Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Semantics of "Area Classification" and who should determined Areas

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,092
    I have looked for training focusing on NFPA 497, RP 500, or focusing on NFPA 70 Article 500, but have not found anything.
    Time is of the essence, and I am low on essence. ~ Graham Hill

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    4,916
    It may be of some interest that the members of the Technical Committees that edit/author the various Standards that I mentioned earlier in Post #16; i.e., CMP 14 (NEC Arts 500 to 516), NFPA Technical Committee on Electrical Equipment in Chemical Atmospheres (NFPA 497) and API Subcommittee on Electrical Equipment (API RP 500) virtually all have "electrical" backgrounds. The API SOEE exclusively in fact.

    I've said many times before Hazardous (Classified) Locations is NOT rocket science. It isn't trivial either; it DOES take some thought but any relatively competent individual can learn it.

    NFPA occasionally offers training for Hazardous Locations - every instructor I've known is "electrical".
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    127
    I work in wastewater and water plant design. Most (9/10) times we (Electrical/I&C) are tasked with identifying classification types and areas, showing them on our plans. It impacts electrical/instrumentation installation costs more so then any other, with exception to perhaps HVAC/mechanical having to add ventilation systems. I think for this reason we often lead the discussion on the subject.

    We have made a push to make it a design team discussion with mixed results.

Posting Permissions

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