1402 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31, NO.

6, NOVEMBERDECEMBER 1995

Edward W. Kalkstein, Member, IEEE, Richard L. Doughty, Fellow, IEEE,

Alfred E. Paullin, Member, IEEE, James M . Jackson, and Jeny L. Ryner

Abstract- One cause of serious injuries to electrical workers

in the petrochemical industry is flash burns from arcing faults
in medium-voltage metalclad switchgear. First introduced in
Europe, arc-resistantswitchgear designs are now being marketed
in North America to eliminate this potential cause of injuries
by containing the arc byproducts and venting the gases in a
safe manner. This paper discusses current worker safety regda-
tions, the arcing fault process, standards governing arc-resistant
switchgear, and switchgear design, application, and casthenefit
considerations. One manufacturer’sexperience testing a new arc-
resistant switchgear design is included.

I. INTRODUCTION

T HE CONTINUING emphasis on worker safety has led

to many enhancements in electrical equipment, such as
arc resistant metalclad medium voltage switchgear shown
pictorially in Fig. 1. While there may be several choices
available to those users concerned about arcing faults, arc-
resistant switchgear has emerged as one of the primary design
options to be evaluated.
The following discussions review the general environment
which has caused arc-resistant switchgear to emerge as well CJ. ‘p;
as some of the theory on arc energy and why this is a safety
Fig. 1. Arc-resistant switchgear.
concern. The discussions on design and testing sprround the
evaluations of prototypes designed, built, and tested by one
American manufacturer. common use of switchgear that was arc-resistant. The arc-
resistant switchgear had to contain and safely vent arc products
from an arcing fault inside the switchgear. This was a departure
11. CURRENT ELECTRICAL SAFETY ENVIRONMENT
from accepted switchgear design practices in North America.
In the mid 1980’s a few progressive petrochemical com- ANSI-designed switchgear tyically reflects the manufacturer’s
panies in North America recognized the arc flash hazard and desire to provide a product with features, such as extra phase
began stressing the importance of electricians and operators spacing, thick insulation, and heavy construction, that tend
wearing flash protection. Typically, protection consisted of a to reduce the likelihood of a flashover or burn-through. IEC
flame-retardant coat and pants to protect the body plus a hood designs typically are smaller in overall size for comparable
or face shield to protect the head. ratings with closer phase spacing, and are designed for specific
During the same time period, companies became more glob- application with little over capacity. For example, ANSI
ally focused and were exposed to European, Asian, and South requires medium-voltage switchgear to be constructed with
American standards and practices. One observed difference, 11-gauge steel outer panels and partitions while IEC Standard
in countries with IEC-based equipment standards, was the 298 states that enclosures be metallic and provide protection
Paper PID 95-17, approved by the Petroleum and Chemical Industry against live parts. Panel thickness and construction material
Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society for presentation at influence the possibility of burn-through and potential injury
the 1994 Petroleum and Chemical Industry Technical Conference (PCIC to personnel.
’94), Vancouver, BC, Canada, September 12-14 Manuscnpt released for
publicaQon May 1, 1995 In spite of the relatively low probability of an arcing
E W Kalkstein and R L Doughty are with E I duPont deNemours & C O , fault in properly designed and maintained switchgear, injuries
Wilmington, DE 19880 USA from arcing faults in switchgear have continued. The large
A E Paulin, J J Jackson, and J L Ryner are with General Electnc C O ,
Burlington, IA 52601 USA majority of injuries due to arcing faults occur in low-voltage
IEEE Log Number 9414393 equipment. However, when arcing faults occur in metalclad
0093-9994/95$04.00 0 1995 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KALKSTEIN et al.: SAFETY BENEFITS OF ARC-RESISTANT METALCLAD MEDIUM-VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR 1403

medium-voltage switchgear where energy levels are high, free from hazard, but not necessarily efficient, convenient, or
there is a high potential for serious injury. Historically, most adequate for good service or future expansion of electrical
of the serious injuries have occurred in switchgear supplied use.” The concept of arc-resistant switchgear seems totally
from solidly grounded medium-voltage power systems that consistent with the above-stated purpose and intent of the
are common in the utility industry. The use of resistance- National Electrical Code. It is probably only a matter of time,
grounded, medium-voltage systems by many petrochemical until the concept is introduced into the Code.
companies has reduced the potential for serious injury due
to arcing faults.
Currently available industry injury statistics do not allow a B. OSHA Regulations
determination of what percentage of electrical burn injuries OSHA 1910 Subpart S (Sections 1910.302 through
are caused by arcing faults in metalclad medium-voltage 1910.308) contains design safety standards for electric
switchgear. Some data on the number of injuries due to electric utilization systems. Section 1910. 303(b)-Examination of
arcs in all types of equipment is available. For example, Equipment, states that “Electrical equipment shall be free
between 1985 and 1989, 82% of serious (OSHA recordable) from recognized hazards that are likely to cause death or
electrical injuries experienced by one major chemical company serious physical harm to employees. Safety of equipment
were burns from exposure to electric arcs. This experience shall be determined using the following considerations:
is similar to data reported by the French national electrical (v) Arcing effects (vii) Other effects which contribute to
utility, Electricite de France. Their recently published study of the practical safeguarding of employees using or likely to
electrical injuries over a 20-year period revealed that electric come in contact with the equipment.” Although no specific
arc burns accounted for 78% of the electrical injuries in provisions in the design safety standards require the use of
their company [l]. As awareness of the arc flash hazard arc resistant switchgear, the wording is certainly open to such
increased, more companies began requiring electrical and an interpretation in the future.
operating personnel to wear protective clothing when they Of more interest are the safety-related work practices con-
were operating or sacking breakers or otherwise exposed tained in Sections 1910.331 through 1910.335 which became
to potential arc burns. There was initial resistance to this effective in December 1990. The OSHA Instruction Standard
new requirement, but this resistance quickly eroded once the 1-16. 7 (July 1, 1991) which establishes policies and provides
reduction in injuries became apparent. The same chemical interpretive guidelines to ensure uniform enforcement, clarified
company mentioned above experienced a six-fold reduction that “Exposure to unexpected electrical energy release that
in injuries due to electric arc bums over the three year period could result in electric shock or burns or in an explosion
from 1990-1993 after introduction of the requirement to wear caused by an electric arc is covered by the standard for Electri-
arc flash protective clothing. cal Safety-Related Work Practices.” Safeguards for personnel
With the current emphasis on metrics (performance mea- protection are covered in Section 1910.335(a). The general
surements) and continuous improvement, companies are now rule states: “Employees working in areas where these are
beginning to focus on root cause analysis to eliminate defects. potential electrical hazards shall be provided with, and shall
Continuous improvement in switchgear safety might imply use, electrical protective equipment that is appropriate for the
eliminating the arc burn flash hazard so that electrical per- specific parts of the body to be protected and for the work
sonnel are no longer exposed. Since it may be prohibitively to be performed.” Subpart 1910.335(a)(l)(v) further states:
expensive to totally eliminate all arcing faults in switchgear, “Employees shall wear protective equipment for the eyes or
one alternative may be to utilize arc-resistant switchgear. face wherever there is danger of injury to the eyes or face
from electric arcs or flashes or from flying objects resulting
from electrical explosion.” In the future, OSHA rules could
111. CURRENT REQUIREMENTS
REGULATORY
provide a legal basis for a liability claim against a company if
any employee is injured due to an arcing fault from medium-
A. National Electrical Code voltage switchgear.
Although there has been an increasing awareness of the In 1991 OSHA approached NFPA and requested the 70E
arc flash issue in Code proposals, the current edition of the Panel be reorganized to review 1910 Subpart S and update it
National Electrical Code, NFPA 70- 1993, contains no specific with the latest National Electrical Code requirements and the
provisions which require switchgear to be arc-resistant. In the safety related work practices used in industry. The work of the
interest of fire safety, Section 110-18 on Arcing Parts requires panel was completed in the fall of 1994 and became effective
only that “Parts of electric equipment which in ordinary February 7, 1995. NFPA 70E softens the requirements of
operation produce arcs, sparks, flames, or molten metal shall OSHA Section 1910.303(b). Clause 1-3.1 in Part 1 of 70E now
be enclosed or separated and isolated from all combustible states: “Examination-In judging equipment, considerations
material.” The purpose of the Code as stated in Section 90- such as the following shall be evaluated: . . . Arcing effects.”
l(a) is “the practical safeguarding of persons and property The safety-related work practices in Part 2 of 70E were also
from hazards arising from the use of electricity.” Furthermore, revised to more clearly identify the hazards of flashburn and
Section 90-l(b) clarifies that: “This Code contains provisions blast. Chapter 3 now includes the following clauses: 3-3.3
considered necessary for safety. Compliance therewith and Body Protection-Employees shall wear clothing resistant to
proper maintenance will result in an installation essentially flash flame whenever there is possible exposure to an electric

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1404 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL 31, NO. 6, NOVEMBER’DECEMBER 1995

arc flash. 3-3.4 Hand and Arm Protection-. . . Appropriate is now routinely certified by third party organizations like Un-
hand and arm protection shall be worn where there is possible derwriters Laboratories and Canadian Standards Association.
exposure to arc flash burns. Third-party certification not only provides verification of the
It is clear that the hazard of arc flash injuries is being switchgear meeting assigned ratings, but also addresses the
recognized by regulatory agencies and consensus standards safety aspects of a design.
organizations. In some parts of the world the use of arc A search of switchgear standards for arc-resistant design
resistance switchgear is common, but as of yet there are no and test requirements indicated that current editions of the
laws requiring its use. It is a business necessity to minimize following standards did not specifically address these issues.
employee liability by eliminating arc flash potential when e American National Standards Institute, Inc. (ANSI);
economically possible, and by insuring that employees wear e Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

appropriate flash protective equipment when the hazard cannot WEE);

be eliminated. Another indication of this trend is the current ac- e National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA);
tivity of the ASTM F-18 Working Group, which is developing * Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL).
a standardized test for measuring the resistance of protective The following standards addressed arc resistance.
clothing to arcing faults.
0 International Electromechanical Commission (IEC) 298

Annex AA & IEC 466 Appendix AA-Both of these

I v . HISTORYOF ARC-RESISTANT
SWITCHGEAR documents, titled “AC Metal-Enclosed Switchgear and
Since the 1950’s, improvements in dielectric materials and Control Gear For Rated Voltages Above 1 kV and Up
the development of smaller interruption devices have allowed To and Including 52 kV or 38 kV,” provide test set-up
a decrease in the overall size of medium voltage switchgear. and criteria for assessment of test results.
With smaller-dimensioned and higher-rated switchgear, the * Standards Association of Australia (SAA) 1136. 1 Appen-
probability of an arcing fault is somewhat higher in recent dix &This is an Australian Standard for low voltage
years 121, [N. switchgear and control gear assemblies which provides
The first evidence of arc-resistant switchgear being designed test conditions and criteria for assessment of test results
and marketed seems to have come from West Germany in the similar to the IEC standards. This standard does not
mid-1970’s [4]. The draft for IEC Standard 298 was prepared provide for various accessibility types.
in December 1976. It included testing recommendations for Canadian Standards Association (CSA) and Electrical
switchgear experiencing internal arcing. The E C standard and Electronic Manufacturers Association of Canada
was later used as the predominant standard to help generate (EEMAC) G14- 1-The document is titled “Procedure
EEMAC Standard G-14 in Canada. For Testing The Resistance Of Metalclad Switchgear
Failures of switchgear under arcing fault conditions have Under Conditions Of Arcing Due To An Internal Fault.”
been documented by a number of sources. At a Canadian EEMAC G14-1 addresses the safety of a switchgear
Utility in the summer of 1977, a serious switchgear fault design by defining in what areas around a unit protection
occurred which alerted utility people to arcing fault hazards. is provided.
The fault is believed to have been initiated when rain caused The areas of protection are broken down according to where
wetting of the bus insulation which led to tracking. This an electrician can work and be protected should an internal arc
developed into a low-value ground fault and ultimately into occur in an energized compartment. The types of accessibility
a full ground fault. The breaker was unable to interrupt are
the fault because the air in the breaker compartment was Type A-Arc-resistant protection from an internal arc
ionized. “When the breaker contacts opened, the fault simply only at the front of the switchgear;
transferred into a three-phase ground fault in the breaker * Type B-Arc-resistant protection at the front, back, and
compartment, which blew off the front panel and the front sides of the switchgear;
door of the breaker” [4]. A fire and second explosion resulted Type C-Arc-resistant protection at the front, back, sides,
and caused great danger to the staff and the firefighters at the and also between compartments within a cell and adjacent
scene. The entire switchgear was destroyed and power was cells.
lost for several days in the served area.
Both EEMAC and IEC standards define performance re-
Experiences such as these in Canada helped drive the quirements for arc-resistant switchgear and how tests will be
creation of the standard for arc-resistant switchgear EEMAC conducted to verify compliance. They do not specify how the
G 14-1. Today the Canadian marketplace is one of the world
switchgear will be constructed to meet the defined criteria.
leaders in the use of arc-resistant switchgear. Union personnel
Refer to Table I for a comparison of EEMAC and IEC
at one Canadian utility, for example, will not enter electrical
requirements.
rooms unless the included switchgear is arc-resistant.

v. APPLICABLE
PRODUCT STANDARDS VI. DESIGNCONSIDERATIONS
Traditional North American switchgear is designed, built, Although medium-voltage metalclad switchgear design fea-
and tested to applicable ANSIOEEE and NEMA standards. tures reduce the probability of arcing faults, they cannot be
Although not required, medium-voltage metalclad switchgear totally eliminated. The use of arc-resistant medium-voltage

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KALKSTEIN et ul.: SAFETY BENEFITS OF ARC-RESISTANT METALCLAD MEDIUM-VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR 1405

TABLE I
COMPARISON
OF EEMAC AND IEC STANDARD

BEMAC-GI4-1 IEC #298 & 466

Test Rated same as equip. Same
Current short time rating.
& Voltage: Closing peak-2.7xRMS. Closing peak 2.5xRMS.
Test Up to 25kA 1 sec. 160msec to prove
Duration: Above 25kA match pressure resistance.
service conditions. 1 sec to prove bum
through.
Arc
Initiation: 0.5" diameter Same
shorting wire.
Indicators: Black cotton cloth Black cotton cloth
150 gramslm' 150 grams/m2for
mounted in 150" x type A accessibility
150" frames. and 40 grams for type B
mounted in 150" x
150" frames.
Accessibility Type A arc resistant Type A switchgear
Types: at front only. restricted to author-
ARC INITIATIO_N POINT3
ized personnel.
Type B at front
and sides.
Type B unrestricted
including public.
OfHH 064-8 o g
Type C at front, back,
sides and between Fig. 2. Test-unit drawing.
compartments.
Indicator Type-A front. Type A facing surfaces the front door closed and latched to prevent the possibility of
Location: Type B front, back 30cm away. a fault while inserting the auxiliary tray.
and side. Type B facing surfaces
Type C kont, back, side lOcm away. In the primary cable termination compartment located at the
and adjacent compartment. back of the switchgear, the primary cables or bus duct must
Indicators placed verti- enter from below to avoid interference with the operation of
Indicators placed verti- cally facing where gas the explosion vents. If cables must come in from above, a rear
cally facing where gas is likely to be emitted,
is likely to be emitted, 2M high and also hori- extension of the frame is required. The primary cable or bus
lOcm away and 2M zontally 2M high 30-80 duct must be isolated from the switchgear to avoid transferring
high. cm from surfaces. the fault from the switchgear to another area. This will also
make sure that the explosion vents will operate quickly by
eliminating an additional path for the pressure to follow. The
rear covers of the primary cable termination compartment
switchgear minimizes the spread of an arcing fault to com- usually contain venting for cooling the bus. These vents are
partments in adjacent vertical sections, and protects person- equipped with a mechanical mechanism that will close and
nel and equipment surrounding the switchgear. Arc-resistant latch over the opening to prevent the escape of hot gases and
switchgear requires significant design modifications to the arcs so as to protect the persons in the area. The barriers that
standard medium-voltage metalclad switchgear. The following make up the primary termination compartment are reinforced
paragraphs describe the significant areas of change as depicted to withstand the pressure and high temperatures caused by
in Fig. 2. the fault. The compartment must contain the fault and vent
Each vertical section must contain only one breaker due to the pressure through the explosion vent on the roof while
the venting requirement of the compartments. An explosion- preventing the transfer of the fault to other compartments,
type vent is required for each of the compartments in which either by pressure or burn-through.
a fault may occur. These are the breaker/auxiliary transformer The breaker-compartment front door was redesigned to
compartment, the bus compartment, and the primary cable withstand the pressures caused by the fault. The latch system
termination compartment. As these explosion vents are not must be positive, and interlocked with the breaker racking
required in standard switchgear, a standard vertical section mechanism to ensure that the breaker door denies access
may contain as many as two breakers, or a combination of to the compartment except when the breaker is in the test
breaker and auxiliary transformer trays. position. Permissive access to the racking mechanism can only
In units where the auxiliary transformer trays are located in occur with the door closed. This will protect the operator
the front of the vertical section, the vertical section is limited to if a fault should occur. The upper compartment above the
one auxiliary transformer tray. The auxiliary transformer tray breaker was configured to allow the gases and pressure from
can only move from the disconnect to the connect position with the fault to escape through the explosion vent on the roof.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1406 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL 31, NO 6, NOVEMBERlDECEMBER 1995

I'HASk; . A TABLE I1
DESCRIFTION
OF EQUIPMENT
TESTED

Cable Compartment - 3000A Rating

Volume 1.87M3
Lower Rear Cover Openings
for caoling ventilation 0.049MZ
Roof Openings
for cooling ventilation 0.093M
PHASE. C Minimum Elechical Clearance 0-0- 101"
TRANSFORMER . NOTE:
a) PDRCALIBRATION: 0-to-Gnd. - 114"
GRWNDED JUMPGR
BOLTED A C R m
PHASBS Breaker Compartment - 3000A Rating
VOLTAGE
DMDER b) DRTPSIS: Volume 2. 14M3
FUSE WIRE ACROSS
. PIIASES Front Door Openings
for cooling ventilation 0.245M2
Fig. 3. Test circuit.
Roof Openings
for cooling ventilation 0.812M2

The breaker compartment front door usually contains venting

-
Minimum Electrical Clearance - 0-0 152"
(a-to-Gnd. - 152"
for cooling the breaker. These vents are equipped with a
mechanical mechanism that will close and latch over the Main Bus Compartment - 3000A Rating
opening to prevent the escape of hot gases and arcs so as to Volume 0.81 1M3
protect the persons in the area. As with the cable termination Roof Openings
compartment, the breaker compartment must withstand the for cooling Ventilation 0.054M
pressure and high temperatures caused by the arcing fault. Minimum Electrical Clearance -
0-0 101"
The main bus compartment was increased in size to reduce 0-to-Gnd. - 101"
the pressure on the barriers making up the bus compartment.
The ideal condition would be for its volume to be equal to that
of the breaker compartment or the cable compartment. As this
is not practical, the area must be increased to the maximum compartment passes through some type of bulkhead connector
available and barriers braced to withstand the pressure. The to prevent entry of the fault into the compartment.
compartment must contain the fault and vent the pressure
through the explosion vent on the roof while protecting VII. PROTOTYPE
UNIT TESTING
from transferring the fault to other compartments either by Prototype units were designed and built to achieve a Type
pressure or burn-through. The transfer of the fault from one C accessibility designation utilizing the EEMAC G14- 1 stan-
bus compartment to the bus compartment of the adjacent dard. To evaluate the design two test units were constructed,
vertical section is allowable based upon the assumption that a each having two cells. Each cell consisted of a main bus
worker following recommended safety procedures would not compartment, a breakerRT or CPT roll-out compartment, and
be working on an energized bus without adequate personnel a cable compartment. In agreement with G14-1, the cells
protection. In any event, the transfer of the fault between bus were functional units not previously tested and any intemal
compartments should be minimized by sealing the bus as it components were the same as used on typical standard design.
passes through the compartment wall supports. The test circuit was a three-phase wye-connected trans-
The explosion vent system must open quickly to reduce the former bank with the center point grounded, see Fig. 3.
amount of pressure built up in the compartment where the fault The test results are applicable to grounded and nongrounded
occurs. The quicker the explosion vent opens, the quicker the systems. A 40-kA-10-kV test circuit was chosen to test the
pressure is reduced. The design of the explosion vent should 750-MVA-rated switchgear. Each test was for one s which
provide a defined operating pressure to open the vent and combined pressure and burn-through as defined by G14-1. In
should be toleranced so as to provide the same protection from dl tests a 0. 5-mm diameter shorting wire was used to initiate
one compartment to the next. an arc between phases as illustrated in Fig. 2.
A low-voltage control compartment was provided in the Cotton indicators were fitted around the outside surface of
upper front portion of the vertical section. This provides a the compartment under test and directly in front of any point
place for relays, switches, terminal blocks and other control that hot gases may escape. Each indicator was a 150 mm-
devices. The barriers that make up this compartment must by-150 mm square piece of 150-g/m2-weight cotton mounted
be reinforced to prevent the entry of the fault from the in a frame with a 30-mm flange around all sides, front and
surrounding breaker or auxiliary compartments located below back.
and behind this compartment. All control wiring entering Table I1 provides dimensional information for the prototype
this compartment from the breaker or auxiliary transformer test unit. Table I11 provides compartment test results.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KALKSTEIN et al.: SAFETY BENEFITS OF ARC-RESISTANT METALCLAD MEDIUM-VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR 1407

TABLE I11 Test #2: The arc was initiated between phases on upper
TESTRESULTS
COMPARTMENT bus bars of breaker in the breaker compartment, which was
in the connected position. This compartment can also be used
for a PT or CPT roll-out tray.
Test Results: The door latch failed allowing arc products to
escape and ignite indicators. See Test #4 for repeat test.
Test #3: The arc was initiated between phases on the
main bus. The shorting wire was connected from one phase
to another at the connection where the riser bus is made. The
bus splice boots and access cover were replaced.
Test Results: The arc burned through the aluminum access
cover into the cable compartment. The test was repeated after
the panel was replaced with a hot rolled steel cover to prevent
bum-through. See Test #7.
Test #4: This was a repeat test to evaluate the breaker
compartment failure as described in Test #2.
Test Results: The door latch failed again similar to Test #2,
but after the test, evaluation revealed that the compartment
panel above the door was forced up by the pressure wave,
unlatching the door pins. See Test #5 for the repeat test and
results.
Test #5: This was a repeat test of Tests #2 and #4 after
A. Test Results
design changes were made. The panel above the door was
The test supply system had a nominal 750-MVA short circuit secured to the corner posts at more points using additional
capacity as documented by the calibration tests. Therefore, the bolts.
maximum theoretical power in a three-phase arc is 375 MW as Test Results: Parts of the switchgear remained secured,
discussed in the Appendix. For a three-phase arc power of 375 indicators did not ignite and vent covers closed as designed
MW, where the test system open circuit voltage is 10 kV, and on pressure.
the arc voltage drop is 2.75 V/mm, the maximum arc length Test #6: The arc was initiated between phases on the bare
achievable can be estimated by the following calculation terminals in the cable compartment. The compartment was
similar to the one used in test #1 except that a PT box and
VOC
Arc length = = 104.9 cm connecting bus were added at the top of the compartment. The
a&*vo phase-to-phase clearance in this test was 203 mm on the riser
where bus and produced the maximum three phase arc energy of 63
MW. The 51-mm-wide bus extension to the PT increased the
VOC= Open Circuit Voltage, 10 kV phase-to-phase clearance from 101 mm to 203 mm.
Vo = Voltage Drop per mm of Arc, 2.75 V/mm Test Results: Parts of the switchgear remkned secured,
indicators did not ignite and vent covers closed as designed
The physical arrangement and associated dimensions of busses on pressure.
and the grounded metal enclosure within medium-voltage Test #7: This was a repeat test to correct the main bus
metalclad switchgear limits the development of arc lengths and compartment failure as described in Tests #1 and #3. The
subsequent arc power from reaching this theoretical maximum aluminum access cover was replaced with a hot, rolled steel
value. cover.
The average three-phase arc power developed during the Test Results: The arc burned through the steel cover similar
various tests ranged from 45 MW to 63 MW, less than 20% to the burn-through on the aluminum cover.
of the maximum 3-phase arc power. The test case phase- Test #8: This was a repeat test on the main bus compart-
to-phase arc lengths, ranged from 101 mm to 203 mm and ment similar to Test #7 except the steel cover was replaced
produced average arc voltages in a range from 350 to 500 V. with a stainless steel cover.
Individualized test results are summarized below. Test Results: The arc did not burn through the stainless
Test #1: The arc was initiated between phases on the bare steel cover as in Tests #1, #3 and #7. Parts of the switchgear
load terminals in the cable compartment. The phase-to-phase remained secured, and the flame indicators did not ignite.
clearance was 101 mm, and closest phase-to-ground clearance The test program pointed out some additional design
was 114 mm. changes required for arc resistant switchgear. A 3000-A
Test Results: Parts of switchgear remained secured, indi- current rating typically requires a break in the flux path
cators did not ignite and vent covers closed as designed on surrounding the current conductors to avoid induction heating.
pressure. The arc burned through an aluminum psnel into the This is normally accomplished by replacing selected mild
main bus compartment. This panel was later replaced with steel panels with aluminum panels. However, the arcing fault
stainless steel to prevent bum-through. temperatures are too high for aluminum when such a panel

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1408 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31, NO. 6, NOVEMBEFUDECEMBER 1995

is close to the arc and they melt. The one-min bum-through 3 ) Another upgrade feature to be considered is mounting
rating was accomplished only after the aluminum panels were protective relays and circuit breaker operating controls
replaced with stainless steel panels which still provide the on separate panels and preferably in a remote control
nonmagnetic feature. room.
The pressure wave created inside the compartment by the
arcing fault pointed out the weak construction areas. Stan- IX. ALTERNATIVE
SOLUTIONS
dard switchgear construction addresses the need to withstand
In addition to the use of flash protection for personnel,
short circuit current forces, shipping, seismic, and installation
the following alternative solutions reduce the arcing hazard
stresses. Arc resistance adds a fifth variable, that of pressure
without the use of arc-resistant switchgear.
containment until the pressure relief panel opens. Extra bolting
was required to eliminate bulging of the side panels between
the standard bolt locations. A. Arc Detection
Several types of arc monitors are commercially available
VIII. APPLiCATiON CONSIDERATIONS which can be used to detect the presence of an arc and respond
Switchgear building designers are concerned with providing quickly to disconnect the power source. A photocell-type arc
safe and adequate access for maintenance and operation of monitor has a response time of 1 ms and when coupled with
the equipment. Provisions for future additions as well as modem, high-speed circuit breakers, can disconnect an arcing
equipment removal are also considered. Adequate ceiling fault in less than 30 ms. To avoid nuisance tripping and
height and clearance is typically provided to install cable tray, maintain system security, load current sensing is employed
conduit banks, lighting fixtures, ventilation ducts, etc. above in series to prevent operation from an irrelevant light source.
switchgear, control panels, and operating aisles. Another type of arc monitor employs a simple pressure
Past practice has been to assume that the probability of switch. This system has a much slower response time in the
an arcing fault in medium voltage switchgear is low. Spe- order of 10-20 ms plus breaker operating time. Even with
cific provisions were generally not included in the design their high-speed response time, these arc monitors are slow in
to deal with the high energy release of arc products. When comparison to the initial compression (pressure) phase time of
the decision is made to use arc-resistant switchgear, one is 5-10 ms to reach maximum peak pressure plus the expansion
consciously recognizing that an arcing fault may occur, and phase which adds another 5-10 ms, or 20 ms or less total time.
that the design must provide for that eventuality. Some of The emissions and thermal phases would already be underway
the considerations to maintain personnel safety, as well as before the arc detectors responded. Their value then would
to protect the switchgear building structure, and other related be to limit the thermal phase or the continuation of the total
auxiliaries are described below. arcing time.
1) Since the large fire ball, hot toxic gases and molten These devices, both the photocell and pressure switch, have
arc products are released into the building housing had limited acceptance, particularly on systems and new instal-
the switchgear, the building design should consider lations where arc-resistant switchgear has been specified. They
the pressure wave created by this release. Based on do seem to have more acceptance and interest in application
experience, this overpressure is not likely to have a on existing nonarc-resistant switchgear installations.
significant impact on the building design unless the
building is very small and contains only the switchgear. B. Low Resistance Grounding
The alternative of designing a duct to convey the arc In medium-voltage systems employing low-resistance
products outside the building is worth considering, but grounding and the use of covered bus in conjunction with
may be difficult to accomplish since the switchgear is metalclad switchgear, the potential for a phase-to-ground
usually not tested with the equivalent back pressure on arcing fault is dramatically reduced. The arcing current is
the relief assembly that could be created by the duct. limited as the arc voltage is essentially being consumed by
In any event, the deflection of the arc by-products from the’voltage drop across the grounding resister which reduces
the ceiling, walls or other elevated objects, back into the the potential for escalation since the limited arc current cannot
operating aisles is a major concern. Sufficient head room remain stable [5].
must be provided to allow for expansion, dispersal, and The use of a resistance-grounded system, however, does
cooling of the hot gasses, thereby reducing the pressure not preclude the development of a three-phase arcing fault.
buildup in the building and the potential for personnel However, in practice most faults start as phase-to-ground and
breathing difficulties. then migrate to phase-to-phase faults. A resistance-grounded
2) Wiring and raceway design should provide for bottom system would reduce that possibility and reduce the potential
entry to the switchgear to allow for proper operation
benefits to be derived from the use of arc-resistant switchgear.
of relief mechanisms and free flow of arc products
out of the top of the switchgear. Maintaining a clear
space above the switchgear helps ensure that personnel x.COST BENEFITANALYSIS
will have no reason to be working on top of it. After Risk assessment is a tool that can be used to prioritize and
installation and energization, this overhead area is to be optimize safety-related investment [6]. Such an assessment
considered “off limits” to all personnel. may help to quantify risk as viewed from the perspective

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KALKSTEIN et al.: SAFETY BENEFITS OF ARC-RESISTANT METALCLAD MEDIUM-VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR 1409

of a petrochemical company. This technique will be used to year for the company in this example. The savings in going
compare three different medium-voltage switchgear options: from Option B to Option C would be much smaller, in the
Option A-Use of nonarc resistant switchgear without flash range of from $12 500 to $125 000 per year.
protection; Option B-Use of nonarc resistant switchgear with The cost of single-high breaker arc resistant switchgear
flash protection; and Option C-Use of arc resistant switchgear (Type C accessibility) for Option C is generally 15-20%
without flash protection. higher than nonarc-resistant designs. Typical nonarc-resistant
Based upon the history of serious injuries due to arcing switchgear costs approximately $25 000 per breaker unit. The
faults in switchgear, it is reasonable to estimate that five incremental cost of $3750-5000 per breaker unit would not
out of 10 occurrences of an arcing fault in nonarc-resistant appear to be justified for the company used in the above illus-
switchgear will result in a serious injury or fatality, assuming tration based on the projected minimum return on investment
that personnel are in the vicinity at the time of the fault and of only 0.1%
that flash protection is not worn. The assumption is made that ROI = ($12 500 x 100)/(2500 bkr units x $5000 per unit).
faults occur most frequently at the time of breaker operation or
insertiodwithdrawal of the breaker unit from the switchgear Option C may look even less attractive when the additional
cubicle by the operator or electrician. costs of one-high versus two-high breaker designs and bottom
If flash protection is worn by the operator or electrician as entry of wiring are considered.
in Option B, the injury frequency is reduced to a lower value Option B looks more attractive since the cost of flash
such as one serious injury or fatality out of ten occurrences of protection equipment is generally less than $500 per person,
an arcing fault. The hazard is not totally eliminated since the and the company used in the example might require only
flash protection does not eliminate the hazard of metal compo- 1000 sets of clothing. The calculated minimum return for the
nents or switchgear doors striking the person. If arc-resistant additional investment required to go from Option A to B is
switchgear is used as in Option C, the injury frequency is fur- a much larger 20%
ther reduced to a low level such as one serious injury or fatality ROI = ($100000 x 100)/(1000 sets x $500 per set).
out of 20 occurrences of an arcing fault. In this case the expo-
sure may be due to personnel working in unsafe areas such as In many cases, the flash protection equipment would already be
on top of the arc-resistant switchgear, or failure of the arc resis- provided because of other hazards introduced by low voltage
tant switchgear due to manufacturing or maintenance defects. equipment. The option of using type A or B accessibility may
The frequency of occurrence of arcing faults in switchgear be more attractive due to reduced cost.
that is properly maintained by qualified personnel is generally
low. One large chemical company experienced approximately XI. CONCLUSION
one fault every eight years with an installed base of 500 Consideration of personnel safety is the primary reason
medium-voltage switchgear line-ups. The switchgear lineups arc-resistant metalclad medium-voltage switchgear is used.
were a mixture of metalclad and metal-enclosed units. Pre- However, it is but one option; other alternatives, such as the
sumably the fault rate would be even lower if all switchgear use of personnel flash protection, may be shown to be more
units were metalclad. If we assume that each switchgear line- cost effective. The use of low-resistance system grounding
up averages five breaker units, then the frequency rate is one also reduces the frequency of occurrence of arcing faults. The
arcing fault per 20 000 breaker unit operating years. regulatory environment may make these considerations a moot
Using the above two statistics for all three options, the point and drive the use of arc-resistant switchgear regardless
frequency of an injury or fatality for the above company was of cost.
calculated to be Another point related to cost is that arc-resistant switchgear
Option A-One serious injury or fatality every 16 years or will typically have longer line-ups than standard designs. This
40 000 breaker unit operating years (0.0625 serious injuries is driven by the one-high breaker requirement and the reduced
or fatalities per year); rollout space availability in arc-resistant switchgear.
Option B-One serious injury or fatality every 80 years In conclusion, arc-resistant designs can help maximize per-
or 200000 breaker unit operating years. (0.0125 serious sonnel safety in the event of an arcing fault. Design work
injuries or fatalities per year); and testing demonstrate the ability to meet the requirements
Option C-One serious injury or fatality every 160 years of the international standards which exist today. Whether
or 400000 breaker unit operating years. (0.00625 serious arc-resistant switchgear will emerge as a widespread design
injuries or fatalities per year). practice is yet to be seen, but the regulatory environment may
The difference in the serious injury or fatality rate between well be the driver which makes this determination.
Option A and B is calculated to be 0.05 serious injuries or
fatalities per year, whereas the difference between Option APPENDIX
B and C is only 0.00625 serious injuries or fatalities per ARC PHYSICS
year. Total company costs for an employee’s serious injury
or fatality may fall in the range of 2-20 million dollars. A. Arc Voltage
Therefore, the potential savings in going from Option A to An electric arc can be defined as an electrical discharge
B would be in the range of from $100 000 to $1 000 000 per between two electrodes of high current density with a low

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1410 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31, NO. 6, NOVEMBEFLDECEMBER 1995

voltage cathode drop of 5-10 V/cm, an anode drop typically and is proportional to the arc length and the supply system
measured at 10-15 V/cm and a column intensity in the range of impedance, the maximum arc power that can be developed can
10-15 V/cm. The material of the electrodes, copper and steel be defined by the maximum power transfer theorem. Maximum
in the cases under study, and their relative position and shape 6&Hz three-phase arc power will occur when the arc voltage
play a significant part in defining the arc voltage drop. The and system voltage drop are equal, or when R,,, = Xsys
heat of the arc core approaches 35 000°F at the arc terminals (Resistance of arc = Impedance of system) in magnitude.
causing the copper and steel electrodes not only to melt, but When the arc is defined as purely resistive and the external
vaporize [7]. system as reactive, maximum 60-Hz power is transferred
The arc vapor has substantially higher resistance than a when the power factor is 0.707. Under these conditions the
solid conductor. The total voltage drop in the arc ranges be- maximum arc power can be derived simply as (.707)2 or
tween 25/40 V/cm (60/100 V h ) . Arc voltages are essentially 50% of the maximum kVA bolted fault capacity. For arc
independent over a wide range of arc current [7],[8]. voltages having a rectangular or square wave shape due to the
In low-voltage systems, the arc may consume a major significant 3rd harmonic component (180 Hz), the maximum
portion of the available system voltage which would lead to power transfer occurs near 0.65 power factor [lo], [Ill.
instability or extinction of the arc as the arc length is increased
in proportion to the available system voltage. As the system E. Pressure Increase
voltage is increased, the arc lengths can be substantially longer
and still maintain stability. In medium-voltage switchgear, arc A developing electric arc in a closed volume generates a
stability is expected because the available voltage and system pressure rise due to the transfer of energy in the form of heat
short circuit capability are more than adequate to sustain the to the surrounding ambient air. This compression phase starts
arc across the phase-to-phase and phase-to-ground clearances with the ignition of the arc at time t = 0 and ends when
in the switchgear. the maximum pressure peak is reached. From the arc energy,
the pressure of the air mass in the switchgear rises since the
B. Arc Voltage Wave Shape pressure reliefs are closed and the air is heated. The pressure
linearly increases with short circuit current and arc length
Since the inductance per length of the arc path is not and is inversely proportional to the volume of arcing space.
appreciably different from that of the solid electrode materials, The duration of the compression phase lasts for approximately
the arc current path is basically resistive, and as such, the arc 5-10 ms, about one-half cycle [12].
voltage is generally in quadrature with the highly inductive The next phase, the expansion phase starts when the peak
supply source impedance. pressure has been reached and the flaps open. This phase lasts
The arc voltage oscillograph traces typically have a flat- for 5-10 ms.
topped curve which results in the arc voltage peak, mean, and The following phase, sometimes referred to as the emission
effective values having approximately the same magnitude. A phase, results from the additional heating by the electric arc
flat-topped or rectangular wave shape indicates a large third which causes the air to discharge from the arcing source.
harmonic component [9]. The final phase, the thermal phase, where the space occupied
near the arc has nearly reached the temperature of the arc, lasts
C. Arc Migration until the arcing has concluded during which time the remaining
The physical space relationship of the switchgear busses, arc energy acts on the solid materials in the switchgear. The
and barrier-restricted tenninals allow a minimum of arc mi- duration of this phase is dependent on the speed of response
gration. Arc migration is essentially due to the thermal and of the fault detection and total clearing time of the protective
electrodynamic forces, as well as wind forces, developed system [13].
during the arcing phase.
The thermal force is a result of the fact that the arc is lighter
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
than the surrounding air and is always directed upward. The
electro-magnetic force generated by the interaction of the arc The authors express their appreciation and thanks to Paul
current and the magnetic field developed in which it is burning Fuoco, GE Canada, and Sankar Sarkar, General Switchgear &
produces a force such that the arc is flexible and migrates Control Ltd., who provided prototype test data for arc resistant
toward the site where the lowest magnetic induction exists, switchgear; and to W. E. Schwabe, Arc Furnace Consultant,
which always means migration away from the energy source. for his valuable input and review comments.

D.Arc Power REFERENCES

In the case of a three-phase bolted fault, there is little heat E. Gourbiers, “Functional consequence of electrical injury,” presented
energy generated at the point of fault. However, as an arc at Sec. Int. Symp. Elec. Trauma, Univ. of Chicago, June 11-12, 1993.
Kindler and Schels, “Systematic studies of defect arc safety in switching
is initiated, a voltage drop proportional to the length of arc panels and switching installations,” AEG Telejmken, vol. 65, pp. 24-34,
will develop. As arc length is increased, a greater amount 1975.
of available system voltage will be consumed and the total H. Kindler, “Problems arising in substations for public electricity
supply,” Sachsenwerk Light and Craft, p. 4.
current flow will decrease. Since power in the arc is the J. P. Meehan, “Arcproofing of metalclad switchgear,” Assoc. Profes-
product of Ea x la (voltage available x current available) sional Eng. Province of Ontario, Dec. 1980.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 KALKSTEIN et al.: SAFETY BENEFITS OF ARC-RESISTANT METALCLAD MEDIUM-VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR 1411

151 J. R. Dunki-Jacobs, “The escalating arcing ground fault phenomenon,” Alfred E. Paullin (M’75) received the B.S.E de-
IEEE Trans. Industly Applicat., vol, IA, no. 6, Nov./Dec. 1986. gree from Widener University, Chester, PA, in 1973.
[6] K. S. Crawford, D. G. Clark, and R. L. Dourrhtv. “Motor terminal box He has been employed in various engineering
explosions due to faults,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Abpiicat., vol. 29, no. 1, p. positions since 1973, and has worked on the design
76, Jan./Feb. 1993. and proof testing of power circuit breakers and
B. Thoren, “Arcs on power lines and in high voltage switchgear,” Asea other related fields for 30 years. He is presently a
High Power Laboratory Elteknik, pp. 139-43 Ludvika, 1962. Design Engineer for the ED&C Division of General
A. P. Strom, “Long 60 cycle arcs in air,” paper 46-22, AIEE Winter Electric. His responsibilites include the design of
Convention, NY, NY, 1946. indoor vacuum switchgear breakers and outdoor
Kusko and Peeran, “Arcing fault protection on low voltage distribution distribution vacuum breakers. He is also responsible
systems,” Ch. 2499-2/87/000-1385 IEEE, 1987. for the direction and planning of test programs to
H. Schmitz, “Protection from electric fault arcs in high voltage switching evaluate new designs.
facilities,”presented at Int. Con$ on Protection of Hydro-Electric Power
Stations, Belgrade, 1959.
R. H. Lee, “Electric arc blast burns,” paper IPSD 81-55, PSPC IEEE-
IAS, 1981.
-, “Pressures developed by arcs,” ZEEE Trans. Znd. Applicat., vol.
IA-23, no. 4, July/Aug. 1987.
G. Harz, M. Niegl, “Arcing under control,” Sachsenwerk, p. 6.

James M. Jackson received the B.S. degree in

Edward W. Kalkstein (M’73) received the mechanical engineering from the University of Mis-
B.S.E.E. degree from Carnegie Mellon University soun at Rolla and the M S. degree in mechanical
in 1962. engineering from Purdue University.
His association with DuPont began in 1973 in He is presently the Manager of the Technology
the Project Engineering and Design Division. His & Quality Group for the Switchgear and Busway
present title is Principal Consultant in Dupont’s Business of General Electric in Burlington, IA. He
Electrical Technology Consulting Group, providing has more than eight years of experience in the design
technical assistance and consulting for DuPont’s and development of electrical distribution prod-
power system facilities. ucts, such as molded-case circuit breakers, small
Mr. Kalkstein is an active member of the IEEE power transformers, and low- and medium-voltage
PES Relay and Transformer Committee. He is a switchgear equipment.
Registered Professional Engineer in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Mr. Jackson is a member of ASME and is a Registered Professional
Engineer in Missouri

Richard L. Doughty (M’75-SM’78-F’95) received

the B.E.E. amd M.E.E. degrees in electrical en-
gineering from Cornel1 University, Ithaca, NY, in
1965 and 1966, respectively.
He has been employed with E. I. du Pont de
Nemours and Company since 1966. He presently
serves as a Principal Consultant in the Electrical
Technology Consulting Group of Engineering, and Jerry L. Ryner is presently a Design Engineer for
General Electric, Electrical Distribution & Control,
specializes in the application of electric motors and
Switchgear Division, in Burlington, IA. He has
power system design.
more than 20 years of design experience in low-
Mr. Doughty is Chairman of the PCIC Chemical
Industry Motors Working Group (RP841), Vice-chairman of the PCIC Chem- and medium-voltage switchgear and switchboard
ical Subcommittee, a CMA representative on American National Standards products.
Committee C50 on Rotating Electrical Machinery, a Member on Panel 10 of
the National Electric Code (representingCMA), and a Registered Professional
Engineer in the State of Delaware. He is the recipient of PCIC and IAS
TRANSACTIONS prize paper awards.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de Concepcion. Downloaded on May 27,2022 at 15:14:49 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.