User Tag List

Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Article 513 question

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Article 513 question

    Article 513 lists rules for aircraft hangers. Section 513.7(c) includes receptacles in a list of those items which may produce arcs. This section then goes on to say that any of this equipment, including receptacles, can be installed if "totally enclosed".

    I found a Navy spec sheet that shows a totally enclosed receptacle, which is a 20amp outlet in a formed handy box, with a metal cover. See attachment.

    I want to know if this setup (attachment) meets the intent of 513.7(c). If it does not, can someone supply a link to equipment which would meet it? I know explosion-proof equipment would, but I want something that is not explosion-proof.

    Thanks

    Rick
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Freeport Texas
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Aircraft Hangers

    513.4 is probably what you need to read, however the location and classification is also a big help. Look at the requirements in 513.3. you can then find out what the listing is for that device you have to determine if it fits your application.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Placerville, CA, USA
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I do not see how that design would do anything to mitigate arcs generated when you plug or unplug a load.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Golddigger, that is what I wondered.

    So am I looking at an explosion-proof receptacle, pin & sleeve, etc...?

    Rick

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Placerville, CA, USA
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rick5280 View Post
    Golddigger, that is what I wondered.

    So am I looking at an explosion-proof receptacle, pin & sleeve, etc...?

    Rick
    That would be my guess, although it is not my area of expertise. Just putting a standard receptacle inside an enclosure would require you to shut down activity just to open the box and plug something in.
    You can have a non sparking connector that is not necessarily explosion proof.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "You can have a non sparking connector that is not necessarily explosion proof."

    Can you provide examples of this?

    Thanks

    Rick

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Placerville, CA, USA
    Posts
    20,312
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rick5280 View Post
    "You can have a non sparking connector that is not necessarily explosion proof."

    Can you provide examples of this?

    Thanks

    Rick
    No....

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ok, thanks anyway. I will keep looking for the correct equipment.

    Thanks again, and Happy Thanksgiving !!

    Rick

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    7,059
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm looking at 513.7E and F in the 2011 code.

    I don't completely understand it, but it mentions locking type receptacles IF they are more than 18" above the floor, and more than 5' away from engines or fuel tanks. So locking type receptacles are required for areas outside 513.3 B and C areas.

    But I'm not sure what they mean by a stanchion, rostrum, or dock. Maybe they are saying the locking type outlets are allowed if there is a platform that keeps sparks from falling into the area up to 18" AFF?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Mission Viejo, CA
    Posts
    5,625
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I basically endorse steve66's Post 9. For it not being an "area of expertise", GoldDigger also did a respectable job based only on the text offered.

    As is often the case, the "key" is reading a whole sentence or, in this case, a whole clause: "... shall be of the totally enclosed type or constructed so as to prevent the escape of sparks or hot metal particles." Virtually any "break before disconnect" will meet this requirement. Many "twist-locking" types will.
    "Bob"
    Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
    Answers based on 2017 NEC unless otherwise noted.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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