It is currently Mon Nov 28, 2022 9:33 pm

Author Message

 Post subject: Transmission Line AssumptionsPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 4:40 pm

Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 12
I have been asked to calculate values for our 115 kV and 69 kV transmission lines. If anyone else is /has done this:

(1) What are you using for arc gap values?
(2) What are you using for typical working distances?

I'm looking for a sanity check on some numbers floating around in-house before I begin.

Thanks.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 12:27 pm

Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:14 am
Posts: 2
Location: Calgary, AB
For our transmission lines I have used:

1) Arc gap - the vertical length of the insulator string (8 bells x 146mm = 1168mm or 46")
2) Working distance - MAID - minimum air insulation distance. That is the minimum approach distance minus the ergonomic safety factor. If an arc was generated there is a good chance that the ergonomic safety factor was breached.

However I haven't done the actual calculations yet due to the lack of a high voltage open air arc model. What arc model are you using to calculate incident energies?

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:31 pm
 Arc Level

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:17 am
Posts: 428
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
jscross wrote:
I have been asked to calculate values for our 115 kV and 69 kV transmission lines. If anyone else is /has done this:

(1) What are you using for arc gap values?
(2) What are you using for typical working distances?

I'm looking for a sanity check on some numbers floating around in-house before I begin.

Thanks.

NESC Table 410-2 uses an arc gap (in) = ÃƒËœ-grd voltage (kV) divided by 10, on the basis of the dielectric strength of air being 10 kV per inch.

Working distance in Table 410-2 is calculated by using the minimum approach distance from Table 441-2 and subtracting two times the arc gap length. This would be 3'-11" for 69 kV and 4'-6" for 115 kV unless a maximum overvoltage other than 3.0 has been determined by engineering analysis.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:29 pm
 Arc Level

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:00 pm
Posts: 596
Big difference. Table 2 suggests that a worker brings a grounded metal object within the air break down distance, holds it there for the duration, and the arc does not lengthen on its own. But using the insulator string strike distance can yield some pretty large incident energy values.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:33 pm
 Arc Level

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:17 am
Posts: 428
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
jghrist wrote:
NESC Table 410-2 uses an arc gap (in) = ÃƒËœ-grd voltage (kV) divided by 10, on the basis of the dielectric strength of air being 10 kV per inch.

Working distance in Table 410-2 is calculated by using the minimum approach distance from Table 441-2 and subtracting two times the arc gap length. This would be 3'-11" for 69 kV and 4'-6" for 115 kV unless a maximum overvoltage other than 3.0 has been determined by engineering analysis.

I just noticed that I added two times the arc gap length instead of subtracting. I'll have to look at this again in the morning, but off-hand it appears that this may yield smaller working distances for 115 kV than for 69 kV!

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:32 am
 Arc Level

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:17 am
Posts: 428
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
jghrist wrote:
I just noticed that I added two times the arc gap length instead of subtracting. I'll have to look at this again in the morning, but off-hand it appears that this may yield smaller working distances for 115 kV than for 69 kV!

I was right, the calculation of working distance according to the footnotes to NESC Table 410-2 result in a working distance for 69 kV of 2'-7" but a working distance for 115 kV of 2'-3". Doesn't seem to make sense having a shorter working distance at 115 kV than at 69 kV.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:14 am

Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:16 am
Posts: 4
table 441-2 needed

Could anybody post a copy of table 441-2 from nesc c2 in pdf or doc formats?

Thanks

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:44 pm

Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 12
Transmission Arc Flash Model

I think the only model to consider is the ArcPro model, but I have several reservations about that one. I'm just trying to do some due diligence before I have to tell my boss "I can't do that".

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:20 am

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:12 am
Posts: 1
jghrist Error?

jghrist wrote:
I was right, the calculation of working distance according to the footnotes to NESC Table 410-2 result in a working distance for 69 kV of 2'-7" but a working distance for 115 kV of 2'-3". Doesn't seem to make sense having a shorter working distance at 115 kV than at 69 kV.

jghrist: I believe that you have used the Phase to ground voltage from table 441-1 (69kV=3' 3"). This distance should be 3' 11" from the phase to phase column for distance to employee. Subtracting 8" would give you 3' 3", not 2' 7".
Please confirm.... and repost. I think that you are ok for the 115kV line however. I do get 2' 3".

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:33 am
 Arc Level

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:17 am
Posts: 428
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
Why use the value for ÃƒËœ-ÃƒËœ work in Table 441-1? If you used the ÃƒËœ-ÃƒËœ Table 441-3 for 115 kV, you would subtract 13" from 4"-7" and get 3'-6".

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 1 [ 10 posts ]

 All times are UTC - 7 hours

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum

 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ Forum Library / Articles The Lounge    Question of the Week - What Do You Think?    Arcflashforum.com Feedback and Announcements    Off Topic Discussions    News in Electrical Safety Arc Flash and Electrical Safety    General Discussion    Electrical Safety Practices    Equipment to Reduce Arc Flash Dangers    Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Arc Flash Studies    General Discussion    Arc Flash Labels    Software for Arc Flash Studies    System Modeling and Calculations    NEW! Electrode Configuration Library â€“ 2018 IEEE 1584 Codes and Standards    CSA Z462 Workplace Electrical Safety    EAWR Electricity at Work Regulations, HSE - Europe    OSHA CFR Title 29    IEEE 1584 - Arc-Flash Hazard Calculations    NFPA 70 - National Electrical Code - NEC (R)    NESC - ANSI C2 - National Electrical Safety Code    NFPA 70E - Electrical Safety in the Workplace    2015 NFPA 70E Share It Here    Arc Flash Photos    Your Stories    What's Wrong Here? by Joe Tedesco
© 2022 Arcflash Forum / Brainfiller, Inc. | P.O. Box 12024 | Scottsdale, AZ 85267 USA | 800-874-8883