Safety

Electrical Enclosures: Making an Informed Decision

Joe Dodds, ROBROY Industries, Stahlin Non-Metallic Enclosures

In addition to the NEMA type and materials of construction, also take into account mounting, security, bonding/grounding plus various options.

any times, an enclosure for a critical application is considered a commodity item that is selected from a catalog, ordered from a distributor and received from a warehouse. Selection is typically based on previous experience, equipment size, protection requirements, the lowest cost and the quickest delivery. Simply thumbing through a catalog and quickly selecting an enclosure may lead to problems or critical failures. Examples are improper installation or an oversight in the specification. How can the potential for such mishaps be reduced? To economically meet todays complex performance and lifecycle requirements, an enclosure must be selected early in the design process as an integral part of a system, rather than near the end of the project as an expedient, lowcost commodity. Selection can be improved and the likelihood of problems reduced by considering the points in this article. Key items are size, National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) type and materials of construction but other factors, such as mounting and security, are important as well.

Size and rating The dimensions of the equipment to be placed inside the enclosure will determine its

size. Additional factors that should be considered include service connections, equipment mounting, wire or cable bending-radius limitations, internal and external access, thermal limitations, maintenance, economics and future expansion. Enclosure ratings are usually based upon NEMA types. NEMA does not test, list, nor certify enclosures; however, performance standards for the NEMA-rated types are found in NEMA 250-1997, Enclosures for Electrical Equipment (1,000 Volts Maximum). Testing, listing and certification are performed by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) for the NEMA ratings according to UL 50, Enclosures for Electrical Equipment (1995). The Canadian Standards Association (CSA) tests and lists enclosures for NEMA ratings according to CSA 22.2 No. 14, Industrial Control Equipment for Use in Ordinary (Non-Hazardous) Locations, CSA 22.2 No. 40, CutOut, Junction and Pull Boxes, and CSA 22.2 No. 94, Special Purpose Enclosures 2, 3, 4, and 5. Both the UL and CSA standards for a respective NEMA rating are similar to the NEMA 250 requirements. A tri-national harmonized enclosure standard for Canada, Mexico and the U.S. is in the approval process, but the issue date for the standard is unclear.

66

www.cepmagazine.org

September 2001

CEP

Table 1. Comparison of enclosure types for non-hazardous locations. Type of Enclosure Provides a Degree of Protection Against the Following Environmental Conditions Incidental Contact with Enclosed Equipment Indoor Outdoor Falling Dirt Dripping and Light Splashing Liquids Rain, Sleet and Snow Circulating Dust, Lint, Fibers and Flyings Settling Dust, Lint, Fibers and Flyings External Ice Hosedown and Splashing Water Oil and Coolant Seepage Oil and Coolant Spraying and Splashing Corrosive Agents Occasional Temporary Submersion Occasional Prolonged Submersion
* External operating mechanisms are required to be operable when the enclosure is ice-covered.

1 X X

2 X X

3 X X X

3R X X X X X X

3S* X X X X X X

4 X X X X X X X X

4X X X

5 X X

6 X X X

6P X X X X X X X X X X

12 X X

13 X X

X X

X X X X X X

X X X X X X X

X X

X X X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X X

X X

X X

X X

X X X

All NEMA enclosure ratings provide a degree of protection to personnel against incidental contact with the enclosed equipment; the ratings are differentiated by the degree of protection provided against various environmental conditions. Table 1 compares the enclosure types for non-hazardous locations. The most common types for outdoor application are NEMA 4 and 4X; the most common for indoors are NEMA 12 and 13. Although NEMA ratings apply to several defined elements of the application environment, NEMA 250 does not define all elements of the environment. For example, the standard does not address chemical resistance, except against salt spray, nor does it address protection against electromagnetic interference (EMI). Even though NEMA 250 does not define all of elements of the application environment, it is more extensive than the International Electrotechnical Commission Enclosure Standard, IEC 60529, Degrees of Protection Provided by Enclosures (IP Code). The two-character IP enclosure ratings in IEC 60529 define only the degree of

protection against the ingress of solid foreign objects including dust (first character) and the degree of protection against the ingress of water (second character). Corrosion or other environmental tests are not specified. A second major difference between NEMA 250 and IEC 60529 are the pass-fail criteria for the respective dust and water ingress tests. Neither dust nor water is permitted inside an enclosure when the respective NEMA/UL/CSA test is complete. In the dust-protected rating, IP5, the ingress of dust is not totally prevented, but dust shall not penetrate in a quantity to interfere with satisfactory operation of the apparatus or to impair safety. For an IP6 dust-tight rating, no ingress of dust is permitted. For an IP water ingress rating, IEC 60529 does permit the ingress of water, but not in any quantity that would cause harmful effects. A discussion of the many additional differences that exist between IEC and NEMA/UL/CSA enclosure standards is too lengthy for this article. However, the effect of the remaining differences is less significant. The major variances mentioned above make for some animat-

CEP

September 2001

www.cepmagazine.org

67

Safety

ed disagreements and misunderstandings when IEC and NEMA enclosure ratings are discussed. The performance of a NEMA-rated enclosure that meets the IEC specifications for the ingress of solid objects and water always exceeds the IEC rating. This is because of the additional test requirements for protection against corrosion and, depending on the rating, dust or water penetration. Conversely, an IEC-rated enclosure could meet the NEMA specifications, but additional testing is required to confirm the corrosion and penetration protection requirements of the NEMA specification. The enclosure application environment helps to define the NEMA enclosure that should be selected; however, additional elements of the application environment such as chemical or EMI resistance must be considered and specified for proper application.

s Figure 1. Performance in a beverage plant: (a) Stainless-steel (left);

(b) Fiberglass (right).

using these tables. If the chemical resistance tables do not contain data for your specific application, check Materials of construction with the manufacturer. Enclosure materials should be selected to meet corroThe results of poor material selection are shown in sion and strength requirements. When choosing an enFigure 1. The painted steel enclosure in Figure 1 (a) was closure, the performance of all materials used to fabriexposed in the same environment as the fiberglass enclocate it must be considered. Tables 2 and 3 will help with sure in Figure 1 (b), but the effect on painted steel is sematerials selection. vere compared to that on the composite. Proper selection is critical. For example, fiberglass has Electrical, thermal and fire resistance, and strength excellent chemical resistance against chromic acid, while properties of enclosure materials are also important. stainless steel erodes and fails in a short period of time. Plastic and fiberglass are electrical insulators, while metThis concern is beyond the scope of either the NEMA als, particularly aluminum, are conductive. The magnetic type or IEC two-character enclosure rating systems. properties of steel can be a benefit when EMI and radio Detailed material strength information is beyond the frequency interference (RFI) protection are specified; scope of this article and should be obtained from a mateconversely, the insulating properties of plastic and fiberrials reference or the enclosure manufacturer. Table 3 glass provide a degree of electrical safety when shortpresents some relative data to help with this aspect of circuits and personnel safety are of concern. material selection. Metals are much better thermal conductors than fiberChemical resistance tables found in most enclosure glass or plastic. Since fiberglass is used as thermal insucatalogs contain performance data for basic enclosure lation, a common misconception is that fiberglass enclomaterials in various chemical environments. Material sures operate at significantly higher temperatures than for other items such as gaskets, windows, latches, metal ones. To the contrary, performance data reflect that mounting feet, etc., should also be carefully specified enclosure material has little effect on the operating temperature because the high thermal insulation of the air within the enclosure has Table 2. Broad categories of enclosure material chemical resistance. more influence on heat transfer than the materials thermal conductivity. This is Continuum General Category of Chemicals an important consideration as electrical of Use and electronic components are reduced Acids Alkalies Solvents in size, allowing designers to place more items in a smaller space. On the other Stainless Steel hand, higher thermal conductivity enStainless Steel Stainless Steel Aluminum ables the metal enclosure to be used as a Fiberglass Fiberglass Fiberglass Recommended Powder-Coated Steel heat sink, which is impossible with plastic and fiberglass. In some instances, fire resistance Acceptable Powder-Coated Steel Galvanized Steel Galvanized Steel should be considered. While metals are Powder-Coated Steel inherently fire-resistant, coatings used to Limited or Aluminum provide corrosion resistance and addiUnacceptable Galvanized Steel Aluminum tional components such as gaskets, con-

68

www.cepmagazine.org

September 2001

CEP

Table 3. Commonly used enclosure system materials. Material Aluminum Fiberglass Relative Physical Strength Average Average Relative Cost Average Low-Average Application Conditions Indoor and outdoor, marine, solvents, petrochemicals, sulfates, nitrates and specific acids. Indoor and outdoor for continuously damp and highly corrosive environments. Petrochemicals, water treatment, food processing, coatings, salts and chemicals. Indoor and outdoor where the respective coating provides acceptable protection in mildly corrosive environments. Indoor and outdoor in highly corrosive applications. Food and dairy processing or marine. Enclosure windows. Weatherable, scratch resistant. Good resistance to solvents. Enclosure windows, external parts. Not recommended for direct sunlight, exposure to organic solvents and concentrated alkalis. Cord grips, hinges and latches. Temperature Limitations None for enclosure applications. -40F (C) to 250F (121C)

Mild Steel: Galvanized Painted Stainless Steel Acrylic Polycarbonate

High

Average-Low

None for enclosure applications. None for enclosure applications. -31F (-35C) to 180F (82C) -31F (-35C) to 248F (120C)

High Average Average

Average-High Low Low-Average

Nylon Gaskets: Neoprene Silicone Urethane

Average

Low

-22F (-30C) to 212F (100C)

Low Low Low

Low Average Average

Oil resistance. Seams may be a problem. Oil, temperature and chemical resistance. Water, oil and chemical resistance

-40F (C) to 225F (107C) -40F (C) to 350F (175C) -40F (C) to 200F (93C)

nections or internal equipment, may not be as resistant. Polymers used to make fiberglass and plastic enclosures are not as fire-resistant as metals; however, fire-retardant additives significantly reduce the flammability of polymers. UL 94, Tests for Flammability of Plastic Materials, and UL 746, Standard for Polymeric Materials Use in Electrical Equipment Evaluations, provide standards for enclosure material and coating flammability. Enclosures with a UL listing are manufactured from materials that comply with the flammability requirements of these standards. Based on the specifications in UL 94, 94V-0 is a common flammability rating for polymer materials. The physical endurance of a metal enclosure is perceived to be greater than one of fiberglass or plastic because the strength properties of metal are much greater. Depending upon the gage of metal used, such an enclosure can withstand some physical loads better than a glass composite or polymer; however, differences in standard strength properties do not always result in better performance. Using developments in continually improving polymer and design technology, fiberglass enclosures are now designed with physical endurance that

s Figure 2.
Three wall-mounted berglass enclosures.

exceeds application requirements. For example, even though the standard physical strength of a metal is greater, a given load may deflect the thin-walled metal enclosure more than a fiberglass one of similar size. Larger deflections may cause excessive loading on circuit boards, or give rise to other electrical problems. Concerning food and drug enclosure approval, neither the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA), nor the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has an enclosure standard, nor does either provide third-party approval. Best-prac-

CEP

September 2001

www.cepmagazine.org

69

Safety

s Figure 3.
Column- or pole-mounted enclosure.

Safety and security of the internal equipment should also be considered during selection. Fastening system options (Figure 5) include padlock hasps, locking latches, key locks, tamperproof locks (three-point key locks or three-point padlocks), fiberglass latches, wing-knobs and screw covers. Choices of hinges include continuous, lift-off, fiberglass, and fiberglass-pin and -sleeve hinges.

s Figure 4.
Fiberglass enclosure mounted on a tank.

Bonding and grounding Although electrical bonding and grounding are separate from enclosure selection, they are one of the most important design considerations for safe and reliable operation of any system in electrical applications. Personnel safety and minimum damage from electrical shortcircuits depend upon a properly grounded system. A misconception is that bonding and grounding are a lesser concern for metal enclosures because metal is an electrical conductor, and fiberglass or plastic are insulators. Independent of enclosure material, during design and installation, the system must be bonded and grounded with wires of sufficient size to carry the anticipated fault currents. The distances between ground wire connections must prevent voltage transients that could damage equipment insulation or cause safety concerns. Options and selection considerations Other features to be considered include climate-control equipment, such as air conditioning, heating, heat exchangers, fans and louvers; color; surface finish; electrical connections; mechanical connections; EMI/RFI shielding; equipment mounting panels; dead-front panels; viewing windows; and special modifications. Additional factors that might affect selection are the weight of internal equipment, ultraviolet resistance, a maximum or minimum temperature rating, installation considerations, maintenance and cost. To achieve the desired performance and reliability, an enclosure must be selected and specified as a system to provide the degree of protection required by the application. Selecting the size and NEMA type only begins the process. Careful consideration of the parameters outlined in this article will help to make the best selection from the variety of enclosure styles, shapes, sizes, configurations, materials and options that are CEP currently available.

s Figure 5.
Fiberglass enclosure with continuous hinge and padlock latch.

tice guidelines for applying a system with enclosures may exist, but do not include or exclude enclosure materials or construction requirements.

Mounting and security The lower weight of a fiberglass enclosure makes design, fabrication and installation of a mounting system less costly. Mounting methods include wall-, pole- and pedestal-mount, and floor standing. Figure 2 shows three fiberglass enclosures mounted on a building wall using non-metal struts and the mounting feet molded into the enclosures. In Figure 3, a metal enclosure mounted on a column is similar to a pole mounting. The fiberglass enclosure in Figure 4 is mounted on a flange on the side of a tank and illustrates the flexibility sometimes required. Enclosures with separate mounting feet are also available.

JOE DODDS is an engineering consultant at ROBROY Industries, Stahlin NonMetallic Enclosures (10 River Road, Verona, PA 15147; Phone: (412) 8204180; Fax: (412) 828-8934; E-mail: jdodds@robroy.com). He completes new enclosure designs and product-improvement projects for Stahlin, a fabricator of fiberglass enclosures. Dodds has enclosure application experience in electrical control and switchgear development. He holds a BSEE from Penn State Univ., and is a member of IEEE, NACE International, and the NEMA Enclosure Technical Committee, which is responsible for NEMA 250.

70

www.cepmagazine.org

September 2001

CEP