not living up to their side of the
> > Non-Proliferation Treaty bargain.
> >
> > 7- Don't mix up Iran and North Korea either: Currently, Iran has
> > signed the Nonproliferation Treaty and its nuclear installations are
> > all under IAEA safeguards - unlike North Korea.
> >
> > 8- If Iran is attacked, Iran will withdraw from the Non-Proliferation
> > Treaty (as it is legally do pursuant to Article X) and will start
> > working on a nuclear weapons program in earnest. Centrifuge sites will
> > pop up like mushrooms all over the country - too many to be bombed -
> > and the IAEA inspectors will not be around to check them. Within 6
> > mos. the first nuclear test will occur, and within a year Iran's
> > missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads.
> >
> > 9- The people of Iran will rally to support their government if Iran
> > is attacked, as their nationalism is stirred by such an act. Iran's
> > decision to develop nuclear deterrence will occur with the full
> > support of the people of the government too, so changing governments
> > will not change the decision to build nukes. Iranians know that their
> > country has a right to nuclear technology, they are proud of their
> > nuclear accomplishments, and have a long history of resenting foreign
> > superpowers trying to deprive them of their rights.
> >
> > 10- Attacking Iran's nuclear installations will prove once and for all
> > to the people of Iran the necessity of obtaining nuclear weapons as a
> > deterrence. There are already many Iranians who believe that Iran
> > should withdraw from the NonProliferation Treaty since the US has
> > failed to abide by ITS OWN obligations under the same treaty (to share
> > nuclear technology,
> > and to get rid of its own nuclear weapons) Furthermore, Iran is
> > surrounded by nuclear-armed or nuclear-capable states that threaten
> > Iran's security.
> >
> > So yes, by all means, go ahead and bomb or try to invade Iran and see
> > what happens.

"toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> There is no harm to running 10/3 rather than 10/2, but unless your machines
> actually require a neutral you don't have to.
>
> You have not mentioned what the machines draw, but unless they are huge 30a
> should be plenty; I run both of mine on 20a.
>
> You will have to use receptacles rated for 30a, but other than that it seems
> pretty straight forward.(though I would rather see two 20a circuits..)

He didnt mention with ground, It needs a ground of course.
I would check on the distance and current draw with a meter. I use all
12/3 with a ground. All my tools are within 30 feet of the panel.
A cheap amp-probe can be a real eye opener on some of these 5 HP
motors. It can also be used to tell if the start capacitor is bad on a
motor.

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:48:50 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:

>There is no harm to running 10/3 rather than 10/2, but unless your machines
>actually require a neutral you don't have to.
>
[snip]

My understanding is that code requires 3 + ground even if the device does
not. Others here seem more qualified for a definitive answer on this.

If you are going to run a sub, make the feed as big as you can, maybe 40 at
least.
I don't think you can buy a tool without thermal overload protection now.
I don't mind blowing the panel breaker in a stall. It keeps the motor a
little cooler, with less stress on the windings and insulation.


OOPS, is there a misunderstanding here? I think it's unlikely the DC draws
12A at 240V?? That's over three HP! The saw must be a two HP??
Wilson

"Gary" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:nUsWc.57134$mD.48161@attbi_s02...
> > I am the original person who posted this. I have the Grizzly G0444Z 220
> > volt table saw and the Grizzly 220 volt G1029Z dust collector. Both are
> > rated at 12 amps each. What I would like to do is have them both on the
> > same circuit. I was confused as to using a 30 amp brkr with 10/3 wire.
I
> > thought 12/3 with a 20 amp brkr would handle it if I turned each on
> > separately and let it get up to speed before turning on the other. It
> > appears that the best solution would be to wire them separately on their
> own
> > circuit. It is somewhat confusing to me.
> > Thanks again for your help.
> >
> >
> > "toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "Charley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > You didn't say what the current ratings were for each of them.
> > > >
> > > > If you do this you need to realize that anything that you hook to a
30
> > amp
> > > > breaker needs to be capable of handling 30 amps. In other words all
of
> > the
> > > > wiring, outlets, switches, etc. to your saw and your dust collector
> > needs
> > > to
> > > > be rated at 30 amps as well. That means #10 wire minimum. The reason
> for
> > > > this is that the wiring needs to be able to handle a short circuit
> > > anywhere
> > > > in the circuit up to the rating of the circuit breaker that's
feeding
> > it.
> > > If
> > > > you use smaller wire and hardware a short circuit will result in a
> fire
> > > and
> > > > a wood shop is one of the last places that you want this to happen.
> > > >
> > > > I strongly recommend that you put each one on their own breaker
which
> is
> > > > sized correctly for their full load ratings and wiring. If you
bought
> a
> > > sub
> > > > panel without adequate space you should consider replacing it with a
> > > bigger
> > > > one.
> > > >
> > > I agree that 2 separate circuits is the best way, but you are wrong to
> say
> > > everything must be 30a. It only has to be 30a up to the receptacle.
> > After
> > > that, 20a is okay, assuming the machines are less than 20a. (In fact,
> > > rereading the code, I am not even sure if the receptacle has to be
30a,
> > > though it seems prudent.)
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> Congrats on your choice of equipment. I too wonder, why couldn't you use
> the 30 amp circuit as a branch circuit, run it into a subpanel with two 20
> amp breakers, and the run your 2 220v 20amp outlets from there.
> 2X12amps=24amps, well within the 30amp breaker's operating range. Just
> don't start 'em both at the same time.
>
> Gary
>
>

> shouldn't do. Regardless of the exact terminology you use, it appears
that
> you believe that plugging one's desk lamp, answering machine, or other
> small, low powered device into a 20 amp socket is something that one
> shouldn't do. If you believe otherwise then you should clarify this
rather
> than arguing that your words mean something other than most people will
> percieve them to mean.
>
I mean precisely what I said several times: It is best to match cord size
to the breaker size when reasonable to do so. It generally normal, safe,
and legal to use smaller cords when it is not reasonable to match them.
No one would dissagree with that, except to hear their own voice.
LR picked up on this and claims that I said it is improper to use smaller
cords than the breaker. I did not.

"Charley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You didn't say what the current ratings were for each of them.
>
> If you do this you need to realize that anything that you hook to a 30 amp
> breaker needs to be capable of handling 30 amps. In other words all of the
> wiring, outlets, switches, etc. to your saw and your dust collector needs
to
> be rated at 30 amps as well. That means #10 wire minimum. The reason for
> this is that the wiring needs to be able to handle a short circuit
anywhere
> in the circuit up to the rating of the circuit breaker that's feeding it.
If
> you use smaller wire and hardware a short circuit will result in a fire
and
> a wood shop is one of the last places that you want this to happen.
>
> I strongly recommend that you put each one on their own breaker which is
> sized correctly for their full load ratings and wiring. If you bought a
sub
> panel without adequate space you should consider replacing it with a
bigger
> one.
>
I agree that 2 separate circuits is the best way, but you are wrong to say
everything must be 30a. It only has to be 30a up to the receptacle. After
that, 20a is okay, assuming the machines are less than 20a. (In fact,
rereading the code, I am not even sure if the receptacle has to be 30a,
though it seems prudent.)

>
> If you believe there is something improper about plugging a 5 A device
> into a 30 A circuit, you should recuse yourself from dispensing any
> further opinions in electrical threads.
>
"Your scheme will work fine and be perfectly legal".
That sounds to you like I think it is improper?

> > I am the original person who posted this. I have the Grizzly G0444Z 220
> > volt table saw and the Grizzly 220 volt G1029Z dust collector. Both are
> > rated at 12 amps each. What I would like to do is have them both on the
> > same circuit. I was confused as to using a 30 amp brkr with 10/3 wire.
I
> > thought 12/3 with a 20 amp brkr would handle it if I turned each on
> > separately and let it get up to speed before turning on the other. It
> > appears that the best solution would be to wire them separately on their
> own
> > circuit. It is somewhat confusing to me.
> > Thanks again for your help.
> >
Your scheme will work fine and be perfectly legal (with the normal
disclaimers about it being installed correctly and all that...)

However there are two reasons to consider having two 20a circuits.
1) Grizzly is apparently a bit careless in their motor design and is
concerned that it can suffer damaging overloads under some circumstances
(perhaps a stalled motor?). They believe the damage is less likely on a 20a
breaker than on a 30a breaker. This should not be an issue, but presumably
they have had problems.
2) It is preferable not to have 20a components (cordsets, outlets, plugs) on
a 30a circuit. It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is undesirable.

I think that is as clear as it gets. Use two circuits if you can; one if
you can't. Use 4wire if you want, but since you have other circuits
available for 120v, there is little point to it.

"LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:22:18 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >>
> >> If you believe there is something improper about plugging a 5 A device
> >> into a 30 A circuit, you should recuse yourself from dispensing any
> >> further opinions in electrical threads.
> >>
> >"Your scheme will work fine and be perfectly legal".
> >That sounds to you like I think it is improper?
>
> From the text of your post to which I had responded:
>
> >2) It is preferable not to have 20a components (cordsets, outlets, plugs)
on
> >a 30a circuit. It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
> >plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is undesirable.
>
> "Preferable not to have" and "undesirable," your words, are virtually
> synonomous with "improper" in the context of your message. So, yes,
> that sounds to me like you think it is improper.
>
Is it English or reason that you have problems with?
1) What does "synonomous" mean? There is a word "synonymous" in English; is
that what you mean? Probably not, since it would be an incorrect usage.
2) If there are more than one way to do something, one way will probably be
"preferable" or "desirable". That certainly does not make the other ways
"improper"; now does it?

"Nate B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "toller"
>
> > It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
> > plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is
undesirable.
>
> This is why I wired my entire house with the same 4 ga wire coming in from
> the utility pole. Using similar logic, one thing led to another. Works
> great now, but I have yet to get to changing my lamp cords to 4 ga. I'll
> get there, though. Safest house on the block.
>
Are you a moron, or do you just play on the internet?
If you have no circuit breakers in your house, then yes, you would have to
wire the whole house in with #4.
You have a breaker box that enables you to use smaller wires, since they are
protected by breakers.
But you probably knew this already and were just being childish.

You didn't say what the current ratings were for each of them.

If you do this you need to realize that anything that you hook to a 30 amp
breaker needs to be capable of handling 30 amps. In other words all of the
wiring, outlets, switches, etc. to your saw and your dust collector needs to
be rated at 30 amps as well. That means #10 wire minimum. The reason for
this is that the wiring needs to be able to handle a short circuit anywhere
in the circuit up to the rating of the circuit breaker that's feeding it. If
you use smaller wire and hardware a short circuit will result in a fire and
a wood shop is one of the last places that you want this to happen.

I strongly recommend that you put each one on their own breaker which is
sized correctly for their full load ratings and wiring. If you bought a sub
panel without adequate space you should consider replacing it with a bigger
one.

--
Charley

All outgoing e-mail is scanned for
viruses by Norton Anti Virus 2004
"Jim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:hXmWc.218086$eM2.92453@attbi_s51...
> I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
> question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
> breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both
of
> them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I would
> let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save
the
> other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is also
> connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in the
> process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new home.
> Thank you all for your opinions.
>
>

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
>question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
>breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both of
>them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I would
>let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save the
>other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is also
>connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in the
>process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new home.
>Thank you all for your opinions.
>

If the issue is room, here is an idea you might consider: For the
"standard" circuits (such as lights, hand tools, etc.), if your box is
capable/proper for such things, consider using a couple of double-circuit
breakers -- that is, 2 20 amp breakers in the space of a normal-sixed
breaker. (RIght now, I cannot recall the name for these things.) That can
help you with the space concern. I don't know why one cannot use as many
as will actually fit in a box, but there is a limit as to how many
circuits, not just breakers, one is supposed to have in a box. Maybe it
has something to do with the amount of wire you can have in a box -- code
talks about this.

BTW, if you do go this route and use two sets of double breakers, I suggest
(though I cannot tell you that the theory and/or code supports this) that
you put them in the box so that they are on opposite sides of the 220 --
for example, put one in right above the other (at least that is how it
works in Square D boxes).

[Warning: Digression.] HTH. Either way, this is an interesting thread you
started. One of the things I love about this NG is that there is some real
expertise around here on all sorts of subjects. I would not be surprised
(notwithstanding all of the refs to SWMBO) that if someone asked what's a
good snack to eat while working in the shop, there would be recipes flying
about. Or, if someone asked whether Iran's nuclear program is a threat, a
group of woodworker/physicists would have at it. Then there would be
someone telling a story about this great cake he makes by putting the pan
on a steam pipe down at the nuclear plant. (Or is that "nucular", Mr.
President?) Myself, I always try to help here on software and other
computer stuff.

Along this same train of thought, anyone remember a long-ago Sat Night Live
routine about the ultimate hardware store? It's just a series of people
coming in asking for stuff. First the basics, such as nails. "Is that
finishing nails or common?" Then less and less typical stuff - but every
time the guy had it in stock. Maybe it was on the third shelf in the back
behind the new flame throwers, but they had it. Then, someone comes in and
asks for a chocolate violin. "Is that light chocolate or dark chocolate?"
If you didn't hang out a lot in real hardware stores as a kid, that skit
must have made no sense whatsoever. But for me, it was a great moment. --
Igor

Your dust collector is likely to draw its full rated current most of the
time. The saw will only draw max when heavily loaded. If the DC is
drawing 12 amps constant and you try ripping that 8/4 piece of oak and
the saw hits its 12 amps, sounds like your 20 amp breaker will trip, no?

bob g.

Jim wrote:

> I am the original person who posted this. I have the Grizzly G0444Z 220
> volt table saw and the Grizzly 220 volt G1029Z dust collector. Both are
> rated at 12 amps each. What I would like to do is have them both on the
> same circuit. I was confused as to using a 30 amp brkr with 10/3 wire. I
> thought 12/3 with a 20 amp brkr would handle it if I turned each on
> separately and let it get up to speed before turning on the other. It
> appears that the best solution would be to wire them separately on their own
> circuit. It is somewhat confusing to me.
> Thanks again for your help.
>
>
> "toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>"Charley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>You didn't say what the current ratings were for each of them.
>>>
>>>If you do this you need to realize that anything that you hook to a 30
>
> amp
>
>>>breaker needs to be capable of handling 30 amps. In other words all of
>
> the
>
>>>wiring, outlets, switches, etc. to your saw and your dust collector
>
> needs
>
>>to
>>
>>>be rated at 30 amps as well. That means #10 wire minimum. The reason for
>>>this is that the wiring needs to be able to handle a short circuit
>>
>>anywhere
>>
>>>in the circuit up to the rating of the circuit breaker that's feeding
>
> it.
>
>>If
>>
>>>you use smaller wire and hardware a short circuit will result in a fire
>>
>>and
>>
>>>a wood shop is one of the last places that you want this to happen.
>>>
>>>I strongly recommend that you put each one on their own breaker which is
>>>sized correctly for their full load ratings and wiring. If you bought a
>>
>>sub
>>
>>>panel without adequate space you should consider replacing it with a
>>
>>bigger
>>
>>>one.
>>>
>>
>>I agree that 2 separate circuits is the best way, but you are wrong to say
>>everything must be 30a. It only has to be 30a up to the receptacle.
>
> After
>
>>that, 20a is okay, assuming the machines are less than 20a. (In fact,
>>rereading the code, I am not even sure if the receptacle has to be 30a,
>>though it seems prudent.)
>>
>>
>
>
>

On the subject of running 3 conductors + ground. What might you want to
run on from there? Someday you may want some 110 at that location.
Planning to go back to the panel or just tap into what you've got. I
don't think many have kicked themselves because they ran too large or
too many conductors the first time. No law against installing a fused
switch or breaker at the location if the device needs more protection.

bob g.

jack wrote:

> "toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>>There is no harm to running 10/3 rather than 10/2, but unless your machines
>>actually require a neutral you don't have to.
>>
>>You have not mentioned what the machines draw, but unless they are huge 30a
>>should be plenty; I run both of mine on 20a.
>>
>>You will have to use receptacles rated for 30a, but other than that it seems
>>pretty straight forward.(though I would rather see two 20a circuits..)
>
>
> He didnt mention with ground, It needs a ground of course.
> I would check on the distance and current draw with a meter. I use all
> 12/3 with a ground. All my tools are within 30 feet of the panel.
> A cheap amp-probe can be a real eye opener on some of these 5 HP
> motors. It can also be used to tell if the start capacitor is bad on a
> motor.

"Jim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:hXmWc.218086$eM2.92453@attbi_s51...
> I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
> question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
> breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both
of
> them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I would
> let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save
the
> other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is also
> connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in the
> process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new home.
> Thank you all for your opinions.
>
>
Grizzly states the following in the manual for their G1029Z Dust Collector:
Circuit Breaker: The 2 H.P. motor will draw roughly 12 amps @ 220V. We
recommend using a 20 amp circuit breaker. Circuit breakers rated higher will
not adequately protect the motor.

I suppose this is true with any 220 amp motor.

Gary

"Gary" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:hXmWc.218086$eM2.92453@attbi_s51...
> > I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
> > question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp
double
> > breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both
> of
> > them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I
would
> > let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save
> the
> > other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is
also
> > connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in
the
> > process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new
home.
> > Thank you all for your opinions.
> >
> >
> Grizzly states the following in the manual for their G1029Z Dust
Collector:
> Circuit Breaker: The 2 H.P. motor will draw roughly 12 amps @ 220V. We
> recommend using a 20 amp circuit breaker. Circuit breakers rated higher
will
> not adequately protect the motor.
>
> I suppose this is true with any 220 amp motor.
>
> Gary
>
>
Ooops!! I mean 220 VOLT motor, obviously.

"Jim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:nUsWc.57134$mD.48161@attbi_s02...
> I am the original person who posted this. I have the Grizzly G0444Z 220
> volt table saw and the Grizzly 220 volt G1029Z dust collector. Both are
> rated at 12 amps each. What I would like to do is have them both on the
> same circuit. I was confused as to using a 30 amp brkr with 10/3 wire. I
> thought 12/3 with a 20 amp brkr would handle it if I turned each on
> separately and let it get up to speed before turning on the other. It
> appears that the best solution would be to wire them separately on their
own
> circuit. It is somewhat confusing to me.
> Thanks again for your help.
>
>
> "toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Charley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > You didn't say what the current ratings were for each of them.
> > >
> > > If you do this you need to realize that anything that you hook to a 30
> amp
> > > breaker needs to be capable of handling 30 amps. In other words all of
> the
> > > wiring, outlets, switches, etc. to your saw and your dust collector
> needs
> > to
> > > be rated at 30 amps as well. That means #10 wire minimum. The reason
for
> > > this is that the wiring needs to be able to handle a short circuit
> > anywhere
> > > in the circuit up to the rating of the circuit breaker that's feeding
> it.
> > If
> > > you use smaller wire and hardware a short circuit will result in a
fire
> > and
> > > a wood shop is one of the last places that you want this to happen.
> > >
> > > I strongly recommend that you put each one on their own breaker which
is
> > > sized correctly for their full load ratings and wiring. If you bought
a
> > sub
> > > panel without adequate space you should consider replacing it with a
> > bigger
> > > one.
> > >
> > I agree that 2 separate circuits is the best way, but you are wrong to
say
> > everything must be 30a. It only has to be 30a up to the receptacle.
> After
> > that, 20a is okay, assuming the machines are less than 20a. (In fact,
> > rereading the code, I am not even sure if the receptacle has to be 30a,
> > though it seems prudent.)
> >
> >
>
>
Congrats on your choice of equipment. I too wonder, why couldn't you use
the 30 amp circuit as a branch circuit, run it into a subpanel with two 20
amp breakers, and the run your 2 220v 20amp outlets from there.
2X12amps=24amps, well within the 30amp breaker's operating range. Just
don't start 'em both at the same time.

Gary

toller wrote:

>
> "LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:22:18 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> If you believe there is something improper about plugging a 5 A device
>> >> into a 30 A circuit, you should recuse yourself from dispensing any
>> >> further opinions in electrical threads.
>> >>
>> >"Your scheme will work fine and be perfectly legal".
>> >That sounds to you like I think it is improper?
>>
>> From the text of your post to which I had responded:
>>
>> >2) It is preferable not to have 20a components (cordsets, outlets,
>> >plugs)
> on
>> >a 30a circuit. It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
>> >plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is
>> >undesirable.
>>
>> "Preferable not to have" and "undesirable," your words, are virtually
>> synonomous with "improper" in the context of your message. So, yes,
>> that sounds to me like you think it is improper.
>>
> Is it English or reason that you have problems with?
> 1) What does "synonomous" mean? There is a word "synonymous" in English;
> is that what you mean? Probably not, since it would be an incorrect usage.
> 2) If there are more than one way to do something, one way will probably
> be
> "preferable" or "desirable". That certainly does not make the other ways
> "improper"; now does it?

Geez, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Do you realize that
you're coming across as something of a wanker with this kind of hair
splitting do you not? Something that is improper is something that one
shouldn't do. Something that is undesirable is something that one
shouldn't do. Regardless of the exact terminology you use, it appears that
you believe that plugging one's desk lamp, answering machine, or other
small, low powered device into a 20 amp socket is something that one
shouldn't do. If you believe otherwise then you should clarify this rather
than arguing that your words mean something other than most people will
percieve them to mean.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

toller wrote:

>
> "Nate B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "toller"
>>
>> > It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
>> > plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is
> undesirable.
>>
>> This is why I wired my entire house with the same 4 ga wire coming in
>> from
>> the utility pole. Using similar logic, one thing led to another. Works
>> great now, but I have yet to get to changing my lamp cords to 4 ga. I'll
>> get there, though. Safest house on the block.
>>
> Are you a moron, or do you just play on the internet?
> If you have no circuit breakers in your house, then yes, you would have to
> wire the whole house in with #4.
> You have a breaker box that enables you to use smaller wires, since they
> are protected by breakers.
> But you probably knew this already and were just being childish.

Do yourself a favor. LIGHTEN UP and learn to recognize a joke when you see
one.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

toller wrote:

>
>> shouldn't do. Regardless of the exact terminology you use, it appears
> that
>> you believe that plugging one's desk lamp, answering machine, or other
>> small, low powered device into a 20 amp socket is something that one
>> shouldn't do. If you believe otherwise then you should clarify this
> rather
>> than arguing that your words mean something other than most people will
>> percieve them to mean.
>>
> I mean precisely what I said several times: It is best to match cord size
> to the breaker size when reasonable to do so. It generally normal, safe,
> and legal to use smaller cords when it is not reasonable to match them.
> No one would dissagree with that, except to hear their own voice.
> LR picked up on this and claims that I said it is improper to use smaller
> cords than the breaker. I did not.

Sorry but I interpreted your post the same way he did. It is clear that you
have failed to successfully communicate whatever you were trying to
communicate.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Thelasian wrote:

> igor <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
>> >question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp
>> >double breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to
>> >run both of
>> >them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I
>> >would
>> >let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save
>> >the other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove
>> >is also
>> >connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in
>> >the
>> >process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new
>> >home. Thank you all for your opinions.
>> >
>>
>> If the issue is room, here is an idea you might consider: For the
>> "standard" circuits (such as lights, hand tools, etc.), if your box is
>> capable/proper for such things, consider using a couple of double-circuit
>> breakers -- that is, 2 20 amp breakers in the space of a normal-sixed
>> breaker. (RIght now, I cannot recall the name for these things.) That
>> can
>> help you with the space concern. I don't know why one cannot use as many
>> as will actually fit in a box, but there is a limit as to how many
>> circuits, not just breakers, one is supposed to have in a box. Maybe it
>> has something to do with the amount of wire you can have in a box -- code
>> talks about this.
>>
>> BTW, if you do go this route and use two sets of double breakers, I
>> suggest (though I cannot tell you that the theory and/or code supports
>> this) that you put them in the box so that they are on opposite sides of
>> the 220 -- for example, put one in right above the other (at least that
>> is how it works in Square D boxes).
>>
>> [Warning: Digression.] HTH. Either way, this is an interesting thread
>> [you
>> started. One of the things I love about this NG is that there is some
>> real
>> expertise around here on all sorts of subjects. I would not be surprised
>> (notwithstanding all of the refs to SWMBO) that if someone asked what's a
>> good snack to eat while working in the shop, there would be recipes
>> flying
>> about. Or, if someone asked whether Iran's nuclear program is a threat,
>
>
> Among the smoke-and-mirror and fear-mongering innuendo, these are some
> facts about Iran's nuclear program that aren't being mentioned:
>
> 1- The Bushehr reactor-which was started under the Shah with US
> support-is not a weapons proliferation threat since it is a lightwater
> reactor which is under IAEA safeguard. Even the IAEA itself admits
> that much.
>
> Proof:
<remainder snipped>

Proof: Israel has not blown it to flinders.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

My apologies to the NG. Give them a hint of a nanometer and they'll take a
lightyear. All I wrote was, "... if someone asked whether Iran's nuclear
program is a threat". IF! Does context mean nothing? Arghhh! That'll
teach me to ruminate about a digressive hypothetical question. Humor
people. Please. It's like that observation I stole from someone here a
while back: When it comes to base two there are 10 kinds of people. Those
who understand it and those who don't. -- Igor


On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 02:44:32 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:

>GET LOST THELASIAN THIS IS A WOODWORKERS NEWS GROUP, NOT A POLITICAL ONE
>DORK!
>
>
>"Thelasian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...

>>
>> Among the smoke-and-mirror and fear-mongering innuendo, these are some
>> facts about Iran's nuclear program that aren't being mentioned:
>>
>> 1- The Bushehr reactor-which was started under the Shah with US
>> support-is not a weapons proliferation threat since it is a lightwater
>> reactor which is under IAEA safeguard. Even the IAEA itself admits
>> that much.
[BIG snip]

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:26:38 GMT, "U-CDK_CHARLES\\Charles" <"Charles
Krug"@cdksystems.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:44:51 GMT, igor <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Along this same train of thought, anyone remember a long-ago Sat Night Live
>> routine about the ultimate hardware store? It's just a series of people
>> coming in asking for stuff. First the basics, such as nails. "Is that
>> finishing nails or common?" Then less and less typical stuff - but every
>> time the guy had it in stock. Maybe it was on the third shelf in the back
>> behind the new flame throwers, but they had it. Then, someone comes in and
>> asks for a chocolate violin. "Is that light chocolate or dark chocolate?"
>> If you didn't hang out a lot in real hardware stores as a kid, that skit
>> must have made no sense whatsoever. But for me, it was a great moment. --
>> Igor
>>
>>
>
>YES . . with Bob Newhart.
>
>"Oh . . I also need Isaac Stern's nephew"
>
>(shouts after Frank) "Hey Frank? Bring up the Stern kid while you're at
>it!"

I had forgotten who was hosting. Now I'll be able to look for the episode.
Thanks!

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
>question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
>breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both of
>them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I would
>let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save the
>other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is also
>connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in the
>process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new home.
>Thank you all for your opinions.
>


you didn't give the draw of the tools.

there's no reason they can't be on the same circuit, as long as it's
sized appropriately.

GET LOST THELASIAN THIS IS A WOODWORKERS NEWS GROUP, NOT A POLITICAL ONE
DORK!


"Thelasian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> igor <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
> > >question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp
double
> > >breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run
both of
> > >them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I
would
> > >let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save
the
> > >other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is
also
> > >connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in
the
> > >process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new
home.
> > >Thank you all for your opinions.
> > >
> >
> > If the issue is room, here is an idea you might consider: For the
> > "standard" circuits (such as lights, hand tools, etc.), if your box is
> > capable/proper for such things, consider using a couple of
double-circuit
> > breakers -- that is, 2 20 amp breakers in the space of a normal-sixed
> > breaker. (RIght now, I cannot recall the name for these things.) That
can
> > help you with the space concern. I don't know why one cannot use as
many
> > as will actually fit in a box, but there is a limit as to how many
> > circuits, not just breakers, one is supposed to have in a box. Maybe it
> > has something to do with the amount of wire you can have in a box --
code
> > talks about this.
> >
> > BTW, if you do go this route and use two sets of double breakers, I
suggest
> > (though I cannot tell you that the theory and/or code supports this)
that
> > you put them in the box so that they are on opposite sides of the 220 --
> > for example, put one in right above the other (at least that is how it
> > works in Square D boxes).
> >
> > [Warning: Digression.] HTH. Either way, this is an interesting thread
you
> > started. One of the things I love about this NG is that there is some
real
> > expertise around here on all sorts of subjects. I would not be
surprised
> > (notwithstanding all of the refs to SWMBO) that if someone asked what's
a
> > good snack to eat while working in the shop, there would be recipes
flying
> > about. Or, if someone asked whether Iran's nuclear program is a threat,
>
>
> Among the smoke-and-mirror and fear-mongering innuendo, these are some
> facts about Iran's nuclear program that aren't being mentioned:
>
> 1- The Bushehr reactor-which was started under the Shah with US
> support-is not a weapons proliferation threat since it is a lightwater
> reactor which is under IAEA safeguard. Even the IAEA itself admits
> that much.
>
> Proof:
> UN clears Iran nuclear facility
> The head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency has said
> Russia's nuclear co-operation with Iran is no longer a matter of
> concern.
> (SOURCE: BBC Online Tuesday, 29 June, 2004)
>
>
> 2- Note how the articles confuse a nuclear "weapons" program with
> a plain "nuclear program". In fact according to Article 4 of the
> Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has an "INALIENABLE RIGHT"
> to possess nuclear technology, as does any othe country. Several other
> nations use the same technology too, such as Brazil and Holland and
> Japan. So a nuclear
> program is not the same as a nuclear weapons program.
>
> 3- A common refrain is that Iran's nuclear program can't possibly be
> for anything except weapons because Iran has so much oil and natural
> gas. In fact Iran needs nuclear energy despite possessing extensive
> oil and gas because of rising domestic consumption and the reliance on
> the sale
> oil and gas for earning hard currency. The Stanford Research
> Institute advised the Shah's government that Iran could not rely on
> oil and gas for energy way back in the mid 1970's. Other nations which
> have extensive oil and gas resources also have nuclear energy - such
> as Russia and the USA. Iran has also been experimenting with
> geothermal energy and wind-turbines, as well as building its largest
> hydroengery dam.
>
> 4- There is in fact no evidence of an actual nuclear WEAPONS program
> in Iran, as admitted by the IAEA itself - there is only the INFERENCE
> that Iran COULD ONE DAY POSSIBLY use the legitimate technology to
> build a weapon of POSSIBLY desires to do so. Needless to say, ANY
> TECHNOLOGY
> "could" be used to make nukes, and so could any country. And the
> reason why Iran would want to build nukes is to DEFEND ITSELF.
>
> Proof:
> "IAEA: No evidence of Iran nukes
> VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency has found 'no
> evidence' Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons...
> SOURCE: AP Monday, November 10, 2003
>
> " 'The United States has no concrete evidence of a nuclear-weapons
> program,' Albright told me. 'It's just an inference. There's no
> smoking gun.' "
> SOURCE: New Yorker by SEYMOUR M. HERSH Issue of 2004-06-28
>
>
> "One Vienna-based diplomat who follows the IAEA expressed concern that
> hard-liners from the United States and some of its allies were
> conducting a smear campaign against Iran that was similar to what it
> did to Iraq before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam
> Hussein...David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and
> president of the Institute for Science and International Security
> (ISIS) believes Tehran wants to keep the nuclear option open, but said
> the United States had a weak case for its view that Tehran is rushing
> to complete an atomic bomb. 'They have weak evidence. I think even
> (the U.S. hard-liners) are worried they don't have a case," Albright
> said, adding that the U.S. policy of confronting and isolating Iran
> was 'bankrupt' and might push Iran to rush to get the bomb. 'The
> hard-liners in the U.S. could really trigger Iran to race to get a
> nuclear weapon,' he added."
> SOURCE: REUTERS Mon Aug 23, 2004
>
>
> 5- Iran can't be compared to Iraq: The bombing of Iraq's Osirak
> reactor did not signficantly affect Iraq's nuclear program, since the
> centrifuge sites were not bombed. If anything, it encouraged them to
> speed up the process. But in any case, Iran has signed the Additional
> Protocol which permits IAEA inspections anywhere-anytime, and Iraq had
> not. Iraq also used chemical weapons and invaded its neighbors- with
> the
> blessing and support of the USA, by the way.
>
> 6- In fact, according to the NonProliferation Treaty, not only is Iran
> entitled to have nuclear technology, but other countries are required
> to share their nuclear technology. That was the quid-pro-quo that the
> nuclear-haves and have-nots agreed upon when they signed the NPT.
> However, the nuclear-haves are not living up to their side of the
> Non-Proliferation Treaty bargain.
>
> 7- Don't mix up Iran and North Korea either: Currently, Iran has
> signed the Nonproliferation Treaty and its nuclear installations are
> all under IAEA safeguards - unlike North Korea.
>
> 8- If Iran is attacked, Iran will withdraw from the Non-Proliferation
> Treaty (as it is legally do pursuant to Article X) and will start
> working on a nuclear weapons program in earnest. Centrifuge sites will
> pop up like mushrooms all over the country - too many to be bombed -
> and the IAEA inspectors will not be around to check them. Within 6
> mos. the first nuclear test will occur, and within a year Iran's
> missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads.
>
> 9- The people of Iran will rally to support their government if Iran
> is attacked, as their nationalism is stirred by such an act. Iran's
> decision to develop nuclear deterrence will occur with the full
> support of the people of the government too, so changing governments
> will not change the decision to build nukes. Iranians know that their
> country has a right to nuclear technology, they are proud of their
> nuclear accomplishments, and have a long history of resenting foreign
> superpowers trying to deprive them of their rights.
>
> 10- Attacking Iran's nuclear installations will prove once and for all
> to the people of Iran the necessity of obtaining nuclear weapons as a
> deterrence. There are already many Iranians who believe that Iran
> should withdraw from the NonProliferation Treaty since the US has
> failed to abide by ITS OWN obligations under the same treaty (to share
> nuclear technology,
> and to get rid of its own nuclear weapons) Furthermore, Iran is
> surrounded by nuclear-armed or nuclear-capable states that threaten
> Iran's security.
>
> So yes, by all means, go ahead and bomb or try to invade Iran and see
> what happens.

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:43:39 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"LRod" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:22:18 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> If you believe there is something improper about plugging a 5 A device
>> >> into a 30 A circuit, you should recuse yourself from dispensing any
>> >> further opinions in electrical threads.
>> >>
>> >"Your scheme will work fine and be perfectly legal".
>> >That sounds to you like I think it is improper?
>>
>> From the text of your post to which I had responded:
>>
>> >2) It is preferable not to have 20a components (cordsets, outlets, plugs)
>on
>> >a 30a circuit. It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
>> >plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is undesirable.
>>
>> "Preferable not to have" and "undesirable," your words, are virtually
>> synonomous with "improper" in the context of your message. So, yes,
>> that sounds to me like you think it is improper.
>>
>Is it English or reason that you have problems with?
>1) What does "synonomous" mean? There is a word "synonymous" in English; is
>that what you mean? Probably not, since it would be an incorrect usage.
>2) If there are more than one way to do something, one way will probably be
>"preferable" or "desirable". That certainly does not make the other ways
>"improper"; now does it?

So, rather than just cop to asserting a ridiculous proposition using
apparently ambiguous English, you fall back to a spelling lame. And
you clearly knew what my typo'd "synonymous" meant and no, it was not
used incorrectly. It was exactly the correct word.

You definitely should recuse yourself from posting on electrical
threads.

- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:29 GMT, "Jim" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
>question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
>breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both of
>them at the same time? I would not turn them on at the same time. I would
>let one get up to speed and then turn the other one on. I want to save the
>other 5 spaces in my 100 amp sub panel (in which my electric stove is also
>connected to) I have for lights and other outlets for tools. I am in the
>process of building a shop in my basement. I just moved into a new home.

One word: subpanel.
Okay, two words, if you spell it: sub panel.

Solves all of your problems. Since your shop is in your basement and
your load center almost assuredly is too, it'll be duck soup.


- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

There is no harm to running 10/3 rather than 10/2, but unless your machines
actually require a neutral you don't have to.

You have not mentioned what the machines draw, but unless they are huge 30a
should be plenty; I run both of mine on 20a.

You will have to use receptacles rated for 30a, but other than that it seems
pretty straight forward.(though I would rather see two 20a circuits..)

I am the original person who posted this. I have the Grizzly G0444Z 220
volt table saw and the Grizzly 220 volt G1029Z dust collector. Both are
rated at 12 amps each. What I would like to do is have them both on the
same circuit. I was confused as to using a 30 amp brkr with 10/3 wire. I
thought 12/3 with a 20 amp brkr would handle it if I turned each on
separately and let it get up to speed before turning on the other. It
appears that the best solution would be to wire them separately on their own
circuit. It is somewhat confusing to me.
Thanks again for your help.


"toller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Charley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > You didn't say what the current ratings were for each of them.
> >
> > If you do this you need to realize that anything that you hook to a 30
amp
> > breaker needs to be capable of handling 30 amps. In other words all of
the
> > wiring, outlets, switches, etc. to your saw and your dust collector
needs
> to
> > be rated at 30 amps as well. That means #10 wire minimum. The reason for
> > this is that the wiring needs to be able to handle a short circuit
> anywhere
> > in the circuit up to the rating of the circuit breaker that's feeding
it.
> If
> > you use smaller wire and hardware a short circuit will result in a fire
> and
> > a wood shop is one of the last places that you want this to happen.
> >
> > I strongly recommend that you put each one on their own breaker which is
> > sized correctly for their full load ratings and wiring. If you bought a
> sub
> > panel without adequate space you should consider replacing it with a
> bigger
> > one.
> >
> I agree that 2 separate circuits is the best way, but you are wrong to say
> everything must be 30a. It only has to be 30a up to the receptacle.
After
> that, 20a is okay, assuming the machines are less than 20a. (In fact,
> rereading the code, I am not even sure if the receptacle has to be 30a,
> though it seems prudent.)
>
>

"Jim" writes:
> I just bought a saw and dust collector and they both run on 220. The
> question I have is, would it be OK for me to use 10/3 and a 30 amp double
> breaker and put both devices on the same circuit and be able to run both
of
> them at the same time?
<snip>

NO.

One load, one circuit protective device.

HTH


--
Lew

S/A: Challenge, The Bullet Proof Boat, (Under Construction in the Southland)
Visit: <http://home.earthlink.net/~lewhodgett> for Pictures

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 01:21:47 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:


>2) It is preferable not to have 20a components (cordsets, outlets, plugs) on
>a 30a circuit. It is legal, and is comparable to having a 10a lampcord
>plugged into a 20a circuit. It is done all the time, but is undesirable.

That's utter nonsense. There are loads of 1 and 2 A devices that are
INTENDED to be plugged into such circuits, such as answering machines,
clock radios, electric toothbrushes, coffee grinders, night lights,
speakers for your computer, caller ID boxes, battery chargers, and
myriad other small appliances and devices. There is no necessity nor
provision for anything other than standard 15 or 20 A circuits for
those devices.

To repeat, so perhaps you will understand: the circuit breaker is to
protect the wire, not the load or device. There are no 1, 2, 5, or
other small circuit breakers to do as you're alluding to in your
statement.

If you believe there is something improper about plugging a 5 A device
into a 30 A circuit, you should recuse yourself from dispensing any
further opinions in electrical threads.

- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net

I was under the impression that your house breaker is only supposed to
protect the house wiring, not the device? Doesn't Grizzly have any
overload protection? Mark L.

Gary wrote:
>
> Grizzly states the following in the manual for their G1029Z Dust Collector:
> Circuit Breaker: The 2 H.P. motor will draw roughly 12 amps @ 220V. We
> recommend using a 20 amp circuit breaker. Circuit breakers rated higher will
> not adequately protect the motor.
>
> I suppose this is true with any 220 amp motor.
>
> Gary
>
>

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:44:51 GMT, igor <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Along this same train of thought, anyone remember a long-ago Sat Night Live
> routine about the ultimate hardware store? It's just a series of people
> coming in asking for stuff. First the basics, such as nails. "Is that
> finishing nails or common?" Then less and less typical stuff - but every
> time the guy had it in stock. Maybe it was on the third shelf in the back
> behind the new flame throwers, but they had it. Then, someone comes in and
> asks for a chocolate violin. "Is that light chocolate or dark chocolate?"
> If you didn't hang out a lot in real hardware stores as a kid, that skit
> must have made no sense whatsoever. But for me, it was a great moment. --
> Igor
>
>

YES . . with Bob Newhart.

"Oh . . I also need Isaac Stern's nephew"

(shouts after Frank) "Hey Frank? Bring up the Stern kid while you're at
it!"