Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Arc-Hazard - DC VS AC PDF
Arc-Hazard - DC VS AC PDF
Industry
Electric Arcs 0
An electric arc is the passage of current through 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
ionized air. The axial temperature of an arc column -500
can reach 15,000 to 25,000°C. In addition to the
radiated thermal energy, tremendous amounts of -1000
noise (150 dB) and pressure (2000 lb/ft2) can also be
released from electric arcs. Accidental arcs can be Figure 2. AC Arc Voltage Waveform
caused by foreign object bridging of phases,
dielectric breakdown and mechanical failure.
16000
The severity of incident energy levels (which 14000
will be the focus of this paper) released from electric 12000
arcs is dependent on the following parameters: 10000
8000
• System voltage
• Available fault current 6000
• Fault duration 4000
• Arc length or gap distance 2000
• Working distance 0
• Electrode materials -2000 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
• Enclosure around arc
• AC or DC
• Number of phases involved Figure 3. DC Arc Current Waveform
• Arc motion
400
Figure 1 to Figure 4 show sample waveforms of
350
AC and DC arcs. The waveforms were obtained
from controlled laboratory experiments at Kinectrics. 300
250
15000 200
150
10000
100
5000 50
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
-5000 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
-10000
Figure 4. DC Arc Voltage Waveform
-15000
As seen from the figures, there exist considerable
-20000 differences between the AC and DC arcs. Below are
some of the major differences:
Figure 1. AC Arc Current Waveform
• AC arcs encounter zero-crossing, but DC
arcs do not. Therefore, under the
assumption that all other parameters remain
constant, DC arcs generate more energy than • Fault duration: 0.01 to 2 seconds
AC arcs because DC arcs will not have • Working distance: 6”, 12”, 22” and 34”
ignition and re-ignition. • Arcing environment: Open air and enclosed
• The diameter of DC arc’s plasma column • Electrode configurations: Vertical,
remain constant, AC arcs’ plasma column horizontal and series
expands and contracts.
• DC arcs are more difficult to extinguish. With the results obtained from the various tests,
• DC arcs decay characteristics are dependent Kinectrics has examined the relationship between
on the source (ie battery systems have a incident energy and working distances from DC arcs,
finite capacity to sustain the arc). estimated arcing fault current from bolted fault
current, and derived equations to predict the amount
DC ARC TESTIG AT KIECTRICS of incident energy released from DC arcs. Kinectrics
has also compared the measured incident energy and
Kinectrics Inc. has conducted the pioneering DC ArcProTM predictions.
arc hazard tests and modeling at their unique High
Current Laboratory. Kinectrics has recently The following subsections show the sample test
completed DC arc flash test for both Bruce Power results and some of the DC arc hazard developments
(power generation company in Ontario, Canada) and achieved by Kinectrics.
Coast Mountain Bus Company (public transit
company in Vancouver, Canada). Figure 5 shows a 130 V and 260 V DC Test Results
sample open-air arc flash test conducted at
Kinectrics’ High Current Laboratory. Figure 6 shows the measured heat flux from DC
arcs of various lengths and at various available arcing
currents for tests using a 260 V DC source.
Controlled DC arcs were generated between 2
vertical electrodes. At 260 VDC, 1 and 2 inch arc
could easily be sustained at higher arcing faults. The
probability of sustaining arcs is highly dependent on
the electrode configuration, the source voltage and on
the current.
16
The following figure shows similar information
14 as Figure 7, it displays the resulting incident energy
with the arcing fault currents and durations. The
Arcing Fault Current (kA)
12
0
Incident Energy at 12" vs. Arc Duration for 1" Gap
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Arcing Current at 600 VDC
Bolted Fault Current (kA)
2 kA 8.60 kA 13.4 kA Cat 0 Cat 1 Cat 2 Cat 3
30
Figure 9. Arcing Fault Current vs. Bolted Fault Current under
Various Arc Gap distances at 600 V DC 25
Incident Energy (cal/cm2)
20
It can be noted from Figure 9 that at 2 kA or
below, the arcing fault current is approximately equal 15
currents. 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
90
At the time of writing, there is no standardized
80
and verified model to determine incident energy
70
Heat Flux (cal/cm2/s)
50
equation is proposed in a paper by Doan [8]. This set
40
of equations, as shown below, is applicable for DC
30 systems rated up to 1000 V.
ܸ௦௬௦ ଶ ܶ
20
ܴ௦௬௦ ܴଶ
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance from Arc (inches)
where:
Figure 10. Heat Flux vs. Working Distances
ܸ௦௬௦ is the system voltage in volts
ܴ௦௬௦ is the system resistance, in ohms
As expected, heat flux or incident energy varies
ܶ is the arcing time in seconds
inversely with the square of the working distances.
R is the working distance from the arc, in • Bolted fault current of 2 kA to 25 kA
centimeters Arc gap distance of up to 0.5” for 130 V
ܧܫ୫ୟ୶ ௪ is the estimated DC arc flash
•
DC systems and up to 2” for 260 V DC
incident energy at the maximum power point, in systems
cal/cm2
2. The set of 600 V DC equations Kinectrics
For exposures where the arc is in a box or derived should be used under the following
enclosure, the proposal suggests using a 3-times conditions:
multiplying factor for the resulting incident energy
value. • 600 V DC
• Bolted fault current of 2 kA to 25 kA
Based on laboratory test results, this calculation • Arc gap distance of up to 6” (depending
is shown to be conservative and estimates higher than on the configuration of the electrodes
measured incident energy levels. A comparison of and the available fault current, arcs may
Doan’s equation1, ArcProTM with a modification not be sustainable at an arc gap distance
factor derived from the DC arc flash tests at 120 V of 6”)
and 260 V DC, and the test results at 600 V DC is
shown in the following figure. 3. In situations where the case being assessed
does not fall in 1. or 2. the maximum arc
Heat Flux at 12 inches vs. Arcing Fault Current energy equation proposed by Doan could be
600 VDC
1" Arc Gap 6" Arc Gap Doan Arcpro 1" Arcpro 6"
used as a conservative approach. Further
90 testing and studies are required in order to
80 derive more practical models and formulae.
70
Heat Flux (cal/cm2/s)
60 COCLUSIOS
50
Figure 12. Comparison of Existing DC Arc Flash Evaluation OSHA states clearly that it is the employers’
Methods responsibilities to ensure that the employees are
adequately protected with PPE.
As seen from Figure 12, under the specific
scenario, ArcProTM with factor matches well with the Based on the research and testing conducted at
results from the 600 V DC test. It is also important to Kinectrics, the following can be concluded:
note that Doan’s equation is designed for worst case
energy and produced the same results independent of 1. At present, there is no standardized and
the value of the arc gap. verified model to determine incident energy
released from DC arcs.
RECOMMEDATIOS 2. An initial set of DC arc measurements from
Kinectrics laboratories can be used as a
An interim approach for performing arc flash verification tool for proposed DC arc hazard
evaluation at DC equipment could include: analysis tools.
3. The DC arc flash formulas proposed by
1. ArcProTM with factors has been verified for Doan is conservative compared to
the following conditions: measurements. Use of ArcpoTM and the 600
V DC arc hazard equation developed by
• 130 V DC to 260 V DC Kinectrics, is suitable within the range of
parameters for which these models have
1
been verified.
It is assumed that Ibf = 2 Iarc, where Iarc is measured
from the laboratory experiment at Kinectrics
4. There is a need for additional development [6] Doughty, R., Neal, T. and Floyd, L..
of DC arc models. Extrapolation may “Predicting Incident Energy to Better Manage the
produce misleading results. Electric Arc Hazard on 600 V Power distribution
5. It is critical to understand the applications Systems”, United States.
and limitations of the existing models and
equations. [7] ArcProTM Software, Kinectrics Inc..
6. The transit industry with DC systems for 3rd
rail and cantenary applications should find [8] Doan, D.. “Arc Flash Calculations for
the test results and preliminary computation Exposures to DC Systems”, Delaware, United States.
methods mentioned in this paper useful for
initial DC arc hazard assessments. [9] Ammerman, R. et al.. “DC Arc Models and
Incident Energy Calculations”, Colorado, United
ACKOWLEDGEMETS States.
REFERECES