Does this comply with NEC 2017 Article 110.26(C)(2)

H

hhsting

Senior Member
Location
Glen bunie, md, us
Occupation
Junior plan reviewer
Please see attached sketch that has existing 2000A 480/277V switchboard more than 6 feet wide. New switchboard is added behind it and new equipments ATSs are added in front. Only one exit is provided as marked on sketch. Also the distance between ATS and existing switchboard is 4.5 feet.

Would the installation comply with NEC 2017 Article 110.26(C)(2) Large Equipment or not?

1c1ddf858355de6e18d1648cc4574e96.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
hhsting said:
The distance is 3.67 feet
Click to expand...

I think you need 4 ft. between the gears. 4' between the energized parts in the gears. Is the gear a deadfront? If so, which side is the one someone would need access to.

Wouldn't both be 277V to ground and need to be open or worked on at the same time since the incoming line is in the old switchboard?

Are any of the panels hinged? Would they impede the exit? Otherwise it looks like an unimpeded path to me. So long as none of the equipment protrudes into the clear egress path.
 
It seems the existing SWBD is "Large Equipment", nothing else. As large equipment, it needs egress from both ends of the working space. IF the existing SWBD is front accessible only and facing the door, then it seems to be compliant.
The 3-1/2' from the new to existing SWBD is good for condition 2
 
ron said:
It seems the existing SWBD is "Large Equipment", nothing else. As large equipment, it needs egress from both ends of the working space. IF the existing SWBD is front accessible only and facing the door, then it seems to be compliant.
The 3-1/2' from the new to existing SWBD is good for condition 2
Click to expand...

Do you think it would meet condition 3? I was thinking it would.
 
Elect117 said:
Do you think it would meet condition 3? I was thinking it would.
Click to expand...
The OP said the distance from the existing SWBD to new SWBD was <4', so if the existing SWBD turns out to be front AND rear accessible or the existing SWBD front is facing Plan North, then it wouldn't be compliant because it would need to meet Condition 3. Otherwise, condition 2 is ok.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top