Video- testing a 100kcal suit

In my experience most of the arc flash incident energies above 25cal/cm^2 are due to lower amounts of fault current that last for a long time. If studies were not typically using a 2 second cut off you could almost never work on the secondary of many, if not most, customer owned 208Y/120V transformers. Arc flash protection should not be considered lightly.
 
Has something changed since I last took a 70E class ten (or so) years ago? At the time, the whole reason for not allowing energized work beyond 40kcal wasn't that there weren't suits that could handle it, but rather that the shockwave would throw you across the room, causing traumatic head injuries.
 
Has something changed since I last took a 70E class ten (or so) years ago? At the time, the whole reason for not allowing energized work beyond 40kcal wasn't that there weren't suits that could handle it, but rather that the shockwave would throw you across the room, causing traumatic head injuries.
That’s what I was told too in the 70e classes I took.
 
Has something changed since I last took a 70E class ten (or so) years ago? At the time, the whole reason for not allowing energized work beyond 40kcal wasn't that there weren't suits that could handle it, but rather that the shockwave would throw you across the room, causing traumatic head injuries.
There is no industry accepted way to calculate arc blast force.
You were taught old wives tales to make sense of an arbitrary cutoff point not based on science.
The 40cal level was for the task tables where an official study had not been done and they wanted a extremely large margin of safety. Early versions of NFPA70E had 65Cal as the cutoff.

Arc flash safety training should be redone or at least updated every 3-5years.

As I stated above, most of the time the 40cal level is exceeded is because the fault current was so low the protective device took a long time to open as opposed to a sudden large explosion.
 
I agree with Jim Dungar. 100 cal arc suits have been available for a long time. The 40 cal/cm2 upper limit was always mostly arbitrary. 50 cal/cm2 over two seconds is not the same event as 50 cal/cm2 in 2 cycles. Unless something has changed in the latest version, there is nothing in NFPA 70E that explicitly states that no work can be done if the calculated energy exceeds 40 cal/cm2. There are some situations where there is little option - such as voltage testing to confirm de-energization.
 
Unless something has changed in the latest version, there is nothing in NFPA 70E that explicitly states that no work can be done if the calculated energy exceeds 40 cal/cm2.
This is an arbitrary point, based on task table PPE options, adopted by many companies. Some of these company policies go back 20 years and have not been updated to present standard industry practices.
 
Side note :About ten years ago they installed wonder full GE outdoor 13.2KV dual service with tie breaker that had a 124 CAL rating. To make it even more dangerous they had ventilation screen at eye level where you had to perform switching. Don't want to think what a persons face would look like in a serious Arc blast even if wearing 100 CAL PPE. That was the third GE switchgear that had to have heaters installed inside of 13.2 gear to reduce condensation. At first GE site we installed electric heaters in switchgear room to bring temperature up to around 65 degrees on coldest days but still could smell not sure of proper term but corona. Once heaters were installed inside of switchgear odor disappeared. At the place I retired from we had 40 CAL PPE for four building 13.2 KV gear and 50 CAL in a another building. Both sets appeared to be close in weight.Best thing the head gear had battery operated cooling fans.
 
2 second cut off
This gets into the question of "how long would someone stand in front of an exploding panel".
I get that when you're in tight quarters you might not have a choice, but for the demonstration at least, I have to imagine most people wouldn't just stand still for 5 or 10 seconds there when their face was being obliterated by plasma. Not sure that's a scientific opinion, maybe it's wrong.
 
This gets into the question of "how long would someone stand in front of an exploding panel".
I get that when you're in tight quarters you might not have a choice, but for the demonstration at least, I have to imagine most people wouldn't just stand still for 5 or 10 seconds there when their face was being obliterated by plasma. Not sure that's a scientific opinion, maybe it's wrong.
I dont think you are wrong at all. I would say there would be forces at work to help assist in a persons movement! both from the blast and our natural reactions....if they are functioning.
 
This is an arbitrary point, based on task table PPE options, adopted by many companies. Some of these company policies go back 20 years and have not been updated to present standard industry practices.
The new standard industry practice that I have seen (since 2022 ish) is if I as a 'outside contractor' need work while energized on a 480V anything someone at the plant needs to authorize it in writing and a signature. For plant mechanics I think its any voltage while energized.
I have yet to get that signature for my work at any the plants I have been to, they all started doing this about the same time. They just pay for a shutdown.
at one plant as part of the first planned shutdown after that policy each 480 panel got a indicator device installed in it so you can tell when its energized.
 
The new standard industry practice that I have seen (since 2022 ish) is if I as a 'outside contractor' need work while energized on a 480V anything someone at the plant needs to authorize it in writing and a signature. For plant mechanics I think its any voltage while energized.
I have yet to get that signature for my work at any the plants I have been to, they all started doing this about the same time. They just pay for a shutdown.
at one plant as part of the first planned shutdown after that policy each 480 panel got a indicator device installed in it so you can tell when its energized.
Large customers understand the financial risks of working hot, so it’s much easier to convince them when a shut down is needed.
 
Large customers understand the financial risks of working hot, so it’s much easier to convince them when a shut down is needed.
The plant guy said the cost of all those 'hot detectors' or whatever they are in the 16 panels cost less than one hot suit. We also put in a new panel next to an existing so they could shutdown one line but keep the other on, seemed like of a lot of work. But worth it to them to keep one line on while the other was in maintenance mode.
 
Top