It is currently Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:16 pm

Author Message

 Post subject: 2012 NFPA 70E Doors Open / Doors ClosedPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:05 am
 Plasma Level

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 1508
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Continuing the doors open / doors closed discussion:

Just thought I would throw this one out there and then run

In the 2012 Edition of NFPA 70E, the Arc Flash Boundaries (AFB) and maximum clearing times and short circuit currents are now listed for each task in table 130.8(C)(15)(1) i.e. the HRC Tables with a new number.

For a few of the tasks the AFB is 0 inches with the doors closed and 235 inches with the doors open - the maximum short circuit current in each case is 35 kA and the maximum clearing time is 0.5 seconds.

Credit for the doors? Interesting….

_________________
Jim Phillips, P.E.
Brainfiller.com

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:04 pm

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:49 am
Posts: 19
brainfiller wrote:
For a few of the tasks the AFB is 0 inches with the doors closed and 235 inches with the doors open - the maximum short circuit current in each case is 35 kA and the maximum clearing time is 0.5 seconds.

Credit for the doors? Interesting….

It sure seems like there is credit for the doors to me. Both cases have the same upper limit for short circuit current and clearing time which should mean the same incident energy.

If I had these values for a calculation study, I would be posting the same arc flash protection boundary whether the doors were open or closed for the person performing work while an arc flash hazard existed.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:12 pm
 Plasma Level

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 11:58 am
Posts: 1103
Location: Charlotte, NC
brainfiller wrote:
Continuing the doors open / doors closed discussion:

Just thought I would throw this one out there and then run

Yeah, you better run

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 5:46 am
 Sparks Level

Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 3:19 pm
Posts: 56
Doors do make a difference no matter what some may think; I’ve seen this first hand more than once. There are even a few test videos out there showing the differences. The problem is no one has come up with a multiplying factor to adjust the calculations or to assist with some type of risk assessment. Everyone continues to treat a fully exposed and a doors or panels closed configuration as the same with regards to “heat exposure”; this has never made sense to me. I agree doors can fly open or projectiles can hit the worker but we’re not calculating impact hazard.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 6:30 am
 Sparks Level

Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:37 am
Posts: 51
Location: Tampa, FL
I think the problem here is that the rules were written that way because the condition of the doors, missing bolts, bolts not tightened, etc., is unknown and as a result a conservative measure was recommended. More times then not I have found these conditions on customer's equipment. Also, when the doors do open during an arc fault, the heat, may be somewhat less, but at what value do you use for the calculations. It all depends on how long they stay closed.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 7:19 am
 Plasma Level

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 11:58 am
Posts: 1103
Location: Charlotte, NC
richxtlc wrote:
I think the problem here is that the rules were written that way because the condition of the doors, missing bolts, bolts not tightened, etc., is unknown and as a result a conservative measure was recommended. More times then not I have found these conditions on customer's equipment. Also, when the doors do open during an arc fault, the heat, may be somewhat less, but at what value do you use for the calculations. It all depends on how long they stay closed.

Right, too many variables (You forgot vents).

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 7:39 am
 Plasma Level

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 1508
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Zog wrote:
Yeah, you better run

Guess I can run but I can't hide.

_________________
Jim Phillips, P.E.
Brainfiller.com

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:10 am
 Sparks Level

Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:37 am
Posts: 51
Location: Tampa, FL
Zog wrote:
Right, too many variables (You forgot vents).

You're right, but sometimes I don't like to vent.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:58 pm

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:45 pm
Posts: 27
richxtlc wrote:
I think the problem here is that the rules were written that way because the condition of the doors, missing bolts, bolts not tightened, etc., is unknown and as a result a conservative measure was recommended. More times then not I have found these conditions on customer's equipment. Also, when the doors do open during an arc fault, the heat, may be somewhat less, but at what value do you use for the calculations. It all depends on how long they stay closed.

This is a very good point.
In order to determine a proper analysis I believe you would want to calculate as though the doors were open. It is too easy to overlook the condition of the doors at the time of calculation or more importantly at some future date.

Equipment does change and not always for the better.

[url="http://www.coverallsale.com"]www.coverallsale.com[/url]

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 2:46 pm

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:59 am
Posts: 4
Location: Palo Alto, California
I heard in a training class a while ago that doors can be traveling around 600 mph when they are blown off. That'll leave a mark!

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 – 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
© 2019 Arcflash Forum / Brainfiller, Inc. | P.O. Box 12024 | Scottsdale, AZ 85267 USA | 800-874-8883