Do Cutler Hammer breakers work in Square D QO ?

[Brian]

Work? Do you not mean fit? Maybe, maybe not. However what you really need to ask
yourself is will Square D cover any damages caused by a Cutler hammer breaker? The
answer to that question is HELL NO! Nor will any other company cover any damages caused
by mismatched products installed by you or a qualified electrician. Good luck getting
your insurance company to cover the loss.


Will a 50A Cutler Hammer GFCI work in a Square D QO breaker box? Thanks

 

[SueMarkP]

Will a 50A Cutler Hammer GFCI work in a Square D QO breaker box? Thanks

The answer is which Cutler Hammer breaker. C-H makes quite a few lines of
breakers. They have their own 3/4" stuff (CH), the old Bryant/Westinghouse
1" stuff (BR), a classified replacement for
Challenger/Crouse-Hinds/GE/T&B/Murray/ITE/Siemens/Sq D Homeline 1" breakers
(CL), and a classified replacement for Square D QO 3/4" (CHQ). So yes they
do, but be careful in which breaker you have, and the CHQ's are harder to
find than plain ol Square D.

 

[Blue Crown]

Will a 50A Cutler Hammer GFCI work in a Square D QO breaker box? Thanks

No.

 

[Blue Crown]

Work? Do you not mean fit? Maybe, maybe not. However what you really need to ask
yourself is will Square D cover any damages caused by a Cutler hammer breaker? The
answer to that question is HELL NO! Nor will any other company cover any damages caused
by mismatched products installed by you or a qualified electrician. Good luck getting
your insurance company to cover the loss.


Will a 50A Cutler Hammer GFCI work in a Square D QO breaker box? Thanks

Breakers must be listed for use with the disconnect/panelboard as per
The National Electrical Code. The stabs on a QO breaker is different
than the Cutler-Hammer,anyway. If you check out the label in a panel,
you can read where it says it must be listed for use in that panel.

 

[Michael Shaffer]

Will a 50A Cutler Hammer GFCI work in a Square D QO breaker box? Thanks

 

[SQLit]

any
damages caused Good
luck getting

The answer is which Cutler Hammer breaker. C-H makes quite a few lines of
breakers. They have their own 3/4" stuff (CH), the old Bryant/Westinghouse
1" stuff (BR), a classified replacement for
Challenger/Crouse-Hinds/GE/T&B/Murray/ITE/Siemens/Sq D Homeline 1" breakers
(CL), and a classified replacement for Square D QO 3/4" (CHQ). So yes they
do, but be careful in which breaker you have, and the CHQ's are harder to
find than plain ol Square D.

Absolutely correct. If you get the right breaker produced by CH it will fit,
meet the UL standards and there will never be a problem.
CH is not the only company that makes replacement breakers for other
manufactures.

 

[Blue Crown]

This is the old "Challenger/Square D" fight that has been going on for many
years. C/H makes a breaker that is designed for and has been tested by U/L in
the Square D panelboards. They are "classified" 110.3(A)(7) as being "suitable"
110-3(A)(1) but Square D refuses to "label" 110.3(B) their panel as accepting
them.
These days I don't know of any 1inspectors who will fail that installation but
there are compelling arguments in NEC language either way. I agree that simply
"fitting" in the hole is not an assurance that something is OK ... but when
something is designed for that application, by a reputable manufacturer, U/L
tests it and says it is OK, I tend to believe them.
Square D is simply trying to protect their market with a label..

Greg, come to Mecklenburg and Union Counties in NC, and they will gig
you for it! Rest assured! Later...Blue Crown

 

[Blue Crown]

|>Breakers must be listed for use with the disconnect/panelboard as per
|>The National Electrical Code
|
| This is the old "Challenger/Square D" fight that has been going on for many
| years. C/H makes a breaker that is designed for and has been tested by U/L in
| the Square D panelboards. They are "classified" 110.3(A)(7) as being "suitable"
| 110-3(A)(1) but Square D refuses to "label" 110.3(B) their panel as accepting
| them.
| These days I don't know of any 1inspectors who will fail that installation but
| there are compelling arguments in NEC language either way. I agree that simply
| "fitting" in the hole is not an assurance that something is OK ... but when
| something is designed for that application, by a reputable manufacturer, U/L
| tests it and says it is OK, I tend to believe them.
| Square D is simply trying to protect their market with a label..

Of course it will never happen, but what I'd like to see is for some
authority group like NFPA and NEMA together design a whole new standard
for pluggable panel boards, and mandate that standard in a few years
after the design is released (e.g. for all new installations and all
upgrades that involve replacing a panel). It would be a single standard
that would be fully cross compatible between manufacturers, who would be
held to high standards for quality in their manufacture.

True Phil, but the "lobbyists" for the manufacturers would NEVER let
that happen! Just like "quick-wire" devices (receptacles and switches)
are still allowed, and I have been on many a service call to repair
where they have gotten loose and backed out of the holes. Oh well,"
Mine is not to reason why, mine is but to do or die!" Later...Blue
Crown

 

[Brian]

Start a new thread!

True Phil, but the "lobbyists" for the manufacturers would NEVER let
that happen!

The Code Making Panels are dominated by manufacturwer reps from the companies
who make products regulated by the articles that CMP oversees so it is not
surprising that things work out the way they do. If you ask the reps they will
say that without manufacturer representation nothing new would ever be accepted
into the code and we would still be using knob and tube.
That can be demonstrated by looking at jurisdictions that are dominated by
unions who refuse to accept labor saving wiring methods. There are still places
that won't let you use Type NM (aka Romex) and that is almost a century old.
(patented in 1922)