"WORKING SPACE" For HVAC's and EWH's

[Ragin Cajun]

The electrical contractor for an apartment complex I designed called regarding the inspector hitting him hard on working spaces. I think the inspector is a bit out of line.

The inspector has no issue with the disconnects for the EWH located in a closet (typical installation).

But, the inspector rejected the ones for the condenser units outside. The contractor said that the inspector has failed all disconnects with line sets that do not come straight out from wall to unit because of the 36" rule as stated in code. He said be does not care about the condenser, rather he says a person has to be able to access the disconnect without interference. [Whatever that means.]

I see more "working space" here than in most installations I have seen. I don't see why the installation is being rejected.

Take a look at the three pictures and tell me what you think. As you can imagine, a "fix" will not be simple and expensive to boot.

I haven't spoken to the inspector yet. Want a good basis first. From past experience with this inspector, he is quite hard nosed and opinionated.

Thanks!

RC

 

[infinity]

I agree about the required 36" in front of the AC disconnects. Is that tape holding the flexible raceway? Obviously there are other problems. :roll:

 

[iwire]

I think the inspector could easily fail both the indoor and outdoor locations.

At the water heater from the looks of it there are few choices, at the outside it looks like the disconnects could be piped to better locations near the units they serve and out away from the line sets.

That is some pretty ugly refrigeration work.

 

[hillbilly1]

I haven't used smurf tube in a long time, but I seem to remember you can't use it exposed like that?

 

[steve66]

I haven't used smurf tube in a long time, but I seem to remember you can't use it exposed like that?

Good point. And I'll bet it doesn't last long on top of the hot water heater. (Due to the rising heat.)

 

[George Stolz]

I agree, the inspector was right. The line sets could also be detoured to stay out of the path.

The failure to tag the water heater could be explained by belief on the inspector's part that inspection, repair, maintenance of the water heater disconnect is not required while energized. I don't suppose the disconnect is non-fusible? For all practical purposes, the only time the WH disconnect wil be used is when replacing the water heater. Just playing devils advocate on the WH disconnect, I've had to play loose with 110.26 on that before, myself. I recall mounting a large disconnect above a grid ceiling for a water heater mounted above grid - 110.26 is a peculiar animal the way it is written, and as 404.8(A) exception 2 comes into play.

 

[Ragin Cajun]

Liquid tight is used outside.

Granted, the refrig lines could use "improvement". Need better support for both the refrig lines AND the flex. On my own house I used treated 2 X 2 on bricks and black tie wraps and one hole clamps for the conduit/flex and refrig lines.

But, in the middle picture, there's lots of room in the middle for access.

Any suggestions?

If the space here is "fail", how can we ever justify putting a disconnect above a drop ceiling for the above ceiling AHU?

One more thought, I don't see a disconnect switch falling into the category of "likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized" per 110.26(A). That's would apply to the unit controls inside the condenser enclosure.

I'm looking for a resonable solution here. As usual, they call me after things go sour.

 

[Darr247]

I agree about the required 36" in front of the AC disconnects.

I was under the impression the 36'' rule was to
a) ensure there's room to open the disconnect's door without having to step aside, and
b) allow room to work safely inside the disconnect.

What IS the measurement between the disconnect and the condensing unit in front of them?

I seem to recall liquidtite being limited to 6' unless it's supported/secured every 3' and within 1' of each end, though I'm not familiar with SC's variances from NEC. Most AHJ's I've met were reasonable... at least I've never had one knock stuff down and say "rip it all out and do it again" (not that I've never heard of that happening, though )...

 

[augie47]

In this area, the probability of both the HVAC and EWH disconnects getting rejected is very high.
Every inspector I work with does consider a disconnect means as "subject to be examined while energized". Some might be a little more lenient on single unit installations.
It looks like you might be able to slide two of the condenser units enough to provide clearance for the outside disconnects and I would definitely not mention the "difference" in enforcement on the EWH disconnects. Might get the inspector to thinking

 

[Gregg Harris]

The electrical contractor for an apartment complex I designed called regarding the inspector hitting him hard on working spaces. I think the inspector is a bit out of line.

The inspector has no issue with the disconnects for the EWH located in a closet (typical installation).

But, the inspector rejected the ones for the condenser units outside. The contractor said that the inspector has failed all disconnects with line sets that do not come straight out from wall to unit because of the 36" rule as stated in code. He said be does not care about the condenser, rather he says a person has to be able to access the disconnect without interference. [Whatever that means.]

I see more "working space" here than in most installations I have seen. I don't see why the installation is being rejected.

Take a look at the three pictures and tell me what you think. As you can imagine, a "fix" will not be simple and expensive to boot.

I haven't spoken to the inspector yet. Want a good basis first. From past experience with this inspector, he is quite hard nosed and opinionated.

Thanks!

RC

I would disagree with your inspector's interpretation of 110.26. The 36 inch clearance would apply to the ac/heatpumps controls which need to be energized during adjustment, maintenance, or service, the disconect does not need to be energized to replace fuses.

I believe he is trying to apply 110.26 (A) 3 to the disconects. 440.14 should apply to the disconects.

 

[Ragin Cajun]

All disconnects are non-fused so that should better support my previous position of the disconnect not requiring work while energized, etc.

RC

 

[augie47]

As a matter of interest I added a poll which might reflect how this is being enforced in different areas.

 

[Darr247]

Personally, I'd be more worried about the landscaper not keep those shrubs trimmed far enough away from the condensors to allow sufficient working space.
Then again, I'm not the inspector... and in the end it's probably not going to matter what anyone here thinks; I recommend calling and discussing it with the inspector to see if just properly securing/supporting the flex is what's really desired.

Because, unless my sense of scale is totally, off, I don't see how there's not 36'' of horizontal space directly in front of any of those disconnects. The top of the handles aren't more than 6'7'' off the ground, are they?

It might take a post hole digger, ten 4' pieces of strut with 20# of quikrete for each piece, and 10 strut clamps (and possibly moving the existing clamps closer to the disconnects), but I'll bet that could be made to look a lot better to the AHJ without having to tear it all out and relocate or using rigid conduit...

 

[charlie b]

Because, unless my sense of scale is totally, off, I don't see how there's not 36'' of horizontal space directly in front of any of those disconnects.

There is not, because the 36" depth has to also extend from the floor to 6'6" above the floor. There is piping in the way of the floor space. An electrician could easily trip over the pipe. I think the solution is in the world of the mechanic, not the electrician. Relocate the pipes so that they do not run below the disconnect's working space.

 

[infinity]

There is not, because the 36" depth has to also extend from the floor to 6'6" above the floor. There is piping in the way of the floor space. An electrician could easily trip over the pipe. I think the solution is in the world of the mechanic, not the electrician. Relocate the pipes so that they do not run below the disconnect's working space.

I agree with Charlie but when looking at the poll it seems that just as many feel that the working space is not required in front of the AC disconnects. Speaking from experience (I for a short time worked for an HVAC contractor) the first thing that we did when checking the unit was to open the disconnect and check for voltage. Obviously this was done while the disconnect was energized which is part of the 110.26 requirement.

 

[Ragin Cajun]

Just gotta love "fuzzy" code issues.

The general contractor will get the electrical and HVAC contractors to "get together", discuss a solution I suggested with the inspector and get the issues resolved.

Attached is another mess from a job several years ago. The city inspector passed it!



The electrical contractor was terrible! Many other issues throughout the job.

RC

 

[iwire]

Speaking from experience (I for a short time worked for an HVAC contractor) the first thing that we did when checking the unit was to open the disconnect and check for voltage.

To me that sounds like a choice you made, not a requirement of the equipment.

You could have checked it at the source.

110.26(A) Working Space. Working space for equipment operating
at 600 volts, nominal, or less to ground and likely to
require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance
while energized shall comply with the dimensions of
110.26(A)(1), (A)(2), and (A)(3) or as required or permitted
elsewhere in this Code.

As has always been the case 110.26 is not written with any real clarity.

 

[renosteinke]

I believe the technical term for work like this is "Fugly."

I mean ... am I the only guy with a shovel? That ground is freshly broken- they couldn't bury the lines? Run them flush to the building, then straight out to the units?

More on topic: Why do we have working space requirements What are disconnects for?

I would think we have disconnects so we can turn stuff OFF, and to do that we need to be able to reach them. I really hate it when you're left looking at a wall of neatly placed switches and left to wonder "Which one shall I pull?"

Really ... code rules aside ... what part of 'let's make our next trip out here easier' are folks having trouble understanding? Just wait until the gardener plants those special kudzu/cactus hybrid zombie shrubs.

The condensers, btw, are sitting on lightweight plastic pads that only lok like concrete. Someone didn't miss any tricks when it came to doing the job cheaply. Your local 'independent' recycler thenks you in advance.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm having some issues finding an HVAC guy who has even the slightest interest in doing a neat, professional job. I'm a whisker from gettin my own 'freon license,' taking on the entire job, and just letting the HVAC hack do the line connections. These guys don't want to do anything more than drop it and run; no concrete pqads, no steel cages, no running lines under the building when you can crawl up the side and punch through the attic.

 

[infinity]

To me that sounds like a choice you made, not a requirement of the equipment.

You could have checked it at the source.


As has always been the case 110.26 is not written with any real clarity.

Checking something at the source would not verify if there was a problem between the source and the disconnect. By using your argument you would never need any working space once your circuit left the source.

We can agree that the clarity in that section is severely lacking.

 

[iwire]

Checking something at the source would not verify if there was a problem between the source and the disconnect. By using your argument you would never need any working space once your circuit left the source.

Except for equipment that specifically requires it to be live during examination.


The word 'requires' is in the section for a reason, should we ignore it?

They could have left it out.

We can agree that the clarity in that section is severely lacking.

Yes.

For instance 110.26 pretty much gets tossed out the window for disconnect switches for HVAC equipment located above suspended ceilings.