Arc Flash: are NFPA 70E and IEEE1584 dangerous?

September 26th, 2011 | Posted in Electrical Safety

Tags: electrical engineer, electrical safety, Electrical Standards, IEEE1584, nfpa 70e

My name is Gnther Mller, I have 20 years of experience in electrical engineering, and I work
for a Consultant in Germany. I currently work on the extension of the electrical installation of a
site in Europe, owned by a large American industrial group.

In this context, we were asked to evaluate the

risk related to Arc Flash, in compliance with NFPA 70E standard and the IEEE1584 calculation
methodology. It was the first time I had to do this evaluation, as this is a US standard which I did
not know about and which has no equivalent here.
First, we had to make the audit of the existing installation, and the dimensioning of the
extension. Then, we had to make the estimation of the Arc Flash risk level for every electrical
switchboard, in order then to choose the category of PPE (Personal Protection Equipment) which
electrical maintenance people should wear when operating on or near these equipments.
But now I really wonder: will this really help to protect the maintenance operators against
arc flash risks?
First, I doubt it is realistic in practice to ask maintenance teams to wear different types of
protections depending on the switchboard they work on. And I doubt they will even wear
these protections, considering they seem to make it really hard to work with (impossible to do
precise work with your fingers, lack of visibility, heat, etc )
Second, I wonder why the standard calculates the Arc Flash energy at a distance of 18
inches (~50 cm): what about the possible damages to the hands and arms of a worker who is at
the origin of the short-circuit, for example due to a mistake when checking that the power is
down?

Third, as the results give a PPE category = 0 for 400V switchboards with a short-circuit
level of 20kA, isnt there a risk that some maintenance people will consider that there is no
risk, when in reality if they are at the origin of a short-circuit with their tool they will be at
minimum seriously burnt?
Also, as I found this standard somewhat questionable, I searched for more information about it
on the web, and found this article and survey done in Australia and published in Industrial
Electrix issue of April/June 2011, which I found on this website:
http://www.flipemag.com.au/APT/emagIE_secondquarter_2011/)
(click the link and go to page 44)
This is an abstract from the article:

So I even wonder if the calculations and estimations of this IEEE 1584 are realistic, or if the
real risk is in some cases underestimated, which makes the standard almost worse than no
standard at all, as people following the rules will feel safe with their PPE when they may risk
more than 2nd degree burns.
Finally, even though my first thought was that it was a good thing there was an existing standard
in the US, I feel that the current situation worldwide is:
* in the US, there is an existing standard but it is potentially dangerous
==> Contradict me if you disagree

* outside US, there is no Arc Flash risk specific analysis or recommendations

==> Tell me if you know about existing surveys or standards in your countries