Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 36 replies
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 2730 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

VRF Equipment fed off local Lighting Circuits

Eddie Currents
What are your thoughts with VRF Equipment being fed off local Lighting circuits – For me not good practice and strongly oppose this but i cannot find a Clause anywhere in the new Regulations. Has anyone ever come across this before or am i being too pedantic ? The VRF Units will have local isolation but for me its still a problem as you will lose your Lighting if you need to switch off at the Breaker for any reason like switching for Mechanical Maintenance. 

Parents
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    Fandango:

    It's our policy that we isolate power before entering voids due to an historical issue therefore we design out the risk at design stage. If isolators are below ceilings then power is killed before entering the void above to service ny equipment - this is where I'm at - cheers 




     

    But don't appear to have done so in this case ?


    I guess you are stuck with complying with policy, adding double pole lockable isolation on all sources of supply into a ceiling void  (perhaps at the Dist. Bd. location) and living with the disruption of having the floorplate unusable for any relamping activity or for the routine checking/swapout of the FCU filters and the inspection of their condensate drain traps.


    To avoid the above, then you are likely to need a lot more circuits adding, or change the policy to include a "where present" circuits in voids will be isolated before access to the void is made.


    Or re do the RAMS to reflect the actual risk of accessing equipment within the void


    Regards


    OMS
Reply
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    Fandango:

    It's our policy that we isolate power before entering voids due to an historical issue therefore we design out the risk at design stage. If isolators are below ceilings then power is killed before entering the void above to service ny equipment - this is where I'm at - cheers 




     

    But don't appear to have done so in this case ?


    I guess you are stuck with complying with policy, adding double pole lockable isolation on all sources of supply into a ceiling void  (perhaps at the Dist. Bd. location) and living with the disruption of having the floorplate unusable for any relamping activity or for the routine checking/swapout of the FCU filters and the inspection of their condensate drain traps.


    To avoid the above, then you are likely to need a lot more circuits adding, or change the policy to include a "where present" circuits in voids will be isolated before access to the void is made.


    Or re do the RAMS to reflect the actual risk of accessing equipment within the void


    Regards


    OMS
Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines