Why Anchoring Battery Racks to Floor & Wall is Not Recommended

  • Thread starter Thread starter MitYeltu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Battery Wall
AI Thread Summary
Anchoring battery racks to both the floor and wall is discouraged due to the potential for relative movement during earthquakes, which can lead to structural failure of the rack. The National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) suggests this practice to prevent damage during seismic events. If the wall and floor shift independently, a dual anchoring could result in tearing apart the rack. Conversely, a robust rack could impede wall movement, potentially damaging the building itself. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for ensuring safety in earthquake-prone areas.
MitYeltu
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I am working on putting a new battery rack into a substation. I was re-reading the NESC and came across section 143. This section suggests it is not recommended to anchor my rack to both the floor and the wall. Can anyone explain why this is not recommended?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
If you are in an earthquake zone, the wall and floor could move relative to each other in minor quakes.
This could tear your rack apart if it was connected to both of them.
 
vk6kro said:
If you are in an earthquake zone, the wall and floor could move relative to each other in minor quakes.
This could tear your rack apart if it was connected to both of them.

Brilliant. I learn something new every dang day here on the PF.
 
That makes sense. I hadn't thought about that, but I agree now that I have. Now, don't be angry for my asking it this way, but, is that the NESC reason for not attaching it to both? I have not seen that specified anywhere.
 
It could work the other way, too.

If the rack was very strong, it could stop part of the wall moving and cause damage to the building.
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'

Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'

I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
View full post »

Thread 'EMF (Electromagnetic Field) & EHS (Electromagnetic Hyper Sensitivity)'

Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
View full post »

Similar threads

Why would disconnecting the positive cable first on car battery cause sparks?
2
Replies
54
Views
11K
UPS, Marine Battery, as Sump Pump backup
Replies
4
Views
3K
"Magic" AA batteries in a home device?
Replies
15
Views
3K
Why can a capacitor be charged by a battery (DC)?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Deciding batteries for my circuit
Replies
3
Views
1K
Why do e.g. smoke detectors need specific battery models?
Replies
20
Views
12K
Question about multimeter continuity
Replies
19
Views
3K
Insulated copper wire turned into gray powder
2
Replies
72
Views
19K
Weight distribution on several floor anchors
Replies
15
Views
4K
Using a wall wart to replace batteries
Replies
1
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top