Identifying Pitfalls in The Arc Flash Calculation Process
Identifying Pitfalls in The Arc Flash Calculation Process
Identifying Pitfalls in The Arc Flash Calculation Process
com/arc-flash/identifying-pitfalls-arc-flash-calculation-process
The basics
Arc flash studies require input from short circuit and coordination analysis to
calculate incident energy based upon bolted and arcing fault current levels,
arcing time duration, and distance to arc. Arcing faults are the result of current
passing through the air. At a particular point in the distribution system, this
current is always less than that possible for a bolted fault, which is a result of
the direct metallic connection between conductors. The incident energy created
during an arcing fault is calculated in the form of calories per square centimeter
(cal/cm2).
The approach taken by the engineering professional performing the analysis
needs to consider some items that are not necessarily addressed in performing
short circuit and coordination analysis. This discussion will concentrate on the
approach taken using IEEE Std 1584-2002 with two amendments: IEEE Std
1584a-2004 and 1584b-2011.
The objective of any arc flash assessment is to calculate the incident energy
and determine the arc flash boundary distance. The arc flash boundary is
defined as the approach limit, at a distance from exposed live parts, within
which a person could receive a second-degree burn if an electrical arc flash
were to occur. The reliability of overcurrent protective devices is critical to
escalation of an arc flash to higher levels than expected, so system
maintenance is very important.
Required data
An arc flash hazard assessment requires the following input data about the
distribution system:
Single-line diagram of the power distribution system from the electric utility
source to the low-voltage panelboards and motors (50 hp and larger).
Electric utility source data, indicating minimum and maximum available bolted
fault current, X/R ratio, and supply voltage.
Transformer data, indicating ratings, impedances, types, and
primary/secondary protection.
Equipment type and voltage rating of current transformers (CTs), breakers,
switches, and fuses in switchgear, motor control centers (MCCs), and
panelboards, indicating manufacturer, types, ratings, ratios, settings, and short
circuit withstand capabilities.
Protective device characteristics from time current curves (TCCs), indicating
CT ratios, manufacturer, model, type, and settings.
Feeder cable material (Cu/Al), sizes and lengths and raceway material
(magnetic / non-magnetic).
Size and rating of motors or loads, especially 40kW or larger, connected to
switchgear, distribution panels, or MCCs.
Working distance of worker to equipment bus or energized component.
Example scenario
Lets begin with a simple example of a radial portion of a distribution system
(Fig. 1) having a 5kV overhead electric utility distribution line, using a polemounted fused disconnect, to feed an underground feeder serving an oil-filled,
pad-mounted 1,500kVA transformer with 5.75% impedance. The primary full
load ampacity (FLA) of the transformer is 208A. According to NEC Table
450.3(A), a primary fuse up to 300% could be used.
Lets begin with a 500A, 5kV fuse, which is about 240% of primary FLA. There
are cables connecting the 480/277V wye transformer secondary with a solidly
grounded neutral to a main power circuit breaker in 480V switchgear. The
secondary FLA of the transformer is 1,804A. Again, according to the NEC, a
protective device could be sized up to 250% (in supervised locations), but a
125% limit (for unsupervised locations) is more common and useful for arc
Other considerations
There are many locations within the power distribution system that are critical
to appropriately understanding the exposure to arc flash energies. First, a
device cannot protect itself. Thus, to evaluate the incident energy at any point,
you must look upstream from the point of the fault to the protective device
ahead of the point being evaluated. Second, to use the main to protect the bus
during an arc flash, it must be physically isolated from the bus and from the
downstream feeders.
Fig. 6. Bolted fault vs. feeder length for 480V, 24,000A fault.
Mitigation
What can be adjusted to affect the arc flash incident energy in a system? The
fault level from the electric utility cant be modified by the facility distribution
system. The transformer size and impedance can be adjusted, especially for
large units, but this may not allow for the appropriate total capacity of service
to the facility. The location of equipment could be adjusted, but other factors
generally have the principal impact on equipment location. The electrical
protective devices and their settings can be selected and have the greatest
effect on the available incident energy at points throughout the distribution
system.
Looking back at the initial system TCC (Fig. 2), can anything be adjusted to
reduce the arc flash incident energies in the system? The primary fuse could be
resized. This would still allow for transformer inrush and full load capability. In
general, medium-voltage fuses do not provide a real means to reduce incident
energy, especially on the low-voltage side of the transformer.
For the 1,500kVA transformer with a 90MVA source, there is 12.5kA bolted fault
current at 4,160V. The medium-voltage arcing fault is roughly 1% to 2% less
than the bolted fault per Equation 2 of IEEE Std 1584. Then, looking at 85%,
the 4,160V arcing fault level is approximately 10.6kA. A 500A fuse would
respond in about 0.02 sec, yielding an arc flash energy at the transformer
primary of less than 1cal/cm2. The secondary 24.3kA of bolted fault at 480V
would have about 12kA of arcing fault and 10.3kA of reduced arcing fault. The
medium-voltage fuses respond much too slowly, resulting in energy above 50
cal/cm2. However, looking at Fig. 7, the short-time pickup (STPU) of the
secondary main could be reduced from 5 to 3. This would reduce the reaction
time for the main breaker from 12 sec to 0.31 sec and thus, the arc flash
incident energy from 50 cal/cm2 (for 2 sec maximum) to 12 cal/cm2. The MCC
feeder STPU could be reduced from 9 to 5 to maintain coordination with the
main. This would overlap the 600A fuse, but if the fuse size could be reduced to
400A, coordination would be maintained.
Be aware of standby generators having lower available fault current than the
electric utility power feed.
Install arc resistant switchgear (Note: This equipment is only arc resistant
when the doors are closed).
A neutral grounded resistor (must be supervised) reduces the magnitude of
single-phase arcs.
Insulate the bus, which reduces the probability for single-phase and 3-phase
arcs.
Conclusion
Although arc flash is a serious workplace hazard, there are means to evaluate
its intensity and to mitigate the affect on electrical workers. IEEE Std 1584 and
NFPA-70E provide mechanisms to calculate its intensity and to recommend
appropriate PPE. Engineers should also be encouraged to determine other
effective mitigation techniques such as providing barriers, increasing working
distance from an arc, and reducing the time an arc would exist.
Scherry is a registered professional electrical engineer with Scherry Engineering
and Consulting, Inc. in St. Louis. He can be reached at
[email protected].