MI- Generator

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mstrlucky74

Senior Member
Location
NJ
Have a note from EE that says all generator control wiresbetween generator and ATS must be run in MI cable and to refer to NEC 700.9. Ican’t find anything specifically that requires these conductors to be run in MIor 2 hour rated.
 
mstrlucky74 said:
Have a note from EE that says all generator control wiresbetween generator and ATS must be run in MI cable and to refer to NEC 700.9. Ican’t find anything specifically that requires these conductors to be run in MIor 2 hour rated.
Click to expand...

In the 2014 edition it's found at 700.10(D)(3) which refers to 700.10(D)(1) (1)-(5).
 
Thanks, I see. Does RGS conduit give a 1 hour rating. Seems like those conductors between ATS and genset only need 1 hour rating or be run in sprinkler protected area.
 

Attachments

  • Pages from NEC CODE BOOK.pdf
    140.6 KB · Views: 0
mstrlucky74 said:
Thanks, I see. Does RGS conduit give a 1 hour rating. Seems like those conductors between ATS and genset only need 1 hour rating or be run in sprinkler protected area.
Click to expand...

In general, RGS will not provide any additional fire protection as far as the requirements are concerned, unless it is part of a listed assembly for that purpose.

By what you sent it looks like you are on the 2008 edition of the NEC. Is this correct?

It looks like if the control wiring is run entirely in a sprinklered area(s) you would be OK. Depending on the situation and the number of conductors you might have to run, it might actually be cheaper to install sprinklers than comply with any of the other methods listed.
 
gadfly56 said:
In general, RGS will not provide any additional fire protection as far as the requirements are concerned, unless it is part of a listed assembly for that purpose.

By what you sent it looks like you are on the 2008 edition of the NEC. Is this correct?

It looks like if the control wiring is run entirely in a sprinklered area(s) you would be OK. Depending on the situation and the number of conductors you might have to run, it might actually be cheaper to install sprinklers than comply with any of the other methods listed.
Click to expand...

Yes I was referring to 08'.

Thanks.
 
compliance with 700.10(D)(1)

compliance with 700.10(D)(1)

In situations such as this where sprinklers are used to comply with 700.10(D)(1) I wonder what constitutes sprinkler protection. The reason I ask is that in most situations the space where the feeder is running, say, above a suspended ceiling is not sprinklered-only the space below. Does this meet the requirement of 700.10(D)(1)(1)?
We have a similar job as this and are not sure of the answer. There seems to be argument both ways on this.
 
texie said:
In situations such as this where sprinklers are used to comply with 700.10(D)(1) I wonder what constitutes sprinkler protection. The reason I ask is that in most situations the space where the feeder is running, say, above a suspended ceiling is not sprinklered-only the space below. Does this meet the requirement of 700.10(D)(1)(1)?
We have a similar job as this and are not sure of the answer. There seems to be argument both ways on this.
Click to expand...

You would have to go to NFPA 13 to decipher what "fully sprinklered" would mean in any given situation. If the area above a suspended ceiling is for "other envrionmental air" (plenum) but otherwise is non-combustible, you don't need sprinklers in the cavity. If the T.O.C. is wood joists and decking, now you need it. You wouldn't put sprinklers in the wall cavities, for instance. The sprinklers are designed to keep the fire away from the cable, not pour water on the cable directly.
 
gadfly56 said:
If you can figure out what class of building and occupancy he has from his OP, you are WAY better at this than I am. ;)
Click to expand...

I narrowed it down to just about any building in NYC that has MI cable would have sprinklers. :)
 
gadfly56 said:
You would have to go to NFPA 13 to decipher what "fully sprinklered" would mean in any given situation. If the area above a suspended ceiling is for "other envrionmental air" (plenum) but otherwise is non-combustible, you don't need sprinklers in the cavity. If the T.O.C. is wood joists and decking, now you need it. You wouldn't put sprinklers in the wall cavities, for instance. The sprinklers are designed to keep the fire away from the cable, not pour water on the cable directly.
Click to expand...

Yes, I see your logic and think I agree. In other words, if the building meets the requirements as a fully sprinklered building, then it is "fully protected by an approved automatic fire suppression system" per the NEC. I think your wall cavity example makes the point well-you wouldn't put sprinklers in a wall cavity just because it had an Art. 700 feeder it. The same would be true for the unsprinklered space in a ceiling as that may be no different than a wall cavity in many situations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top