I am currently rewiring a local community college and the Electrical engineer has put in the specs a requirement to furnish and install a sheet metal drip pan over all panels in all panel rooms existing and new. I can not find any example for this anywhere. All panels are indoor and in a dry location. They are all type 1 enclosures. The reason was explained to me that since they installed a new sprikler system that I must fullfill this requirement. I have never seen this requirement at all and can not find it in the NEC and only a slight mention in NFPA 13 8.15.10.2. All panels are installed with all wire and conduit. Please Help explain this. Thanks. BTW no nema 3R panels or hubs are required to do this. That was the first question I asked.
Sheet metal drip pans over electric panels? For Sprinkler Protection?
- Thread starter chad865
- Start date
- Status
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
110.26(F)(1)(a) mentions that no leak protection apparatus is to be installed within dedicated electrical equipment space.
That is about all you will find in the NEC.
I don't think the installation of a fire sprinkler system requires NEMA 3R or better enclosures or that a fire sprinkler is a source to call an area a wet or damp location. If the sprinkler is called on to do its job then any damage needs assesed and appropriate repairs can be done otherwise you have a dry location and the shields are not needed.
That is about all you will find in the NEC.
I don't think the installation of a fire sprinkler system requires NEMA 3R or better enclosures or that a fire sprinkler is a source to call an area a wet or damp location. If the sprinkler is called on to do its job then any damage needs assesed and appropriate repairs can be done otherwise you have a dry location and the shields are not needed.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
I am not a fire sprinkler expert but what good does it do to place a sprinkler in an electrical room and then sheild all of the equipment from the sprinkler, this is about as productive as removing the sprinkler and installing a pipe plug in its place.
Everyone has heard the saying water and electricity don't mix, but if you have a situation where the sprinkler is called on to do its job then who cares what happens, it is going to burn down anyway if no sprinkler was there.
Everyone has heard the saying water and electricity don't mix, but if you have a situation where the sprinkler is called on to do its job then who cares what happens, it is going to burn down anyway if no sprinkler was there.
I have seen situations where "wet" sprinkler piping will "sweat" in high humidity locations and sprinkler couplings can leak. A small drip pan under a sprinkler pipe will address these issues without necessarily blocking the sprinkler head for fire protection.
Personally I can see no reason to treat a sprinkler pipe differently from any other water or drain pipe.
Personally I can see no reason to treat a sprinkler pipe differently from any other water or drain pipe.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
If the sprinkler piping is in the 110.26(F)(1) space, then a drip pan is required by the NEC. No protection is required for sprinkler piping and head installed in electrical equipment spaces if the piping and heads are outside of the dedicated equipment space.
NEMA 250: 2008: 4.2 Rainproof - A Type 3R or 3RX enclosure may be marked "Rainproof".
3R and 3RX when properly installed resist water, sleet, snow.
Types 3,4,6 are outdoor panels that are supposed to resist water, sleet, snow. Should not require any additional protection against the sprinklers when installed correctly.
Types 5,12,13 are indoor panels that are to provide some protection against dripping and light splashing. Will probably be effective against the sprinkler if installed correctly.
In any case, if the enclosure is not installed correctly that "rain shield" will not be effective. I've seen those sprinklers go off. They aren't like the movies. It's monsoon time, not shower time. Water will be pouring off the shield and down its sides onto anything below. Maybe with less force and volume. But it won't be dry.
3R and 3RX when properly installed resist water, sleet, snow.
Types 3,4,6 are outdoor panels that are supposed to resist water, sleet, snow. Should not require any additional protection against the sprinklers when installed correctly.
Types 5,12,13 are indoor panels that are to provide some protection against dripping and light splashing. Will probably be effective against the sprinkler if installed correctly.
In any case, if the enclosure is not installed correctly that "rain shield" will not be effective. I've seen those sprinklers go off. They aren't like the movies. It's monsoon time, not shower time. Water will be pouring off the shield and down its sides onto anything below. Maybe with less force and volume. But it won't be dry.
brian john
Senior Member
- Location
- Leesburg, VA
The engineer is missing the point when a sprinkler head goes off two things happen.
First water goes EVERYWHERE and a sheet metal pan is like the proverbial whizzing in the wind, water water everywhere.
Second when the water hits the fire and steam is generated, well if you think you stand a chance of catching the water good luck with the steam, steam will permeate everything.
So basically well he may have good intentions he is wasting someones money and time IMO.
Washington DC requires these over main switchboards and I cannot think of any cases where the pans have prevented any damage from a sprinkler release. Possible from a slow leak, but a full on sprinkler head going at it, nah.
First water goes EVERYWHERE and a sheet metal pan is like the proverbial whizzing in the wind, water water everywhere.
Second when the water hits the fire and steam is generated, well if you think you stand a chance of catching the water good luck with the steam, steam will permeate everything.
So basically well he may have good intentions he is wasting someones money and time IMO.
Washington DC requires these over main switchboards and I cannot think of any cases where the pans have prevented any damage from a sprinkler release. Possible from a slow leak, but a full on sprinkler head going at it, nah.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
Are you telling us that the panels must be protected from the operation of the sprinkler system?
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
Of course, you wouldn't want the sprinkler to get the panel wet if it is on fire now would you
No. I'm saying these enclosures are already rated to resist the sprinkler system as is. As long as you are sealing your holes as required, there should not be an issue.
A number of these NEMA enclosures are rated for hose down in an industrial facility. As long as you seal the conduit connections correctly the sprinkler will have no effect on them.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
But there is no need or requirement to have the electrical enclosures rated to resist the operation of the sprinkler system. The only code requirement is for drip protection when the sprinkler piping runs in the dedicated space above the enclosures.
I think that you mean over the dedicated space not thru the dedicated space which would be a violation of Section 110.26 (F) (1) (a).
Last edited:
No, if I were stating a requirement then I would post the reference.
I have only stated that, in brief, any NEMA enclosure other than Type 1 or 2 would not need any additional protection. I did not state that it was either required or desired to protect them from sprinklers.
Frankly, with the water mist a sprinkler generates, I don't believe you can design a shield that will keep the Type 1 enclosure vents from breathing the water.
brian john
Senior Member
- Location
- Leesburg, VA
If a fire sets off the sprinkler NEMA 3R would be useless, steam permeates everything.
Catching a drip with a pan, OK stopping the sprinkle from affecting the distribution equipment a waste of time.
Should not be steam, only mist. I have a lot of enclosures here that are covered regularly in mist - Soluble oil in water. The only infiltration points are bad conduit connections.
- Location
- Illinois
- Occupation
- retired electrician
If there is a fire that sets off the sprinklers, there will be lots of steam. The conversion of the water to steam is one of the main ways that the sprinkler system puts out the fire. It removes the heat from the fire triangle. However, if the electrical room is hot enough to activate the sprinkler system, the electrical equipment is probably already junk.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
I will not argue with the idea that the requirement is for drip protection, but I question why is the sprinkler system going to leak?
Maybe we need drip protection in most indoor installations in case the roof leaks above the protected equipment.
A water pipe that will carry cold water and have high humidity condense on it makes a lot of sense to have drip protection sometimes over more than just electrical equipment even.
As far as a potential leaking pipe, I am not entirely sold on the drip protection idea. What if a pressurized liquid media line is installed in front of the dedicated space and any dripping from this line will not fall on the electrical equipment? NO problem and no drip protection needed right? Now have the same line blow a fitting and and because of the pressure within, spray onto the electrical equipment. You can not protect from every possibility, you can not always know what all the possibilities are.
I think it is a good practice to keep the other systems that could leak onto the electrical equipment as far away as possible, but I also understand that the more systems and more complicated the facility the harder it is to do.
brian john
Senior Member
- Location
- Leesburg, VA
I have been involved in countless fires and electrical blow-ups and all involve steam. The humidity is unbearable in many cases!
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
While I think it was already said,
first in 110.26(F)(1)(a) it says no then in 110.26(F)(1)(b) it says ok but:roll:
what it is saying, between both of these two sections is if you put a foreign system in the dedicated space then you have to provide protection from leaks, if you don't then these foreign systems can not be in the dedicated space.
So no the NEC doesn't require drip protection unless you have foreign systems in the dedicated space
But what doesn't make sense is why the words
first in 110.26(F)(1)(a) it says no then in 110.26(F)(1)(b) it says ok but:roll:
what it is saying, between both of these two sections is if you put a foreign system in the dedicated space then you have to provide protection from leaks, if you don't then these foreign systems can not be in the dedicated space.
So no the NEC doesn't require drip protection unless you have foreign systems in the dedicated space
But what doesn't make sense is why the words
in 110.26(F)(1)(a)????? as (b) says you need it, but (a) says you can't have it
Last edited:
- Status