non-incendive circuit analogy in IEC standards

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

allen.west

Member
Location
Australia
Can any one help with this problem?
Equipment certified as non-incendive circuit by CSA Standards which is the IEC standards analogy to that protection technique.
The CSA certification say -
CSA certified , accepted for use in this application when connected to non-incendive circuit. connected to annunciator non-incendive circuit.
Is it possible to say what class, division and gas group it is applicable and what will be IEC standard analogy of protection technique usd.
It is a pressure switch gauge intended for typical Class 1 Division 1 Group C & D application. Which will be located in zone 2.
 
allen.west said:
typical Class 1 Division 1 Group C & D application. Which will be located in zone 2.
Click to expand...
totally different systems of classification and protection, and many products suitable for one system are not suitable for the other.

in any case a zone 2 application is closer to division 2 than division 1.
 
Assuming it is for a US domestic installation, a CSA certification can be meaningless unless the product certification is also to a US National Safety Standard; more specifically in Hazloc applications, an ANSI/ISA 12 Series standard. CSA has several “marks” that indicate that their product certification is to a US standard.

Canada has done a much more through job adopting the IEC 60079 series standards than the US. A few IEC standards have been recognized by incorporation into the ANSI/ISA 12 Series.

If there is a valid US domestic certification, interchangeability is determined by Section 501.5 for Zone marked equipment in Division classified locations and Section 505.20 for Division marked equipment in Zone Classified locations.

A pressure switch gauge marked for Class I, Division 1, Group C & D is suitable for Class I, Zone 1 & 2 of the same gas and suitable temperature class. NOTE: Gas groups are not as easy to interchange as might be believed. Review NFPA 497 carefully.
 
non-incendive circuit

non-incendive circuit

The equipment is part of gas compressor package manufactured in Canada which is indented to be used in Australia.
Equipment is located inside a Ex V enclosure which is to be located in Zone 2.

Does this non-incendive circuit comes under intrinsic safety?







rbalex said:
Assuming it is for a US domestic installation, a CSA certification can be meaningless unless the product certification is also to a US National Safety Standard; more specifically in Hazloc applications, an ANSI/ISA 12 Series standard. CSA has several ?marks? that indicate that their product certification is to a US standard.

Canada has done a much more through job adopting the IEC 60079 series standards than the US. A few IEC standards have been recognized by incorporation into the ANSI/ISA 12 Series.

If there is a valid US domestic certification, interchangeability is determined by Section 501.5 for Zone marked equipment in Division classified locations and Section 505.20 for Division marked equipment in Zone Classified locations.

A pressure switch gauge marked for Class I, Division 1, Group C & D is suitable for Class I, Zone 1 & 2 of the same gas and suitable temperature class. NOTE: Gas groups are not as easy to interchange as might be believed. Review NFPA 497 carefully.
Click to expand...
 
You may be under the misconception that the US and Canada use the same electrical codes. The national standards are similar in many conceptual respects and there is often interchange at the national technical committee level; but the standards development processes are different and there are still significant differences in various practices. As I said in my earlier post, the Canadian Electrical Code is much more closely attuned to IEC standards than the US National Electrical Code with respect to Hazardous Location practices.

Technically there is no direct analog to nonincendive in the IEC scheme. It is probably closest to ?ic? or ?nL.? Basically, nonincendive essentially means the wiring and equipment is energy limited under ?normal? conditions and is suitable only for Division 2.

Permission to use nonincendive methods in a US classified Zone would be under NEC Section 505.20 as I mentioned before. There is a similar concept in the Canadian Code although I?m not sure what Rule to cite.

My non-authoritative opinion is that a properly installed, Canadian listed, nonincendive device should be acceptable in Zone 2.
 
CSA certification

CSA certification

Thanks Robert
The Hazardous area equipment CSA certification document which we got from the manufacture does not say which type of protection they use. The certificate only says certified for Hazardous area Class 1 division 1 Gas group C & D.
The certificate covers all energised and de-energised equipments (de-energised during gas detector activation) in Ex V enclosure. Will there be separate document to cover each individual equipment.
 
One commonality between the US and Canada it that an entire assembly may be certified even if some of the part or components are not individually certified. Again my non-authoritative opinion is that a properly installed assembly, CSA certified for application in Class I, Division 1, Group C&D should be acceptable in Zone 2 of the same gas and suitable temperature class. I am assuming the gas under consideration is methane. It is Group D in the Division scheme and Group IIA in Zones. It is ?T1? in both schemes.
 
compliancy with IEC or AS standard

compliancy with IEC or AS standard

Hi Rob
It is matter of compliancy with IEC or AS standard. In Australia any equipment to be used in hazardous area should be certified under IEC Ex or AS Ex schemes. If it is not certified a under these schemes a conformity assessment document is required. For this purpose we have to compare relevant parts of both standards ( the standard which it is certified and AS standard ) then state that the equipment is certified to similar or better standard. In IEC and AS standards it clearly states which protection techniques can be used in each zones.
 
I have no doubt you are correct. That's one reason I qualified my opinion as "non-authoritative."

We have similar constraints in the US. Most jurisdictions require that electrical products be certified by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). Several NRTLs have laboratories outside the US but the certification must be to a US product standard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top