Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: TEFC motors in Class I, Divison 2

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    23,817

    TEFC motors in Class I, Divison 2

    I always thought that the code language in 510.125(B)(3) was clear that you could use a TEFC motor in that classification. (with attention to the ignition temperature of the products involved and the operating temperature of the motor)

    I was at a presentation from a GE application engineer yesterday, and his position is that any motor used in that classification must be specifically approved by the motor manufacturer for that use.
    Don, Illinois
    (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    5,249
    Quote Originally Posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
    I always thought that the code language in 510.125(B)(3) was clear that you could use a TEFC motor in that classification. (with attention to the ignition temperature of the products involved and the operating temperature of the motor)

    I was at a presentation from a GE application engineer yesterday, and his position is that any motor used in that classification must be specifically approved by the motor manufacturer for that use.
    And what did he base that on? It sure ain't Code language.
    Last edited by rbalex; 06-22-18 at 09:32 PM.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    5,249
    Basically GE is the only member of the NEMA MG-1 Group to get their motors listed for Class I, Division 2. When they did it with switchgear years ago, OSHA enforced it. They seem to be hoping for a repeat.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    5,249
    I just got off the phone with an old CMP14 buddy. He is still on the Panel. He threw a flag on the GE story. It ain’t true now and won’t be in 2020 either.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    68
    <message deleted>

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    23,817
    Thanks Bob.
    I sent a note to the presenter with the code language and he was going to send it on their engineering group. His comment, was just that that motors are not suitable for used in that classification unless they are specifically marked as such. He gave nothing technical to back it up.

    Maybe their listing is the reason is the reason he said that.
    Don, Illinois
    (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NE Nebraska
    Posts
    38,517
    Quote Originally Posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
    Thanks Bob.
    I sent a note to the presenter with the code language and he was going to send it on their engineering group. His comment, was just that that motors are not suitable for used in that classification unless they are specifically marked as such. He gave nothing technical to back it up.

    Maybe their listing is the reason is the reason he said that.
    Simple solution, tell him you won't be using GE motors for such applications
    I live for today, I'm just a day behind.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    5,249
    Quote Originally Posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
    Thanks Bob.
    I sent a note to the presenter with the code language and he was going to send it on their engineering group. His comment, was just that that motors are not suitable for used in that classification unless they are specifically marked as such. He gave nothing technical to back it up.

    Maybe their listing is the reason is the reason he said that.
    You're welcome. I actually just discussed this recently in this thread beginning in Post #19. The only valid "marking" required is detailed in Section 430.7(A)(5).
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    10

    TEFC Motor are not listed for the C!D1 or C1d2

    The motor has to be listed for the environment they are used in, the Code may not specifically reference this but MSHA has a section in CFR 30 for motors, in order to considered explosion proof. Common sense is you can not install a motor that can create a hazard in the environment they are installed in, simple enough, the listing has to match the classification it is used. Non-Classified motors should not be used in classified locations unless they are listed an tested for that area. My 2 cents worth.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    68
    As long as you don't have a centrifugal switch that can arc, internal overloads that can arc, or motor space heater leads that exceed 80% of the lowest AIT, common sense tells me that the motor would not be an ignition source.

Posting Permissions

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