See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324643403

Arc Flash Assessment: Two-Case Study of Public Service Facilities in Kalamazoo,

Michigan

Conference Paper · April 2018

DOI: 10.1109/EIT.2018.8500083

CITATIONS READS
0 1,127

5 authors, including:

Ghassan Abdulhussein Bilal Haider Hashim

University of Technology, Iraq Western Michigan University
7 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS 4 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Pablo Gómez Ikhlas Abdel-Qader

Western Michigan University Western Michigan University
84 PUBLICATIONS 596 CITATIONS 116 PUBLICATIONS 1,035 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Modeling and design of inverter-fed rotating machines View project

construction safety View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmed Al-Bayati on 28 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 0040

Arc Flash Assessment: Two-Case Study

of Public Service Facilities in Kalamazoo, Michigan
Ghassan Bilal, Haider Hashim, Pablo Gomez, Ahmed Jalil Al-Bayati
Ikhlas Abdel-Qader Kimmel School of Construction Management
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Western Carolina University
Western Michigan University Cullowhee, NC 28723, USA
Kalamazoo, MI 49008, USA ajalbayati@wcu.edu
pablo.gomez@wmich.edu

Abstract— Arc flash accidents are one of the leading causes of
fatal and non-fatal injuries in both construction and general
industries. This paper describes the causes of arc flash and the
underlying concepts associated with short-circuit fault analysis.
These concepts are applied to model and simulate arc flash scenarios
based on the NFPA 70E Standard – 2015 Edition. The case studies
considered in this project correspond to two public services facilities
located in the City of Kalamazoo, Michigan. These studies are
simulated using EasyPower software for short circuit and incident
energy analyses. The final result of this work was the successful
placement of arc-flash labels according to NFPA safety standard for
all main system components.
Keywords— Arc flash; incident energy; NFPA 70E; EasyPower
I. INTRODUCTION
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) defines an
arc flash hazard as “a dangerous condition associated with the
possible release of energy caused by an electric arc” [1], [2].
Arcing from an electrical fault may produce very high
temperatures that can create a very hot blast with forces similar
to an explosion [3]. It can be caused by faulty installation,
condensation, dust, failing equipment, corrosion, with the most
common incidents occurring during maintenance on energized
conductors. This phenomenon can cause damage to equipment
and severe injury or death to anyone within the flash boundary
[4]. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
there were approximately 6,000 fatal electrical injuries to
workers in the U.S. between 1992 and 2013 and about 24,100
non-fatal electrical injuries from 2003 through 2012 [5].
In addition to a large number of fatalities and the
considerable medical costs related to injuries; there is also the
cost of replacing expensive equipment that can be affected by
this phenomenon [2]. Consequently, industries have become
increasingly interested in the development of power system
analyses for the assessment of arc flash hazard in electrical
systems [6],[7].
Arc flash phenomena can be divided into four groups:
understanding of arc-flash hazards [8], arc flash calculations [9],
personnel and equipment protection [10], and reduction of
incident energy [11]. Understanding and quantifying the most
sensitive parameters in electrical systems is a major concern for
the adequate study of arc flash events in order to decrease and
prevent technicians from injuries and fatalities.
This paper presents the main outcomes of two case studies
corresponding the arc flash assessment of public services
facilities located in the City of Kalamazoo, Michigan. To
perform such studies, the causes of arc flash were initially
analyzed using the underlying concepts associated with short
circuit fault analysis. Then, these concepts were applied to
model and simulate arc flash scenarios representative of the
potential hazard in the stations. The successful completion of
these studies resulted in the placement of labels generated by the
commercial simulation software EasyPower for all primary
system components.
II. ARC FLASH, INCIDENT ENERGY AND BOUNDARY
DISTANCE CALCULATION
This section briefly describes the formulations to determine
the incident energy and boundary distance in an arc flash event.
EasyPower software can accomplish these calculations once the
power system model is developed and all the input data are
defined.
Many different methods can be used to perform arc flash
study calculations. According to NFPA 70E and IEEE 1584 –
IEEE Guide for Performing Arc Flash Hazard Calculations [1].
The arcing current is obtained using the following equation [9]:
log = + 0.662 log + 0.0966 + 0.000526
+ 0.5588 ∗ log − 0.00304 (1)
∗ log
where:
is the arcing current (kA);
is -0.153 for open configurations and is -0.097 for box
configurations;
is the bolted fault current for three-phase faults (kA);
is the system voltage (kV);
is the gap between conductors (mm).
Once the arcing current is calculated, the normalized
incident energy and then incident energy could be found by (2)
and (3), respectively.
log = + + 1.081 log + 0.0011 (2)

978-1-5386-5398-2/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE

 0041

where: 4- Finally, the appropriate personal protective gear can be

selected from the results of the previous steps.
is the normalized incident energy of 3.63J/cm2;
is -0.792 for open configurations and is -0.555 for box IV. CONFIGURATION OF CASE STUDY
configurations; A. Lift Station Test Model
is 0 for open configurations and is -0.113 for box The first case study corresponds to a small public service
configurations; station (Lift Station) located in the City of Kalamazoo. The
utility supplies the system through an 8.32/4.8 kV feeder. The
610 maximum short circuit MVA ratings at the utility transformer
= 4.184 (3)
0.2 are 40 MVA for 3-phase symmetrical fault, with an x/r ratio of
where: 1.1, and 50 MVA line to ground, with and x/r ratio of 7.8, as
shown in the single diagram depicted in Fig. 1. The secondary
is the incident energy (J/cm2); voltage of 0.48 kV shown in the figure is connected to a main
is the calculation factor of 1.0 for voltages above 1kV and is switchgear bus (SWGR) and feeds two lines to the Motor
Control Center (MCC) that excites two 19.4 HP water pumps
1.5 for voltages at or below 1 kV;
and a 5 kVA delta-wye transformer, which in turn supplies 120
is the arcing time (seconds); V to a breaker panel for distribution to the auxiliary loads of the
station.
is the distance exponent;
is the distance from the possible arc point to the person (mm).
The boundary distance is computed using the following
equation:

610 (4)
=
0.2
where:
is the boundary distance in mm;
is the incident energy level at the boundary in cal/cm2
III. ARC FLASH STUDY PROCESS
The arc flash study is based on computational methods
provided by NFPA 70E – 2015 Edition and IEEE 1584 – IEEE
Guide. The general procedure is as follows:
1- Data collection is the first and longest step in the
process including system configurations, information
of cable, motor control center (MCC) data, switchgear
data, and component construction. Even though the
facilities are relatively updated, the drawings did not
reflect recent changes and other information was not
directly accessible. The authors visited the stations
several times to obtain data not provided in drawings
or hidden inside energized panels.
2- Once the sites information were collected, specialized
software (EasyPower) was used to calculate the short
circuit current for each bus bar. The short circuit
current, also referred to as the bolted current for each
bus, is the maximum available energy that could form
an arc. Fig. 1. Single line diagram of the Lift station test system
3- After the arcing current is obtained, the next step is
B. Pump Station Test Model
calculating how a protective device is going to respond
to the event and the arc duration. The arc duration is This system is far more extensive than the Lift station, and
the most significant factor affecting the incident includes a variety of transformers, switching elements, control
energy. Once the incident energy is determined, the arc centers, and pumps. The single-line diagram of the Pump
flash boundary can be calculated. station test system is shown in Fig. 2. Two utility transformers
supply the system through an 8.32/4.8 kV feeder. The
0042

Fig. 2. Single line diagram of the pump station test system

 0043

maximum short-circuit MVA ratings at the utility transformers TABLE II. ARC-FLASH RESULTS FOR PUMP STATION
are as follows:
Arc Fault Arc Bus Bus Trip Est Arc Incident
• 69 MVA for 3-phase symmetrical fault, with an x/r ratio of Bus Fault Bolted Arc Time Flash Energy
Name Bus Fault Fault (sec) Boundary (cal/cm2)
2.4, and 53 MVA line to ground, with and x/r ratio of 2.5, (kV) (kA) (kA) (inches)
for the transformer feeding bus 12 from Fig. 2. ATS-2 0.48 17.849 10.203 0.015 11.7 0.6
BUS-4 0.48 29.509 15.509 0.015 16 1
• 44 MVA for 3-phase symmetrical fault, with an x/r ratio of BUS-6 0.48 30.258 15.837 0.015 16.2 1
1.4, and 33 MVA line to ground, with and x/r ratio of 1.7, BUS-6A 0.48 12.178 7.42 0.015 9.3 0.5
for the transformer feeding bus 11 from Fig. 2. BUS-6_B 0.48 16.971 9.783 0.015 11.4 0.6
BUS-6_C 0.48 16.971 9.783 0.015 11.4 0.6
These step-down transformers supply 0.48 kV to the main
BUS-6D 0.48 12.152 7.407 0.015 9.3 0.5
switchgear buses. An automatic control system is included
BUS-6_E 0.48 16.971 9.783 0.015 11.4 0.6
between buses to support each other during a contingency. Each BUS-6_F 0.48 15.821 9.228 0.015 10.9 0.6
switchgear bus (SWGR) feeds a 480 V Motor Control Center BUS-6G 0.48 11.554 7.095 0.015 9 0.4
(MCC) to excite and control the water pumps. Finally, a 75- BUS-6H 0.48 11.554 7.102 0.015 9 0.4
kVA delta-wye transformer supplies a 208 V distribution panel BUS-6_I 0.48 11.568 7.11 0.015 9 0.4
for auxiliary loads. BUS-6_J 0.48 11.579 7.115 0.015 9 0.4
BUS-6K 0.48 11.579 7.115 0.015 9 0.4
V. RESULTS BUS-6_L 0.48 15.832 9.233 0.015 10.9 0.6
The arc flash results for both stations according to NFPA- BUS-7 0.48 32.281 16.714 0.015 16.9 1.1
70E Standard – 2015 Edition determine the most significant BUS-7A 0.48 28.008 14.849 0.015 15.5 1
parameters to reduce the potential hazard of work performed on BUS-7_B 0.48 28.047 14.866 0.015 15.5 1
energized electrical equipment, as well as the information of the BUS-7_C 0.48 28.047 14.866 0.015 15.5 1
required Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) levels for the BUS-8 0.48 29.368 15.447 0.015 15.9 1
technicians to prevent them from injuries or fatalities. BUS-9 0.48 32.309 16.726 0.015 16.9 1.1
BUS-10 0.208 3.74 1.817 0.822 42 4.2
The results are provided in Tables I and II for Lift and Pump
BUS-17 0.48 30.719 16.037 0.015 16.4 1
stations, respectively. The investigation of the arc flash
PNL-1 0.48 25.905 14.786 0.015 16 1
boundaries at each bus of the system includes: (a) the available
PNL-2 0.208 3.642 1.819 0.819 39.2 4.3
short-circuit current (in kA) obtained from the feeder values
provided by the utility, (b) the arcing current (in kA), (c) the time
(in seconds) required to clear the arcing current, (d) the distance
(in inches) from an electrical component to the worker
performing work (boundary), and (e) the incident energy (in
cal/cm2).
The study concluded with the placement of labels generated
using simulations performed using the commercial program
EasyPower for all the main system components. Some pictures
included in Figs. 3 and 4 show examples of arc-flash labels
placed at both sites.

TABLE I. ARC-FLASH RESULTS FOR LIFT STATION

Arc Arc Bus Bus Trip Est Arc Incident

Fault Fault Bolted Arc Time Flash Energy
Bus Bus Fault Fault (sec) Boundary (cal/cm2)
Name (kV) (kA) (kA) (inches)
Bus-1 0.48 48.267 29.804 0.015 28.9 2.4
Bus-3 0.12 5.749 5.478 0.015 5.1 0.2
Bus-4 0.48 28.441 19.811 0.015 13.8 0.8 (a) (b)
Bus-6 0.48 19.486 14.523 0.01 8.6 0.4
Fig. 3. Arc-Flash labels at Lift Station: (a) Main switch and (b) Switch
Bus-7 0.48 28.441 19.811 0.015 13.8 0.8
Board.
Bus-9 0.48 19.486 14.523 0.01 8.6 0.4
PNL4 0.12 2.931 2.931 0.015 3.2 0.1
 0044

(a) (b)

Fig. 4. Arc-Flash labels at Pump Station: (a) Transformer and (b) Switchgear Board.

VI. CONCLUSIONS [7] S. Mohajeryami, M. Arefi and Z. Salami, "Arc flash analysis:
Investigation, simulation and sensitive parameter exploration," 2017
This paper investigated the underlying arc flash concepts and North American Power Symposium (NAPS), Morgantown, WV, 2017,
described a comprehensive arc flash hazard assessment study to pp. 1-6.
ensure that two public service facilities, located in the City of [8] K. J. Lippert, D. M. Colaberardino and C. W. Kimblin , "Understanding
Kalamazoo, are in compliance with OSHA safety regulations. Arc Flash Hazards," in Record of the 2004 Annual Technical conference
on Pulp and Paper Industry, July 2004.
Arc flash hazard is one of the main causes of fatal and non-
[9] "IEEE Guide for Performing Arc Flash Hazard Calculations," in IEEE
fatal injuries in electrical systems. In addition, it costs the Std. 1584-2002, New York, 2002.
industry millions of dollars per year. Ensuring accurate results
in arc flash studies regarding incident energy, arcing current, and [10] A. Holliday and J. Kay, "IR Sight Glasses Protect Against Arc-Flash
arc flash boundaries is essential for an adequate protection of Exposure," IEEE Industry Applications Magazine, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 5968,
May-June 2007.
facility workers and equipment.
[11] M. D’Mello, M. Noonan, H. Aulakh and J. Mirabent, "Arc Flash Energy
VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENT ReductionCase Studies," IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,
vol. 49, no. 3, p. 11981204, March 2013.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the opportunity and
support provided by the Public Services Department at the City
of Kalamazoo for the successful completion of this project
which indicates the department commitment to provide safer
working conditions to the City of Kalamazoo’s working men
and women.
VIII. REFERENCES
[1] "NFPA 70E" 2015 Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace," in
National Fire Protection Association.

[2] NFPA Website [Online]. Available: http://www.nfpa.org.

[3] R. H. Lee, "The Other Electrical Hazard: Electrical Arc Blast Burns,"
IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, Vols. IA-18, no. 3, pp. 246-
251, 1982.
[4] R. B. Campbell and D. A. Dini, "Occupational injuries from electrical
shock and arc flash events," in NFPA , Quincy, CA, Tech. Rep, 2015.

[5] BLS Website. [Online]. Available: http://www.bls.gov.

[6] A. Asrari, B. Ramos, S. Lavoie and M. Churilla, "Arc flash analysis of

silver springs north switchyard — A case study in North Florida," 2017
North American Power Symposium (NAPS), Morgantown, WV, 2017,
pp. 1-6.

View publication stats