1. Updates on Code Revisions
2016 EFCOG Electrical Safety Workshop

2. Upcoming Revisions 2017 NEC to be published September 2016
2018 NFPA 70E – 2nd Review of Proposals, comment resolution, and final votes – THIS WEEK, to be published September 2017
IEEE 1584 – to be released late -– Guide to Arc Flash Calculations

3. 2018 NFPA 70E Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace
1. All references to other standards will be removed from mandatory text. 2. The DC shock table will be reduced to 50 volts, but the lower range will go from 50 to 300 volts. 3. The lower thresholds for hazardous energy will be implemented into Articles 320, 330, and 350 will be 50 Vac and 100 Vdc. 4. The exception to has been removed. 5. Deleted references to SPGFCI introduced during first draft. 6. PC 32 Richard Waters reject. 7. Better clarification of Shock Hazard definition with informational note. 8. PC 31 Richard Waters reject. 9. Global change replacing short circuit current to available fault current with informational note to definition addressing batteries. 10. Defined Fault Current and Fault Current, Available, including an illustration.

4. 2018 NFPA 70E Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace
11. Documented program must include inspection element. 12. Applying hierarchy of controls to risk assessments. 13. PC 153 Mark Scott reject. 14. Documented program must include investigation of near misses. 15. Minor changes to training for safe release but not much impact for us. 16. Article 120 major changes in format and content. 17. PC 158 Mark Scott reject. PC 145 Mark Scott reject. I did not capture the actions on other 120 PC by EFCOG members, but they may have been folded into the major overhaul of 120.

5. IEEE 1584 – Guide to Arc Flash Calculations

6. Final Report of Task Group ‘New Model Validation’
IEEE P1584
Final Report of Task Group
‘New Model Validation’
Chair – Dan Doan
Vice Chair – Albert Marroquin
Meeting at ESW on March 7, 2016

7. Membership
Scope
Meeting schedule
Summary of evaluation
Conclusions
Path Forward

8. Membership Dan Doan Chair
Albert Marroquin Vice-Chair / Secretary, ETAP
Jim Babcock Member
Lloyd Gordon Member
Ken Jones Member
Wei Jen Lee Member
Afshin Majd Member, EasyPower
Vince Saporita Member, EATON
Tom Short Member, EPRI
Marcelo Valdes Member, GE
Mike Lang IEEE/NFPA Collaboration Chair
Daleep Mohla P1584 WG Chair
Bruce McClung P1584 WG Vice Chair
Jim Phillips P1584 WG Secretary
Everyone stand up

9. Scope Review the new model, model basis, methods, data
Compare results to the existing 2002 model
Develop application guidance to be included in the text of the next edition of IEEE-201X for review by P1584WG

10. Model Modifications (Each was reviewed by TG)
Modification Number
Modification Date 1
September 2013 2
July 2014 3
August 2014 4
October 2014 5
March 2, 2015 6
March 16, 2015 7
April 4, 2015 8
June 15, 2015 9
July 28, 2015 10
August 21, 2015 11
September 2, 2015 12
September 14, 2015 13
September 25, 2015 14
November 14, 2015 15
December 3, 2015 16
December 14, 2015 17
December 21, 2015

11. Summary of evaluation
For details, see TG reports August 2015 and February 2016.
Phase 1: Understanding of test results and data processing
Phase 2: Creation of validation plan and comparison validation tools
Phase 3: Comparisons against processed test results performed by IEEE/NFPA Collaboration
Phase 4: Comparisons against IEEE test results.

12. Phase 2 Tools Validation Tool Created by
Matlab Comparison Program (s), C#, C++ Based Arc Current Asymmetrical / Symmetrical Component Program
Albert Marroquin
Iarc Comparison Program using Excel
Marcelo Valdes
Comparison Program(s) to Check against all types of available data / Alternative Regression AF Model Programs
Tom Short
Typical Factory/Site Model Comparison
Dan Doan
Statistical Analysis Tools and Plots in Excel
Afshin Majd
Model Result Comparisons against Test Results – Excel and third party software
Jim Babcock

13. Examples: Arc Current Comparison Spreadsheet

14. Examples: HCB configuration with graphing of box size, IE, and working distance:

15. Examples: Modification Comparison spreadsheet:

16. Phase 3
Model predictions were compared against all test results to determine the overall performance of the model
Outliers and incomplete test data points were reviewed
Final model development test data (subset of total test results) was agreed on with collaboration research team
Annex to report has 2 files, ‘Model Development’ data and ‘All Test’ data spreadsheets

17. Phase 4
Final model release candidate was reviewed and compared with model development test data
Comparisons showed the proposed model has improvements over the model:
HCB, HOA, and VCBB configurations are available
Continuous model between LV and MV
Arcing current variation is considered at MV
More enclosure sizes
Larger variable range especially gap
Results are less ‘over-conservative’, especially AFB at MV
Gap variable considered for entire voltage range

18. Range of Parameters Voltage: 208V to 15kV (all configurations)
Frequency: 50 or 60 Hz
Bolted Fault:
V A to 106kA
601V-15kV 200A to 65kA
Gap between conductors:
V to 3 inches (6 to 76 mm)
601V-15kV to 10 inches (19 to 254 mm)
Working Distance: 12” minimum
Arc Flash Boundary: same as WD
Duration: no limits
Enclosures: Note: Width must be > (4 x Gap)
V x12 to 20x20 (inches)
>600V - 2.7kV 20x20 to 26x26 (inches)
> kV x26 to 45x30 (inches)
>5 - 15kV x36 to 45x30 (inches)

19. Application Guidance
Use Average and Minimum Iarc calculations, determine the durations for both, find the IE’s, and pick use the higher value. (All configurations, all voltages)
Enclosure sizes – use closest size from table 8.2, or use a value in the range allowed by voltage for more detailed calculation. Also use deep/shallow selection for <600V.
Some guidance on selecting configurations (HCB vs VCB vs VCBB, for example)

20. The following documents/files go along with the report:
Model Files
The following documents/files go along with the report:
DataSummary All Test.xlsx
DataSummary Model Development.xls
IARC Ratio at Different Voltage_1.xlsx
IEEE1584 ExcelCalculator_Version 2.6.2_User Define.xlsm
IEEE1584 ExcelCalculator_Version 2.6.2_User Define_M.xlsm

21. Example Calculator sheet
Or open calculator and show configurations

22. Conclusions TG reviewed the proposed model in 17 modifications
Exceptions:
TG did not duplicate the regression analysis that provided the equation values
TG did not review equations for ‘HCB with CT no Tube’ (no test data provided)
Scope was to evaluate results, not duplicate results; did not have enough time to complete this.
HCB with CT, No Tube – TG did not receive data.

23. Conclusions
TG consensus: If applied within valid parameter ranges, the proposed model will provide results which are consistent, in more applications than
The new model is based on over 1800 test points with additional configurations
The new model corrects some anomalies in such as discontinuity at 1kV
TG has completed its scope and submitted a detailed report to WG officers

24. Future Research Recommendations
There is room for improvement; more testing would be useful to determine effect of:
Range of enclosure sizes
Enclosure depth
Distance from arc to back of box
Larger and smaller gaps based on actual equipment
Larger working distances
Effect of actual equipment including contents DC

25. Working Group Presentations

26. Working Groups 4 DOE Electrical Safety Handbook
2 Hazardous Energy Control
3 10CRF851 Flowdown, and Subcontractors
5 Risk Assessment per 70E-2015
1 DC Systems

27. Working Group 4 DOE Electrical Safety Handbook
Lloyd Gordon, LANL
Mike Hicks, Idaho DOE
Eugene Santiago, BNL
John Lacenere, PPPL

28. Working Group 2 Hazardous Energy Control
Stephanie Collins, LBNL

29. Working Group 3 Electrical Safety Subcontractors and 10CFR851 Flowdown
Jeff Williams, NNSA, Los Alamos
etc.

30. Working Group 5 Risk Assessment
Greg Christensen, INL

31. Working Group 1 DC Systems
Leads
Gary Dreifuerst, ex LLNL
Stan Berry, ex Navy
Alan Tatum, current ORNL
Peter McNutt, NREL