It is currently Sat Feb 24, 2018 8:37 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
ekstra   ara
 Post subject: Label w/Multiple IEs
PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:38 am 
Offline
Sparks Level

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:10 am
Posts: 73
I am quoting printing & affixing AF labels for a new company (not yet fully commissioned, online and producing) that has already performed their analyses. The company's various operating scenarios were analyzed. This LVPCBs are CH Magnum DS with the ARMS technology which is essentially a maintenance switch used to lower (or enable) the INST setting. The study spec'd analyses with the maintenance switch on and then with it off. The downstream IE was not always affected by the maintenance switch position. Here's the issue... the company wants (and has developed a template) that includes BOTH analyses results. For instance, a panelboard was calculated at HRC #3 with the switch OFF and HRC #1 with the switch ON, therefore the label will show BOTH! Even if there is no difference in the calculated scenarios, the label will have BOTH! I think this is going to be a nightmare for whomever develops their electrical safety program. I always label for the worst case scenario and have never received a request like this. What think ye?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:18 pm 
Offline
Sparks Level

Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 7:54 am
Posts: 201
Location: St. Louis, MO
viper57 wrote:
I am quoting printing & affixing AF labels for a new company (not yet fully commissioned, online and producing) that has already performed their analyses.
...
Here's the issue... the company wants (and has developed a template) that includes BOTH analyses results.
...
What think ye?


If I wanted their business, I'd quote what they wanted. If they already have a template, then I'd use it. This at least saves you the hassle of creating a new template.
If you want to tell them you think it's a bad idea, go ahead. But you may not get a call back.

Now, personally, I think it's a bad idea as well, and would rather see just the worst case posted. Most of this is pretty confusing to the electrician seeing it for the first time, anyway.
The maintenance mode settings and resulting arc flash levels should be included in the training, regardless, if they are going to use them.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 9:36 pm 
Offline
Arc Level

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:17 am
Posts: 411
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
I think both should be included in the labelling where there is a difference. Training will not tell the worker what PPE to use at each piece of equipment when using the maintenance setting. If that were the case, why not include PPE requirements for every piece of equipment in the training and forget about the labels altogether? If you are going to have a maintenance setting to reduce the IE, why not use the lower PPE?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:00 pm
Posts: 5
viper57 wrote:
I am quoting printing & affixing AF labels for a new company (not yet fully commissioned, online and producing) that has already performed their analyses. The company's various operating scenarios were analyzed. This LVPCBs are CH Magnum DS with the ARMS technology which is essentially a maintenance switch used to lower (or enable) the INST setting. The study spec'd analyses with the maintenance switch on and then with it off. The downstream IE was not always affected by the maintenance switch position. Here's the issue... the company wants (and has developed a template) that includes BOTH analyses results. For instance, a panelboard was calculated at HRC #3 with the switch OFF and HRC #1 with the switch ON, therefore the label will show BOTH! Even if there is no difference in the calculated scenarios, the label will have BOTH! I think this is going to be a nightmare for whomever develops their electrical safety program. I always label for the worst case scenario and have never received a request like this. What think ye?


First I agree with you that this will be a nightmare for electricians with two values. In addition, it may be a liability issue if someone is wearing PPE with with switchon rating but switch is off. I would prefer only one rating and have some stringent procedures, with oversight and audits, to implement the procedures .
I noticed you mention that this is based on analysis results. If Incident energy is calculated than labels cannot be posted in HRC. HRC is a task oriented category with tasks defined in the table NFPA 70 E 130.7 (C ) ( 9) if the equipment is within the paremters of the notes at the end of the table. In this case. labels should indicate incident energy in cal/cm2 with working distance on one case only and procedures should be rigidly implemented to ensure the condition on which incident energy is based on is followed ( switch on or OFF)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 9:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 8:25 am
Posts: 4
Location: Ontario
If workers are confused about labels then the training is inadequate

Labels on their own are not effective enough particulary when the program is new
Add a work instruction placard that will clearly indicate the meaning of each line item with a picture example indicating the procedure and steps required for the correct application of PPE and the hazards and risk controls
The label alone will never provide enough guidance
The labels should be applied by the workers with an expert and specific training should be completed and signed off
John B. Salmon RME


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:10 am
Posts: 45
Location: Mid-West
training...

To me it's all about the training and procedures, and I believe although the two labels might seem confusing it may be a good idea, if you only indicate the "worst case" you could be posing more of a hazard. The maintance switch is there to reduce the clearing time reducing the incident energy level allowing you to work in a cat.1 clothing, if you are going to dress for the worst case regardless than what is the point of spending the money on the "arc flash reduction switch" . If you turn the switch on and reduce the category on the downstream panel to a cat.1 what advantage do you have to dress in a cat.3 gear with the hood and overalls, etc. this would possibly create a more dangerous situation as it would be harder to work in the unnecessary clothing and could possibly create a larger hazard. If the downstream equipment was a cat.4 with the switch off and a 1 with it on you are follow the guidelines of a cat.4 when only a 1 is present, only working for 15-20min. at a time requiring two electricians in the "moonsuit" the switch was created for a reason if you are not going to take advantage of it they why specify or install it in the first place. it's all about the training and procedures. just my 2 cents.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
© 2017 Arcflash Forum / Brainfiller, Inc. | P.O. Box 12024 | Scottsdale, AZ 85267 USA | 800-874-8883