Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
(OP)
Recently upgraded a large manufacturing facilities lighting from 400W HID to high bay flourescents with integral occupancy sensors. Everything went well and the areas looked great upon completion. Project will pay for itself in 2 years with energy savings since old lights burned 24/7/365. There were some grumblings from the union but we worked with supervisors and operators to move and/or add fixtures as needed to meet their concerns. Yesterday however an email from the local union safety rep stated that we are in violation of the 2011 NEC 110.26(E). Their arguement is that the areas must have manual overide controls since they are served by bus duct, there are local panelbouards, and the manufacturing machines have control panels which periodically require maintenance. This section of the code was changed in 2011 as before it only required the manual overides in electrical equipment rooms. Since the 2011 code has not been adopted by our state I tried the card that we were working with the 2008 NEC, needless to say this argument didn't win. Anyone have any opinions on this? Is an occupancy sensor considered automatic controls? It does require movement of an person to activate the light. I think the main reason for the complaint is that the fixtures were installed by an outside contracter and not the UAW skilled trades.
Thanks for your input.
Thanks for your input.





RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
But, wait till others who are very good at NEC regs can react on your post.
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
But I also suppose it will matter what TYPE of occupancy sensor you are using. If it's only PIR, then any person (ostensibly living) in the area will set it off but it is subject to the "cone" effect of the sensors, so you can have blind spots. If it is strictly ultrasonic, then a lack of adequate movement may allow for the lights to go off while a worker is engaged in something dangerous but not requiring a lot of movement. If you are using a combination type of sensor system, it may behoove you to arrange for a demonstration of it's effectiveness and that it will not turn the lights off during a "reasonable" period of low activity. If you can't prove it to their satisfaction, an override switch may be in order.
"Dear future generations: Please accept our apologies. We were rolling drunk on petroleum."
— Kilgore Trout (via Kurt Vonnegut)
For the best use of Eng-Tips, please click here -> FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
"Dear future generations: Please accept our apologies. We were rolling drunk on petroleum."
— Kilgore Trout (via Kurt Vonnegut)
For the best use of Eng-Tips, please click here -> FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
We previously added sensors in the restrooms but most have been disabled due to the fact they claimed they were often left in the dark. I told them that if it takes longer that 20 minutes to take a dump then you may need to see doctor.
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
I'd probably verify the claims about being left in the dark, at least before being dismissive of it. You might have a point, but they might too.
RE: Automatic Lighting Controls vs. NEC 110.26 (E)
A collegue sent me this link:
http://w
From the NFPA's definition of automatic it would appear that an occupancy sensor requires human intervention and would not be considered automatic.