Is this live work?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jischr

Member
Location
St. Louis, MO, USA
We'er having a debate at work. Changing an energized incadesent bulb is live work but can be made safe by throwing the wall switch and locking it, after which it is not energized work, presuming a single energy source. Changing 48" fluorescent tubes isn't live work because the contacts are resessed. My position is both are live work and need to be de-energized. I couldn't find any OSHA interpretations on this. Your thoughts?

Thanks
 
I've fried ballasts and received one heck of a zap while changing 48" bulbs 'hot.' It's probably not a good idea. It's pretty hard to change the bulbs without shorting the bulb against the fixture at some point.

Oh .. and the 'recessed' pins on a VHO bulb wil blast a very nice rice-grain sized crater in your thumb.
 
I'll take this to another level. We are having conversation at work about 277 volt fed fluorescent lighting, there are folks who believe that NFPA 70e requires us to have arc flash level 2 protection to change these lamps energized. I'm not making this up fella's this is legitimate talk. Any buddy else running into this?
 
120, 277 VAC primary input while secondary output is the same.

120, 277 VAC primary input while secondary output is the same.

Damn right I agree thats live work becuase you are completing the circuit once the new lamp is installed, and the fixture is always energized. Any mislamping of the pins could result in epic failure or serious sparks. Some modern flourescent fixtures have master switches so that you can isolate and de-energize any given fixture in the circuit without having to shut the whole circuit down. Also if the fixture is fed by 120 or 277 the secondary output is still the same at the pins. Modern FL fixtures with electronic ballasts have wide ranges of input power from 120-277 without taps. Automatic.
 
Voice coils that is one of my issues 120/277 doesn't matter it's an input voltage! What does concern me is the level of the hazard and the PPE they are saying may have to be worn. I don't have the exact 70e articles in front of me but I will post it. just seems extreme to me, I don't take safety lightly. My fix would be to de-energize the fixture but the contention there is it has to be verified and now you're back to a level 2 PPE requirement.
 
I beleive the implication is that lethal volatges exist within the fixture. So a light fixture fed with 277 volts AC inside of it could be a threat while relamping. Even if you are very cautious and never open the fixture, the fixture itself while relamping could have an un-forseen hazard ready to arc or short out in your face or hands.
 
I really doubt that the incident energy on the output side of the ballast would be high enough to require hazard class 2 PPE.
 
Twins n fins said:
Voice coils that is one of my issues 120/277 doesn't matter it's an input voltage! What does concern me is the level of the hazard and the PPE they are saying may have to be worn. I don't have the exact 70e articles in front of me but I will post it. just seems extreme to me, I don't take safety lightly. My fix would be to de-energize the fixture but the contention there is it has to be verified and now you're back to a level 2 PPE requirement.
Click to expand...

Here is the problem from my perspective. Everything is excessive until the one time that all of the possible things that can go wrong do go wrong. It is pretty excessive to have to tie off when you are on the roof of a house ( how many of you really do, I know I don't) until you fall off of one, and this is a more common problem. I read where ladder fall deaths are actually a large statistic in construction deaths, yet I see my guys violate ladder safety every day, and I challenge them every time.
 
Strathead said:
Here is the problem from my perspective. Everything is excessive until the one time that all of the possible things that can go wrong do go wrong.
Click to expand...

So where do you draw the line?
What steps have you taken to address protecting your employees from a meteoroid explosion?

NFPA70E says you need to perform a risk analysis as part of your Safety Program. What values are you putting into your analysis that equates the task of 'replacing a fluorescent lamp' with that of performing a voltage test?
 
jim dungar said:
So where do you draw the line?
What steps have you taken to address protecting your employees from a meteoroid explosion?

NFPA70E says you need to perform a risk analysis as part of your Safety Program. What values are you putting into your analysis that equates the task of 'replacing a fluorescent lamp' with that of performing a voltage test?
Click to expand...

And that is a good question, for which I have no answer. In fact, I don't believe there is an answer! I, as a Project Manager, who doesn't pay the bills, do a job specific hazard analysis and discuss safety requirements for every job with the responsible people on the job. I reinforce this by not looking the other way when I see a violation, but I don't "write people up" usually. I will regret it if one day I say something to an employee and then later they get hurt doing the same thing, but....

For example, if I see someone on the top two steps of a ladder I will tell them to step down right then. I have had workers say something like, "I only have this last screw." I will say, "I don't care, if you can't do it from the correct step than go find the correct ladder. Next time remember that." I have always felt this to be the MOST important thing we can do as supervisors, perhaps besides not standing on the top ourselves!
 
hillbilly1 said:
We require voltage rated gloves and safety glasses when installing screw in type lamps, and leather gloves and safety glasses for florescent lamps.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine trying to get a fluorescent bulb turned into a tight fixture while wearing any gloves. Period. I can barely get my fingers on it and get it twisted into place as it is! Ever try changing bulbs in a shallow wrap-around type fixture?

Ain't gonna happen while wearing gloves!
 
kbsparky said:
I can't imagine trying to get a fluorescent bulb turned into a tight fixture while wearing any gloves. Period. I can barely get my fingers on it and get it twisted into place as it is! Ever try changing bulbs in a shallow wrap-around type fixture?

Ain't gonna happen while wearing gloves!
Click to expand...

Yeah, it can be a real pain, the main concern there is to prevent cuts if the lamp breaks. I had one guy I was doing an inspection on that wasn't wearing his gloves, he put them on, then about 10 or so lamps down the line, the lamp broke in his hands. Saved him from getting cut.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top