<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Arc-flash Hazard Protection &#8211; IEC Standard</title>
	<atom:link href="http://s.pangonilo.com/index.php/2009/11/arc-flash-hazard-protection-iec-standard.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://s.pangonilo.com/index.php/2009/11/arc-flash-hazard-protection-iec-standard.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:26:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Hugh Hoagland at e-Hazard.com</title>
		<link>http://s.pangonilo.com/index.php/2009/11/arc-flash-hazard-protection-iec-standard.html/comment-page-1#comment-601</link>
		<dc:creator>Hugh Hoagland at e-Hazard.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://s.pangonilo.com/?p=951#comment-601</guid>
		<description>I love the IEC standards for arc flash mitigation but thy are not like the IEEE or NFPA standards.  The IEEE and NFPA standards are not met with IEC standards.  The standards you cite are for NEW switchgear.  If you have old equipment, and most sites do, the IEC standards you cite don&#039;t help.  They are for making equipment more arc flash resistant but the IEEE 1584 standard allows you to calculate the energy in the event of a fault.  Many things cause faults including lack of maintenance or cleaning, improper work techniques or tools and human error.  Even arc resistant switchgear can still flash and kill when the doors (their method of supressing injury) are open such as during troubleshooting.  Just feel this is an unfair comparision.  The fatalities continue in IEC standard countries and in old equipment.  IEEE 1584 and NFPA 70E made us stop ignoring the deaths.  I support IEC standard safer designs but this doesn&#039;t eliminate the need for the IEEE 1584 and NFPA 70E</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love the <acronym title="International Electrotechnical Commission">IEC</acronym> standards for arc flash mitigation but thy are not like the <acronym title="Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers">IEEE</acronym> or NFPA standards.  The <acronym title="Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers">IEEE</acronym> and NFPA standards are not met with <acronym title="International Electrotechnical Commission">IEC</acronym> standards.  The standards you cite are for NEW switchgear.  If you have old equipment, and most sites do, the <acronym title="International Electrotechnical Commission">IEC</acronym> standards you cite don&#8217;t help.  They are for making equipment more arc flash resistant but the <acronym title="Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers">IEEE</acronym> 1584 standard allows you to calculate the energy in the event of a fault.  Many things cause faults including lack of maintenance or cleaning, improper work techniques or tools and human error.  Even arc resistant switchgear can still flash and kill when the doors (their method of supressing injury) are open such as during troubleshooting.  Just feel this is an unfair comparision.  The fatalities continue in <acronym title="International Electrotechnical Commission">IEC</acronym> standard countries and in old equipment.  <acronym title="Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers">IEEE</acronym> 1584 and NFPA 70E made us stop ignoring the deaths.  I support <acronym title="International Electrotechnical Commission">IEC</acronym> standard safer designs but this doesn&#8217;t eliminate the need for the <acronym title="Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers">IEEE</acronym> 1584 and NFPA 70E</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
