electricshadow
Member
- Location
- Cincinnati, OH
- Occupation
- Electrical Engineer
Our typical design if we have a generator at a new school is to use one transfer switch for NEC 700 and another for 702 loads. The issue is that NEC 2023 (700.32) requires selective coordination on the emergency branch for new commercial buildings (including high schools). Typically, this is achieved using expensive equipment such as Eaton's QSCP fused panels or adjustable trip breakers. NEC 2023 (700.5(D)) also requires a bypass isolation transfer switch on the emergency system, which increases costs further with ASCO 7000 series equipment.
One potential solution is to use one or multiple central inverters for emergency lighting instead of a generator. This would eliminate the need for selective coordination and a bypass isolation transfer switch, potentially saving money. However, it's important to note that a generator would still be necessary to power NEC 702 standby loads, such as kitchen refrigeration and tech racks.
Has anyone explored using inverters for emergency lighting and a generator for standby loads to avoid the costs associated with selective coordination?
One potential solution is to use one or multiple central inverters for emergency lighting instead of a generator. This would eliminate the need for selective coordination and a bypass isolation transfer switch, potentially saving money. However, it's important to note that a generator would still be necessary to power NEC 702 standby loads, such as kitchen refrigeration and tech racks.
Has anyone explored using inverters for emergency lighting and a generator for standby loads to avoid the costs associated with selective coordination?
