| Arc Flash Forum https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/ |
|
| Arc flash-rated badge lanyards? https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2266 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | garyc [ Wed May 30, 2012 8:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Arc flash-rated badge lanyards? |
Our plant's standard issue breakaway lanyards have metal alligator clips, snaps, etc. so they can present a shock hazard. Has anyone identified an arc flash-rated badge lanyard that is commercially available? |
|
| Author: | JBD [ Wed May 30, 2012 9:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
How does it represent a shock hazard? |
|
| Author: | garyc [ Wed May 30, 2012 10:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Qualified personnel cannot wear conductive material within an electrical hazard boundary, and I realized this should include my badge lanyard or clip. I know there are arc flash-rated fall protection lanyards, is there such a thing for badge holders? |
|
| Author: | JBD [ Wed May 30, 2012 12:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
garyc wrote: Qualified personnel cannot wear conductive material within an electrical hazard boundary, and I realized this should include my badge lanyard or clip. This must be a company policy as it is not worded this way in NFPA70E. For example, 130.3(B)(1) allows for safe work practices, such as 'clipping' the lanyard to your clothing so that it does not swing into a restricted approach boundary as outlined in 130.4(C) (i.e. 1ft @ 480V). If your lanyard regularly swings 1 ft away from your body it probably interferes with your work regardless of the shock potential. |
|
| Author: | Allison White [ Thu May 31, 2012 1:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I use a company called Snugz. They offer 100% cotton lanyards with plastic bulldog clips. |
|
| Author: | garyc [ Thu May 31, 2012 2:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks Allison. |
|
| Author: | elihuiv [ Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
100% cotton will still burn. Chums has a Kevlar lanyard with plastic clips. I have arc tested them. They do not ignite, melt or drip to 40 cal. I do not work for Chums but did the test. |
|
| Author: | MIControl [ Tue Jun 12, 2012 2:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
This brings up a point that I have questioned since reading the rules. I wear a non-conductive wedding ring and we are not allowed to wear watches in our facility, but, if I were to be wearing my origial white gold ring and a watch, these are both covered by my Class 0 gloves when I am within the restricted approach distance. How does that pose a hazard? If it is going to get that close to touch either the ring or the watch, or badge in this case, I am WAY too close. |
|
| Author: | elihuiv [ Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
MIControl wrote: This brings up a point that I have questioned since reading the rules. I wear a non-conductive wedding ring and we are not allowed to wear watches in our facility, but, if I were to be wearing my origial white gold ring and a watch, these are both covered by my Class 0 gloves when I am within the restricted approach distance. How does that pose a hazard? If it is going to get that close to touch either the ring or the watch, or badge in this case, I am WAY too close. The standard does not allow you to wear a ring or a watch in the 2009 version forward. The watch can fall off and the ring will cause gloves to wear out faster (I'm not a fan of the ring part since it isn't always practical. I've never seen a non-conductive wedding ring but that's a nice idea.) The badge is also not allowed if it is metal containing unless it stays outside the restricted approach distance. This is pretty easy to do practically but if the lanyard breaks and falls into buswork, it could potentially be a hazard. |
|
| Author: | MIControl [ Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The ring is ceramic and carbon-fiber. I tested it with the Meggar at 1000V and got no return. I also understand the extra wear factor, but in our facility, I only need to glove-up a couple of time a week and our gloves are tested every 6 months. I haven't seen any issues yet. |
|
| Author: | A King [ Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[font=Tahoma]2012 NFPA-70E Article 130.6(D) covers conductive articles being worn and states that they, “shall not be worn where they present an electrical contact hazard…”[/font] I don’t believe that rings, watches or bracelets are a good idea in any manufacturing, construction or other similar environment even when there are no electrical hazards. I've heard too many bad stories, witnessed a few incidents, and value my hands too much to risk it. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 7 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|