Safety Switch Defeat

[gabany]

I'm sorry if this has been covered before but I can not find it.
I noticed certain manufacturers of safety / disconnect switches (fused or unfused) do not make the switch with a defeat so you you can open while in the "ON" position. These are just standard 30-60-100A 240-600V disconnect switches.
When I ask the vendor, "the manufacturer has stopped installing the defeat mechanism due to new code requirements"
What code requirement is this?

 

[hillbilly]

I don't think that it's covered by the NEC. It may be a OSHA requirement.
steve

 

[petersonra]

I don't think that it's covered by the NEC. It may be a OSHA requirement.
steve

In the back of my brain, there is some remembrance that this is only an issue with service rated disconnect switches for some reason.

 

[jim dungar]

There are interlock defeater restrictions in NFPA79 for machine panels, but nothing in the NEC for <600V equipment.

 

[peteo]

Just a stab in the dark, we're not using the 2005 NEC here yet. Let me try... folks with better knowledge may correct me.

2002 430.102(B) Exception has locks 'permanently installed on or at the switch or circuit breaker used as the disconnecting means.'

2005 430.102(B) Exception says: " The provision for locking or adding a lock to the disconnecting means shall be installed on or at the switch or circuit breaker used as the disconnecting means and shall remain in place with or without the lock installed."

In other words, the CE way, with lockout not being defeated by having the cover open.

This page from T&B gives the following analysis:

ANALYSIS OF CHANGE: ​

This change clarified that the locking means must be available at all times and that portable locking means, which can be removed when the lock is removed, are not allowed as a means for lockouts on disconnecting means that are not within sight of the motor. The words "and shall remain in place with or without the lock installed" were added.

 

[jim dungar]

That section from T&B would address the issue of cover mounted operators. It does not address the issue of defeating the door interlock of a flanged or side mounted (like on a safety switch) operating mechanism.

 

[gabany]

Explained

Explained

Well, my dilema is solved.
Turns out I got defective switches,,, and the guy I talked to at the help desk was just slightly confused, and just made the "new code" thing up!
They are still manufacturing safety switches with defeaters, with no plans to stop.

 

[genesparky]

I recently called SQ D on this issue. The sales engineer told me that Standard Duty switches do not have that option. You must specify Heavy Duty safety switches to get the defeater.

 

[dsteves]

I recently called SQ D on this issue. The sales engineer told me that Standard Duty switches do not have that option. You must specify Heavy Duty safety switches to get the defeater.

You don't need a cover interlock override if you don't have a cover interlock.

Light- and general-duty Square D safety switches do not have cover interlocks. See Digest 173 pages 3-1 through 3-4.

Dan

 

[genesparky]

You don't need a cover interlock override if you don't have a cover interlock.

Light- and general-duty Square D safety switches do not have cover interlocks. See Digest 173 pages 3-1 through 3-4.

Dan

I am not sure that is true, I recently inadvertantly installed 2 general duty safety switches that can not be opened with out killing the power. That is why I called SQ D.