Author |
Message |
AB P.E.
|
Post subject: More on the 125 KVA, <= 240 V topic Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:53 am |
|
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 12:59 pm Posts: 70 Location: Milwaukee WI
|
I model a transformer with multiple secondary windings. Using the pre-2012 exclusion, results are like this: 480V, 350KVA, with NGR, CAT1, 2.8 cal/cm^2 240V, 10KVA, with NGR, CAT0, 1.2 cal/cm^2 208V, 40KVA, no NGR, CAT0, 1.2 cal/cm^2 Now, using the post-2012, report as calculated: 480V, 350KVA, with NGR, CAT1, 2.8 cal/cm^2 240V, 10KVA, with NGR, CAT2, 6.9 cal/cm^2 208V, 40KVA, no NGR, CAT3, 15.4 cal/cm^2 Perennial problem, the smaller secondary windings cannot easily affect the transformer primary side fusing. Still, quite a jump from CAT0 to CAT3 at 208V, 40KVA. As if the software is overstating the risk. My preference was the pre-2012 result.
|
|
Top |
|
 |
MattB
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2012 7:22 am |
|
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:49 am Posts: 40
|
What software were you using? What was the available short circuit current?
|
|
Top |
|
 |
SArni01
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:15 am |
|
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:43 pm Posts: 11 Location: Denver, CO
|
The 1st values come straight from the exception, so I'm curious if you've run the pre-2012 exception WITHOUT using both the exception and the 2 second rule just to see how those values compare. To me it seems as though the post-2012 result would almost have to come from a long duration event.
|
|
Top |
|
 |
JKlessig
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:26 am |
|
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:40 am Posts: 119
|
Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying, but it seems to me that you shouldn't be using the exclusion in the first case. The Transformer is clearly rated >350 KVA, and the exclusion is not on a "per winding " basis. I also strongly dislike calling the "2 seconds" a "RULE". At best, as I see it, it is a suggestion, or a guideline, and comes out of thin air as far as I can see.
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Terry Becker
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:11 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 5:00 pm Posts: 127 Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
|
The IEEE P1584 Standard does include a "2 Second Rule" it is also noted in Annex D now in 70E and Z462. The existing IEEE P1584 formulas currently calculate a very high incident energy, you will see this change in the new IEEE P1584 forumulas based on additional arc flashes at the lower voltages. Currently the 125kVA rule still applies, no arc rated PPE required for less than or equal to 125kVA, single transformer, 240V. Regards; Terry Becker, P.Eng. Owner, ESPS Electrical Safety Program Solutions INC.
|
|
Top |
|
 |
McQ
|
Post subject: Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:27 am |
|
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:59 am Posts: 14
|
Terry Becker wrote: The IEEE P1584 Standard does include a "2 Second Rule" it is also noted in Annex D now in 70E and Z462. The existing IEEE P1584 formulas currently calculate a very high incident energy, you will see this change in the new IEEE P1584 forumulas based on additional arc flashes at the lower voltages. Currently the 125kVA rule still applies, no arc rated PPE required for less than or equal to 125kVA, single transformer, 240V. Regards; Terry Becker, P.Eng. Owner, ESPS Electrical Safety Program Solutions INC. I know I hate to saddle a dead horse on this issue but doesn't the IEEE 1584 say "The transformer supplying the circuit is rated less than 125 kVA" Just checking my own sanity.
|
|
Top |
|
 |
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|