501.10 b

[HOGO.]

Hi

I have sealed solenoid 24v (coil)and I need to use it in C1D2 but this coil without enclosure(there is no terminal box on the coil),see below

View attachment 9172

so, how can terminate it ( protect the cable) per 501.10(b) ????

 

[rbalex]

I can't read the markings on the solenoid although I suspect it is "Ex m" or possibly "EEx m" at best. If that be the case, you have been painted into a corner and there is no valid NEC method to terminate the leads unless you use an intrinsically safe or nonincendive wiring method. Even then, you will need a manufacture's control drawing for full NEC compliance. A control drawing is required by both Section 501.10(B)(3) or 504.10(A) as appropriate to the wiring method.

While "AEx m" would be acceptable under Section 501.5, "Ex m" and "EEx m" are not. "AEx equipment is evaluated by US domestic NRTLs for compliance with both IEC and NEC including termination means. However for CENELEC compliance It would also need to be marked "EEx"; "AEx" alone is unacceptable.

I have warned you and several other of your Far East and Middle East colleagues to avoid using IEC equipment and concepts for NEC installations.

 

[HOGO.]

I can't read the markings on the solenoid although I suspect it is "Ex m" or possibly "EEx m" at best. If that be the case, you have been painted into a corner and there is no valid NEC method to terminate the leads unless you use an intrinsically safe or nonincendive wiring method. Even then, you will need a manufacture's control drawing for full NEC compliance. A control drawing is required by both Section 501.10(B)(3) or 504.10(A) as appropriate to the wiring method.

While "AEx m" would be acceptable under Section 501.5, "Ex m" and "EEx m" are not. "AEx equipment is evaluated by US domestic NRTLs for compliance with both IEC and NEC including termination means. However for CENELEC compliance It would also need to be marked "EEx"; "AEx" alone is unacceptable.

I have warned you and several other of your Far East and Middle East colleagues to avoid using IEC equipment and concepts for NEC installations.

the coil has UL for ordinary location and the data for this coil as follows: epoxy encapsulated,24V ,6WATT,CLASS B winding,and non arcing
and I am trying to to terminate the leads with suitable method!!

 

[rbalex]

the coil has UL for ordinary location and the data for this coil as follows: epoxy encapsulated,24V ,6WATT,CLASS B winding,and non arcing
and I am trying to to terminate the leads with suitable method!!

And I have told you there is no suitable method to terminate the leads unless you use an intrinsic safety or nonincendive wiring method. Section 501.120(B)(2) only says the enclosure isn't required to be explosionproof; it doesn't say just any "ordinary location" solenoid is suitable. Get a solenoid with an integral terminal box.

Whether an "ordinary location" solenoid is suitable or not in Division 2, even with an intrinsic safety or nonincendive wiring method, you still must meet all grounding and bonding requirements of Section 501.130. The solenoid indicated won't do as field installed equipment.

 

[weressl]

the coil has UL for ordinary location and the data for this coil as follows: epoxy encapsulated,24V ,6WATT,CLASS B winding,and non arcing
and I am trying to to terminate the leads with suitable method!!

These solenoids are meant to be installed inside panels and control assemblies. They are not suitable for field installation.

 

[HOGO.]

And I have told you there is no suitable method to terminate the leads unless you use an intrinsic safety or nonincendive wiring method. Section 501.120(B)(2) only says the enclosure isn't required to be explosionproof; it doesn't say just any "ordinary location" solenoid is suitable. Get a solenoid with an integral terminal box.

Whether an "ordinary location" solenoid is suitable or not in Division 2, even with an intrinsic safety or nonincendive wiring method, you still must meet all grounding and bonding requirements of Section 501.130. The solenoid indicated won't do as field installed equipment.

These solenoids are meant to be installed inside panels and control assemblies. They are not suitable for field installation.

Ok, in case I put it ( the solenoid and the valve) inside an enclosure (general purpose or type 4x..etc) then I can use listed fitting with LFMC as an example, is this acceptable???:blink::blink::blink::blink::blink:

 

[rbalex]

Ok, in case I put it ( the solenoid and the valve) inside an enclosure (general purpose or type 4x..etc) then I can use listed fitting with LFMC as an example, is this acceptable???:blink::blink::blink::blink::blink:

There are others on this site that can better tell you what you can do in a listed manufactured assembly under Section 90.7 for a Class I, Division 2 installation. So far, none of them have challenged my position or suggested that as a solution. I have accepted fully wired factory assembles when all internal wiring is terminated on factory installed terminal blocks and all other internal components are suitable for Division 2. The entire assembly must be suitable [Section 500.8(A)] for Division 2. If the exterior is properly marked by a NRTL (NOT "CE" marked) for the entire assembly as suitable for Division 2, I probably would accept it without an internal inspection. In over 45 years, I've never seen it. Usually the enclosure is simply marked as a UL 508A Industrial Control Panel and it doesn't cover the internals as suitable for Division 2. Otherwise, the answer is still NO; the wiring as shown is still unsuitable for Division 2, enclosed as suggested or not.

That said, enclosing everything may also open this to a purged/pressurized solution if the entire assembly isn't otherwise suitable. .[NFPA 496, NEC Section 500.7(D)] A purged/pressurized solution is still an expensive alternative for not getting a proper solenoid.