| Arc Flash Forum https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/ |
|
| Table 130.7(C)(9)(a) https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=59 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | raffle [ Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Table 130.7(C)(9)(a) |
I heard there is a good possibility in the next revision of NFPA, some of the tables might be removed. What is the possibility that the 600V Class Switchgear table will stay as is with notes 5 and 6 staying exactly as they are? I hate to be doing everything based on Table 130 and then find this table is fully altertered when the new version come out. Raffle |
|
| Author: | K. Jackson [ Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
In a copy of the 2008 ROP Report on Proposals that I have it looks like the table will be around for 2008. I could not imagine it going away. The Report on Comments are due in February with things being finalized in a few months. Footnote 5 is now 35 kA up to 0.5 Seconds. That corresponds with the the Tennative Interim Amendment that was in the 2004 version. Foot note 6 seems to disappear, there is just the note ROP 349 and then it is blank. |
|
| Author: | raffle [ Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
If footnote 6 disappears, then we cannot reduce the hazard/ risk category by one of the short circuit current available is less than 25 kA. By the way, these tables appear to be much easier to use, so why are people spending so much time doing the IEEE method, especially when these tables will still be around? I am looking at this from the compliance perspective. |
|
| Author: | K. Jackson [ Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That one stumped me too. All I saw was "ROP 349" where footnote's 6 text was. It would seem odd that reducing by 1 category for < 10kA would disappear. Does anyone else know the history of this? |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 7 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|