Ecmweb 7608 Nec Logo 2013promogifcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay
Ecmweb 7608 Nec Logo 2013promogifcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay
Ecmweb 7608 Nec Logo 2013promogifcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay
Ecmweb 7608 Nec Logo 2013promogifcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay
Ecmweb 7608 Nec Logo 2013promogifcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay1pngcropdisplay

Watch Out for that Voltage Drop

July 22, 2015
To improve energy efficiency, follow the recommendations in NEC Informational Notes, even though they are not requirements of the NEC.

The NEC provides a recommendation on voltage drop for branch circuits in Informational Note No. 4 following 210.19(A). A similar recommendation for feeders exists in Informational Note No. 2 following 210.2(A). Informational Note No. 1, following 310.15(A)(1), states that the ampacity tables don’t take voltage drop into consideration. And then it refers you to the two Informational Notes just mentioned.

There are two problems with these Informational Notes. The first problem is that these recommendations are not NEC requirements. They exist in the Informational Notes. Often during budget-cutting design discussions, the mentality is to do what the NEC requires and no more.

If you size conductors per the ampacity tables and aren’t required to size them any larger to accommodate voltage drop, your “by the ampacity tables” design will pass inspection. If you try to use larger conductors based on “you’ll save energy,” you might not be persuasive. These Informational Notes don’t require you to spend the money on “oversizing” conductors. So, the “thinking” goes, meet the NEC minimums and you’ve done a good job of engineering because you didn’t spend money unnecessarily.

The second problem is these Information Notes are intended to help you size conductors to “provide a reasonable efficiency of operation.” The numbers provided are 3% for any branch circuit and 5% for the combined voltage drop of feeder and branch-circuit conductors. That’s generally reasonable, but rarely optimal. In some environments, it’s not acceptable.

If we turn to Art. 647 [Sensitive Electronic Equipment], we see there is actually an NEC requirement to size conductors so as to limit voltage drop. But the limits aren’t 3% and 5% — they are half those values (i.e., 1.5% and 2.5%). Article 647 provides the requirements for “sensitive electronic equipment.” Limiting voltage drop to these values for other types of circuits will probably get you pretty close to optimal.

The limits in Art. 647 are good ones to use, if one project goal is to have an energy-efficient installation. You can point out that those values are in the NEC. Although they are for “sensitive electronic equipment,” you can easily argue that they make sense for other types of circuits where energy efficiency is a desired outcome.

There may be practical and cost considerations that make these values difficult to achieve throughout the entire distribution system. A couple of “tricks” can help you achieve something close, even if budget or other considerations get in the way. One trick is to make your home runs larger, but not upsize all of the conductors (larger conductors for the longer runs). Another is to distribute at a higher voltage for as long as you can (higher voltage means less drop in a given length).

About the Author

Mark Lamendola

Mark is an expert in maintenance management, having racked up an impressive track record during his time working in the field. He also has extensive knowledge of, and practical expertise with, the National Electrical Code (NEC). Through his consulting business, he provides articles and training materials on electrical topics, specializing in making difficult subjects easy to understand and focusing on the practical aspects of electrical work.

Prior to starting his own business, Mark served as the Technical Editor on EC&M for six years, worked three years in nuclear maintenance, six years as a contract project engineer/project manager, three years as a systems engineer, and three years in plant maintenance management.

Mark earned an AAS degree from Rock Valley College, a BSEET from Columbia Pacific University, and an MBA from Lake Erie College. He’s also completed several related certifications over the years and even was formerly licensed as a Master Electrician. He is a Senior Member of the IEEE and past Chairman of the Kansas City Chapters of both the IEEE and the IEEE Computer Society. Mark also served as the program director for, a board member of, and webmaster of, the Midwest Chapter of the 7x24 Exchange. He has also held memberships with the following organizations: NETA, NFPA, International Association of Webmasters, and Institute of Certified Professional Managers.

Voice your opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of EC&M, create an account today!

Sponsored Recommendations

Electrical Conduit Comparison Chart

CHAMPION FIBERGLASS electrical conduit is a lightweight, durable option that provides lasting savings when compared to other materials. Compare electrical conduit types including...

Don't Let Burn-Through Threaten Another Data Center or Utility Project

Get the No Burn-Through Elbow eGuide to learn many reasons why Champion Fiberglass elbows will enhance your data center and utility projects today.

Considerations for Direct Burial Conduit

Installation type plays a key role in the type of conduit selected for electrical systems in industrial construction projects. Above ground, below ground, direct buried, encased...

How to Calculate Labor Costs

Most important to accurately estimating labor costs is knowing the approximate hours required for project completion. Learn how to calculate electrical labor cost.