Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Powder coating hazardous location classification

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Carthage, MO
    Posts
    4

    Powder coating hazardous location classification

    Classification for area around actual powder coating booth. Area is used for storage of excess powder for the process.
    Thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Northern illinois
    Posts
    15,584
    Quote Originally Posted by pnorb409 View Post
    Classification for area around actual powder coating booth. Area is used for storage of excess powder for the process.
    Thanks
    Is a powder coating booth typically classified? I have seen several and I don't recall they looked like there was anything special going on.

    But if it is classified it is likely Class II and the requirements there are not as obvious as Class I.
    Bob

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    4,878
    Quote Originally Posted by petersonra View Post
    Is a powder coating booth typically classified? I have seen several and I don't recall they looked like there was anything special going on.

    But if it is classified it is likely Class II and the requirements there are not as obvious as Class I.
    Depending on the actual material is could be a dust under Articles 502 and 516. The primary applicable classification Standards are NFPA 34 and 499. Both are referenced in Section 500.4(B) Informational Note No. 2. As usual, it takes understanding the process and geometry of the installation.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    20

    Produce combustible powder or dust.

    NFPA 484
    Standard for Combustible Metals-metal alloys are subjected to processing or finishing operations that produce combustible powder or dust.

    This standard applies to the production, processing, finishing, handling, recycling, storage, and use of all metals and alloys that are in a form that is capable of combustion or explosion.

    Of course if it is sugar dust - Sugar-land Texas & explosions can give you a great deal of information based on operation of horizontal conveyors, motors , bearing temperatures on and on.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    4,878
    Quote Originally Posted by nec_addicted View Post
    NFPA 484
    Standard for Combustible Metals-metal alloys are subjected to processing or finishing operations that produce combustible powder or dust.

    This standard applies to the production, processing, finishing, handling, recycling, storage, and use of all metals and alloys that are in a form that is capable of combustion or explosion.

    Of course if it is sugar dust - Sugar-land Texas & explosions can give you a great deal of information based on operation of horizontal conveyors, motors , bearing temperatures on and on.
    You are aware that NFPA 484 says nothing about classifying hazardous locations in the sense of Articles 500, 502, and 516 and is useless with regard to the original post, right? In fact you don't even know the coating material is metallic.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    20

    Powder

    Then nothing in a Class II is relevant with out groups E,F,G you are the one that brought up dust not the original post message. So you are a bit off key Mr. 502 everything in 502 in fact all forms of Special Hazardous are derived from Article 500.

    Or did you forget Article are the proper form to address NEC Code?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    20

    Powder

    So I guess in all fairness I gravitated to your suggestion dust is what the original post intended evn though he did not ask taht question his question was about powder.

    Since powder does not appear to be a term NFPA 70 NEC articles why are you allowed to make the ruling your post has any validity what so ever?

    The framers of thew forum charter rules discourage offering assistance with non compliant NEC terms and definitions and article 500 specifically disclaims any evaluations "This code does not classify areas where explosive materials such as , dynamite and blasting powder are present." NFPA 70 code under 500.1 Scope"... only limited locations classified as Class I, Class II, Class III , which are further addressed in Articles 501,502 and 503."

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    4,878
    Quote Originally Posted by nec_addicted View Post
    So I guess in all fairness I gravitated to your suggestion dust is what the original post intended evn though he did not ask taht question his question was about powder.

    Since powder does not appear to be a term NFPA 70 NEC articles why are you allowed to make the ruling your post has any validity what so ever?

    The framers of thew forum charter rules discourage offering assistance with non compliant NEC terms and definitions and article 500 specifically disclaims any evaluations "This code does not classify areas where explosive materials such as , dynamite and blasting powder are present." NFPA 70 code under 500.1 Scope"... only limited locations classified as Class I, Class II, Class III , which are further addressed in Articles 501,502 and 503."
    You may wish to read the Scope of Article 516.:

    516.1 Scope. This article covers the regular or frequent
    application of flammable liquids, combustible liquids, and
    combustible powders by spray operations and the application
    of flammable liquids, or combustible liquids at temperatures
    above their flashpoint, by dipping, coating, printing,
    or other means.
    It appears reading for comprehension is not you strong suit. Your reference to NFPA 484 still doesn't apply to the original post (OP) and my initial response didn't say the material was a dust, simply that it could be and Articles 502 and 516 would apply and the appropriate classification Standards are NFPA 34 and 499.

    I also mentioned "... it takes understanding the process and geometry of the installation", which you obviously don't. I admit I don't either - but I do know what properly applies.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    15
    I don't know the process either.

    However, I agree that NFPA 34 and NFPA 499 are excellent places to start looking.

    Possible others:

    - NFPA 652 supports NFPA 499, and so may very well be useful. (I believe it is now recommended reading per the NFPA.)

    - "Booth" implies spray application, in which case NFPA 33 may be useful.

    - NFPA 484 will probably apply if the powdered material is metallic.

    - NFPA 654 does not deal with area classification, but does deal with managing the hazard. You may want to read it to see if any useful related information is in there.

    Feel free to eliminate / disregard any that do not apply.

    For my part, unless it is a simple application, I usually read as much as I can. There is a lot of good guidance, the trick is finding it.
    Last edited by IntrinsicSafety; 09-30-17 at 12:38 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •