Posted on April 28, 2009 by lewellyntech
As a project manager for Lewellyn Technology I spend a lot of my time visiting with clients reviewing their electrical systems to provide a proposal for a complete Arc Flash Analysis and 70E Implementation. Over the past few months my travels have led me to uncover a few disappointing items during these visits. The last several I have visited have already had some form of an arc flash analysis completed. The majority of these have shown me a book titled “Arc Flash Study”, a handful of labels if any, and then if applied, mostly just on main switchgear.
The troubling point of all this is not the money the client had wasted getting a study that was not complete, but also that the majority of equipment where work is to be conducted is not in the “mains,” but typically on the floor level at the machine or a nearby panel. Most of these companies spent thousands of dollars for this while being told they were getting NFPA 70E compliant.
The majority of companies out there dabbling in arc flash as a side business have highly recognized names, but not in electrical safety. They are typically awarded this type of business because they are usually already associated with the plant or conduct various other services already for the client; they throw Arc Flash in their bag of tricks and before long they are scrambling to find the lowest bidding electrical contractor in the area to do the work. From what I have seen, this type of setup is destined to fail. Over the past 5 years Lewellyn has spent most of our time doing Arc Flash Studies and 70E Training, but as of late, we are now seeing a trend of fixing a lot of studies that were carelessly conducted. I cannot stress the importance of thoroughly understanding what an Arc Flash Analysis is all about and understanding that it is not an Engineering Study and it’s not just about the labels. Don’t allow yourself to be sold on “compliance;” understand what you are getting and request a thorough analysis be done on all parts of your system, and recommendations made to mitigate the hazards.
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety |
Tagged
arc flash,
arc flash analysis,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
nfpa 70e |
Comments Off
Posted on April 23, 2009 by lewellyntech
Arc Flash can happen anywhere, at any time, and the so the need to protect your employees remains constant, whether your working at a school in Florida or a paper factory in Canada.
As this story relates, a company with plants in Canada and the United States was fined by the Canadian Ministry of Labour after an arc flash injured an employee.
A couple interesting items in this piece: First, the term arc flash is actually used. That is rare in reporting of these incidents. Second, the worker could have been spared injury and the company spared a fine if proper PPE was worn.
In Canada, the company officially violated the Occupational Health and Safety Act, which requires employers to protect employees from electrical hazards.
Sound familiar? It should. In the United States, OSHA requires the exact same thing. How can this be accomplished? The best way is to have a company perform a detailed Arc Flash Analysis and recommend ways to mitigate the hazards. If you are uncertain whether your company could end up like the one in the above story, contact Lewellyn today.
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety,
lewellyn news |
Tagged
arc flash,
arc flash consulting,
arc flash safety,
electrical news,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
workplace safety |
Comments Off
Posted on April 17, 2009 by lewellyntech
As we mentioned in an earlier post, many people fail to recognize the frequency of arc flash incidents because of the terminology used to report them.
News reporters are not electrical maintenance workers. They write for a mass audience most of whom have no electrical training whatsoever, so it is understandable that a term such as “arc flash” would not be used. There are other words the media frequently uses to describe these incidents.
A great example is found in this story out of Bakersfield, CA. Here, a man was working at a panel when “some kind of short” occurred, causing “serious burns to his upper body.”
Even with these few clues we know almost certainly that what took place was an arc flash. We know he was working at a panel when the incident occurred. What the lay public would describe as “some kind of short” is most likely the explosive release of energy that typifies an arc flash. And unfortunately, we know that arc flashes cause serious injuries, which it appears this worker sustained.
As survivors of arc flash will tell you, these incidents can and do happen: an estimated 5-10 a day, according to NIOSH. Every safety manager should ask themselves, “Am I doing enough to protect my people from electrical hazards?” If you’re unsure, contact Lewellyn today.
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety,
lewellyn news |
Tagged
arc flash,
arc flash accidents,
electrical news,
lewellyn technology,
nfpa 70e |
Comments Off
Posted on April 15, 2009 by lewellyntech
Keeping an arc-flash analysis up to date is as important as having a study done for the first time. Here are some questions to answer to determine if your study needs an update:
1. Have you done construction or renovation? Any addition or modification to the electrical system can have an affect on incident energy levels. Changing a circuit breaker type, size, or settings will have the potential to raise or lower PPE requirements. The same applies to changing other protective devices (fuses, relays, etc.). Adding a new piece of equipment will add another enclosure and you’ll need to know the hazard at that point. Changing cable size or length can also affect the PPE requirements since this will change the available fault current.
2. Has the utility changed their system supplying your facility? These changes are often done without any notice from the utility. That’s why we suggest requesting fault current information from your servicing utility every two to three years or so. Remember, NFPA 70E-2009 says in Article 130.3 “The arc flash hazard analysis shall be updated when a major modification or renovation takes place. It shall be reviewed periodically, not to exceed five years, to account for changes in the electrical distribution system that could affect the results of the arc flash analysis.”
3. Have the standards changed? Arc flash analysis is still a fairly young animal and many experts are still working to develop better standards. With any change in NFPA 70E or IEEE 1584, it is a wise idea to review your analysis. You may be grandfathered in to compliance, but if it’s safety that’s guiding your analysis it’s worth a second look. NFPA 70E 2009 went into effect in September 2008. Studies completed before this time under NFPA 70E 2004 are not wrong, but are worth reviewing. Our engineering department has seen several cases of changed PPE requirements, largely at the 240 V or 208 V level. As most testing up to this point has been completed at 480 V, we expect these changes at lower voltage levels to continue for some time.
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety |
Tagged
arc flash,
arc flash analysis,
arc flash engineering,
arc flash safety,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
nfpa 70e,
ppe |
Comments Off
Posted on April 9, 2009 by lewellyntech
People often fail to recognize that arc flash incidents occur relatively frequently. The reason these incidents fly under the radar is that when they are reported by local media, they are almost never referred to as an “arc flash” (if they make the news at all). Take this story from a Kansas television station as an example. The incident described here, which occurred just this week and in which the victim appears to be seriously injured, is likely an arc flash. They happen all the time, and OSHA requires protection from them. If you have questions about how to keep your employees safe from arc flash or implementing NFPA 70E, contact Lewellyn Technology today.
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety |
Tagged
arc flash,
arc flash accidents,
arc flash hazards,
electrical news,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
nfpa 70e,
osha,
ppe,
workplace safety |
Comments Off
Posted on February 27, 2009 by lewellyntech
Dear CEO:
Allow me to cut to the chase: It is imperative your organization invests the money and resources needed to improve electrical safety in your facilities. The best way to do this is adherence to NFPA 70E. This could be argued from a human interest perspective, and I have ample anecdotal evidence of terrible stories of personal loss as a result of electrical accidents. Instead, I want to discuss improving electrical safety from a purely business point of view.
Over the past 30 years there have been major advances in electrical safety, including, but not limited to: research on the effects of shock on the human body, research on arc flash and new ways to predict its severity, and new fabrics developed to prevent burn injuries. Thousands of dedicated volunteers have spent countless hours developing new standards, like NFPA 70E, based on this research. This enlightenment has shown us we can avoid and/or mitigate injuries caused by electrical hazards. Sadly, in spite of all these advances, many facilities continue to unnecessarily expose their employees to electrical hazards the same way we did 30 years ago.
Taking the proper steps to protect employees can be expensive. But what is the cost of doing nothing? Analysis of electrical accidents shows that while they may be small in terms of percentage of all workplace accidents, the severity of the injury incurred and the fatality rate is much higher. Therefore, the impact can be much longer-lasting.
If an electrician suffers a severe burn from an electrical arc flash event, the costs of that accident to the organization over the next five or ten years could be in the tens of millions of dollars. Firstly, OSHA will likely issue a citation for failing to protect your employee. But that will be insignificant “chump change” compared to the other costs to come. These costs include equipment damage, lost product, downtime, medical bills, insurance premium increases, workers comp, attorney fees, accident investigation costs, law suits, retraining, etc. Indirect costs can be even more costly such as bad publicity when OSHA writes you a citation and posts a news release on the front page of their website, as they commonly do. The news release will explain to the world, mentioning your company by name, that “this accident could have been avoided by following recognized safe practices for working around electrical hazards.” Instantly, safety newsletters and blogs will pick up the story and in minutes the news is spread around the world.
It’s hard to put a price tag on some of these costs, but experience has shown us, without question, it is far more expensive to allow one of these preventable accidents to occur than it is to avoid it.
Aversion of high cost is only one argument made against properly protecting employees from electrical hazards. Another argument from upper management is that OSHA regulations do not explicitly require compliance with the NFPA 70E standard. This attitude borders on willful ignorance and must be addressed.
OSHA regulations concerning electrical hazards are simple. They state that you must protect employees from electrical hazards – shock and arc flash – but they do not specify how accomplish that. OSHA requires proper personal protective equipment (PPE) be provided as a line of defense against these hazards. OSHA requires “specific safety related work practices” be employed that are consistent with the associated electrical hazard. OSHA requires employers to perform, and document, assessments of the workplace to determine the PPE required, OSHA requires employers to train employees on the proper use of this PPE. The list goes on.
OSHA requires all of these things without giving you enough detail on how to accomplish them. That’s where 70E comes in. It is a bridge between OSHA regulations and compliance. As top OSHA officials have said, “If I were an employer, and I had to protect my employees from electrical hazards, the first place I would look is NFPA 70E.” Do not misunderstand: Items do not have to be explicitly spelled out in OSHA regulations for OSHA to expect you to do them. It does not matter that NFPA 70E is not mentioned by name in OSHA regulations; it is the recognized best practice for electrical safety in the workplace. OSHA does require employers follow recognized best practices.
Implementing NFPA 70E in all facilities is a good business decision. It protects the employee and the assets of the organization. Yes, it will involve a significant upfront investment, but it will protect the organization for years to come. If an injury or fatality were to occur on your watch stemming from something warned against in NFPA 70E, it would be very difficult to defend.
Protection from arc flash and shock is not something to prepare for. It is required now. If you are not going to follow NFPA 70E then to which recognized best practice will you adhere? The cost of inaction is far too steep for any responsible businessperson to ignore.
Sincerely,
Daryn Lewellyn
President/Founder
Lewellyn Technology
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety,
lewellyn news |
Tagged
arc flash analysis,
arc flash consulting,
electrical hazards,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
nfpa 70e,
osha,
ppe,
workplace safety |
Comments Off
Posted on February 19, 2009 by lewellyntech
“Why are there so many different pricing options available for an Arc Flash Analysis?”
“I just want to get this done with what I need to make my plant safer, but now I’m confused as to what it is I need?”
Have you been entertaining proposals for an Arc Flash Analysis and you now find yourself asking these questions? If so, you are not alone. These days, if you Google “Arc Flash” you will find hundreds of companies with a website stating they can solve all of your problems. In reality, there are only a few companies that are even qualified to conduct an Arc Flash Analysis. The reason for so many variances in price and options for an analysis is simple: most companies are just trying to make quick money off of arc flash. You will see companies starting up with nothing more than a laptop and a website claiming they have been doing dozens of studies, but the truth is, when the Arc Flash runs out, so will that company.
When you see a price for an Arc Flash Analysis there are several key items you need to look for up front:
1.) There is no a la carte Arc Flash. If a company says you can “Do it Yourself” or allows you to pick and choose items like you’re at a buffet, forget it. They are only in the business of making money and have no concern with safety.
2.) If a company uses software from the internet that you can download for free, be careful. Most reputable Arc Flash companies pay upwards of $15-20,000.00 per software license. There must be a reason why some companies would pay that much money for software when others use free versions, right?
3.) You must receive new labels, new single-line diagrams, and a report summarizing the findings and making recommendations on how to mitigate the hazards. Why would you leave a higher hazard in the building if you could eliminate it, most often, at no additional cost? Don’t be fooled by a company that doesn’t want to price you a full-scale study, they simply want to make their price look lower.
4.) How detailed must the study be? It must assess every fuse and breaker in the building all the way down to the last device on the floor. You cannot skip the buss-duct or stop at the MCC. You must carry the study down to the floor level. That is the law!
5.) If a price looks low, it probably is. You need to have a Licensed Professional Engineer conduct your study. This is a little tougher to spot. If you want to be sure, ask the company for their License# and where to verify it. A reputable company that employs full-time Licensed PE’s should have no problem directing you on how to verify their license.
6.) Be cautious of companies offering “free training,” or as some call it “value added.” While this may make the proposal look lower, it is just like using free software. When is the last time you had free training that was of any value? Sure, you can have free discussions, or read things for free like this blog, but training is the most important aspect of an Arc Flash Analysis, and since it is required by NEC, NFPA, and OSHA, why would you skimp on this portion of your 70E Implementation.
These are just a few tips to keep in mind when reviewing prices for an Arc Flash Analysis. There are many more aspects to take into account before moving forward with a study. If you have further questions, just call!
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety |
Tagged
2012 nfpa 70e,
70e,
arc flash,
arc flash analysis,
arc flash consulting,
arc flash safety,
electrical hazards,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
nfpa 70e |
Comments Off
Posted on January 15, 2009 by lewellyntech
Required Equipment
In order to accurately perform an arc flash study many key components about the electrical system and the equipment need to be collected. First, a single-line diagram has to be generated that accurately represents the electrical distribution system from the utility source down to the individual panels, MCC’s, and switchboards in the system. In addition to the main distribution equipment, any loads within the system that are supplied from one of these pieces of equipment that have a local disconnect also have to be included. Knowing the quantity and topology of this equipment within the electrical system is very important in determining what the arc flash levels will be at each piece of equipment and will allow for the printing of the appropriate label.
Data Required
The information for each overcurrent protective device located in a panelboard, MCC, switchboard, and switchgear that supply another panel or disconnect within the system needs to be collected. The interconnecting cable information between the protective device and load also needs to be collected. Nameplate data for any transformer or motor over 50 hp will need to be collected, with the exception that any transformer smaller than 125kVA with a 240V or lower secondary can be omitted per IEEE 1584-2002 Std. Most importantly, the utility should provide primary fault current information at the
Circuit Breaker
• Manufacturer
• Model Number
• Breaker Size
• Breaker Settings
o LTPU
o LTD
o STPU
o STD
o INST
Relay
• Manufacturer
• Model Number
• CT Ratio
• Relay Settings
o Pickup
o Curve Type
o Curve Pickup
o Inst Pickup
Cable
• Cable Size
• Cable Length
Transformer
• Primary Voltage
• Secondary Voltage
• kVA Rating
• Percent
Impedance (%Z)
Motor (>75HP)
• Motor HP
Utility (Primary)
• 3-Phase Fault Current
• L-G Fault Current
• System X/R Ratio
Not all circuit breakers will have all the settings indicated above; thermal magnetic circuit breakers for example may only have an INST setting or perhaps no setting at all (fixed type). The relay settings are just examples since many of the newer electronic type can have multiple curve types and pickups to achieve the desired function and operation.
Why so much information?
Each component in the electrical system contributes to the arc flash calculations in their own way. The circuit breaker information is required in order to select the proper breaker and associated time current characteristic (TCC) from the software library. The amount of fault current available within the electrical system is determined by the transformer supplying the facility. The transformer kVA rating and percent impedance are what determines the total amount of fault current available at the secondary, and the total magnitude of this fault current is driven by the primary fault current contribution of the utility at the primary of the transformer. The cables act as an impedance or resistance to the electrical system - the longer and smaller the cables are, the more impedance there is for that particular run of cable. Thus throughout the system the fault current available at each piece of equipment varies. The arc flash calculations are based on these fault currents along with the TCC curve of the protective devices. The TCC curve determines how fast a device will trip based on an available fault current and the arc flash calculation is based on the magnitude of the fault current and how quick the breaker will trip at that fault current. Thus, a higher fault current will result in a quicker trip time and a lower arc flash calculation, whereas a lower fault current results in a longer trip time and a higher arc flash calculation.
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety |
Tagged
arc flash,
arc flash analysis,
arc flash study,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
nfpa 70e,
ppe,
ppe requirements |
Comments Off
Posted on October 24, 2008 by lewellyntech
Coming up in January there will be a requirement from the NESC that addresses Electrical Safety Training, Arc Flash Analysis, and PPE. The below are a few items to note when determining if your facility will be in compliance. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact Lewellyn Technology at 800-242-6673 or www.lewellyn.com
1.) The employer shall inform each employee working on or about communications equipment or electric supply equipment and the associated lines, of the safety rules governing the employee’s conduct while so engaged.
When deemed necessary, the employer shall provide a copy of such rules.
2.) The employer shall provide training to all employees who work in the vicinity of exposed energized facilities. The training shall include applicable work rules required by this Part and other mandatory referenced standards or rules. The employer shall ensure that each employee has demonstrated proficiency in required tasks. The employer shall provide retraining for any employee who, as a result of routine observance of work practices, is not following work rules.
3.) Effective as of January 1, 2009, the employer shall ensure that an assessment is performed to determine potential exposure to an electric arc for employees who work on or near energized parts or equipment. If the assessment determines a potential employee exposure greater than 2 cal/cm2 exists (see Neal, Bingham, and Doughty {B59}), the employer shall require employees to wear clothing or a clothing system that has an effective arc rating not less than the anticipated level of an arc energy.
When exposed to an electric arc or flame, clothing made from the following materials shall not be worn: acetate, nylon, polyester, or polypropylene.
The effective arc rating of clothing or a clothing system to be worn at voltages 1000 V and above shall be determined using Tables 410-1 and 410-2 or performing an arc hazard analysis.
When an arc hazard analysis is performed, it shall include a calculation of the estimated arc energy based on the available fault current, the duration of the arc (cycles), and the distance from the arc to the employee.
Information gathered from the National Electrical Safety Code C2-2007
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety |
Tagged
arc flash,
electrical safety,
electrical training,
lewellyn technology,
nesc,
ppe,
ppe requirements |
Comments Off
Posted on October 8, 2008 by lewellyntech
Welcome to Lewellyn Technology’s Blog! We will feature informative posts on topics such as Arc Flash Analysis, Maintenance Training, and Electrical Safety! Please check in often!
www.lewellyn.com
blog@lewellyn.com
Posted in
arc flash,
electrical safety,
lewellyn news,
maintenance training |
Tagged
arc flash,
electrical safety,
lewellyn technology,
maintenance training,
nfpa 70e,
safety blog |
Comments Off
Page 8 of 8« First«...45678
