Hazardous Classification How to tell

Status
Not open for further replies.
AKElectrician said:
I have a lot more flammable material's in my single car garage, so do lots of others. I'd be willing to bet some people have all three classes in some single car garages. Gun powder, gas, painting supplies, wood dust, animal feed, welding bottles.... Forgot to add most also have the boiler in there also (ignition source)
Click to expand...

My point is that until you or a qualified person in hazardous locations determines if it is classified or not, I cannot say whether romex or rigid is needed to wire your garage.

Not that you are asking, I was just presenting a scenario.
 
rbalex said:
Possibly, but see Section 500.1 IN No.1.
Click to expand...

I understand that gunpowder isn't included in the NEC if that's what your trying to get at. I will say the 1 military munitions installation I have seen (bomb storage facility, empty, Adak Island) they had explosion proof wiring throughout it. Seabee's sure can build some stuff.
 
codequestion said:
If you arent quailfies then dont answer and please dont insult share your knowledge.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Actually, I am reviewer and noticed matrials post #1 on plans. I made comment see nec 2014 article 500 to the designer to provide class division and designer came back saying he looked thru article 500 and not been able to determine min quantities of chemicals req to produce vapor in the air in quantities sufficent to produce explosive or ignitble mixtures aricle 500.5 (B). And so i came to this thread to see if anyone else know anything about this.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
codequestion said:
Actually, I am reviewer and noticed matrials post #1 on plans. I made comment see nec 2014 article 500 to the designer to provide class division and designer came back saying he looked thru article 500 and not been able to determine min quantities of chemicals req to produce vapor in the air in quantities sufficent to produce explosive or ignitble mixtures aricle 500.5 (B). And so i came to this thread to see if anyone else know anything about this.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Having been around labs of various types for the first decade of my professional life, this sort of thing would likely have been Class I Div 1 for the interior of the hood, standard for the rest of the lab.

It is incumbent on the designer to present you with the necessary information to conduct your review. If you start instructing him/her on means and methods, you become part of the design process and your sovereign immunity may evaporate.
 
codequestion said:
Actually, I am reviewer and noticed matrials post #1 on plans. I made comment see nec 2014 article 500 to the designer to provide class division and designer came back saying he looked thru article 500 and not been able to determine min quantities of chemicals req to produce vapor in the air in quantities sufficent to produce explosive or ignitble mixtures aricle 500.5 (B). And so i came to this thread to see if anyone else know anything about this.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
You keep changing the scenario. Why were you asking in the OP what the Class it was? At least the designer was able to tell you it was Class I by citing Section 500.5(B).

If you are going to be a plans reviewer for potential classified (hazardous) locations, you had best become very familiar with Section 500.4, especially 500.4(B) and its INs. Except for Articles 511 through 516, You can't determine a location's electrical area classification from the NEC. Hint: If the facility is actually a laboratory you need to review NFPA 45. Other Standards will apply for other installations.

You should have asked the designer what Standard was used to classify the location.
 
codequestion said:
I get proects because i am good at electrical
Click to expand...
That doesn't appear to be the case.

codequestion said:
If you arent quailfies then dont answer and please dont insult share your knowledge.
Click to expand...
Those trying to help you are with no doubt more qualified than you are.


codequestion said:
Not really. I read the code if their is something i missed. Not all the time i do what is being said on here. Anywaus i got my answer on this one.
Click to expand...
You claim to be an EE, not an EIT, with that said, how did you get through the "professional writing" part of your exam?

rbalex said:
You keep changing the scenario.
Click to expand...
That is his/her SOP.

rbalex said:
Why were you asking in the OP what the Class it was? At least the designer was able to tell you it was Class I by citing Section 500.5(B).

If you are going to be a plans reviewer for potential classified (hazardous) locations, you had best become very familiar with Section 500.4, especially 500.4(B) and its INs. Except for Articles 511 through 516, You can't determine a location's electrical area classification from the NEC. Hint: If the facility is actually a laboratory you need to review NFPA 45. Other Standards will apply for other installations.

You should have asked the designer what Standard was used to classify the location.
Click to expand...
It would behoove you to listen to Bob's advice.

Roger
 
roger said:
That doesn't appear to be the case.

Those trying to help you are with no doubt more qualified than you are.


You claim to be an EE, not an EIT, with that said, how did you get through the "professional writing" part of your exam?

It would behoove you to listen to Bob's advice.

Roger
Click to expand...
Last one reviewer is correct.

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk
 
roger said:
codequestion said:
Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

Roger
Click to expand...

There are a lot of folks running around with "Electrical Engineer" on their business card who aren't licensed PE's. It might even be on your diploma. My granddad was an electrical engineer and worked for the Army for 40 years and they didn't seem to mind he wasn't a PE. Now, that can get tricky in certain jurisdictions, like California. In CA, you can't have "Engineer" on your card unless you are licensed in CA. Your mileage may vary on this requirement.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top