Hi Michael,
Thanks for your swift response.
arcad wrote:
Note please that Equipment Class has been removed from the new IEEE 1584 standard year 2018 edition. Instead, Electrode Configuration has been introduced.
Equipment Class has
not been removed from the new 2018 edition, it is a column within Table 8 (the table that also has columns for typical bus gaps and enclosure sizes) and contains:
- 15 kV switchgear,
- 15 kV MCC,
- 5 kV switchgear,
- 5 kV MCC,
- LV switchgear,
- Shallow LV MCCs and panelboards,
- Deep LV MCCs and panelboards
- Cable junction box
arcad wrote:
Also, Open Air implies the arc not restricted by equipment / enclosure. Hence I see no reason why the Table 8 dedicated to different classes of equipment would include Open Air.
The 2002 edition contained Table 6 which comprised the following columns:
- System voltage
- Equipment type
- Typical gap between conductors
- Distance x factor
...and included these equipment types:
- Open air
- Switchgear
- MCC and panels
- Cable
Therefore, I'd suggest that typical bus gap for Open Air equipment is relevant, hence my question. Obviously, enclosure sizes are irrelevant for Open Air equipment as there is no enclosure.
arcad wrote:
The table shows same typical gap of 25mm both for deep and shallow equipment so I would consider using this value across the board (min to max depth).
My 2nd question was related to a default value for enclosure depth (greater than 8 inches, if I go with "Deep"/"Typical" as a default) not bus gap.
arcad wrote:
Also, I would leave it up to end user to specify enclosure dimensions and gap instead of pushing default values. Just make a placeholder indicating accepted range of values and make an info button or help menu showing typical values the user can consult for the information in case accurate information is not readily available.
Fair point, but defaults are helpful if relevant data is unavailable.
arcad wrote:
The table implies 18 in for low voltage and 36 in for medium voltage. I think you can follow that approach if you really want to include Equipment Class in your application.
That sounds sensible.
arcad wrote:
Note please that at least one IEEE 1584-2018 web API has already been developed and is powering a universal arc flash hazard analysis and labeling app. You may consider focusing on developing the app front-end and hooking it up to that API instead of reinventing the wheel.
I wasn't aware that a 1584-2018 web API was freely-available. I'm updating an existing Windows desktop application which won't necessarily have internet access, so a web API wouldn't be suitable, but I would be interested to find out more about the web API for possible future web-based projects. I presume it's a REST API?
Many thanks for your input.