UL 508 Enclosed ICP environmental rating

[Watchfog]

First post on the forum for me .

Just when you think UL 508 is making sense to you, it's not. Hoping to use a Heyco flex NM liquidtight 1/2 conduit connector (#8402) on enclosure . Piece is UL Listed , but no NEMA environmental rating is listed , only IP 68 is given in any Heyco literature . UL 508A section 19 comes in to play here . Enclosure and all other cord grips are rated NEMA 4 or 12 . Can I "assume" the IP 68 of the conduit connector is good enough for a NEMA 4 or am I stuck with derating to a type 1 enclosure or investigating a conduit connector that is environmentally rated ?

 

[tom baker]

NEMA and IP ratings don't cross over, NEC and UL? don't recognize IP ratings.

 

[Jraef]

UL adopted the NEMA enclosure standards a few years ago. So NEMA 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. are now UL type 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. The standards are exactly the same.

It is correct that for you to not violate the rules of UL environmental listing of an enclosure, any device penetrating the enclosure must have an equal or greater UL environmental rating on it. You cannot assume an IEC IP rating is the same, it must be LISTED by UL for the environmental rating of the enclosure.

The Heyco fittings are UL listed though, so they should have a UL environmental rating in their file. You're right though, it's not in their data sheet. I would call them and tell them you need that information.

 

[SceneryDriver]

I had to label an outdoor control panel "UL TYPE 1" and "NEMA 4" to satisfy both the UL inspector and the client's spec. Why? Because nobody MAKES an Ethernet passthrough that's listed as UL TYPE 4. I had a passthrough that was rated IP69K but that couldn't satisfy the UL overlords. I also had to jump through hoops to mount the brake resistor in that panel because I couldn't get the magic "blessed by UL" gasketed screws for mounting through the side of the enclosure while maintaining the environmental rating.

The client completely understood and accepted the label doublespeak. They've been through it all before. And UL wonders why we dropped our 508A status...


SceneryDriver

 

[Watchfog]

UL adopted the NEMA enclosure standards a few years ago. So NEMA 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. are now UL type 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. The standards are exactly the same.

It is correct that for you to not violate the rules of UL environmental listing of an enclosure, any device penetrating the enclosure must have an equal or greater UL environmental rating on it. You cannot assume an IEC IP rating is the same, it must be LISTED by UL for the environmental rating of the enclosure.

The Heyco fittings are UL listed though, so they should have a UL environmental rating in their file. You're right though, it's not in their data sheet. I would call them and tell them you need that information.

Sounds like i am not alone here with my issues . If someone knows of the magic IP to Nema crossover that is sanctioned by UL ,, please make it known. I checked the Heyco File number for more info , but no luck there. I'll see if I can get an answer out of Heyco, hope its other than "it UL Listed " so its good...

 

[petersonra]

I had to label an outdoor control panel "UL TYPE 1" and "NEMA 4" to satisfy both the UL inspector and the client's spec. Why? Because nobody MAKES an Ethernet passthrough that's listed as UL TYPE 4.

UL 508a does not seem to require it be "listed". Only marked. And there are a number of such bulkhead type fittings available for ethernet.

 

[petersonra]

This is another option for dealing with openings in an enclosure. This is just one brand of such windows.

 

[Watchfog]

UL 508a does not seem to require it be "listed". Only marked. And there are a number of such bulkhead type fittings available for ethernet.

View attachment 2556196
[/QUO
I think Scenery Driver was in the same situation I am in . The component I want to use is a UL Listed component , but they do not publish a NEMA Environmental rating with the component to satisfy 508 requirements .

 

[petersonra]

First post on the forum for me .

Just when you think UL 508 is making sense to you, it's not. Hoping to use a Heyco flex NM liquidtight 1/2 conduit connector (#8402) on enclosure . Piece is UL Listed , but no NEMA environmental rating is listed , only IP 68 is given in any Heyco literature . UL 508A section 19 comes in to play here . Enclosure and all other cord grips are rated NEMA 4 or 12 . Can I "assume" the IP 68 of the conduit connector is good enough for a NEMA 4 or am I stuck with derating to a type 1 enclosure or investigating a conduit connector that is environmentally rated ?

Since the fitting is only marked as suitable for wet locations if you use their O ring, it seems likely to me that it won't meet the requirements for a type 4 enclosure anyway. There are some pretty serious tests it would have to pass to be marked as type 4 and even with the O ring it probably would fail.

 

[SceneryDriver]

UL 508a does not seem to require it be "listed". Only marked. And there are a number of such bulkhead type fittings available for ethernet.

View attachment 2556196

... And that's another gripe I have about UL. No consistent enforcement or interpretation of their own standards. And no one you can call to actually find out. My inspector claimed that the passthrough needed to be listed by UL for use in a 508A control panel as a TYPE 4 penetration. He wouldn't budge.

Their field inspectors can't answer technical questions either. "That's not what they are trained to do" is the response I got. Then what are they for?! If they can't answer technical questions about the UL standard they're supposed to be inspecting to, how can they be expected to inspect to the standard?


SceneryDriver

 

[petersonra]

... And that's another gripe I have about UL. No consistent enforcement or interpretation of their own standards. And no one you can call to actually find out. My inspector claimed that the passthrough needed to be listed by UL for use in a 508A control panel as a TYPE 4 penetration. He wouldn't budge.

Their field inspectors can't answer technical questions either. "That's not what they are trained to do" is the response I got. Then what are they for?! If they can't answer technical questions about the UL standard they're supposed to be inspecting to, how can they be expected to inspect to the standard?


SceneryDriver

My take is they are not inspecting to the standard. My take is they are making sure you fill out the forms correctly and maintain an accurate log of the UL labels you apply.

They seem to have a different point of emphasis each visit that they do check for.

You can email the principle engineer for clarification. Sometimes he will respond. Sometimes not.

 

[cpickett]

UL adopted the NEMA enclosure standards a few years ago. So NEMA 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. are now UL type 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. The standards are exactly the same.

Are you sure about that? It looks like don't entirely align for whatever reason, at least for some of these enclosures from Saginaw. Or is it just that they didn't test and list it for type 13 for whatever reason?



SCE-24EL2412LP - Saginaw Control and Engineering

 

[petersonra]

Type 13 is not real common it is basically type 12 but protects against spraying oil and coolants as well.

 

[jim dungar]

I remember NEMA 13 being a rating for control stations, like for pushbuttons, rather than for general enclosures.

 

[petersonra]

I remember NEMA 13 being a rating for control stations, like for pushbuttons, rather than for general enclosures.

That's because they are the ones usually exposed to spraying coolant.

 

[Watchfog]

UL adopted the NEMA enclosure standards a few years ago. So NEMA 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. are now UL type 1, 3R, 12, 4, 4X etc. The standards are exactly the same.

It is correct that for you to not violate the rules of UL environmental listing of an enclosure, any device penetrating the enclosure must have an equal or greater UL environmental rating on it. You cannot assume an IEC IP rating is the same, it must be LISTED by UL for the environmental rating of the enclosure.

The Heyco fittings are UL listed though, so they should have a UL environmental rating in their file. You're right though, it's not in their data sheet. I would call them and tell them you need that information.

I got an answer back from Heyco "the HFC series, they do not have any NEMA type ratings , only the IP68 which is through internal testing " . So that is a dead end.
They have a series that does have a NEMA rating , so we will migrate to that series ; 9147 Heyco Flex 3 , NEMA rating right on the datasheet.

 

[Jraef]

Are you sure about that? It looks like don't entirely align for whatever reason, at least for some of these enclosures from Saginaw. Or is it just that they didn't test and list it for type 13 for whatever reason?

View attachment 2556210

SCE-24EL2412LP - Saginaw Control and Engineering

There is no difference between UL type 13 and NEMA type 13 requirements. They are exactly the same as they are for all other ratings).

I can't speak to why Saginaw would not get UL type 13, but maybe because under NEMA rules, a manufacturer could just "say" that it met the requirements, but under UL, it must be tested for each one. It costs a lot to get each rating, and the demand for UL type 13 was maybe not high enough to warrant it? Type 13 is only going to be required in industrial plants, who do not often rely on UL listing as much as other industries, because they have their own internal standards that are sometimes MORE stringent, and they are not going to have to worry about local AJHs inspecting it. That's just speculation though. It might just as easily be that some typist didn't punch those keys into that document...