User Tag List

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: Electrical Room 1200 Amps and Over

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Clark County, NV
    Posts
    2,083
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ...While this may be OK code-wise, neither I nor my colleague feel comfortable with it. Finding an exit is tough enough when your head is going "RUN! RUN! RUN!" without negotiating a flight of stairs, however short,...
    Fire exits can have a flight (or more) of stairs after the egress. Appropriate railing would be necessary, but this shouldn't bother you in and of itself.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,572
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ron View Post
    Prior to LOCAL LAW 64 of 2001, NYC's electric code was the wild west.

    Similar to what Steve66 said, be sure you need to bring this old condition up to code. Unless you found someone's old grey cover loose-leaf Electric code from the archive, the NYC Electric Code was not always documented well. If this was greater than 1000kVA, the Electrical advisory board review may have been dependent on whoever slipped over the biggest envelope.
    Talking to my colleague, he believes it might be the '50's, so certainly before the watershed 1968 codes.

    Whether or not you have to bring it up to code is usually a function of whomever is reviewing your design at the agency, regardless of what the code might say.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,572
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Fire exits can have a flight (or more) of stairs after the egress. Appropriate railing would be necessary, but this shouldn't bother you in and of itself.
    Unfortunately, the flight will be before the egress. I don't know if it's forbidden, but I think it's a bad idea.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    7,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gadfly56 View Post
    Whether or not you have to bring it up to code is usually a function of whomever is reviewing your design at the agency, regardless of what the code might say.
    And I would also say it depends a lot on what you are doing. just adding a feeder breaker, or replacing the service could make a world of difference.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If the new path leads to another elec room, you don't necessarily need a door between them, just an opening. You still have the stair issue, but I think it could be ok.
    Jeff

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Egress from Working Space 110.26(C)

    Seems like everything comes down to $$ so; pose the question to the arch. -do they want to spend the money to prevent a law suit -or do they want to spend the money bringing the room up to code? It probably will be cheaper to cut a door in the wall.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    19,459
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gadfly56 View Post
    The only other apparent location available on one end would require installing a door about 3 feet off the floor, with stairs and a platform. In addition, the space that this door leads to is another electrical room that is connected, circuit-wise, to the first room. The architect is insisting that this arrangement meets the requirements of the NEC, and I can't find anything in the appropriate article (110.26.C) that says directly otherwise.
    I agree with the architect. The objective of either exit is to allow the worker to move to a distance away from the equipment that is undergoing a fault. Once you are clear of the working space, the code does not care where you will be situated. Once you are clear, you are safe. If you find yourself unable to move any further, and if you therefore have to wait for hours and hours for someone to come to your rescue, then during those hours and hours you will be safe. That is all that matters.
    Charles E. Beck, P.E., Seattle
    Comments based on 2017 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    WAIT FOR HOURS??

    Quote Originally Posted by charlie b View Post

    I agree with the architect. The objective of either exit is to allow the worker to move to a distance away from the equipment that is undergoing a fault. Once you are clear of the working space, the code does not care where you will be situated. Once you are clear, you are safe. If you find yourself unable to move any further, and if you therefore have to wait for hours and hours for someone to come to your rescue, then during those hours and hours you will be safe. That is all that matters.
    Charlie, you know how there are no Atheists in a foxhole? I feel the same about an exploding, burning electrical room.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    19,459
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by egurdian3 View Post
    Charlie, you know how there are no Atheists in a foxhole?
    I am not familiar with that expression. But I suspect it is not literally true.
    Quote Originally Posted by egurdian3 View Post
    I feel the same about an exploding, burning electrical room.
    I don't think I would want to stick around and watch that happening. That said, once I am no longer in the room that has all that happening, the responsibility of the NEC, the electrical engineer who designed the room, and the electrician who built the room will have ended. I am drawing the line between "emergency conditions" and "stable conditions." The intent of code requirements is to give the worker a reasonable opportunity to exit the danger area. That is what I mean by "emergency conditions." The code is not concerned with allowing the worker to make it to the truck in time for lunch. That is what I mean by "stable conditions."
    Charles E. Beck, P.E., Seattle
    Comments based on 2017 NEC unless otherwise noted.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,572
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by charlie b View Post
    I am not familiar with that expression. But I suspect it is not literally true.
    I don't think I would want to stick around and watch that happening. That said, once I am no longer in the room that has all that happening, the responsibility of the NEC, the electrical engineer who designed the room, and the electrician who built the room will have ended. I am drawing the line between "emergency conditions" and "stable conditions." The intent of code requirements is to give the worker a reasonable opportunity to exit the danger area. That is what I mean by "emergency conditions." The code is not concerned with allowing the worker to make it to the truck in time for lunch. That is what I mean by "stable conditions."
    So, if the worker has to negotiate a flight of stairs and a landing before he hits the door, that's OK?

    As for the door, which way would it swing? It could be considered an exit for each space, and exit doors must open in the direction of exit travel during an emergency.

Posting Permissions

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