Nema Abp1 - 2024-03-26

A NEMA Low-Voltage Distribution Equipment Section Document
ABP 1-2016
Selective Coordination of
Low-Voltage Circuit Breakers
Published by:
National Electrical Manufacturers Association

1300 North 17th Street, Suite 900
Rosslyn, Virginia 22209
www.nema.org
© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association. All rights including translation into other languages,
reserved under the Universal Copyright Convention, the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and
Artistic Works, and the International and Pan American Copyright Conventions.
NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
The information in this publication was considered technically sound by the consensus of persons engaged in
the development and approval of the document at the time it was developed. Consensus does not necessarily
mean that there is unanimous agreement among every person participating in the development of this
document.
NEMA standards and guideline publications, of which the document contained herein is one, are developed
through a voluntary consensus standards development process. This process brings together volunteers and/or
seeks out the views of persons who have an interest in the topic covered by this publication. While NEMA
administers the process and establishes rules to promote fairness in the development of consensus, it does not
write the document and it does not independently test, evaluate, or verify the accuracy or completeness of any
information or the soundness of any judgments contained in its standards and guideline publications. NEMA
disclaims liability for any personal injury, property, or other damages of any nature whatsoever, whether special,
indirect, consequential, or compensatory, directly or indirectly resulting from the publication, use of, application,
or reliance on this document.
NEMA disclaims and makes no guaranty or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of
any information published herein, and disclaims and makes no warranty that the information in this document
will fulfill any of your particular purposes or needs. NEMA does not undertake to guarantee the performance of
any individual manufacturer or seller’s products or services by virtue of this standard or guide.
In publishing and making this document available, NEMA is not undertaking to render professional or other
services for or on behalf of any person or entity, nor is NEMA undertaking to perform any duty owed by any
person or entity to someone else. Anyone using this document should rely on his or her own independent
judgment or, as appropriate, seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of
reasonable care in any given circumstances. Information and other standards on the topic covered by this
publication may be available from other sources, which the user may wish to consult for additional views or
information not covered by this publication.
NEMA has no power, nor does it undertake to police or enforce compliance with the contents of this document.
NEMA does not certify, test, or inspect products, designs, or installations for safety or health purposes. Any
certification or other statement of compliance with any health or safety-related information in this document shall
not be attributable to NEMA and is solely the responsibility of the certifier or maker of the statement.
ABP 1-2016
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................... III
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Scope .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Definition of Selective Coordination................................................................................................................ 1
1.4 Coordination ................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.5 Examples ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
2 NEC SELECTIVE COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS................................................................................ 5
2.1 Requirements ................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Challenges Meeting the Requirements .......................................................................................................... 7
2.2.1 Local Jurisdiction Interpretation and Enforcement ................................................................................ 7
2.2.2 Overriding Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 8
3 CIRCUIT BREAKER TRIP RESPONSE FUNCTIONS ................................................................................ 10
3.1 Fixed Thermal-Magnetic Type Circuit Breaker ............................................................................................. 11
3.2 Adjustable Thermal-Magnetic Type Circuit Breaker ..................................................................................... 12
3.3 Adjustable Electronic Type Circuit Breaker .................................................................................................. 14
3.4 Short-Time Withstand Current Rating .......................................................................................................... 14
3.5 Instantaneous Override Function ................................................................................................................. 17
4 APPLICATION INFORMATION FROM MANUFACTURERS ..................................................................... 18
4.1 Application of Time-Current Curves ............................................................................................................. 18
4.2 Limitation of Time-Current Curves................................................................................................................ 18
4.2.1 Overload Region .................................................................................................................................. 18
4.2.2 Instantaneous or Short-Circuit Region................................................................................................. 19
4.3 Short-Circuit Selective Coordination Tables ................................................................................................. 22
4.4 Coordinating Ground-Fault Protection of Equipment ................................................................................... 24
5 DESIGN GUIDELINES ................................................................................................................................. 28
5.1 Simplify the One-Line Diagram..................................................................................................................... 32
5.1.1 Divide Larger Loads into Smaller Loads .............................................................................................. 32
5.1.2 Reduce the Number of Levels of Protective Devices .......................................................................... 32
5.2 Reduce the Available Fault Current.............................................................................................................. 33
5.2.1 Increase the Impedance of the System ............................................................................................... 33
5.2.2 Use Step-Down or Isolation Transformers........................................................................................... 33
5.2.3 Take Advantage of the Added Arc Impedance of Circuit Breaker Combinations ................................ 37
5.3 Review Device Selection .............................................................................................................................. 37
5.3.1 Increase the Withstand Capabilities of the Upstream Line-Side OCPDs ............................................ 37
5.3.2 Change the Type of Circuit Breaker .................................................................................................... 38
5.3.3 Select Current Limiting-Type Molded Case Circuit Breaker ................................................................ 38
5.4 Special Equipment Application Requirements ............................................................................................. 38
5.4.1 Generator Protection............................................................................................................................ 38
5.4.2 Automatic Transfer Switches ............................................................................................................... 38
5.4.3 Busway................................................................................................................................................. 40
5.4.4 Arc Flash Energy ................................................................................................................................. 40
5.4.5 Zone Selective Interlocking .................................................................................................................. 42
5.4.6 Bus Differential ..................................................................................................................................... 44
5.5 Field Adjustment ........................................................................................................................................... 45
5.6 Lifetime Selective Coordination .................................................................................................................... 45
6 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................... 45
7 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 46
8 INFORMATIVE ANNEX ............................................................................................................................... 47
© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association i

ABP 1-2016
FIGURES
Page
Figure 1 System is selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD .............................................................. 3
Figure 2 System is selectively coordinated—fault at feeder level OCPD ............................................................... 3
Figure 3 System is not selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD ........................................................ 4
Figure 4 System is not selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD ........................................................ 4
Figure 5 Code interpretation example ..................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 6 Excerpt from NFPA 110-2013 Figure B.1(b) ............................................................................................. 9
Figure 7 Typical TCCs for a low-voltage circuit breaker ....................................................................................... 11
Figure 8 Typical TCC for a fixed magnetic pickup action...................................................................................... 12
Figure 9 Typical TCC for an adjustable magnetic pickup action ........................................................................... 13
Figure 10 Typical adjustable settings for circuit breakers ..................................................................................... 14
Figure 11 Typical TCC characteristics for LVPCBs vs. molded-case/insulated-case circuit breakers ................. 16
Figure 12 Typical adjustable versus fixed instantaneous pickup settings ............................................................ 17
Figure 13 Typical TCCs of two OCPDs................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 14 Effect of current limiting on circuit breaker performance ...................................................................... 20
Figure 15 Peak let-through current of a circuit breaker ......................................................................................... 21
Figure 16 Circuit breaker settings (set so circuit breaker TCC does not overlap fuse TCC) ................................ 21
Figure 17 Circuit breaker settings (set to ensure coordination to full available bolted fault current) .................... 22
Figure 18 The mandated limits for low-voltage ground-fault protection ................................................................ 25
Figure 19 Circuit breakers selectively coordinated with 1200 A ground fault ....................................................... 26
Figure 20 Circuit breaker and fuses with 1200 A ground fault NOT selectively coordinated ................................ 27
Figure 21 20 A single-pole lighting circuit breaker under 240 A ground fault ....................................................... 28
Figure 22 Three levels of selective coordination required .................................................................................... 33
Figure 23 Simplified scheme with two levels of selective coordination ................................................................. 33
Figure 24 Coordination requirements for transformer primary and secondary devices ........................................ 34
Figure 25 Distribution of incoming phase currents into a delta primary winding................................................... 35
Figure 26 Delta wye transformer windings with balanced 3-phase fault ............................................................... 35
Figure 27 Delta wye transformer windings with single phase-to-phase fault ........................................................ 35
Figure 28 Single phase to ground ......................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 29 Coordination requirements for transformer primary and secondary devices based on unknown high
available primary fault current, known kVA, and known transformer impedance (the effect of conductor
impedance is ignored) ........................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 30 Three circuit breakers achieving coordination using nested short-time bands ..................................... 42
Figure 31 A simplified ZSI communication scheme for three circuit breakers ...................................................... 43
Figure 32 The three circuit breakers of figure 31 at their backup protection settings and at the faster “in-zone”
protection settings ................................................................................................................................................. 43
Figure 33 The effect of bus differential on a bus protected by zone-interlocked circuit breakers......................... 44
TABLES
Page
Table 1 Typical ratings of LVPCBs vs. molded-case/insulated-case circuit breakers .......................................... 15
Table 2 Typical selective coordination table ......................................................................................................... 23
© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association ii

ABP 1-2016
FOREWORD
This NEMA white paper was developed in response to the requirements in the National Electrical Code® for
selective coordination in order to assist engineers in designing selectively coordinated power systems using low-
voltage circuit breakers.
To ensure that a meaningful publication was being developed, draft copies were sent to a number of groups
within NEMA having an interest in this topic. Their resulting comments and suggestions provided vital input prior
to final NEMA approval and led to a number of substantive changes in this publication. This publication will be
reviewed periodically by the Molded-Case Circuit Breaker Product Group of the Low-Voltage Distribution
Equipment Section of NEMA for any revisions necessary to keep it up to date with advancing technology.
Proposed or recommended revisions should be submitted to:
Senior Technical Director, Operations

National Electrical Manufacturers Association
1300 North 17th Street, Suite 900
Rosslyn, Virginia 22209
This white paper was developed by the Molded-Case Circuit Breaker Product Group of the Low-Voltage
Distribution Equipment Section of NEMA. Approval of this white paper does not necessarily imply that all
members of the product group voted for its approval or participated in its development. At the time it was
approved, the Molded-Case Circuit Breaker Product Group included the following members:
ABB, Inc.—Memphis, TN
Eaton Corporation—Pittsburgh, PA
General Electric—Plainville, CT
Siemens Industry, Inc.—Norcross, GA
Schneider Electric USA—Andover, MA
© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association iii

ABP 1-2016
1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to provide guidance to engineers regarding the National Electrical Code® (NEC)
requirements for selective coordination. This paper specifically addresses how to comply with these
requirements for low-voltage circuit breakers (LVCBs). LVCBs include molded-case circuit breakers (MCCBs)
listed to UL 489 and low-voltage power circuit breakers (LVPCBs) listed to UL 1066. (The MCCB category also
includes insulated case circuit breakers [ICCBs].)
1.2 Scope
This paper provides information on the following topics:
1) Description of the key functions of the overcurrent protective devices (OCPDs) used in low-voltage
applications for meeting selective coordination requirements per the latest edition of the NEC [18]
2) Discussion of selective coordination application information provided by manufacturers and implications
for system design
3) The importance of including both phase currents, as well as ground-fault currents, for selective
coordination
4) The role of the system design engineer and the necessary interaction with applicable authorities having
jurisdiction (AHJ)
5) An overview of considerations for designing selectively coordinated systems
6) Background information illustrating why overlapping of time current characteristic curves does not
equate to a loss of selective coordination
1.3 Definition of Selective Coordination
The goal of selective coordination is to isolate the faulted circuit while maintaining power to the balance of the
electrical distribution system.
NEC Article 100 [18] definitions related to selective coordination are as follows:
 Selective coordination: “Localization of an overcurrent condition to restrict outages to the circuit or

equipment affected, accomplished by the selection and installation of overcurrent protective devices and
their ratings or settings for the full range of available overcurrents, from overload to the maximum
available fault current, and for the full range of overcurrent protective device opening times associated
with those overcurrents.”
 Overcurrent: “Any current in excess of the rated current of equipment or the ampacity of a conductor. It
may result from overload, short-circuit, or ground fault.”
 Overload: “Operation of equipment in excess of normal, full-load rating, or of a conductor in excess of

rated ampacity that, when it persists for a sufficient length of time, would cause damage or dangerous
overheating. A fault, such as a short circuit or ground fault, is not an overload.”
 Ground fault: “An unintentional, electrically conducting connection between an ungrounded conductor
of an electrical circuit and the normally non-current carrying conductors, metallic enclosures, metallic
raceways, metallic equipment, or earth.”
Other relevant definitions:
 Short circuit current: “An overcurrent resulting from a fault of negligible impedance between live
conductors having a difference in potential under normal operating conditions.” [13]
With selective coordination, only the OCPD nearest to the fault should open to clear the fault. This overcurrent
fault condition may be caused by an overload, a short circuit, or a ground fault, and ideally each OCPD shall be
selectively coordinated with other upstream protective devices in the system.
© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 1

ABP 1-2016
1.4 Coordination
The use of the terms “selective coordination” and “coordination” in the 2012 edition of NFPA 99 and the 2014
edition of the NEC [19] has created a clear distinction between two levels of coordination that need to be
understood by the engineer.
The 2014 edition of the NEC changed the requirements around coordination for health care facilities. Article
517, “Health Care Facilities,” introduced a new section titled “coordination.” This new language sought to ensure
the curves do not overlap for times greater than or equal to 0.1 seconds. The language in the NEC stated that
“overcurrent protective devices serving the essential electrical system shall be coordinated for the period of time
that a fault’s duration extends beyond 0.1 seconds.” The informational note that was added provides further
clarification of the level of current.
This language in the code gives the engineer flexibility to establish coordination for selected times or currents to
achieve an optimized solution. The engineer may need to reach a compromise between competing objectives of
maximum protection, maximum service continuity, and/or budgetary constraints.
With this in mind, the following definition is offered for the term “coordination”:
Coordination: Localization of an overcurrent condition to minimize outages to the circuit or equipment

affected, accomplished by the selection and installation of overcurrent protective devices and their
ratings or settings, ensuring separation of their time current curves beyond a specified time period
without regard to fault current magnitude or below a specified level of fault current less than the
maximum available fault current.
Note that the following text in this document will explain how it may be possible to achieve coordination to higher
levels of fault current than would be possible using time-current curves (TCCs) alone. Please see section 4.3.
1.5 Examples
The concept of selective coordination is probably best understood through graphical presentations.
Example 1: A system that is selectively coordinated
Figure 1 shows a typical electrical system with multiple levels of branch and feeder OCPDs.
In figure 1, for a fault below the 20 A OCPD in panel P-1, only the 20 A OCPD should open. Electrical power
continues to be available in all other circuits—they are not affected, since only the 20 A OCPD closest to the
fault operates to clear the fault.

ABP 1-2016
Power Distribution Equipment

OCPD Not affected 800A
OCPD Opens
400A
Unnecessary power
loss
Fault P-2
200A
P-1
20A
Selectively Coordinated
For the full range of overcurrents possible at P-1, only the 20A OCPD opens.
Figure 1 System is selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD
In figure 2, the same system is shown, except with the fault now located between panels P-1 and P-2. Since this
system is selectively coordinated, only the 200 A OCPD in panel P-2 operates to clear the fault.
Power Distribution Equipment

OCPD Not affected 800A
OCPD Opens
400A
Unnecessary power
loss
Fault P-2
200A
P-1
20A
Selectively Coordinated
For the full range of overcurrents possible at P-2,
only the 200A OCPD opens.
Figure 2 System is selectively coordinated—fault at feeder level OCPD
Example 2: A system that is not selectively coordinated
Figure 3 shows the same scenario as in figure 2, except in this case, the system is NOT selectively coordinated.

ABP 1-2016
Figure 3 System is not selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD
In the scenario of figure 3, where the system is NOT selectively coordinated, an overload or fault downstream of
the 20 A OCPD in panel P-1 causes both the 200 A and the 20 A OCPD to open. If this system were selectively
coordinated, only the 20 A OCPD should open.
If the fault current were a short circuit condition such that the currents were great enough to cause the 800 A
circuit breaker to open, the scenario would be as shown in figure 4. The 800 A, 400 A, 200 A, and 20 A OCPDs
may ALL open instead of just the 20 A OCPD, since the system is NOT selectively coordinated.
(Note that the opening of all of these OCPDs in this scenario is theoretical. In practice, impedances in the circuit
may typically limit the current to levels that may not necessarily cause all of the OCPDs to open.)
Figure 4 System is not selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD
The purpose of selective coordination is to isolate the faulted circuit, regardless of the type of fault, while
maintaining power to the balance of the electrical distribution system. For short circuit coordination, each pair of
OCPDs should ideally be selective up to the maximum fault current available at the load terminals of the

ABP 1-2016
downstream device. This level of current defines the maximum fault current of concern for selective
coordination. The devices must also be selective for all lower fault currents.
2 NEC Selective Coordination Requirements

2.1 Requirements
NEC Section 240.12 [18] defines “Electrical System Coordination” as follows:
Where an orderly shutdown is required to minimize the hazard(s) to personnel and equipment, a system of
coordination based on the following two conditions shall be permitted.
(1) Coordinated short-circuit protection

(2) Overload indication based on monitoring systems or devices.
Selective coordination first became a requirement in the 1993 edition of the NEC [15] in Article 620 for
Elevators, Dumbwaiters, Escalators, Moving Walks, Wheelchair Lifts, and Stairway Chair Lifts.
In the 2005 NEC [16], these requirements were expanded to include the following types of systems:
 Emergency Systems in Section 700.27

 Legally Required Standby Systems in Section 701.18
 Health Care Facilities in Section 517.26
In the 2008 NEC [17], these requirements for selective coordination were expanded into the new Article 708 for
Critical Operations Power Systems (COPS) in Section 708.54. In addition, NEC 701.18 was revised to 701.27.
In the 2011 NEC [18], these requirements for selective coordination were further expanded by adding a
selective coordination requirement to Article 695 for multi-building, campus-style complex fire pumps in Section
695.3(C)(3).
Several changes were made in the 2014 NEC regarding selective coordination. In addition to the change in the
definition in Article 100 previously mentioned, NEC 700.27 was revised to 700.28, and changes in requirements
were made to key sections such as revising 517.26 to only apply to the Life Safety Branch of the Essential
Electrical System, Essential Electrical Systems for Hospitals, 517.30(F) and Critical Operations Data Systems,
645.27. Language was also added to existing requirements (620.62, 700.28, 701.27, and 708.54) that specifies
that selective coordination shall be selected by a licensed professional engineer or other qualified persons
engaged primarily in the design, installation or maintenance of electrical systems. The selection shall be
documented and made available to those authorized to design, install, inspect, maintain, and operate the
system.
In the 2014 edition of the NEC [19], the following articles require selective coordination:
1) Article 517—Health Care Facilities
517.17 Ground-Fault Protection.

(C) Selectivity. Ground-fault protection for operation of the service and feeder disconnecting means shall
be fully selective such that the feeder device, but not the service device, shall open on ground faults on the
load side of the feeder device. Separation of ground-fault protection time-current characteristics shall
conform to manufacturer’s recommendations and shall consider all required tolerances and disconnect
operating time to achieve 100 percent selectivity.
517.26 Application of Other Articles. The life safety branch of the essential electrical system shall meet
the requirements of Article 700, except as amended by Article 517.
Informational Note No. 1: For additional information see NFPA 110-2010, Standard for Emergency and
Standby Power Systems.
Informational Note No. 2: For additional information see 517.30 and NFPA 99, Chapter 6.

ABP 1-2016
517.30 Essential Electrical Systems for Hospitals.
(G) Coordination. Overcurrent protective devices serving the essential electrical system shall be
coordinated for the period of time that a fault’s duration extends beyond 0.1 second.
Exception No. 1: Between transformer primary and secondary overcurrent protective devices, where only
one overcurrent protective device or set of overcurrent protective devices exists on the transformer
secondary.
Exception No. 2: Between overcurrent protective devices of the same size (ampere rating) in series.
Informational Note: The terms coordination and coordinated as used in this section do not cover the full
range of overcurrent conditions.
In NFPA 99-2012 Health Care Facilities Code [10] three new sections were added regarding selective
coordination. These sections read as follows:
Overcurrent protective devices serving the essential electrical system shall be selectively coordinated for the
period of time that a fault’s duration extends beyond 0.1 second.
Three new annex sections were also added to explain these new requirements. They read as follows:
It is important that the various overcurrent devices be coordinated, as far as practicable, to isolate faulted
circuits and to protect against cascading operation on short circuit faults. In many systems, however, full
coordination could compromise safety and system reliability.
2) Article 620—Elevators, Dumbwaiters, Escalators, Moving Walks, Wheelchair Lifts, and Stairway
Chair Lifts
620.62 Selective Coordination. Where more than one driving machine disconnecting means is supplied by
a single feeder, the overcurrent protective devices in each disconnecting means shall be selectively
coordinated with any other supply side overcurrent protective devices.
3) Article 645-Information Technology Equipment
645.27 Selective Coordination. Critical operations data system(s) overcurrent devices shall be selectively
coordinated with all supply side overcurrent protective devices.
4) Article 695 – Fire Pumps

695.3 Power Source(s) for Electric Motor-Driven Fire Pumps.
(C) Multibuilding Campus-Style Complexes.
(3) Selective Coordination. The overcurrent protective device(s) in each disconnecting means shall be
selectively coordinated with any other supply-side overcurrent protective device(s).
5) Article 700—Emergency Systems
700.28 Selective Coordination. Emergency system(s) overcurrent devices shall be selectively

Selective Coordination shall be selected by a licensed professional engineer or other qualified persons
engaged primarily in the design, installation, or maintenance of electrical systems. The selection shall
be documented and made available to those authorized to design, install, inspect, maintain, and operate
the system.
Exception: Selective coordination shall not be required between two overcurrent devices located in
series if no loads are connected in parallel with the downstream device.
6) Article 701—Legally Required Standby Systems
701.27 Selective Coordination. Legally required standby system(s) overcurrent devices shall be selectively

ABP 1-2016
engaged primarily in the design, installation, or maintenance of electrical systems. The selection shall be
system.
Exception: Selective coordination shall not be required between two overcurrent devices located in series if
no loads are connected in parallel with the downstream device.
7) Article 708—Critical Operations Power Systems
708.52 Ground-Fault Protection of Equipment.
(D) Selectivity. Ground-fault protection for operation of the service and feeder disconnecting means shall
be fully selective such that the feeder device, but not the service device, shall open on ground faults on the
load side of the feeder device. Separation of ground-fault protection time-current characteristics shall
conform to the manufacturer’s recommendations and shall consider all required tolerances and disconnect
operating time to achieve 100 percent selectivity.
708.54 Selective Coordination. Critical operations power system(s) overcurrent devices shall be
selectively coordinated with all supply side overcurrent protective devices.
engaged primarily in the design, installation, or maintenance of electrical systems. The selection shall be
system.
Exception: Selective coordination shall not be required between two overcurrent devices located in series if
no loads are connected in parallel with the downstream device.
In each of the NEC sections above, the spirit of the NEC requirement is that the OCPDs in these types of
electrical distribution systems are coordinated such that their operation does not cause unnecessary power loss
whenever a fault occurs. Whenever a fault does occur, only the OCPD closest to the fault should respond and
allow power to remain in all other unaffected parts of the electrical system. The OCPDs should be selectively
coordinated to respond to all types of overcurrents—overloads, short circuits, and ground faults.
2.2 Challenges Meeting the Requirements
2.2.1 Local Jurisdiction Interpretation and Enforcement

Authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) are typically not required to analyze or interpret short circuit and selective
coordination studies. Furthermore, there is significant controversy on the exact intent and interpretation of some
of the NEC passages referencing coordination. At the time of this writing, there is considerable variation
regarding interpretation of the requirements, enforcement practices, and enforcement rigor.
While local AHJs do not have to be experts at how electrical systems are designed to meet these selective
coordination requirements, they do have to understand what the NEC requirements mandate. More importantly,
the AHJs must understand how to interpret documentation that has been provided by engineers or contractors
and must determine how to enforce the requirements.
Below are some examples that illustrate the challenge facing the AHJ enforcing these code requirements.
The NEC requires selective coordination for “all supply-side overcurrent protective devices” in circuits such as
legally mandated emergency, life safety, and critical operation power system types of loads. Examples of these
types of loads are lights, pumps, and fans that would play critical life safety roles during fires, natural disasters,
building collapses, loss of utility power, and other similar catastrophic situations.
AHJs must determine which portions of the electrical systems are covered by the various NEC clauses and then
must determine what to enforce and how to enforce it. In recent years, electrical system designers are being
reminded to seek input from their local AHJ early in the design process, relative to interpretations of NEC
requirements for their local city or municipalities. It is important that the designer understand how the applicable
AHJ will interpret and enforce the NEC with respect to the subject system.

ABP 1-2016
For example, when considering the language “all supply-side overcurrent protective devices” in the selective
coordination requirement, some jurisdictions may interpret the meaning of this phrase differently. For some
AHJs, the words in the requirement “all supply-side” mean that the overcurrent protective devices (OCPDs) on
the normal side of the transfer switch (devices A and B of figure 5) must selectively coordinate with each other.
Other AHJs require only those overcurrent devices on the emergency side of the transfer switch to selectively
coordinate with the overcurrent devices upstream of the transfer switch (device C selectively coordinating with
devices A, B, E and F of figure 5) and do not require the devices on the normal side of the transfer switch
(devices A and B) to selectively coordinate with each other.
Figure 5 Code interpretation example
Attempts have been made each cycle to add clarity to this specific example. The code-making panel has been
very clear in stating that the devices on the normal side of the transfer switch, devices A and B of Figure 5, do
not fall under their jurisdiction and so are not required to selectively coordinate with each other. The code-
making panel has stressed and continues to stress that the OCPDs downstream of the transfer switch, those on
the emergency side namely devices C and D in figure5, must selectively coordinate with all line-side OCPDs,
which can be interpreted that devices C and D must selectively coordinate with devices B and A of figure5.
In another example of the interpretation challenge, when a new installation is being added to an existing facility,
shall all the OCPDs in the existing facility be made to selectively coordinate with those OCPDs in the new
installation? Again, depending on any number of different factors, different AHJs may make different decisions
as to how to interpret and enforce the NEC requirements in a case such as this.
While the NEC requirements may be drafted in reasonably clear text, the practical interpretation and
enforcement are sometimes subjective matters and may be controversial. This may be best handled by early
communications between the local AHJ and electrical system design engineers, such that all the parties
involved can air positions and come to agreements that satisfy NEC requirements and user needs.
2.2.2 Overriding Requirements

Some jurisdictions may have overriding requirements, such as the Agency for Health Care Administration
(AHCA) in Florida and the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) in California, or may
have amended the NEC requirements previously mentioned.
Statewide agencies may regulate specific types of occupancies such as hospitals and may enforce specific
requirements that are different from the NEC for those occupancies. Within those states, the state agency will
override NEC requirements that may pertain to other occupancies not covered by the state agency. Sometimes
cities, counties, and other governmental organizations may also have specific requirements that amend the
NEC or use sections of the NEC from older editions. Again, electrical system designers are urged to understand
the NEC requirements as applicable to the occupancy for which they are designing and the governmental
agencies that have jurisdiction over those specific occupancies.
The NFPA has recognized that various codes and standards address selective coordination, which can create
conflict; therefore, it was prudent for the NFPA to establish jurisdictional guidance for each technical committee.
The NFPA has directed that the technical committees responsible for documents that address system

ABP 1-2016
performance write performance requirements and that the technical committees responsible for documents that
address installation write installation requirements based on the following definitions:
Performance Requirement: A specification of the manner in which equipment or a system is intended to
function or operate.
Installation Requirement: A specification of the material and process associated with putting equipment in
place and making it ready for use in accordance with performance requirements. With respect to
emergency, legally required, critical operations and essential electrical systems, the NEC addresses the
installation requirements of these systems and NFPA 99 and 110 address the performance requirements of
these systems.
The 2012 edition of NFPA 99 Health Care Facilities Code [10] defines an essential electrical system as follows:
A system comprised of alternate sources of power and all connected distribution systems and ancillary
equipment, designed to ensure continuity of electrical power to designated areas and functions of a health
care facility during disruption of normal power sources, and also to minimize disruption within the internal
wiring system.
The following performance requirement for types 1, 2, and 3 essential electrical systems is stated in clauses
6.4.2.1.2, 6.5.2.1.1, and 6.6.2.1.1:
Overcurrent protective devices serving the essential electrical system shall selectively coordinate for the
period of time that a fault's duration extends beyond 0.1 second.
Annex A goes on to explain in clauses A.6.4.2.1.2, A.6.5.2.1.1, and A.6.6.2.1.1:
It is important that the various overcurrent devices be coordinated, as far as practicable, to isolate faulted
circuits and to protect against cascading operation on short-circuit faults. In many systems, however, full
coordination could compromise safety and system reliability. Primary consideration also should be given to
prevent overloading of equipment by limiting the possibilities of large current inrushes due to instantaneous
reestablishment of connections to heavy loads.
NFPA 110 is the Standard for Emergency and Standby Power Systems [11]. Before discussing the NFPA 110
requirements, let's start by understanding the scope of the standard:
This standard covers performance requirements for emergency and standby power systems providing an
alternate source of electrical power to loads in buildings and facilities in the event that the primary power
source fails.
The 2010 edition of NFPA 110 [11] defines an emergency power supply system (EPS) as follows:
A complete functioning EPS system coupled to a system of conductors, disconnecting means and
overcurrent protective devices, transfer switches, and all control, supervisory, and support devices up to and
including the load terminals of the transfer equipment needed for the system to operate as a safe and
reliable source of electric power.
This definition is clarified by the drawing in Appendix B.1(b) of NFPA 110-2013 (see figure 5):
Figure 6 Excerpt from NFPA 110-2013 Figure B.1(b)

ABP 1-2016
3 Circuit Breaker Trip Response Functions

There are various methods of obtaining selective coordination between LVCBs. Generally, coordination is
achieved by adjusting the line-side or source device to be less sensitive and slower than the load-side device.
This is particularly true in the overload region of the various TCCs. In NEC [18] articles 700 and 701, there is an
exception where two devices in series need not be selective. The intent is that when two or more devices are
feeding the exact same circuit with no loads connected in between, then they need not be selective with each
other. However, they do need to be selective with other devices above and below. For this exception, it would
not matter which LVCB opens, or if they both open, since the protected circuit would be disconnected in either
case. The point is that the outage would not have expanded more than was necessary.
The response of LVCBs to fault currents is typically shown using TCCs.
An example is shown in figure 7. The TCCs of LVCBs can generally be broken into two separate regions to
better understand the two separate time response characteristics of these devices. These regions are called the
overload region and the instantaneous or short circuit region, as shown in figure 7.
NOTE: For countries that use International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standards, there are somewhat different
terminologies that are used in discussing TCCs. The IEC/TR 61912-2 [1] document uses the terminology “fault-current
zones” to describe the “high” current areas of TCCs. The different terminologies, either fault-current zones or the
instantaneous or short circuit regions, are both intended to describe that area of the TCCs where currents are above an
overload condition.
The TCC in figure 7 also shows the tolerance bands for the time it takes the device to operate. The TCC shows
the maximum tolerance of this time, called the total clearing time.
The total clearing time for a LVCB has three main components: the sensing time, or delay time, the operating
time, and the arcing time. The sensing time includes any artificial delay an algorithm implements or time for a
bimetal to warm up. If the overcurrent stops during the sensing time, the LVCB will not operate. The operating
time includes all of the sequence of events that occur within the device from the point in time when the device
commits to open because it has decided that an overcurrent condition has occurred until current arcing begins.
In circuit breakers, it includes the time for sensing components and trip unlatching mechanisms to operate. The
arcing time is the time taken for the arc to be extinguished and the current is reduced to zero.
A simple thermal-magnetic circuit breaker consists of two key tripping mechanisms. The curved inverse time
portion known as the overload region is generally controlled by a bimetallic strip that flexes with heat, caused by
current flowing through the strip or by heat caused by a nearby resistive element that has current flowing
through it. The vertical line and flat portion of the TCC in figure 7 is known as the instantaneous region and is
generally controlled by a magnetic unlatching mechanism that operates directly from the load current in thermal-
magnetic circuit breakers.

ABP 1-2016
In the overload region, the overcurrent device has an

inverse-time operating response, meaning that the
response time for the device to open decreases as the fault
current level increases. Total clearing times are typically
fairly long—seconds to hours.
In the instantaneous or short circuit region, the overcurrent

device responds instantaneously. Total clearing times are
typically very fast—less than 30 milliseconds (ms) for molded
case CB and 60 ms or less for LVPCB.
Figure 7 Typical TCCs for a low-voltage circuit breaker
The overall TCC is the combination of these two protective elements. The transition may be vertical, as shown
in figure 7, which indicates a relatively simple transition from the slow bimetallic mechanism operation to the
faster magnetic operation, or it may be more sloped, showing a more complex interaction between the two
mechanisms.
In the example shown in figure 7, for a fault current of 3,000 A, the TCCs show that this circuit breaker rated at
70 A will trip instantaneously, in a time that is less than 30 millisecond (ms). For another circuit breaker, rated at
say 1,000 A, this same 3,000 A fault will likely cause that larger circuit breaker to trip in the overload region, in
tens of seconds or longer, depending on the design and user settings.
Selecting LVCBs that provide coordination for faults in their respective overload ranges may be accomplished
by providing overload functions that are increasingly less sensitive and slower as the circuit goes from branch to
main. For any specific fault current, if the load-side device operates in its instantaneous region and the line-side
device operates in its overload region, coordination is easily achieved. However, when a fault is in the range
where the instantaneous responses of multiple series devices overlap then coordination may be harder to
achieve and traditional TCC overlays may not be sufficient to illustrate device behavior.
Therefore, a key to optimized selective coordination is the instantaneous response of the circuit breakers that
are being considered in the design of the electrical system. There are a number of different types of
instantaneous functions associated with circuit breakers, and which have similarities and differences.
For circuit breakers, the tripping function is accomplished by designs that operate on thermal-magnetic
principles or designs that operate using electronic circuits. In either of these trip designs, whether thermal-
magnetic or electronic, various adjustable or fixed setting options are often possible. Their differences and how
they relate to selective coordination are key to understanding how coordination may be achieved.
3.1 Fixed Thermal-Magnetic Type Circuit Breaker

The response time in the instantaneous region of a particular family of circuit breakers is typically drawn at a
constant value in the range of 16 to 30 ms or less. Once the fault current exceeds the trip threshold, called the
pickup level of the device, the magnetic fields from this current are sufficient to unlatch the device from its
closed state. The only factor in the operation after this point is the time it takes for the contacts to physically

ABP 1-2016
open and for the electrical arc to be extinguished. This complete action typically takes place within one cycle of
the electrical current for smaller devices and possibly two cycles for larger devices, without any intentional
mechanical or electronic delay on the part of the device.
Pickup Level
Figure 8 Typical TCC for a fixed magnetic pickup action
In figure 8, the magnetic pickup level of the device is fixed by design to operate once the current exceeds
approximately 1,000 A. The device will trip with no intentional delay, in approximately one cycle (17 ms) or less.
There are various tolerances associated with the dimensional and material properties of the components used in
the design of the device. The result of these variations in the design materials causes a tolerance in the
response levels of both the pickup current and the exact trip time. The total tolerance is represented by the band
shown around the nominal current and time on the TCCs.
Standards such as UL 489 [2] specify the maximum tolerance (such as −20% to +30%) allowed for an
adjustable instantaneous setting marked on the circuit breaker. Manufacturers’ TCCs may demonstrate less
tolerance for a particular device based on the device’s actual performance. In the case of LVCBs, the TCCs
provided by a manufacturer reflect applicable clearing time tolerances that are demonstrated by the
corresponding circuit breaker.
For selective coordination applications, the designer of the electrical system must therefore select LVCBs in
such a manner that the LVCBs coordinate at the calculated fault currents, whether the fault current is in the
overload or instantaneous range of the various devices. Typically, line-side devices are selected such that the
instantaneous trip level of the device can be set higher than the available fault current at the load-side device’s
terminals. Conversely, a load-side branch device is usually selected such that it will respond instantaneously to
faults above the normal expected currents required to sustain the load.
3.2 Adjustable Thermal-Magnetic Type Circuit Breaker
Circuit breakers with adjustable instantaneous trips are available from most manufacturers over a wide range of
circuit breaker sizes and types. An adjustable instantaneous trip offers system designers greater flexibility by

ABP 1-2016
allowing selection of an optimized instantaneous protection function that allows normal load fluctuations while
tripping for higher abnormal currents. A simple example of this option with three settings is shown in figure 9.
In this example, the electrical system designer has the flexibility to select the instantaneous pickup setting to be
at current level “low” amperes, as in figure 8, or adjust it higher to levels “medium” or “high” amperes based on
the needs of the electrical system.
Figure 9 Typical TCC for an adjustable magnetic pickup action
Traditionally, when performing a selective coordination study, the goal is to achieve selective trip coordination by
adjusting trip bands on the various devices to achieve a separation of the tolerance bands to the point where
there is “white space,” or a visible space, between them. There have been various opinions and
recommendations for how much white space is adequate to ensure selective trip coordination, especially in the
area of medium- and high-voltage circuit breakers where an external sensing and tripping device is employed.
When the TCCs for the external relays were drawn, an allowance for the reaction and clearing time of the circuit
breaker was necessary. The achievement of “white space” was considered good design practice and carried
over into all trip curve coordination.
LVCB TCCs represent the operation of the circuit breaker as a complete system. Per applicable UL standards
[2], LVCBs and their respective trip systems are tested and listed as a system. A LVCB TCC usually includes
sensing time, signal processing time, mechanical operation time, and arc extinguishing time, plus all the
associated tolerances. Hence modern circuit breaker manufacturers do not generally require that additional
tolerance or clearing time be allocated between LVCB curves in a composite TCC. If two circuit breakers are
operating at similar temperatures, it can usually be expected that they will be selective for a given fault current
even if the respective TCC are close enough together that “white space” is not evident in the composite TCC.
Manufacturer literature should be consulted to ensure this is the case if close curve positioning is being
implemented.
Modern LVCBs with integral trip units may operate at high speeds, even to the point where some MCCBs not
listed as current limiting are current limiting. Modern trip units also employ many techniques to improve their
performance and accuracy; even the standard thermal-magnetic trip units are better today than in the past.

ABP 1-2016
3.3 Adjustable Electronic Type Circuit Breaker

Electronic trip units employ high-speed microprocessors and are characterized by their adjustability (figure 10),
their accuracy, and their repeatability. This repeatability that is inherent with electronic design allows less
variability in the point at which the device will pick up during a fault condition. As a result, circuit breakers with
electronic trip units typically have much narrower tolerance bands as compared to other designs of OCPDs.
There are presently no unique industry standards for the pickup tolerances for circuit breakers with electronic
trip units. While these devices comply with tolerance requirements of the present UL 489 [2] for MCCBs, for
example, most circuit breaker manufacturers publish TCCs with tolerances that are considerably narrower than
the UL 489 requirements—some may be 10% or less.
Most electronic circuit breaker designs have simple controls on the devices that provide for several adjustable
selections of the pickup setting for instantaneous response, as shown in figure 10. These adjustable electronic
circuit breakers therefore provide the electrical system designer with two key advantages. First, they provide
maximum flexibility in adjusting the desired level of pickup current, and second, they inherently have the
narrowest tolerances for coordinating the response of multiple OCPDs.
Figure 10 Typical adjustable settings for circuit breakers
3.4 Short-Time Withstand Current Rating

LVCBs fall into two basic classifications of design—low-voltage power circuit breakers (LVPCBs) and molded-
case circuit breakers (MCCBs). One of the most important application features that distinguish a LVPCB from a
MCCB is the ability of the LVPCB to withstand very high overcurrent levels without tripping for a specified period
of time.
There is a special type of MCCB called an insulated case circuit breaker (ICCB). These circuit breakers have
many of the LVPCB characteristics, including short-time current duty cycles and two-step stored energy
mechanisms.

ABP 1-2016
The main difference between ICCBs and LVPCBs is that ICCBs, like MCCBs, are tested in accordance with UL
489 [2]. ICCBs tend to have lower withstand capability than LVPCBs and also tend not to have single pole
ratings as high as that of LVPCBs which are required to have them per applicable standards. Table 1 shows just
some of the key differences in the ratings between LVPCBs (UL 1066) [3] and molded-case/insulated-case
circuit breakers (UL 489) [2].
Table 1 Typical ratings of LVPCBs vs. molded-case/insulated-case circuit breakers
Required UL 1066 [3] UL 489 [2]

Ratings (LVPCBs) (MCCBs & ICCBs)
120, 120/240, 240,
Rated 254 V, 508 V, or 635 V
277, 347 V,
(maximum) (unfused), or 600 V
480Y/277, 480,
voltage (if integrally fused)
600Y/347, or 600 V
Rated
DC, 50 Hz, or 60 Hz DC, 50 Hz, or 60 Hz
frequency
Frame sizes:
Rated 600 A to 6000 A,
Frame sizes:
continuous ratings by
15 to 6000 A
current combination of
sensors and trip units
Rated short- Carry fault current
time withstand current for two 0.5 sec. Not specified
duty cycle periods
Rated short-
circuit current
200 kA max. 7.5 kA to 200 kA
(at rated maximum
voltage)
Rated short-
O – (2 to 60 min.) –
circuit current O – (15 sec.) – CO
CO
duty cycle
15% (X/R ratio 6.6) unfused LVPCBs
Short-circuit test 20% (X/R ratio 4.9) fused LVPCBs
(4.9 is the X/R as stated in ANSI/IEEE 20% (X/R ratio 4.9)
power factor
C37.50, which is referenced in UL 1066
[3] for LVPCBs)

ABP 1-2016
Figure 11 shows some typical TCC characteristics for these circuit breaker types.
Figure 11 Typical TCC characteristics for LVPCBs vs. molded-case/insulated-case circuit breakers
The short-time withstand current rating of a LVPCB is the level of rms symmetrical current that a circuit breaker
can carry in the closed position for a specified period of time. This term is typically used in association with
LVPCBs, and not with MCCBs. Some MCCB manufacturers may publish a Short Time Withstand Current Rating
where they exist.
The short-time withstand current rating represents the mechanical and thermal ability of the circuit breaker to
withstand an overcurrent for the given amount of time. This specific rating is published by the manufacturer.
Rated short-time withstand current: The maximum root-mean-square (rms) total current that a circuit breaker
can carry momentarily without electrical, thermal, or mechanical damage or permanent deformation. The current
shall be the rms value, including the dc component, at the major peak of the maximum cycle as determined from
the envelope of the current wave during a given test time interval. (Adapted from IEEE Std. C37.100-1992) [4]
LVPCBs are typically used in electrical distribution systems to feed a switchboard, a motor control center, or
other electrical panelboards. A number of circuit breakers in these power distribution centers may then be used
to feed a variety of separate loads. To coordinate the tripping characteristics of the LVPCB with other
downstream circuit breakers, it is desirable to have the mechanical characteristics of the circuit breaker so that
its withstand current rating is as high as possible. Short-time withstand ratings allow the circuit breaker to
intentionally delay up to 30 cycles (0.5 seconds) before tripping, depending on the manufacturer and design.

ABP 1-2016
The result is to enable the LVPCB to remain closed, allowing selective coordination with downstream circuit
breakers to open and clear a fault.
3.5 Instantaneous Override Function

There are two types of Instantaneous trip functions that are typically found in many circuit breakers:
1) An instantaneous trip that is adjustable by the user, and
2) An instantaneous trip that is fixed and cannot be adjusted by the user
For circuit breakers with adjustable instantaneous functions, the typical range of instantaneous pickup
adjustment are from around 1.5–2.0 up to 12 (or higher) times the continuous ampere rating of the circuit
breaker, depending on the manufacturer and design. In the example of the circuit breaker in figure 12, this
circuit breaker (rated for 1000 A) could be adjusted to trip instantaneously at the 2x setting (2,000 A) up to as
high as the 10x setting (10,000 A).
Some circuit breaker manufacturers have electronic designs that either do not have an adjustable instantaneous
pickup or allow the adjustable instantaneous function to be turned to an “off” setting. When a circuit breaker with
an electronic trip unit is specified without an adjustable instantaneous pickup function, or has an “off” setting for
instantaneous pickup, that electronic trip unit may contain what’s called an “instantaneous override” function
(may not be needed in LVPCBs). This instantaneous override function has a fixed instantaneous trip level and is
not adjustable by the customer. The instantaneous override function is set to pick up and trip the circuit breaker
instantaneously, but its pickup is set at a higher level than the maximum adjustable instantaneous settings, as
shown in figure 12. As a result, the instantaneous override pickup setting of the circuit breaker may be as high
as the short-time withstand capability of the circuit breaker (60,000 A in the example in figure 12).
Figure 12 Typical adjustable versus fixed instantaneous pickup settings

ABP 1-2016
4 Application Information from Manufacturers

4.1 Application of Time-Current Curves
The correct method for determining selective coordination and the protection of equipment is by a coordination
study. This method provides a thorough analysis of the requirements and results in documented evidence that
the coordination and protection requirements have been adequately achieved.
The selective coordination study involves a time-current coordination study by comparing the timing
characteristics of the various protective devices being considered with each other. In addition, the study looks at
the potential damage characteristics of equipment being protected. For electronic or thermal-magnetic circuit
breakers, the appropriate settings for the circuit breaker trip units are developed in the coordination study.
The short-circuit currents available at different points in the system must also be understood. To ensure an
optimal analysis, a coordination study is typically performed in conjunction with a short circuit study. This study
evaluates the short-circuit currents that may be available in the system and allow the designer to see, at the
same time, the impact of these short-circuit currents on the selection of devices to meet selective coordination,
arc flash, and protection requirements.
When discussing selective coordination, TCCs for LVCBs are properly displayed as a band—not a single line.
Note that because of the time difference between minimum response time and total clearing time, a band must
always be shown around that curve. Without this band, a user may accidentally create a selective coordination
error resulting from hidden curve overlap.
The TCCs provide a quick and easy way to identify if selective coordination exists between OCPDs. By
overlaying the TCCs of two OCPDs onto one graphical plot, the designer can determine whether selective
coordination exists. If the TCCs of two circuit breakers intersect, the area of intersection indicates conditions
under which both circuit breakers may trip. If these two circuit breakers were used in an electrical system, the
overlap of TCCs could result in both circuit breakers tripping, causing unnecessary power loss to some portions
of the electrical distribution system. On the other hand, if the TCCs do not overlap, the circuit breakers are said
to be coordinated. However, circuit breakers may still be selective even if curves overlap in the instantaneous
region. This is achieved several ways; see section 4.3.
4.2 Limitation of Time-Current Curves

4.2.1 Overload Region
The TCCs are broken into two separate regions, called the overload region and the instantaneous region, as
shown in figure 7.
In the overload region, as shown in figure 13, the curves of two devices in series are typically separated by time,
and the trip response time involved is relatively long (seconds or minutes or even hours).

ABP 1-2016
Figure 13 Typical TCCs of two OCPDs
Therefore, in the overload region where fault currents are relatively low, and the response time of OCPDs is
typically not much faster than around one second or so, selective coordination is relatively easy to accomplish
between most devices. In this region, the TCCs of the various OCPDs are typically an adequate tool for
determining selective coordination of devices.
4.2.2 Instantaneous or Short-Circuit Region

Most MCCBs use a design that allows the contacts to magnetically repel each other during the first milliseconds
of a fault event, forcing the contacts apart prior to the trip mechanism operating and creating an arc that, due to
its impedance, limits the current. It should be pointed out here that although most MCCBs have this current
limiting effect during faults, only those breakers that limit the let-through energy (I2t) to less than the equivalent
of one half of a waveform cycle can be UL listed as "current-limiting." Only these listed current-limiting breakers
have published peak let-through current and energy curves. Although there are typically not commonly
published current-limiting values for "non-current-limiting" breakers, manufacturers, through additional testing
and evaluation, take the current-limiting effects of circuit breakers, whether listed as current-limiting or not, into
account in producing many of the selective breaker pairs in their published selective coordination tools. So that
example values may be used in the following discussion, listed current-limiting breakers and their published let-
through curves will be used as examples.
Traditional interpretation of TCCs in the instantaneous region is the same as the interpretation in the overload
region. An overlap of the curves indicates potential lack of coordination and, a lack of overlap indicates probable
coordination. However, TCC analysis alone ignores the current limiting effect of the load-side circuit breaker and
how the upstream circuit breaker or trip may interpret that behavior. Hence, in the instantaneous region, circuit
breakers may be more or less selective than traditional TCCs indicate. This is based on how the line-side circuit
breakers instantaneous trip function reacts to a fault current flowing through both devices as altered by the
typically smaller load-side circuit breaker. The line-side circuit breaker will react to the peak let-through current
allowed to flow by the smaller, or faster, LVCB for a given prospective fault current.

ABP 1-2016
An effect of current limitation on the trip performance of the line-side circuit breaker may be illustrated by figure
14.
90,000 Trip
80,000
Fault between line &
load side devices
70,000
60,000 Line side trip set at
50,000 36kA peak (25kA RMS)
40,000 Electronic
Amperes
30,000 Trip CB
20,000
10,000
Peak let-through
0 ~32kA
-10,000
-20,000 Fault above CL CB
-30,000
-40,000 Current
-50,000
-60,000
Limiting CB
-70,000
-80,000
- Seconds 0.0083 0.0167 Fault below CL CB
Figure 14 Effect of current limiting on circuit breaker performance
In figure 14, the larger sine wave represents a prospective fault current or the fault magnitude possible at the
line-side terminals of the load-side circuit breaker. The smaller half cycle sine wave represents the current-
limiting effect of the current limitation of the load-side circuit breaker on the larger prospective fault current. The
dashed line is the instantaneous trip setting, in instantaneous or “peak” amperes, of the line-side circuit breaker.
As may be seen from this diagram, even though the prospective fault current could have had a peak ampere
value over 80 kA, the current-limiting effect of the load-side device limited the peak current to approximately 32
kA ensuring coordination with the line-side device set at 36 kA.
Peak let-through currents may be provided by manufacturers in the form of peak let-through plots for various
circuit breakers. Values for peak let-through current at a specific prospective fault current may be selected from
these graphs. If a line-side circuit breaker trip is set above the peak allowed to flow through by the downstream
device then the pair should be selective for the defined prospective fault current and below. In the example
shown in figure 15, the current-limiting circuit breaker allows a peak let-through current of 33 kA for a
prospective fault of 50 kA rms. As long as the line-side circuit breaker is set above 33 kA rms, coordination up to
50 kA is possible.

ABP 1-2016
100
2  RMS
I Peak Let-through (kA)

33kA Peak
50kA RMS = 33kA

Peak let-through
33kA = 23kA
Peak at PF = 1
10
10 Prospective RMS Fault I (kA) 100
Figure 15 Peak let-through current of a circuit breaker
Understanding how the current-limiting behavior of a current-limiting fuse or circuit breaker is sensed by a line-
side device that operates based on instantaneous peak currents can also prevent setting circuit breakers too
low when the downstream device’s curve is drawn only down to the 0.01 axis on the Log-Log TCC.
Figure 16 shows a circuit breaker set high enough to not overlap with the fuse’s TCC as drawn on a typical TCC
showing a 0.01 second minimum response time.
1000
800A CB
100
10200A J TD
SECONDS
0.10
0.01100 1K 10K 100K

Amperes RMS
Figure 16 Circuit breaker settings (set so circuit breaker TCC does not overlap fuse TCC)
However, when the peak let-through current of the fuse is taken into consideration, the circuit breaker may need
to be set as shown in figure 17 to ensure coordination up to the full available bolted fault current because there
may be interaction between the two devices below the 0.01 second time minimum shown on the TCC.

ABP 1-2016
1000
800A CB
100
10 200A J TD
SECONDS
1
0.10
0.01100 1K 10K 100K

Amperes RMS
Figure 17 Circuit breaker settings (set to ensure coordination to full available bolted fault current)
Circuit breaker manufacturers have developed additional analytical methods and advanced proprietary
electronic trip algorithms that allow the coordination of multiple current limiting circuit breakers in series and
allow electronic trips to be set at lower, more sensitive settings than the above-described peak let-through-
based method. Testing performed by the manufacturers under a variety of fault conditions should confirm the
validity of the methods used. Description of these methods is beyond the scope of this document.
Manufacturers will provide short-circuit coordination tables or other tools that document the instantaneous
coordination that may be achieved with their devices based on the peak let-through current or energy of the
load-side devices and how the line-side devices respond to that let-through current or energy.
4.3 Short-Circuit Selective Coordination Tables

The TCCs of LVCBs are typically developed by conducting current interruption tests at various levels of
overload and short-circuit current. The time taken for the device to completely interrupt the current flow is then
measured and plotted to generate the TCCs. These tests are done on individual devices, and the corresponding
TCCs plotted.
In the case of selective coordination, the idea is to see how two of these devices perform, not as individual
devices but when connected in series with the same fault current flowing. At current levels in the overload
region, TCCs for the individual devices may be overlaid on each other to visually see if selective coordination is
achievable. At higher short-circuit current levels, the TCCs alone may not show as complete a picture as
possible. The TCCs alone do not include the impact of the added impedance of the downstream circuit breaker
if it begins to open faster than the upstream circuit breaker and the resulting higher coordination levels.
At these high fault current levels, if the TCCs do not indicate that the two circuit breakers in question are
coordinated, then selective coordination performance should be determined by looking at the additional
information provided by the manufacturer of the LVCBs. Most manufacturers provide additional selective
coordination information that is summarized in the form of tables such as table 2 [6] and show the interrupting
capabilities of the two devices when connected in series.

ABP 1-2016
Table 2 Typical selective coordination table
Branch
Main Main
Coordination 1, 2, and 3 Pole Branch Breakers
Amps Breaker
Level
15-60A BL, BLH, BLF, BLHF, BAF, BAFH, QP, QPH, QF, QFH,
ED4, ED6 100A 1kA
QAF, QAFH
FD 175A 1.5kA QAF, QAFH
100A
15-70A ED
15-100A BL, BLH, BLF, BLHF, BAF, BAFH, QP, QPH, QF,
FG-545,555,576,586 QFH, QAF, QAFH
3kA
100A
15-70A ED
150A LDG 200kA 15-90A NGB, HGB, LGB, NGG
LFG (225,250A) 200kA 15-125A NGB, HGB, LGB, NGG
HHFD (225,250A) 200kA 15-125A NGB, HGB, LGB, NGG
200KA 15-125A NGB, HGB, LGB, NGG
CFD6 (225,250A)
100kA 15-30A BQD
HFG (225,250A) * 100kA 15-125A QPH
250A
FD, FG
250A JD 15-100A BL, BLH, BLF, BLHF, BAF, BAFH, QP, QPH, QF,
QFH, QAF, QAFH
250A 3kA
15-125A ED
70-150A FD
FG-545,555,576,586
70-250A
LJG 200kA 15-125A NGB, HGB, LGB, NGG
CJD6 (350,400A) 200kA 15-125A NGB, HGB, LGB, NGG
10kA
JD 400A QAF, QAFH
LD 400A 80-100A BL, BLH, BLF, BLHF, BAF, BAFH, QP, QPH, QF,
SJD 8kA
QFH, QAF, QAFH
400A JG 15-125 ED
400A 3.6kA 70-250A FD
200-250A JD
400A 15-100A BL, BLH, BLF, BLHF, BAF, BAFH, QP, QPH, QF,
10kA
QFH, QAF, QAFH
SLD6-A
600/400A 15-125 ED
6.4kA 70-250A FD
200-300A JD, LD
15-125 ED
WL 65kA 70-250A FD
800/400A 200-250A JD, LD
FS1 Class L 22kA 15-100A BLH, BLHF, BAFH, QPH, QFH, QAFH
LS Trip
10kA 15-100A BL, BLF, BAF, QP, QF, QAF
These selective coordination tables typically show the downstream circuit breaker data on one axis and the
upstream circuit breaker on the second axis. The numbers that fill in the matrix between these two axes
represent the levels of coordination between the upstream and downstream devices. The tables are also
intended to be a quick and visually easy-to-use way to determine selective coordination, without design
engineers needing to perform complex, error-prone calculations. To further the ease of use, there are software
companies that have set up programs that automate the navigation through the tables, to speed up and simplify
the interpretation of the information in these tables.
In some application cases, this increased level of coordination between what’s determined by TCCs alone,
versus the use of selective coordination tables, may make an appreciable difference in criteria such as the
physical size, costs, and availability in the selection of these devices. Most manufacturers of LVCBs publish
both TCCs and selective coordination tables. The electrical system designer should consult the manufacturer’s

ABP 1-2016
tables to determine if improvements in the levels of selective coordination may be gained over the level of
coordination indicated by using traditional TCC analysis. Fuse manufacturers also provide selective coordination
tables that indicate the ampacity ratio required to achieve selective coordination between fuses. Some
manufacturers have additionally tested and now provide selective coordination tables between fuses and circuit
breakers that indicate the maximum level of fault current between a load-side fuse and upstream circuit breaker
that are selectively coordinated.
NEMA AB 5 Establishing Levels of Selective Coordination for Low Voltage Circuit Breakers provides guidance
to manufacturers by defining the requirements for test procedures that shall be employed by circuit breaker
manufacturers to validate the levels of instantaneous selective coordination data that are shown in selective
coordination tools, for molded-case, insulated-case and low-voltage-power circuit breakers with instantaneous
trip functions. In addition, the standard describes in general the acceptable analytical methods that may also be
used to develop the data for selective coordination tools. The intent of the standard is to ensure that circuit
breaker manufacturers are consistent in the methods that they use to validate the information that is published
in selective coordination tools.
4.4 Coordinating Ground-Fault Protection of Equipment

Dedicated equipment ground-fault protection such as ground-fault relays or the integral ground-fault function in
circuit breaker trips units, or switches, is often applied in low-voltage systems. Equipment ground-fault protection
is not intended to provide protection against shock or electrocution. Devices that provide equipment ground-fault
protection must adhere to the applicable sections of the NEC [18], UL 489 Molded-Case Circuit Breakers,
Molded-Case Switches and Circuit-Breaker Enclosures [2], and UL 1053 Ground-Fault Sensing and Relaying
Equipment [7]. This discussion applies to equipment ground-fault protection, not ground-fault circuit interrupters
(GFCI) personnel protective devices.
NEC [18] article 230.95 requires equipment ground-fault protection to be provided on solidly grounded wye
electric services of more than 150 volts to ground but not exceeding 600 volts phase-to-phase for each service
disconnect rated 1000 A or more. Exceptions are made for legally mandated emergency and standby systems
and systems where a disorderly shutdown may present more risk to human life than a fire caused by an arcing
ground fault. Because of the NEC [18] requirement and the desire to protect against low magnitude arcing faults
in 480Y/277 V systems, ground-fault protection is common in systems rated 1000 A or larger.
The mandate and need for ground-fault protection arises out of the potential for an arcing ground-fault current to
be low relative to the settings of the phase protection devices. Prior to ground-fault protection mandates being
added to the NEC [14] in 1971, a large number of building and electrical system fires were attributed to arcing
ground faults that persisted long enough to seriously damage equipment or start building fires. The industry
recognizes ground faults as the most common type of electrical fault;1 hence, in systems that require higher
reliability, it is common to include more than one level of ground-fault protection. Many systems, and hospitals
meeting the additional ground-fault selectivity requirements of section 517.17, will have two or more levels of
ground-fault protection in series. The intent of the second level of ground-fault protection is to increase system
reliability by preventing the service entrance main LVCB from opening from a ground-fault below a second-level
feeder LVCB. However, as the following text describes, incorrect selection of downstream LVCBs, complicated
by multiple levels of ground-fault protection, may decrease system reliability.
Multiple standards define performance for ground-fault protective devices. The NEC [18] defines maximum
pickup to be 1200 A and the maximum clearing time at 3000 A to be one second. UL 1053 [7] defines maximum
clearing time at 150% of nominal pickup setting as two seconds. Figure 18 shows the various mandated limits
along with a typical ground-fault protective device curve at maximum pickup allowed for any size of LVCB.
1. J.R. Dunki-Jacobs, F.J. Shields with Conrad St. Pierre Industrial Power System Grounding Design Handbook, self-published, 2007:
- Pg. 175: "Non-bolted faults generally are intermittent rather than continuous faults, and occur mostly as ground faults for the reason
that, among electrical faults, ground faults statistically prevail."
- Pg. 189: "Statistically, ground faults make up around 95% of all faults. Of these, in industrial systems, a large portion may be initiated
as arcing-ground faults in low-voltage systems.”
- Pg. 336: "As more than 90 percent of all faults in electrical systems in industry involve ground, an effective ground-fault detection and
protective system merits prime consideration."
- Pg. 444: "Statistics tacit (sic) indicate that about 95% of all short circuits in industrial plants are line-to-ground faults, of which most are
of the arcing fault variety."

ABP 1-2016
1000.00
1200A NEC
maximum
nominal pickup
100.00
10.00 UL 1053, maximum 2

second clear at 150%
Seconds
nominal setting
1.00
NEC 3000A, maximum
1 second clear
0.10
0.01
100 1,000 10,000 100,000
Amperes
Figure 18 The mandated limits for low-voltage ground-fault protection
Because of standard requirements, the shape of the ground-fault function’s protective curve is more limited than
the shape of phase protection devices. The response of phase protection devices must be shaped to allow
normal transient currents associated with motor starting and transformer inrush to flow; hence, the response of
the downstream phase protection device may not be slower or less sensitive than the ground-fault protection in
an upstream OCPD.
Ground-fault protective devices are able to use various sensing mechanisms or calculations to discern a
ground-fault current separate from balanced phase current, even if the phase current includes a phase-to-phase
fault component. However, phase protection devices cannot separate a ground fault from a phase fault. A
ground fault with enough fault current can operate phase protection. However, a phase fault should not operate
properly functioning ground-fault protection.
This requires that, for complete system coordination, the phase protection devices and ground-fault protection
coordinate with each other, as shown in figure 19.

ABP 1-2016
CURRENT IN AMPERES
1000
250A Electronic CB
100A TM CB
TIME IN SECONDS
100
1200 A GF
10
Seconds
0.10
0.01 10 100 1K 10K 100K

GF1.tcc Amperes
Ref. Voltage: 480V
Current in Amps x 1
Figure 19 Circuit breakers selectively coordinated with 1200 A ground fault
The sloped portion of the ground-fault curve is called an I2t slope and is a user-selectable response typically
provided by circuit breaker and ground-fault relay manufacturers. In this figure, a 100 A thermal-magnetic
lighting type branch circuit breaker and a 250 A MCCB are shown to be barely selective with the maximum NEC
[18] allowed 1200 A ground-fault setting. The difference in sensitivity to fault types between ground-fault relays
and normal overcurrent protection provides additional coordination complexity within systems that include both
phase and ground-fault protection.
Figure 20 demonstrates a 100 A thermal-magnetic circuit breaker that is not selectively coordinated with the
1200 A ground-fault function and two 200 A class-J fuses. One of the fuses shown in figure 20 is selectively
coordinated, and the other is not. The time-delay version is not coordinated with the ground-fault relay; however
the fast-acting version (which operates faster in the overload region) is coordinated.

ABP 1-2016
CURRENT IN AMPERES
1000
100A TM CB
200A TD J fuse
TIME IN SECONDS
100
200A J fuse
1200A GF
10
Seconds
1
0.10
0.01 10 100 1K 10K 100K

Amperes
tcc1.tcc Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1
Figure 20 Circuit breaker and fuses with 1200 A ground fault NOT selectively coordinated
These two figures demonstrate that phase protection devices connected downstream of equipment ground-fault
protection must be carefully selected with respect to size, type, and individual response characteristics to obtain
coordination. However, in all cases the downstream device may need to be significantly smaller than the device
that incorporates the ground-fault protection.
Due to the limits on ground-fault response and the shape of typical fuses and circuit breaker phase protection
downstream of a LVCB equipped with equipment ground-fault protection, downstream phase protectors may
need to be relatively small. In the case of circuit breakers, the downstream circuit breakers adjustment flexibility
may allow for devices as large as 250 A, potentially more depending on the degree of curve shaping flexibility in
the downstream device. Time-delay fuses may need to be under 125 A to be selective with ground-fault
functions as high as 1200 A. Non-time-delay type fuses as large as 200 A may be selective. The fuse curve
should be compared to the actual ground-fault protection curve for fuses in the 125–200 A range to ensure
selectivity. Some fuses will be easier to be selective with, and some ground-fault curves may be more selective
with specific fuses than others.
In systems with multiple levels of ground-fault protection, feeders with ground-fault protection may be impossible
to make selective with branch circuit breakers as small as 20 A single-pole. Any fault to ground in a single-
phase circuit protected by a one-pole OCPD will be sensed as a ground fault by an upstream three-phase
ground-fault protective device. It is commonly believed that most faults are ground faults2 and that most faults
occur at end-use equipment and circuits. Hence, ground and phase protection coordination with branch circuit
2. Per the references:
- “In actual practice, unbalanced faults are much more common, especially line-to-ground in grounded systems.” Per the IEEE Color
Book Series—Orange Book pg. 175
- “Ground faults comprise the majority of all faults that occur in industrial and commercial power systems.” Per the IEEE Color Book
Series—Buff Book pg. 4
- “Operating records show that the majority of the electrical circuit faults originate as phase-to-ground failures.” Per the IEEE Color Book
Series—Red Book pg. 187
- “Most electric-circuit faults occur as phase-to-ground breakdowns.” Protection Fundamentals for Low-Voltage Electrical Distribution
Systems in Commercial Buildings, IEEE JH 2112-1, 1974, pg. 113.

ABP 1-2016
OCPDs is very important in systems where coordination is deemed important for system reliability. Figure 21
shows a system, as may be found in a hospital application with two levels of ground fault, as required by NEC
article 517.17, set at the highest pickup settings.
CURRENT IN AMPERES
1000
20A 1P Branch CB
TIME IN SECONDS
100
240A GF
1200A GF
10
Seconds
0.10
0.01 10 100 1K 10K 100K

tcc1.tcc Amperes
Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1
Figure 21 20 A single-pole lighting circuit breaker under 240 A ground fault
The feeder with ground-fault protection in this figure is a 400 A circuit breaker with ground-fault set at 240 A
nominal pickup. This ground-fault function is barely selective with a 20 A single-pole lighting type circuit breaker.
A lower setting of the ground-fault circuit breaker would be impossible to coordinate with a small branch circuit
single-pole circuit breaker.
In power delivery systems where continuity of power is important, ground-fault protection, circuit size, OCPD
type, as well as device settings must be selected carefully to optimize coordination. Ground-fault protection in
small feeder circuit breakers may reduce system reliability by causing a lack of coordination between feeder
trips and branch circuit breakers.
5 Design Guidelines
In order to properly design a selectively coordinated system, the design professional engineer must recognize
and understand how the various technical, business, and personnel issues of such a system are interrelated.
The OCPD and associated control and monitoring equipment must all have technical (electrical, mechanical,
thermal, etc.) capacities that are equal to or greater than the system to which they are being applied. The choice
of these components drives short- and long-term costs, overall system reliability, and maintenance
considerations and impacts the lives of the personnel that must install and maintain these devices.
As a result, the design of selectively coordinated systems must consider more than just the alignment of
equipment selection with NEC requirements and/or technical customer specifications. As design professional
engineers have worked over recent years to implement these systems, comments from feedback exchanges
indicate that there are general approaches that typically yield successful results when designing selectively
coordinated systems. Feedback has also indicated that the earlier in the design process that the various
selective coordination requirements are considered, the smoother the entire process will be. For example,
getting preliminary data about things such as the available fault currents from the utility and/or generators,

ABP 1-2016
estimates of cable lengths, and OCPDs typically results in designs that minimize rework and time-consuming
revisions.
Successfully designed systems typically follow some fairly straightforward guidelines:
1) Understand the overall requirements and objectives of the electrical system
2) Understand how the local AHJ interprets the NEC with respect to the proposed system
3) Determine the available fault currents at each device, from all sources of power; conduct a short circuit
study of the system
4) Select OCPDs that provide selective coordination—use TCCs and selective coordination tables from
manufacturers
5) Optimize the design—consider special application requirements and make iterative changes to simplify
the impact of the design on initial installation, ongoing maintenance, and the safety of operating
personnel
1) Understand the overall electrical system
Prior to designing a system, the design engineer must understand the overall requirements and objectives
of the electrical system, particularly in the area of selective coordination. The understanding of these
requirements should be documented. The requirements for selective coordination often go hand-in-hand
with systems that involve standby generators and automatic transfer switches (ATS).
a) System drawings and documentation should indicate the nature of the application that the ATS scheme
is to be used for. These applications may be for situations that involve emergency, life safety, critical
care, elevators, or similar “people-movers,” legally required standby or critical operations power
systems, some other local NEC requirement.
b) System documentation should clearly identify where requirements need to meet selective coordination
per NEC sections 620.62, 645.27, 695.3, 700.28, 701.18, or 708.54, as required.
In some cases, preliminary drawings may not clearly identify which areas of the electrical system require
selective coordination. If selective coordination requirements are not clearly and fully addressed early in the
design phase of a project, equipment manufacturers that may bid on the project for example, can make
erroneous assumptions that may later impact the physical size, performance capabilities, costs, availability,
etc., of equipment being provided.
2) Understand the local authority having jurisdiction’s interpretations
The design engineer should develop a sound understanding of how the local jurisdiction interprets the
selective coordination NEC requirements with respect to the various areas of the proposed electrical
system. Early discussions should be conducted with the appropriate AHJ to clarify how any areas of
potential ambiguity will be interpreted.
In an example such as the addition of a new building wing to an existing hospital, a number of opportunities
for confusion may arise. Exactly what portions of the existing building’s equipment shall coordinate with the
equipment of the new wing, and whether the devices connected to both the emergency generator and the
normal utility shall be selectively coordinated, may have different answers depending on the exact nature of
the application. It’s best to proactively surface these issues in order to discuss and determine the answers
as early as possible in the design phase, so that the upcoming selection of the appropriate equipment can
be made without unnecessary redesign.
3) Determine the available fault currents
In order to determine whether devices are selectively coordinated, the system designer must know which
devices will stay closed and which devices will open when fault currents flow through those devices. In order
to know which devices will open or stay closed, a study must be conducted to determine the prospective

ABP 1-2016
fault currents that are available at each device in the electrical system. To make this determination, the
following basic information is needed:
a) A one-line diagram of the electrical system
b) Voltage at various points in the system
c) Short-circuit fault currents at various points in the system
A simple electrical system may have a single power source, and analysis of such systems will usually be
simple and straightforward. Other, more complicated systems may have multiple power sources, requiring
more involved analysis. In either case, whether simple or complicated, the analysis for determining the
available fault currents will follow the same general approach.
The approach for determining available fault currents in a complex scheme is similar to that of the single-
source scheme, except that a number of factors must be considered. The system design engineer must
make sure that other factors such as fault current contribution from motors will require adjustments for
changes in X/R ratios and that the effect of power loss due to various cable-length impedances are all
accounted for and included in the analysis. In the more complicated schemes, there are a number of
different components in the electrical system that may impact the available fault current at each OCPD. The
analysis of how these various components impact the system design must be done by qualified system
design personnel.
In schemes involving both a normal utility power source and an alternate emergency generator power
source, the design engineer must work with the local AHJ to establish whether both the utility and the
generator power source, or just the generator power source, are to be considered in the analysis of the
available fault currents. In general, generators will typically have much lower available fault currents than the
normal utility source, making selective coordination somewhat simpler. There are, however, applications
such as large data centers and hospitals where the available fault currents from the generator power source
may be quite high.
Early discussions between the design engineer and the local AHJ will typically surface the appropriate
approach to take in addressing these options, during the actual system design phase.
4) Select OCPDs for selective coordination
At this point in the design of the system, the design engineer may preliminarily select OCPDs that satisfy the
requirements for being able to appropriately interrupt fault currents and provide protection to limit damage.
The next step in the design process is to examine whether these preliminarily selected devices will also
selectively coordinate. For this discussion, we determined that selective coordination of all devices
connected on both the normal utility and the emergency generator power sources are required by the local
AHJ.
a) Start at the smallest device and work from the bottom up
To begin the analysis, start with the smallest device that is the farthest-downstream point of the utility
system. Using the fault current available to this device from the short circuit study, examine if this
downstream device will coordinate with the device that is immediately upstream from it. This
examination may be done by looking at both TCCs and/or by short-circuit selective coordination tables,
provided by the manufacturers of the devices. Be aware, however, that since changing one device
sometimes requires changing upstream and/or downstream devices, the designer must appreciate that
it is an iterative process.
b) Use TCCs and short-circuit selective coordination tables
TCCs may be solely used when the fault currents are relatively low and the trip response time of the
devices are relatively long (hundreds of milliseconds or longer). In this case, on a single plot, overlay the
TCCs for both the downstream and the upstream devices. On the fault current axis, locate the value of
the available fault current at the downstream device. At this fault current value, determine if the
upstream device can be set to remain closed, either via adjustable pickup or time-delay settings, while

ABP 1-2016
allowing the downstream device to open. If these two devices are selectively coordinated, there will
typically not be any overlap in their TCC plots.
The available fault current at the downstream device may be sufficiently high that, when plotted with the
TCC of the upstream device, it may not be clear from looking at the TCC plots if these two devices will
selectively coordinate. There may be partial overlap of the curves in some regions.
When there is overlap in the TCC plots of two devices, selective coordination tables should be used to
determine if coordination is still possible at the available short circuit fault current levels. Most
manufacturers of OCPDs provide these tables along with detailed instructions for using them. In general
with these tables, the first step is to find the downstream device, and then locate the first upstream
device that will coordinate at a fault current value that is equal to or greater than the available fault
current at the downstream device. Most tables will typically show a maximum value up to which the
combination of these two devices will coordinate.
c) Use available software tools to speed up the analyses
Depending on the types of OCPDs selected, and the level of complexity of the system being designed, it
should be evident that this iterative design effort may become time-consuming and error prone and
produce somewhat subjective results. In recent years, as the NEC [18] requirements for selective
coordination have become more widespread, design engineers have recognized the need to take
advantage of various new tools to simplify and improve the efficiency of the design efforts.
As a result, third-party software companies now make available the TCCs and selective coordination
tables in various electronic media, such that the current data plots and lookup table results can be
manipulated using software. To guide the calculation of the available fault currents in a short circuit
study, third-party calculator-type software is now available. These calculators allow the designer to enter
just some key, basic information that describes the configuration of the system, and then the software,
with built-in formulas, does the required numerical operations and provides the desired calculated
results.
Electronic tools such as these serve to simplify and speed up the potentially time-consuming portions of
the design process, freeing up design engineers to focus their skills on much more important non-
arithmetic considerations that typically need much more attention and deliberation. It can be anticipated
that third-party software companies will continue to refine and enhance these tools as the NEC
requirements become even more widespread.
d) Mixing of OCPDs
The design engineer may select OCPDs that may seem well suited for satisfying the requirements of the
short circuit study, but may not be the best choice for selective coordination. As a result, the system
may have a mixture of OCPDs of different types—circuit breakers or fuses. In addition, the design may
have devices of the same type but from different manufacturers. This scenario is particularly likely when
an existing facility is being remodeled or expanded.
Systems with a mix of fuses and circuit breakers present additional coordination challenges. The mixing
of multiple brands of circuit breakers may cause limitations in calculating the coordination levels needed
for the system.
Fuse manufacturers provide TCCs for their fuses. When used according to manufacturer
recommendations, coordination assessment for faults whose magnitudes are below where the upstream
fuse crosses the 0.01 second axis on the TCCs may be accessed with TCCs alone. However, when
fault currents are below the 0.01 second crossing for both fuses, then the fuses may be operating in
their current and energy limiting range and hence the coordination tables or recommended ratios
provided by the manufacturer should be used. However, at the time of this writing, fuse coordination
tables and ratios apply only to one manufacturer at a time. Guidelines on how to assess coordination
across fuses made by different manufacturers do not exist at this time. Hence, any system implemented
in this manner should use replacement fuses of the same type, brand, and size as the fuse being
replaced.

ABP 1-2016
Similarly, when fuses are used downstream of circuit breakers, coordination may be ascertained with
the TCCs alone as long as the available fault current does not exceed the instantaneous pickup of the
upstream circuit breaker shown on the TCCs. When fault currents exceed the upstream circuit breakers
pickup, coordination may still be possible. However, more thorough analysis may be required. In some
cases, analysis may be performed via the peak let-through current method described earlier in this
document. When that situation is encountered, the circuit breaker manufacturer should be contacted for
additional information.
When fuses are on the line side of circuit breakers, similar complexities arise. The let-through energy of
a circuit breaker may or may not be enough to melt an upstream fuse. However, manufacturers of
neither circuit breakers nor fuses commonly provide sufficient information to allow the required analysis
to be performed by system design professionals. When coordination of fuses on the line side above
circuit breaker combinations must be analyzed beyond where the fuse crosses the 0.01 second axis of
the TCC, the circuit breaker manufacturer should be consulted.
Another situation that limits the availability of coordination tools is the mix of multiple brands of circuit
breakers. Coordination in the short- and long-time range may be verified by the TCCs. However, in the
instantaneous range, coordination tables are recommended, and at this time, like fuses, no cross-brand
coordination tables are provided by any of the manufacturers.
5) Optimize the design
Depending on how complex the electrical system is, the design engineer will likely find that there are points
in the analysis that the selection of devices may present possible contradictions for decisions in system
protection, arc flash reduction, selective coordination, or even personnel safety. The designer may be faced
with iterative design changes by making tradeoffs in the types of devices to satisfy NEC requirements and
customer specifications, in addition to maintenance considerations.
Therefore, the next key step in this process is to gather all the resulting data from the various analysis of the
short circuit studies, the selective coordination analysis, and any other relevant systems data, and then attempt
to optimize the design of the overall system. While there are obviously no foolproof steps to ensure that every
possible system configuration can be optimized, there are some basic guidelines that, when followed, will
typically result in a system design that takes into consideration many of the key design, implementation, and
maintenance concerns.
The optimization process will involve an iterative look at some possible ways to streamline the final results—with
approaches such as simplifying the original design, reducing the fault currents, reviewing the selection of
OCPDs, and a focus on any special equipment application requirements.
5.1 Simplify the One-Line Diagram

5.1.1 Divide Larger Loads into Smaller Loads
Where possible, split up larger loads into smaller loads such that the resulting fault currents will be lower due to
use of smaller supply transformers. The lower fault currents may result in smaller protective devices and
conducting cables, etc., thereby making selective coordination simpler. The tradeoff may be things such as
more space, possibly higher (or lower) total costs for the smaller load devices, and more involved wiring for
control schemes.
5.1.2 Reduce the Number of Levels of Protective Devices

The lower the number of levels of OCPDs, the simpler selective coordination becomes. Figures 22 and 23
demonstrate this approach.

ABP 1-2016
Figure 22 Three levels of selective coordination Figure 23 Simplified scheme with two levels of
required selective coordination
In figure 22, Panel-2 and Panel-3 are supplied, in series, with power from Panel-1, resulting in three levels of
devices. The same number of panels may be re-configured, as shown in figure 23, into a two-level scheme,
thereby simplifying the selective coordination levels.
5.2 Reduce the Available Fault Current

5.2.1 Increase the Impedance of the System
Conductors used in distributing power from sources to loads add resistive and inductive impedance to the
system. Increased impedance will lower available fault current at the end of the conductors. In some cases,
using longer conductors or dividing circuits into multiple smaller circuits will reduce fault current at different
points in the circuit. Lower fault current may allow for easier coordination.
Longer conductors may have a slight effect on voltage drop and may increase the cost and complexity of the
installation. However, the increased cost may be offset by the ability to use lower cost protective devices or a
simpler distribution topology. In all cases, the engineer must evaluate the balance of increasing impedance (to
reduce fault currents) and proper voltage regulation of the system.
The conductors that connect the various electrical equipment and devices in the system inherently add
impedance. The more impedance, the lower the available fault currents will be and the simpler selective
coordination will be. Equipment may be relocated, for example, such that longer cable runs are required. The
tradeoff for longer cables will be their added costs, but these costs may be offset by the smaller and less costly
OCPDs that may now be used to handle the reduced fault currents. Note that whenever sizing cable conductors,
in addition to selective coordination requirements, voltage drop and NEC and/or local code derating factors must
also be considered. In all cases, the engineer must evaluate the balance between increasing impedance (to
reduce fault currents) and proper voltage regulation of the system.
The most effective way to reduce available fault current in the system is often by using step-down or isolation
transformers.
5.2.2 Use Step-Down or Isolation Transformers

Transformers are used within commercial and industrial low-voltage power systems to reduce utilization voltage
from 480 or 600 volts, typically used for large machinery, to 120/208 or 240/120 volts, used for smaller
machinery, lighting, and general-purpose branch circuits. Transformers have a significant effect on coordination
in multiple ways:
1) They create a separately derived system where the transformer’s impedance becomes the main
determinant of maximum fault current. Adding a transformer, either step-down or isolation (same voltage
on both primary and secondary sides), can reduce the downstream available fault current from tens of
thousands of amperes to only a few thousand amperes depending on the transformer size and

ABP 1-2016
impedance. The maximum possible available fault current on the secondary side of any transformer is
equal to the rated secondary current divided by the transformer’s impedance (noted on the transformer
in percent), regardless of the available fault current on the primary side.
2) They have a winding-turns ratio and a voltage ratio that determines the secondary voltage from primary
voltage and the primary current for a given value of secondary current. This “reflected” current from
secondary to primary is important to proper selection of OCPDs.
3) They have winding configurations (typically delta-wye) that cause secondary single-phase faults to
appear as smaller magnitude multiple phase faults on the transformer’s primary conductors.
In addition, the primary main feeding the transformer and secondary main fed from the transformer do not need
to be selective with each other. The NEC [18] specifically provides an exception for this device combination and
consideration of the effect on system reliability shows that the effect on delivery of power to loads is the same
regardless of which OCPD opens, or if both open. Both, however, need to be selective with the OCPD above
and below them. See figure 24 for illustration of coordination needs around a transformer circuit.
The transformer ratio may be calculated by dividing the rated primary voltage by the secondary primary voltage.
For a 480 V to 208 V transformer, the turns ratio is 2.31. This means that any balanced three-phase current on
the secondary side conductors is reflected on the primary side conductors 2.31 times smaller. For example, a
10,000 A three-phase balanced fault on the secondary side would be fed by a 10,000/2.3 to 1 (4,329 A) fault
current on the primary side. Transformers also have a winding-turns ratio, defined as the ratio of wire turns in
the primary winding to the number of turns in the secondary winding (N1/N2). This ratio determines the voltage
and current ratio for a single-phase transformer and the winding current and winding voltage ratio in a three-
phase transformer.
The typical distribution transformer has a delta primary winding. In a delta winding, the current flowing through
each winding is not the same as the current flowing into the winding from the phase conductors. The current
from the phase conductors will divide into the winding by relationships determined by the three windings working
together.
Should be selective
with each other
Should be selective
with each other
Need not be selective

with each other
Should be selective
with each other
Should be selective
with each other
Figure 24 Coordination requirements for transformer primary and secondary devices

ABP 1-2016
The division of currents is seen in figure 25. The 3/3 factor affects how fault currents on the secondary circuit of
the transformer are seen by OCPDs on the primary side of the transformer.
A balanced three-phase fault is only affected by the transformer ratio as seen in figure 26. However, single
phase-to-phase and phase-to-ground faults are also affected by the delta-wye transformer winding
configuration. Figure 27 shows the effect of the winding configuration on a single-phase fault, and figure 28
shows the effect on a ground-fault on the secondary transformer circuit.
I phase
1.0A
I winding 3/3 =0.58A
I winding 3/3 =0.58A
Delta Winding Delta Current Phasors
Figure 25 Distribution of incoming phase currents into a delta primary winding
1.0/2.31 A 1.0 A
N1
1.0/4 A
1.0/2.31 A N2 3-phase Fault
1.0/4 A
1.0/4 A
1.0/2.31 A
1.0 A
For 480-208 V transformer
V ratio = 480/208V = 2.31
Turns Ratio = N1/N2 = 4 1.0 A
Figure 26 Delta wye transformer windings with balanced 3-phase fault
0.5/2.31 A 3  0.87 A
2
0.5/2.31 A 0.5/2.31 A
0.5/2.31 A 1-phase Fault
1.0/2.31 A
3
3  3  2A
3 2
0.87  0.58  0.5
Figure 27 Delta wye transformer windings with single phase-to-phase fault

ABP 1-2016
1.0 A
1.0 A/4
0A 1.0 A/4
1.0 A/4 1-phase to ground Fault

Primary current on two
phases equal to
secondary current
divided by turns ratio
Figure 28 Single phase to ground
In addition to the effects of the winding configuration, transformers affect available fault current on their
secondary side with their inherent impedance. Each transformer has characteristic impedance that may be
provided by the manufacturer’s product information or may be read on the transformer’s nameplate. This
impedance acts as a choke, limiting the maximum possible secondary fault current. To a lesser degree, the
current available at the transformer’s primary terminals affects the fault current available at the secondary side
of the transformer. Short circuit calculations can determine the precise fault current available based on both of
these factors, as well as the effect of conductor impedance in the circuit. However, dividing the secondary full-
load current by the transformer impedance and multiplying the result by 100 can conservatively estimate
secondary fault current.
The following formulas can be used to estimate fault current at the transformer’s secondary side if conductor
impedance and source fault current are ignored.
Maximum secondary fault current = 100  FLA / Z%

Where: Z% = percentage transformer impedance
FLA = Full Load Amperes
As an example, look at the estimated requirements or a 75 kVA transformer with 4% Z.
FLA = 75000 VA  208 V / 3 = 208 A

Maximum secondary fault current =
100  FLA / Z% = 20,800 A / 4 = 5,200 A

ABP 1-2016
Ignoring conductor impedances and fault current available from the source system, figure 29 shows the
coordination requirements at the various circuit breakers around a 75kVA transformer.
2,253A 3 
2,253A 1  -
1,300A 1  -G
480V
Delta
75kVA
4%z
208V
Wye
2,253A 3 
2,253A 1  -
1,300A 1  -G 5,200A 3 
4,528A 1  -
5,200A 1  -G
Figure 29 Coordination requirements for transformer primary and secondary devices based on unknown
high available primary fault current, known kVA, and known transformer impedance (the effect of
conductor impedance is ignored)
Understanding how transformer ratios, windings, and impedance affect coordination needs is required to
optimally assess coordination needs in a transformer circuit. Careful selection of transformer size and
impedance can help to provide coordination solutions or avert coordination problems. In some cases using 1:1
transformers to “choke” down fault current can facilitate coordination where high source fault current would have
otherwise made coordination difficult. For example, in the system illustrated in figure 29, if the 75 kVA
transformer were a 1:1, 480 V isolation transformer used in a system with 65 kA available, coordination
requirements could be simplified.
Branch circuit breakers in the panel fed by the transformer would have fault currents in the 2,253–1,300 A range
rather than a 65,000 A range to deal with.
5.2.3 Take Advantage of the Added Arc Impedance of Circuit Breaker Combinations
The current limiting and peak let-through current effects between OCPDs is described in some detail in section
4.2.2, Instantaneous or Short Circuit Region. In summary, most circuit breaker manufacturers provide selective
coordination tables or other tools that show the levels of coordination between specific combinations of line-side
and load-side circuit breakers. Design engineers should review this information to see if coordination at higher
current levels may be achieved.
5.3 Review Device Selection

5.3.1 Increase the Withstand Capabilities of the Upstream Line-Side OCPDs
The withstand capabilities of the upstream line-side circuit breaker should be selected to be as high as practical,
such that it can remain closed while a downstream circuit breaker opens. This can be accomplished by selecting
a larger-frame MCCB that has a higher instantaneous override trip level. By increasing the frame size of the

ABP 1-2016
upstream circuit breaker, from, say, a 1,200 A to a 2,000 A MCCB, most selective coordination tables will show
an increase in the level of fault current that a downstream circuit breaker will coordinate.
5.3.2 Change the Type of Circuit Breaker

Selective coordination tables will show that by changing from a MCCB to either an ICCB or a LVPCB that the
level of selective coordination with a downstream device will typically increase. This increase in the level of
selective coordination is achieved by the inherent higher withstand capability ratings required in the design
requirements of ICCBs and LVPCBs.
The tradeoffs may be higher costs and larger space for the ICCB or LVPCB, but these costs may be offset, for
example, by the option to use the ICCB or LVPCB to remain closed while supplying power to reduced number of
levels of OCPDs, as shown in figure 23.
5.3.3 Select Current Limiting-Type Molded Case Circuit Breaker

Where possible, current limiting-type MCCBs may be used for branch devices. Current limiting devices respond
rapidly and significantly limit the let-through current and, in doing so, coordinate better with upstream devices.
5.4 Special Equipment Application Requirements

5.4.1 Generator Protection
Generator manufacturers often supply their generators with circuit breakers on the output. These are typically
thermal-magnetic or simple electronic types with only adjustable longtime and instantaneous (LI) trip functions.
Consideration must be given to whether the generator circuit breaker will coordinate with downstream circuit
breakers. If the prospective fault current the generator can produce is below the maximum instantaneous trip
point of the circuit breaker, then coordination can be achieved, regardless of the type or brand of downstream
OCPDs.
If the prospective fault current that the generator can produce is above the maximum instantaneous trip point of
the circuit breaker, then the let-through current of the downstream circuit breaker must be considered using the
selective coordination tables provided by the manufacturer. This means that the downstream OCPDs will need
to be circuit breakers from the same manufacturer as the generator circuit breaker.
Consideration must also be given to the protection of the generator and to the careful selection of the protection
settings of any generator protective devices supplied by the generator manufacturer. For example, in
applications where the ratings required of the circuit breaker to protect the generator are such that it will not
allow selective coordination to be achieved with downstream OCPDs, it may not be necessary to change to a
different generator breaker. In this case, an allowance from the AHJ will be necessary to favor protection of the
generator over total selective coordination of the system.
There are applications where multiple generators are in place, and connecting and running multiple generators
in parallel, while ensuring short circuit protection and selective coordination, may become a significant
challenge. In such an instance involving a complex system, an external scheme involving differential relaying
may be necessary to provide adequate generator protection and selective coordination.
5.4.2 Automatic Transfer Switches

Electrical equipment and components not designed to interrupt high values of fault current are usually rated in
terms of withstand current. Withstand is typically defined as a high value of current that can be carried by the
equipment or components for a specific amount of time, or long enough for a specific OCPD upstream to clear
the fault. Short-circuit withstand ratings are commonly applied to distribution equipment (such as switchboards,
switchgear, and panelboards), busway, transfer switches, molded case switches, non-fused safety switches,
and others.
The application of transfer switches is a major consideration in the design of emergency, legally required
standby, and optional standby systems. Transfer switch short-circuit ratings must be appropriate for the
available fault current, the upstream OCPD, and the overcurrent device settings.
In all except healthcare facilities (covered under NEC 517), emergency and legally required standby systems
require selective coordination. If coordination is accomplished using short-time delays with circuit breakers, the

ABP 1-2016
transfer switches require a suitable short-time rating as well. Not all transfer switches are rated for use with short
time delays.
Transfer switches may have integrated overcurrent protection provided by fuses or a circuit breaker. For those
devices, the fuse or circuit breaker TCC, fuse ratio table, or circuit breaker short-circuit selective coordination
table may be used to determine selective coordination as with any separate overcurrent device.
Under the newer editions of UL 1008 [22] and CSA 22.2 No. 178.1 [23], a transfer switch that does not have
integral overcurrent protection will specify the fault current ratings for which it is qualified with one or more of the
following:
1) specific fuse
2) specific circuit breaker, without short-time rating
3) specific circuit breaker, with short-time rating
4) time duration without short-time rating
5) time duration with short-time rating
Past revisions of transfer switch standards allowed three-cycle testing, and the transfer switch would be marked
to be protected by “any circuit breaker.” This led to confusion regarding the proper selection of protective
devices. The current version of these standards eliminates this marking and provides more specific selection
criteria.
A transfer switch may have multiple types of ratings. These ratings must be evaluated based on the pairing of
the transfer switch with the immediate upstream OCPDs in order to achieve proper coordination. The withstand
ratings are marked for maximum available fault currents at maximum system voltages. The markings will either
specify maximum time duration or the type of protection associated with each withstand rating. If the rating is
accomplished using a specific circuit breaker, the manufacturer, type, and maximum ampere rating is included.
For withstand ratings requiring the use of specific fuses, the rating includes the fuse class and its maximum
ampere rating. The marking may also include short-time current ratings that include maximum time durations.
If the transfer switch does not have integral overcurrent protection, then it must be rated for the available fault
current and the overcurrent protection being provided for both the normal and alternate source feeders. The
following checks are involved in assessing the switch ratings and switch protection:
1) Determine the available fault current and system voltage at the normal and alternate line terminals of
the switch.
2) Select a switch that is rated for a fault current greater than or equal to that available fault current.
3) Check that the switch is rated for use with the type and maximum current rating for a circuit breaker of a
particular manufacturer as selected or the class and maximum current rating of a selected fuse.
4) If a circuit breaker is to use a short-time delay, the transfer switch must include a short time rating that is
suitable for use with the required short-time current setting.
If a transfer switch has integral overcurrent protection, its time-current characteristic needs to be reviewed since
it becomes an integral part of the selective coordination design. If the transfer switch short-time current rating is
higher than the available fault current, the instantaneous setting is not required to protect the switch.
Selective coordination can be achieved in a number of ways. Some approaches will require the transfer switch
to be rated for use with short-time delay functions. Other approaches such as locating the transfer switches
close to the served loads may result in lower available fault currents and simpler coordination between the
OCPDs. Applying more switches with lower continuous current ratings rather than a few large switches can
simplify the coordination and improve overall reliability.

ABP 1-2016
5.4.3 Busway
Manufacturers may state busway withstand in terms of current and time or in terms of a specific type of
protective device such as size and class of fuse. When protecting busway with circuit breakers with long delays
or oversized frames due to coordination considerations, it is important to verify that the bus is adequately
protected and will operate within its claimed withstand ratings. In some cases, it may be required to select a
larger bus size, different construction material, or different type of busway to ensure that its ratings are suitable
for the protective device ahead of the busway. Alternatively, OCPD selection may need to be changed to
provide suitable protection to the busway.
5.4.4 Arc Flash Energy

Selective coordination often requires upstream OCPDs to wait longer to enable downstream protective devices
to clear the fault. As protective devices permit fault currents to flow with intentional delay before the fault current
is cleared, the amount of potential arc flash energy increases the longer the fault current is allowed to arc. As a
result, a conflict is created: selective coordination involves having OCPDs remain closed during fault conditions,
while arc flash energy reduction requires these same devices to open as quickly as possible.
The OCPDs are required to operate quickly enough for all levels of available fault current to adequately protect
conductors and electrical equipment. However, while the level of arc energy that results in a selectively
coordinated system may be fully within acceptable levels for equipment protection from damage, this level of arc
energy may be very dangerous to personnel that may be working near that electrical equipment.
There are three documents that provide guidelines and/or requirements for some of the important factors that
should be considered when personnel are exposed to arc flash dangers.
 NFPA 70E Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace [8] recognizes that there are circumstances
that allow working on live, energized electrical equipment. As a result, recommendations and
requirements are defined for the levels of protective systems and apparatus that must be in place when
personnel are working near live energized electrical equipment. Strict guidelines are outlined in NFPA
70E for the various levels of personnel protective equipment (PPE) that must be worn by personnel in
certain hazardous situations.
 IEEE 1584 Guide for Performing Arc-Flash Hazard Calculations [9] provides guidelines for conducting a
formal arc flash study of the devices in an electrical system. A comparative study of an electrical system
that requires selective coordination versus one that does not require it will typically show that the
selectively coordinated systems require higher levels of PPE for personnel working on or near that
energized equipment utilizing circuit breakers (without arc-flash mitigation techniques). This comes from
the longer times that upstream circuit breakers are required to remain closed, while downstream devices
open, in order to meet selective coordination requirements.
 The NEC [18] added a new set of requirements in the 2011 edition for addressing arc flash energy
reduction in circuit breaker applications. These requirements were revised in the 2014 edition of the
NEC.
Note that since some jurisdictions may have adopted the 2011 edition and some the 2014 edition of the NEC,
the requirements from both editions are shown below for reference.
a) For the NEC 2011 edition, the original requirements are as follows:
240.87 Noninstantaneous Trip. Where a circuit breaker is used without an instantaneous trip,
documentation shall be available to those authorized to design, install, operate, or inspect the
installation as to the location of the circuit breaker(s).
Where a circuit breaker is used without an instantaneous trip, one of the following or approved
equivalent means shall be provided:
(1) Zone-selective interlocking
(2) Differential relaying

ABP 1-2016
(3) Energy-reducing maintenance switching with local status indicator
Informational Note: An energy-reducing maintenance switch allows a worker to set a circuit breaker
trip unit to “no intentional delay” to reduce the clearing time while the worker is working within an
arc-flash boundary as defined in NFPA 70E, 2009 [8], Standard for Electrical Safety in the
Workplace, and then to set the trip unit back to a normal setting after the potentially hazardous work
is complete.
The intent behind this new NEC requirement is that in cases where a circuit breaker may be too large or slow to
provide optimal arc flash protection, additional protection be implemented to ensure fast sensitive arc flash
protection. The alternate means shall be provided to reduce the fault clearing time while a worker may be within
an arc flash boundary of that circuit breaker. The three devices and technologies listed in this new NEC
requirement have been available in the electrical industry for several years now. The NEC requires the use of
these devices as a solution for arc flash energy reduction in certain circuit breaker applications.
b) In the NEC 2014 edition, the revised requirements are as follows:
240.87 Arc Energy Reduction. Where the highest continuous current trip setting for which the
actual overcurrent device installed in a circuit breaker is rated or can be adjusted is 1,200
amperes or higher, (A) and (B) shall apply.
(A) Documentation. Documentation shall be available to those authorized to design, install, operate,
or inspect the installation as to the location of the circuit breaker(s).
(B) Method to Reduce Clearing Time. One of the following or approved equivalent means shall be
provided:
(1) Zone-selective interlocking
(2) Differential relaying
(3) Energy-reducing maintenance switching with local status indicator
(4) Energy-reducing active arc flash mitigation system
(5) An approved equivalent means
Informational Note No.1: An energy-reducing maintenance switch allows a worker to set a circuit
breaker trip unit to “no intentional delay” to reduce the clearing time while the worker is working
within an arc-flash boundary as defined in NFPA 70E-2009, Standard for Electrical Safety in the
Workplace, and then to set the trip unit back to a normal setting after the potentially hazardous
work is complete.
Informational Note No. 2: An energy-reducing active arc flash mitigation system helps in reducing
arcing duration in the electrical distribution system. No change in circuit breaker or the settings of
other devices is required during maintenance when a worker is working within an arc-flash
boundary as defined in NFPA 70E-2012, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace.
In order to maintain selective coordination in some applications, an upstream main circuit breaker may be
chosen that does not have an instantaneous trip function. In these cases, if this main circuit breaker were to
experience a short-circuit condition, it would remain closed for its set delay time. And the longer it takes to trip,
the higher the arc flash risk.
As a result of these recommendations and requirements from the various standards, the design engineer’s
challenge is to meet the selective coordination requirements as specified in the NEC, while still implementing
devices that reduce arc flash energy hazards to personnel working near energized electrical equipment. There
are some types of OCPDs that can respond extremely quickly to a fault current. Their fast response of typically
less than one half-cycle occurs at very high short-current levels and limits the current and the corresponding

ABP 1-2016
potential arc flash energies to relatively low levels. On the other hand, for fault currents that are below the fast
response, current limiting levels of these devices, their operating time is appreciably slower and may actually
result in longer arcing time and arcing energies. So while fast-acting, current-limiting devices may seem an
obvious design preference, the design engineer must examine the actual available fault currents and select the
best type of OCPD for each application.
Therefore, in addition to the short-circuit fault current study for conductor and equipment protection and the
selective coordination study to minimize unnecessary power outages, the design engineer should also conduct
an arc flash study to identify the recommended PPE and other personnel safety considerations, and then select
devices that meet these various requirements.
5.4.5 Zone Selective Interlocking

Coordination between circuit breakers in the short time range and for ground faults is achieved with a
combination of nested pickup settings and time-delay bands. Figure 5.8 demonstrates three circuit breakers
achieving coordination using nested short time bands.
Nested time bands achieve coordination at a cost to arc flash hazard and equipment protection. The closer
circuit breakers are to the power source, the slower their selected response time and the less sensitive their
pickup levels will be. These slower response times and less-sensitive pickup settings will have a negative effect
on arc flash and equipment protection. Two circuit-breaker control schemes are possible to improve protection:
zone selective interlocking (ZSI) and bus differential protection, typically called by its ANSI designation of 87B
protection.
ZSI is the more commonly applied scheme for improving protection in low-voltage systems, as most advanced
electronic trips for LVPCBs, ICCBs, and many MCCBs will provide a ZSI option.
CURRENT IN AMPERES
1000
Fdr
Tie
TIME IN SECONDS
100
Main
10
Seconds
0.10
0.01100 1K 10K 100K 1M

Amperes
ZSI.tcc Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1
Figure 30 Three circuit breakers achieving coordination using nested short-time bands
The basic premise of ZSI is that a pair of circuit breakers establishes sufficient communication between the
downstream device and the upstream device such that the upstream device is aware when the downstream
device has sensed a fault that exceeds a ZSI-enabled threshold and is timing towards a trip. This information
allows the upstream device to change its time-delay setting to a slower time delay to allow the faster
downstream circuit breaker to fulfill its protection role. The upstream device operating at its slower setting

ABP 1-2016
provides suitable backup protection in case the faster circuit breaker does not operate properly or does not clear
the fault. ZSI allows each circuit breaker receiving the ZSI signal to operate faster for faults within its respective
zone of protection than it does when it is acting in a backup role to downstream devices. Figure 31 is a
simplified ZSI communication scheme for three circuit breakers.
Main Trip
ZS I signal to
Tie Trip
upstream CB
Fdr Trip
TCC shift caused
by ZSI signal
from CB below
Figure 31 A simplified ZSI communication scheme for three circuit breakers
Different manufacturers may provide different ways to achieve this function. In most cases, however, the net
result is very similar regardless of manufacturer. Figure 32 shows the same three circuit breakers of figure 30 at
their backup protection settings and at the faster “in-zone” protection settings.
CURRENT IN AMPERES
1000
TIME IN SECONDS
100
10
Seconds
Main Main In zone

Tie In Zone Tie
1 In Zone Fdr
Fdr
0.10
0.01100 1K 10K 100K 1M

Amperes
ZSI.tcc Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1
Figure 32 The three circuit breakers of figure 31 at their backup protection settings and at the faster “in-
zone” protection settings

ABP 1-2016
Figure 32 illustrates how the tie and main are able to provide faster protection for faults in their zone of
protection without any sacrifice in coordination. Coordination is not enhanced by short-time and ground fault
ZSI, but equipment protection is. Protection is improved by allowing the same coordination achievable with
nested time delays to be maintained while protection in the upper layers of the system is accelerated. The use
of ZSI may also reduce the severity of an arc flash because of the faster response time of the protective device
to in-zone faults.
There are some limitations to ZSI applications in complex systems with multiple sources and tie circuit breakers.
Manufacturers have different ZSI interconnection schemes and methods that may approach the complexities of
multiple source systems differently.
ZSI allows improvement in the speed of protection. In some product designs, it also improves the sensitivity
(lower pickup in amperes) of protective settings in upstream devices. In applications where it is deemed
important to provide more sensitive fault detection in an upstream bus, differential protection may provide an
alternative way to control one or more circuit breakers.
5.4.6 Bus Differential

Bus differential protection consists of a system that measures all the current into a zone and out of a zone. The
sum of entering currents minus the sum of exiting currents should always equal zero. A non-zero quantity is
indicative of current flowing outside of the expected circuit. Bus differential protection measures sources for a
bus and compares against loads; if the total of one does not equal the total of the other there is a fault within the
zone, i.e., there is a bus fault.
Bus differential protection is not often applied in low-voltage systems because of the complexity of the scheme
and the cost of implementation. The most common implementation requires a dedicated protective relay and
dedicated current transformers used only for the bus differential relay. Figure 33 shows the effect of bus
differential on a bus protected by zone-interlocked circuit breakers.
CURRENT IN AMPERES
1000
TIME IN SECONDS
100
10
Seconds
Main In zone
In Zone Tie
1
Fdr
87B (Differential)
0.10
0.01100 1K 10K 100K 1M

ZSI.tcc Amperes
Ref. Voltage: 480V Current in Amps x 1
Figure 33 The effect of bus differential on a bus protected by zone-interlocked circuit breakers
Bus differential protection should be able to provide sensitive and fast protection for a specific bus with no
negative effect on the coordination of other circuit breakers. In some cases, 87B protection may be the only way
to provide coordination in complex multiple sources systems without significant sacrifice in protection speed. A
detailed discussion of differential protection is beyond the scope of this publication.

ABP 1-2016
5.5 Field Adjustment

All the efforts that may go into designing a selectively coordinated electrical system will quickly be wasted if the
OCPDs are not properly set per the recommended settings from the coordination study. For example, in the
interest of erring on the side of highest fault current protection, most manufacturers will, as standard practice,
set their protective devices at the lowest, minimum pickup and trip time settings when they are shipped from
their manufacturing factories. These minimum pickup and trip time settings are usually not in line with those
recommended by the design engineer’s study.
There is usually an appreciable time lag between when the design engineer develops the settings for the
protective devices and when those devices arrive at the facility for installation and startup commissioning. It is
therefore critical that the settings developed by the design engineer be documented and properly communicated
to the personnel that perform the installation and startup of the electrical system. Setting of the devices as
specified should be verified.
5.6 Lifetime Selective Coordination

If circuit breaker selective coordination tables or fuse ratio tables were used, to maintain the selective
coordination throughout the life of the system, OCPDs of that type and from that same manufacturer will always
need to be used in that system.
Selective coordination may be affected by changes in the system. Protective device audits and tests should be
performed to ensure that changes to the system haven’t affected either selective coordination or arc flash
safety. Verify that the proper rating, brand, and type of each fuse are installed for each phase. Confirm that all
circuit breaker and protective relay settings match the analysis studies.
Selective coordination requires very thorough upfront analysis and design, the selection of protective devices
that considers the concerns of the local AHJ, the various requirements of equipment protection, and the impact
of device selection on the arc flash energies that personnel may be exposed to. These analyses must be done
by qualified personnel. Once completed, the results of the system design must be communicated to the various
personnel that will install and maintain the electrical system per the specifications of the design engineer.
For an electrical distribution system to be selectively coordinated, both an initial design phase and ongoing
monitoring of the system’s changes must be conducted by the appropriate qualified personnel.
It is recommended that the settings of circuit breaker electronic trip units and ground-fault relays be sealed and
that fusible switches be marked with the specific manufacturer and type of fuse to be installed in them.
6 Summary
In recent years, the 2005, 2008, 2011, and 2014 NEC [16, 17, 18, and 19] requirements for selective
coordination have changed the way engineers go about designing electrical distribution systems. Design
engineers must now look at the electrical system from a more comprehensive perspective. They must now
communicate even more with interested parties such as the local AHJ, equipment manufacturers, and system
installation and maintenance personnel.
The design engineer must be prepared to optimize an initial design by taking into consideration various results
from different analyses—short circuit analysis, selective coordination study, arc flash energy analysis—and
review any other equipment or facility data that may have a bearing on the final installation of the electrical
system. This design process is usually iterative in order to yield optimal results for addressing conflicts that
typically arise.
Manufacturers of OCPDs are actively seeking ways to expand the capabilities of their devices to meet the
continually increasing demands for safety, flexibility, and ease-of-use in the design, installation, and application
of their devices in electrical power distribution systems. They will continue to investigate and research innovative
ways and technologies to meet these demands, and users can expect that, while significant improvements have
been made over recent years, improvement in devices and analytical techniques will be ongoing.

ABP 1-2016
7 References
[1] International Electrotechnical Commission, IEC/TR 61912-2, IEC:2009(E) Edition 1.0, 2009, Low-voltage
switchgear and controlgear—Over-current protective devices—Part 2: Selectivity under over-current conditions
[2] Underwriters Laboratories, UL 489, UL Standard for Safety for Molded-Case Circuit Breakers, Molded-Case
Switches and Circuit-Breaker Enclosures, Tenth Edition, 2002
[3] Underwriters Laboratories, UL 1066, UL Standard for Safety Low-Voltage AC and DC Power Circuit Breakers
Used in Enclosures, Third Edition, 1997
[4] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, IEEE C37.100, Standard Definitions for Power Switchgear,
October 1992
[5] unused
[6] Ray Clark, Senior Application Engineer, Selective Trip Coordination with Modern Molded Case Circuit
Breakers, Siemens Technical Journal, August 2006
[7] Underwriters Laboratories, UL 1053, UL Standard for Safety for Ground-Fault Sensing and Relaying
Equipment, Sixth Edition, Dated October, 1999
[8] National Fire Protection Association, NFPA 70E, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace®, 2012
Edition
[9] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, IEEE Std 1584, IEEE Guide for Performing Arc-Flash
Hazard Calculations. 2002 Edition
[10] National Fire Protection Association, NFPA 99 Health Care Facilities Code, 2012 Edition
[11] National Fire Protection Association, NFPA 110, Standard for Emergency and Standby Power Systems,
2013 Edition
[12] National Fire Protection Association, National Electrical Code® Committee Report on Proposals, 2010
Annual Revision Cycle
[13] Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, IEEE 100 The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standard
Terms, Seventh Edition
[14] National Fire Protection Association, NFPA 70, National Electrical Code®, 1971 Edition
[20] National Fire Protection Association, National Electrical Code® Committee Report on Proposals, 2013
[21] National Fire Protection Association, National Electrical Code® Committee Report on Comments, 2013
[22] Underwriters Laboratories, UL 1008, UL Standard for Safety Transfer Switch Equipment, Seventh Edition,
2012
[23] Canadian Standards Association, CSA C22.2 No. 178.1, Requirements for Transfer Switches, 2007

ABP 1-2016
8 Informative Annex
The following is a list of papers on selective coordination that the reader may find useful.
IEEE Recommended Practice for Applying Low-Voltage Circuit Breakers Used in Industrial and Commercial
Power Systems (Color Book Series—Blue Book), IEEE Std 1015-2006, Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, January 2006
Larsen, Ed, A New Approach to Low-Voltage Circuit Breaker Short-Circuit Selective Coordination, Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Conference, 2008
Papallo, T., Valdes, M.E., Traditional Time-Current Curves Are Not Enough, Adding I2t Considerations, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Volume 49 Issue 1,
2013, Pages 264–274
Valdes, M.E., Dougherty, J.J., Advances in Protective Device Interlocking for Improved Protection and
Selectivity, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Volume
50, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 1639–1648
Valdes, M.E., Hansen, S., Sutherland, P. Optimized Instantaneous Protection Settings: Improving Selectivity
and Arc-Flash Protection, Industry Applications Magazine, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Volume 18 Issue 3, 2012, Pages 66–73
Valdes, M.E., Crabtree, A.J., Papallo, T., Method for Determining Selective Capability of Current-Limiting
Overcurrent Devices Using Peak Let-Through Current—What Traditional Time–Current Curves Will Not Tell
You, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Volume 46
Issue 2, 2010, Pages 603–611

Nema Abp1 - 2024-03-26

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

Nema Abp1 - 2024-03-26

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A NEMA Low-Voltage Distribution Equipment Section Document

National Electrical Manufacturers Association

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association i

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association ii

Senior Technical Director, Operations

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association iii

 Selective coordination: “Localization of an overcurrent condition to restrict outages to the circuit or

 Overload: “Operation of equipment in excess of normal, full-load rating, or of a conductor in excess of

Other relevant definitions:

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 1

Coordination: Localization of an overcurrent condition to minimize outages to the circuit or equipment

Example 1: A system that is selectively coordinated

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 2

Power Distribution Equipment

Figure 1 System is selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD

Power Distribution Equipment

Figure 2 System is selectively coordinated—fault at feeder level OCPD

Example 2: A system that is not selectively coordinated

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 3

Figure 3 System is not selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD

Figure 4 System is not selectively coordinated—fault at branch level OCPD

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 4

2 NEC Selective Coordination Requirements

(1) Coordinated short-circuit protection

 Emergency Systems in Section 700.27

1) Article 517—Health Care Facilities

517.17 Ground-Fault Protection.

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 5

517.30 Essential Electrical Systems for Hospitals.

3) Article 645-Information Technology Equipment

4) Article 695 – Fire Pumps

700.28 Selective Coordination. Emergency system(s) overcurrent devices shall be selectively

6) Article 701—Legally Required Standby Systems

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 6

7) Article 708—Critical Operations Power Systems

708.52 Ground-Fault Protection of Equipment.

2.2.1 Local Jurisdiction Interpretation and Enforcement

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 7

Figure 5 Code interpretation example

2.2.2 Overriding Requirements

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 8

Figure 6 Excerpt from NFPA 110-2013 Figure B.1(b)

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 9

3 Circuit Breaker Trip Response Functions

The response of LVCBs to fault currents is typically shown using TCCs.

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 10

In the overload region, the overcurrent device has an

In the instantaneous or short circuit region, the overcurrent

Figure 7 Typical TCCs for a low-voltage circuit breaker

3.1 Fixed Thermal-Magnetic Type Circuit Breaker

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 11

Figure 8 Typical TCC for a fixed magnetic pickup action

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 12

Figure 9 Typical TCC for an adjustable magnetic pickup action

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 13

3.3 Adjustable Electronic Type Circuit Breaker

Figure 10 Typical adjustable settings for circuit breakers

3.4 Short-Time Withstand Current Rating

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 14

Table 1 Typical ratings of LVPCBs vs. molded-case/insulated-case circuit breakers

Required UL 1066 [3] UL 489 [2]

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 15

© 2016 National Electrical Manufacturers Association 16