Distance between motors?
- Thread starter adamscb
- Start date
- Status
iceworm
Curmudgeon still using printed IEEE Color Books
- Location
- North of the 65 parallel
- Occupation
- EE (Field - as little design as possible)
- Location
- Placerville, CA, USA
- Occupation
- Retired PV System Designer
AFAIK there is not even a requirement for the junction box to be accessible once the motor is mounted (if flexible wiring is used.)
In practice there might be thermal issues if one motor blocks air circulation to the other.
In practice there might be thermal issues if one motor blocks air circulation to the other.
Unfortunately.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
The general rule in the first sentence of 110.26 requires adequate space for operation and maintenance.
Johnnybob
Senior Member
- Location
- Colville, WA
In real life, though, I'll bet I could show you 10 motors on this plant site alone, not counting the sawmill, where it's a near impossibility to get a stubby screwdriver on the peckerhead screws! In fact, there are 6 kilns with eight 10hp motors apiece( and these are 6 pole motors), where I have to take 3 of the mount bolts out to access the peckerhead lol! Don't ask me why its so, but when a millwright mounts a motor, 9 times out of 10 the peckerhead will end up against a chainway, beam, upright or knee brace, its just a law of nature, I guess. I just asked a millwright, and he said its so he can get me before i get him:?? I would never!:angel:
Electrical installations shall be done in a neat and workmanlike manner. That's Article 110. NECA speaks more but this one fails the obviousness test. But you won't get a Code official out there on a repair, so its up to OSHA theoretically or whoever is the AHJ in your organization.
- Location
- Massachusetts
One of the most ridiculous code sections in the book.
Even the NFPA admits both words 'neat' & 'workmanlike' are vague and likely unenforceable.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
Operation and maintenance of what? All electrical equipment as indicated in the title? If so why do we conceal wiring in building walls? It all basically needs access and working space according to first sentence of 110.26.
Reading further into the sub sections does narrow some things down, but still leaves pretty vague range of what is intended to be required at times.
Most 110.26 related violations are only cited around panelboards, switchboards, fused switches, and MCC's or other control panels.
Uh, yeah. Speaking from the industrial side of things, have you ever actually seen what a Code inspector looks for? Let me put it this way on the memorable things I was cited on in the past:
1. Not putting every single one of the screws into the cover for one of those Siemens expletive-model panelboards that is so flimsy that it requires a fastener about every 8 inches. One corner fastener was missing due to being wallowed out (from the factory) so we had to drill/tap and install a larger fastener. Well guess what the complaint was then...yep, we modified it. Ended up ripping entire panel out and replacing on warranty, and eating a day's labor cost. Glad this made it so much safer.
2. Split system air conditioner had a CE stamp on it but not a UL one simply because we got the "international" model because of the voltage (208/120 three phase office building) but was UL tested/approved. Just had to get the manufacturer to send us paperwork verifying it. Also learned to never trust CE regardless of whether it was a Code job or not.
3. TEFC motor used in a Class II/Div. 2 area did not have a temperature rating on the name plate.Same one, it didn't have BOTH class/division and zone ratings. Basicaly this was the inspector's first time looking at a hazardous location and he had to read the Code book the day before, and mixed up all kinds of things between the difference classes and the two different classification systems.
4. This one is even more funny...not having the properly rated fire stop for a ship application with an ABS inspector. Inspector cited some other Code which escapes me. Looking up the Code, it referred to another one, which then specifically stated that the local Code official (that would be ABS) must decide on what's approved and what's not, which they weren't willing to do because they were confused themselves. So eventually I just had to make something up that said what we were using was acceptable and since they approved it, Catch-22, it as accepted by the Code they cited.
Trust me, I have seen this in tons of plants before. Generally speaking in the industrial world at least you won't ever even SEE any kind of Code or federal inspector unless your plant manages to kill somebody, and maybe not even then. The worst inspections you will ever get (outside of internal ones) will be if you have to deal with business loss insurance inspectors, some of which are actually pretty good at what they do.
The only way things get better is with self-policing. Most plants don't even have a copy of the Code, let alone a current copy. They do things however they've done it for years. What's amazing is when you start getting them to do everything to Code, the breakdowns and maintenance issues start to go away. Pretty soon you can get them all talking about doing it according to Code. And the best part is that the argument is really easy. What? You mean you are going to violate state regulations and Codes and risk getting fired/fined over it?
And I do agree that "neat and workmanlike" is pretty vague, which is why I mentioned NECA and so does the Code. NECA is written/developed/maintained by union contractors to keep their union subs/crews in line and not do stupid things. So it's pretty loose but does cover a lot of basics.
- Status