mikeholt.

com

What is Arc Flash?

31-39 minutes

Why the focus on Arc Flash?

In the early 1980's a paper "The Other Electrical Hazard: Electric

Arc Blast Burns" by Ralph Lee was published in the IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Applications. The effect of this paper
was to realize the need to protect people from the hazards of arc
flash. Four separate industry standards concern the prevention of
arc flash incidents:

• OSHA 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1910 Subpart

S.

• NFPA 70-2002 National Electrical Code.

• NFPA 70E-2000 Standard for Electrical Safety Requirements for

Employee Workplaces.

• IEEE Standard 1584-2002 Guide for Performing Arc Flash Hazard

Calculations.

Compliance with OSHA involves adherence to a six-point plan:

• A facility must provide, and be able to demonstrate, a safety

program with defined responsibilities.

• Calculations for the degree of arc flash hazard.

• Correct personal protective equipment (PPE) for workers.

• Training for workers on the hazards of arc flash.

• Appropriate tools for safe working.

• Warning labels on equipment. Note that the labels are provided by

the equipment owners, not the manufacturers. It is expected that
the next revision of the National Electric Code will require that the
labels contain the equipment's flash protection boundary, its
incident energy level, and the required personal protective
equipment (PPE).

Companies will be cited and fined for not complying with these
standards.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

Categories of PPE as described in NFPA 70E are:

Category Cal/cm2 Clothing

0 1.2 Untreated Cotton

1 5 Flame retardant (FR) shirt and FR pants

2 8 Cotton underwear FR shirt and FR pants

3 25 Cotton underwear FR shirt, FR pants and

FR coveralls

4 40 Cotton underwear FR shirt, FR pants and

double layer switching coat and pants

Cal/cm2 are the units of incident energy that the PPE can
withstand. Note that a hard hat with full-face shield and the
appropriate gloves are required also.

Steps required for a flash hazard analysis

To perform an arc flash hazard analysis, data is collected about
the facility's power distribution system. The data includes the
arrangement of components on a one-line drawing with nameplate
specifications of every device. Also required are details of the
lengths and cross section area of all cables. The utility should be
contacted for information including the minimum and maximum
fault currents that can be expected at the entrance to the facility.
Once the data has been collected, a short circuit analysis followed
by a coordination study should be performed. The resultant data
can then be fed into the equations described by either NFPA
70E-2000 or IEEE Standard 1584-2002. These equations will
produce the necessary flash protection boundary distances and
incident energy to determine the minimum PPE requirement.

Flash hazard analysis - a new approach

Once the data is prepared and a flash hazard analysis has been
performed, most likely it will be discovered that category 4 PPE will
be required in most places. This is most unfortunate as this type of
PPE is very unwieldy and could be costly in terms of time taken to
perform work and the potential for mistakes. Prior to the new arc
flash regulations, coordination studies were targeted at reliability
with all settings adjusted towards the high side. Compliance with
the new arc flash regulations means that not only does the
coordination study need to be more accurate but it also needs to
take into account the fact that the arc fault current is less than the
bolted fault current.

The data can be used to perform a sensitivity study to adjust

breaker/fuse characteristics to lower the PPE requirement. To
achieve this goal, the existing breakers may need to be replaced,
generally by more modern counterparts. Old breakers have
relatively slow reaction times and will trip at too high a current. To
limit the flash hazard the breakers are adjusted to trip earlier than
before. It is expected that the outcome of this sensitivity study,
when implemented, will result in most category 4 PPE
requirements being decreased to category 1 or 2.

Short-Circuit Study

The short-circuit study is based on a review of one-line drawings.

The drawings must be created if they do not exist, and field-
verified if they do. Maximum available fault current is calculated at
each significant point in system. Each interrupting protective
device is then analyzed to determine whether it is appropriately
designed and sized to interrupt the circuit in the event of a bolted
type of short circuit. Next, the associated equipment must be
reviewed to insure that the bus bar is adequately braced to handle
the available fault current. Finally, the bolted fault currents are
converted into arc fault currents for additional analysis.

Coordination Study

A coordination study is the examination of the electrical system

and available documentation with the goal of ensuring that over-
current protection devices are properly designed and coordinated.
Over-current protective devices are rated, selected and adjusted
so only the fault current carrying device nearest the fault opens to
isolate a faulted circuit from the system. This permits the rest of
the system to remain in operation, providing maximum service
continuity. The study consists of time-current coordination curves
that illustrate coordination among the devices shown on the one-
line diagram. Note that protective devices are set or adjusted so
that pickup currents and operating times are short but sufficient to
override system transient overloads such as inrush currents
experienced when energizing transformers or starting motors.

The Problems

Now that the hazards associated with arc flash have been brought
to our attention, we face the problem of trying to eliminate or at
least reduce those hazards. The following discusses some of
these problems and the subtleties in implementing corrective
actions.

There are several problems in dealing with Arc Flash Analysis:

1. Being overly conservative in your short circuit analysis may result

in the required PPE protection category being set at a level higher
than necessary.

The above figure is a person in a full Category 4 suit. This suit will
provide the necessary protection, but it is cumbersome to work in,
it is hot, and it provides poor visibility.

The suits will make many tasks very difficult, if not impossible, to
perform. Because of their restrictions to vision and movement,
they may even make some tasks more dangerous. There are
definitely times when this type of protection is both necessary and
required, but being overly conservative will result in excessive
stress to workers and unacceptable time to make repairs or
adjustments.

2. Relying upon quick analysis methods can expose you to

unexpected liabilities. There are a number of shortcuts being
offered by individuals and companies that can have disastrous
results. Be sure that your methods will stand up to analysis and
peer review.
Cure-all solutions are being promoted, such as the installation of
current-limiting fuses. Pfeiffer Engineering is a firm believer in the
use of fuses, particularly current-limiting types, but as will be
shown below, they are not always the answer. They are definitely
not a quick fix solution.

3. Being overly conservative when performing a short circuit analysis

results in the misapplication of circuit protection equipment, which
in turn has the consequence of calculated Arc Flash levels being
higher than they actually are.

4. The calculated bolted fault or short circuit current is a worst-case

calculation that assumes very low short circuit impedance. It is a
short circuit connection based upon two conductors being bolted
together to form the short. In reality, most short circuits are less
than ideal resulting in fault currents that are less than the alculated
bolted short circuit condition.

5. On the other hand, the Arc Fault should be a more predictable

occurrence. The arc fault calculations assume that there is a
physical gap between conductors that was bridged by something
resulting in the formation of an arc. Once the arc is formed and
plasma is produced, the arc current should closely approximate
the calculated fault levels. The Arc Fault calculations are an
approximation based upon research and testing similar to the short
circuit analysis methods. They are not exact and therefore one
needs to be careful when using the results.

Solution

The solution is to first perform, as accurately as practical, a short

circuit analysis. The goal for most people performing a short circuit
analysis has always been to error toward the conservative. For
example, when a cable length was needed, it is the practice to
always use the shortest practical value, which would result in
higher calculated short circuit current values. When the public
utility is contacted, it is the practice to only ask for the worse case
short circuit value.

The overall result is that the short circuit values are always
calculated on the high side. When doing a short circuit analysis for
sizing the interrupting capability of protection equipment, this is the
best practice. But, it is not the best practice when evaluating
equipment for Arc Faults and establishing PPE requirements. This
is extremely significant, and quite non-intuitive, situation.

Arc Fault current (Ifc) is derived from the available bolted short
circuit or fault current (Isc) and is always substantially less than its
corresponding short circuit current. The IEEE has established
formula for calculating (estimating) the Ifc and they provide a
spreadsheet. The following are example results from using their
formula:

Bolted Fault Current Arc Fault Current

@ 480 V

10 kA = 6.56 kA

20 kA = 11.85 kA

30 kA = 16.76 kA

40 kA = 21.43 kA

What is now important is to obtain:

1. The expected maximum (worse case) bolted short circuit current.

2. The minimum and maximum voltage to the facility.

3. The minimum expected short circuit current.

Also needed are definitions of the operating modes of the facility

such as:

1. What are the minimum and maximum motor loads expected during
normal operation and off-hour operation.

2. Variation in the sources of supply to the plant, such as alternate

feeders or co-generation.

The data from the public utility and the determination of the
facility's modes of operation should be converted into the
maximum and minimum Arc Fault current at various locations in
the plant. These results are applied to protective device
coordination studies, where the protective devices are evaluated,
and adjusted, if necessary, allowing the proper PPE categories to
be determined.

The following coordination curve illustrates the point:

The figure above shows the coordination curve for the secondary
of a 1000 kVA 480 V transformer. The curve shows two types of
secondary protection, a fuse and a circuit breaker, each selected
based upon the National Electrical Code requirements. The fuse is
a KLP-C 1600A and the circuit breaker is a Westinghouse HND
breaker with a Digitrip.

All transformers limit the amount of fault current that can pass
through the transformer. This is a function of the transformer's
impedance. The coordination curve shows a line for the Isc, the
maximum short circuit current that can pass through this
transformer (20,741 amps). The Isc value used assumes that there
actually is sufficient current available at the primary to provide
20,741 amps on the secondary.

Based upon the IEEE formula, the calculated Arc Fault current Ifc
is 12,230 amps. Using these two currents and the coordination
curve one can estimate the time the circuit breaker and the fuse
will take to clear the fault.

Bolted Fault Condition:

• Fuse clears in 0.22 seconds

• Circuit Breaker clears in 0.02 seconds

Arc Fault Condition

• Fuse clears in 1.80 seconds

• Circuit Breaker clears in 0.02 seconds

From these current levels and clearing times the PPE category
can be determined.

Emb (Maximum in cubic box incident energy)

• Fuse 74 cal/cm2 Category 4 PPE

• Circuit Breaker 0.8 cal/cm2 Category 0 PPE

Clearly, in this example the circuit breaker outperforms the current-

limiting fuse resulting in a minimal "worker friendly" PPE
requirement.

In the above example both the Arc Fault current and the Bolted
Fault current are less than the current-limiting point for the fuse,
which is approximately 28,000 amps. Thus, there is no current-
limit effect from using the fuse. Current-limiting fuses often do
provide additional protection and they are very good devices but
they must be applied properly. In this example, the circuit breaker
provides the best protection.

Studying this example further, let us assume that the fuse and the
circuit breaker are at the main of a facility and the facility is served
by a much larger transformer where the worse-case bolted short
circuit current as reported by the utility is 60,000 amps. Under this
condition the arc fault current would be 30,300 amps. In this case,
the fuse would open in 1/4 cycle and would limit the fault current.

The Emb would equal 1.15 cal/cm2, which falls under a category 0
PPE.
In the next example we have a fuse and a circuit breaker
protecting a 125 Hp motor. The fuse is a LLS-RK 200 A and the
circuit breaker is a Westinghouse HKD with a Digitrip. There are
three Arc Fault currents analyzed.

Point 1

• Arc Fault Current 3100 Amps

• Bolted Fault Current 4200 Amps

Point 2

• Arc Fault Current 2200 Amps

• Bolted Fault Current 2800 Amps

Point 3

• Arc Fault Current 1800 Amps

• Bolted Fault Current 2200 Amps

• Results:
Point 1

• Circuit Breaker clears in .02 seconds 1.42 cal/cm2 PPE Cat. 1

• Fuse clears in .02 seconds 1.42 cal/cm2 PPE Cat. 1

Point 2

• Circuit Breaker clears in .02 seconds 1.42 cal/cm2 PPE Cat. 1

• Fuse clears in .1 seconds 7.7 cal/cm2 PPE Cat. 2

Point 3

• Circuit Breaker clears in .02 seconds 1.42 cal/cm2 PPE Cat. 1

• Fuse clears in 1.0seconds 78.8 cal/cm2 PPE Cat. 4

At an Arc Fault current of 4000 amps the fuse will begin to current
limit and will open the circuit in ¼ cycle reducing the PPE category
to 0.

The three points analyzed show that a relatively small change in

calculated bolted fault current has a major effect on the calculated
arc fault current. This situation could easily lead to the
misapplication of circuit protection equipment or inappropriate
adjustment of same. It should also be noted that as the calculated
arc fault current is reduced, the clearing time increases, resulting
in the incident energy level increasing and thus, the PPE
requirement increases.

In reality, the arc current is primarily effected by facility operating

conditions, i.e. motor contribution and changes in the fault current
coming from the utility. The examples illustrate that the accuracy
required when calculating short currents has to be improved over
traditional methods. Both reliability and arc fault conditions must
now be considered when performing coordination studies.

The Risk

In a study of 33 plants with 4892 busses or switch points under

600 volts, the median incident energy was only 2.1 cal/cm2,
however many busses had quite high incident energy levels1:

• 24% of busses over 8 cal/ cm2 PPE 2

• 12% of busses over 40 cal/ cm2 PPE 4

• 5% of busses over 85 cal/ cm2 Deadly - no protection

• 1% of busses over 205 cal/ cm2 Deadly - no protection

Risks to personnel include2:

• Burns

• Damaging sound levels

• High pressure - 720 lbs/ft2 eardrums rupture, 1728 to 2160 lbs/ft2

lung damage

Conclusions

1. Arc Fault Analysis is in actually Risk Management. There are

basically three choices:

• Be very conservative and require PPE 4 in most cases resulting in

higher maintenance cost.

• Do nothing and suffer the consequences (pay later).· Perform the

necessary analysis and make adjustments to reduce the arc fault
conditions resulting in reduced PPE requirements.

2. A reduction in bolted fault current and thus a reduction in arc

fault current can actually result in a worse situation. In the motor
example above an arc fault current reduction from 4000 amps to
1800 amps resulted in an increase in arc fault energy from 0.6
cal/cm2 to 78.8 cal/cm2. Exactly the opposite one would expect
before doing the math. In terms of the above example coordination
curves, this occurs because the arc fault current moves from the
instantaneous portion at the bottom of the coordination curve to a
point higher up, incurring a the time delay before the device trips.

3. Overly conservative short circuit analysis will result in bolted

short circuit numbers that may well result in the misapplication of
circuit protection equipment.

4. It is very important to obtain the minimum available short circuit

current as well as the maximum short circuit current from the
electric utility. Voltage fluctuations in the plant supply should be
considered when developing the short circuit calculations. The arc
fault calculations need to be evaluated at more than just the worse
case and the minimum case conditions. In the example above, a
reduction in the arc fault current actually resulted in worse
conditions. This represents a subtle, but extremely significant,
change in the methodology of short circuit analysis.

5. Apart from the fines, nominal compliance with the regulations

will cause workers to have to wear cumbersome PPE. This will
result in little or no high voltage maintenance being performed,
eventually compromising safety, equipment operation, and
ultimately productivity. Arc flash is a risk management issue.

6. Have a registered professional engineering firm perform the

calculations for arc flash hazards for the devices in your facility
and have them recommend any necessary plans that when
executed would result in the lowest category of PPE being
required.

Note:

Short circuit analysis is based upon a number of assumptions; any

or all may change over time;

1. Available short circuit current from the utility may vary, particularly
in areas where there has been a significant expansion of, or
change to, the electrical systems.

2. The number of motors running at the time of a fault affects the

amount of short circuit current and arc fault current available
(motor contribution).

3. The facility voltage often varies as a function of time of day. The

utility is often more loaded during the day.
Similarly, the arc fault may also be affected by variations in any of
the following:

1. The available short circuit current.

2. Dirt buildup in the equipment that may affect the conductive path.

3. Moisture (humidity).

4. Circuit supply voltage.

5. Amount of motor contribution during a fault

Definitions

Bolted Fault - Short circuit current resulting from conductors at

different potentials becoming solidly connected together.

Arc Fault - Short circuit current resulting from conductors at

different potentials making a less than solid contact. This results in
a relatively high resistant connection with respect to a bolted fault.

Author
John C. Pfeiffer, P.E., president, Pfeiffer Engineering Co., Inc.,
Louisville, Kentucky

1 "A Summary of Arc-flash Hazard Calculations" D.R. Doan & R.A.

Sweigart
2 "Arcing Flash/Blast Review with Safety Suggestions for Design
and Maintenance" Tim Crnko & Steve Dyrnes