When customers tell you they would “like to upgrade” but “can’t get project approval,” what is your response?

Some contractors will ask what the magic number might be for project approval, then lower their bid to just meet it. This is a recipe not only for failure, but for disaster.

If your end user customer (e.g., the plant engineer or facilities manager) is looking for a way to get the lighting upgraded but just can’t seem to get there, suggest trying a different approach.

A common issue is the corporate office trying to smooth out cash flow by deferring (sometimes indefinitely) projects that require additional financing beyond X dollars. A big lump expenditure is a target for rejection. But the same money spent over time is often acceptable. Chances are your company isn’t in the position to provide zero interest installment payments, so what can you do?

Generally, small projects are easier to get approval for than large ones. If the facility lighting upgrade project doesn’t get approval, plan it out as a series of monthly mini-projects. Find some logical way to break the job down. For example, you can count the number of lighting circuits that need upgrading, then group them into mini-projects. Or upgrade a room or area one at a time.

Even though total project cost might be higher versus one big project, the smoother flow of capital might help the upgrade sail past the bean counters.

Source: Mark Lamendola | Mindconnection

The pass rate for electrical exams is low, even though the exams are open book. Yet among people who prepare by using any of the leading exam prep systems, the pass rate is high. Some of the performance improvement is due to solving practice problems, but mostly it’s due to understanding the “where and why” of the NEC schema—how the NEC organizes the calculation requirements.

The exams, just like real-world electrical work, test your understanding of the NEC’s schema. The exams have a time limit, so you can’t spend all day poking around in the NEC until you find the relevant requirements. When you’re charging billable hours, you can’t do that in real life either.

But why doesn’t the NEC have calculation process flow charts, worksheets, or step by step instructions? One reason the NEC doesn’t have all this additional (and costly) material is the scope of the NEC. It’s not an instruction manual for untrained persons [90.1(C)]. Nor is it a design specification. Expanding the NEC’s scope to include either of these two purposes would vastly increase its size and complexity.

Nor is the NEC concerned with optimal design. Instead, the NEC provides the minimum requirements to safeguard people and property. Per the NEC, you might select a 4AWG conductor for a given circuit. But you might want a larger conductor to accommodate future loads. Or perhaps it’s a long run and you have efficiency concerns (the NEC does not have a voltage drop requirement).

Source: Mark Lamendola | Mindconnection

A customer of yours would like to reduce high bay lighting costs, but the corporate office has turned down the funding for two of your proposals already. You can save the customer money, but they can’t afford to do the project. Does this sound familiar?

It’s likely a matter of cash flow and capital. The solution is to find out what the limits are for this type of project, and then propose something within those limits. Ask for a meeting, preferably in person or via Skype, with the plant controller (or person in a similar role). The stated and actual purpose is to learn what the controller needs to get project approval and what amount everyone could realistically expect to be approved. Think of the controller as your funding obstacle coach and focus the discussion on that concept.

What if the limit is well below what’s needed to replace the existing lighting system? Trade the idea of total replacement for “low cost major upgrade.” This is now possible, due to innovative lighting products that have hit the market over the past year.

For example, one product dramatically cuts the time of upgrading fluorescent fixtures by integrating components you’d normally have to wire in the field. There are LED fixtures that you can use as direct replacements for metal halide HID fixtures of a given size (as opposed to wiring in a whole new system with new raceway, new supports, etc.).

Source: Mark Lamendola | Mindconnection

OSHA’s role relative to electrical personnel safety requirements is (with the few exceptions listed in 29CFR1926, Subpart K) to turn certain NEC requirements into federal law.

Spacing around equipment is one of those requirements. It’s important to understand that as you struggle to get management to “give” you enough space around equipment, you aren’t asking them to do you any personal favors. You are explaining to them how to comply with federal law.

It’s not that you’d like to have about three feet of empty space in front of a transformer, except for those boxes that are easy to move. It’s that specific minimum clearances are federally mandated.

The minimums for equipment operating at under 600V are in Article 110, Part II. For equipment operating above 600V, the minimums are in Part III.

Meeting legal requirements is a good first step. But minimum spacing might not be enough to permit adequately supporting production or a wider safety goal.

Example 1. The proposed location for an electrical cabinet for a critical production line puts its face three feet from a wall. With a maintenance cart and two electricians in there and the cabinet doors almost scraping the wall, how effective are downtime calls going to be?

Example 2. Suppose you have 480V switchgear located near an exit commonly used by production workers. Table 110.26(A)(1) tells us the minimum working space is three feet. That is not enough to ensure the safety of those production workers.

Source: Mark Lamendola | Mindconnection

The requirements for motor rating determination and for sizing the conductors that supply motor-related equipment are in subsection 430.6. This subsection starts off by essentially telling you to select your conductors the same way you would for any other circuit.

What it doesn’t tell you is that getting the ampacity right is the tricky part. Article 430 provides detailed instructions, later.

Once you know the correct ampacity for a given motor circuit conductor, then you can turn to the ampacity tables in 310.15(B). As with other conductors, you also have the option of calculating the ampacity per 310.15(C).

To determine the motor rating, you first need to decide what type of application this is. You have four choices:

1. General motor application.
2. Torque motor.
3. AC adjustable motor.
4. Valve actuator motor assembly.

If it’s not one of the last three, it automatically defaults to the first one. Let’s look at those requirements.

Base motor overload protection on the motor nameplate current rating [430.7(A)(2)]. For all motors except low-speed, high-torque, or multi-speed, don’t use the actual current rating on the motor to determine the ampacity of conductors. This same restriction applies to determining the ampere ratings of switches and overcurrent protection devices. Instead, use the NEC’s Table 430.247, 430.248, 430.249, or 230.50 as applicable.

For:

• Torque motors, use the locked-rotor current.
• AC adjustable motors, use the maximum operating current on the motor nameplate.
• Valve actuator, use the name-plate full load current.

Source: Mark Lamendola | Mindconnection