| Arc Flash Forum https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/ |
|
| 70E Table versus IEEE85 PPE Levels https://brainfiller.com/arcflashforum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=66 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | haze10 [ Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 70E Table versus IEEE85 PPE Levels |
I am a little confused as to why the 70E Table would list different PPE Level for conditions when the Incident Energy may be the same. Using the Table for 600V MCCs, changing fuses is 2* while inserting a bucket is Level 3. If the Incident Energy was calculated to be 7.9 cal/cm2, would it matter what function you are performing. The Table says its based upon 2 cycle clearing and 65K AFC. I can understand the need to adjust the PPE level to the task at hand, and inserting a bucket is riskier than changing a fuse. But if you follow IEEE for calculating Incident Energy, and you install labels that have PPE Levels, are those PPE Levels subject to change depending on the task. How does one deal with this when labelling, if PPE level is dependant on task. |
|
| Author: | WDeanN [ Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Haze, If you perform the calculations, you should use the PPE levels as calculated for any task. The only reason for the levels at that point is to determine how much PPE to wear. (face shield, hearing protection, switching suit, etc.) The tables are hazard/risk tables, and very little effort is made to actually determine the actual energy levels. They, in their infinite wisdom, decided that if you were changing a fuse, you would not get hurt as bad as if you were inserting a bucket, because inserting a bucket is riskier. So no, PPE is not dependent on task if you calculate the energy levels. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 7 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|