It is currently Fri Aug 07, 2020 11:03 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
ekstra   ara
 Post subject: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:39 am 

Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:22 am
Posts: 2
Hello All.

It appears that there are somewhat conflicting information regarding the NESC Table 410-1 and the IEEE 2002 and 2018 (Draft) for 3-phase 208V equipment.

1584 2002 provided the 125kVA statement implying that three-phase 208V equipment fed from less than 125kVA transformer could be labeled at less than 1.2cal/cm2.

Next came the NESC Table 410-1 which stated three-phase 208V equipment could be labeled with 4.0cal/cm2, with no indication on a transformer or fault current limit.

It appears 1584 2018 has changed the 125kVA value to a 2000A or less fault current.

I am curious what others will be doing for 208V equipment going forward?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 3:17 pm 
Plasma Level
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 1499
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Yes it is a bit confusing right now.

The 2002 Edition of IEEE had the 125 kVA "exception" but it was discovered that it might have been a bit optimistic. Under specific conditions - although not common, we had arcs sustain down to 2500A so we took 80% to arrive at 2000A However, this is an empty test box with the exception of the electrodes terminating in a barrier.

The NESC data is based on testing actual equipment and is very specific based on the accompanying notes. I know the people involved with that research very well - work with them on various committees.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:38 pm 

Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:22 am
Posts: 2
Jim Phillips (brainfiller) wrote:
Yes it is a bit confusing right now.

The 2002 Edition of IEEE had the 125 kVA "exception" but it was discovered that it might have been a bit optimistic. Under specific conditions - although not common, we had arcs sustain down to 2500A so we took 80% to arrive at 2000A However, this is an empty test box with the exception of the electrodes terminating in a barrier.

The NESC data is based on testing actual equipment and is very specific based on the accompanying notes. I know the people involved with that research very well - work with them on various committees.


Hi Jim.

I guess I am a bit confused. When is the NESC applicable since it doesn’t give too much detail? Any 208V panelboard regardless of Current is 4cal or less? When would the IEEE come into play?

It seems to me that they are conflicting. 2000A is very low compared to the blanket 4cal or less from NESC.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:55 am 
Arc Level

Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:00 pm
Posts: 532
1) The scope of the NESC is fairly narrow. I would make sure you are in scope before adopting NESC tables.
2) OSHA has expressed doubts regarding some of the Table's footnotes.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 9:04 am 
Sparks Level

Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:23 pm
Posts: 110
Location: Ohio
Attachment:
OSHA Letter Titus Diamond_20150716184438 - OSHA LoR on 410-1.pdf


stevenal wrote:
1) The scope of the NESC is fairly narrow. I would make sure you are in scope before adopting NESC tables.
2) OSHA has expressed doubts regarding some of the Table's footnotes.


OSHA has also endorsed some of the NESC work - see attached


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:41 am 

Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 9:28 am
Posts: 11
Location: Oregon
No question the standards are conflicting at present. We just have to deal with it. If the Categories Method in NFPA 70E-2018 is used, Category 1 (4 cal/cm2) is the required PPE for working on panels < 250 V (within specified fault current and clearing time maximums).

So 4 cal/cm2 seems like a reasonable level for <250 V, basically consistent with NESC. It will be interesting to see how calculations using IEEE 1584-2018 equations at 208V end up - especially when the additional variables of electrode configuration and enclosure size are factored in.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:09 pm 
Plasma Level
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:08 am
Posts: 2174
Location: North Carolina
The sources of information in NESC are described only in vague terms but it is my understanding that the data comes from the EPRI testing. The testing went up to 20 kA available fault current and measured incident energy as high as 3.2 cal/cm2...hence rounding up to 4 cal/cm2.

As far as reconciling the two, first let me ask a simple question: is it better to use a theoretical calculation or an empirical equation? And based on that decision where does actual equipment testing fit into the framework? And I'll just say this...engineers tend to be biased strongly towards calculations over table-based results irrespective of the underlying basis behind it, even when it is inappropriate to do so.

There are really 3 cases to consider:
1. You don't have enough information to use IEEE 1584 in the first place. In this case the table based approach (NESC or NFPA 70E) is really your only practical option. This is generally the case when doing an arc flash study for the first time.
2. The conditions are known and don't match those specified in the tables (70E or NESC). Note that NESC is kind of low on detail so this is a little more work to determine. Then the fall back obviously should be IEEE 1584.
3. Conditions are known to the point where IEEE 1584 empirical calculation could be used, AND the conditions match known values in the NESC or NFPA 70E table based approach. In this case the NFPA 70E table shouldn't be used...since it will be essentially the IEEE 1584 calculation at discrete points, using the calculated method gives lower (and tighter) values. However NESC table based approach will often produce lower estimates because it is based on actual testing on equipment. This would be appropriate if your conditions match. If not, IEEE 1584 produces more accurate results. Note that NESC is pretty vague on details about the sources so it takes some sleuthing to find it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old 125kVA, New 2000A, and NESC for 208V Equipment
PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:11 pm 
Sparks Level

Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:23 pm
Posts: 110
Location: Ohio
More food for thought - take a look at the tables, in some cases they can be applied at 480 volts. As an example, the LV (480V) side of a pad mount transformer is a max of 4 cal/sq cm. To further substantiate that number, OSHA has issued a letter confirming the NESC value of 4 cal/sq cm can be used on pad mount transformers.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


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

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