chris kennedy
Senior Member
- Location
- Miami Fla.
- Occupation
- 60 yr old tool twisting electrician
Would a 2/0 door satisify this requirement?
chris kennedy said:Would a 2/0 door satisify this requirement?
cowboyjwc said:I don't believe so. I didn't read the section, but I believe it says 24" clear space. A 2/0 door will not give you that.
chris kennedy said:Thats how I read it and a 2/0 door gives you about 23". Time to send an RFI to the architect.
Thanks John.
Sorry that was off the top of my head. I'm looking at the 05 now which is what the permit is issued on.charlie b said:Not so fast. Is the equipment more than 6 feet wide?
Note to readers: Since we are talking about 110.26(c)(3), we must also be talking about 2008 requirements.
cowboyjwc said:I don't even have a copy of the 2008.
I could use a clearer description of the physical situation and of the code issue. The "six feet wide" aspect of the rule was removed in the 2005 NEC, and a similar (but not identical) version of a "six feet wide" rule was added in the 2008 NEC. But the 2008 added words that either clarified or clouded (you decide for yourself) a tricky part of the working space rules.chris kennedy said:The install looks like it does not meet 110.26(C)(2)(a) or 110.26(C)(2)(b).
charlie b said:I could use a clearer description of the physical situation and of the code issue. The "six feet wide" aspect of the rule was removed in the 2005 NEC, and a similar (but not identical) version of a "six feet wide" rule was added in the 2008 NEC. But the 2008 added words that either clarified or clouded (you decide for yourself) a tricky part of the working space rules.
The "working space" itself is a box at least 30 inches wide, 36 inches deep, and 6.5 feet high. In the 2005 version, 110.26(C) requires at least one, and perhaps two, entrances to the "working space." That is different than requiring at least one, and perhaps two, entrances to the room in which the equipment is located. Based on the words that appear in the 2005 version, if I have only one door to the room, and if that door is a nominal 2 foot wide (actual 23.5 inches within the frame), and if there is a 1200 amp board in the room, and if there is working space in front of that board, and if after I walk through the only door I have to walk another 2 feet before I get to the working space, and if I can enter the working space from the left side and have 36 inches (i.e., more than 24) of access room (with the board on my left and lots of room on my right), and if I can instead enter the working space from the right side and have 36 inches (i.e., more than 24) of access room (with the board on my right and lots of room on my left), then I would be willing to ignore the single door and declare that I have TWO entrances, each at least 24 inches wide, TO THE WORKING SPACE.
I would, of course, never tell that to an architect. I want the architect to give me two doors to the room, with each door opening outwards.
In the 2008 version, there are words about a door that is intended to be an entrance to the working space and that is located within 25 feet of the working space. So my previous paragraph could no longer be defended. That is OK by me, because I would never design a space on the basis of that argument. I was merely pointing out my interpretation of the words, as written, in the 2005 version.