Search:

Type: Posts; User: rbalex

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.05 seconds.

  1. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    261

    That is essentially correct for multiconductor...

    That is essentially correct for multiconductor cables with "...a gas/vaportight continuous sheath..." . [Such as Type TC] In fact, if the Division 2 enclosure wasn't required to be explosionproof, it...
  2. Replies
    4$$
    Views
    152

    If the product is listed as Type SO and is being...

    If the product is listed as Type SO and is being installed per Sections 400.7(A)(10), 501.10(A)(2) and 501.140 it is acceptable.
  3. Replies
    4$$
    Views
    152

    I've been referring to Section 501.15 FPN/IN No....

    I've been referring to Section 501.15 FPN/IN No. 1 a lot lately; it and FPN/IN No. 2 offer a bit of insight about seals and how liquids, gases, and vapors can migrate through a cable.

    For all...
  4. Replies
    2$$
    Views
    92

    If I understand you correctly, I believe you're...

    If I understand you correctly, I believe you're looking in the wrong Section. See the last paragraph of Section 501.15(A)(1).
  5. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    261

    You are under the 2014 NEC and Section 501.15(E)...

    You are under the 2014 NEC and Section 501.15(E) has been wordsmithed in the last few Code editions to make it as confusing as possible. For Division 2, you must parse 501.15(E)(1) very carefully to...
  6. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    261

    It will depend on what your AHJ believes is...

    It will depend on what your AHJ believes is acceptable. If it requires a listed or labeled product you may as well return to the main rule.

    Otherwise, there are a few alternate means that should...
  7. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    174

    Just a comment. "Chico" and other explosionproof...

    Just a comment. "Chico" and other explosionproof sealing compounds don't necessarily "seal" as well as you might expect. While water alone won't damage it, it won't necessarily hold it that well...
  8. Thread: Gas Dispensing

    by rbalex
    Replies
    7$$
    Views
    409

    It's fine. There's no other practical location...

    It's fine. There's no other practical location for the seal to be accessible. See Section 501.15(C)(1).
  9. Thread: Gas Dispensing

    by rbalex
    Replies
    7$$
    Views
    409

    I've mentioned before that a problem with Article...

    I've mentioned before that a problem with Article 514 is that it is basically controlled by a different Technical Committee than CMP 14. By most common area classification practices the underground...
  10. A friend pointed out the second bullet should...

    A friend pointed out the second bullet should have referenced 501.115(B)(3​).
  11. One of the reasons, "This Code is not intended as...

    One of the reasons, "This Code is not intended as a design specification or an instruction manual for untrained persons" [Section 90.1(A), NEC 2014] is the CMPs are not obligated to explain why a...
  12. Replies
    3$$
    Views
    296

    They are called explosionproof flexible couplings...

    They are called explosionproof flexible couplings. You will still have to seal the enclosure.
  13. The "basic" marking rules are in Section 500.8...

    The "basic" marking rules are in Section 500.8 with some temperature specific rules in Subsections 500.8 (C)&(D). [See especially Subsections 500.8 (C)(4), (5) and (6).]

    There is no general...
  14. Replies
    4$$
    Views
    205

    This is a typical manufacturer's application...

    This is a typical manufacturer's application diagram.

    They do practically guarantee that flammable gases/vapors will enter an explosionproof enclosure. Then again, the flammable gases/vapors will...
  15. Replies
    2$$
    Views
    327

    Read Section 501.5 carefully. Also recognize ATEX...

    Read Section 501.5 carefully. Also recognize ATEX itself is meaningless; it is just another EU trade scheme to exclude US/NRTL products.
  16. Replies
    10$$
    Views
    503

    There are definitely limits to the application....

    There are definitely limits to the application. As I said, that's a "philosophical", not necessarily inherently automatic, concept.

    Personally, I prefer passive (explosionproof, hermetically...
  17. Replies
    10$$
    Views
    503

    I'm not a big fan of Type X or Y schemes...

    I'm not a big fan of Type X or Y schemes especially but, philosophically, a purged/pressurized application that forces the purging medium throughout an external device should be suitable.
  18. A word of caution: With respect to a 'Type "Ex p"...

    A word of caution: With respect to a 'Type "Ex p" (purged/pressurized)' protection technique, do not attempt to apply IEC/CENELEC/EN (etc.) Zone 22 concepts to NEC Class II, Division 2 - or even NEC...
  19. Replies
    11$$
    Views
    836

    You have a rather arcane application and I...

    You have a rather arcane application and I confess, I was inclined to say "Trust me and don't worry about it." However, after reviewing the cut-sheet link I am concerned about how the Division 2...
  20. Replies
    11$$
    Views
    836

    Not usually; but specifying engineers should get...

    Not usually; but specifying engineers should get it right.
  21. Replies
    11$$
    Views
    836

    Read Section 500.8(C)(2) and its FPN/IN...

    Read Section 500.8(C)(2) and its FPN/IN carefully.

    With regard to the pump motor only, in Division 2, the Group is irrelevant. [See Section 501.125(B)] For other ancillary pump equipment, the...
  22. Thread: MC Cable

    by rbalex
    Replies
    4$$
    Views
    653

    All Type MC-HL is rated for Class I, Division 1. ...

    All Type MC-HL is rated for Class I, Division 1. NOT all Type MC is MC-HL though; it is a very specific construction.
  23. Thread: MC Cable

    by rbalex
    Replies
    4$$
    Views
    653

    Class I, Division 1 wiring methods are not...

    Class I, Division 1 wiring methods are not limited to RMC or IMC.
  24. Replies
    11$$
    Views
    927

    Simply using CGDS is tacit recognition the...

    Simply using CGDS is tacit recognition the location is at least Class I, Division 2. Otherwise, why do you have detection if you don't believe the presence of gas/vapor is a reasonable possibility.
    ...
  25. Replies
    11$$
    Views
    927

    Combustible Gas Detection System. (CGDS) [Section...

    Combustible Gas Detection System. (CGDS) [Section 500.7(K)] is a protection technique, it does not alter the classification. In fact, if you will read Subparts (1), (2), or (3) carefully, they simply...
Results 1 to 25 of 200
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4