Electrical Equipment Pad/Working Space Violation

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BettinaD

Member
Location
Honesdale, PA, USA
If a switchboard is located on a 5" concrete equipment pad and the pad only extends 20" in front of the switchboard is this a violation of the designated working space in front of electrical equipment as described in NEC 110?
 
No. The clearance rules are not dictated by what the subsurface is constructed of.. Just about what is in the space. As long as approach is not prohibited I would say you are good.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
I must beg to disagree. If you are standing at the very front of the panel, you will be standing on the concrete pad. If you take one step backwards, you could fall off the edge of the concrete pad. An attempt to prevent that fall could easily have you leaning forward, and into the live parts you wanted to work on. I believe the pad has to extend just a short distance away from the panel (i.e. 6" max), or it has to extend the full depth of the working clearance.
 
Do you know where this would be listed in the NEC under article 110? I agree it makes sense as a hazard, however, I cannot find where it specifically disagrees with the defined violation of the designated working space.
 
I don't have a code book handy, but I think the answer lies in the "height of working space" rule. You need floor to 6.5 feet above the floor for the entire width and depth of the working space. A floor that is 5" high for the first 20" of working space depth, and that changes height at that point, would not satisfy this rule. That's my best answer for now.
 
110.26(A)

(3) Height of Working Space. The work space shall be clear and extend from the grade, floor, or platform to a height of 2.0 m (61⁄2 ft) or the height of the equipment


Floor, grade, and platform are singular. Cannot have 2 different starting points in the one defined space IMO.
 
jumper said:
110.26(A)

(3) Height of Working Space. The work space shall be clear and extend from the grade, floor, or platform to a height of 2.0 m (61⁄2 ft) or the height of the equipment


Floor, grade, and platform are singular. Cannot have 2 different starting points in the one defined space IMO.
Click to expand...


Thank you!
 
jumper said:
110.26(A)

(3) Height of Working Space. The work space shall be clear and extend from the grade, floor, or platform to a height of 2.0 m (61⁄2 ft) or the height of the equipment


Floor, grade, and platform are singular. Cannot have 2 different starting points in the one defined space IMO.
Click to expand...
While I acknowledge both observations (and agree in ideal conditions).. you placed an "and" where there is an "or".

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
I think I can clarify some confusion here.
jumper said:
110.26(A) (3) Height of Working Space. The work space shall be clear and extend from the grade, floor, or platform to a height of 2.0 m (61⁄2 ft) or the height of the equipment

Floor, grade, and platform are singular. Cannot have 2 different starting points in the one defined space IMO.
Click to expand...
KnightPower said:
While I acknowledge both observations (and agree in ideal conditions).. you placed an "and" where there is an "or".
Click to expand...
Jumper correctly quoted the article, including correctly placing the word "or" between "floor" and "platform." Then he made his own observation that each of the three words, grade -- floor -- platform, is a singular word. Placing "and" in that sentence was correct.
 
I concede that the wording works as described. And agree that the conditions could be better.. but the reference does mention elevation just access and egress.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
charlie b said:
I think I can clarify some confusion here.

Jumper correctly quoted the article, including correctly placing the word "or" between "floor" and "platform." Then he made his own observation that each of the three words, grade -- floor -- platform, is a singular word. Placing "and" in that sentence was correct.
Click to expand...
So your distance would use grade or floor, since you have both, to the higher height, if there is a difference. Or is that not what has always been done with outside AC units?
 
charlie b said:
I must beg to disagree. If you are standing at the very front of the panel, you will be standing on the concrete pad. If you take one step backwards, you could fall off the edge of the concrete pad. An attempt to prevent that fall could easily have you leaning forward, and into the live parts you wanted to work on. I believe the pad has to extend just a short distance away from the panel (i.e. 6" max), or it has to extend the full depth of the working clearance.
Click to expand...
I agree, presuming OP is talking about a "rise or step" at the edge of this pad. If the concrete pad ends 20" in front of equipment but some other surface continues at the same elevation, there is no violation.
 
BettinaD said:
If a switchboard is located on a 5" concrete equipment pad and the pad only extends 20" in front of the switchboard is this a violation of the designated working space in front of electrical equipment as described in NEC 110?
Click to expand...

Yes, this is a violation. It seems to come up on every project. You'd need to extend the pad to the prescribed distance shown in Table 110.26(A)(1) for LV Switchgear
 
Dale001289 said:
Yes, this is a violation. It seems to come up on every project. You'd need to extend the pad to the prescribed distance shown in Table 110.26(A)(1) for LV Switchgear
Click to expand...

Can an equipment slab count for the 6" rule per 110.26(A)(3), just as a raceway can penetrate the workspace up to 6"? The article states "other equipment associated with the electrical installation", and a housekeeping slab specifically built for electrical equipment is "associated with the electrical installation".
 
Carultch said:
Can an equipment slab count for the 6" rule per 110.26(A)(3), just as a raceway can penetrate the workspace up to 6"? The article states "other equipment associated with the electrical installation", and a housekeeping slab specifically built for electrical equipment is "associated with the electrical installation".
Click to expand...

IMO it'd be quite a stretch to argue a concrete slab that extends 6" would qualify as 'associated equipment'; however, Construction uses it all the time to avoid rework. An AHJ could approve under section 90.2(C), special permission.
 
Dale001289 said:
IMO it'd be quite a stretch to argue a concrete slab that extends 6" would qualify as 'associated equipment'; however, Construction uses it all the time to avoid rework. An AHJ could approve under section 90.2(C), special permission.
Click to expand...

A housekeeping pad in switchgear rooms with a 4” or 6” reveal is standard on many projects.
What rework are you talking about.

I think that the pad extension of up to 6” is compliant.
 
tkb said:
A housekeeping pad in switchgear rooms with a 4” or 6” reveal is standard on many projects.
What rework are you talking about.

I think that the pad extension of up to 6” is compliant.
Click to expand...

I believe most AHJs would disagree with you. Besides most housekeeping pads are nowhere near 6”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top