Choosing the Right Enclosure - NEMA 4x versus NEMA 4x Class 1 Div 2

[hanifjosh]

Hi Guys,

I am new to the forum. I have a choice of two NEMA 4X boxes. One is specifically rated NEMA 4X Class 1 Division while the other is just NEMA 4x. My system is going to be used in a Class 1 Division II environment and all the electrical components are Class 1 Division 2. The box without a Class 1 Division 2 rating is considerably cheaper and I was told by someone that I can use the cheaper box.

My questions are as follows:
- Can I in fact use the cheaper box or do I have to use the Class 1 Division 2 box?
- What is the difference between the boxes?
- If we can use a regular NEMA 4x box then why would anyone ever pony up for the way more expensive box?


Thanks So Much

 

[petersonra]

I have never heard of an enclosure rated for C1D2.

maybe it is a Canadian thing.

Can you post a link to it?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I use A/B control stations with their non-metallic enclosures. They offer the same enclosure as a NEMA 4x and as a NEMA 4x with a label saying for use in Class I, Division 2. The label is expensive.
I use the NEMA 4x box without the expensive sticker.
The standard box would be a 800H-1HZ4R and the one with the sticker would be 800R-1HZ4R.

 

[hanifjosh]

Enclosure Comparison

Enclosure Comparison

I have never heard of an enclosure rated for C1D2.

maybe it is a Canadian thing.

Can you post a link to it?

The Non-Rated Box I am considering is by Hubbell Wiegmann part no BN4121206CHSS (cost ~$350)
The Class One Division 2 box is by Cooper Industries part no XLVS11212061 (cost ~$1,000)

Again, the box is not an electrical component - and their sizes are the same and they are both NEMA 4X. I really don't get why one is so much more expensive.

Thanks,

 

[rbalex]

The Non-Rated Box I am considering is by Hubbell Wiegmann part no BN4121206CHSS (cost ~$350)
The Class One Division 2 box is by Cooper Industries part no XLVS11212061 (cost ~$1,000)

Again, the box is not an electrical component - and their sizes are the same and they are both NEMA 4X. I really don't get why one is so much more expensive.

Thanks,

Basically you are paying for the manufacturer to confirm the product is suitable for Division 2 to give some less knowledgeable inspectors confidence in identifying the product.

During the 1999 and 2002 NEC cycles, the IAEI practically demanded that equipment suitable for Division 2 be marked for it since many inspectors couldn't tell what "Ordinary Location" equipment/material was acceptable. CMP14 declined.

CSA routinely marks material/equipment for Division 2 even where the CEC (oddly enough a CSA document) doesn't require it.

In the US, unless the installation required an explosionproof enclosure, the lesser expensive 4X would be suitable.

 

[hanifjosh]

Follow Up

Follow Up

Basically you are paying for the manufacturer to confirm the product is suitable for Division 2 to give some less knowledgeable inspectors confidence in identifying the product.

During the 1999 and 2002 NEC cycles, the IAEI practically demanded that equipment suitable for Division 2 be marked for it since many inspectors couldn't tell what "Ordinary Location" equipment/material was acceptable. CMP14 declined.

CSA routinely marks material/equipment for Division 2 even where the CEC (oddly enough a CSA document) doesn't require it.

In the US, unless the installation required an explosionproof enclosure, the lesser expensive 4X would be suitable.

Thanks everyone, you have been very helpful! Dare I ask one more question:
I am looking for a Class 1 Division 2 Straight Terminal Block similar to those States Products makes. But they build on order and they take a long time. I need something similar (8 stud) but quickly. Any recommendations?

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Thanks everyone, you have been very helpful! Dare I ask one more question:
I am looking for a Class 1 Division 2 Straight Terminal Block similar to those States Products makes. But they build on order and they take a long time. I need something similar (8 stud) but quickly. Any recommendations?

There is no requirement that a terminal block or other type of wire connector be identified for use in a Class I, Division 2 area.

 

[rbalex]

There is no requirement that a terminal block or other type of wire connector be identified for use in a Class I, Division 2 area.

I would definitely concur with this if it were US NEC installation. Since the OP declared a Class I, Division 2 design then Don's comment should be OK, even under the CEC>

It has been since the late 1990s, that I worked with the CEC. At that time Canada had effectively adopted the IEC as the preferred, although not exclusive, hazardous location philosophy. Under IEC rules, terminals must also be identified for their protection technique, usually EX e.

 

[hanifjosh]

There is no requirement that a terminal block or other type of wire connector be identified for use in a Class I, Division 2 area.

Are you sure? I met with CSA and I showed them normal 8-stud straight terminal that I bought and they said it wouldn't work in a class 1 division 2 area.

Thanks again,

 

[rbalex]

Are you sure? I met with CSA and I showed them normal 8-stud straight terminal that I bought and they said it wouldn't work in a class 1 division 2 area.

Thanks again,

As I said in my previous post he's absolutely right for an NEC installation. It appears CSA/CEC is getting IEC indoctrinated.

The NEC doesn't consider terminals as arcing, sparking or heat producing (ASH) under normal conditions. IEC thinks common terminals can vibrate open. That still wouldn't require anything special under historic Division classified installation concepts.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Are you sure? I met with CSA and I showed them normal 8-stud straight terminal that I bought and they said it wouldn't work in a class 1 division 2 area.

Thanks again,

Sorry, I did not look at your location. As Bob said, my comment is based only on the rules found in the NEC.