Arc Flash Labels/ Motor Control Center

Status
Not open for further replies.

nhee2

Senior Member
Location
NH
I came across an MCC with arc flash labels applied to individual buckets, with varying IE levels given, depending on the bucket. I've always understood that an entire MCC (downstream of the MCB) has a single IE level for all buckets / sections.

Are there situations (arc-rated gear?) where individual bucket/feeder IE levels would be different between sections of an MCC?
 

JoeStillman

Senior Member
Location
West Chester, PA
Arc-flash energy should be calculated on the line-side lugs and not allow for any protection by a main device. So different values in each bucket would be incorrect. They are all subject to the same line-side energy.
 

nhee2

Senior Member
Location
NH
thanks JoeStillman.

Regarding your comment on 'main device' - for MCC with a main circuit breaker, are you saying no credit can be taken when evaluating the downstream sections/buckets? For instance - one IE level in the section containing the MCB, and a different IE for all branch/feeder sections?
 

Jraef

Moderator, OTD
Staff member
Location
San Francisco Bay Area, CA, USA
Occupation
Electrical Engineer
The Incident Energy levels for something that shares the same interior air space, like an MCC lineup, should be the same through the lineup, because blast pressure from an arc fault incident anywhere in the lineup will be expressed through it. That would not change even if the MCC were labeled as Arc Resistant.

And just so you know, if it WERE Arc Resistant, it must state so with a label a fixed to each and every section with the specific wording “Arc Resistant Equipment” with the IE of the lineup. Some people have used other variations of the wording to get around the fact that their MCC was not qualified as Arc Resistant, usually because it failed the rather difficult testing requirements. There is no AR standard for LV MCCs yet, so the standard that is use for those that have it is the IEEE/ANSI C37.20 standard for Medium Voltage Gear and it’s a tough test standard to meet. It requires that blast pressure be relieved to the point of not creating any hazard to people standing in front of (or to the side or back of if added) the gear, no matter where the incident takes place in the gear. This is measured by placing white cotton blocks around all openings, setting off an arc flash event inside and if any of the cotton turns brown, you fail. So there is no way this can be effectively applied separately to individual buckets at different levels.

Labels in buckets are not the same as the overall Arc Resistant label and not required, so someone likely did that on their own, not the manufacturer, or it’s just for general information. But for the purposes of determining the PPE when a door is opened, it is the IE at the main incoming terminals that counts.

The only time a Main OCPD can be used to reduce the IE is if you have fast acting Current Limiting fuses or if you have a main breaker with “Maintenance Mode”. MM is a separate setting with much lower trip thresholds so that the clearing time is reduced, effectively lowering the IE. But the levels required will put the breaker at risk for nuisance tripping. So you have one set of normal coordinated trip settings, then with a switch closure, a n electrical worker changes to the Maintenance Mode lower settings, but only while working on the equipment.

Something I just remembered regarding that last statement about MM breakers. I recently bid a job for a national food producer where the corporate standard for MCCs was calling for MM breakers on all feeders of 400AF or higher. Ostensibly that could be used to reduce the IE on the DOWNSTREAM equipment when engaged. But it would not reduce the IE in that MCC bucket because it would be based on the line side IE. But it made me wonder if someone misinterpreted that on yours?
 
Last edited:

wbdvt

Senior Member
Location
Rutland, VT, USA
Occupation
Electrical Engineer, PE
Agreed with everything said. I have been doing arc flash studies for over 10 years and am amazed sometimes at what I see done. That is clearly incorrect on the labels on each MCC cubicle and I would question the accuracy and validity of the entire study. This could lead to a serious injury if the line side of the MCC main breaker is something like 20 cal/cm2 and the line side and mcc cubicles are labeled at something like 1 cal/cm2. For the safety of individuals working there, this study needs to be reviewed and redone by a competent arc flash engineer.
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
PE (Retired) - Power Systems
Mains typically will not have INST trips...
Maybe in your world.

No Instantaneous trip is old school system design. In my experience over the past decades, probably 80% of the mains, especially molded and insulated case construction, have Instantaneous settings up to an including 5000A devices. About the only time I see this no I functions is on systems where the design(er) has not fundamentally changed from the days of iron frame breakers with dashpot or early generation solid state trip units.
 

zog

Senior Member
Location
Charlotte, NC
Maybe in your world.

No Instantaneous trip is old school system design. In my experience over the past decades, probably 80% of the mains, especially molded and insulated case construction, have Instantaneous settings up to an including 5000A devices. About the only time I see this no I functions is on systems where the design(er) has not fundamentally changed from the days of iron frame breakers with dashpot or early generation solid state trip units.

Agree, but the question was specifically asked about power CB's, not molded case
 

MRKN

Member
Location
California, USA
Thanks, yes of course, I was tired when I used that example.

Let me re-phrase my question.

If the ETAP analysis shows the interrupting device as the main circuit breaker (which is properly coordinated), is there any reason you cannot take credit for it. That would be news to me. The way it was phrased by Jraef, he made it sound like a code violation.
 

nhee2

Senior Member
Location
NH
Thanks, yes of course, I was tired when I used that example.

Let me re-phrase my question.

If the ETAP analysis shows the interrupting device as the main circuit breaker (which is properly coordinated), is there any reason you cannot take credit for it. That would be news to me. The way it was phrased by Jraef, he made it sound like a code violation.

In my earlier question I was considering a multisection MCC whose MCB is in Section 1, and serves as Service disconnect. In this case, I would have thought that downstream buckets/breakers in sections 2 - X would have a different IE level than Section 1, because the main would trip.

Is this a case where an arc event in the downstream section might propagate through the MCC to the line terminals of the MCC?
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
PE (Retired) - Power Systems
If the ETAP analysis shows the interrupting device as the main circuit breaker (which is properly coordinated), is there any reason you cannot take credit for it.

Many, if not most, interpretations depend on the arcing event propagating to and engulfing the main device, effectively shorting around to its source side, before the main device clears the fault.

This is easy to see in a wall mounted panelboard where the arc occurs inside of a relatively small enclosure. It is a only little harder to imagine in a commercial grade switchboard where there is no barrier, of any type, between the wiring areas, feeder devices, the main device, and the source connection. It maybe hard to envision in a LV MCC where the fault in one bucket would need to move into the vertical section and then cross over to the main device, but there is no way to say it won't without fully understanding the internal construction of the MCC. It is fairly easy to see how individually compartmented power circuit breaker switchgear might slow down the arc propagation sufficiently to allow a main device enough time to clear the fault.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top