I have been using ETAP v7.1 and the descriptions for the labels for each arc-flash category seems to be inaccurate. Anyone else notice that? In some cases it says Cat 3 requires only a min ppe of 4. and Cat 1 requires a min PPE of 8.

I basically deleted those descriptions and just typed up what was in NFPA 70E 130.11? I don't remember if it was 130.. but I just used the descriptions in the NFPA 70E. Seems more accurate.

Anyone else came across this?

PPE of 4? PPE of 8? 4 and 8 what?

Good Catch! - Sounds like a potentially troublesome glitch. One more reason people can not "blindly" use software without understanding everything else about arc flash and studies.

I am not familiar with ETAP but I bet there is a data table somewhere within the S/W where you can make a change to the correlation of Categories and Incident Energy.

You are correct in using the NFPA 70E values, i.e.

Cat 1 = Minimum 4 cal/cm^2 PPE
Cat 2 = Minimum 8 cal/cm^2 PPE
Cat 3 = Minimum 25 cal/cm^2 PPE
Cat 4 = Minimum 40 cal/cm^2 PPE

SKM software has similar confusion around the no. of layers of FR clothing required for the different PPE levels.According to one FR clothing group contacted, theoretically you can be in your birthday suit and put on the 40 cal arc flash suit.(you do not need 3 and 4 layers of FR clothing)

Huh??? 3 and 4 layers?

Zog:

Here is the FR clothing info(see attachment) directly from the SKM manual.This info is transferred directly and printed onto each of their arc flash labels.

Well that is a mess (Don't see any 4 layers, that is what really threw me off). Is that from a current revision of the SKM software? What is with the HRC 5?

It's not HRC 5, it's the fifth row in a Excel-like control.

And the number of layers they quote uses cotton underwear as the first layer (which you can skip, just don't use meltable underwear), and for HRC3 and HRC4, their multilayer approach (including a "Multi Layer Flash Suit") is not the heading of most of the PPE industry that I see, which is a single garment with the required arc rating over non-melting underwear.

Not the best way to put that info in a table...

Zog,
They do not show an HRC 5, I think you are looking at the row number of the spreadsheet.

The SKM default values are fully editable. You can make them match your company's standards.

SKM was contacted in FEB 2010 ,about these apparent mistakes.They said,they were simply following the standard when they created these FR clothing tables.They will not change them.

I don't have SKM... my problem lies in ETAP...

I use Etap 7.1 and found the same thing with incorrect cal/cm^ ratings. I contacted Etap support and got an answer more confusing than the question. I gave up and use the software "user" option for cal/cm^ values vs. PPE that agree with 70E