| Author |
Message |
|
jorgepaz
|
Post subject: Arc Flash Protection Boundary  Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:55 am |
|
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:14 am
Posts: 15
Location: Fot McMurray, Alberta, Canada
|
|
Working on the Arc Flash Analysis i found that for a Low Voltage MCC Buss the AFB (10.56 inches) is less than the Limited Approach (42 inches) and Restricted Approach (12 inches). What could be wrong in my model?
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Voltrael
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:58 am |
|
 |
| Sparks Level |
 |
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:31 am
Posts: 237
Location: Port Huron, Michigan
|
jorgepaz wrote: Working on the Arc Flash Analysis i found that for a Low Voltage MCC Buss the AFB (10.56 inches) is less than the Limited Approach (42 inches) and Restricted Approach (12 inches). What could be wrong in my model? What's the incident energy? I'm betting it's well below 1.2 cal/cm2.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
jorgepaz
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:23 am |
|
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:14 am
Posts: 15
Location: Fot McMurray, Alberta, Canada
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Voltrael
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 10:51 am |
|
|
| Sparks Level |
|
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:31 am
Posts: 237
Location: Port Huron, Michigan
|
jorgepaz wrote: Yes it is 0.5 cal/cm2 There's no reason that isn't possible. Can't say for sure without having your model. The other boundaries you mention deal with shock hazard, and have nothing to do with arc flash hazard.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
jorgepaz
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 11:54 am |
|
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:14 am
Posts: 15
Location: Fot McMurray, Alberta, Canada
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
arcad
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 12:58 pm |
|
|
| Sparks Level |
 |
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:00 pm
Posts: 204
Location: Toronto
|
jorgepaz wrote: Working on the Arc Flash Analysis i found that for a Low Voltage MCC Buss the AFB (10.56 inches) is less than the Limited Approach (42 inches) and Restricted Approach (12 inches). What could be wrong in my model? what is the arc duration? are you calculating the arc flash boundary based on actual incident energy to 2nd degree burn or based on 1.2 cal/cm^2?
_________________
Michael Furtak, C.E.T.
http://arcadvisor.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
PaulEngr
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 1:43 pm |
|
|
| Plasma Level |
 |
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:08 am
Posts: 1779
Location: North Carolina
|
jorgepaz wrote: Working on the Arc Flash Analysis i found that for a Low Voltage MCC Buss the AFB (10.56 inches) is less than the Limited Approach (42 inches) and Restricted Approach (12 inches). What could be wrong in my model? The original source for the shock protection boundaries is IEEE 516. NFPA 70E, NESC, and all subsections of OSHA regulations refer back to IEEE 516. I suggest reading this if you want to know the excruciating details. Below a certain voltage the limited approach boundary is fixed at 3'6" for everything except overhead lines (where it switches to 10'). Eventually it increases as the underlying flashover distance increases. The restricted approach boundary is fixed and somewhat arbitrary below 1 kV. Above that point it is calculated using the flashover distance plus a constant that accounts for inadvertent movement.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
elihuiv
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 9:32 am |
|
|
| Sparks Level |
 |
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 5:00 pm
Posts: 248
Location: Louisville, KY
|
jorgepaz wrote: Working on the Arc Flash Analysis i found that for a Low Voltage MCC Buss the AFB (10.56 inches) is less than the Limited Approach (42 inches) and Restricted Approach (12 inches). What could be wrong in my model? This is not uncommon at all. The Limited Approach is a SHOCK boundary based on IEEE 516 with the idea that Limited is for UNQUALIFIED persons to remain safe since they do not know which parts are energized and could potentially TOUCH energized parts and be shocked. There is never correlation of Limited Approach and AFB. Different hazards of the same device. Hugh Hoagland e-Hazard.com
| Last edited by wbd on Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:32 am, edited 1 time in total. |
| removed personal contact info |
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
jorgepaz
|
Post subject: Re: Arc Flash Protection Boundary Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:23 am |
|
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:14 am
Posts: 15
Location: Fot McMurray, Alberta, Canada
|
|
Thanks everyone for your response.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
 
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 9 posts ] |
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest |
|
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
|
|
