10.1109@TIA.2020.3004769

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2020.3004769, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications
APPLICATION OF INCIDENT ENERGY REFERENCE BOUNDARY AREA

PLOTS IN TCCs CONSIDERING IEEE 1584-2018 INPUT PARAMETER
VARIABILITY
Albert Marroquin Antony Parsons

Senior Member IEEE Member IEEE
ETAP Schneider Electric
17 Goodyear, Suite 100 9101 Burnet Rd., Suite 202
Irvine, CA 92618 Austin, TX 78758
albert.marroquin@etap.com aparsons@ieee.org
Abstract – A simplified arc-flash analysis technique that service-entrance equipment through the low-voltage switchgear
allows for determination of the settings of overcurrent protective or motor control centers (MCCs) in the facility. If the arc-flash
devices and selection of arc-rated PPE based on a reference study ends here, many locations where workers may be exposed
constant incident energy boundary area is presented in this to arc-flash hazards go “unanalyzed”—control panels,
paper. The reference areas are created based on the equations disconnect switches, junction boxes, etc. Extending the arc-flash
of IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 [1], taking into consideration potential study to cover these locations can cause field data collection
variation in the input parameters described in the standard. requirements and the analysis time required for the studies to
The method presented in this paper provides an efficient and grow tremendously, and can ultimately require several times the
straightforward means to simultaneously consider the effects of effort needed to execute the more traditional study work scope.
varying input parameters on arc-flash calculation results by Evaluation of arc-flash hazards in these areas can be aided by
plotting areas of constant incident energy on a time-current plot. application of simplified analysis methods.
Actual power distribution equipment may have multiple electrode Though constant energy lines are useful, changes to IEEE Std.
configurations, gaps between conductors, operating voltages, as 1584™-2018, made simple lines incapable of characterizing the
well as a range of available bolted short-circuit currents and incident energy levels. IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 adds several
variation in the size of equipment enclosures. The multiple input variables to the arc-flash calculation model and has
combinations require dozens of simulations to determine the enhanced the sensitivity of the incident energy calculations to the
worst-case incident energy levels. Unlike previous existing input parameters. Single-parameter C-lines are
implementations of incident energy curves, which were typically inadequate to represent the potential variation in the physical
single line representations of the incident energy, the plotting of electrical parameters of equipment such as low-voltage (LV)
bounded areas (C-area plots) allows for multiple parameter switchgear, MCCs, medium-voltage (MV) switchgear, etc. Power
sweeps to determine a band of variation within a defined set of system parameters required for the incident energy calculation
parameter combinations. may vary significantly because of equipment design and
operating conditions. The parameter variation can affect the
Index Terms — Arc fault currents, arc flash, arc-flash operating voltage, short-circuit current, arc current, gap between
boundary, arc-flash hazard analysis, IEEE 1584, incident energy, conductors, enclosure dimensions (height, width and depth),
working distance working distances, and finally, electrode orientation and
arrangement (Electrode Configurations VCB, VCBB, HCB) [1].
INTRODUCTION To help account for all these variables, the idea of constant
energy boundary area plots – the C-area plots – are introduced
Constant-energy lines, sometimes referred to as C-lines [2], C- to help reduce the analysis requirements and eliminate some of
curves or energy boundary curves [3], have been used over the the multiple analysis combinations caused by the parameter
last 12 to 15 years as a reference and aid for calculation of arc- variation.
flash incident energy levels. These curves were developed
based on the solution of the incident energy equation published BACKGROUND
in IEEE Std. 1584™-2002 [4]. The curves may be used for
practical or simplified arc-flash hazard analysis, such as when Arc-flash incident energy calculations are highly complex.
they are used as a guide for setting or selecting overcurrent According to [4], many variables must be considered, including
protective devices (OCPDs) during the protective device system voltage, available fault current, the duration of the arc,
coordination study conducted before the arc-flash hazard the length of the air gap between phase conductors or from
analysis. phase to ground, etc. Further complicating the analysis is the
Simplified analysis techniques supported by these types of relationship between variables. For example, the incident energy
curves also help make arc-flash analysis more efficient in some is based largely on the available fault current and the arcing
cases. According to [3], short-circuit and coordination studies in duration. However, the arcing duration, that is the clearing time
industrial facilities in the US have typically extended from the of the upstream OCPD, is dependent on the arcing fault current
0093-9994 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on July 01,2020 at 15:30:25 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2020.3004769, IEEE
level. The arcing current, in turn, depends on the available bolted

fault current, the system voltage level, and the configuration of
the conductors in the faulted equipment. To simplify the analysis
where system conditions vary widely, the constant energy C-
area plots referenced in Section I were developed. Although the
approaches for development of the C-lines and C-area plots are
different, the result in both cases is similar – curves or area points
on a log-log time-current plot (TCC) that correspond to a selected
incident energy value.
The derivation of C-lines for the new IEEE model is described
in Section III, and the C-area plots are described in Section III.E.
Since some characteristics of C-lines and C-area plots are the
same, the C-lines are reviewed first before the derivation of the
C-area plots is discussed. The C-line for a given incident energy
can be generated based on time and current if other parameters
are fixed. The plot in Fig. 1 shows the C-line per IEEE Std.
1584™-2002 corresponding to an incident energy level of 8
cal/cm2 at a panelboard operating at 480 V with 25mm gap,
457mm (18 in.) working distance, and in a solidly-grounded
power system. Since the incident energy at time-current plots
along the C-line equals 8 cal/cm2, any point on the plot below/left
of the C-line has incident energy less than 8 cal/cm2, while any
point above/right of the C-line exceeds 8 cal/cm2. The trip curve
for a 200A circuit breaker feeding the panelboard is also shown.
To ensure that less than 8 cal/cm2 is available at the panel,
either the available arcing fault current must be greater than the
point where the breaker curve intersects the C-line, or the
breaker characteristics or settings must be selected to remain
below and/or to the left of the C-line throughout the possible Fig. 1. Sample C-line (Energy Boundary Curve).
range of available fault current. Otherwise, the breaker may not
clear the fault within the time required to hold the incident energy
below the desired level.
With the recent revisions to IEEE Std. 1584™, the calculation
models for both arcing current and incident energy have
changed, producing corresponding changes in the calculation
results. For example, Fig. 2 shows a plot of incident energy vs.
available bolted fault current for a 480 V system with 25 mm gap,
constant 100 ms arcing duration, 457 mm working distance, and
a 508 mm x 508 mm x 508 mm enclosure. In the 2018 model,
the incident energy varies not only with the fault current but also
with the electrode configuration. Results for the VCB, VCBB, and
HCB enclosure types are shown. The 2002 “in box” calculations
are also shown for reference. As shown in the plot, relative to the
2002 model, the incident energy values for the 2018 model may
be either higher or lower, depending on configuration and
available fault current. This alone illustrates the need to revise
the C-lines developed in [2] and [3], but further refinements in the Fig. 2. IEEE 1584-2018 I.E (cal/cm2) comparison for diff. ECs.
IEEE 1584-2018 model (e.g., different arcing current calculations
for the various electrode configurations, the enclosure correction CONSTANT ENERGY BOUNDARY AREAS
factor, etc.) must also be considered.
To summarize, this paper will first describe how to create the C-area plots are derived based on the equations provided in
C-lines based on the new IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 model IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 and described in sub-section E. Before
equations, and then, it will introduce to the industry the concept presenting the details on the derivation of the C-area plots, a brief
of the constant energy boundary or area plots (“C-area” plots). review of the equations and calculation processes in this
C-area plots are a tool designed to capture the effect of variation standard is presented.
and sensitivity of all input parameters.
A. Arc Current and Incident Energy for Medium Voltage (MV)
The MV part of the IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 model uses

interpolation for both the current and incident energy solutions.
The arc current is derived based on (1), (2) and (3) as follows.
𝐼arc_600= 10(a1)(b1) (1) 12.552

𝐸600 = 𝑇 × 10(𝑐1) (7)
50
𝐼arc_2700= 10(a2)(b2) (2)
12.552
𝐸2700 = 𝑇 × 10(𝑐2) (8)
𝐼arc_14300= 10(a3)(b3) (3) 50
12.552
The coefficients a1, a2, a3, b1, b2, b3 are of the form: 𝐸14300 = 𝑇 × 10(𝑐3) (9)
50
an = k1 + k 2lg I bf + k 3lg G The form of cn where n = 1 is shown below. The forms for c2
and c3 are similar, with the exception that Iarc 600 is replaced with
bn = k 4 I bf6 + k 5I bf5 + k 6 I bf4 + k 7 I bf3 + k 8I bf2 + k 9I bf + k10 Iarc_2700 and Iarc_14300, respectively.
Where: cn = k1 + k 2lg G +
I bf Bolted fault current (rms) (kA) k 3I arc_600
I arc_600 Ave. rms arc current at Voc = 600 V (kA) +
k 4 I + k 5I + k 6 I + k 7 I bf4 + k 8I bf3 + k 9 I bf2 + k10 I bf
7
bf
6
bf
5
bf
I arc_2700 Ave. rms arc current at Voc = 2700 V (kA)
1
I arc_14300 Ave. rms arc current at Voc =14 300 V (kA) k11lg I bf + k12lg D + k13lg I arc_600 + lg
CF
G Gap between electrodes (mm)
k1to k10 Coefficients provided in Table 1 of [1] Where:
lg log10 E600 Incident energy (IE) at Voc = 600 V (J/cm2)
E2700 IE at Voc = 2700 V (J/cm2)
Note that regardless of the actual voltage, it is necessary to E14300 IE at Voc = 14300 V (J/cm2)
determine intermediate arcing current values using (1), (2) and T Arc duration (ms)
(3) to derive the final arc current. The three intermediate
equations are processed through interpolation equations to apply
G Gap between conductors (mm)
the effect of voltage on the final current. The interpolation I arc_600 rms arc current for 600 V (kA)
process required to derive the final current is shown in (4), (5) I arc_2700 rms arc current for 2700 V (kA)
and (6).
I arc_14300 rms arc current for 14300 V (kA)
I arc_2700 - Iarc_600 I bf Bolted fault current (symm. rms) (kA)
I arc_1 = (Voc - 2.7)+ Iarc_2700 (4)
2.1 D Working distance (mm)
CF Enclosure size correction factor (see 4.6 and 4.8
I arc_14300 - Iarc_2700 of [1])
I arc_2 = (Voc - 14.3)+ Iarc_14300 (5) lg log10
11.6
k1to k13 Coefficients provided in Table 3, Table 4, and
I arc_1 (2.7 - Voc ) I arc_2 (Voc - 0.6) Table 5 of [1].
I arc_3 = + (6)
2.1 2.1 A final round of interpolation is required to obtain a final
incident energy as described in Section 4.9 of [1]. The previous
Where: equations (1) to (9) clearly show that in order to solve for both the
I arc_1 Interpolated term between 600 V and 2700 V (kA) final arc current and incident energy requires solving for six
intermediate values of current and energy. This situation is the
I arc_2 Interpolated term when Voc > 2700 V (kA) main reason why for MV systems, it is impossible to apply a direct
I arc_3 Interpolated term used when Voc < 2700 V (kA) solution to obtain the constant energy time required as described
in [3].
Voc System pre-fault voltage (kV)
When 0.600 < Voc ≤ 2.7, the final value of arcing current is I arc_3 B. Determination of MV C-lines
and when the voltage > 2.7 kV the final value of arcing current is
The MV C-line plot points for the new IEEE Std. 1584™-2018
I arc_2 . calculation model can be derived using an iterative approach.
The form of the incident energy equations for MV systems in The iterations can be made using time (arc duration) as the
(7), (8), and (9) also use interpolation, and are similar in form to solution parameter. We can setup a residual for the termination
(1), (2) and (3) for arcing current. of the iterative process based on the difference between the
constant energy setting and the estimated incident energy at
each step. Equations (10) and (11) illustrate the concept.
The initial fault current is used as the initial current in the

𝑟 = 𝑏 − 𝐴𝑥 (10) iterative process.
Fig. 3 shows the C-lines for a three-phase 4.16 kV switchgear
with typical parameters as defined by [1]. The three curves
r
< (11)
represent the VCB, VCBB and HCB electrode configurations for
a constant energy of 33.5 J/cm2 (8.0 cal/cm2). The parameters
b used are voltage = 4.16 kV, gap = 104 mm, working distance =
914 mm (36 in.), height = 914 mm, width = 914 mm and depth =
Where: 914 mm.
r Residual for iterative process (J/cm2)
b Constant incident energy (J/cm2)
Ax Estimated incident energy at step x (J/cm2)
 Termination criterion error (J/cm2)
The initial iteration step condition for Ax can be set to 0.001

sec. Adaptive step algorithms can be used to accelerate the
iterative process. The details of the adaptive step algorithm
process are outside the scope of this paper. The term Ax
represents equations (1) to (9) solved for each bolted short-
circuit current in the range. In other words, Ax can be defined
using function notation as shown in (12). The coefficients are
selected according the selected electrode configuration (EC).
Fig. 3. MV C-lines for VCB, VCBB and HCB
Ax = f ( EC , I bf x, I arc ,Voc , G, k1to k10,(T + T ) x, D, CF , k1to k13) (12)
Fig. 3 shows that in MV systems the curves almost look linear.
Where: The C-lines obtained with the iterative process are similar in
I bf x shape to the direct solution counterparts obtained using
Bolted fault current at step x (rms) (kA)
equations from [4]. Since the C-lines are all based on the same
T + T Arc duration and iteration step (ms) incident energy value, a C-area plot could be created by
EC Electrode Config. (VCB, VCBB, HCB) connecting the endpoints of the individual C-lines. If HCB is not
a configuration that needs to be considered for a given piece of
I arc Arc current (rms) (kA)
equipment, the C-area plot could be defined based on VCB and
Voc System pre-fault voltage (kV) VCBB configurations only.
C. Determination of Low-Voltage (LV) C-lines
k1to k10 Coefficients provided in Table 1 of [1]
k1to k13 Coefficients provided in Table 3, Table 4, and The low-voltage (LV) part of the IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 model
Table 5 of [1]. does not use interpolation to solve for the current and incident
D Working distance (mm) energy. A direct solution can be obtained after an algebraic
manipulation of (14)
of [1]) 12.552
𝐸≤600 = 𝑇 × 10(𝑐4) (14)
The arc current and incident energy equations from [1] are 50
non-linear in nature, and the iterative procedure described here
is not the only one that may be used to solve for the time/current Where c4 is defined as
points. The granularity of the C-line plot can be set to ten or more
points. The C-lines derived using the iterative process used N = c 4 = k1 + k 2lg G +
10 (plot points). Equation (13) defines one possible way to
k 3I arc_600
determine the step size. +
k 4 I + k 5I + k 6 I + k 7 I bf4 + k 8I bf3 + k 9 I bf2 + k10 I bf
7
bf
6
bf
5
bf
( I bf_max - I bf_min ) 1
I bf x = I bf 0 + (13) k11lg I bf + k12lg D + k13lg I arc + lg
N CF
Where:
I bf_max Max bolted fault current at step x (rms) (kA)
I bf_min Min bolted fault current at step x (rms) (kA) Where:
𝐸≤600 Incident energy at Voc = 600 V (J/cm2)
I bf0 Initial fault current (rms) (kA)
T Arc duration (ms)
N The number of steps required
I arc_600 rms arc current for 600 V (kA)

The shape of the C-lines derived using equations from [1] is
I arc rms arc current for Voc ≤ 600 V [obtained using different from its counterparts derived using equations from [4].
(25) of [1] (kA) The curved lines in Fig. 4 are the result of an increased non-linear
I bf Bolted fault current (symm. rms) (kA) behavior in the arc current in the model, becoming more
D Working distance (mm) noticeable at bolted fault currents higher than 50 000 Amps. As
before, the C-area plot could be developed by connecting the
end points of the C-lines.
of [1])
lg log10 D. Sources of Input Parameter Variation
k1to k13 Coefficients provided in Table 3 of [1].
The process for generating the C-lines has been described in
The arc current equation for Iarc ((25) of [1]) is presented here detail in Sections III.B and III.C. The next step is to generate the
as (15) and it also depends on the solution of Iarc_600 or (1) in C-area plots using the variability in the input parameters which is
Section III.A. expected in actual equipment and operating conditions. This
section provides some information on the expected variation of
1 selected parameters
𝐼arc = (15)
1) Voltage: The operating voltage may fluctuate because
0.6 2 1 0.62 − 𝑉 2
√[ ] ×[ 2 − ( 2 oc2 )] of changing loading, system, or generation conditions. In low-
𝑉oc 𝐼arc_600 0.6 × 𝐼bf voltage systems the fluctuation may be as high as ± 10%, while
the average system may expect to see a ± 5% variation in
Where: operating voltage. Medium-voltage systems typically expect
Voc System voltage (kV) voltage drops less than ± 2%, with some potential voltage
fluctuations of 5% or higher. Arc-flash incidents can occur at any
I arc_600 rms arc current for 600 V (kA) voltage level within this operating voltage range.
I arc rms arc current for Voc ≤ 600 V 2) Current: The bolted fault current variation can be
considered to have a maximum and minimum value [6] and this
I bf Bolted fault current (symm. rms) (kA)
variability can be considered by selecting the max and min
values of the current range used to plot the energy curves. Also,
Equation (14) can be solved for the arc duration as presented the arc current model applies its arc current variation correction
in (16). factor for each electrode configuration. This correction factor is a
function of the voltage; so it combines the with voltage variability.
𝑏 Fig. 5 shows the variation for a VCB electrode configuration.
𝑇 = 12.552 (16)
×10(𝑐4)
50
Where:
b Constant Incident Energy (J/cm2)
T Arc duration (ms)
c4 Exponent term from (14)
Fig. 4 shows the C-lines for a three-phase 480 V switchgear

with typical parameters as defined by [1]. The three curves
represent the VCB, VCBB and HCB electrode configurations for
a constant energy of 8.0 cal/cm2. The parameters used are
voltage = 0.480 kV, gap = 32 mm, working distance = 610mm
(24 in.), height = 508 mm, width = 508 mm and depth = 508 mm.
Fig. 5. Iarc versus Voc for 208 V to 1000 V (Fig G.32 of [1])
3) Gap between conductors: The distance between

conductors can vary significantly depending on equipment
design. Typically, UL standards specify a minimum gap between
conductors which is derived based on the BIL rating of the
equipment. However, different OEM designs include gaps which
could be much higher than the typical values presented in IEEE
Std. 1584™. For example, the LV switchboard cross-bus
pictured in Fig. 6 has a gap of about 102 mm (4”) between
phases, while phase spacing at the breaker terminals is closer to
25-32 mm. The typical gap values given in [1] and [4] are closer
to the values seen near the breaker terminals.
Fig. 4. LV C-lines for VCB, VCBB and HCB
Fig. 7. Various LV MCC Starter Enclosure Sizes

Fig. 6. Phase Bus in LV Switchboard.
7) Enclosure depth: The IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 model
4) Working distance: The distance between the arc and only uses this parameter for low-voltage incident energy
the electrical worker is not constant. Incident energy calculations calculations, so its variation should only be considered for
are typically performed at the working distance specified in Table equipment rated for 600 Volts or less. The results of the
10 of IEEE Std. 1584™-2018. Energized work tasks may require calculation model do not vary directly with the enclosure depth,
personnel to move around the equipment, particularly for but may be different if the depth is less than or greater than
workers performing troubleshooting tasks. Inadvertent 203mm (8 in) – i.e., a “shallow” or “typical” enclosure depth. For
movement can easily bring the person’s face and torso to within depths near this 203mm threshold, considering variation in depth
the expected working distance, resulting in higher incident is particularly important. When the average depth is farther from
energy exposure. the 203mm threshold, then consideration of depth variation may
5) Opening area width: The application of an enclosure not be necessary. If necessary, variation for the depth can be
size correction factor to modify the incident energy requires the considered to ± 20%.
determination of the enclosure opening size. This factor was not 8) Electrode configuration: in IEEE Std. 1584™-2002 and
part of the IEEE Std. 1584™-2002 calculation model. The previous implementations of C-lines, the question about the
potential variation in enclosure opening size is significant. LV selection of electrode configuration (EC) did not exist because all
switchboard and switchgear are typically made up of several the equipment was modeled as “in-box”, equivalent to the VCB
vertical sections, the width of which may vary widely depending configuration in the new model. IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 Table 9
on equipment ampacity or on the type of equipment inside. Given presents examples of equipment which include conductor
the variation, it may not be practical for every specific opening arrangements which can be considered as VCBB and HCB. It is
dimension to be considered. Suppose, for example, that the possible that most of the enclosures in equipment can be
average width of a LV motor control center (MCC) section is considered as VCBB, but this does not mean that other types do
508mm (20”), but may vary by up to 20%. In such a case, not need to be considered, as any one enclosure may include
enclosure widths ranging from 406 to 610mm may be more than one electrode configuration. The consideration of
encountered. In lieu of selecting a possible variation range as multiple electrode configurations during the protective device
described here, an overly “conservative” assumption could be coordination and protection stage becomes very important to
made which is to use the smallest width. This assumption could reduce the number of iterations or scenarios when performing an
result in overly conservative incident energy calculations, which arc-flash analysis at a later stage.
could cause unnecessary selection and use of higher levels of 9) Arcing duration: while arcing current is not an input
personal protective equipment which could introduce other parameter like the other items discussed in this section, it is an
hazards. input parameter to the incident energy equations (7)-(9) and (14).
6) Opening area height: Like the opening area width, the The arcing duration is assumed to be equal to the response of
height varies for different equipment designs. In fact, the height the relevant overcurrent protective device, based on the
may experience greater variation because of low footprint available arcing current at the point of interest. The duration can
equipment designs – i.e., enclosures tend to be taller than wider vary based on changes in the current or in changes in the
to reduce the footprint area. The image in Fig. 7 shows a single operating time of the protective device. Arcing current variation
enclosure where at least three very different enclosure sizes should be accounted for when the variation in the other relevant
have been highlighted. One LV MCC manufacturer’s Size 1 input parameters (e.g., bolted fault current, conductor gap,
NEMA motor starter has a maximum height of 305mm (12”), electrode configuration, etc.) is considered. Variance in
while a Size 5 starter may be as large as 1219mm (48”) high. As operation of some protective devices is accounted for in the
with the enclosure width, it may not be practical or reasonable to device time-current curves (e.g., the operating band for the circuit
always assume worst-case height for evaluating the incident breaker shown in Fig. 1). For other devices, including protective
energy. relays and some fuses, only a single line is given for the time-
current curve. For those devices, operating time tolerances may
be evaluated either by drawing a band around the time-current
characteristic, or by considering protective device operating time
as another input parameter that may vary over a defined range.
E. C-area plots with Parameter Variation
Section III.D defined the variation considerations for each of

the input parameters required to generate a C-area plot. The
1
purpose of this section is to formulate a process to generate plots 𝐼arc = − ∆𝐼arc
that take these variations into consideration. The C-lines as 0.6 2
1 0.62 − (𝑉oc + ∆𝑉oc )2
√[ ] ×[ 2−( )]
presented in Sections III.B and III.C represent a single 𝑉oc + ∆𝑉oc 𝐼 0.62 × 𝐼bf 2
[ arc_600 ]
combination of input parameters. When considering the effect of
the variation in each parameter over a particular range, the C-
Table I lists the base input parameters and variances in
lines become area plots. Each of the variations adds additional
percent used to generate the C-area plots for LV and MV in Fig.
combinations which require the solving of the incident energy at
8 and 9 respectively. The three C-area plots shown are for VCB
step x (using (12)) and arc duration (using (16)) for medium-
@ 16 cal/cm2, VCBB @ 8 cal/cm2 and HCB @ 4 cal/cm2. The
voltage and low-voltage respectively. The C-area plots are
range of the bolted short-circuit current for the plots is also
bounded by a minimum and maximum boundary and by the
included.
maximum and minimum short-circuit current considered. The C-
The LV and MV C-area plots were generated using similar
area plot upper boundary is what is referred to here as the
input parameter variations; as an example, since variation
maximum boundary curve. The lower boundary is referred to as
percentage is expected to be different between LV and MV
the minimum boundary curve. The maximum and minimum
systems. The C-area plots, presented in Figs. 8 and 9, were
boundaries are determined using combinations of parameter
derived for only one electrode configuration. However, it is very
variation. Each combinations of parameter results in a point
likely that equipment contains more than one electrode
which either lies inside the bounded area or at the upper or lower
configuration. The same process can be used to generate C-
boundaries. Let each variation be defined as:
area plots which are the result of the combination of several ECs.
± Voc System voltage variation (p.u.) TABLE I
± G Pos. or neg. variation in Gap (p.u.) INPUT PARAMETER VARIATION FOR LV & MV C-area PLOTS
Pos. Neg.
± D Working distance variation (p.u.) Input parameter LV MV
var. (%) var. (%)
± CF Enclosure size correction factor (p.u.) Voltage (kV) 0.480 4.16 5 5
EC Electrode Config. (VCB, VCBB, HCB) Gap (mm) 32 104 30 30
Work. Dist. (mm) 610 914 0 15
I arc Arc current variation (p.u.) Height (mm) 508 660 20 20
Width (mm) 508 660 20 20
All variations are defined in per-unit except for the electrode Depth (mm) 508 660 10 10
Ibf Range (kA) 16 to 65 16 to 74
configuration, which takes on discrete values. The ± CF Electrode Config. VCB, VCBB, HCB
variation value itself is composed of the defined variation
values for ± Width , ± Height and ± Depth . For MV
systems, (12) can be solved for each possible combination of
input parameters. The total number of permutations can be
estimated based on solutions only at the positive, negative and
zero p.u. variation points for each parameter. The total
minimum number of permutations for each N solution plot step
is at minimum 3^7 or 2187. The solution to (12) for each
permutation then becomes:
Ax = f (EC , ( I arc + I arc ), I bf x, (Voc + Voc ), (G + G ), k1to k10,

(T + T ) x, ( D + D ), ( CF ), k1to k13)
The variations can be added to the input parameters in similar

fashion for (14) and (15) to solve for (16).
Fig. 8. LV - VCB, VCBB and HCB C-area Plots
c 4 = k1 + k 2lg(G + G ) +
k 3I arc_600
+
k 4 I bf7 + k 5 I bf6 + k 6 I bf5 + k 7 I bf4 + k 8I bf3 + k 9 I bf2 + k10 I bf
1
k11lg I bf + k12lg( D + D ) + k13lg( I arc - I arc ) + lg
(CF )
Fig. 10. Variation in Enclosure Height for VCB E.C.

Fig. 9. MV - VCB, VCBB and HCB C-area Plots
The potential variation in the electrode configuration (E.C)
The C-area plot of multiple electrode configurations typically shown in Fig. 10 can cause the arc columns to extend to longer
results in a parallelogram shape which is bounded by the worst- lengths and thus increase the total arc resistance and voltage
case solution points. The parallelogram contains two “key” arc drop. The increase in arc resistance and arc voltage cause a
current and arc duration (time) points. The lower right-side end reduction in the arc current magnitude. The arc current of the tall
point represents the higher current and energy flux output of all enclosure can approach VOA magnitudes as the distance to the
the ECs. The upper left-side end point represents the lower bottom surface is significantly increased; however, the incident
current and energy flux output of all the ECs. This last point is of energy is expected to be similar to the enclosed VCB E.C. Fig.
importance since lower arc currents could cause very long 11 shows a VCB only C-area plot superimposed on a C-area plot
clearing times and consequently very high overall incident which considers both VOA and VCB E.C.s.
energy even if the energy flux per second is lower.
The detailed step-by-step process used to generate the C-
area plots cannot be described in detail in this paper due to
content amount limitations. The process used to generate C-area
plots can also be described as a combination of multiple C-lines;
which when combined, form an area plot. Since C-areas require
multiple solutions of a complex set of equations, they are best
applied in TCCs generated by power system analysis software
packages.
Variation from Laboratory Test Conditions
The IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 new arc-flash model was created

based on five different test enclosure sizes. The equipment
classes and typical bus gaps table, (table 8 of [1]), provides the
dimensions and gaps used during the laboratory tests. Arc-flash
results are most accurate when the equipment closely resembles
the test enclosure dimensions and electrode arrangement. Fig. 11 Variation in E.C. (Mix of VOA and VCB)
However, it is very likely that many equipment dimensions fall out
of the recommended range for each equipment class (i.e. non- The Lower current magnitudes of the VOA/VCB C-area could
typical dimensions). C-area plots can create input parameter cause longer clearing time as shown by the intersection of the C-
combinations which account for variations in equipment design. area plot with the trip unit short-time pickup band. The VCB only
The physical differences can cause the arc current prediction to C-area plot does not intersect this curve. To summarize, the
be different from that obtained with the equations from [1]. The combination of arc current from VOA and incident energy from
change in current can affect the arc duration and consequently VCB cannot be easily accomplished given the nature of the direct
the incident energy. solutions of the equations published in [1], but C-area plots easily
One example of non-typical test enclosure dimensions is very allow for this type of analysis.
tall enclosures where the distance from the tip of the electrodes Another example of variation from laboratory test conditions is
to the bottom surface is much longer than what was used in the the case where an arc-flash starts in one form and transitions to
laboratory test setup. The variation is shown in Fig. 10, where the another during the event. Fig. 12 shows the aftermath of an arc-
image on the left is a rendering of the laboratory test enclosure, flash test on actual equipment, where the arc was initiated on the
and the image on the right is a rendering of the same but with line-side of the circuit breaker. Sometime during the arcing, the
increased height. conductors eroded and became lose. The initial electrode
configuration is VCBB and after the electrodes became lose it
transition to a form closer to VCB. Fig. 13 shows a C-area plot
for VCB superimposed on the C-area plot for both VCBB and C-area plots rather than C-lines, could be used to identify
VCB combined. minimum arcing current levels for typical protective devices so
that the effect of differing system or equipment parameters can
be more readily assessed. This would be particularly useful
when a company operated many sites or installations that are
electrically similar – e.g., at oil well pumping units, cell phone
tower sites, etc., and desired to establish maximum incident
energy exposure levels at each location.
The case studies discussed in IV.A and IV.B illustrate the use
of the C-area plots in both MV and LV applications.
A. MV Application Case Study
In this section, the C-area plots are applied to a MV MCC

example. In Fig. 14 there are two C-area plots and one C-line
plot shown, along with characteristics of OCPDs in the circuit.
Table II shows the input parameters and the variations in percent
used to generate two C-area plots. The first C-area plot
represents the line side of the main circuit breaker “Main CBA”
Fig. 12. AF Test Image Showing a Mix of VCBB and VCB and the constant energy value is 8 cal/cm2. The second C-area
plot represents the bus side and its constant energy value is 1.2
cal/cm2. The short-circuit study yielded a minimum and
maximum bolted fault current of 2.5 to 5 kA. The C-area plots
show the respective arc current for the specified Ibf range.
TABLE II
INPUT PARAMETER VARIATION FOR MV APPLICATION EXAMPLE
Pos. Neg.
Input parameter Value
var. (%) var. (%)
Voltage (kV) 4.16 5 5
Gap (mm) 102 30 30
Working Distance (mm) 914 10 10
Height (mm) 660 20 20
Width (mm) 660 20 20
Depth (mm) 660 20 20
Ibf Range (Min to Max) (kA) 2.5 to 5
Electrode Configurations VCB, HCB
Fig. 13. C-area plots for VCB and Mix of VCBB and VCB
Like Fig. 11, the VCB/VCBB C-area plot of Fig. 13 also

intersects the protective device curve and thus the energy
exposure could be higher than the desired reference value.
APPLICATION TO ARC-FLASH ANALYSIS
C-lines or C-area plots can be used in arc-flash analysis in two

primary ways – to help define requirements regarding
characteristics and/or settings of protective devices, and to help
ensure that incident energy levels remain below a target level
when system conditions may vary. For example, consider again
the plot shown in Fig. 1, which shows the characteristics of a
circuit breaker feeding a panelboard and the 8 cal/cm2 line for the
panelboard. The C-line intersects the breaker curve at
approximately 2500A. If the minimum available arcing fault
current at the panelboard is less than 2500A, then the clearing
time would be above the C-line and the available incident energy
would exceed the 8 cal/cm2 level. To ensure that the incident
energy level remains below this level, selection of another OCPD
is required.
For a given protective device, the C-line or C-area plot could
also be used to identify system conditions that could result in
undesirable incident energy levels. Graphs like Fig. 1, but with Fig. 14. MV VCB/HCB and VCB C-area Plots
The lower C-area plot is for a bus fault location and its circuit. To determine the required PPE at each piece of load
electrode configuration is VCB. The upper C-area plot is for a equipment, it is not necessary to solve for the exact incident
fault on the line side of the main circuit breaker “Main CBA”, and energy at each location. Instead, it may be sufficient to simply
it was determined that both VCB and HCB electrode determine if the maximum available incident energy falls below
configurations should be considered for this location. The C-line 12 cal/cm2 so that a worker can determine if that level of PPE is
shown in the middle of the upper C-area plot represents an 8 adequate. If the energy may be higher, then further analysis
cal/cm2 VCB line with no input parameter variation. would be required. The plot in Fig. 16 shows a 12 cal/cm2 C-area
For faults near the maximum short-circuit current, the plot along with the time-current curve for a 300 A class RK-5 LV
corresponding arc current and corresponding total clearing time fuse curve. The C-area plot is generated based on the data
of the upstream fuse (arc duration) is below the C-line. Based on provided in Table III.
the C-line, the incident energy for an arc flash on the line side of
“Main CBA” should be less than 8 cal/cm2. However, the fuse
curve clearly overlaps the C-area plot for the VCB/HCB
configuration C-area plot. The incident energy for a fault on the
line side of “Main CBA” is expected to release incident energy
higher than 8 cal/cm2 for the entire short-circuit current range.
The C-area curve clearly indicates that a different fuse size
selection is needed to ensure that the incident energy on the line
side is limited to the desired value (8 cal/cm2). It is determined
that a smaller fuse size can be used for this application and the
150 Amp fuse can be changed to 125 Amp. Since the
transformer primary amp rating is 100 Amps, the new size should
also protect the transformer better against other faults. After
making the adjustment, as shown in Fig. 15, the incident energy
calculated would once again be below 8 cal/cm2 at the indicated
Arc Current level as the fuse curve is fully below the C-area plot
at this point.
The VCB C-area plot in Fig. 14 shows that the relay operating
time is well below the lower portion of the C-area at the indicated
arc current level, as this point is well within the instantaneous
operating region of overcurrent relay “OCR A”. The energy is
clearly lower than 1.2 cal/cm2 even when adding circuit breaker
“Main CBA” opening time.
Fig. 16. LV C-area Plot with Fuse.
In LV systems, the arcing fault current may differ significantly

from the bolted fault current value, with the difference due largely
to the impedance of the arc itself. While C-lines and C-area plots
can be defined for either arcing or bolted fault current levels, arc-
flash analysis requires that OCPD clearing times be determined
based on arcing fault current levels. Given this, it may be most
straightforward to plot the C-lines or C-area plots vs. Iarc when
they are to be compared with OCPD curves. By plotting both the
area curve and the OCPD curve as Arcing currents, no
adjustments to either curve are required. The C-area plot here is
extending over a current range corresponding to 65kA bolted
fault current on the high end to a level where the lower end of the
area plot intersects a clearing time of approximately 2 seconds.
Fig. 15. MV VCB/HCB and revised fuse size Intersection The curve could be plotted to higher short-circuit current values
(e.g. to 106 kA), but typically the upper range is the maximum
B. LV Case Study available current of the equipment. Furthermore, two seconds is
chosen because IEEE 1584-2018 states that this is a reasonable
In this section, application of the C-area plots to help simplify maximum clearing time in many situations [1]. Longer arcing
arc-flash analysis in LV systems is considered. For example, durations may be considered by extending the C-area plot
suppose a site employs a two-level arc-rated PPE system like beyond 2 seconds.
that described in Table 130.5(G) of NFPA 70E-2018 [5], which
defines arc-rated PPE systems of either 12 cal/cm2 or 40 cal/cm2.
The site has many LV MCCs with fuses protecting each branch
10
Fig. 17 shows a 4 cal/cm2 C-area plot generated with the

TABLE III parameters shown in Table II, along with the trip curve for a 250A
INPUT PARAMETER VARIATION FOR LV EXAMPLE #1 circuit breaker. If the circuit breaker trips in its Instantaneous
Pos. Neg. region, then the incident energy at the downstream load will be
Input parameter Value
var. (%) var. (%) less than 4 cal/cm2 since its operating time would be below the
Voltage (V) 480 5 5 lower boundary of the C-area plot. This happens when the
Gap (mm) 25 10 10
available arcing current at the downstream load is greater than
Working Distance (mm) 457 0 10
approximately 2750A, which corresponds to 4300A bolted fault
Height (mm) 508 20 20
Width (mm) 508 0 0
current assuming a 480V system and VCB electrode
Depth (mm) 508 0 0 configuration.
Electrode Configurations VCB, VCBB What if the available fault current level is lower? As shown in
the graph, the C-area plot and circuit breaker trip curve intersect
The 300 A RK-5 fuse is chosen because this is the largest fuse in the circuit breaker’s short-time region. The upper boundary of
that does not intersect with the energy area curve, as shown in the C-area plot intersects with the circuit breaker trip curve at 1.9
Fig. 16. The implication of this is that for any load fed from such seconds and 1250A, while the lower boundary intersects at 1
a fuse, if the arcing time does not extend past 2 seconds, then second and 1750A. For arcing fault currents above 1750A, the
the available incident energy downstream can never exceed 12 points on the breaker curve will be below the C-area plot and the
cal/cm2, since the calculation would either “time out” at 2 seconds incident energy will be less than 4 cal/cm2. Below 1250A, the
or the fuse would clear before the 12 cal/cm2 level was reached. breaker operating times will fall above the C-area plot, and the
The same would be true for any smaller fuses of the same type, incident energy will be higher than 4 cal/cm2. In-between, the
since their total clearing curves would be below and/or left of the breaker operating times are inside the C-area plot and the
300A fuse shown. As long as the parameters used to generate incident energy level is indeterminate – depending on the actual
the energy area curve are representative of potential variation in combination of parameters, the energy could be either greater
the load equipment downstream of the MCCs, 12 cal/cm2 PPE than or less than the 4 cal/cm2 threshold. To ensure that the
may be assigned to any location downstream of this particular energy at the downstream equipment will be less than 4 cal/cm2,
type of RK-5 fuse so long as the rating of the fuse does not then, the available arcing current must be greater than 1750A,
exceed 300A, regardless of available fault current, cable size, which translates to approximately 2800A bolted fault current for
cable length, etc. A similar analysis could be performed for other a 480V system and VCB electrode configuration. This type of
energy levels (e.g., 40 cal/cm2, 8 cal/cm2, or even 1.2 cal/cm2), information could potentially be used to simplify the arc-flash
other types of fuses, other types of protective devices such as analysis – e.g., by allowing a maximum incident energy threshold
circuit breakers, wider ranges of variable parameters, or even for to be determined at locations protected by similar OCPDs by
clearing times longer than (or shorter than) 2 seconds. simply verifying that the appropriate level of bolted fault current
is available in the system. This could be applied either for
analysis of existing facilities or in design of new facilities.
CONCLUSIONS
C-lines or C-curves have been used with success by the

industry for several years; however, with the release of the new
IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 and with the increase in parameter
variability and sensitivity of the new arc-flash model, the C-area
plots shown here provide a more efficient way to conservatively
select protective device settings during the design stage where
short-circuit currents may be the only available information.
The C-area constant energy plots can account for multiple
electrode configurations as well as variations in the input
parameters of the arc-flash model. The C-area plots help to
reduce the number of analysis scenarios required during a formal
arc-flash analysis. Also, just like the C-lines or C-curves did
before, the C-area plots may be the only arc-flash analysis
reference points for some systems where due to other factors, a
formal analysis may not take place.
The variation in parameters can be significant, and the C-area
plots provide a reference lower boundary curve which can be
considered the worst-case combination of parameter variation.
This is of high importance due to the fact the majority of the arc-
flash analysis are performed using only a fixed set of “typical”
values as provided in [1]. Unfortunately, the typical parameters
provided in IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 are not necessarily the
Fig. 17. LV C-area Plot with Circuit Breaker. combination of parameters which lead to the worst-case incident
11
energy and arc-flash boundary distance. calculation standards which include ANSI and IEC short-circuit,
Finally, the C-area plots provide a more realistic and AC & DC arc flash and transient stability. Albert has participated
conservative method to account for variation in parameters not in several IEEE seminar and presentation for different IEEE
previously considered by IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 such as the communities including Orange County and San Francisco
enclosure opening height, width and depth. Actual equipment Industry Application Society.
such as MCCs include a variety of enclosure or “bucket”
dimensions and it may be impractical to otherwise consider all of Antony Parsons, P.E., (M’96) received the BSEE degree
the individual parameters in a study. from the University of Houston in 1995, then received the MSE
and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Texas at Austin in 1996
and 1999, respectively, all in electrical engineering. He then
REFERENCES joined Schneider Electric and is presently a Senior Staff Engineer
in the Power Systems Engineering group, where he is
[1] IEEE 1584-2018, IEEE Guide for Performing Arc-Flash responsible for providing analysis, design, and troubleshooting
Hazard Calculations, New York, NY: IEEE support to commercial and industrial facilities. Antony is a
[2] Tinsley, H.W. and Hodder, M., “A Practical Approach to Arc member of the IEEE Industry Applications Society and of the
Flash Hazard Analysis and Reduction,” IEEE Transactions IEEE P1584 working group on Arc Flash Hazard Calculations.
on Industry Applications, vol. 41, no. 1, 2005. He is a licensed engineer in the state of Texas.
[3] Parsons, A.C., Leuschner, W.B., and Jiang, K.X.,
“Simplified Arc-Flash Hazard Analysis Using Energy
Boundary Curves,” IEEE Transactions on Industry
Applications, vol. 44, no. 6, 2008.
[4] IEEE Std. 1584-2002, IEEE Guide for Performing Arc-Flash
Hazard Calculations, New York, NY: IEEE.
[5] NFPA 70E-2018, Standard for Electrical Safety in the
Workplace, Quincy, MA: NFPA
[6] IEEE 1584.1-2013, IIEEE Guide for the Specification of
Scope and Deliverable Requirements for an Arc-Flash
Hazard Calculation Study in Accordance with IEEE Std
1584™, New York, NY: IEEE
[7] A. Marroquin and A. Parsons, "Application of Incident
Energy Reference Boundary Area Plots in TCCS
Considering IEEE 1584-2018 Input Parameter Variability,"
2019 IEEE Petroleum and Chemical Industry Committee
Conference (PCIC), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2019, pp.
369-380, doi: 10.1109/PCIC30934.2019.9074502.
VITAE
Albert Marroquin, BScEE, SMIEEE, PE – V.P., Electrical Safety

& Dynamics Eng. Divisions, Senior Principal Electrical Engineer
– Co-chair of IEEE P1584 Ballot Resolution Committee and vice-
chair of IEEE P1584 New Arc Flash Model Validation Group.
ETAP. Mr. Marroquin is a registered professional engineer in the
state of California. He is also the main designer and product
manager for ETAP’s AC and DC Arc Flash products as well as a
working group member of IEEE 1584, IEEE 1458 and an active
attendee of NFPA 70E seminars and meetings. He is a member
of NFPA’s electrical systems branch. Albert is currently the
dynamic-system engineering department manager. In this area,
he has gained expertise in modeling power generation systems
including renewable energy technologies. He has worked on
many transient stability simulations which include hybrid (wind-
diesel) plants. He is also responsible for the modeling of many
exciters, governors and power system stabilizers components
required for transient stability simulations in power generation
and nuclear plants around the world. Albert joined ETAP in
January of 2001 as an electrical engineer. He is an active power
system analysis instructor and has expertise in many different
12

10.1109@TIA.2020.3004769

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

10.1109@TIA.2020.3004769

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

10.1109@TIA.2020.3004769

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

APPLICATION OF INCIDENT ENERGY REFERENCE BOUNDARY AREA

Albert Marroquin Antony Parsons

level. The arcing current, in turn, depends on the available bolted

The MV part of the IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 model uses

𝐼arc_600= 10(a1)(b1) (1) 12.552

The initial fault current is used as the initial current in the

The initial iteration step condition for Ax can be set to 0.001

I arc_600 rms arc current for 600 V (kA)

Fig. 4 shows the C-lines for a three-phase 480 V switchgear

3) Gap between conductors: The distance between

Fig. 7. Various LV MCC Starter Enclosure Sizes

E. C-area plots with Parameter Variation

Section III.D defined the variation considerations for each of

Ax = f (EC , ( I arc + I arc ), I bf x, (Voc + Voc ), (G + G ), k1to k10,

The variations can be added to the input parameters in similar

Fig. 10. Variation in Enclosure Height for VCB E.C.

Variation from Laboratory Test Conditions

The IEEE Std. 1584™-2018 new arc-flash model was created

A. MV Application Case Study

In this section, the C-area plots are applied to a MV MCC

Like Fig. 11, the VCB/VCBB C-area plot of Fig. 13 also

APPLICATION TO ARC-FLASH ANALYSIS

C-lines or C-area plots can be used in arc-flash analysis in two

Fig. 16. LV C-area Plot with Fuse.

In LV systems, the arcing fault current may differ significantly

Fig. 17 shows a 4 cal/cm2 C-area plot generated with the

C-lines or C-curves have been used with success by the

Albert Marroquin, BScEE, SMIEEE, PE – V.P., Electrical Safety

You might also like