Search:

Type: Posts; User: rbalex

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.04 seconds.

  1. Replies
    1$$
    Views
    146

    If this were the NEC, there would be no need to...

    If this were the NEC, there would be no need to mark the enclosure for Class I, Division 2. Canada’s marking requirements are generally very similar but not identical; especially after adopting IEC...
  2. Replies
    1$$
    Views
    225

    This may sound petty but bear with me. Has the...

    This may sound petty but bear with me. Has the area classification been "properly documented" as required by Section 500.4(A) and what standard was used to determine the classification? See Section...
  3. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    342

    See Annex B.4 and following.

    See Annex B.4 and following.
  4. Replies
    28$$
    Views
    1,120

    Is it on the Dalton Highway? If so, it's not too...

    Is it on the Dalton Highway? If so, it's not too far from my hometown (Fairbanks).
  5. Replies
    28$$
    Views
    1,120

    If you go to the history of what became MC-HL...

    If you go to the history of what became MC-HL [NEC 1996] it was proposed by the API Subcommittee on Electrical Equipment (SOEE). I was the instigator within the SOEE.


    I was also a major...
  6. Replies
    28$$
    Views
    1,120

    As the "grandfather" of MC-HL, I concur with...

    As the "grandfather" of MC-HL, I concur with iceworm. I would confirm that it is indeed MC-HL (hard to read the label) although it looks like it.
  7. In Class I, Division 2, it is only an installed...

    In Class I, Division 2, it is only an installed cost evaluation. (Unless there is a need for a "warm-fuzzy' feeling from MC.)
  8. Since Part 5.4 applies to both Type Z and Y...

    Since Part 5.4 applies to both Type Z and Y systems, it would be helpful to know which you are using; however, in absence of that knowledge, Subpart 5.4.2 is an alternative to Subpart 5.4.1 and...
  9. I no longer have access to ANSI/ISA-12.12.1;...

    I no longer have access to ANSI/ISA-12.12.1; however, nonincendive systems place limits on voltage, current, thermal effects and overall Minimum Ignition Energy (MIE).
  10. Replies
    7$$
    Views
    674

    Sorry for my tardy reply. This is from the IEEE...

    Sorry for my tardy reply. This is from the IEEE Std 100 - 1996 edition:

    I have always treated the vaults you described as "manholes" in my refinery experience.
  11. Replies
    2$$
    Views
    894

    First, in Canada, you are most likely dealing...

    First, in Canada, you are most likely dealing with Zones rather than Divisions.

    Second, Class I equipment is not automatically rated for Class II [See NEC Section 502.5 for example.]

    Third, an...
  12. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    1,166

    That's fine - remember the rules are only...

    That's fine - remember the rules are only similar, not identical.
  13. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    1,166

    I understand your concern - so you can either...

    I understand your concern - so you can either trust me and basically treat NI for Class I, Division 2 as you would IS for Division 1 which gets a whole Article for itself in Article 504 OR you can...
  14. Replies
    5$$
    Views
    1,166

    I believe your answer is in Section 501.10(B)(3)....

    I believe your answer is in Section 501.10(B)(3).

    Basically, a nonincendive system in Class I, Division 2 can be installed as if it were in an unclassified location. The additional relevant...
  15. Replies
    10$$
    Views
    772

    As kwired mentioned XLPE is available in several...

    As kwired mentioned XLPE is available in several constructions, so is EPR (ethylene propylene rubber). I personally prefer XHHW-2.
  16. Replies
    10$$
    Views
    772

    SIS is very flexible - and soft - and not...

    SIS is very flexible - and soft - and not generally suitable for pulling through a raceway.
  17. Replies
    10$$
    Views
    772

    Not in and of itself. That is a determination of...

    Not in and of itself. That is a determination of the NRTL.
  18. Replies
    10$$
    Views
    772

    See Table 310.104(A). It is possible the wire is...

    See Table 310.104(A). It is possible the wire is multi-labeled, but if it is SIS only, it is for switchboards and switchgear only.
  19. Replies
    1$$
    Views
    716

    There are several other manufacturer/fabricators...

    There are several other manufacturer/fabricators here that are better suited to answer this question. While I have certainly required vendors to obtain NRTL certification, I don't tell them or the...
  20. Thread: C1D1GC

    by rbalex
    Replies
    5$$
    Views
    1,064

    I was just saying most "standard" RMC [Article...

    I was just saying most "standard" RMC [Article 344] unions (not Erickson types) are already suitable for Class I, Division 1. Of course, replacing them is still OK.

    I'm sorry I didn't mention it...
  21. Thread: C1D1GC

    by rbalex
    Replies
    5$$
    Views
    1,064

    If I understand your solution correctly, the only...

    If I understand your solution correctly, the only thing else you need to consider is a boundary seal somewhere. [Section 501.15(A)(4)] The existing union may also already be suitable.
  22. Replies
    1$$
    Views
    911

    Question 1. No. There is no benefit sealing a...

    Question 1. No. There is no benefit sealing a non-explosionproof enclosure. See Section 501.15(B)(1). The key word is required.

    Question 2. If the device is suitable for Division 2, see Section...
  23. Replies
    2$$
    Views
    921

    Possibly. The heater itself may actually mitigate...

    Possibly. The heater itself may actually mitigate the classification, but the piping to the heater may also affect the classification. In fact, it might require a Division 1 classification. Hard to...
  24. Thread: C1D1GC

    by rbalex
    Replies
    5$$
    Views
    1,064

    You have some serious issues beginning with...

    You have some serious issues beginning with Section 501.10(A)(3). Hint: No arching devices in the conduit run is pretty much irrelevant for non-IS Class I, Division 1. Check Section 501.10(A)(1) as...
  25. Thread: Class 1 Div 2?

    by rbalex
    Replies
    6$$
    Views
    1,504

    If I were to do the electrical area...

    If I were to do the electrical area classification around this process, I would require a great deal more than this. I would probably spend a day interviewing the process, mechanical, and piping...
Results 1 to 25 of 200
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4