advanced search

Don’t Leave Arc Flash Protection to Chance — Part 3

Nov 21, 2011 5:48 PM, Frank Mercede, P.E., Mercede Engineering LLC

Common misconceptions in arc flash labeling standards

This is the final installment of a three-part series on the importance of arc flash labeling of electrical equipment. In Part 1, which ran in the September 2011 issue, we considered the low-level task of taking measurements within a non-fused safety switch that serves as a local motor disconnect and learned that the level of arc flash risk can be significant, depending on the amperage and class of the upstream fuses in the motor starter compartment and the length of the branch circuit conductors running from the fuses to the safety switch. In Part 2, which ran in the October 2011 issue, we moved further upstream to a combination motor starter bucket of a motor control center and learned once again that the level of arc flash risk can defy expectations, depending on the instantaneous setting of the upstream solid-state trip unit and the feeder length to the motor control center.

In this final installment, we focus our attention on the main switchboard in the example system shown in Fig. 1 (click here to see Fig. 1). As we can see in the one-line diagram of Fig. 1, the 3-phase electric service of the commercial facility is fed from the electric utility at 13.2kV and transformed to 480V via a 1,500kVA, dry-type, delta-grounded wye main transformer (TX-1). The main transformer is protected on the primary side by fused switch FUPS. On the secondary side, the main switchboard SWBD0 is composed of main secondary breaker MB0 and four feeder breakers (FB1, FB2, FB3, and FB4); all are molded-case circuit breakers equipped with solid-state trip units. The feeder breakers serve a motor control center (MCC1), two lighting panelboards (LP2A and LP2B), a conveying system switchboard (SWBD3), and induction motor drive (M6). MCC1 consists of five combination motor starters with fused disconnects for induction motors M1 through M5. The main feeder for the lighting panelboards travels some distance from FB2 to a junction box JB2, and two short subfeeders travel from JB2 to the main breakers MB2A and MB2B of LP2A and LP2B, respectively. The four fused disconnects of SWBD3 feed the integral, non-fused disconnects of the conveying system control panels (CP3A, CP3B, CP3C, and CP3D).

Table 1 (click here to see Table 1) presents the results of arc flash calculations per IEEE Std. 1584 at main switchboard SWBD0. Note that the results depend on the upstream trip device that clears the arc fault. Referring to Table 1, if primary fused switch FUPS serves as the upstream trip device for an arc fault at SWBD0, the incident energy level is 104.8 cal/cm2. This extreme incident energy level exceeds the upper limit of the highest Hazard/Risk Category 4 (i.e., 40 cal/cm2), and work on the switchboard cannot proceed until it has been put in an electrically safe work condition per Article 120 of NFPA 70E. However, if the main secondary breaker (MB0) serves as the upstream trip device, then the incident energy level is much lower (5.3 cal/cm2), which corresponds to a Hazard/Risk Category of 2*.

Based on Table 1, one may mistakenly believe that the extreme incident energy level applies only to the MB0 compartment of main switchboard SWBD0. However, an explosion due to an arc fault in a feeder breaker compartment could spread to all compartments of the switchboard (because the switchboard of this example is not arc resistant in construction) and render MB0 incapable of clearing the fault. Thus, the extreme incident energy level applies to all compartments of the switchboard, as shown in Table 2 (click here to see Table 2). Figure 2 provides a sample of an NFPA 70E-compliant arc flash label for the extreme incident energy level noted previously.

In conclusion, we hope that the examples of this three-part series reinforce the importance of conducting an arc flash study. This type of study will help you gather the information needed to meet the arc flash labeling requirement of Sec. 130.3(C) of NFPA 70E-2009, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace.

Finally, keep in mind that an arc flash study by itself is not a substitute for electrical safety training and an ongoing electrical safety program. These types of training courses and safety procedures are still required for both in-house and contracted workers who work on or near energized electrical equipment.  

Mercede, P.E., is principal of Mercede Engineering LLC, based in Bryn Mawr, Pa. He can be reached at: fmercede@mercedeengineering.com.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!

© 2012 Penton Business Media, Inc.

---

Acceptable Use Policy blog comments powered by Disqus

Browse Back Issues Select an Issue EC&M Magazine | April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 1, 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 1, 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 1, 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 1, 2006 May 1, 2006 April 2006 March 1, 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 1, 2004 January 1, 2004 December 1, 2003 November 1, 2003 October 1, 2003 September 1, 2003 August 1, 2003 July 1, 2003 June 1, 2003 May 1, 2003 April 1, 2003 March 1, 2003 February 1, 2003 January 1, 2003 December 1, 2002 November 1, 2002 October 1, 2002 September 1, 2002 August 1, 2002 July 1, 2002 June 1, 2002 May 1, 2002 April 1, 2002 March 1, 2002 February 1, 2002 January 1, 2002 December 1, 2001 November 1, 2001 October 1, 2001 September 1, 2001 August 1, 2001 July 1, 2001 June 1, 2001 May 1, 2001 April 1, 2001 March 1, 2001 February 1, 2001 February 1, 1995 January 1, 2001 December 1, 2000 November 1, 2000 October 1, 2000 September 1, 2000 August 1, 2000 July 1, 2000 June 1, 2000 May 1, 2000 April 1, 2000 March 1, 2000 February 1, 2000 January 1, 2000 December 1, 1999 November 1, 1999 October 1, 1999 September 1, 1999 August 1, 1999 July 1, 1999 June 1, 1999 May 1, 1999 April 1, 1999 March 1, 1999 February 1, 1999 January 1, 1999 December 1, 1998 November 1, 1998 October 1, 1998 September 1, 1998 August 1, 1998 July 1, 1998 June 1, 1998 May 1, 1998 April 1, 1998 March 1, 1998 February 1, 1998 January 1, 1998 December 1, 1997 November 1, 1997 December 1, 1996 November 1, 1996 October 1, 1996 September 1, 1996 August 1, 1996 July 1, 1996 June 1, 1996 May 1, 1996 April 1, 1996 March 1, 1996 February 1, 1996 January 1, 1996 December 1, 1995 November 30, 1995 November 1, 1995 October 1, 1995 September 1, 1995 August 1, 1995 July 1, 1995 June 1, 1995 May 1, 1995 April 1, 1995 March 1, 1995

browse e-newsletters