Arcflash2 76 130

Arc Flash Analysis Page 76 of 221
In the case of a fault at “Bus30”, the arcing current is too low on the primary side of Transformer “T9”. To determine the arcing current on the primary of T9, take the ratio of the
SC contribution over the total SC current and multiply the total arcing current by this ratio.
(34.33 kA/35.3 kA) * 24.27 kA = 23.59 kA
Then convert to the primary base kV.
23.58 kA * (0.48kV/13.2kV) = 0.857 kA
At this time all that is left to determine is if indeed the calculated arcing current on the primary is too low for “Relay28” to trip. You can confirm this by plotting the relay on a Star
view TCC. In the TCC shown below, the red arrow indicates the arcing current value at the beginning of the fault. This clearly shows that the relay does not trip.
Sometimes the protective device will still trip, but it will do so in a very long time since it is using the 51(overcurrent protection section of the relay). In this case, ETAP may
calculate a very high incident energy value. If the cal/cm2 exceeds the limit of Category 4 (based on NFPA 70E), then it will flag it on the one-line diagram by displaying the
message “Exceeds Max. PPE Arc Rating”. This is the case at Bus14 in the image above.
4. The Source Protective Device is outside the Search Branch Level Number: In order to reduce the calculation speed and computer system requirements, certain limits are set
by ETAP. The limitation consists of reducing the number of levels required in the search of the source protective device. The source protective devices are of course used to
determine the Fault Clearing Time.
The number of levels away can be changed by modifying the entry in the Tools\Options (Preferences): Bus Levels Away to Find Source PD = 10 (default). The maximum is 50.
file:///C:/Users/MICHAEL-INGENIERO/AppData/Local/Temp/~hhA07B.htm 28-05-2024
5. The source protective device is completely outside the search area of the program: For some very special cases, the Arc Flash Program will not be able to determine the Fault
Clearing Time since the source protective device cannot be located. This means that the system does not have protection within the searchable area of the system. The
searchable area of the program is limited by the number of meshed source fault current contributions. And the number of bus levels away (please see previous item). The
search area for multiple source systems can be increased by modifying the following entry under the Tools\Options (Preferences) section: Multiple Source Contribution
Levels = 2 (default).
This entry can be theoretically extended to as many levels as the Bus Levels Away to Find Source PD entry (50). However, it is recommended to extend this option only as needed
to 3, 4 or 5 (i.e. to gradually increase depending on the system complexity). Using a very high number for both of these options can cause performance issues (slow down) with the
arc flash calculation. In some cases, the system memory requirements can be more than what can be handled for a 32-bit computer system application.
Determination of Incident Energy

After the fault clearing times have been determined, the next step is to determine the incident energy for the fault location. ETAP is capable of determining the incident energy for a
fault at any location in the equipment by simply specifying a fault at the bus. The locations are categorized as follows:
1. Fault at the main bus

2. Fault on the source protective devices
3. Fault on load protective devices (typically the same as the bus fault, but different in some special cases).
4. Fault on load terminals connected directly to the faulted bus or connected through equipment cables
The process of determining the incident energy is simple. The program will use equations [D.7.3(c)] (empirical method) or [D.7.4] (theoretical method) depending on the bus
nominal voltage and bolted fault current value.
The empirical method is used for the range of parameters specified by IEEE 1584 2002. The Lee method is used for any system with voltage or bolted fault current outside the range
of the empirical method.
The IEEE 1584 and NFPA 70E 2009 guidelines do not address how complex electrical system with multiple sources should be handled. These guidelines only indicate that the
incident energy can be determined based on the fault clearing time of the first upstream protective device which de-energizes the fault. This methodology is simple enough for radial
systems; however, there is no mention on how to handle looped or meshed systems with multiple source protective devices energizing the fault location.
ETAP has two methods of handling the calculation of the incident energy for power systems which have more than one energizing source protective device. The first method
(existing method before ETAP 7.0.0) takes the total bus arcing current and determines the energy using the fault clearing time of the last protective device to de-energize the fault.
For most power systems having multiple sources, it is likely that the operating time of each source is similar and thus it is acceptable to use the entire arcing current up to the final
fault clearing time.
The second method was added to ETAP 7.0.0 to handle those situations for which the first method is not acceptable. Mainly the cases there multiple sources have very different trip
times. The new method is called “Subtraction of Incident Energy for Multiple Source Systems”. There is an ETAP Options (Preferences) setting which needs to be set to “True” in
order to activate this method. The following image shows the entry and its location in the preferences editor:
For example, we can analyze a multiple source system and place an arc fault at Bus “5BM”. Bus 5Bm is fed from two different utility connections with source protective devices
(HVCBs) “22” and “12”. Each breaker operates at different fault clearing times.
The difference in the operating times is caused by the different relay time dial settings as shown in the following TCC:
The time difference averages about 2 to 3 seconds between the relay operations. In this case RelayA1 operates first (at approximately 1 second) and its arcing current contribution is
removed at this time. This constitutes almost 33% of the energy contribution to the fault location. The total incident energy calculated with the removal of CB 12’s contribution is
nearly 80 cal/cm2 which is well above the maximum value described for PPE in NFPA 70E 2009. By comparison if we were to run the same calculation without using the incident
energy subtraction method, the incident energy results would be as shown in the images below:
The incident energy removed between 1 and 3 seconds (33% of the total fault current) amount to about 20 cal/cm2. The new result is nearly104 cal/cm2.
The previous calculations were executed using the ½ cycle method with/out applying with incident energy subtraction for the multiple sources. We can also use the fault current
decay method to perform the same calculation. Please note that the asynchronous machine contribution to the fault was nearly 2.0 kA and it comes from substation “SUB 5B”. This
contribution constitutes the only AC decay component of the fault since the source contributions from CB 22 and 12 come from utility connections and such are always assumed to
be constant.
The result obtained using the fault current decay method with the incident energy subtraction option enabled is shown below:
The decay from the asynchronous loads in substation SUB5B is also a significant decrease in the energy calculation. The calculated energy is now down to nearly 68.9 cal/cm2. For
this type of system, the fault current decay method yields the least conservative results, however, its results should be the most accurate of all the methods.
The fault current decay method produces many intermediate results. The intermediate results are arranged according to the stage at which they occur. These intermediate values are
usually denoted as E1, E2, E3, FCT1, FCT2, FCT3, etc. The following table lists these intermediate values and provides a description of the physical events they represent. These
parameters are displayed in the Arc Flash Result Analyzer and in the Arc Flash Analysis Reports. For the previous example we have the following parameters generated:
Parameter Description Physical meaning
Incident energy
accumulated over the
first 4 cycles. It is
obtained using the
E1
subtransient fault
current contributions
(Ia”) from every source
in the system.
Duration of the first

FCT1 No protective device operates during this stage. The FCT1 value is set to 4 cycles.
stage
Total subtransient
Total Ia”
arcing current
Total subtransient
Total Ibf” bolted fault current Used to estimate Ia”.

Incident energy
accumulated between 4
cycles and 30 cycles. It
is obtained using the
transient fault current
contributions (Ia’) from
E2
every source in the
system. In our example
the reduction in energy
in this stage comes from
the reduced motor
contribution.
Duration of the second Typically 26 cycles if the steady-state time is set to 30 cycles. In our example only the
FCT2
stage. motor contribution is completely removed at the steady-state time.
Total transient arcing
Ia’
current
Total transient bolted
Ibf’ Used to estimate Ia’.
fault current
Incident energy
accumulated between
30 cycles and the final
fault clearing time. In
our example E3 is
E3 actually the sum of two
individual stages. The
motor contribution has
completely decayed in
this stage as can be seen
in the image.
In our example FCT3 is actually composed of two individual stage durations. The first
Duration of the third stage is set between 30 cycles to 1 second and the second stage time is set between 1 sec
FCT3
stage and 3 seconds. The difference between these two stages is that the current from CB 12 is
removed as the protective device operates
The program always displays the total arcing currents for any stage; however, internally it
Total steady-state arcing may reduce the current for any stage as each source protective device is de-energized. This
Ia
current is the case for Ia for stage E3. It experiences the reduction because of motor decay and
because of CB 12’s operation.
Total steady-state bolted
Ibf Used to estimate Ia.
fault current
This is the sum of
FCT1, FCT2 & FCT3 In our example the final FCT is determined as (FCT1 = 4 cycles) + (FCT2= 26 cycles) +
Final FCT
and it represents the (FCT3 = 150 cycles) = (Total Fault Duration = 180 cycles).
total arc fault duration.
This is the sum of E1,
E2 & E3 and it In our example the Total Incident energy = (E1=1.9) + (E2=11.5) + (E3=55.5) ≈ 69
Total Incident represents the total cal/cm2. Any stage can be split into intermediate smaller stages, but such are not reported
Energy incident energy released by the program. In our example this is the case of stage E3 which is internally split into
throughout the arc fault two smaller stages which are not reported for simplicity.
duration.
For a description of all the calculation results displayed in the AF Result Analyzer and AF analysis reports, please refer to the AF Result Analyzer section of this chapter.
Source/Load PD Arc Fault Calculations

The previous examples described the calculation results for a fault at the Bus location. The same methodology applies if the fault is located on the main protective device which
energizes the bus or if it happens on load protective devices connected to the bus. The difference in the calculation results are summarized below:
1. In the majority of cases the results of faults on load protective devices are the same as those for those on the bus. Only for certain cases in differential protection applications,
the program may yield different results for the load PDs (if the Pd is inside or outside the differential protection zone as defined by the location of the current transformers in
the circuit).
2. The fault location for source PDs is almost treated as a completely different fault location. The results for a fault at the source PDs are in most cases much different than the
results for a fault at the bus.
The following image illustrates how ETAP calculates and displays the results at these locations.
TThe previous image shows that the program calculates independently the AF results at the source PD, Load Pd, Bus and Load terminals by simply specifying a fault only on the
bus. The results show that the most dangerous area is the source PD arc fault and that the least dangerous location is the load terminal box arc fault.
Load PD Load Side Arc Fault

This section provides information on the operation of the load protective device load-side arc fault evaluation. It also summarizes the rules and application information on this
feature. Make sure to read all the application notes prior to enabling the application of this feature.
The load protective device load side arc fault feature allows the calculation of the incident energy at an additional location by assuming that there is isolation between the load
breaker and the fault location (perhaps a lower cubicle such as a cable connection). The load PD should be completely isolated by sheet metal barriers which would prevent the arc
from extending from the lower cubicle and perhaps damage the breaker and render it incapable of clearing the fault.
The diagram below indicates the arc fault locations that can be calculated by the arc flash program for all three-phase buses.
Note that CB8 is considered as the source protective device that energizes the MV switchgear. CB19 happens to be a load breaker which energizes transformer T4. The load PD load
side arc fault is shown just below CB19.
The load side of CB 19 can be considered to be a separate compartment which is by physical construction considered separate from the compartment which houses CB19. In the
event of an arc fault in the load side compartment (i.e. cable connection compartment), ETAP arc flash will consider CB19 to a candidate protective device to de-energize the fault.
Note that the determination of the isolation between compartments needs to be done under engineering supervision and should be determined based on manufacturer advice.
To enable ETAP arc flash load PD load side arc flash calculation; two requirements must be met:
1. Check the option “Load PD” under the Enclosure Isolation section of the Bus Rating page
2. Enable the option “Calculate Load PD Load Side Arc Flash” from the Tools\Options(preferences) editor as shown in the image below.
After configuring the previous two options and performing the arc flash analysis, the results can be observed on the one-line diagram by configuring the display options “Load PD
(Load Side)” as shown below:
A separate set of results will be displayed next to the load PD which indicates the result.
In the same fashion, a load PD load Side Arc Fault can be introduced into the equipment by placing the arc flash sequence of operation fault insertion icon right “on top” of the load
PD. The following image shows the process of inserting the arc fault graphically on the load PD.
The Load PD Load Side Arc Fault results may also be viewed through the reports and arc flash result analyzer.
Load PD Load Side Arc Fault Application Notes

This section provides a summary of the items which need to be considered prior to using this feature. Engineering judgment and analysis have to be made about the construction and
enclosure isolation of the equipment before applying this feature.
1. Up to ETAP 12.6.5 the arc flash program always set the load PD arc flash results to be equal to those of a line-side arc fault (equivalent to a bus arc fault). In ETAP 14.0.0
with the addition of the load PD load side arc fault, the engineer must consider if there is enough of a barrier or isolation between the enclosures. This isolation or barrier
should be enough to assure that the arc fault does not propagate to the LD PD enclosure and thus potentially causing failure of its operation during the arc fault. If it is
considered that this isolation is enough to prevent the arc fault to extend to the load PD enclosure then this option could be used.
2. This feature is meant to be a time saving tool that would allow the engineer to obtain an arc flash analysis for this isolated location (i.e. cable connector compartment). In
previous versions, placing a node or bus at the load PD Load Side would produce the same results. However, once the feature is active, now the program will only provide the
load PD load side results and no longer provide the load PD Line side results for the load PD. Caution must be exercised when using this feature as the selection of the arc
flash labels (for the load PD enclosure and the isolated cable connection enclosure) would require a “two step” process. The load PD Line Side (same as bus) would only be
available for the load PD if the load PD Load Side option is disabled.
3. The Load PD Load Side arc flash calculation is only available for 3-Phase AF calculation methods. The feature is not available under 1-phase arc flash calculations.
It is recommended that when printing labels to make sure that only load PD line Side (Bus Side) labels be placed on the enclosures which contain the load PD and that only load-PD
load Side labels are placed on this lower cable connection enclosures if they are properly isolated.
Load Terminal Arc Fault Calculation

ETAP Arc Flash gives you the flexibility to analyze hundreds of possible arc fault locations within the same equipment without the need to add additional buses. This simple “One
Click and Fault” operation makes the hazard analysis far more efficient by reducing the setup time of the one-line diagrams, by not having to use a large number of buses to
represent every possible arc fault location. This feature works seamlessly with the existing load equipment cable feature in ETAP.
In a power system, there could be hundreds of different arc fault locations within a large motor control center or switchgear lineup. With this feature, the Arc Flash program
produces detailed analysis reports for every faulted location and it can automatically generate AF labels for every incoming main circuit breaker cubicle, load circuit breaker or for
every load terminal point.
The Arc Flash program can simulate arc faults at the load terminals of the following devices:
1. Induction Motors
2. Synchronous motors
3. Static Loads
4. MOVs
5. Capacitors
The following image illustrates the locations for which ETAP calculates the incident energy. The program will calculate the incident energy at all of the locations shown below as
long as the main bus (LV-MCC) is faulted and the entries have been configured in the ETAP options (Preferences) editor.
The load terminal arc fault simulation can be configured from the Options (Preferences) Editor by setting the option “Calculate Load Terminal Arc Flash” = True.
Calculate Load Terminal Arc Flash

This entry specifies if the Arc Flash Program will calculate the incident energy in the event of an arc fault at the load terminals. The default value is set to “False” and it means that
the load terminal arc fault is not considered. If you set this entry to True, then the program determines the incident energy results for arc faults at the load terminals.
Load Terminal Arc Fault Equipment Type

This entry specifies what type of equipment to use to determine the arcing current for an arc fault at the motor terminals. The default is Panelboard = 0. The remaining options are
Cable Bus = 1, Open Air = 2, MCC = 3, Switchgear, Switchboard, Switchrack = 4. The values of the Gap and distance X-factor parameters used are typical values according to the
equipment voltage.
The reason that the panelboard has been set to default for modeling the load terminal faults is that the program is trying to simulate an arc fault in a small enclosure like a terminal
box. The enclosures used by the IEEE 1584 test group to develop the equations for panelboards were the smallest in size of all the enclosures tested and thus they are the best fit.
The values of the Gaps and X factor used by the program to simulate the load terminal arc fault are listed in the following table:
Table 10: Default values for Gaps between Conductors and X factors for Load Terminal Faults
Gap Default X factor
Equipment type*
Value (mm) Value
0.208 – 1.0 kV Open Air 40 2.000
0.208 – 1.0 kV Cable Bus 13 2.000
0.208 – 1.0 kV MCC 25 1.641
0.208 – 1.0 kV Other 13 2.000
0.208 – 1.0 kV Panelboard 25 1.641
0.208 – 1.0 kV Switchgear 32 1.473
0.208 – 1.0 kV Switchboard 32 1.473
0.208 – 1.0 kV Switchrack 32 1.473
>1.0 – 5.0 kV Open Air 102 2.000
>1.0 – 5.0 kV Cable Bus 13 2.000
>1.0 – 5.0 kV MCC 102 0.973
>1.0 – 5.0 kV Other 13 2.000
>1.0 – 5.0 kV Panelboard 102 0.973
>1.0 – 5.0 kV Switchgear 102 0.973
>1.0 – 5.0 kV Switchboard 102 0.973
>1.0 – 5.0 kV Switchrack 102 0.973
>5.0 – 15 kV Open Air 152.4 2.000
>5.0 – 15 kV Cable Bus 13 2.000
>5.0 – 15 kV MCC 152.4 0.973
>5.0 – 15 kV Other 13 2.000
>5.0 – 15 kV Panelboard 152.4 0.973
>5.0 – 15 kV Switchgear 152.4 0.973
>5.0 – 15 kV Switchboard 152.4 0.973
>5.0 – 15 kV Switchrack 152.4 0.973
>15.1 - 36 kV N/A N/A N/A
The program can generate detailed report for every faulted load terminal or load protective device as shown in the image below:
The program can automatically generate load terminal and load protective device arc flash labels once the options have been configured.
Load CB Label Load Terminal Label
Note: In ETAP 18.0 the one line diagram results for load terminal, source, and load PD’s arc faults has been enhanced to display the working distance used for the arc flash analysis.
Applying the Maximum FCT Option for the Incident Energy

The option to consider the fault clearing time as a maximum value was derived from IEEE1584 guidelines. The wording in section 4.6 Step 5 of IEEE 1584 b-2011 states:
“When a manufacturer’s time current curve shows a band, or range, the longest time should be used. If the time is longer than 2 seconds, consider how long a person is likely to
remain in the location of the arc flash. It is likely that a person exposed to an arc flash will move away quickly if it physically possible, and 2 seconds is usually a reasonable
maximum time for calculations.”
The option to limit the fault clearing time to a typical value of 2.0 seconds is accomplished from the study case (Please see the study case section of this chapter for more
information).
This section describes the special logic required for some special conditions. The option can be applied under two different circumstances:
1. The actual fault clearing time was determined for the fault location; however, it is longer than the maximum value specified (i.e. 2.0 sec). In this case the program returns the
incident energy at the maximum FCT specified and produces a warning for the location. The warning can be observed in the arc flash result analyzer.
2. The actual fault clearing time was not determined at all. In this case, the program returns an “FCT not determined” warning message and no incident energy is calculated. The
program does this for all locations under which it found impossible to determine a clearing time.
Any result which returns an FCT not determined warning should be investigated in detail and analysis as to why the program fails to find the FCT should be done. The program still
allows the energy to be estimated at a bus and load PD by using the user-defined fault clearing and the fixed FCT methods (please refer to the study case section for the Clearing
Time page). However, the same option is not possible for source protective devices (i.e. for an arc fault on the line side of a main protective device).
One solution can be to add a node in the line side of the protective device. This solution would work but then again it will require the additional node. Because of this the following
option under the ETAP Tools\Options (Preferences)\Arc Flash section can be used:
Force “FCT not Determined” to use Limit Max FCT = False (default).
This option allows the arc flash program to use the maximum fault clearing time to calculate the incident energy of all the locations for which the program failed to find an FCT (i.e.
FCT not determined). The default is “False” which means the locations will be reported as FCT not determined. Setting the option to “True” would calculate and report the incident
energy using the maximum fault clearing time specified in the study case.
Note: If this option is enabled (set to True) along with the Maximum FCT limit option (from the AFC FCT page of the short-circuit study case, then no “FCT not determined”
message would be generate at all. All locations for which the program could not calculate an actual FCT would return incident energy values determined using the maximum FCT.
It is recommended that the FCT be determined for all locations even if the maximum FCT option is used. The following images illustrate the behavior for some cases when the FCT
is not determined and when the FCT is determined but limited to the max value.
Case 1: FCT is determined for all locations but it exceeds the max FCT
This case is simple. The program determines that the operating time of the protective devices upstream is longer than the maximum time (i.e. 2.0 sec). The image below shows the
results without the “Limit Maximum FCT = 2.0 sec” option selection in the study case. The FCT for the bus is found to be 3.803 seconds and the FCT for the line-side fault on the
main source PD is 6.0 seconds.
Once the study case is enabled with this option, the incident energy results at all locations are determined based on the maximum FCT time. This only occurs since the FCT was
determined for all locations. The FCT has been limited at all locations with an FCT higher than 2.0 seconds (bus and source PD).
Case 2: FCT not determined for all locations

In this case the program cannot find the FCT for the Bus and the Source PD fault locations.
In this case since there is no FCT at all, the fault location at the bus can be user-defined to 2.0 seconds (using the user-defined FCT or Fixed FCT options). However, the source PD
still is has no incident energy result.
If the option Force “FCT not Determined” to use Limit Max FCT = True, then the program will use the maximum FCT time to determine the incident energy for the source PD. The
image below shows the results:
Case 3: FCT not determined just for the source PD

In this case the source PD is the only location which returns FCT not determined warnings. The image below shows this case. Please note that the Bus fault location has an FCT less
than 2.0 seconds.
If the option Force “FCT not Determined” to use Limit Max FCT = True, then the program will use the maximum FCT time to determine the incident energy for the source PD. The
image below shows the results:
Differential Relay Handling for AF

ETAP allows you to model different types of differential relays like bus, line and transformer differentials. The program allows you to determine the incident energy which could be
released for an “internal” arc fault (inside the differential protection zone) while at the same time; the program still considers the locations which may be outside (or external to the
differential relay) protection zone. The following image illustrates a bus differential relay.
Differential Relay Setup & Troubleshooting

The differential relay must be configured before it can be used for Arc Flash analysis. The following items need to be considered for properly configuring the differential relay to
trip on internal faults, but not on external faults.
1. The Current Transformer polarities must be pointing away from the element which they protect. For example, if the relay is a bus differential, then all CT polarity markings
must be pointing away from the protected bus.
Bus Differential CT Polarity
Transformer Differential CT Polarity Configuration
2. All the CTs must be connected to the differential relay and all the energizing (source PD) circuit breakers must be interlocked to the device as well.
3. The differential relay operating time must be specified. The default value is zero seconds. However, it is recommended that you enter a value between 10 to 30 msec. This
value should be obtained from the relay manufacturer documentation and it should be applied in a conservative fashion. Differential relay operating time may change
depending on the severity of the fault. The operating time of a differential relay may be a lot higher for unbalanced faults. The longest possible operating time should be used.
4. The total fault clearing time for a differential relay will be the sum of the Operating time plus the breaker time. In the case of three cycle breakers, the FCT = 0.020 + (3/60) =
0.070 sec.
5. The selection of Percentage or High Impedance from the Differential Type drop list does not make any difference in the way the program determines if an arc fault is internal
or external to the differential relay. This field will be utilized in future versions of the arc flash program as the internal operation of the differential relay is modeled.
6. The Current Transformer (CT) turn ratio does not affect the operation of the differential relay, but of course you should enter the turn ratios as configured in the actual device.
7. The calculation of the incident energy for the source protective devices internal to the differential protection zone is dependent on the fault clearing time of external upstream
protective devices. See the image below:
8. Differential relay internal protection zones may be overlapped. That is a protective device like a circuit breaker can reside within the protection zone of two differential relays.
9. Make sure the current transformers (CT) components are in service. This can be done by enabling the display option PT & CT > “ID” in the One-Line, this will display the
grayed out CT ID for components which are “Out of Service”.
10. Another possible problem is the “Current Summer” option. Please make sure this option is unchecked under the “Input” tab of the relay editor window.
11. It is important to consider the physical placement of protective devices within an enclosure. In other words, protective devices which do not reside within the same enclosure,
should be associated with different buses/enclosures. For example, in the figure below, CB61 and Fuse12 are placed on the same connector (in series). The enclosure editor
automatically places both protective devices in the same enclosure. The figure illustrating the enclosure editor clearly shows that the enclosure indicates that both PDs are in the
same enclosure.
To ensure that each device is placed in their own enclosure to reflect real-life equipment conditions, simply add or place a bus or bus and impedance. The additional bus has
additional enclosures and Fuse12 can reside on its own separate location. The figure below illustrates the changes suggested.
The presence of differential protection zones makes this requirement to be more important since protective devices in and out of the differential zone experience different fault
clearing response time.
Maintenance Mode Switch

ETAP gives you the ability to simulate the operation of maintenance mode switches. Newer solid state trip units are being equipped by the manufacturer with special maintenance
mode switches which allow the override of the normal settings to use instead very fast operation settings with very low pickup values. The purpose of these trip units is to override
normal coordination settings while energized work is being performed in order to minimize the fault clearing time.
The arc-flash program can easily be configured to simulate the incident energy which could be released under maintenance or non-maintenance conditions. In order to do this, the
maintenance mode must be enabled in the ETAP LVSST trip unit library as shown in the image below:
Next, you must select the device from the library for the each low voltage circuit breaker which has the Maintenance Mode capability. The images below show the incident energy
results when 1) The maintenance mode check box is not selected (top) 2) when the maintenance mode check box is selected (bottom):
Current Limiting Fuse Handling

Current limiting fuses (CLF) are a great way of mitigating the arc flash energy. ETAP provides a method of handling current limiting fuses for arc flash calculations. A current
limiting device by definition; limits the current and also trips the arc faults very fast. This version of ETAP allows to take credit for the fast operating time of fuses operating in their
current limiting range.
The current limiting fuse operation in ETAP is accomplished by using three methods.
1. Peak Let-Through Curves

2. Bottom of the Curve Method
3. IEEE 1584 2002 Section 5.6 Equations / IEEE 1584-2018 Annex H equations (which are the same as those of the 2002 version)
Peak Let-Through Curve Method

This method allows the program to determine the current limiting operation of the fuse by comparing the arcing current passing through the fuse against the peak let-through curves.
The logic used by the program when this option is applied is described below. The following image shows the curve points used to determine the CLF operation.
Peak Let-thru curves for a CLF
The following definitions are applicable:
Let I Point A be the starting point at which the fuse can be considered to operate as CLF
Let Ia”-Fuse be the arcing current which would flow through the CLF
Logic:
If I Point A ≤ Ia”-Fuse ≤ 2* I Point A, then the fuse fault clearing time is set to ½ cycle.
If Ia”-Fuse > 2* I Point A, then the fault clearing time is set to ¼ cycle
Note1: The implementation of the current-limiting fuses for IEEE 1584-2018 allows for one additional capability which is to user-define the values of the clearing time of the fuse.
This can be accomplished from the Tools\Options (Preferences)\Arc-Flash group of options as shown below:
The unit of the clearing time for both regions is cycles. The default values are ½ cycle and ¼ cycle respectively for region 1 and region 2.
If the arcing current passing through the fuse is below point A, then the TCC curves of the fuse are used to determine the fault clearing time of the fuse. Please note that the bottom
of the curve method is not used in this case since it is only used when the peak let-through curves for the fuse are not available. It is considered that the peak let-through curves are a
more accurate method to determine CLF operation and the bottom of the curve method is only used when the peak let-through curve is not present.
Note: This method does not offer any reduction in the arcing current passing through the fuse. It only offers reduction in the fault clearing time. The incident energy results coming
from the CLF will be slightly higher because there is no reduction in the current.
Bottom of the Curve Method

This method can be used if there are no peak let-thru curves defined for the element. The value of the arc fault current passing through the fuse is compared against the fuse TCC
current value at 0.01 seconds. The following image shows a CLF fuse TCC with the value of the arcing current at the 0.01 second time.
CLF TCC showing the values of Ia” passing through the fuse
The following definitions are applicable:
Let I Bottom-Curve be the point at the bottom of the curve at 0.01 sec.
Let Ia”-Fuse be the arcing current which would flow through the CLF
Logic:
If I Bottom-Curve ≤ Ia”-Fuse ≤ 2* I , then the fuse fault clearing time is set to ½ cycle.
Bottom-Curve
If Ia”-Fuse > 2* I Bottom-Curve, then the fault clearing time is set to ¼ cycle
The following conditions must be met for this method to be applied:
l The CLF has no peak let-thru curves

l The Study case option “Use bottom of the CLF TCC (if peak let-through not available)” is enabled.
If the arcing current passing through the fuse is lower than the TCC curve value at 0.01 second then the value from the TCC (total clearing time or average melt time) is used
directly as the fault clearing time of the fuse.
Note: This method does not offer any reduction in the arcing current passing through the fuse. It only offers reduction in the fault clearing time. The incident energy results coming
from the CLF will be slightly higher because there is no reduction in the current.
Note: The fuse clearing times are also user-definable as previously described when running the IEEE 1584-2018 method.
IEEE 1584 2002 Section 5.6 Equations

This method uses the IEEE 1584 equations. This method does not determine the fault clearing time or the arcing current reduction because of the CLF operation. The equations
provide directly the incident energy results for a fault downstream from the fuse. This method is very limited. It can only be used for systems with particular configurations.
The IEEE 1584 CLF equations are only applied under the following conditions:
1. The system is radial. Multiple source systems are not allowed.

2. The system voltage must be 600 Volts or less.
3. The fuse class must be L & RK1 only.
4. The working distance must be 18 inch or higher
5. The bolted fault current values at the fault location downstream from the fuse must be within the range of the equations provided by IEEE 1584.
If any of the previous conditions are not met, then the program will not use the equations. By default the program will attempt to use the peak let-through curves for class L & RK1
first. If they are not available, then the fuse TCCs will be used to determine the fuse fault clearing time. The following image shows a radial system with some motor loads
connected.
The IEEE 1584 equations do not have any provisions or do not account for fault current contributions from motor loads downstream from the fuse. To determine this energy, the
program determines the portion of the current which comes from the motor loads and adjusts the energy from the motor loads based on the portion of the energy from the source.
ETAP does not know the fault clearing time (equations do not predict this) and thus the energy from the motors is calculated based on the ratio of the motor contribution and the
total fault current.
The following equations are used to determine the additional energy from the motor current:
Let:
Ibfuse be the current passing through the fuse

Ibftotal be the total fault current at the point of the fault
Efinal be the final incident energy including the motor contribution
Note: For IEEE 1584-2018, the program only applies the IEEE equations if the electrode configuration is set to VCB and VOA. This is because Annex H of this version of the
standard has added additional explanation/clarification on the application of these equations.
Overall Logic for Current Limiting Fuse Operation

The following diagram describes the logic used to determine the fault clearing time for current limiting fuses. This logic has been designed to transition between methods if curves
are not available or if the parameters are not applicable based on the selected method.
The following logic flow diagram describes how the program determines the CLF operating time based on the options selected in the Clearing Time page of the Arc Flash study
case.
Modeling Zone Interlock Prot. And Light Detecting Relays

The ETAP Arc Flash program has a couple of different methods which can be used to model the incident energy mitigation benefits of zone interlock protection and light detecting
relays. The simulation of these mitigation methods can be accomplished by using one of the following functions:
1. User-defined FCT (Fault Clearing Time)

2. Fixed FCT
Modeling the zone selective interlock protection for a zone as described in the image below would require communication between each trip unit so that the first upstream device
can interrupt with any delays introduced for selective coordination purposes.
The circuit breakers on Bus-Level 1 and Bus-Level2 would be restrained is located at in the Bus-Level 3 zone. Effectively, the fault clearing time for a fault at each location would
become a definite time which can be set to a couple of cycles (the manufacturer should indicate what is the communication time and the actual breaker operating time). The
combination of both times should be used as the definite operating time or fault clearing time (FCT).
Using the User-Defined FCT Method

The definite time can be defined at each bus by entering the user-defined time and then selecting to use the user-defined FCT option from the arc flash FCT page. The images below
illustrate this process.
Bus Arc Flash Page: User Defined FCT AF Study Case Clearing Time Tab: User Defined from Bus Editor
Using the Fixed FCT Method

The definite time can be defined at each bus by entering the user-defined time and then checking the fixed FCT option. This will accomplish the same operation as the previously
described method, except that other locations can still be set for automatic determination of the fault clearing time. The image below shows the selections which must be made:
Bus Arc Flash Page: Fixed FCT AF Study Case Clearing Time Tab: Auto Select Source PD
The Fixed FCT method is preferable in most cases. The light detecting relays can be modeled using the same techniques as described above. Both light detecting relays and ZSIP
schemes will be modeled as direct components in the one-line diagram in future versions of the program. For now their incident energy mitigation effect can be easily modeled using
the techniques described in this section.
The image below shows the results with a 3 cycle fault clearing time for a fault at each of the buses. As can be seen the incident energy has been calculated based on the definite
time. No automatic selection of source protective devices has been done.
Note: The results for the an arc fault on the line side of the main circuit breakers “CB Zone 3” and “CB Zone 2” should be determined by adding a node in between the cable and the
breaker and also fixing the FCT at the node with the required fault clearing time.
Please note that when these methods are used, it means that the arc fault current is enough to trip the devices in its instantaneous operation and that the current magnitude is higher
than the short-time pickup of the devices. The proper magnitude of the arcing current should be checked against the device settings to make sure the ZSIP operates as designed.
Effect of Arc Resistant Switchgear in Arc Flash

The effect of arc-resistant switchgear (arc-proof) in arc flash calculations cannot be determined because all the models available assume direct exposure to the arc flash incident
energy. No barrier or closed door test models have been used to determine if the equipment has been properly sized.
The energy calculated by ETAP is the energy stored in the electrical circuit. That energy is a function of time, fault current and voltage. An Arc-Resistant Switchgear reduces the
amount of energy to which the person is exposed to. However, it does not reduce the electrical energy stored in the circuit.
The actual energy, to which the person is exposed to, needs to be obtained from the manufacturer. ETAP results can be used to determine if the kA cycle rating of the switchgear is
appropriate for the energy, which can be generated by the electrical system.
In conclusion, it is recommended to run arc flash analysis in the system to determine how much energy can be released by the electrical system. The calculated energy should be
compared against the rated value provided by the manufacturer. As mentioned before, this rating is typically given in kA cycles (combination of arcing current in kA and clearing
time in cycles).
Main Protective Device Isolation

This feature allows the arc flash program to consider that the main source protective devices may not be adequately isolated from the bus and may fail to operate or be capable of de-
energizing the arc fault before it escalates into a line-side arc fault.
The following wording was added in IEEE1584(b):
“It is important to realize that in evaluating the incident energy at an arcing fault location in the system, the protective device upstream from the point of the fault must be
considered. An integral “main” overcurrent protective device may be considered in the calculation if it is adequately isolated from the bus to prevent escalation to a line-side fault.
When the integral main overcurrent protective device is not adequately isolated from the bus, the upstream protective device must be considered as protecting the main and bus.”
Note: ETAP considers by default that panelboards and MCCs are equipment types where the main protective device isolation may be an issue. This was the original wording of the
modification in IEEE 1584(b). This is the reason why ETAP has left those two types of equipment with possible main PD isolation conditions. However, each equipment should be
evaluated for this condition and if it is determined that the main protective devices is properly isolated then the global or individual settings can be modified to indicate the proper
isolation from the bus and load side arc faults.
The following sections describe how the Main PD Isolation can be modified.
Main Protective Device is not Isolated: Individual (Bus Editor)

The following study case configurations will only look at each individual bus editors and check for the check-box option “Main PD” under the Rating tab of the Bus Editor:
Depending on the selection in the bus editor, the program will consider the protective device to be isolated or not when selecting the source protective device.
Main Protective Device is not Isolated: Global Typical IEEE 1584

If the option in the study case Clearing Time page is to consider “Global Typical values” then the settings are taken from the Arc Flash Analysis Data editor (Project\Settings\Arc-
flash\Arc Flash Analysis Data). The main protective device isolations are fixed for buses based on voltage range and equipment type.
Main Protective Device is not Isolated: Global User-Defined

If the study case is configured to the global user-defined options, then the settings for the device main PD isolation are taken from the User-Defined values under Arc Flash Analysis
Data, accessible via Project Settings. The main protective device isolations can be customized for buses based on voltage range and equipment type.
The following rules and assumptions have been applied for this feature:
1. The main protective device isolation option only affects the results for a bus or load protective device arc fault (directly connected). It also affects load terminal arc fault
calculations if the load is directly connected (since the results for the directly connected load terminals are set the same as those of the connected bus). This option does not
affect load terminal arc fault calculations if an equipment cable has been assigned (i.e. there is an electrical distance between the cable and the main breaker)
2. If the Main PD is not isolated, then the program will not consider the first level (directly connected) source PDs as possible devices which can clear the fault.
3. Since the effect on the results can be considerable, there are some flags displayed in the arc flash result analyzer (AFRA). These flags indicate which locations were affected
by the main PD isolation assumption. The following table summarizes the flags which appear in the AFRA.
Main Protective Device Isolation Flags

AFRA Flag Conditions for setting the Main PD Isolation Flags
This flag is set to blank for a bus, load PD or load terminal (directly connected load) arc flash result
for the following conditions:
“Blank”
· The Main PD Isolation feature is not enabled (study case)
· The load has equipment cable
This flag is set for a bus, load PD or load terminal (directly connected load) arc flash result for the
following conditions:
“Main PD is Isolated”
· The Main PD Isolation feature is enabled (study case)
· The device Main Source PD is not Isolated
“Main PD is not Isolated” · The Main PD Isolation feature is enabled (study case)
· The Isolation of the main PD does not affect the determination of the final FCT.
“Main PD Isolation affects
· The Main PD Isolation feature is enabled (study case)
FCT”
· The Isolation of the main PD affects the determination of the final FCT.
The following images illustrate the concept of main protective device isolation. The electrical panel and corresponding one-line diagram representation are shown below. The main
breaker is not isolated from the load breakers and if the cover is removed, exposure to the load and line side of the main breaker is possible. The AF results for the bus shown on the
one-line do not consider the effect of main PD isolation.
If the main PD isolation option is enabled and the panels are configured to consider this option, then the results for the bus arc flash results no longer consider the directly connected
main PDs “UPSTREAM CB” and “Panel 1B” as capable of limitng the energy at the panels. In this case, the source PD for Panel 1B becomes the “UPSTREAM CB” and the source
PD for the Main Swbrd becomes the “Primary Side Fuse”. The arc flash results for two panels after considering the main PD isolation option are displayed in the following image:
Without the main PD isolation option, the results of the line side arc fault of the source protective devices had to be used for the bus as well. This feature is just one more way to
guarantee that the most conservative solution or arc flash scenario is considered for the calculation.
Running Device Duty before Arc Flash Analysis

The main objective of this feature is to determine if the bolted short-circuit current exceeds the device’s short-circuit ratings. If this occurs, it may be possible for the device to fail at
interrupting the arc fault.
The simulation cannot predict of the device will operate properly or not under arc flash current levels. ETAP assumes that all devices still operate as long as their trip units or
overcurrent protection indicates that they should; however, the program generates a list of alerts which are displayed in the alert view window and in the arc flash result analyzer.
It is recommended to always perform a full short-circuit device duty evaluation using the regular device duty calculation. The intention of running this additional device duty
calculation ahead of the arc flash analysis is to provide a backup check on the short-circuit ratings of each device connected to a faulted location.
Note: The practical application of this option should be only done under the scenarios which tend to yield the highest bolted fault current values. It is also recommended to apply all
impedance tolerances as negative in order to produce higher fault currents.
The arc flash program applies this option using the following logic:
1. When the checkbox “Run Device Duty Calculation before Arc Flash” is checked, the program runs a device duty calculation before arc flash.
2. If the option “Apply Pos. Tolerance and Max. Temp. for ANSI Min. Short-Circuit & Arc Flash” is checked on the Adjustments tab of the short-circuit study case editor, then
the “Run Device Duty before Arc Flash” option will be hidden and disabled. This is done to prevent running device duty calculation with non-conservative fault currents.
This option should be unchecked from the adjustments page before being able to run the device duty calculation.
3. The device duty evaluation is performed in the same manner as if it were performed separately (by clicking on the first icon on the short-circuit toolbar). The device duty
evaluation can be used with ½ cycle, 1.5 to 4 cycle, 1-Phase, and IEC arc flash methods. If the decay method is enabled, then the “Run Device Duty before Arc Flash” option
will be hidden and disabled.
4. The device duty alerts can be accessed through the alert view window. The alert view window will show both the arc flash and device duty alerts.
5. The arc flash result analyzer is capable of displaying the device duty alerts. Select the “Device Duty Alerts” filter (Filter Results by section) and click on the Device Duty
Alert field in the Results section (lower right hand side corner of the AFRA).
The following flow diagram describes the overall logic of this feature by means of a flow chart diagram.
The following images show the Alert View window and the Arc Flash Result Analyzer with device duty alerts. The Alert View window can be accessed from the Arc Flash toolbar.
To access the device duty alerts from the AFRA, select the settings as displayed in the AFRA image below.
Logic for Determining the System Grounding (IEEE 1584-2002 only)

The arc flash calculation can automatically determine the grounding configuration of the faulted buses if this option is selected from the arc flash page of the Short-Circuit Study
Case editor. IEEE 1584-2002 indicates that the factor K2 (used for the calculation of the incident energy) is zero for ungrounded or low/high resistance grounded systems and -0.113
for grounded systems (solidly grounded). The incident energy is higher when the system is determined to be ungrounded.
In other words: High, Low, Delta and Open-Wye systems are all considered to be ungrounded configurations according to the rules described in section 5.3 or IEEE1584 2002. Only
solidly grounded systems will be considered as grounded.
ETAP uses the following rules to determine if an element is grounded or ungrounded:
l If there is any device like a transformer or voltage source (generator or power grid) that is solidly grounded, then the bus will be considered grounded.
l If the system only has low/high resistance grounding connections, then it is considered ungrounded unless there is at least one path that is solidly grounded. (See the figure
below.)
l If the system is wye-open or delta connected, then the Arc Flash module will determine this bus to be ungrounded.
Important! Note: The motor grounding connection cannot be considered as the only solidly grounded source for a bus. Only transformer or voltage sources are considered as solid
grounding points.
There may be some situations under which ETAP determines that the bus is ungrounded, but it may actually be connected to a solidly grounded transformer. This situation may
happen around transformers that are solidly grounded on one side and resistor or reactor grounded on the other side.
Calculating Incident Energy for PDs

ETAP Arc Flash calculates the incident energy once the arcing current, the FCT and the system grounding configurations have been determined. The module yields the incident
energy results for the bus and individual protective devices.
The main goal of the Arc Flash module is to provide you with flexibility to determine the correct calculation of the incident energy. Even for individual cubicles (PDs), the module
will assume the worst-case scenario.
The worst possible arc fault at a PD occurs at the input side of the PD (line side or side facing the feeder). In this case, the PD itself cannot clear the fault, and it must be cleared by a
typically slower operating feeder PD upstream in the system.
For example, the figure below indicates the worst-case fault.
The upstream breaker will clear the fault in this case. The current used to determine the incident energy for the PD will be either the maximum through fault current or the total bus
fault current depending on the selection on the Arc Flash page of the Short-Circuit Study Case.
If there are multiple sources, the module will take the longest device operating time as the FCT used to calculate the incident energy.
The energy of source protective devices is calculated based on the first upstream device that can clear the fault. If multiple source PDs are connected to the faulted bus, ETAP will
use the longest opening time of from the different source PDs, to calculate the energy. Load PD incident energy is always determined based on the calculated bus FCT.
Calculating Incident Energy for Tie-PDs

Implementation based on the IEEE 1584-2002 Method (ETAP 18.1.1. and prior)
Tie protective devices require special handling for most calculation situations. In arc flash a tie-pd requires special handling because of the equipment type. The equipment type is
specified in the Bus Rating Page - Type section. The special handling is required when the equipment type specified is different for each bus across a tie-pd.
The arc flash program checks tie-pds and determines if their connected buses have different equipment types. If this is the case then a flag is set. The flag or warning indicates that
there faulted buses with tie protective devices which have different equipment types across.
The program is designed to report the highest incident energy for a fault across either side of the tie-pd. This can be observed in the image above. The image on the left shows the
arc flash results for the tie-pd “CB14” to be the same as those for the buses on either side. This is because the equipment type is the same for both sides. The image on the right
shows the incident energy for the tie-pd to be the same as that of Bus8 (the highest value). This is because the equipment type (MCC – 50 mm) causes a higher incident energy
release.
Note: It is recommended to have the same equipment type across tie protective devices. Specifying different equipment types may yield different arc flash results for faults on either
side (especially if only one side is faulted).
The result for CB14 may be different if only one of the buses was faulted (in the case of image on the right) and the equipment types are different.
The need to use the tie-pd may arise when the connecting cable or impedance between the two different pieces of equipment is small. However, for arc flash analysis representing
the small cable impedance will indicate to which equipment the protective device belongs. This is what cannot be easily determined if the impedance is neglected and the equipment
types are different.
The program will provide some warning conditions when this condition is present. A warning flag for this condition can be displayed in the Arc Flash Result Analyzer by accessing
the “Tie-PD Bus Types” field from the “Results” section. The following image shows how to access this field:
Please note that the flag indicates that the equipment types are different across the protective device “CB14”. Please see all the highlighted fields in the image above.
Implementation Based on IEEE 1584-2018

The handling of tie-PDS when running arc-flash with the IEEE 1584-2018 method is similar to that of the IEEE 1584-2002 method when there are no enclosures defined. With the
introduction of the enclosures in ETAP 19.0.0, there is no longer a problem with indicating actual parameters for the location which contains the tie-PD.
The idea is now much simpler, first the tie-PD should be defined under one bus. Once the tie-PD enclosure has been created for a bus, the same tie-PD cannot be added to another
enclosure. Since the tie-PD is only associated and defined with one enclosure, there is no ambiguity related to its input settings.
Just like when there is no enclosures defined, a sequence-of-operation can be placed on the tie-PD. The sequence of operation will now follow the enclosure settings instead of using
the “From Bus” settings as is the case in ETAP 18.1.1 or when there are no enclosures defined.
Incident Energy Level Determination

The incident energy level is determined by comparing the calculated incident energy in cal/cm2 against the ranges specified in the “Incident Energy Levels” editor. The selection
depends on the option selected in the “Parameters” page of the arc flash study case editor.
ETAP gives the option of defining your own incident energy levels. You can define up to 10 levels, but in the majority of the cases it proves impractical to define more than three
levels.
The Incident Energy Levels editor can be accessed from the Project menu by pointing to Settings – Arc Flash and selecting the option as displayed below:
The Incident Energy Levels editor appears as follows:
The incident energy levels window has the following sections:
1. Standard: which includes the four pre-defined PPE requirements as described in NFPA 70E 2000, 2004, and 2009 and a user-definable set of descriptions (NFPA 70E
2012~2018).
2. PPE (Personal Protective Equipment): where you can specify the personal protective equipment list for each level.
3. Disclaimer section: Where you can enter text that can be used as a disclaimer about the Arc Flash Analysis results that are printed on a label
NFPA 70E-2000 Incident Energy Levels

These ranges are listed on Table 3-2.9.3 of NFPA 70E-2000.
Incident Energy Levels based on NFPA 70E 2000

Incident Energy
Level
Exposure cal/cm2
0 < cal/cm2<1.2 0
5 > cal/cm2³ 1.2 1
8 > cal/cm2³ 5 2
25> cal/cm2³ 8 3
40 > cal/cm2³ 25 4
cal/cm2> 40 N/A

These ranges are listed on Table 130.7 (c)(11) of NFPA 70E –2004.

Incident Energy
Level
Exposure cal/cm2
0 < cal/cm2<2.0 0
4 > cal/cm2³ 2.0 1
8 > cal/cm2³ 4 2
25> cal/cm2³ 8 3
40 > cal/cm2³ 25 4
cal/cm2> 40 N/A

These ranges are listed on Table 130.7 (c)(11) of NFPA 70E –2009.

Incident Energy
Level
Exposure cal/cm2
0 < cal/cm2<1.2 0
4 > cal/cm2³ 1.2 1
8 > cal/cm2³ 4 2
25> cal/cm2³ 8 3
40 > cal/cm2³ 25 4
cal/cm2> 40 N/A
User-Defined Incident Energy Levels

The User-Defined levels are interpreted by the Arc Flash module as described in the following table:
User Defined Incident Energy Levels

Level Range (example) Defaults
0 0 < cal/cm2<C0 2
1 C1 > cal/cm2³ C0 4
2 C2 > cal/cm2³ C1 8
3 C3> cal/cm2³ C2 25
4 C4 > cal/cm2³ C3 40
5 C5 > cal/cm2³ C4 100
6 C6> cal/cm2³ C5 120
7 C7> cal/cm2³ C6 0
8 C8> cal/cm2³ C7 0
9 C9> cal/cm2³ C8 0
The level ranges are always from low values to higher values. For example, this means that the level 4 value cannot be equal to or higher than the value in level 3. This is true for all
the levels.
If any level (6, 7, 8, and 9) is left as zero, the module ignores it and uses the 5th level for any value higher than the maximum value in the 5th level. This will also apply if level 6 is
the last one and 7, 8, and 9 are left as zero. You cannot skip a level.
The incident energy levels editor has the following properties and behavior:
1. The NFPA 70E 2000, NFPA 70E 2004 and NFPA 70E 2009 Incident energy ranges are not customizable and follow the definitions published by NFPA 70E Standards. The
only items that can be customized are the list of PPE equipment (requirements) for each level. This is an old design which has been used in previous versions of the program.
2. If you select the User-Defined Values option, then the Level ID fields become editable and you can define a name for the each level, which can be composed of up to 12
alphanumeric characters (i.e., a Level0 or Level1, etc.).
3. If you select the User-Defined Values option, the Incident Energy range fields become editable you may type the different limits in cal/cm2.
4. You have the option to type in some text for a disclaimer statement. This disclaimer statement may appear in some selected label templates. This field holds up to 250
alphanumeric characters.
5. You have the ability to create a user-defined text field, which may be used to type in custom information (such as engineering company name and address). This information
is included in certain label templates or is stored in the output report database. This field holds up to 125 alphanumeric characters.
6. You may navigate using the scroll arrows allows you browse the different PPE descriptions for each level.
7. There are four sets of PPE descriptions. One for each of the options “NFPA 70E 2000” (5 descriptions), “NFPA 70E 2004” (5 descriptions), “NFPA 70E 2009” (5
descriptions), and one for the “User-Defined/AF Analysis” (10 descriptions. The description fields hold up to 250 alphanumeric characters.
The PPE Requirements window has some default descriptions based on the simplified Two-Category Level PPE system published in Table F-1 of NFPA 70E 2000 and Annex H of
NFPA 70E 2004 and 2009.
Note: The following descriptions are provided only as examples of PPE requirement descriptions as described by NFPA 70E Standards. These descriptions are not recommendations
made by ETAP on how to protect personnel from arc flash or shock hazards. Please exercise caution in applying these descriptions and follow all the remaining recommendations
made in the PPE matrix tables provided in NFPA 70E 2000, 2004, and 2009.
In previous versions of ETAP the incident energy levels were defined as incident energy categories. For the purpose of keeping older projects or versions compatible, the word
category is maintained and still used for the 2000, 2004 and 2009 sets of energy levels.
Note: Starting with NFPA 70E 2012, that a new set of PPE descriptions specifically designed to be used with for arc flash analysis has been approved and added. It is important to
understand that the energy levels or “categories” as they used to be called in previous versions are nothing more than a method of sorting incident energy results and do not imply
that the table method from NFPA 70e is being used. These ranges have been used in the past versions of ETAP as a method of rationalizing or analyzing the incident energy found at
different locations in the system. It was convenient to use the incident energy breakdown from the table method of NFPA 70E as a starting range to sort or present the incident
energy results.
Also, the PPE requirements in the past have been defaulted using the simplified two level clothing system of annex H (2000 ~ 2009). This PPE description is the closest set of PPE
requirements which can be adapted to an arc flash analysis study. In fact, the new annex H.3 in NFPA 70E 2012 is similar in the way the incident energy levels have been created
except that the breakdown between Level 1 and Level 2 is done at 12 cal/cm2 instead of at 8. Clarifications added to NFPA 70E 2012 in annex H.3 can help the user in the selection
of PPE based on arc flash analysis results.
Furthermore, in ETAP 14.0.0 a new set of PPE description has been added. Annex H.3(b) from NFPA 70E 2015 is incorporated as an option in the “Incident Energy Levels” PPE
description section.
Default PPE Descriptions based NFPA 70E 2000, 2004 & 2009 and for User-Defined
Level Default
Non-melting or untreated natural fiber long-
Category0
sleeve shirt and long pants
FR long-sleeve shirt (minimum ATPV of 5)
Category1 worn over an untreated cotton T-shirt with FR
pants (minimum ATPV of 8)
FR long-sleeve shirt (minimum ATPV of 5)
Category2 worn over untreated cotton T-shirt with FR pants
(minimum ATPV of 8)
NFPA 70E 2000 Double-layer FR flash jacket and FR bib overalls
(Table F-1 Simplified , Two- worn over either FR coveralls (minimum ATPV
Category Flame Resistant of 5) or FR long-sleeve shirt and FR pants (min
Clothing System) Category3
ATPV of 5), worn over untreated natural fiber
long-sleeve shirt and pants, worn over an
untreated cotton T-shirt.
Double-layer FR flash jacket and FR bib overalls
worn over either FR coveralls (minimum ATPV
of 5) or FR long-sleeve shirt and FR pants (min
Category4
ATPV of 5), worn over untreated natural fiber
long-sleeve shirt and pants, worn over an
untreated cotton T-shirt.

Category0
sleeve shirt and long pants.
FR long-sleeve shirt (minimum arc rating of 4)
Category1 worn over untreated cotton t-shirt with FR pants
(minimum arc rating of 8).
NFPA 70E 2004 Category2 worn over untreated cotton t-shirt with FR pants
(Annex H Simplified, Two- (minimum arc rating of 8)
Category, Flame Resistant
Multilayer FR flash jacket and FR bib overalls
(FR) Clothing System)
(minimum arc rating of 4) or FR long-sleeve
shirt and FR pants (minimum arc rating of 4)
Category3
worn over untreated natural fiber long-sleeve
shirt and pants, worn over an untreated cotton t-
shirt.

Category4 worn over untreated natural fiber long-sleeve
shirt.

Category 0 sleeve shirt, long pants, safety glasses, hearing
protection, and leather gloves
FR long-sleeve shirt (minimum arc rating of 4),
worn over untreated cotton T-shirt with FR pants
Category 1
(minimum arc rating of 8) or FR coveralls
NFPA 70E 2009 (minimum arc rating of 8)
(Annex H Simplified, Two-
Category, Flame Resistant FR long-sleeve shirt (minimum arc rating of 4),
(FR) Clothing System) worn over untreated cotton T-shirt with FR pants
Category 2
(minimum arc rating of 8) or FR coveralls
(minimum arc rating of 8)
A total clothing system consisting of FR shirt
and pants and/or FR coveralls and/or arc flash
Category 3
coat and pants (clothing system minimum arc
rating of 4)
A total clothing system consisting of FR shirt
and pants and/or FR coveralls and/or arc flash
Category 4
coat and pants (clothing system minimum arc
rating of 4)

Cat A
sleeve shirt and long pants.
Cat B worn over untreated cotton t-shirt with FR pants
Cat C worn over untreated cotton t-shirt with FR pants
User-defined shirt and FR pants (minimum arc rating of 4)
(You can define your own Cat D
incident energy limits and shirt and pants, worn over an untreated cotton t-
PPE descriptions; however shirt.
NFPA only provides PPE
descriptions up to 40 cal/cm2 ) (minimum arc rating of 4) or FR long-sleeve
Cat E
shirt.
Cat F “None available based on NFPA 70E”
Cat G “None available based on NFPA 70E”
Cat H “None available based on NFPA 70E”
Cat I “None available based on NFPA 70E”
Cat J “None available based on NFPA 70E”
Non-melting or untreated natural fiber for long

Annex H.3(b) Level A ≤ sleeve shirt and pants/coverall, Face shield for
NFPA 70E 2012 1.2 cal/cm2 projectile protection, Safety glasses, Hearing
protection and Leather gloves.
Arc-rated long-sleeve shirt and arc-rated pants or
Level B ≥ arc-rated coverall and/or arc flash suit, Arc-rated
1.2 to 12 face shield, Arc rated jacket, Hard hat, FR hard
cal/cm2 hat liner, Safety glasses, Hearing protection,
Leather gloves and Leather work shoes.
Arc-rated long-sleeve shirt and arc-rated pants,
Arc-rated arc flash suit hood, Arc-rated gloves,
Level C >
Arc-rated jacket, Hard hat, FR hard hat liner,
12 cal/cm2
Safety glasses, Hearing protection, Arc-rated
gloves, Leather work shoes.
Level3 “Not defined in annex H.3”
Protective clothing, non-melting (in accordance

with ASTM F 1506) or untreated natural fiber
Annex H.3(b)
Level A ≤ for long sleeve shirt and pants/coverall, Face
NFPA 70E 2015
1.2 cal/cm2 shield for projectile protection, Safety glasses,
Hearing protection and Heavy-duty leather
gloves.
Arc-rated clothing and equipment with an arc
rating equal to or greater than the determined
incident energy. Arc-rated long-sleeve shirt and
Level B ≥
arc-rated pants or arc-rated coverall or arc flash
1.2 to 12
suit, Arc-rated face shield, Arc-rated arc flash
cal/cm2
suit hood, Arc-rated jacket, Hard hat, Arc-rated
hard hat liner, Safety glasses, Hearing protection,
Heavy duty leather gloves and Leather footwear.
Arc-rated clothing and equipment with an arc
rating equal to or greater than the determined
incident energy. Arc-rated long-sleeve shirt and
Level C > arc-rated pants or arc-rated coverall and/or arc
12 cal/cm2 flash suit, Arc-rated arc flash suit hood, Arc-
rated jacket, Hard hat, Arc-rated hard hat liner,
Safety glasses, Hearing protection, Arc-rated
leather gloves and Leather footwear.

Arc-rated long-sleeve shirt and arc-rated pants or

Table 130.5(G) arc-rated coverall and/or arc flash suit, Arc-rated
Level A ≤
NFPA 70E 2018 face shield, Arc-rated jacket, Hard hat, Arc-rated
12 cal/cm2
hard hat liner, Safety glasses, Hearing protection,
Leather gloves and Leather footwear.
Arc-rated long-sleeve shirt and arc-rated pants,
Level B ≥ Arc-rated arc flash suit hood, Arc-rated gloves,
12 to 40 Arc-rated jacket, Hard hat, FR hard hat liner,
cal/cm2 Safety glasses, Hearing protection, Arc-rated
gloves with Leather footwear.
Level3 “Not defined in Table 130.5(G)”
Annex H.2 Level A ≤

Arc-rated long-sleeve shirt with Arc-rated pants
NFPA 70E 2018 (minimum arc rating of 8) or Arc-rated coveralls
8 cal/cm2
(minimum arc rating of 8).
Changes in equipment settings or system
Level B ≥
configuration will invalidate the calculated
8 to 40
values and PPE requirements which may result
cal/cm2
in a hazardous condition.
Level3 “Not defined in Annex H.2”
Note: The default values can be fully customized by simply typing in the new description in the PPE Requirements Levels for PPE description fields for each set of categories.
PPE Approval
The PPE requirements must be approved prior to printing any reports or printing arc flash labels. For this reason, starting with ETAP11, an approval checkbox has been added to
raise the awareness towards the review and approval of the PPE which will be reported.
The PPE requirements can be approved from the PPE Requirements editor by clicking on the “Approve PPE” button. The following message window appears:
Logic for PPE Approval:
l Once the PPE Requirements have been approved, the message window closes, and the PPE requirements become display only (read-only). This is done to prevent further
changes or undesired PPE requirements once the approval has been done. If modifications are needed then the PPE approval box should be unchecked.
l If the PPE requirements have not been approved, the arc flash calculation will not write them into the output reports or label databases.
Additional PPE Notifications

The new warning message appears as a reminder to use the latest version of the NFPA 70E available from the study case. The following is the logic for the warning message
l If an arc flash calculation is executed with the PPE requirements set to something other than the latest, then the following window will appear.
l This message will not affect the logic of the PPE Requirements. It is only a notification alert. Setting the NFPA PPE Requirements to the latest version will not prompt the
window.
Arcing Current & Incident Energy Correction Factors (IEEE 1584-2002 only)
The arc current and incident energy correction factors can be used to account for the effect of equipment configurations not included in IEEE 1584-2002. The configurations
included in both IEEE and NFPA 70E standards are VCB (vertical conductors in a box) and VOA (vertical conductors in open air). With the help of correction factors a
higher/lower arc current and incident energy can be simulated for configurations like VCBB, HCB and HOA.
The following table illustrates the configurations which can be applied in ETAP 14.0.0. The selections have to be made from the Bus Rating page.
Selection of Equipment Type and Conductor Configurations from Bus Rating Page:
Conductor Conductor
Configuration Equipment Type
Orientation Termination
Other, MCC, Switchgear,
VCB Switchboard, Switchrack, Vertical Open Tips
Panelboard, Cable Bus
Insulating
VCBB Switchboard, Switchrack, Vertical
Barrier
VOA Open Air Vertical Open Tips*
HCB Switchboard, Switchrack, Horizontal Open Tips*
HOA Open Air Horizontal Open Tips*
Note: The program still handles the selection of Insulating Barrier for the conductor termination as VOA or HCB and HOA (i.e. VOAB, HCBB & HOAB are not included in
ETAP). If any of these configurations is present, then use different correction factors for VOA, HCBB & HOAB.
As an example, the image below shows how a HCB configuration would be selected from the bus rating page.
The correction factors for each of the configurations described above are applied by means of special ETAPS.ini entries. The entries can be placed in the scenarios or in the
ETAPS.ini; however it is recommended to apply them by means of the ETAPS.ini (global options applied whenever ETAP is opened).
The arc current correction factor entry should be placed under the [AppVariables] section of the ETAPS.ini file:
UserDefinedIarcCfFactor= 1.0|1.0|1.0|1.0|1.0
UserDefinedIarcCfFactorMV= 1.0|1.0|1.0|1.0|1.0
The incident energy correction factor entry should be placed under the [AppVariables] section of the ETAPS.ini file:
UserDefinedCfFactor= 1.5| 1.5| 1.5| 1.5|1.5

UserDefinedCfFactorMV= 1.0| 1.0|1.0|1.0|1.0
The order of the correction factors for both arc current and incident energy is VCB, VCBB, VOA, HCB & HOA.
Furthermore, it can be observed that there are a total of four entries. This allows the flexibility of specifying different correction factors for low voltage and medium voltage systems.
The breakdown for MV is when the bus nominal voltage is > 1.0 kV. The two entries whose description includes “MV” identify the medium voltage correction factor entries. The
remaining two entries identify the low voltage correction factors.
The entries are displayed with default correction factors (same as defaults in IEEE 1584-2002). Note that the correction factors used will affect all the calculations in ETAP arc flash
as long as the entries are placed through the ETAPS.INI file. ETAP must be closed and re-opened for the correction factors to take effect. This means that the correction factors will
be used in the “Bus Editor Arc Flash Calculations”, will be used in the Arc Flash Incident Energy TCC plots, and also will be used in any global or individual calculation.
The correction factors are displayed as output values in the arc flash result analyzer (AFRA). To see the correction factors used, open the AFRA and select the result fields as shown
in the image below:
Selection of the Arc Current and Incident Energy Correction Factors (IEEE 1584-2002 only)
Any correction factor needs to be applied with especial engineering assumptions that are outside the scope of the current arc flash standards available as of 2015. There is no
guideline on how to select these correction factors other than a few IEEE papers and white papers published on the subject of how to handle additional equipment configurations in
arc flash incident energy calculations.
A list of “some” of the IEEE papers which deal with the subject are given below:
l “Effect of Electrode Orientation in Arc Flash Testing” – IEEE 40th IAS Meeting – 2005 pp 459-465
l “Effect of Insulating Barriers in Arc Flash Testing” IEEE PCIC- 2006 Paper PCIC-2006-06
l “Impact of Arc Flash Events with Outward Convective Flows on Worker Protection Strategies”, Paper No. ESW2010-11
It is recommended that the users exercise caution and consider the effect of the correction factors before applying them.
From “Effect of Insulating Barrier in Arc Flash Testing” we can gather that the VCBB configuration arcing current in average would be higher than its VCB counterpart by about
20%. The testing in this paper was done in low voltage systems with about 235 tests at 0.208, 0.250, 0.480 and 0.6 kV.
From the same tests it was observed that the incident energy increased about 31% for all tests (all voltage levels combined). However, the higher voltage tests at 0.480 kV showed an
increase of 49% and at 0.6 kV the increase in incident energy was measured as 86%.
From “Impact of Arc Flash Events with Outward Convective Flows on Worker Protection Strategies” a correction factor of 2.0 is recommended for low voltage VCBB
configurations and a correction factor or 3.0 is recommended for low voltage HCB type equipment. The arc current in HCB configurations was estimated to be lower than that of
VCB configurations by about 15%. With arc current variation included, the HCB current could be as low as 70% of the 100% VCB arc current.
None of the papers above include medium voltage tests (>1000 V). However, in medium voltage systems the variation on arc current is a much smaller factor and it can be
considered to not have a significant effect. Perhaps in MV systems it may be advisable to use a 5% correction factor for HCB and HOA configurations. No correction factor may be
needed for VCBB.
Based on the information above the following could be used as an initial set of correction factors which should lead to a more conservative set of incident energy results:
UserDefinedIarcCfFactor= 1.0|1.2|1.0|0.7~0.85|1.1~1.2
UserDefinedIarcCfFactorMV= 1.0|1.0|1.0|0.95|1.0~1.05
UserDefinedCfFactor= 1.5| 2.0| 1.5| 3.0~4.5|2.5~3.0

UserDefinedCfFactorMV= 1.0| 2.0|1.0|3.0~4.5|2.5~3.0
Where the order is VCB, VCBB, VOA, HCB, & HOA
Note1:
The HCB Iarc correction factors in LV, the value could range between 0.7~0.85. The correction factor for LV & MV HCB could be between 3.0~4.5.
Note 2:
The incident current correction factors for HOA are assumed to be similar to those of HCB; however slightly lower incident energy correction factors are suggested because of the
open air configuration. Do note that the VOA equation is used as reference for VOA so the correction factor for current is higher than 1.0.
Important: The correction factors recommended above are to be used as an initial value. Actual values should be applied based on the best engineering judgment and based on the
interpretation of the research work on additional test configurations presented in the reference technical papers. The correction factors presented here are only initial values but
should yield more conservative results than just simply assuming all equipment is configured VCB and VOA configurations.
Application Notes on Arc Current and Incident Energy Correction Factors (IEEE 1584-2002 only)
This section discusses some important information on how ETAP arc flash applies the corrections factors which can be entered into the program.
Individual Enclosure / Location

ETAP arc flash assumes that all enclosures have the same conductor / electrode orientation and termination. Once the orientation and termination are selected from the bus “rating”
page, then the program determines the results for all location (source and load PDs) based on the same configuration. This may not be the case in actual equipment and ETAP is
working add individual location configurations in a future release.
Load Terminal Arc Flash Analysis

For load terminals, ETAP uses only VCB or VOA correction factors (i.e. if user specifies then as different from what was recommended in IEEE 1584-2002). In the future, ETAP
will add specific locations, orientation and termination to each load terminal as well.
For now ETAP only uses either VCB or VOA as defined from Tools\Options (Preferences) \ Arc Flash \ Load Terminal Arc Fault Equipment Type.
Arc Flash Analysis Look-up Table

ETAP only uses default correction factors and configurations as described in IEEE 1584-2002 in the calculations presented in the “Arc Flash Analysis Look-up Table” report. In
other words, the correction factors for current or incident energy are not used to generate this table. These factors may be used in this table in a future release of the program.
TCC Incident Energy Curves

ETAP only uses the correction factors in the TCC incident energy curves if they were entered into the ETAPS.ini file and ETAP is closed and re-opened with those entries in place.
If the entries are placed in the “Preferences/Ini File” section of the Scenario Wizard, then the correction factors are applied only to the simulation executed from this tool.
Calculation Warnings for IEEE 1584-2018

The following table summarizes the warnings which the program produces related to the limits on the range of the input parameters of the IEEE 1584 2018 model. A flag or set of
flags are printed to the “Calc Method Limits” field in the Arc Flash analyzer.
Under some conditions the calculation is halted. Under some others, the calculation continues using the parameter rage extension. Analysis was performed by ETAP Arc-Flash
designers to determine if the calculation could be extended or halted. The following information presents some special conditions where ETAP Arc-Flash either proceeds with the
IEEE 1584-2018 method, switches to alternative methods or actually halts the calculation.
1. If V is greater than 0.6 kV and the fault current is larger than 65kA:
1. For 65 kA < Ibf ≤ 120 kA:
ETAP proceeds with the calculation using the IEEE 1584-2018 method and provides a warning message which indicates the condition “Ibf >65 kA”.
2. When Ibf > 120 kA, ETAP AF switches to Lee method and the AFRA still lists the same warning message “Ibf > 65 kA”
2. If the voltage is greater than 0.6kV and Ibf is less than 0.2kA
1. ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584-2018 method and provides a warning message to indicate the condition “Ibf < 0.2kA”.
3. If V is ≤ 0.6 kV and Ibf < 0.5kA
1. ETAP AF calculates the incident energy based on IEEE 1584-2018 method and provides a warning message to indicate the condition “Ibf < 0.5kA”.
4. If V ≤ 0.6 kV and Ibf > 106 kA:
1. When 106 kA < Ibf ≤ 200 kA:
ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584-2018 and provides a warning message “Ibf > 106 kA”.
2. Ibf > 200 kA:
ETAP switches to Lee method and the AFRA lists the following Warning “Ibf > 106 kA”
5. If V is greater than 15 kV,
1. ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the Lee Method and provides a warning message “Voc > 15kV"
6. If Voc is less than 0.208 kV,
1. ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584 - 2018 method and provides a warning message “Voc < 0.208kV”
7. If Voc > 0.6 kV and the Gap > 254 mm:
1. When 254 mm < Gap ≤ 2000 mm:
ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584-2018 method and provides a warning message “Gap > 254 mm”.
2. If the Gap > 2000 mm:
ETAP switches to Lee method and the AFRA lists the following Warning “Gap > 254 mm”
8. If Voc ≤ 0.6 kV and Gap > 3 in (77 mm):
1. When 77 mm < Gap ≤ 305 mm:
ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584-2018 method provides a warning message “Gap > 77 mm”.
2. If Gap > 305 mm:
ETAP switches to Lee method and the AFRA lists the following Warning “Gap > 77 mm”
9. If Voc ≤ 0.6 kV and Gap < 0.25 in (6 mm),
1. ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584-2018 method and provides a warning message “Gap < 6mm”
10. If Voc > 0.6 kV and Gap < 0.75 in (19 mm),
1. ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584-2018 method and provides a warning message “Gap < 19mm”
11. If the box width (mm) is less than 4*Gap (mm) :
1. ETAP AF calculates the incident energy using the IEEE 1584-2018 method and provides a warning message “Width < 4*Gap”
The warning messages are displayed in the arc flash result analyzer as shown below.
The field “Calc. Method Limits” contains the warning condition flags.
Arc Flash Analysis

AC Arc Flash Mode
Bus Editor
Study Case Editor
Display Options
Running Arc Flash Analysis
Arc Flash Sequence of Operation
Calculation Methodology
Required Data
Alerts
Arc Flash Report
Arc Flash Result Analyzer
Enclosure Editor
AC Arc Flash Calculator
DGUV-I 203-078 AF Calculator
Bibliography
Required Data - Arc Flash

The data required for an arc flash calculation is in essence the same data required for a 3-phase fault analysis minus the device short-circuit capability ratings (i.e. device duty
evaluation) and plus the grounding and connection types for all source and branches (i.e. Y-solidly grounding, Delta connections, resistor-grounded, etc).
Bus Data
Required data for short-circuit calculation for buses include:
l Nominal kV (when the prefault voltage option is set to use nominal kV)
l %V (when the prefault voltage option is set to use bus voltage)
l Type (such as MCC, switchgear, etc.) and continuous and bracing ratings
l X-factor (IEEE 1584-2002)
l Electrode Configuration
l Height
l Width
l Depth
l Gap between conductors
l Working Distance
l Equipment Name (not actually required, but is displayed by the program on arc flash labels)
l Insulated Glove Class (required for some labels)
l Insulated Glove V-rating in Volts (required for some labels)
l Main Protective Device Isolation
Branch Data
Branch data is entered into the Branch editors (i.e., 3-Winding Transformer, 2-Winding Transformer, Transmission Line, Cable, Reactor, and Impedance). Required data for short-
circuit calculations for branches include:
l Branch Z, R, X, Y, or X/R values and units, tolerance, and temperatures, if applicable

l Cable and transmission line length and unit
l Transformer rated kV and MVA
l Base kV and MVA of impedance branches
l Overload Heater Resistance (recommended to consider this resistance for Arc Flash calculations)
l Equipment Cable Impedance (recommended to consider this resistance for Arc Flash calculations)
For determination of the incident energy you will also need:
l Transformer winding connections, grounding types, and grounding parameters to determine the K2 factor per IEEE 1584.
Power Grid Data

Required data for short-circuit calculations for utilities include:
l Nominal kV
l %V and Angle
l 3-Phase MVAsc and X/R
l Grounding types and parameters to determine the K2 factor per IEEE 1584.
Synchronous Generator Data

Required data for short-circuit calculations for synchronous generators include:
l Rated MW, kV, and power factor

l Xd”, Xd’, and X/R
l Generator type (i.e. Salient Pole, Round Rotor)
l Data required for generator decrement curve
Inverter Data
Required data for short-circuit calculations for inverters include:
l Rated MW, kV, and power factor

l K factor in the Rating page
Synchronous Motor Data

Required data for short-circuit calculations for synchronous motor includes:
l Rated kW/hp and kV and the number of poles

l Xd”, Xd’ and X/R
l % LRC, Xd, and Tdo’ for IEC short-circuit calculation
Induction Motor Data

Required data for short-circuit calculations for induction motors include:
l Rated kW/hp and kV

l
l X/R plus one of the following:
Xsc at ½ cycle and 1.5-4 cycle if ANSI Short-Circuit Z option is set to Xsc, or
%LRC if ANSI Short-Circuit Z option is set to Std MF

% LRC, and Td’ for IEC short-circuit calculations
Lumped Load Data

Required data for short-circuit calculations for lumped load includes:
l Rated MVA and kV

l
l % motor load
l
l % LRC, X/R, and Xsc for ½ cycle and 1.5-4 cycle
l
l X’ and Td’ for IEC short-circuit calculation
High Voltage Circuit Breaker Data

Required data for short-circuit calculations for high voltage circuit breakers include:
ANSI Standard Circuit Breaker:
l Max kV
l Cycle (not the contact parting time but the rated interrupting time)
IEC Standard Circuit Breaker:
l Rated kV
l Min. Delay (minimum delay time in second)
ETAP needs to know the opening time of the circuit breakers only. The SC Duty parameters are required only for device evaluation (please see Chapter Short-Circuit Required Data
for device evaluation).
Low Voltage Circuit Breaker Data

Required data for short-circuit calculations for low voltage circuit breakers include:
ANSI Standard Circuit Breaker:
l Type (power, molded case, or insulated case). This information is needed based on IEEE 1584 2002 Table1 (Power Circuit Breaker Operating Times).
l Rated kV
IEC Standard Circuit Breaker:
l Type (power, molded case, or insulated case). This information is needed based on IEEE 1584 2002 Table1 (Power Circuit Breaker Operating Times).
l Rated kV
l Min. Delay (minimum delay time in second)
Trip Device
l Trip device type library parameters

l
l Device settings / TCC curves
Fuse Data
Required data for short-circuit calculations for fuses include:
l Fuse ID
l
l Fuse library data including Size and TCC curves
ANSI Standard Fuse:
l Fuse rated kV
IEC Standard Fuse:
l Fuse rated kV
Overload Heater/49
Required data for short-circuit (Clipping kA and Sequence-of-Operation) calculations for OLH/49 includes:
l Resistance / Tolerance
l
l OLH library parameters
CT/PT Data
Required data for short-circuit (Clipping kA and Sequence-of-Operation) calculations for CT and PT includes:
l Bus or Branch or Source or Load Connections

l
l Rating (Ratio)
Relay/MVSST Data
Required data for short-circuit (Clipping kA and Sequence-of-Operation) calculations for Relay includes:
l CT/PT Connections / Assignments

l
l Interlocked Devices, Device ID, Action, Delay, Setting, Unit
l
l Relay/MVSST Library parameters including settings and TCC curves
Other Data
There are some study case related data, which must also be provided, and you can enter this data into the Short-Circuit Study Case editor. The data includes:
l Standard (ANSI/IEC)
l XFMR tap option (transformer tap modeling method)
l Prefault voltage
l Machine X/R (machine X/R modeling method)
l Faulted buses
l Cable/OL heater (select this option to include cable and overload heater elements for Arc Flash)
Arc Flash Analysis

AC Arc Flash Mode
Bus Editor
Study Case Editor
Display Options
Required Data
Alerts
Arc Flash Report
Enclosure Editor

Bibliography
Arc Flash Alerts (Arc Flash and Device Duty)

The Arc Flash Alerts are generated whenever the global arc flash calculation is performed. The alert view window enables the display of the alerts by means of the “Arc Flash
Analysis Alert View Window”.
Alert View
The Alert View window will display according to the same rules that apply in short-circuit alerts. The “Auto Display” option on the Arc Flash Study Case Alert page determines if
this window is opened automatically after the arc flash calculation completes. You can open the Alert View by clicking the Alert View button on the arc flash toolbar.
Please note that the arc flash alerts only appear if you run the global arc flash calculation using the “Calculate” short-circuit current option from the Arc Flash page of the SC Study
Case. If you select the option “User-Defined (Bus Editor)” the alerts are not generated. Please also note that device duty alerts generated by the preliminary device duty calculation
before arc flash will be included in this alert view window.
The format of the alert displayed is as follows:
Device ID
The ID of the faulted bus for which the arc flash calculation has found a critical violation.
Type
The bus type according to its setting on the Rating page of the bus (for example, Panelboard, Switchgear, Cable Bus, or MCC).
Rating / Limit
This is the available protection incident energy level from the Arc Flash page of the bus. The units are cal/cm2. The range is the same as the bus field.
Operating
This is the calculated incident energy level at the faulted bus. This value is compared against the rating on the Arc Flash page of the bus. Its units are Cal/cm2.
%Operating
The percent value for the violation is 100%. This means that you only have “critical alerts” and those appear whenever the calculated incident energy is higher or equal to the
available protection rating value in the Arc Flash page of the bus.
Condition
The condition reported for this alert is that the available PPE rating has been exceeded at the faulted buses. The alert view window condition also contains device duty alerts if the
option to run device duty before arc flash calculation has been configured from the method page of the short-circuit study case editor.
Marginal / Critical
There are two windows. Any result which exceeds the critical alert value of 100% will be displayed within the “Critical” alert section. Any violation less than the critical value will
be displayed as “Marginal”
Arc Flash Analysis

AC Arc Flash Mode
Bus Editor
Study Case Editor
Display Options
Required Data
Alerts
Arc Flash Report
Enclosure Editor
Bibliography
Arc Flash Reports

Opening the Arc Flash Report
To open the Arc Flash Report, do the following:
1. Click the Report Manager button on the Arc Flash toolbar. ETAP displays the Arc Flash Report Manager.
2. Click the Result page tab, select Arc-Flash Analysis, and click OK to generate the report.
You may also start the Arc Flash Crystal Reports by selecting them from the Report Manager located on the upper right-hand corner of ETAP as shown below:
Types of Arc Flash Output Reports

Arc flash calculations are performed using ANSI Short-Circuit, IEC Short-Circuit, or User-Defined values. Each type of arc flash calculation has Crystal Report databases with
different extensions. They are *.AAFS (for ANSI), *.IAFS (for IEC) and *.UAFS (for user-defined).
The ANSI and IEC Reports are generated when you have selected either option from the Arc Flash Study Case SC Standards page. You must also select the Calculate Fault Currents
option from the Arc Flash page. If you select the user-defined option, the report generated is not linked to any standard regardless of which toolbar button (ANSI or IEC) you use to
start the arc flash calculation.
Structure of the Arc Flash Report Manager

The Report Manager is structured into different sections and each one of them contains some information about the arc flash calculation.
Input
The Report Manager’s Input page also shows the input data for the short-circuit and arc flash calculations. The Bus Arc Flash Input Data and the Hazard/Risk Categories can be
accessed from this group.
The bus input data for arc flash has the following information for the bus arc flash ratings:
l Equipment type (Bus Rating page)

l Gap (Bus Rating page)
l X Factor (Bus Rating page)
l Approach Boundaries
The following footnote may appear at the bottom of the Bus Arc Flash Input Data section. This message indicates that for some locations, the program used the theoretically derived
Lee method instead of the empirical IEEE equations method.
“The Gap and X-Factor are not utilized if the theoretically derived Lee method was used to determine the incident energy and Arc Flash Boundary. The Lee method is used if the
bus voltage and/or short-circuit parameters are outside the range covered by the IEEE 1584 empirical equations.”
The gap and x-factor are not shown in this report if the any of the following conditions are true:
0.208 > Bus Nom kV, Bus Nom kV > 15, Ibf” < 0.7 or Ibf” >106)
The Incident Energy Levels Report contains information on the incident energy levels used to determine the risk level. The report will contain information on the following:
l NFPA 70E-2000
l NFPA 70E-2004
l NFPA 70E-2009
l NFPA 70E 2012 to 2018 / User-Defined
Complete
The Report Manager Complete page shows only the Arc Flash Complete Report (it does not include the Short-Circuit Reports). The Complete Report contains the arc flash input
data, the analysis results (not including look-up tables), and the summary.
Summary
From the Report Manager Summary page, you can generate the Incident Energy Summary Report. It does not include any short-circuit summary reports.
Result
The Report Manager Result page has two reports. The first one is the new ETAP 7.0.0 report format called Arc-Flash Analysis. The second is called the Arc-Flash Look-Up Table.
No short-circuit reports can be accessed from the Result page.
Analysis
The Analysis section contains information about the arc flash results. The report contains information about the calculated fault currents, prefault voltage, system grounding, total
arcing current, working distance, and Arc Flash Boundary. The report also contains the incident energy results for the bus or for individual PDs.
The report has many flags that indicate special conditions found for the faulted buses in the Arc Flash Analysis. The flags that may appear on the footer of the Analysis Reports are:
l If the option to use the User-Defined Fault Clearing Time (FCT) from the bus is selected, then the following flag will appear:
The User-Defined Fault Clearing Time value is used.
l If the user has selected the option to use the User-Defined Fault Current, the following flag will appear:
The User-Defined Fault Clearing Time and Bolted Fault Current values are used for calculations.
l If the user has selected the User-Defined System Grounding Configuration option rather than letting the module determine it automatically, then the following flag will
appear:
The User-Defined System Grounding is used.
l Depending on the PPE Requirements option selected on the study case editor Arc Flash data page, one of the following flags will appear:
NFPA 70E 2000 Table 3-3.9. Protective Clothing Characteristics, is used to determine the energy level (i.e. energy range)
NFPA 70E 2004 Table 130.7 (C)(11) Protective Clothing Characteristics, is used to determine the energy level (i.e. energy range)
NFPA 70E 2009 Table 130.7 (C)(11), Protective Clothing Characteristics, is used to determine the energy level (i.e. energy range)
User-Defined energy levels are used
l When the program forces the category to either “0” or “1” due to its low voltage equipment, the following message will appear. This message and flag are tied to the options
for “Hazard Cat for LV Equipment” in the Arc Flash page of the study case.
The arc flash calculation at this location was not performed since it is fed by a radial low voltage transformer rated less than or equal to 125 kVA. The hazard category has been
automatically assigned a low hazard level”.
l The following footnote appears in the arc flash analysis crystal reports when the following condition occurs ((0.208 <= Bus Nom kV and Bus Nom kV <=15) and (0.7> Ibf”
or Ibf” >106)) or (Bus Nom kV < 0.208).
“The theoretically derived Lee method was used to determine the incident energy and flash protection boundary for this location since the bolted fault current or nominal voltage is
outside the empirical method range”
l If the calculated incident energy exceeds the limit for category 4 of NFPA 70E (2000 or 2004), then the category will not be reported and the following message will appear
in the reports:
Beyond the limit specified in NFPA 70 E Std. for Category 4.
l If the arcing current variation set of values was used to determine the incident energy at the faulted bus, then the report will show the percent current variation next to the bus
source protective device. This indicates that there is some device whose FCT settings could potentially cause a large incident energy exposure if the arcing current variation
occurs. The report will show:
For Protective Device: SOURCE PD ID @ %Variation Ia = Arcing current in kA. (i.e. For Protective Device: CB3@ 85% Ia = 3.45 kA).
A ♦ is shown next to the individual source/load terminal faults to indicate that variation was applied for the results at this location.
l The arcing current variation will not be shown for faulted buses with kV higher than 1.0.
l The following message will appear at the footer of the Analysis Report if the user-defined source protective device specified in the bus editor is not within the region that the
program can view and search.
**The User-Defined Fault Clearing PD, as specified in the Bus Editor, is outside the region for calculating short-circuit contributions.
l The following message will appear in the Analysis Report footer if the user-defined source PD is a relay that is not connected to an energized Current Transformer or has not
been interlocked with a breaker, contact or switch.
**The User-Defined Relay, as specified in the Bus Editor, is not connected to an energized phase CT nor has no interlock PDs.
l The following message will appear in the Analysis Report footer if the user-defined source PD is not energized.
**The User-Defined Fault Clearing PD, as specified in the Bus Editor, is not energized.
Arc Flash Analysis Report Structure

The Analysis Report is structured as follows:
Look Up Table Report

The arc flash reports for the tabulated information, also known as Look-Up Tables, remain the same as those of previous versions of ETAP. This approach of this report is to show
incident energy results for various working distances and for different fault clearing times.
The Fault Clearing Time (FCT) is varied from 0.025 seconds all the way up to 2 seconds. The plotted arc duration can be extended well beyond this point by changing the default
value of the option “Look-up Report Time Duration” in the Options (Preferences) menu to a value higher than 2 seconds (default value). This option is not to be confused with the
option “Limit Maximum FCT” from the Arc Flash Study Case. The Look-up Report Time Duration option only affects the amount of plotted arc duration points in the Look-up
Tables Report.
Sample of the Look-Up Tables Report:
Arc Flash MS Excel Reports

ETAP can generate MS Excel Arc Flash Reports. The reports contain two sheets, one for the bus arc flash results and the second sheet for the protective device arc flash results (both
load and source protective devices).
The MS Excel report can be generated when the following ETAP Preferences Option is selected:
“Export Results to Excel = True” from the Options (Preferences) editor.
Once this option has been selected, the program will generate Excel output reports which have the same name as the output report name you specify for your crystal reports. The
Excel reports may only be accessed by using Windows Explorer. You need to navigate to the project directory to view the generated Excel reports. The following image illustrates
this process for the ETAP Example-ANSI project file.
The MS Excel Arc Flash Bus report sheet has the following fields:
Table 12: MS Excel Bus_Report Format

Source of Field Data
Field Name Data Type Description
in ETAP
Bus ID
Bus Identification Bus Info page
Equipment Name
Name field Bus Info page
Bus Nominal kV
Voltage in kV Bus Info page
Equipment Type
MCC, Switchgear, etc Bus Rating page
Gap
Gap between conductors in mm. Bus Rating page
X factor
constant defined by IEEE (dimensionless) Bus Rating page
Grounding Type based on IEEE One-line diagram
Grounded or ungrounded (high/low resistance/delta are considered
1584 connection or Bus Arc
as ungrounded)
Flash page
Limited Approach Boundary to
Limited approach boundary to Exposed Movable conductors based
Exp. Mov. Conductor Bus Rating page
on NFPA 70E Standards in ft.
Limited Approach Boundary to
Limited approach boundary to fixed circuit parts based on NFPA
Fixed Part Bus Rating page
70E Standards in ft.
Restricted Approach Boundary Restricted Approach Boundary based on NFPA 70 Standards in ft.
Bus Rating page
Prohibited Approach Boundary Prohibited Approach Boundary based on NFPA 70 Standards in ft.
Bus Rating page
Available PPE Protection
Available personal protective equipment ATPV rating in cal/cm2. Bus Arc Flash page
Total Bus Bolted Global AF calc or Bus
Total 3-phase Short-circuit (SC) current for a fault at the bus in kA.
Arc Flash page
Total Bus Arcing Global AF calc or Bus
Calculated arcing current at the faulted bus in kA.
Arc Flash page
Source PD Bolted Amount of the total bus short-circuit current that passes through the
Global AF calc
upstream source PD in kA.
Source PD Arcing Amount of the total bus arcing current that passes through the
Global AF calc
upstream source PD in kA.
Source Trip Device ID Identification of the protective device considered to be the last one
Global AF calc
to trip the fault
Trip Time Time it takes a relay to send the tripping signal to breaker or fuse
Global AF calc
and LVCB tripping time in cycles.
Open Time Time it takes the breaker to open once it has received the relay trip
Global AF calc
signal in cycles.
Total FCT Total arc fault clearing time (sum of relay tripping and breaker
Global AF calc
opening times) in cycles.
AFB
Arc flash boundary in ft. Global AF calc
Incident Energy Incident energy value based on the total fault clearing time and
Global AF calc
total arcing current in cal/cm2.
Working Distance (in) Working distance from the energized conductors to the face and
Global AF calc
torso in inches.
Hazard /Risk Category Category level selection based on the amount of incident energy
Global AF calc
(i.e. 0, 1, 2, 3, etc.).
Hazard/Risk Category
PPE Description Description of the required personal protective equipment based on Levels for PPE Editor
the determined Hazard/Risk Category. from the project
settings.
Insulated Glove V-rating
Insulated glove voltage rating in volts AC. Bus Rating page
Insulated Glove Class
Insulated glove class rating (i.e., 00, 01, etc) Bus Rating page
Sample of the MS Excel Arc Flash Report Bus Report worksheet:
The MS Excel Arc Flash PD Report sheet has the following fields:
Table 13: MS Excel PD_Report Format

Source of Field Data in
Field Name Data Type Description
ETAP
PD ID
Load or Source PD Identification PD Info page
Equipment Name
Name field PD Info page
Connected Bus ID
ID of faulted bus to which the PD is connected to. Bus Info page
PD Type
LVCB, Fuse, HVCB, etc Global AF calc
Limited Approach
Boundary to Exp. Mov. Limited approach boundary to Exposed Movable conductors based on Connected Bus Rating
Conductor NFPA 70E Standards in ft. page
Limited Approach
Limited approach boundary to fixed circuit parts based on NFPA 70E Connected Bus Rating
Boundary to Fixed Part
Standards in ft. page
Restricted Approach
Restricted Approach Boundary based on NFPA 70 Standards in ft. Connected Bus Rating
Boundary
page
Prohibited Approach
Prohibited Approach Boundary based on NFPA 70 Standards in ft. Connected Bus Rating
Boundary
page
PD Bolted Total 3-phase Short-circuit current contribution passing through this
Global AF calc
device towards the faulted bus in kA.
PD Arcing Calculated arcing current contribution passing through this device
Global AF calc
towards the faulted bus in kA.
PD FCT Total opening time for this PD based on its actual arcing current
Global AF calc
contribution to the faulted bus in cycles.
Arcing kA for Incident
This field shows the total bus arcing current or the maximum through
Energy Global AF calc
arcing current to be used in the determination of the PD incident energy.
Upstream Source PD
Identification of the Source Protective Device Global AF calc
Upstream Source PD FCT Total opening time of the upstream PD in the event of a fault at the line
Global AF calc
side of source PDs or load PDs.
AFB
Arc flash boundary in ft. Global AF calc
Incident Energy Incident energy value based on the total fault clearing time and total
Global AF calc
arcing current in cal/cm2.
Working Distance (in) Working distance from the energized conductors to the face and torso in
Global AF calc
inches.
Hazard /Risk Category Category level selection based on the amount of incident energy (i.e., 0,
Global AF calc
1, 2, 3, etc.).
Hazard/Risk Category
Description of the required personal protective equipment based on the
PPE Description Levels for PPE Editor
determined Hazard/Risk Category.
from the project settings.
Insulated Glove V-rating
Insulated glove voltage rating in volts AC. Bus Rating page
Insulated Glove Class
Insulated glove class rating (i.e. 00, 01, etc.) Bus Rating page
Sample of the MS Excel Arc Flash Report PD_Report worksheet:
Arc Flash Analysis

AC Arc Flash Mode
Bus Editor
Study Case Editor
Display Options
Required Data
Alerts
Arc Flash Report
Enclosure Editor
Bibliography
Arc Flash Labels

The arc flash label templates can be accessed through the Arc Flash Report Manager Label page. These templates are pre-designed. If you select the template that you want, all the
buses will be displayed with the same label template. The same is true for the Protective Device Arc Flash labels.
You will notice from the image below that there are two templates for the same label format. One template has an extension “-Bus” and the other template has an extension “-PD”
and as their name extensions imply one template is dedicated for the arc flash results at every faulted bus and the other template is dedicated for the arc flash results for every
protective device (PD) directly connected to the faulted buses. The PD template shows the results for both Source and Load protective devices for every faulted bus.
Note: Certain labels may be generated in Spanish and Portuguese. Each language has been separated into different sections on the Report Manager.
ETAP labels can be printed to a Brady Label Printers or to DuraLabel printers as well. Some templates are designed for Avery label templates. The Brady and DuraLabel machines
have rolls of label media that come with pre-printed headers like “WARNING” and “DANGER”. You can select among three different sizes of labels for the Brady and DuraLabel
(3”x3”, 4”x4” and 4”x6”).
Arc Flash Label Formats

This section describes some of the features of the arc flash label templates available in ETAP 7.0. The following templates can be printed to an 81/2” X 11” sheet of label media like
the Avery White Permanent Durable I.D Labels (6575). This media is used for labeling applications and it is a full sheet. ETAP supports the following templates besides the 6575.
You can also print the arc flash labels to non-permanent durable I.D. Media as long as the label has the proper lamination and adhesives (to ensure that the labels will endure harsh
weather / chemical environments).
l 6579 Permanent ID labels (portrait) (color laser)

l 6575 Permanent ID labels (landscape) (color laser)
l 6575 Permanent ID (portrait) (color laser)
l 6878 Color Printing labels (landscape) (color laser)
6575 (portrait)
Full 8 ½ x 11
6579 (portrait)
6878 (landscape)
6575 (Landscape)
Full 8 ½ x 11
6575 (portrait)
Full 8 ½ x 11
Three Labels per Page

The following labels are designed to print three per page. You will need a color laser printer to print to this media. Once the labels have been printed, then you can cut them to make
them individual labels.
The following images illustrate how ETAP generates these labels when you print to an 8 1/2” by 11” sheet of label media:
Note: The unit of measurement of every label template is in inches.
3.5X7 Danger2-Bus 3.5X7 Danger2-PD
3.5X7 Warning1-Bus 3.5X7 Warning1-PD
3.5X7 Warning2-Bus 3.5X7 Warning2-PD
3X6 Danger1-Bus
3X6 Danger1-PD
3X6 Danger2-Bus
3X6 Danger2-PD
3X6 Danger3-Bus
3X6 Danger3-PD
3X6 Danger4-Bus
3X6 Danger4-PD
3X6 Warning1-Bus
3X6 Warning1-PD
3X6 Warning2-Bus
3X6 Warning2-PD
3X6 Warning3-Bus
3X6 Warning3-PD
3X6 Warning4-Bus
3X6 Warning4-PD
Two Labels per Page (6575 and 6579)

The following labels are designed to print two per page. You will need a color laser printer to print to this media. Once the labels have been printed, then you can cut them to make
them individual labels. Again these labels can be printed to the Avery White Permanent Durable I.D Labels (6575).
4X6 Danger1-Bus
4X6 Danger1-PD
4X6 Warning1-Bus
4X6 Warning1-PD
Avery-6579 Danger-Bus

Arcflash2 76 130

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arcflash2 76 130

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arc Flash Analysis Page 76 of 221

(34.33 kA/35.3 kA) * 24.27 kA = 23.59 kA

Then convert to the primary base kV.

23.58 kA * (0.48kV/13.2kV) = 0.857 kA

Determination of Incident Energy

1. Fault at the main bus

Parameter Description Physical meaning

Duration of the first

Total Ibf” bolted fault current Used to estimate Ia”.

Source/Load PD Arc Fault Calculations

Load PD Load Side Arc Fault

Load PD Load Side Arc Fault Application Notes

Load Terminal Arc Fault Calculation

Calculate Load Terminal Arc Flash

Load Terminal Arc Fault Equipment Type

Load CB Label Load Terminal Label

Applying the Maximum FCT Option for the Incident Energy

Case 2: FCT not determined for all locations

Case 3: FCT not determined just for the source PD

Differential Relay Handling for AF

Differential Relay Setup & Troubleshooting

Bus Differential CT Polarity

Transformer Differential CT Polarity Configuration

Maintenance Mode Switch

Current Limiting Fuse Handling

1. Peak Let-Through Curves

Peak Let-Through Curve Method

Peak Let-thru curves for a CLF

The following definitions are applicable:

Bottom of the Curve Method

The following definitions are applicable:

The following conditions must be met for this method to be applied:

l The CLF has no peak let-thru curves

IEEE 1584 2002 Section 5.6 Equations

1. The system is radial. Multiple source systems are not allowed.

Ibfuse be the current passing through the fuse

Overall Logic for Current Limiting Fuse Operation

Modeling Zone Interlock Prot. And Light Detecting Relays

1. User-defined FCT (Fault Clearing Time)

Using the User-Defined FCT Method

Using the Fixed FCT Method

Effect of Arc Resistant Switchgear in Arc Flash

Main Protective Device Isolation

The following wording was added in IEEE1584(b):

Main Protective Device is not Isolated: Individual (Bus Editor)

Main Protective Device is not Isolated: Global Typical IEEE 1584

Main Protective Device is not Isolated: Global User-Defined

Main Protective Device Isolation Flags

Running Device Duty before Arc Flash Analysis

Logic for Determining the System Grounding (IEEE 1584-2002 only)

ETAP uses the following rules to determine if an element is grounded or ungrounded:

Calculating Incident Energy for PDs

For example, the figure below indicates the worst-case fault.

Calculating Incident Energy for Tie-PDs

Implementation Based on IEEE 1584-2018

Incident Energy Level Determination

The Incident Energy Levels editor appears as follows:

The incident energy levels window has the following sections:

NFPA 70E-2000 Incident Energy Levels

Incident Energy Levels based on NFPA 70E 2000

NFPA 70E-2004 Incident Energy Levels

Incident Energy Levels based on NFPA 70E 2004

NFPA 70E-2009 Incident Energy Levels