Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 67

Thread: Hazardous Classification How to tell

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    3 Hr 2 Min from Winged Horses
    Posts
    14,196
    Quote Originally Posted by AKElectrician View Post
    I have a lot more flammable material's in my single car garage, so do lots of others. I'd be willing to bet some people have all three classes in some single car garages. Gun powder, gas, painting supplies, wood dust, animal feed, welding bottles.... Forgot to add most also have the boiler in there also (ignition source)
    My point is that until you or a qualified person in hazardous locations determines if it is classified or not, I cannot say whether romex or rigid is needed to wire your garage.

    Not that you are asking, I was just presenting a scenario.
    "Electricity is really just organized lightning." George Carlin


    Derek

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Soldotna, AK, USA
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by rbalex View Post
    Possibly, but see Section 500.1 IN No.1.
    I understand that gunpowder isn't included in the NEC if that's what your trying to get at. I will say the 1 military munitions installation I have seen (bomb storage facility, empty, Adak Island) they had explosion proof wiring throughout it. Seabee's sure can build some stuff.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by codequestion View Post
    If you arent quailfies then dont answer and please dont insult share your knowledge.

    Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
    Actually, I am reviewer and noticed matrials post #1 on plans. I made comment see nec 2014 article 500 to the designer to provide class division and designer came back saying he looked thru article 500 and not been able to determine min quantities of chemicals req to produce vapor in the air in quantities sufficent to produce explosive or ignitble mixtures aricle 500.5 (B). And so i came to this thread to see if anyone else know anything about this.

    Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
    Last edited by codequestion; 02-23-18 at 05:39 PM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    5,733
    Quote Originally Posted by codequestion View Post
    Actually, I am reviewer and noticed matrials post #1 on plans. I made comment see nec 2014 article 500 to the designer to provide class division and designer came back saying he looked thru article 500 and not been able to determine min quantities of chemicals req to produce vapor in the air in quantities sufficent to produce explosive or ignitble mixtures aricle 500.5 (B). And so i came to this thread to see if anyone else know anything about this.

    Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
    Having been around labs of various types for the first decade of my professional life, this sort of thing would likely have been Class I Div 1 for the interior of the hood, standard for the rest of the lab.

    It is incumbent on the designer to present you with the necessary information to conduct your review. If you start instructing him/her on means and methods, you become part of the design process and your sovereign immunity may evaporate.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    5,180
    Quote Originally Posted by codequestion View Post
    Actually, I am reviewer and noticed matrials post #1 on plans. I made comment see nec 2014 article 500 to the designer to provide class division and designer came back saying he looked thru article 500 and not been able to determine min quantities of chemicals req to produce vapor in the air in quantities sufficent to produce explosive or ignitble mixtures aricle 500.5 (B). And so i came to this thread to see if anyone else know anything about this.

    Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
    You keep changing the scenario. Why were you asking in the OP what the Class it was? At least the designer was able to tell you it was Class I by citing Section 500.5(B).

    If you are going to be a plans reviewer for potential classified (hazardous) locations, you had best become very familiar with Section 500.4, especially 500.4(B) and its INs. Except for Articles 511 through 516, You can't determine a location's electrical area classification from the NEC. Hint: If the facility is actually a laboratory you need to review NFPA 45. Other Standards will apply for other installations.

    You should have asked the designer what Standard was used to classify the location.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fl
    Posts
    17,140
    Quote Originally Posted by codequestion View Post
    I get proects because i am good at electrical
    That doesn't appear to be the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by codequestion View Post
    If you arent quailfies then dont answer and please dont insult share your knowledge.
    Those trying to help you are with no doubt more qualified than you are.


    Quote Originally Posted by codequestion View Post
    Not really. I read the code if their is something i missed. Not all the time i do what is being said on here. Anywaus i got my answer on this one.
    You claim to be an EE, not an EIT, with that said, how did you get through the "professional writing" part of your exam?

    Quote Originally Posted by rbalex View Post
    You keep changing the scenario.
    That is his/her SOP.

    Quote Originally Posted by rbalex View Post
    Why were you asking in the OP what the Class it was? At least the designer was able to tell you it was Class I by citing Section 500.5(B).

    If you are going to be a plans reviewer for potential classified (hazardous) locations, you had best become very familiar with Section 500.4, especially 500.4(B) and its INs. Except for Articles 511 through 516, You can't determine a location's electrical area classification from the NEC. Hint: If the facility is actually a laboratory you need to review NFPA 45. Other Standards will apply for other installations.

    You should have asked the designer what Standard was used to classify the location.
    It would behoove you to listen to Bob's advice.

    Roger
    Moderator

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by roger View Post
    That doesn't appear to be the case.

    Those trying to help you are with no doubt more qualified than you are.


    You claim to be an EE, not an EIT, with that said, how did you get through the "professional writing" part of your exam?

    It would behoove you to listen to Bob's advice.

    Roger
    Last one reviewer is correct.

    Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fl
    Posts
    17,140
    Quote Originally Posted by codequestion View Post
    Last one reviewer is correct.
    Meaning what?

    Roger
    Moderator

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    MD, USA
    Posts
    628
    [QUOTE=roger;1898848]Meaning what?

    I am reviewer EE with EIT.

    Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fl
    Posts
    17,140
    [QUOTE=codequestion;1898850]
    Quote Originally Posted by roger View Post
    Meaning what?

    I am reviewer as EIT.
    Why does your profile say you are an EE?

    Roger
    Moderator

Posting Permissions

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