LED Grow Lighting Rated for Damp or Wet Location?

[SnapsProvolone]

I am working on a greenhouse contract. In order to satisfy AHJ requirements and my clients wish to use energy saving LED technology, I am looking for LED grow lights that are either UL or CSA-US certified, listed for use in damp (or wet) location. Zero luck after extensive research.

Anyone know of such a creature? 277 volt operation is a big plus.

 

[hyroot]

Check with aquarium shops. Other than that apache tech is the only led company that is UL listed. Inda gro induction is UL listed and used in a lot of green houses.

 

[Scotch089]

Apache Tech (in univeristy greenhouses... UL and working on CUL if I remember right..)

Inda Gro

Illumitex (ETL listed)


EDIT: A51 was looking at what it'd take to get into UL listing, wait a few weeks and maybe their new "series" will be.

 

[SnapsProvolone]

None of above are listed for damp location. Its like they don't understand.

 

[SnapsProvolone]

The fact that the ApacheTech panels, as well as others such as Lumigrow, utilize active cooling fan enclosures as opposed to the passively cooled bars like Illumitex (Ip66) and are not expressly listed for damp locations would give an inspector every right to not pass the job since the listing agency does not show this product as Damp Location rated.

Problem with illumitex bars is the client wants a footprint similar to the hid lighting (square).

 

[Scotch089]

Thank you for explaining the logic.

Be safe!

 

[SnapsProvolone]

This is a big hole in the LED market. Damp / Wet location listing.

Looking at over 2000 lights for this one client.

 

[puffenuff]

You should call Apache tech up and ask about whether their UL rating covers damp/wet locations. I'm not entirely educated on the differences between ip and UL but it seems UL covers much of the same standards. I could totally be wrong but the only way to find out is to call Apache directly. Their website is terribly kept so not everything is published there. Good luck.

 

[SnapsProvolone]

Way ahead of you. Reply from Apache.

Good morning?

We have not subjected our lights to this testing protocol. This is a protocol primarily utilized by the UK and the EC, and it has gained acceptance here in the US and we can see it's usefulness. However, this is not a UL certification process. UL has their own and has deemed our lights appropriate for wet locations. We may consider submitting the lights to this testing procedure in the future, but have no immediate plans to do so. Our lights were designed to work effectively and safely in the rigorous environments of controlled environmental chambers (>99% RH), over the top of public aquariums (100% RH, salt intrusion and high amounts of splashing) and in greenhouses (High temperatures, high humidity and splashing) and have been UL qualified and accepted for all environments. All chips are sealed in a water tight enclosure, fans are designed for wet conditions, power supplies are epoxy sealed and connectors are all waterproof. If jets of water penetrate the housing (which is possible), no damage will occur to the product (this is what IP ratings are concerned with). UL certification is concerned with the "user" and how safe they are working around the product. I'm also certain GFI's are a must in this construction.

Bottomline, is that we do not have an official IP certification number and you are the first client that has ever actually requested one. Our lights have passed the scrutiny and safety measures required by prestigious universities, government research agencies, some of the large commercial corporations and some of the largest public aquariums in the world. No HPS or MH lighting fixture would meet this requirement either, with the exception of some lighting systems with additional and very expensive additional housings around the light and ballast.The Illumitex bars are really good lights and it sounds like this might be the proper answer for your client. Light bar technology will provide this type of protection.

Illumitex make a very good product, but do not come close to our lights in intensity and footprint. Apache Tech LED is the only agricultural LED that has a greater light intensity and equal footprint as a 1000W HPS.btw, sulfur burners are no problem.Sorry we could not get you the certification you were looking for and good luck with your project!

 

[Scotch089]

Way ahead of you. Reply from Apache.

Like like like like like like like like like like............................

 

[SnapsProvolone]

Our problem here is AHJ is hardballing. May have to go get an engineer to sign off on a fixture and go up the ladder. Just hoped there was an easy solution as I didn't want to reinvent the wheel so to speak.

Sure is a market niche for a listed product. Big bucks, not just mh agriculture, but big agriculture period.

 

[SnapsProvolone]

Also we plan implementation of 277v ground fault protection using gf sensing relay triggers on shunt trip breakers in order to prevent tripping main lighting gfi.

 

[hyroot]

Chaz was dealing with the same thing in Canada. The inspector said the led's don't pass inspection. So inda gro is in the process of getting the csa cert for induction and led pontoons. They already have other certs. So I will let you know when they have it.

 

[chazbolin]

Our problem here is AHJ is hardballing. May have to go get an engineer to sign off on a fixture and go up the ladder. Just hoped there was an easy solution as I didn't want to reinvent the wheel so to speak.

Sure is a market niche for a listed product. Big bucks, not just mh agriculture, but big agriculture period.

Seriously bro? No engineer is ever going to sign off on this. Every inspector in the USA is pissed off that they are being forced to defend NEC sections 110-3B as manufacturers assert their products are damp location certified and they are not. These inspectors are truly the last line of defense and they can not catch everything on the job. For them to identify a greenhouse as damp location under NEC section 314-16 is a pop up fly ball that is makes it easy for them to flag the obvious.

NEC, Article 100 -- Definitions
Approved. Acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ).
Identified (as applied to equipment). Recognizable as suitable for the specific purpose, function, use, environment, application, etc., where described in a particular Code requirement.
FPN: Suitability of equipment for a specific purpose, environment, or application may be determined by a qualified testing laboratory, inspection agency, or other organization concerned with product evaluation. Such identification may include labeling or listing. (See definitions of Labeled and Listed.)

Labeled. Equipment or materials to which has been attached a label, symbol, or other identifying mark of an organization that is acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction and concerned with product evaluation, that maintains periodic inspection of production of labeled equipment or materials, and by whose labeling the manufacturer indicates compliance with appropriate standards or performance in a specified manner.

Listed. Equipment, materials, or services included in a list published by an organization that is acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction and concerned with evaluation of products or services, that maintains periodic inspection of production of listed equipment or materials or periodic evaluation of services, and whose listing states that either the equipment, material, or services meets identified standards or has been tested and found suitable for a specified purpose.
FPN: The means for identifying listed equipment may vary for each organization concerned with product evaluation, some of which do not recognize equipment as listed unless it is also labeled. Use of the system employed by the listing organization allows the authority having jurisdiction to identify a listed product.

So why not just get the fan cooled panels certified and be done with it? Well there is a fundamental problem with doing so in fan cooled panels that passively cooled panels don't face. Check out the CSA standards for LED equipment. When reading this standard pay special attention to section 1.3.1 (end use testing), 9.12.1 (humidity exposure), 9.4 (dielectric voltage withstand test for LED panels marketed expressly for damp location installations, and lastly section 10 where each fixture must bear specific markings which the inspector can see prove it is listed for the environment it is being installed in.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDcQFjAA&url=http://www.comm-2000.com/docs/C22.2.250.13-12EN.PDF&ei=tucHU8CeDceEyAHRroGYBg&usg=AFQjCNGMtmS9T4wW6IKpSC1omdzSzBmf4A&sig2=Rz3GZwmkHWx-s4LQfjtKxw&bvm=bv.61725948,d.aWc

If I were Lumigrow, who from what I've seen doesn't even list a UL or ETL certification, I would be prepared for a class action as they expressly market their products to greenhouse customers who buy them in the belief their products meet code and they do not. Pay special attention to the bolded statement.

ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS
AND THE
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA)
​

Electrical Inspectors have an ally in enforcing their local regulations and the National Electrical Code where there are requirements for products to be Listed and Labeled in accordance with Section 90-7 of the NEC. Electrical Inspectors are required to assure that all products installed in their jurisdiction are safe and comply with the NEC. To assure this compliance many Inspectors must rely on a label that appears on the product to make their determination of compliance. When the label does not appear the Inspector is usually left with the unpopular option of turning down the product or the installation.

This requires the Electrical Inspector not only to be very observant about the installation he/she is inspecting but also the products that are being installed. Additionally, he/she must also determine that the label is acceptable in his/her jurisdiction and the product is compliant with Section 110-3b of the NEC. If an unlisted product goes undetected and it is a Hazard, the Electrical Inspector could be held accountable. This is an unreasonable burden to be place on an inspector.

OSHA Electrical Standard (Subpart S) requires that all electrical products installed in the work place be listed, labeled or otherwise determined to be safe by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). OSHA places the responsibility of this squarely on the Employer. OSHA, defines the building owner, facility or property owner as the employer.

The Electrical Inspector can require the contractor to remove an item not labeled in accordance with Section 90-7 or prevent the facility from opening, etc. OSHA, however can impose fines on the Employer of $7,000.00 to $70,000.00 for each violation. Often the Employer does not even know that a violation exists. OSHA’s involvement would be more effective than the authority a inspector may exert and would also be a major benefit in assisting an inspector with his/her legal responsibilities. The best thing an inspector can do is defer to OSHA the determination that a product legally complies with the standard and Section 90-7 of the NEC. Assuring that as many cord connected or installed devices are properly listed and labeled during an inspection is deferring a lot of the inspectors responsibility over to OSHA.

For a manufacture, designing and meeting these OSHA and NEC requirements is a fundamental responsibility that should come well before the glitzy ad campaigns.

 

[SnapsProvolone]

Well it looks like we are in the same boat. I suppose this is on hold. Wish I met you a week ago. Lol.

You think any new options are around the corner? I know the demand is there.

 

[Eraserhead]

2000 lamps, you can get something 100% custom made. Really, if the mind can imagine it, it can be made, and cost a fraction of retail.

I get lights made at 250-500 lamps at a time... really, for something that big, build it according to exactly what it needs to be. It's not that hard

Don't buy anything ready-made.

This is a big hole in the LED market. Damp / Wet location listing.

Looking at over 2000 lights for this one client.

 

[chazbolin]

Well it looks like we are in the same boat. I suppose this is on hold. Wish I met you a week ago. Lol.

You think any new options are around the corner? I know the demand is there.

If you're asking if I think there are going to be options in the future for third party testing and listings of fan cooled LED panels for greenhouse environments I think not. Look at the Lumigrow site and tell me if there is anywhere on there that they meet with the UL and NEC requirements for design,specifying and marking these lights so that the end user and the building inspector can see that they are recognized for damp location? These guys know they can't get that rating or they would already have it. What are their options? To make passively cooled light bars like Phillips and Illumitex does that they can get IP65 or better ratings on. Yet they continue to aggressively market these lights, with 'state of the art' knobs that adjust spectrum, and miss the fundamental responsibility they have to the consumer.

http://www.lumigrow.com/products/pro-series-greenhouse-lights/

You're right. The demand for third party damp location rated, lower wattage, long life, spectrally stable, better area coverage, controllable, affordable lights that deliver supplement light levels to greenhouse plants is there. Perhaps you take Eraserheads advice and go get them custom made,tested and certified. But aside from the time and expense of you doing that, don't you think companies like LG would have already done so? If they had it would be splashed all over their spec sheets.


Why put it on hold? If you need 2000 lights IP65 certified lights now IG has them in stock and you'll pick up a $350 + per light rebate with Xcel Energy in CO.

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/index.cfm?re=0&ee=0&spv=0&st=0&srp=1&state=CO

 

[Romes187]

I know of an LED grow light that is both IP65 rated and UL certified. Is this what you're looking for?

 

[SnapsProvolone]

It might be, you have a link or mfgr / model?

 

[Romes187]

I do have some information but would rather go through private messaging. However, it seems like to avoid spammers this function is not available when you first make an account, which makes sense. I've been browsing the forums for sometime and your topic made me sign up. Would an e-mail conversation be ok? Feel free to shoot me one at [email protected]

If not, we can wait until I get messaging abilities, but I am not sure how long it takes.