Class 1 Div. 2 conduit thru wall or ground.

[sprjac]

Scenario: Class 1 Div.2 containment dike, conduit run 24" above ground, penetrating dike wall that is 20' wide (assume conduit coupling under dike wall) and terminating at same height in adjacent Class 1 Div. 2 dike.

Question: Do we need seals when you terminate in same classification area and conduit passes thru a 4' high dike wall or roadway ?

Thank you for your help.

 

[rbalex]

The interior of the dike wall is generally considered unclassified. So, as described, there are two boundaries, each needing boundary seals. However, they are not required to be explosionproof. See 501.15(B)(2); especially the last sentence.

As an aside, where two locations have the same classification, but with a physical boundary, they should share the same source as well as Class, Division, Group and T Class before even considering eliminating a seal.

Added the “physical boundary” phrase. I don’t want to imply that a seal is needed at every source’s transitional boundary.

 

[sprjac]

Class 1 Div. 2 conduit thru wall or ground.

Class 1 Div. 2 conduit thru wall or ground.

Thank you.

I think one seal at either side will do, I may also consider making the entire area, including the road between the dikes a classified area, I don't see this causing any problem as there is no equipment on the dike wall. This will save from having to dismantle the instalation to add a seal.


JAC

 

[BPoindexter]

You can also use a retrofit "split" seal in a C1D2. typically we use the first junction inside the dike as our boundary seal. Typically in tank farms anything outside the dike is unclassified unless of course it is the dike wall between two tanks.

 

[sprjac]

Class 1 Div. 2 conduit thru wall or ground.

Class 1 Div. 2 conduit thru wall or ground.

You can also use a retrofit "split" seal in a C1D2. typically we use the first junction inside the dike as our boundary seal. Typically in tank farms anything outside the dike is unclassified unless of course it is the dike wall between two tanks.

Thank you.

This is an intermediate dike, I find it easier to classify the entire area including the dike walls as Div.2, except that where the dikes are drivable this may be a problem with vehicles and not so practical.

 

[rbalex]

A few responses:

• ?Split? seals are not NRTL certified.
• Automobiles are not subject to electrical area classifications; they drive through Class I, Division 2 locations at gas stations every day.

 

[sprjac]

Class 1 Div. 2 conduit thru wall or ground.

Class 1 Div. 2 conduit thru wall or ground.

Thank you for the information, maybe that is why I have never seen split seals used ?

We require permits as a company policy to drive any vehicle into dike areas.

Thanks again.

 

[BPoindexter]

A few responses:

• ?Split? seals are not NRTL certified.
• Automobiles are not subject to electrical area classifications; they drive through Class I, Division 2 locations at gas stations every day.

I beg to differ:

http://www.cooperindustries.com/con...s_retrofitsealingfittings.certifications.html

They are UL listed for C1D2 (Not for C1D1) and have been used for years in the all types of petrochemical facilities. Unless we calling two different types of seals "split seals".

 

[BPoindexter]

Actually I meant CSA not UL. At least CSA is the mark on the ones we have though the literature does indicate UL as well. And yes CSA is a NRTL per OSHA. Would check with your local inspector if there is any question.

 

[rbalex]

I beg to differ:

http://www.cooperindustries.com/con...s_retrofitsealingfittings.certifications.html

They are UL listed for C1D2 (Not for C1D1) and have been used for years in the all types of petrochemical facilities. Unless we calling two different types of seals "split seals".

Ask your friendly local Crouse-Hinds rep for the EYSR?s UL Category Code and/or E-Number. You can attempt to find it yourself at the UL Online Certification Directory. (A hint: the Category Code for Conduit Fittings for Use in Hazardous Locations is EBNV; Crouse-Hinds' ?E-Number? is E-10279)

C-H is notorious for claiming ?compliance? or, sometimes, ?compliances or certifications? for products that aren?t NRTL certified. EYSRs are CSA Certified but not as a NRTL. Note they are even accepted in Division 1 in Canada. In this case, ESYR's are definitely CSA "certified" for Canada, but it is only C-H?s opinion that EYSRs ?comply? with UL 886 and 1203 (sort of like a ?CE? mark) and are acceptable in Division 2 ? but they aren?t UL listed.

EYSRs have two NEC problems ? even in Division 2:

• Both ends are not threaded as required by 501.10(B) (1) (2).
• That neoprene gasket in the unthreaded end violates 501.30 because the small ?set screws? are not identified for bonding.

 

[BPoindexter]

C-H is notorious for claiming “compliance” or, sometimes, compliances or certifications for products that aren’t NRTL certified. EYSRs are CSA Certified but not as a NRTL

Well I have to admit you have me there... exactly what is meant by "CSA certified but not as a NRTL". CSA certified equipment per UL 886 and UL 1203 is on OSHA's list of products standards for CSA and CSA is listed as an NRTL?

Even so you do have a point about NEC 501.10 but I can tell you that I have seen hundreds of these used in C1D2 areas and have never had an inspector question them (which of course does not make it right). This included some high profile NEC remediation projects where multiple inspectors including Federal oversight entities were involved.

And I have asked the C-H rep and waiting his answer.

 

[rbalex]

Well I have to admit you have me there... exactly what is meant by "CSA certified but not as a NRTL". ...

I mean it is CSA certified only to a Canadian standard not a US Recognized American Safety Standard (ANSI, ASTM or UL); i.e. it isn't to UL 886 or 1203. If it were, UL would have accepted it too and put their own UL/CSA label on it.

Look at the CSA mark on the product. Unless it shows something as indicated here, it is not a NRTL mark.

As I mentioned, C-H has been misleading this way for years. Many (very many) years ago almost NONE of there products were actually listed, it was just their opinion that they "complied" with the appropriate standards. (And, of course they mostly did) Today most, but not quite all, are truly listed.

Your local inspectors may have been accepting CSA without question, but that just means you?re too close to Canada.

 

[BPoindexter]

Well the plot does thicken... I received the CSA Certification from CH (see attached). The funny thing is that it is even a typo on it. Have it listed as an ESYR instead of and EYSR. And yes I got the routine about "self certification" which means absolutely nothing. Like you said about the 'CE' marking. We will be reviewing their use here in this facility.

 

[GoldDigger]

Well the plot does thicken... I received the CSA Certification from CH (see attached). The funny thing is that it is even a typo on it. Have it listed as an ESYR instead of and EYSR. And yes I got the routine about "self certification" which means absolutely nothing. Like you said about the 'CE' marking. We will be reviewing their use here in this facility.

Eight pages of information about individual parts, and the only reference to which standard the parts were tested (or self certified) to refers you to another document!

Class: 4418-03
Refer to Class Description for program details

Need to look there. :roll:

 

[rbalex]

You will also note that the CSA listing makes no distinction between Divisions, simply "Class I, Groups B, C and D; Class II, Groups E, F and G; Class III"; i.e. per CSA, "Division" is not significant per application of the product.

In all honesty, I believe the product is fine if you put a proper bonding jumper across it – but then that’s only my opinion