I thought I would query some people about their opinion on NEC 410.72(G), as we are about to write it into our spec permanetly, forever, hardcore, and without much input from me. Right now, I'm working on a light industrial / manufacturing facility lighting. I hope they have the ability to meet exception 4, at least.
I have a layout of about 350 industrial strips flourescents, about 5 ckts, in a wharehose outside the production area, 25 isles or something like that. Anyways, I was told to fuse and sta-kon each ballast Has anyone ever fused each ballast, not being a field elecrtrician, I don't know what that device would look like (precicesly I mean). I don't believe the ballasts are internally fused or even have a thermal OL
If the ballast failed wouldn't it more than likely quit, instead of tripping, and continuing to trip a breaker? The engineer was worried about it taking out the whole circuit and CB not being able to reset. There will be about 70 fixtures on a ckt. I thought I could provide an egress fixture with internal battery backup in each isleway incase a ckt failed anyways. To cover the argument that we won't leave them in the dark, (the area is not occupied continuously), until they can get the ballast replaced.
What bothers me isn't so much the estimated doubling the cost of connecting the lights, and marginal labor increase, but the principal of over doing installations. Safety wasn't given as a reason supprisngly; while I see increasing equipment / personell protection vs increasing equipment / connection failure could be debated. Opinions please, thx.
I have a layout of about 350 industrial strips flourescents, about 5 ckts, in a wharehose outside the production area, 25 isles or something like that. Anyways, I was told to fuse and sta-kon each ballast Has anyone ever fused each ballast, not being a field elecrtrician, I don't know what that device would look like (precicesly I mean). I don't believe the ballasts are internally fused or even have a thermal OL
If the ballast failed wouldn't it more than likely quit, instead of tripping, and continuing to trip a breaker? The engineer was worried about it taking out the whole circuit and CB not being able to reset. There will be about 70 fixtures on a ckt. I thought I could provide an egress fixture with internal battery backup in each isleway incase a ckt failed anyways. To cover the argument that we won't leave them in the dark, (the area is not occupied continuously), until they can get the ballast replaced. What bothers me isn't so much the estimated doubling the cost of connecting the lights, and marginal labor increase, but the principal of over doing installations. Safety wasn't given as a reason supprisngly; while I see increasing equipment / personell protection vs increasing equipment / connection failure could be debated. Opinions please, thx.
