[RE-wrenches] protecting wire below 8' w/awning array

Sat Jul 18 18:56:49 EDT 2020

I've always interpreted this rule to mean to the wiring, not to the 
bottom edge of the array.  110.27  refers to live parts; that's actual 
uninsulated  bare conductors, lugs, or switch contacts, etc.  Further, 
690.31(A) just says "circuit conductors shall be guarded...."  Finally, 
if the conductors are within 8 ft of the ground, then usually you can 
just put a plastic shield, or expanded aluminum lathe on the bottom of 
the rails to protect the conductors.

Wire Shielding ground Mount

I pinched this pic from Miller Solar, one of our long time wrenches here.

Ray Walters
Remote Solar
303 505-8760

On 7/18/20 3:57 PM, Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar wrote:
>
> I would give a small amount of additional time to convince the 
> inspector. After that I would build the fence he wants. I would also 
> build it to be easily dismantled/removed. Good Luck!
>
>   
> *Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar "we go where powerlines don't" 
> http://members.sti.net/offgridsolar/ e-mail offgridsolar at sti.net 
> <mailto:offgridsolar at sti.net> text 209 813 0060*
>
> On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 10:05:49 -0400, Kirk Herander <vtsolar at icloud.com> 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks all. The NEC reference 110.27 is helpful.
>> I am in a battle now with my AHJ building inspector which relates 
>> indirectly to the 8' rule question. I have mounted several modules 
>> awning-style above a window at an angle of 30 degrees. The bottom of 
>> the array is 7' from grade. The inspector insists that this is a 
>> ground-mount array, even though it is mounted on the wall of a 
>> habitable building. He cites NFPA 1, 2012 fire safety rules which are 
>> adopted in my locale. In his brain, I must add a fence to insure no 
>> one can touch the array within 10' per NFPA access guidelines for 
>> ground-mounts.
>> The NFPA does not cover wall-mounts specifically, if at all. It only 
>> defines arrays on buildings (roof) and "real" ground mounts, i.e. 
>> mounted on a detached structure.
>> The exposed PV wire enters a J-box roughly 10' above grade(behind the 
>> array), more than complying with guidance in NEC 110.27. I am using 
>> this rule as backup to my position that NFPA fire safety rules for 
>> ground mounts do not apply, and the wire runs are protected 
>> accordingly per the NEC. IMO the intent of the NFPA 10' ground-mount 
>> rule is to protect the array and specifically wiring from damage, 
>> which compliance with NEC 110.27 already does.
>>
>>     On 7/18/2020 4:01:34 AM, Martin Herzfeld <findsolar at herzfeld.org>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>     Simply, the '2.5 m' (8 ft) has been inferred from Article
>>     110.27(A)(4).  It's interesting now that the distance in the 2019
>>     CEC/2017 NEC has  increased based on voltage.  In other words, if
>>     the voltage is greater than 301 volts the minimum would be 8 ft 6
>>     in. :)
>>
>>     All the best,
>>
>>     Martin Herzfeld, Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC)
>>     Certified Master Trainer ™ for Photovoltaics (PV) Installation
>>     Professional #IREC 10037
>>     Contract Training Provider (CTP)
>>     Adjunct Professor, Energy
>>
>>     California Solar & Electrical Contractor License  #00833782  C46,
>>     C10, D56, D31, C-7
>>     Solar, Electrical, Trenching, Pole Installation & Maintenance,
>>     Instrumentation
>>
>>     Contract Solar (PV) Technical Inspector - 3rd Party Inspections
>>     Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Certified PV Installer #17, OSHA 30
>>     OSHA-Authorized Construction Trainer #32-0105338
>>     CompTIA Certified Technical Classroom Trainer (CTT+)
>>     #T3NSZCNBBKB4QTQG
>>
>>     * Professional Member, International Association of Electrical
>>     Inspectors  #7035507 - Since 2006
>>     * Accredited and Registered North American Board of Certified
>>     Energy Practitioners (NABCEP) Continuing Education (CE) Training
>>     Provider
>>
>>     On Fri, Jul 17, 2020, 7:32 PM August Goers <august at luminalt.com
>>     <mailto:august at luminalt.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi Kirk - We work in San Francisco where they have a local
>>         code amendment:
>>         <https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/san_francisco/latest/sf_building/0-0-0-84935>
>>
>>         300.4(I) Add the following section:
>>          (I)   Subject to Physical Damage. Premises wiring systems
>>         installed less than 2.44 m (8 feet) above a walking surface
>>         or finished floor are considered subject to physical damage.
>>         As far as I'm aware otherwise, there is not a specific
>>         definition specifying 8' for physical damage in the broader
>>         NEC - I think it's just up to the AHJ.
>>         August
>>         Luminalt
>>
>>
>>         On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 8:38 AM Kirk Herander
>>         <vtsolar at icloud.com <mailto:vtsolar at icloud.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             All,
>>             Is there a reference to this so-called "8-foot rule" that
>>             someone could point me to in the NEC? Thanks.
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>>
>>             List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>>             <mailto:RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
>>
>>             Change listserver email address & settings:
>>             http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>>             List-Archive:
>>             http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>>             List rules & etiquette:
>>             www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>>             <http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm>
>>
>>             Check out or update participant bios:
>>             www.members.re-wrenches.org
>>             <http://www.members.re-wrenches.org>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>>
>>         List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>>         <mailto:RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
>>
>>         Change listserver email address & settings:
>>         http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>>         List-Archive:
>>         http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>
>>         List rules & etiquette:
>>         www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>>         <http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm>
>>
>>         Check out or update participant bios:
>>         www.members.re-wrenches.org <http://www.members.re-wrenches.org>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________ List sponsored by
>>     Redwood Alliance List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>>     Change listserver email address & settings:
>>     http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>     List-Archive:
>>     http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>     List rules & etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check
>>     out or update participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change listserver email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out or update participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches_lists.re-wrenches.org/attachments/20200718/5e994737/attachment.htm>