Clarification on 110.26(E)

[AZElectrical]

In reference to the 2011 NEC, 110.26(E) states that switchboards, panelboards, and MCCs need to be located in dedicated equipment space. I have an issue where the drawing package shows refrigerant piping routed directly through a wall. On the same wall, below the piping, is the location of a new UPS. Maybe the answer is obvious, but the question I have is does 110.26(E)(1)(a) apply when the electrical equipment in question is a UPS? Note that no protection is shown for leaks or breaks in the piping.

Thanks for any input.

 

[charlie b]

What you describe is not a violation of 110.26(E). I believe there is a reason that switchboards, panelboards, and MCCs are listed in this article, and such things as UPS, transformers, disconnect switches, and VFDs are not. I believe the reason is to allow room for the future installation of new conduits. After a panelboard is initially installed, there is a good chance that there will be new circuits added sometime in the future. But once a UPS is installed, there should never again be a need for new conduits.

 

[Carultch]

What you describe is not a violation of 110.26(E). I believe there is a reason that switchboards, panelboards, and MCCs are listed in this article, and such things as UPS, transformers, disconnect switches, and VFDs are not. I believe the reason is to allow room for the future installation of new conduits. After a panelboard is initially installed, there is a good chance that there will be new circuits added sometime in the future. But once a UPS is installed, there should never again be a need for new conduits.

What you are saying is that electrical equipment in general, does not require "dedicated space", except for specific types of equipment referenced in this particular code article. Electrical equipment in general requires working space, but not necessarily dedicated space. Foreign systems and structural features can therefore occupy the same footprint, for other types of electrical equipment than those specifically referenced.

Is this correct? It is a bit counterintuitive.

 

[ActionDave]

....Is this correct? It is a bit counterintuitive.

What is it you find counter intuitive?

 

[AZElectrical]

What is it you find counter intuitive?

I had the same reaction as Carultch when I went through and read the section a few more times. For some reason I had always thought of dedicated equipment space as applicable to all types of electrical equipment. The idea of installing refrigerant piping above a UPS (less than 6') still makes me pause when I think about it. The installation seems to be acceptable from an NEC perspective, but maybe the question changes to is it good practice to do so.

 

[Carultch]

I had the same reaction as Carultch when I went through and read the section a few more times. For some reason I had always thought of dedicated equipment space as applicable to all types of electrical equipment. The idea of installing refrigerant piping above a UPS (less than 6') still makes me pause when I think about it. The installation seems to be acceptable from an NEC perspective, but maybe the question changes to is it good practice to do so.

What is it you find counterintuitive?

Precisely as AZElectrical described.

 

[ActionDave]

I see it as pretty straight forword, once the UPS is installed and powered up your done.

Panels are a different story, once your done a year later someone is going to want another UP, or some other piece of equipment that needs power and the electrician is going to need to get in that dedicated space to make a new home run.

 

[charlie b]

The installation seems to be acceptable from an NEC perspective, but maybe the question changes to is it good practice to do so.

Exactly so! We are obligated to do, as a minimum, what the NEC requires. Beyond that, it is up to the owner to decide what they are willing to pay for, and what risks they are willing to take. Running a refrigerant pipe above a UPS is not an NEC violation. But it does risk water leaking onto the UPS. The owner's decision, based in part on the piping designers description of why the pipes need to be run along that path, is whether that is an acceptable risk.