1. Create Your User Profile and Status Updates

    Arc Flash Forum members are invited to create a user profile. Let others know who you are, what you do and even add a picture or avatar of yourself. What are you up to? Let people in the arc flash and electrical safety community know with "status updates"!
  2. Welcome to the All New Arc Flash Forum

    Arc Flash Forum is a community where we help each other learn about arc flash and electrical safety. There is still much to be learned about arc flash, standards, PPE, studies and more and We need your HELP!

    If you have good information about Arc Flash - Post It! If you have a question about Arc Flash - Post It! If you can provide answers to Arc Flash questions - Post it!

    Sign up as a today member! Feel free to link to this site www.arcflashforum.com. Tell your friends. We want to help everyone be safe in the workplace!
  3. Bigger and Better!

    As you have no doubt noticed, the forum has been through quite an upgraded and looks and feels very nice! There are loads of new features and ways in which this site can now be even more useful to the community in learning about Arc Flash and Electrical Safety.

    Create your detailed user profile
    Add a profile photo of yourself
    Like the forum on Facebook
    "Like" users' posts
    Publish your articles in the library
    ...and much, much more!

    Learn More About the New Features Here

2 Phase Fault in IEEE-1584?

Discussion in 'IEEE 1584 - IEEE Guide for Performing Arc-Flash Ha' started by Electric John, May 15, 2008.

  1. Electric John New Member

    Hi,

    I have a feeder that has a greater probability of having a 2 Phase fault because the other phase line is far away from the 2 others. Hence, only 2 Phase fault should be considered in the arc flash calculations.

    Can we use IEEE-1584 arcing current calculations? Are the equations only valid for 3phase faults?

    Thanks
  2. Homerjs78 New Member

    The 1584 equations are based on three phase faults (see page 1) and do not cover single phase, DC, or the case you mention. That being said, the 1584 equations are still the industry standard for determining the hazard. You may think about using the arcing current equation with a multiplication factor to reduce the current. This will account for the two phases since the 1584 equations are so heavily based on current (trip time might be reduced).
  3. acobb Well-Known Member

    Phase to Phase Faults

    John,

    I expect what Homer meant to say is that the trip time would probably be increased since the line to line fault current available will generally be 87% of the 3 phase value. Don't know how that would figure into the equations though. The standards use the 3 phase value assuming that with close phase spacings the fault will quickly involve the adjacent phases. I would hesitate to assume that you could extrapolate the energy from a 2 phase fault based on the 3 phase equation. I guess you could use the equations with the lower value of line to line fault current and the increased clearing time, but I am not sure how good the information you get would be. If you take that approach and the energy is higher with the longer times, I would probably use those values, eventhough the results might be higher because it is a 3 phase model. After all, there have already been many assumptions for the published equations. The other option would be to go with the flow and use the 3 phase values for fault current and take what you get. Probably not what you were looking for but at least you would have the standards to back up your calcs. Unless this ends up being a common issue, I would expect that we will never have any test data to work with.

    Do we have a physicist in the forum?

    Maybe someone else will have some input here?
    Alan
  4. Homerjs78 New Member

    oops! Reduced arcing current = Increased trip time. Thanks for the catch

Share This Page