It is currently Thu Jan 27, 2022 10:17 pm

Author Message

 Post subject: Generator Contribution after tripPosted: Wed May 02, 2018 12:55 pm

Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 12:39 pm
Posts: 7
I have a client that has a large unit connected generating station.

The main auxiliary bus has transformer differential protection for the main auxiliary transformer.

Their question is if they are racking in the breaker on the secondary of the main auxiliary transformer with the generator running and have an arcing event (on the line side of the breaker), what should the generator contribution be after the excitation has been removed?

The other sources (motors and utility) will be removed after the lockout trip and the excitation will be off, but there will still be some energy left in the generator.

How long will the generator still provide energy to the arcing fault? I talked to SKM, and they felt that the additional energy would be minimal, which seems like it might be not conservative enough, while a flat two seconds seems too conservative.

Has anyone come across this before?

Top

 Post subject: Re: Generator Contribution after tripPosted: Wed May 09, 2018 4:17 pm
 Plasma Level

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:08 am
Posts: 2174
Location: North Carolina
It’s inductor but we usually measure impedance. Convert back to inductance and calculate joules of energy. Maximum power transfer to the arc occurs if the arc impedance equals the system impedance (we’re following the Lee derivation). Finally as with Lee calculate the energy over a 2 Square cm area of a sphere with radius equal to working distance. This gives incident energy.

We can really cast any electrical system into a case where we can calculate the energy in the system then divide by two (maximum power transfer argument) followed by the working distance calculation as a generalized Lee calculation. It’s use is the simplicity and that it produces conservative results useful as a first pass to determine if there might be a hazard.

Similar calculations are used for capacitors and DC arcs as given on Annex D.8 of 70E. After doing this exercise for a lot of similar situations and never getting to 1.2 cal/cm2 this is probably just due diligence. As with Lee the calculated value will be off by a huge multiple (measured DC arcs were 2-5 times lower) but since it’s a due diligence exercise anyways why beat yourself over accuracy.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Generator Contribution after tripPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 7:23 am

Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 12:39 pm
Posts: 7
Thanks Paul.

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 1 [ 3 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 – 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