Electric Grills

Archive for April, 2010

Many people wonder why these informants go along with this? Why would anyone go along with causing the suicide of their fellow citizens, or enacting cruelty on someones cats, dogs, kids, family, property etc? Why would you knowingly go along with a practice that many would consider to be evil?

The answer is obedience to authority. As long as an authority figure is giving the orders, experiments have shown that most people will go along with whatever is being ordered, even if those orders are to inflict pain on another human being.

Let’s start with the Milgram experiments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mst1h31daV4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

[quote]Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.[4]

[/quote]

As part of the experiment a stranger off the street is asked to shock an individual as part of a learning or behaviour modification experiment. The person doing the shocking is told that this will help the person to learn the answers to the question. The person being shocked has agreed to the experiment.

The person giving the shocks is giving a test shock of the lowest voltage to see what the pain is like. It’s not pleasant. They are told that if the person fails to answer the question, they are to increase the voltage and to keep shocking the person till they get the answer correct.

The person giving the answers starts to get the questions wrong, they are asked to keep going by the person in authority. The person answering the questions, starts to scream out in pain, sometimes even screaming, my heart, my heart.

Many times the person giving the shock wants to stop what they are doing, but they are told don’t pay it any mind we have to keep going, and so they are goaded on by the experimenter to the end of the experiment. 65% of those in the studied continued to the very end of the voltage metre.

Now imagine you are an average citizen, you are asked to become an Informant by the state, country that you love. At some point you realise that what you are doing is wrong and that people are being harmed. Let’s say you come across a Gang Stalking website, and realise what you are taking part in. How can you stop?

First you are bound by a gag order, so you can’t say anything. Second if you go to the police, local authorities, they are taking part, so you can’t go there, human rights organizations, the same thing. Since becoming an Informant you realise that this is systemic and that the majority of your community is in some way taking part. What do you do where do you turn?

You can ask to not take part, but many people are afraid of being targeted themselves the same way, experiencing the same sort of harassment. There is a real cult like mentality about what is happening, even if most people do not identify it as such, so how would you get out, much less help the target?

In many cases they can’t, and some of them are as trapped as we are. Either get the punishment or give the punishment. Not a great choice. This is not true for all of them, some are just really lowlifes and happy to go along with this, and would report anyone not following suit.

Within the system you can try to hint to the target about what is happening, try to help expose what is happening. Don’t allow yourself to feel or become powerless, keep thinking, keep finding ways, try to keep feeling. Remain hopeful. If you let the stress of the situation overwhelm you, a part of you disassociates emotionally, and you became biddable, capable of not much but following orders.

How quickly can this shift come about, in a really short space of time. The Milgram experiment happened within an hour or two.

The next experiment happened over a few days.

The Stanford Prison Experiment.

http://www.prisonexp.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

The scary part about this, is that thy knew in advance that they were part of an experiment, they were paid for it and everything. Which should indicate that they would be able to leave if they wanted to, but that did not happen.

The experiment was suppose to last 2 weeks, but had to be ended after six days. One group of students were assigned to the role of prisoners, another to the role of guards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0jYx8nwjFQ

[quote]
As the experiment proceeded, several guards became progressively sadistic. Experimenters said that approximately one-third of the guards exhibited genuine sadistic tendencies. Interestingly, most of the guards were upset when the experiment concluded early.

Zimbardo argued that the prisoner participants had internalized their roles, based on the fact that some had stated that they would accept parole even with the attached condition of forfeiting all of their experiment-participation pay. Yet, when their parole applications were all denied, none of the prisoner participants quit the experiment. Zimbardo argued they had no reason for continued participation in the experiment after having lost all monetary compensation, yet they did, because they had internalised the prisoner identity, they thought themselves prisoners, hence, they stayed.
[/quote]

The prisoners (students pretending to be prisoners) started to riot, the cops (students pretending to be cops) started to get brutal with them. Made them do all sorts of sick and sadistic things. Tried to get some to turn into snitches, one prisoner faked being crazy to get out, they turned on each other in some cases, and just fell in line with obeying authority, in most cases. The person conducting the experiment actually thought he was a warden, he got so caught up in the role.

[quote]In psychology, the results of the experiment are said to support situational attributions of behavior rather than dispositional attribution. In other words, it seemed the situation caused the participants’ behavior, rather than anything inherent in their individual personalities. In this way, it is compatible with the results of the also-famous Milgram experiment, in which ordinary people fulfilled orders to administer what appeared to be damaging electric shocks to a confederate of the experimenter.[/quote]

The experiment at the time was used to help better understand the psychological changes that prisoners and their jailers go through. Later it was used to help explain the situation at Abu Ghraib with the prisoner abuses.

The Strip Search Prank Call

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strip_search_prank_call_scam

This experiment was anything but. Because a crank caller pretended to be an authority figure. Police officer. Average sheeple were willing to carry out horrible actions on innocent people.

[quote]The strip search prank call scam was a series of incidents occurring for roughly a decade before 2004. These incidents involved a man calling a restaurant, claiming to be a police detective, and convincing managers to conduct strip-searches of female employees. Reports of over 70 such occurrences in 30 U.S. states finally led to the arrest and charging of David R. Stewart, a 37-year-old Florida corrections officer.[/quote]

These are a few of the incidents that occurred in the wake of these phone calls.

[quote]
A call to a McDonald’s restaurant in Hinesville, Georgia resulted in a janitor performing a body cavity search on a 19-year old cashier.[5]
A 17-year-old customer at a Taco Bell in Phoenix, Arizona was strip-searched by a manager receiving this kind of prank call.[6]

On Nov. 30, 2000, the caller persuaded the manager at a McDonald’s in Leitchfield, Kentucky, to remove her own clothes in front of a customer whom the caller said was suspected of sex offenses. The caller promised that undercover officers would burst in and arrest the customer the moment he attempted to molest her, said Detective Lt. Gary Troutman of the Leitchfield Police Department.[7]

On May 29, 2002, a girl celebrating her 18th birthday — in her first hour of her first day on the job at the McDonald’s in Roosevelt, Iowa — was forced to strip, jog naked and assume a series of embarrassing poses, all at the direction of a caller on the phone, according to court and news accounts.[8]

On Jan. 26, 2003, according a police report in Davenport, Iowa, an assistant manager at an Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar conducted a degrading 90-minute search of a waitress at the behest of a caller who said he was a regional manager — even though the man had called collect, and despite the fact the assistant manager had read a company memo warning about hoax calls just a month earlier. He later told police he’d forgotten about the memo.[9] [/quote]

His downfall came when he was able to get one of these sheeple to sexually assault a teenage girl over the phone. All the while giving the instructions. She complied, because an authority figure was on the phone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFXeXK3szOk

http://www.mahalo.com/Louise_Ogborn_Video

[quote]
The final prank call in this scheme was made to a McDonald’s restaurant in Mount Washington, Kentucky on April 9, 2004. According to assistant manager Donna Summers, the caller identified himself as a policeman, ‘Officer Scott’, he described an employee whom he said was suspected of stealing a customer’s purse. Summers called 18-year-old employee Louise Ogborn to her office and told her of the suspicion. Following the instructions of the caller, Summers ordered Ogborn first to empty her pockets, and finally to remove all her clothing except for an apron, in an effort to find the stolen items. Again following the caller’s instructions, Summers had another employee watch Ogborn when she had to leave the office to check the restaurant. The first employee, 27 year old Jason Bradley, whom she asked to stay there refused to after he was on the phone with the caller, so she phoned her fiance Walter Nix, asking him to come in to ‘help’ with the situation. [10]

According to Ogborn, after Summers passed off the phone to Nix, he continued to do as the caller told, even as the caller’s requests became progressively more bizarre. A security camera recorded Nix forcing Ogborn to remove her apron, the only article of clothing she was still wearing, and to assume degrading positions, such as standing on a chair and getting on all fours. When Ogborn refused to obey the caller’s instructions, Nix hits the 90 lb Ogborn on the buttocks several times creating painful red welts, and at one point he does this for 10 minutes. At the caller’s request, Nix then threatens to beat Ogborn again and forces Ogborn to kiss him and then perform oral sex on him. Ogborn says at the point of sexual assault she was scarred for life.[11] The tape showed that Summers re-entered the office several times and dismissed Ogborn’s pleas for help, a statement which Summers denies.

When another employee was asked to take part and objected, Summers decided to call the store manager, whom the caller claimed to have on another phone line. She then discovered that the store manager had not spoken to any police officers, and that the call had been a hoax. A quick-thinking employee dialed *69 to determine that the caller had called from a supermarket pay phone in Panama City, Florida. Summers then called police, who arrested Nix and began an investigation to find the caller. [/quote]

The above scenario is really sick and hard to believe that something like that could happen, mush less that similar circumstances happened at least 70 times prior to this incident, but it’s true.

Other events show us that people are willing to kill upon request, even innocent woman, children and the elderly, while others are not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHk4TGWx0ZM

[quote]
the My Lai massacre where the US army in Vietnam slaughtered 500 unarmed civilians, many women and children.

Some victims were sexually abused, beaten, tortured, maimed and mutilated.

Three U.S. servicemen who made an effort to halt the massacre and protect the wounded were sharply criticized by US Congressmen, received hate mail, death threats and mutilated animals on their doorsteps. Only 30 years after the event were their efforts honored.

American media first claimed 100 had been killed in a fierce fire fight.
[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre

[quote]
Charlie Company landed following a short artillery and helicopter gunship preparation. The soldiers found no enemy fighters in the village on the morning of March 16. Many suspected there were NLF troops in the village, hiding underground in the homes of their elderly parents or their wives. The U.S. soldiers, one platoon of which was led by Second Lieutenant William Calley, went in shooting at “suspected enemy position”. After the first civilians were killed and wounded by the indiscriminate fire, the soldiers soon began attacking anything that moved, humans and animals alike, with firearms, grenades and bayonets. The scale of the massacre only spiraled as it progressed, the brutality increasing with each killing. BBC News described the scene:

“ Soldiers went berserk, gunning down unarmed men, women, children and babies. Families which huddled together for safety in huts or bunkers were shown no mercy. Those who emerged with hands held high were murdered. … Elsewhere in the village, other atrocities were in progress. Women were gang raped; Vietnamese who had bowed to greet the Americans were beaten with fists and tortured, clubbed with rifle butts and stabbed with bayonets. Some victims were mutilated with the signature “C Company” carved into the chest. By late morning word had got back to higher authorities and a cease-fire was ordered. My Lai was in a state of carnage. Bodies were strewn through the village.[12] ”

More victims at My Lai. Photo by Ronald L. HaeberleDozens of people were herded into an irrigation ditch and other locations and killed with automatic weapons[13]. A large group of about 70 to 80 villagers, rounded up by the 1st Platoon in the center of the village, were killed personally by Calley and by soldiers he had ordered to fire. Calley also shot two other large groups of civilians with a weapon taken from a soldier who had refused to do any further killing.

Members of the 2nd Platoon killed at least 60-70 Vietnamese men, women, and children, as they swept through the northern half of My Lai 4 and through Binh Tay, a small subhamlet about 400 meters north of My Lai 4.[1]

After the initial “sweeps” by the 1st and the 2nd Platoons, the 3rd Platoon was dispatched to deal with any “remaining resistance”. They immediately began killing every still-living human and animal they could find, including shooting the Vietnamese who emerged from their hiding places, and finishing off the wounded found moaning in the heaps of bodies. The 3rd Platoon also rounded up and killed a group of 7 to 12 women and children.[1]

Since Charlie Company had encountered no enemy opposition, 4th Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, was moved into its landing zone between and attacked the subhamlet of My Khe 4, killing as many as 90 people. U.S. forces lost one man killed and seven wounded from mines and booby traps.[1] During the next two days, both battalions were involved in additional burning and destruction of dwellings, and in the mistreatment of Vietnamese detainees.

Most of the soldiers had not participated in the crimes, but neither did they protest or complain to their superiors.[14]
[/quote]

At the end of the day what can really be said about these incidents are occurrences? Why are some people driven by a higher authority, a greater code of conduct than others? Why are some not willing to go along with this, when others just fall in line, or stand helplessly by and let these atrocities happen? Why do some decline to become Informants for the system while others just accept? Why do some just go along with injustice and corruption, while others turn away from all appearances of evil?
Why do some question, while others don’t?

There are a variety of reasons, many people are culturally engineered or programed to obey authority, many have never been in a similar situation before and their survival instinct is to comply, because everyone else is going along with it. Humans for the most part are social creatures and very few have the capacity to stand on their own, or be excluded from society, friends, family, neighbours and if the corruption, or atrocity is systemic, most will just fall in line with what is happening, just like in Nazi Germany.

gangstalking
http://www.articlesbase.com/news-and-society-articles/obedience-to-authority-704033.html

There are a few debates that will rage on until the end of time: global warming, economic health, the Iraq war and um, speed cameras. Yep you read that correctly. You see I haven’t met a motorist who doesn’t despise speed cameras and their purpose. I know we’re told they help reduce crashes as they are only erected in ‘accident black spots’ but everyone knows that they pay for the police to have drinks at Christmas every year. If you disagree it’s probably because you think I want to go everywhere at 100mph and I can’t because I’ll be caught. You’d be correct. However I have a friend who drives a Volkswagen Polo Bluemotion and whose sole purpose is to get from A to B economically in an affordable car and he doesn’t like the Big Brother element to them, so having to drive slowly isn’t the only consideration.

My gripe is that I now spend more time looking at my speedometer than the road ahead and have surely run many people over without knowing it. It’s interesting that Swindon Council have taken the decision to remove their speed cameras as they see no correlation in using them and the reduction in accidents. With cars getting safer each year you’d expect the numbers of deaths on our roads to reduce naturally, however it has remained static at approximately 3,000 per year - speed cameras or not.

This then is an odd situation. If cars are getting safer and speed cameras don’t make any difference you’d still expect the number of deaths to reduce. So is the reality that speed cameras do help reduce fatal accidents and cars are getting worse? Well no that’s rubbish as European Car Safety testing has witnessed massive improvements in the past decade. The answer then must be with the person behind the wheel of the car, or more pointedly their intelligence.

By enforcing a 30mph speed limit for all because of some idiot having a crash you penalise those with a brain. As noted above I am guilty of creeping over the speed limit on the motorway or on a deserted A-road at night, but I’d never drive through a school zone during home-time at 50mph. The answer then is to rid the world of speed cameras and dependent on your IQ, have your car’s speed limited.

In the interim you could take a big step in displaying intelligence by considering the Volkswagen Polo Bluemotion as your next car (assuming you’re after a small hatchback that is). The additional ‘Bluemotion’ tag is more than just a name, but a big shouty word that means this Polo is very economical and environmentally friendly. The mpg in this little car is a whopping 73 and this is due to a few clever tweaks from Volkswagen. Firstly the front grill has been modified along with the rest of the front end to slip through the air more efficiently. The rear roof spoiler is subtle but also plays a vital role in the car being more aerodynamic, along with smaller wing mirrors and tall skinny tyres to reduce resistance against the tarmac.

The engine is a 1.4 litre diesel that can be found in the standard Polo range. The difference in the Bluemotion is the valve timing, exhaust and catalytic converter have all been fettled to improve efficiency. The three cylinder engine can be noisy when you put your foot down, however for a little car it is a surprisingly competent motorway cruiser with minimal wind noise (proof the styling changes have worked) a comfortable ride and a long top gear.

Speaking of top gear, the car show of the same name recently raced from Basle in Switzerland to Blackpool in England using a single tank of fuel for the 750 mile journey. The Volkswagen won the race and despite running on fumes in the final stages completed the journey - testament if ever there was one that you don’t need an expensive hybrid car to be economical. The Polo Bluemotion is actually more frugal on fuel than the Toyota Prius and much cheaper to buy.

In terms of cost, expect to pay £12,000 for the Volkswagen which is similarly priced to the 1.4 TDI version of the Polo which does have more kit in terms of air conditioning and other luxuries (these are absent in the Bluemotion along with electric windows to save weight), so you’ll need to weigh up the fuel cost savings of the Bluemotion derivative with having less kit to play with.

The best thing about the Bluemotion however is whilst speed cameras remain; you won’t be going fast enough to be caught out and you’ll be showing everyone how intelligent you are at the same time.

Mark Creese
http://www.articlesbase.com/automotive-articles/volkswagen-polo-bluemotion-680946.html

Im in the market for a barbeque, gas, charcoal or electric, what are my pros and cons, which produces the best tasting, etc. I am a novice but what to very much get into outdoor grilling. All suggestions are helpful. Thanks.

charcoal grills are far more work you have to clean out the old coals andit takes about 45 minutes to let the charcoal burn down enough to grill your food alsoit cost more a tank of gas last amonth and cost 20 bux where as a bag of coals is around 8 bux and you can only use it 2-4 times

guys i luv steak like most of you guys do and grill atleast 2-3 time s a month in my George Foreman ElecElectric Grill. (it doesnt have a temp. control). I usually get the steak from sams club(bone less) and make it rare.(1.5" thick). I grill it for about 7-8 minutes flipping it every 3 minutes. Sometimes it come out great and juicy, some times its like tasty when i start to eat, by the time i get it done, it will get colder and gets harder to chew. Am i doing it right (based on time). Is 1.5" good in 8 minutes? Also i marinate it for atleast 2 hours.

Something else to think about ::
The meat is refrigerated, right? Some cook it chilled, some let it get to room temp before cooking and this effects the final result as well; one might work better than the other.
Are you preheating the grill? Marinating it? Putting a rub on the meat before cooking?

.

What is an Arc Flash?

An arc flash is like a bolt of lightening that occurs around energized electrical equipment. It can occur spontaneously and is often triggered simply by the movement of air when an electrical enclosure is opened. The NFPA has recognized the significant hazard of arc flash and is attempting to protect workers via the latest implementation of NFPA 70E-The Standard for Employee Safety in the Workplace.

About 10-15 serious arc flash incidents occur in the US each day. Most causes of arc flash are operator induced.

Most technicians who routinely work around energized electrical equipment are familiar with arc flash-having seen it first hand. It is thought of like a major automobile accident: no one really expects it to happen to them, so people have a tendency to drive with significantly less caution than they should. So it is with arc flash, only worse. Similar to driving you can make a mistake, or you can be doing everything right when someone slams into you.

Specifically, what is an arc flash?

An arc flash is electric current flowing through an arc outside its normal path where air becomes the conductor of high thermal energy (5000ºC %2B) and generates highly-conductive plasma. An arc flash will conduct all available energy and generate an explosive volumetric increase of gases which blows electrical system doors off and potentially generates shrapnel.

What are the causes of Arc Flash?

An arc flash occurs when the gap between conductors or conductors and ground is momentarily bridged. There is always a trigger event which almost always involves human intervention. Typical causes and contributing factors include:

• Accidental contact with energized parts
• Inadequate short circuit ratings
• Tracking across insulation surfaces
• Tools dropped on energized parts
• Wiring errors
• Contamination, such as dust on insulating surfaces
• Corrosion of equipment parts and contacts
• Improper work procedures

An arc flash is electric current flowing in an arc outside its normal path where air becomes the conductor.

The vast majority of arc flash faults occur when the door is open or being opened. The National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) is the author of NFPA 70, also known as the National Electric Code (NEC). This paper is not intended to provide a comprehensive review of the information available in the code, but merely to highlight some of the information that may be related to thermography.

NFPA 70E is the standard for safe electrical work practices.

The NEC is an electrical design, installation and inspection standard. It does not specifically address topics like electrical maintenance and safe work practices. A national consensus was needed for safety while working around live electrical equipment. NFPA 70E is the standard for safe electrical work practices. NFPA 70E addresses four specific topics: safety related work practices, safety related maintenance requirements, safety requirements for special equipment and installation safety requirements. NFPA 70 suggests that a Hazard/Risk analysis must be conducted prior to working on electrical equipment. The core of the analysis is based on shock and arc flash boundaries which must be done by a qualified electrical engineer.

Shock Hazards, Flash Hazards and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Selection

Prior to beginning work around live electrical components, an Energized Electrical Work Permit must be obtained and should include but not be limited to the following:

• A description of the circuit, the equipment to be worked on and the location
• Justification for why the work must be performed in an energized condition
• Description of the safe work practices to be performed
• Results of the Shock Hazard Analysis
• Determination of the Shock Protection Boundaries
• Results of the Flash Hazard Analysis
• The Flash Protection Boundary
• Identify the necessary Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) required to safely perform the assigned task
• Means employed to restrict unqualified personnel from entering the work area
• Evidence of completion of a job briefing
• Energized work approval from responsible management, safety officer and owner

Prior to working with live components, the correct Personal Protective Equipment and safe working practice must be determined.

NFPA 70E allows for an exemption to the safe work permit for qualified personnel who are performing tasks such as testing, troubleshooting, voltage measuring, etc. so long as they utilize safe work practices and the proper PPE. Prior to working with live components, the correct personal protective equipment and safe working practice must be determined by carrying out a Shock Hazard and a Flash Hazard Analysis. A Shock Hazard Analysis will determine the voltage to which personnel are exposed, boundary requirements and the proper PPE necessary to minimize the possibility of shock to personnel. The shock protection boundaries are identified as limited, restricted, and prohibited for the distances associated with various voltages.

Unqualified personnel should be notified and warned of hazards by qualified personnel when working at or near the limited approach boundary. When an unqualified person must work inside the restricted boundary, it is important that they be further notified of the risks and hazards and continuously escorted by a qualified person. Under no circumstances should they be allowed inside the prohibited boundary. It is important that a Flash Hazard Analysis be conducted in order to protect personnel from being injured by an arc flash. The analysis will determine the Flash protection boundary and determine the proper PPE. In so doing, the Flash protection boundary is calculated at the distance from energized parts where a burn will be “recoverable” (2nd Degree) and “incurable” (3rd Degree). The guidelines dictate that the Flash protection boundary for systems that are 600 volts or less be 4′ for clearing times of 6 cycles (0.1 second) and available bolted fault current of 50kA or any combination not exceeding 300kA cycles. For all other clearing times and bolted fault currents, the flash protection boundary is normally determined based on the calculated incident energy of an arc fault taking into account system voltage, available current, and clearing time (where incident energy is the measure of thermal energy at a specific distance from the fault). Where it is not possible to perform these analyses (or they have not been performed), NFPA 70 provides guidelines (NFPA 70 Table 130.7-C9a) that can be used to determine the required PPE based on the task conducted. In lieu of a Flash Hazard study, selection of PPE by task is normally allowed. However, for tasks not listed in the table and for clearing times different then those listed there, a complete Flash Hazard Analysis is required. Using Flash Hazard Analysis or Task Risk Assessment, the following table can be used to identify the correct PPE:

Thermography Inspection Practices Infrared cameras have been used to identify problems in electrical systems for many years. Problems in electrical systems manifest themselves by connections and conductors becoming overheated as the result of increased resistance, the result of loose or corroded connections, or load imbalances. An infrared camera can readily identify these problems in a thermal image and is an excellent method for identifying failing or problem components prior to a failure. A failure can disable an electrical system and cause significant lost production, equipment damage and bodily injury. Insurance companies use infrared electrical inspection to help determine risk profiles and rates for industrial customers. More recently, thermographers have found that they can use IR to prevent and predict failures to help further reduce down time equipment failure and increase overall safety.

Often, during thermography inspections, panel covers are removed and subsequently replaced, a method that conflicts with the requirements of NFPA70E.

Like visible cameras, infrared cameras require a direct-line-of-site view of an object. In most cases surveys are hampered by cabinet designs that obscure the target components being inspected and thermographers are put at risk by having to open cabinets or doors in an attempt to gain access to the internal components. IR surveys of electrical systems are best conducted when the system is under heavy if not peak electrical load, which requires the thermographer to perform the inspection in and around live electrical components. Typically, electrical system covers are removed during thermography inspections and subsequently replaced. This working method conflicts with the requirements of NFPA 70E.

Recommendations of NFPA70E as they relate to Thermography Inspection

NFPA 70E recommends that only “qualified” personnel be allowed to perform work inside the flash protection boundary. Thermographers must be accompanied by “qualified” individuals if they intend to have panel covers removed. Both the thermographer and the additional person should be in full PPE. One way NFPA 70E determines Hazard and Risk and the required PPE is based on the activity that you are conducting around the equipment. Risk potentials are determined on a scale from 0-4, where 4 indicates the highest risk potential. For example, removal of a bolted cover on 600V equipment carries a hazard/risk classification of 3 and that goes up to a rating of 4 on voltages greater than 600V. As this work occurs within the Flash Protection boundary, the appropriate PPE must be worn. The required minimum PPE for Hazard/Risk Classification 3 work is to withstand 104.6 J/cm², and the required minimum PPE for Hazard/Risk Classification 4 work is to withstand 167.36 J/cm². As much of the work performed for an IR inspection requires removal of bolted covers, this would be the PPE that is required.

Infrared Windows: Eliminate the Controllable Risk

The first rule in any risk assessment is to eliminate the risk if possible. Infrared Windows eliminate many of the risks associated with live inspections since they enable an infrared camera direct view of live electrical components without the need to open electrical enclosures. They provide an excellent means of accessing electrical equipment efficiently and safely. In addition, a second qualified technician is not required to open and unbolt enclosures. An IR viewing window is basically an infrared transparent material with a holder/mounting body. Thermographers may even decide to not use a window when inspecting energized components at some distance from the cover and use a protective grill in place of a window. The grill must be IP2X certified (the grill size must offer protection against foreign objects with diameters larger than 12mm). This method can significantly reduce the window cost and also has the additional benefit of allowing ultra sound inspections of the electrical switchgear. However when using grills, operators will be exposed to live electrical components and they must wear the appropriate level of PPE identified from the Arc Flash Hazard Analysis of the switchgear. Infrared Windows eliminate many of the risks associated with live infrared inspections since they enable an infrared camera direct view of live electrical components without the need to open electrical enclosures. The optics holder design depends upon a number of parameters: the field of view, equipment lens and window size are all functions of the design and must meet all the parameters that the thermographer requires before a holder is manufactured. Also, a protective cover should be included in the design as crystals are very expensive and in some cases, extremely fragile. Infrared Windows are available in multiple sizes and can be custom made to retrofit dead fronts on distribution and isolator boards. The larger the size of the window, the greater the field of view one can see with their IR camera.

Considerations in Installing Infrared Windows

To correctly install infrared windows, the targets that require inspection must be identified. Typically, traditional surveys only look at the bolted connections within the switchgear. These are generally considered to be the “weakest points” or “points most likely to fail.” These may include:

• Cable connections
• Bus Bar Connections
• Isolator or Circuit breaker connections

The formula for calculating the field visible through an Infrared Window is: FoV = 2 x tan (angle/2) x D, where FoV is the width of the object area that will be viewed, the “angle” is the angular field-of-view of the camera, and “D” is the distance from the camera (ostensibly the window) to the objects being viewed. Once a decision has been made about what objects are to be inspected through the infrared window, the number of windows and appropriate size must be determined as well as where they need to be installed to ensure best coverage (and therefore maximum efficiency). The size of the infrared window will depend on several factors, including the infrared camera’s clear aperture, its ability to focus on close objects, its ability to be placed as close as possible to the window, the camera’s angular field-of-view and the amount of manipulation is possible with the camera when viewing through the window. An important consideration is how the infrared camera can be manipulated when looking through an infrared window. A high degree of manipulation can have the effect of increasing the size of the inspection area by up to a factor of 3. This means that if the object under observation is 12 inches across, depending on several factors, it is possible that a window diameter of 4 inches (for IR window size calculation purposes) can still be used if the operator manipulates the camera from left to right or up and down.

The required size of the window will depend on the following:

• the size of the objects to be viewed and their distance from the panel cover;
• the infrared camera’s angular field-of-view and clear aperture;
• the camera’s ability to focus on close objects and to be placed close to the window.

Typically, infrared cameras have a horizontal field of view of 25°. Those infrared cameras that offer a wide-angle lens option (for example 50°) permit the user to have a substantially wider field of view, resulting in an increase in viewing area through the same infrared window size. This can be a great advantage in certain situations, reducing the size and possibly the number of windows. Other useful infrared camera features are close focus capability, small lens diameter resulting in a small clear aperture, motorized focus (eliminating the need to get fingers on the lens focus ring and moving the camera away from the window) and a chassis design that facilitates movement at the window such as an articulating camera head that allows the user to look into windows above eye level or at near floor level.

The View through an Infrared Window

An infrared window allows a camera operator to inspect the inside of an electrical cabinet to check the physical condition of the components that you have chosen to inspect. As with traditional thermographic inspections we can see temperature differences very clearly. You need to have the confidence in the infrared windows that you are using. They are designed to allow infrared energy to transmit through them at a known transmission rate; therefore, if there is even a slight temperature difference you will be able to see that with your IR camera, and be able to record images for the IR inspection program.

Considerations for Installing Infrared Windows

Installing an infrared window requires cutting holes into very expensive switchgear. Therefore, it is very important to be very sure that they are installed in the correct location and that the switchgear ratings are not degraded in any way. Before installation, the following factors need to be considered:

• NEMA or IP rating of the switchgear and IR windows: Remember to never install an IR window of a lower rating than the rating of the switchgear.
• Test Certifications: Ensure that the IR windows have been tested and approved by the certification bodies as the switchgear for which they are intended (i.e. UL, IEEE. Lloyds).
• Internal obstacles: Before removing internal Perspex/Plexiglas covers or cables, ensure that the local safety manager’s approval is sought first. In some cases you may not be able to totally remove the covers and may only be able to modify them by drilling or punching holes to retain the IP2X requirement for some switchgear.
• Explosion Ratings (if applicable): Some panels are positioned in intrinsically safe areas and as such can never be modified in the field.
• Dielectric Clearances: Where IR windows use grills or inspection orifices, they must comply with IP2X (13mm 0.5″), and clients must be made aware of the safe dielectric clearances for the type of switchgear that they intend to install the window into. The table shown at the left (from IEEE C37.20.2 table A.3) specifies minimum distances from live components, and it is recommended that these be considered as a standard for grills/inspection orifices.

When using Infrared Windows, it is important to correct for the transmission specification of the window and the emissivity of the component that is to be inspected through the IR window. One way of correcting for the effects of the window is by adjusting the camera’s emissivity value for an object of known temperature until the camera’s reading is correct. For objects at the same ambient temperature and emissivity, the new emissivity value can be used.

When using Infrared Windows, it is important to correct for the transmission loss of the window and the emissivity of the component that is to be inspected through the IR window.

Another way of using IR windows is to prepare all components that are to be inspected so that they have the same emissivity (for example, with electrical tape, emissivity paint, IR-ID Labels). In this case, all components being inspected will have the same transmission rate and emissivity readings; consequently, the results gathered will be far easier to compare.

Can IR Windows Carry a Generic Arc Rating?

Electrical switchgear takes on many different shapes and sizes. The surface areas and volumetric elements of the cabinets are different with each model, type and rating. Each cabinet is subjected to the testing that is laid down by the certification bodies such as UL, IEEE, etc. This test is completed on the cabinet assemblies and not the components that make up the assembly. Electrical cabinet designs and dimensions are infinite, and we therefore CANNOT or MUST NOT use the data from one cabinet design for another design unless they are identical in every way. This is why components never carry a generic arc rating and must be subjected to industry standard tests to confirm that they conform to the minimum required level of mechanical strength and environmental properties for the electrical cabinets and assemblies which they are going to be fitted into.

Conclusion

Because of the frequent occurrence of arc flash in industry, it is extremely important to be aware of the risks associated with inspection of high voltage switchgear and related items. Concerns about operator safety due to an arc-flash event are causing inspectors to adopt new practices in accordance with NFPA 70E, the standard for safe electrical work practices. Shock and Flash Hazard analyses are required in many situations. Personal Protective Equipment recommendations are also available. One new common safety practice involves the use of infrared transparent windows which eliminate many of the risks associated with live infrared inspections since they enable an infrared camera to have a direct view of live electrical components without the need to open electrical enclosures.

Please visit us at www.electrophysics.com/nfpaab

For more comprehensive White Papers visit our online Knowledge Center www.electrophysics.com/thermal-imaging

Electrophysics - IR Cameras for Thermography Professionals 373 Route 46, Fairfield, NJ 07004?Phone: 973-882-0211?Fax: 973-882-0997

Josh White
http://www.articlesbase.com/electronics-articles/nfpa70e-arc-flash-and-safe-and-efficient-thermography-practices-686771.html