Author |
Message |
PJ
|
Post subject: Equipment that has a lower Ka rating than calculated? Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2021 6:38 am |
|
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2020 10:01 am Posts: 2
|
I am learning Etap and when I modeled some known equipment the Ka rating for some of the circuit breakers is lower than calculated for the short circuit study. How would you handle under rated PD’s in the arc flash study?
|
|
Top |
|
 |
mpparent
|
Post subject: Re: Equipment that has a lower Ka rating than calculated? Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:41 am |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:42 am Posts: 39
|
I would not label those instances other than to use a "DANGER" label w/ no other information. Then, an engineering solution must be found to ensure the breakers/equipment in question have an appropriate interrupting rating or appropriate bracing.
Mike
|
|
Top |
|
 |
PJ
|
Post subject: Re: Equipment that has a lower Ka rating than calculated? Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2021 8:51 am |
|
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2020 10:01 am Posts: 2
|
mpparent wrote: I would not label those instances other than to use a "DANGER" label w/ no other information. Then, an engineering solution must be found to ensure the breakers/equipment in question have an appropriate interrupting rating or appropriate bracing.
Mike Thank you!
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Jim Phillips (brainfiller)
|
Post subject: Re: Equipment that has a lower Ka rating than calculated? Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2021 6:50 am |
|
Plasma Level |
 |
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:00 pm Posts: 1558 Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
|
PJ wrote: I am learning Etap and when I modeled some known equipment the Ka rating for some of the circuit breakers is lower than calculated for the short circuit study. How would you handle under rated PD’s in the arc flash study? That question can still stir up quite a bit of discussion. Below is a survey that I conducted several years ago on the subject. Overdutied Equipment and Arc Flash Studies Survey
|
|
Top |
|
 |
mayanees
|
Post subject: Re: Equipment that has a lower Ka rating than calculated? Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2021 7:12 am |
|
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:38 am Posts: 52 Location: Westminster, MD
|
When devices fail the equipment evaluation the analysis takes on a new level of complexity. You need to verify that it fails beyond a doubt because you're telling the client that they need to spend money for a fix that will only be a problem on the rare occasion of a fault in the system. And if there is a fault it could be could be extremely dangerous. So you need to exhaust all options in the review with specific attention to NEC 240.86 Series ratings. And you also need to make sure your calculation is appropriate and uses the correct fault current and X/R ratio for the contribution as well as accurate cable lengths and sizes. I often say that anyone can buy a power systems analysis package and press the button for an equipment evaluation, but it takes proficiency to interpret the results. Good luck. It's good work.
|
|
Top |
|
 |
wbd
|
Post subject: Re: Equipment that has a lower Ka rating than calculated? Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:51 am |
|
Plasma Level |
 |
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 5:00 pm Posts: 831 Location: Rutland, VT
|
Another item to note when encountering overdutied equipment in a study is that this is not only an NEC violation but also an OSHA violation. I think a lot of people are unaware that it is also an OSHA violation.
OSHA 1910.303(b)(4): Interrupting rating. Equipment intended to interrupt current at fault levels shall have an interrupting rating sufficient for the nominal circuit voltage and the current that is available at the line terminals of the equipment. Equipment intended to interrupt current at other than fault levels shall have an interrupting rating at nominal circuit voltage sufficient for the current that must be interrupted.
_________________ Barry Donovan, P.E. www.workplacesafetysolutions.com
|
|
Top |
|
 |
JBD
|
Post subject: Re: Equipment that has a lower Ka rating than calculated? Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:01 am |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:35 am Posts: 525 Location: Wisconsin
|
One thing to consider when performing the required risk analysis is the likelihood of an occurrence before mitigation can be implemented.
Equipment is considered as being overdutied based on a three phase bolted fault. What is the likelihood that this type of fault occurs in an operating electrical system that has no maintenance or rewiring performed on it? Arcing fault currents are often significantly lower than bolted fault currents, so it may be the equipment is adequately rated for clearing these faults.
Overdutied equipment needs to be mitigated.
|
|
Top |
|
 |
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 7 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
|
|