HRC Tables Vs.

Incident
Energy Calculations
The decision on
which approach to
take is not always
obvious.

Arc flash events pose extreme danger to those Vi/orking near energized equipment.

By Michael Woodruff, AF Services, LLC

hy perform an arc flash study, label the equipment, and

require employees to wear personal protective equipment
(PPE)? Many companies want an arc flash study to meet the
OSHA requirement to provide employees a safe workplace.
Additionally, it just makes good business sense, considering
the expense of an accident in lost production time, insur-
ance costs, facility damage, and liability claims.
When it comes to arc flash studies, there are two basic approaches. However, the
decision on which one to use is not obvious when you consider the trade-offs. Key
documents to help in this decision process include NFPA 70E 2012, "Handbook for
Electrical Safety in the Workplace," and IEEE-1584 2002, "Guide for Performing Arc
Flash Hazard Calculations." Unfortunately, neither one of these completely answers
all questions. Before selecting an approach, you must start with a basic understand-
ing of arc flash severity — so let's start with a quick review.

Arc flash 1 0 1 . The severity of an arc flash is determined by the magnitude ofthe
incident energy a worker is exposed to during an arcflash.The magnitude of incident

20 H l f i M January 2014 • www,ecmweb,com

 Table 130.7(C)(15)(a) for Panelboards Rated >240V and up to 600V
Hazard/
Task Performed on Energized Equipment Risk Category
Perform infrared thermography and other non-contact inspections outside the restricted 1
approach boundary
CB or fused switch operation with covers on 0
CB or fused switch operation with covers off 1
Work on energized electrical conductors and circuit parts, including voltage testing 2
Work on energized electrical conductors and circuit parts of utilization equipment fed 2
directly by a branch circuit of the panelboard
This data is a small portion of the massive table shown in the actual NFPA 70E standard.

energy is determined by three factors: shall take into consideration the design for each task listed. The use of HRC is
• Distance from the source. of the overcurrent protection device and intended to only be used with the tables
• Fault current available at the point its opening time, including its condition such that it is known that the severity
of work. of maintenance." levels are estimates at best.
• Clearing time of the protective Fxception: The requirements of The Table above shows a section of
device. 130.7(C)(15), and 130.7(C)(16) shall be the 130.7 Tables for PPE. This section
Ensuring accuracy of these factors is permitted to be used in lieu of determin- addresses panelboards, which are com-
critical to determining a valid severity ing the incident energy at the working mon in most all electrical systems. Each
level. Variations of any of these factors distance. section of Table 130.7(C)(15)(a) begins
can result in significant changes in the The NFPA 70E paragraph requires the with a listing of conditions and the
available incident energy. For example, calculation of incident energy and then potential arc flash boundary. Let's take a
it is not unusual for a 2x change in fault relaxes the requirement in the Exception, look at some examples:
current to result in a lOx change in clear- allowing the use of the 130.7(C) tables. Panelboards or other equipment rated
ing time. A decrease in fault current can The calculation of incident energy, at greater than 240V and up to 600V.
increase the clearing time, thus increas- performed in accordance with IEEE- • 25kA short circuit current, maxi-
ing the arcflashthreat. That is why it is so 1584, is based on the actual equipment mum
common for systems with low fault cur- in the system. These calculations also • 0.03 fatdt clearing time, maximum
rent to have higher arc flash threats than define the distance to the point where • 18-inch working distance, mini-
similar systems with high fault currents. the incident energy is below 1.2 cal/cm^ mum
— establishing an arc flash boundary. • Potential arc flash boundary with
Table vs. caiculation method. NFPA The table approach lists an approach exposed energized conductors: 2 feet,
70F contains two ways to accomplish an boundary for different types of equip- 6 inches
arc flash study: one is based on the haz- ment, which frequently does not match 600V motor control center
ard/risk category (HRC) table; the other the HRC levels listed. To use the bound- • 65kA short circuit current, maxi-
requires calculating the incident energy at aries listed, assumptions must be made mum
each piece of equipment. The goal of both for the clearing time and short circuit • 0.03 fault clearing time, maximum
approaches is to define the arcflashsever- current. Typically, these assumptions • 18-inch working distance, mini-
ity, flash boundary, and required PPE. basically amount to a best guess because mum
NFPA 70E paragraph 130.5 states: "An the necessary data is not available to • Potential arc flash boundary with
arc flash hazard analysis shall determine make accurate determinations. exposed energized conductors: 4 feet,
the arc flash boundary, the incident en- The table approach (see HRC Table 5 inches
ergy at the working distance, and the per- Highlights on page 23) also provides 600V motor control center
sonal protective equipment that people a group of tables that can be used to • 42kA short circuit current, maxi-
within the arc flash boundary shall use." determine the PPE requirements based mum
It goes on to say, "The arc flash hazard on the voltage, type of equipment, and • 0.33 fault clearing time, maximum
analysis shall be updated when a major task being performed — none of which • 18-inch working distance, mini-
modification or renovation takes place. are key factors in determining incident mum
It shall be reviewed periodically, not to energy. The values contained in these • Potential arc flash boundary with
exceed five years, to account for changes tables were identified by a task group exposed energized conductors: 13 feet,
in the electrical distribution system that using their collective experience and 9 inches
could affect the results of the flash hazard estimated exposure levels. 600V switchgears and switchboards
analysis... The arc flash hazard analysis The HRC tables list a severity level • 35kA short circuit current, maximum

www.ecmweb.com • January 2014 E C G M 21

 • 0.5 fault clearing time, maximum to determine these critical parameters to de-energize before working within the
• 18-inch working distance, mini- before using this table. limited approach boundary of the exposed
mum • The potential arc fiash boundaries electrical conductors or circuit parts."
• Potential arc flash boundary with rarely match the HRC levels. NFPA 70E doesn't tell users when such
exposed energized conductors: 19 feet, In many situations, the tables are a situation may exist. Also note that Infor-
5 inches conservative, requiring more PPE than is mational Notes are explanatory material
Observations regarding the HRC typically defined by the incident energy that isn't intended to be enforced. This
table include: calculations. The switchboard section paragraph doesn't take into account that
• The table has no HRC greater than 4 is a major exception to the conservative switchboards connected directly to elec-
(40 cal/cm'). Actual calculations find that listings. Switchboards are commonly con- tric utility service transformers Irequently
the incident energy is frequently greater nected directly to the electric utility trans- have incident energy levels much greater
than 40 cal/cm^ for switchboards con- former, resulting in a higher fault current. than 40 cal/cm'—withboundary levels in
nected directly to electric utility service Thus, they may have a more severe hazard excess of 360 inches (30 feet). Equipment
transformers. level than listed. A mislabeled switchboard with these excessive levels of incident en-
• The table has no 3 or 4 HRCs for that's actually an HRC 3 or HRC 4 could ergy needs to be identified and labeled as
switchboards and panelboards, which are result in serious injuries to anyone work- "Do Not Open While Energized."
common throughout industry. ing on this equipment. Paragraph 130.7(C)(15) states that
• What is the basis of changing the The lack of HRCs for incident energy if the system has a "greater than the as-
clearing times and the setting the short levels greater than 40 cal/cm^ in Table sumed maximum short circuit current
circuit currents for same and different 130.7 creates a serious issue. Paragraph capacity or with longer than the as-
equipment? These are two key param- 130.7(A), Informational Note No. 3 states: sumed maximum fault clearing times,"
eters in incident energy and are set with "When the incident energy exceeds 40 an incident energy analysis approach
no justification. cal/cm- at the working distance, greater is required. Users cannot determine
• There is no instruction on how emphasis may be necessary with respect the fault currents or clearing times

REGISTRATION NOW OPEN!

^ 2014 March 3-6, 2014
P@WERTEST C o N FEREN C
Hyatt Regency Denver
Denver, Colorado ^

2014 Electrical Maintericifiiti and Safety Event''

www.powertest.org • 888-300-6382 (NETA)

22 E C s M January 2014 • www.ecmweb.com

without doing a detailed analysis. Thus,
they generally assume the levels fall
within the listed maximum levels. This HRC Table Highlights
provides for a significant risk potential
in the hazard rating. As previously The severity is determined by:
reviewed, the risk level can be worse • Distance from the source
if the fault currents are less than the • Fault current avaiiable at the point of work
maximum, resulting in the clearing • Clearing time for protective devices
times increasing significantly.
The actual incident energy for a — Not the task being performed
majority of panelboards and MCCs will — Not the type of equipment being serviced
be less than the level in the HRC table.
The HRC tables in 2012 NFPA 70E provide maximum fault current levels and maxi-
This results in employees wearing un-
necessary PPE (especially if the table is mum clearing times.
at HRC 3 or 4). The increased PPE can • Lower fault currents can increase the incident energy as the clearing time increases;
be a source of discomfort and reduced thus, maximum levels are not appropriate.
visibility — potentially sufficient to • Clearing times vary by fuse versus breaker, manufacturer, breaker settings, and
distract the worker from the tasks and
magnitude of the fault current
increase the possibility of an accident.
The calculation approach provides a • The tables require the user to make assumptions, which can result in injuries.
more accurate definition of the arc flash The HRC tables assign the flash boundary based on equipment type and assumed
severity level by calculating the actual fault current.
incident energy at the equipment. It also
provides an opportunity to determine • In the 2009 version of the standard, the typical flash boundary was 4 feet
minor or major changes that could be • In the 2012 version, the flash boundaries can be up to 19 feet 5 inches for an HRC
incorporated to mitigate the existing arc of 1 or 2.
flash hazard. The system model devel-
oped as part of the detailed analysis can The most critical condition of greater than 40 cal/cm^ is not listed anywhere in the
be updated with additions, removals, or HRC tables.
changes made to the power system with • This is a critical level that must be addressed; it is the most dangerous arc flash level.
minimal effort while maintaining the • This is a common level found in many pieces of equipment fhat provide the first
accuracy of the hazard level. ECsM
level of protection in the facility.
Woodrujf is an eiectricai safety consuitant HRC tables only provide a means of placing labels (that have questionable accuracy)
with AP Services, LLC, Goodyear, Ariz. He on the equipment
can be reached at mii<[email protected].

Helping you save money,

no matter what you drive.
No matter what business you're in, you could save with Progressive Insurance.
To learn more about Progressive, and see why we are the #1 Truck Insurer in
America, please visit ProgressiveCommercial.com.

Call for a Free Quote

1-888-375-7908
Find an Agent
ProgressiveCommercial.com
7/ PROGRE55IIÍE
COMMERCIAL

Progressive Casualty Ins. Co. S affliialËS. Available in mosT states. No, 1 truct from SNL Financial's 2011 national written premium data, D5P(X156O,BA {03n3)

Circle 34 on Reader Service Card or visit freeproductinfo.net/ecm

www.ecmweb.com • January 2014 ECsM 23

© 2014 Penton Media, Inc. All rights reserved.