EPRI Arc Flash Issues in Transmission and

2011 TECHNICAL REPORT
Arc Flash Issues in Transmission and

Substation Environments
Results from Tests with Long Arcs
Arc Flash Issues in
Transmission and Substation
Environments
Results from Tests with Long Arcs
EPRI Project Manager

G. Gela
3420 Hillview Avenue

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1338
USA
PO Box 10412
Palo Alto, CA 94303-0813
USA
800.313.3774
650.855.2121
askepri@epri.com 1022632
www.epri.com Final Report, June 2011
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF

WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI).
NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY
PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH
RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM
DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED
RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE
TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING
ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT
OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS
DOCUMENT.
REFERENCE HEREIN TO ANY SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL PRODUCT, PROCESS, OR SERVICE BY ITS TRADE
NAME, TRADEMARK, MANUFACTURER, OR OTHERWISE, DOES NOT NECESSARILY CONSTITUTE OR
IMPLY ITS ENDORSEMENT, RECOMMENDATION, OR FAVORING BY EPRI.
THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS PREPARED THIS REPORT:
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
Kinectrics Inc.
Windsor Bush Consulting
NOTE
For further information about EPRI, call the EPRI Customer Assistance Center at 800.313.3774 or
e-mail askepri@epri.com.
Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI, and TOGETHERSHAPING THE FUTURE OF ELECTRICITY are
registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright 2011 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Acknowledgments The following organizations prepared this report:
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
115 East New Lenox Road
Lenox, MA 01240
Principal Investigator
G. Gela
Kinectrics Inc.
800 Kipling Ave, Unit 2
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M8Z 6C4
Principal Investigators
K. Lotho
E. Petrache
S. Cross
Windsor Bush Consulting
205 Windsor Bush Road
Cummington, MA 01026
Principal Investigator
D. Birrell
This report describes research sponsored by EPRI.
This publication is a corporate

document that should be cited in the
literature in the following manner:
Arc Flash Issues in Transmission and

Substation Environments: Results from
Tests with Long Arcs.
EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2011.
1022632.
iii
EPRI would like to acknowledge the support of the following
organizations:
American Electric Power Service Corporation

AltaLink Management Ltd.
FirstEnergy Service Company
Great River Energy
Manitoba Hydro Electric Board
MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company
New York Power Authority PSE&G
Southern Company Services, Inc
Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association , Inc.
Tennessee Valley Authority
The United Illuminating Company
Western Area Power Administration
The support of the staff at the EPRI High Voltage Laboratory in

Lenox, Massachusetts, is gratefully acknowledged.
iv
Abstract
Arc flashes are a serious hazard that may potentially put people in
life-threatening situations and cause great damage to existing assets.
National Electrical Safety Code and Occupational Safety and Health
Administration safety rules have introduced requirements for electric
utilities to perform arc-flash hazard analysis of all electric facilities
operating at and above 1000 volts.
Most methods available at this time for analyzing the arc-flash

incident thermal energy were developed for low- and medium-
voltage industrial and commercial settings. The Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI) testing and analysis summarized in this
report shows that the currently available methods for calculation of
incident thermal energies are not applicable to practical transmission
situations and lead to inaccurate estimates of incident thermal
energy.
A new empirical arc model was formulated in this project, and more
realistic curves of incident thermal energy versus arc energy, arc gap
length, and distance from the arc gap axis based on long gap tests
(gaps up to 5 ft [1.5 m]) were developed. A statistical factor was
derived that allows the user to define a desired worst-case scenario
and determine the average expected energy levels. Alternatively, the
user may choose to take advantage of the fact that the commercially
available ARCPRO software tends to provide overestimates of
incident thermal energy for the tested vertical gaps. It must be
recognized, however, that ARCPRO has not been validated for
situations outside the tested conditions.
The research performed as part of this project is expected to enhance

the safety of live work on overhead lines and in substations.
v
Planned Further Work
The equations developed in this project for calculating incident
thermal energy are based on empirical (test) data. Analysis of
obtained test data and high-speed video records indicates a need for
further refinement of the arc model and incident thermal energy
equations for arcs in long gaps that are different from the tested
vertical gaps. The following research is planned:
Investigation of voltage gradient and resulting arc power at

various regions of the arc
Investigation and modeling the physical relationship between arc
power and incident thermal energy for live working situations
Tests on full-size transmission and substation structures with
high fault current
Further development of statistical methods to predict the
probability of exposure to given incident energy levels in live
working situations
Keywords
Arc flash
Live working
Safety
Thermal energy
vi
Table of Contents
Section 1: Introduction ..............................................1-1

Objectives of the Project ...................................................1-1
Scope of the Kinectrics Project ...........................................1-1
Glossary of Terms ............................................................1-2
Arcing Current ...........................................................1-2
Gap Length ................................................................1-2
RMS Arc Voltage ........................................................1-2
Bolted Current ............................................................1-2
Boundary, Arc Flash Protection.....................................1-3
Distance to Arc...........................................................1-3
Duration ....................................................................1-3
Incident Thermal Energy ..............................................1-3
Working Distance.......................................................1-3
Structure of the Report ......................................................1-3
Section 2: Assessment of Existing Arc Models for

Applications to Arcs on Overhead
Transmission Lines and in Substations......2-1
Objective ........................................................................2-1
Existing Models for Incident Thermal Energy........................2-1
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Standard 1584-2002..................................................2-2
Lees Method..............................................................2-5
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
Standard 70E Doughtys Equations ............................2-7
Physics and Engineering Based Arc Modeling
(ARCPRO Software) ....................................................2-8
Arc Fault Modeling Techniques........................................2-11
Johns, Aggarwai and Song Study...............................2-11
Terzija and Koglin Study ...........................................2-16
Darwish and Elkalasy Study .......................................2-19
Goda, Iwata, Ikeda, and Tanaka Study.......................2-21
Summary of Main Features of Existing Methods for
Incident Thermal Energy and Arc Fault Current
Calculations ..................................................................2-24
vii
Section 3: Test Setups for High Current Arc Test in
Long Air Gaps in an Arc Cage ..................3-1
Background.....................................................................3-1
Description of the Test Set-up for Arcs in Long Gaps .............3-2
Description of Apparatus and Equipment.......................3-2
Calibration and Quality Control ...................................3-5
Description of the Test Configurations and Parameters..........3-5
VFC Test Configuration with SH Calorimeter
Configuration ...........................................................3-10
VFC Test Configuration with SV Calorimeter
Configuration ...........................................................3-12
VFC Test Configuration with SVa Calorimeter
Configuration ...........................................................3-16
VFC Test Configuration with SH2 Calorimeter
Configuration ...........................................................3-17
VFC Test Configuration with SV2 Calorimeter
Configuration ...........................................................3-19
VFC2 Test Configuration (Asymmetrical Cage) with
SH2 Calorimeter Configuration ..................................3-22
Other Test Configurations and Calorimeter
Configurations Tested................................................3-22
Section 4: Test Results and Test Data Structure ..........4-1

Summary of Tests .............................................................4-1
Section 5: Analysis of Test Data and Development

of a Simplified Equation for Calculation
of Incident Thermal Energy ......................5-1
Arc Voltage-Current (V-I) and Arc Resistance
Characteristics .................................................................5-2
Arc Voltage-Current Characteristics...............................5-2
Arc Resistance Characteristics ......................................5-4
Average Arc Voltage Gradient Analysis ...........................5-24
Background - Existing Studies on Voltage Gradient
of Long Arcs.............................................................5-24
Determination of Average Arc Voltage Gradient
Using Kinectrics-EPRI Experimental Data ......................5-27
Proposed Equation for the Average Voltage
Gradient in the Arc ...................................................5-34
Relationship between the Average Arc Voltage
Gradient and rms Arc Voltage ...................................5-42
Incident Thermal Energy Analysis .....................................5-44
Plots of Measured Incident Thermal Energy ..................5-45
viii
Analysis of the Characteristics of the Incident
Thermal Energy Measured Data .................................5-51
Incident Thermal Energy Flux......................................5-55
Development of a Simplified Equation for Incident
Thermal Energy Flux as Function of Working
Distance ..................................................................5-55
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy Flux
and Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy
as Function of Working Distance Putting it All
Together ..................................................................5-77
Summary of Test Conditions and Range of
Application of the Derived Equations ..........................5-82
Verification of the Simplified Incident Thermal Energy
Equation against Test Data ........................................5-82
Summary and Conclusions ..............................................5-85
Section 6: Analysis of the Effects of Variability of

the Arc Path and Calorimeter
Orientation..............................................6-1
Background.....................................................................6-1
Comparison of September 2009 and November 2009
Test Setups ......................................................................6-1
Analysis of Test Results......................................................6-4
Calorimeter Readings versus Gap Length.......................6-6
Calorimeter Readings versus Arc Current.....................6-17
Effects of Variability of the Arc Path ............................6-28
Effect of the Calorimeter Line-of-Sight...........................6-29
Averaging of Calorimeter Readings .................................6-35
Example ..................................................................6-35
Experimental Confirmation of the Effect of
Calorimeter Line-of-Sight ............................................6-40
Statistical Adjustment Factor.......................................6-44
Summary and Conclusions ..............................................6-48
Section 7: Comparisons of Test Data with Results

Calculated using Arcpro ...........................7-1
Comparisons for Gap Length G = 1 ft ................................7-2
Comparison for Gap Length G = 5 ft................................7-11
ix
Section 8: Summary of Derived Equations,
Conclusions and Recommendations..........8-1
Summary of Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal
Energy Flux and Incident Thermal Energy as Function of
Working Distance ............................................................8-1
Simplified Average Voltage Gradient Equation ..............8-1
Simplified Arc Voltage Equation ...................................8-2
Simplified Arc Power Equation .....................................8-2
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy Flux ......8-2
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy .............8-4
Statistical Adjustment Factor.........................................8-4
Summary of Test Conditions and Range of
Application of the Derived Simplified Equations .............8-4
Comparison with ARCPRO...........................................8-5
Conclusions.....................................................................8-5
Recommendations for Further Work....................................8-6
Task 1: Improve the Computation of Incident
Radiated and Convected Thermal Energies ....................8-7
Task 2: Conduct Tests on Full-Scale Mockups of
Transmission and Substation Structures..........................8-7
Task 3: Develop Guidelines for Handling Situations
with Multiple Arc Current Sources.................................8-7
Benefits to Project Participants ......................................8-7
Section 9: References................................................9-1
Appendix A: Results (Raw Data) from all Tests..........A-1

September 2009 Test Data .............................................. A-1
November 2009 Test Data............................................... A-6
Appendix B: Test Records (Voltage, Current,

Calorimeter Energy) ................................. B-1
Appendix C: Voltage Gradients at Current Peaks ...... C-1
Appendix D: Determination of Parameter ...............D-1
x
List of Figures
Figure 2-1 Incident Energy vs. Gap Length Calculated with

Various Methods..............................................................2-4
Figure 2-2 Incident Energy vs. Voltage Calculated with
Various Methods..............................................................2-6
Figure 2-3 Volt-Ampere Cyclograms of Heavy Current
(Primary) Arc .................................................................2-12
Figure 2-4 Volt-Ampere Cyclograms of Low Current
(Secondary) Arcs ...........................................................2-14
Figure 2-5 Line and System Configuration ..............................2-16
Figure 2-6 Recorded Arc Voltage ..........................................2-18
Figure 2-7 Recorded Arc Voltage and Current ........................2-18
Figure 2-8 EMTP Network of Synthesizer Generator and
Breaker .........................................................................2-20
Figure 2-9 Arc Conductance .................................................2-23
Figure 3-1 Photograph of the Test Cage Showing the
Arrangement of Arc Electrodes for a 1-ft Long Vertical
Air Gap ..........................................................................3-3
Figure 3-2 Photograph Showing Calorimeters Used for
Measurement of Incident Energy at Various Radial
Distances from the Electrode Axis.......................................3-4
Figure 3-3 Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH and
Cage Location and Orientation Inside HCL Test Cell
Used in the First Session of Testing Top View ..................3-11
Figure 3-4 Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH Used in
the First Session of Testing Elevation View ......................3-11
Figure 3-5 Photograph Showing the Vertical Stainless
Steel Electrodes in the Cage (VFC Configuration) with 9
Calorimeters Placed in Horizontal Configuration (SH);
Setup for 4-ft Long Air Gap. ............................................3-12
xi
Figure 3-6 Vertical Calorimeter Configuration SV Used in
the First Session of Testing Elevation View; 4-ft Gap
Configuration Shown......................................................3-13
Figure 3-8 Vertical Stainless Steel Electrodes in the Cage
(VFC) with 9 Calorimeters Placed in Vertical
Configuration (SV); Setup for 4-ft Long Air Gap Shown ......3-15
Figure 3-9 Vertical 3/4" Stainless Steel Electrodes in the
Cage (VFC) with 9 Calorimeters Placed in Vertical
Configuration (SV); Setup for 2-ft Long Air Gap Shown ......3-15
Figure 3-10 SVa Calorimeter Configuration: 9 Calorimeters
Placed in Vertical Configuration with Calorimeters 1, 3,
7, and 9 Pointed at the Mid-Point of the Gap ....................3-16
Figure 3-11 Vertical Stainless Steel Electrodes in the
Cage (VFC) with 9 Calorimeters Placed in SVa
Configuration for 2-ft Long Gap .......................................3-17
Figure 3-12 Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH2 Used
in the Second Session of Testing, and Cage Position
Inside the HCL Test Cell Top View .................................3-18
Figure 3-13 Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH2 Used
in the Second Session of Testing Elevation View..............3-18
Figure 3-14 Vertical Stainless Steel Electrodes in the
Cage (VFC) with 8 Calorimeters Placed in Horizontal
Configuration (SH2); Setup For 1-ft Long Gap Shown.........3-19
Figure 3-15 Vertical Calorimeter Configuration SV2 Used in
the Second Session of Testing (Gap Length: 4 ft)
Elevation View...............................................................3-20
Figure 3-16 Calorimeter Vertical Configuration SV2 for the
4-ft Long Gap ................................................................3-21
Figure 3-17 Cage Position Inside the HCL Test Cell for the
First and Second Testing Sessions. ...................................3-22
Figure 3-18 Testing Performed with the Asymmetrical Cage
(No Return Pipes); Distance Between the Vertical Gap
Axis and the Return Cable Is 42" .....................................3-24
Figure 3-19 Configuration VFC3: Testing Performed with
Graphite Jetrods ............................................................3-25
xii
Aluminum Rods ..............................................................3-25
Copper Rods .................................................................3-25
Figure 3-22 Configuration VFC2i: Testing Performed with
Asymmetrical Cage (VFC2) and a Polymer Insulator
Inserted in the Gap between and Attached to the
Electrodes (Insulator Length 31" Metal to Metal) ................3-26
Figure 4-1 Sample of Recorded Waveforms .............................4-8
Figure 5-1 Voltage-Current Characteristics of Arcs in the 1-ft
Gap ...............................................................................5-3
Figure 5-2 Voltage-Current characteristics of Arcs in 2-ft
Gap ...............................................................................5-3
Figure 5-3 Voltage-Current Characteristics of Arcs in 4-ft
Gap ...............................................................................5-4
Figure 5-4 Voltage-Current Characteristics of Arcs in 5-ft
Gap ...............................................................................5-4
Figure 5-5 Equivalent Circuit used in Kinectrics Tests.................5-5
Figure 5-6 Short Circuit Voltage and Current Waveforms
across the Cage...............................................................5-6
Figure 5-7 Peak to Peak Magnitude and Phase V-I Phase
Shift................................................................................5-7
Figure 5-8 Voltage and Current Curves for 1-ft Gap and 8
kA Current Test ..............................................................5-10
Figure 5-9 Sample Arc Voltage Waveform .............................5-10
Figure 5-10 Voltage at Arc Current Peak to RMS Voltage
Ratio.............................................................................5-18
Figure 5-11 More Accurate Arc Resistance as Function of
Arc Current ...................................................................5-19
Figure 5-12 Voltage Gradient Calculation ..............................5-25
Figure 5-13 Voltage and Current Measurement Points .............5-28
Figure 5-14 Arc Voltage at Current Peaks vs. Arc Current for
Different Gap Lengths .....................................................5-29
Figure 5-15 Arc Voltage Gradient vs. Arc Current for
Different Gap Lengths (Cage Voltage Removed) ................5-30
xiii
Figure 5-16 Arc Voltage Gradient vs. Arc Current for 1 ft
Gap (Cage Voltage Removed).........................................5-31
Figure 5-20 Arc Voltage Gradient vs. Arc Current for
Different Gap Lengths .....................................................5-35
Figure 5-21 Intercept vs. Gap Length ..................................5-37
Figure 5-22 Slope vs. Gap Length ......................................5-37
Figure 5-23 Linear Approximation of Calculated Average
Arc Voltage Gradient for Different Gaps...........................5-40
Figure 5-24 Arc Voltage Gradient from Test Data and from
Equation 5-16 for 1 ft Gap..............................................5-41
Figure 5-28 Schematic Test Setup for Measuring Radial
Profiles of Incident Thermal Energy...................................5-45
Figure 5-29 Incident Thermal Energy for 1-ft Gap Length, 2
Cycles ..........................................................................5-46
Cycles ..........................................................................5-46
Figure 5-31 Incident Energy for 1-ft Gap Length, 12 Cycles......5-47
Cycles ..........................................................................5-47
Cycles ..........................................................................5-48
Cycles ..........................................................................5-48
xiv
Cycles ..........................................................................5-49
Cycles ..........................................................................5-49
Cycles ..........................................................................5-50
Cycles. Change gap to gap length...................................5-50
Figure 5-39 Sketch of Working Distance, D, Relative to Gap
Length, G, for Various Values of G...................................5-54
Figure 5-40 Incident Thermal Energy Flux for 1-ft Gap .............5-68
Figure 5-44 Average Decay Factor x as Function of Gap
Length...........................................................................5-72
Figure 5-45 Parameter versus Arc Current for all Gap
Lengths .........................................................................5-73
Figure 5-46 Parameter versus Arc Current for Gap Length
G = 1 ft ........................................................................5-74
G = 2 ft ........................................................................5-74
G = 4 ft ........................................................................5-75
G = 5 ft ........................................................................5-75
Figure 5-50 Parameter versus Gap Length G in m.................5-76
Figure 5-51 Parameter versus Gap Length G in ft .................5-77
Figure 5-52 Comparison of Calculated Incident Thermal
Energy Flux (Equation 5-65) and Measured Data, G = 1
ft ..................................................................................5-83
ft ..................................................................................5-83
xv
ft ..................................................................................5-84
ft ..................................................................................5-84
Figure 6-1 Plan View of the Test Setup in September Tests ..........6-2
Figure 6-2 Plan View of the Test Setup in November Tests ........6-3
Figure 6-3 Comparison of the Locations and Orientations
of the Test Setup in the September (Black Lines) and
November (Red Lines) Tests ...............................................6-3
Figure 6-4 General View of the Test Cage................................6-5
Figure 6-5 Sequence of Still Photographs from a High-Speed
Video of a 40 kA, 6 Cycle Arc Test in a 4 ft Gap ................6-5
Figure 6-6 Additional Examples of Arc Behavior .......................6-6
Figure 6-7 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 1-ft Gap................6-8
Figure 6-8 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 2 ft Gap .............6-11
Figure 6-9 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 4 ft Gap .............6-13
Figure 6-10 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 1 ft Gap ...........6-15
Figure 6-13 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 8 kA Arcs .........6-18
Figure 6-14 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 20 kA Arcs .......6-21
Figure 6-15 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 40 kA Arcs ......6-24
Figure 6-16 Highest Calorimeter Readings for 8 kA Arcs .........6-27
Figure 6-19 Sketch of the test cage........................................6-31
Figure 6-20 Plots of Variation of Normalized Calorimeter
Readings as Function of Arc Location; Arc Represented
by a Point Source (Spherical Structure) .............................6-39
Figure 6-21 Plots of Variation of Normalized Calorimeter
by a Cylindrical Source (Cylindrical Structure) ...................6-40
xvi
Figure 6-23 SVa Calorimeter Configuration: 9 Calorimeters
Placed in Vertical Configuration with Calorimeters 1, 3,
7, and 9 Pointed at the Mid-Point of the Gap ....................6-42
Figure 6-24 Comparison of Adjusted Calculated Incident
Thermal Energy Flux (Using Equation 6-9) and Measured
Data, G = 1 ft ...............................................................6-46
Data, G = 2 ft ...............................................................6-46
Data, G = 4 ft ...............................................................6-47
Data, G = 5 ft ...............................................................6-47
Figure 7-1 Comparison of Measured Incident Thermal
Energy with ARCPRO Calculation, Iarc = 8 kA, Duration =
6 Cycles, Gap Length = 1 ft ..............................................7-2
12 Cycles, Gap Length = 1 ft ............................................7-2
Energy with ARCPRO Calculation, Iarc = 20 kA, Duration
= 2 Cycles, Gap Length = 1 ft ...........................................7-3
xvii
= 2 Cycles, Gap Length = 4 ft .........................................7-10
xviii
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Typical Gap Lengths for Various Equipment

Classes ..........................................................................2-3
Table 2-2 Distance Factors for Various Equipment Types and
Voltages..........................................................................2-3
Table 2-3 Range of Applicability of the IEEE Standard
1584-2002 Equation ........................................................2-5
Table 3-1 Equipment List.........................................................3-5
Table 3-2 Record ID Naming System for EPRI Tests and
Description of Test Configurations ......................................3-6
Table 3-3 Cross-Reference of Test Numbers for Each Test
Configuration ..................................................................3-8
Table 4-1 Sample of Raw Test Data (VFC Cage and
Electrode Configuration, SH Calorimeter Configuration) .......4-3
Table 4-2 Sample of Raw Test Data (VFC Cage and
Electrode Configuration, SV Calorimeter Configuration) .......4-4
Table 4-3 Sample of the Contents of the Voltage and
Current Text Files .............................................................4-5
Table 4-4 Sample of the Contents of the Voltage and
Current Text Files .............................................................4-6
Table 5-1 Arc Test Parameters.................................................5-1
Table 5-2 Bolted Fault across the Kinectrics Cage......................5-6
Table 5-3 Peak Cage Voltage, Cage Current, and Phase
Shift................................................................................5-8
Table 5-4 RMS Voltage to Arc Voltage Comparison ................5-12
Table 5-5 Calculation of Arc Resistance .................................5-20
Table 5-6 Parameters of the Goda Study ................................5-25
Table 5-7 Parameters of the Strom Study ................................5-26
Table 5-8 Summary of Results from the Strom Study .................5-27
xix
Table 5-9 Summary of Arc Voltage Gradients for VArious
Gap Lengths and Arc Currents.........................................5-33
Table 5-10 Parameters and in Equation 5-13 as
Function of Gap Length...................................................5-35
Table 5-11 Comparison between Average Voltage Gradient
Calculated Using the Linear Fits from Figure 5-20 and
the Derived Equation 5-16 ..............................................5-39
Table 5-12 Equations of Best-Fit Curves of Incident Thermal
Energy, W, versus Working Distance, D ...........................5-52
Table 5-13 Steps in the Derivation of the Expression for .......5-57
Table 5-14 Groupings of Test Data and .................................5-64
Table 5-15 Equations of Best-Fit for Variation of Incident
Thermal Energy Flux, , with Working Distance, D............5-71
Table 5-16 Comparison of Average and Individual Values
of the Decay Factor, x ....................................................5-71
Table 5-17 Average Decay Factor Values x from Table 5-
16................................................................................5-72
Table 5-18 Arc Test Parameters.............................................5-82
Table 6-1 Summary of the Spread Data and the Resulting
Estimated Arc Offset for the Extreme Shots ........................6-34
Table 6-2 Calculated Variation of Normalized Calorimeter
2
by a Point Source (Spherical Structure; Variation 1/d ).......6-37
Table 6-3 Calculated Variation of Normalized Calorimeter
by an Infinite Cylindrical Structure (Line Source;
Variation 1/d) ...............................................................6-38
Table 6-4 Effect of Calorimeter Line-of-Sight ............................6-43
Table 6-5 Computed Average Difference and Standard
Deviation of the Difference between Measured and
Calculated Incident Thermal Energy Flux...........................6-45
Table 8-1 Arc Test Parameters.................................................8-5
Table C-1 Voltage Gradients at Current Peaks for 1-ft Gap ..... C-2
Table C-2 Voltage Gradients at Current Peaks for 2-ft Gap ... C-11
xx
Table D-1 Determination of Parameter ................................. D-1
xxi
Section 1: Introduction
In recent years much laboratory testing was performed and computational
methods were developed to determine the incident thermal energy from
accidental exposure to electric arcs in order to assist with the selection of arc
resistant Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). By far most of the modeling
and testing has been related to low voltage applications and almost exclusively for
arcs shorter than 6 inches and system voltages below 13.8 kV. Very little
information exists that is applicable to arcs in longer air gaps relevant to higher
voltage transmission systems.
Kinectrics has developed a software package (ARCPRO) for calculation of arc

flash hazards. The verified range of the software is mainly in the medium voltage
range for arcs in vertical air gaps and in gaps less that 1 ft in length. There have
been no test results to verify arc model for situations on overhead transmission
and outdoor substations where gaps (i.e., distances between electrodes where an
arc occurs) are much longer, and the arcs can be of any orientation, can deviate
significantly from a straight path, and can be subjected to electromagnetic forces,
thermal drift, wind, and other disturbing factors.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) launched a project to obtain test
results for long gaps. These results are needed to assess the validity of existing
transmission arc hazard assessment methods and eventually to develop arc models
that would be applicable to power arc situations in overhead transmission and
outdoor substations. All testing work for this project was performed by
Kinectrics, and analysis of results and additional research were done by Kinectrics
Inc., EPRI and Windsor Bush Consulting.
Objectives of the Project
The main objectives of this project are to obtain test results to quantify incident
thermal energy from single-arc events that could occur on overhead transmission
lines and in outdoor substation, and to develop a simple method for computation
of the incident thermal energy in these situations.
Scope of the Kinectrics Project
The scope of work performed by Kinectrics consisted in the following tasks:

Task 1: Identify the limitations of existing arc models for application to arcs
in air at transmission voltages and in long gaps.
1-1
Task 2: Investigate methodologies to assess incident thermal energy from
transmission electric arcs and develop a proposal of an adequate yet simple
method.
Task 3: Perform arc testing in long gaps, analyze the test results and prepare
progress reports
Task 4: Develop a simple computational; model of arcs in long air gaps,
compare with the model with test data and other available computational
methods, and revise the model as needed
Task 5: Prepare a Final Report for EPRI
This report describes the tests performed by Kinectrics and analysis and
additional research performed by Kinectrics Inc., EPRI and Windsor Bush
Consulting.
The results obtained through Kinectrics tests are presented and analyzed.
Comparisons between the test data Kinectrics and other previous published
studied are made. An empirically-based simplified equation that can be used to
estimate incident thermal energies at various working distances is presented.
Glossary of Terms
Arcing Current
The current that jumps a gap of normally nonconductive media (such as air)
between two electrodes in the event of an electrical breakdown.
Gap Length
The distance between the electrodes. The arc is assumed not to consume the
electrode material, so that the gap length remains constant for the duration of the
arc. Note, however, that tests described and analyzed in this report show that arcs
in long gaps meander and assume varying paths. As a result, the distance
between the electrodes GAP LENGTH is not a good measure of the ARC
LENGTH for arcs in long gaps. In this report, we use GAP LENGTH without
the modified arc to refer to the physical distance between the electrodes. Also,
tests have shown that some small amount of electrode material is consumed in
high-current tests.
RMS Arc Voltage
The root-mean-square (rms) value of the voltage across the arc column caused by
the arc resistance, excluding the cathode and anode voltage drops.
Bolted Current
Bolted current is equivalent to the short-circuit current. It is defined as the

current flowing through a low-resistance connection established accidentally or
intentionally between two points in an electric circuit.
1-2
Boundary, Arc Flash Protection
When an arc flash hazard exists, an approach limit at a distance from a

prospective arc source within which a person could receive a second degree burn
if an electrical arc flash were to occur.
Distance to Arc
The radial distance from the center of the arc column to the surface receiving the
heat or heat flux. Note, however, that tests described and analyzed in this report
show that long arcs meander and assume varying paths. As a result, the actual
physical distance to an arc in a long gap cannot be predicted or determined, and
must be treated as a probabilistic parameter. In this report, which summarizes
tests that were performed with the vertical electrode configuration, the term,
DISTANCE TO ARC is used to define the radial distance between the axis of
the electrode gap and the location of the calorimeter positioned radially out and
at elevation corresponding to the mid-point of the gap.
Duration
The time span of the arc from initiation to extinction, specified as the number of
cycles of 60 Hz current.
Incident Thermal Energy
The amount of thermal energy impressed per unit surface area, at a certain
distance from the source, generated during an electrical arc event. The primary
unit used for incident thermal energy in this report is calories per centimeter-
squared (cal/cm2). The final equations are also expressed in Joules per
centimeter-squared (J/cm2).
Working Distance
WORKING DISTANCE is used to describe the physical radial distance

between the axis of the electrode gap and the location of the calorimeter
positioned radially out and at elevation corresponding to the mid-point of the
gap.
Structure of the Report
This report consists of 9 Sections and 4 Appendices.
Section 1, Introduction, contains the background and description of the

project.
Section 2, Assessment of Existing Arc Models for Applications to Arcs on

Overhead Transmission Lines and in Substations, provides a review of available
methods for estimate of the incident thermal energy that were developed for arcs
in short gaps, discusses disadvantages of these methods and identifies
1-3
fundamental reasons that make these methods unsuitable for use in situations
involving long gaps. The following methods are reviewed and discussed:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standard 1584-
2002
Lees Method
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 70E Doughtys
Equations
Physics and Engineering Based Arc Modeling (ARCPRO Software)
Arc Fault Modeling Techniques
- Johns, Aggarwai and Song Study
- Terzija and Koglin Study
- Darwish and Elkalasy Study
- Goda, Iwata, Ikeda, and Tanaka Study
Section 3, Test Setups for High Current Arc Test in Long Air Gaps in an Arc
Cage describes the arc cage tests.
Section 4, Test Results and Test Data Structure discusses the general features
and form of the test data.
Section 5, Analysis of Test Data and Development of a Simplified Equation for

Calculation of Incident Thermal Energy contains detailed analysis of the arc
cage data and derivation of a simplified equation for estimating the incident
thermal energy produced by high-current arcs in long arc gaps. The following
topics are covered:
Arc Voltage-Current (V-I) Characteristics
Arc Resistance Characteristics
Determination of Average Arc Voltage Gradient Using Kinectrics-EPRI
Experimental Data
Incident Thermal Energy Analysis
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy Flux as Function of
Working Distance
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy as Function of Working
Distance
Statistical Adjustment Factor
Section 6, Analysis of the Effects of Variability of the Arc Path and Calorimeter
Orientation presents an analysis of the effects of variability of the arc path and
calorimeter orientation relative to the arc (calorimeter line-of-sight). The
following topics are covered:
Comparison of September 2009 and November 2009 Test Setups
Analysis of Test Results
1-4
Calorimeter Readings versus Gap Length
Calorimeter Readings versus Arc Current
Effects of Variability of the Arc Path
Effect of the Calorimeter Line-of-Sight
Modeling the observed calorimeter spread
Averaging of Calorimeter Readings
Experimental Confirmation of the Effect of Calorimeter Line-of-Sight
Summary and Conclusions
Section 7, Comparisons of Test Data with Results Calculated Using ARCPRO

presents comparisons between test data and ARCPRO calculated results.
Section 8, Conclusions and Recommendations includes conclusions of this

study and recommendations for future work.
Section 9, References, lists applicable references used in the report.
Appendices contain raw test data and other supporting materials:

Appendix A: Results (Raw Data) from All Tests
- September 2009 Test Data
- November 2009 Test Data
Appendix B: Test Records
Appendix C: Voltage Gradients at Current Peaks
Appendix D: Energy Flux at 1-ft Working Distance
1-5
Section 2: Assessment of Existing Arc
Models for Applications to Arcs
on Overhead Transmission Lines
and in Substations
Objective
The objective of this Section is to determine the suitability of existing arc flash
incident energy calculation methods for assessing high voltage arc hazards in high
voltage transmission and substation applications.
Various arc flash modeling methods that may be applicable to long arc gaps and
high voltage situations are examined. The technical assumptions and limitations
of these methods are discussed and their applicability to calculations of incident
energy in high voltage transmission and substation applications is evaluated.
Existing Models for Incident Thermal Energy
The empirically derived equations, namely the IEEE-1584 [2] equations and
Doughtys equations [6], fail to accurately determine the amount of incident
energy released at such conditions and produce unreasonable (over-predicted)
results for arc gaps greater than 24 inches. Doughtys equations do not take arc
gap distances into consideration since his equations are experimentally derived
based on a fixed arc gap distance of 1.25 (3.175 cm) at 600V. Therefore, they
will likely under-predict incident energy levels at higher voltage components,
which are usually associated with longer arc gap distances (longer than 2 ft).
Ralph Lees equation [4], as offered in the same standard, assumes an arc gap
that provides maximum energy and that the entire arc energy is delivered by
thermal radiation. Lees equation is unrealistic and is considered too conservative
industry-wide. It generates unrealistic results beyond 4.16 kV.
Unlike the IEEE-1584 equations and Doughtys equations, ARCPRO [8] is

developed based on arc physics. However, ARCPRO is intended to predict
incident energy levels for single phase arcs and was only verified for the arc
lengths between 1 inch and 12 inches.
2-1
Consequently, the existing incident energy calculation methods and algorithms
are not applicable to transmission voltages with long arc gaps.
Several methods are discussed in detail next.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standard

1584-2002
The IEEE Standard 1584-2002 defines a set of equations that can be used to
calculate the incident energy of an arc flash event [1-3]. The equations were
statistically derived using a large number of test data from several different
laboratories. The procedure begins with calculating the three-phase bolted fault
current at the point of interest. The arcing current is then determined as follows:
For a system voltage less than 1 kV, Ia is calculated from Equation 2-1:
log I a 0.00402 0.983 log I bf Equation 2-1
where:
Ia = arcing current (kA)

K = -0.153 for open configurations
Ibf= bolted fault current for three-phase faults (symmetrical rms) (kA)
V = system voltage (kV)
G = gap between conductors (mm); typical values are shown on Table 2-1
For a system voltage greater than 1 kV, Ia is calculated from Equation 2-2:
log I a 0.00402 0.983 log I bf Equation 2-2
Note that these equations do not distinguish between box and open
configuration.
Also, for system voltages over 15 kV, the arcing fault current is assumed to be
equal to the bolted fault current.
The incident energy is then calculated using the following:
log E n K 1 K 2 1.081 log I a 0.0011G Equation 2-3
where:
En = incident energy (J/cm2) normalized for time = 0.2 seconds and gap length =
610 mm
K1= -0.792 for open configurations and -0.555 for box configurations
K2= 0 for ungrounded and high-resistance grounded systems and -0.113 for
grounded systems
2-2
G = the gap between conductors (mm); typical values are shown on Table 2-1
To convert from the normalized incident energy En to incident energy, E, for any
duration and any gap length, use the following:
t 610 x
E 4.184C f E n Equation 2-4
0.2 D x
where:
E = incident energy (J/cm2)

Cf =1.0 for voltages above 1 kV and 1.5 for voltages at or below 1 kV
En= incident energy normalized for time = 0.2 seconds and gap length = 610 mm
t = arcing time (seconds)
D = distance from the possible arc point to the person (mm)
x = distance exponent; typical values are shown on Table 2-2
Table 2-1
Typical Gap Lengths for Various Equipment Classes
Classes of Equipment Typical Bus Gaps (mm)

15 kV Switchgear 910
5 kV Switchgear 910
Low-Voltage Switchgear 610
Low-Voltage MCCs and Panelboards 455
Cable 455
Other To be determined in field
Table 2-2
Distance Factors for Various Equipment Types and Voltages
System Voltage (kV) Equipment Type Distance x Factor

0.208 1 Open Air 2.000
Switchgear 1.473
MCC and Panels 1.641
Cable 2.000
>1-5 Open Air 2.000
Switchgear 0.973
Cable 2.000
> 5 - 15 Open Air 2.000
Switchgear 0.973
Cable 2.000
2-3
IEEE Standard 1584-2002 Operating Conditions and Limitations
Although a wide data set was used to generate the IEEE 1584-2002 equations,
including conditions with supply voltages from 208 V to 18.8 kV, bolted fault
currents from 700 A to 106 kA, and gap lengths from 7 mm to 152 mm [2, 3],
there is a lack of data for long, high voltage arcs.
Figure 2-1 illustrates the behavior of the IEEE 1584 equation 2-4 for incident
thermal energy when it is applied to long gaps. Figure 2-1 was generated with all
parameters being constant, except the gap length (referred to as the arc gap in the
Figure) as per Equation 2-3 and Equation 2-4. Figure 2-1 shows that the
calculated incident energy levels increase drastically and become unreasonable
when the gap length increases beyond 2 ft. For transmission line and substation
situations, the gap length can reach 2 ft to 12 ft and more.
Incident Energy vs. Arc Gap
50
45
40
35
Incident Energy (cal/cm2)
30
25
20
15
10
0
6 12 24 48 96
Arc Gap (in.)
Arcpro without Factors Arcpro with Factors IEEE 1584 Equations Ralph Lee's Equation
Figure 2-1
Incident Energy vs. Gap Length Calculated with Various Methods
As such, IEEE1584-2002 is not suitable for modeling the arcs in long gaps such
as those found in transmission line and substation situations. Further, the range
of application of the equations is limited to the values listed in Table 2-3.
2-4
Table 2-3
Range of Applicability of the IEEE Standard 1584-2002 Equation
Parameter Rating
Voltage Level 208 V - 15 kV
Frequency 50 Hz or 60 Hz
Bolted Fault Current 700 A to 106 kA
Gap Widths 13 mm (~1/4 in) to 152 mm ( 6 in)
Fault Type Three Phase
System Setup grounded, ungrounded, high resistance
grounded
Equipment Enclosure open air, common equipment enclosure
Lees Method
For conditions outside of the range established for IEEE 1584-2002 (voltages
greater than 15 kV or gap lengths greater than 152 mm, for example), the Lee
equations 2-5 and 2-6 are generally used [4]. Equation 2-5 is used to calculate
the incident thermal energy as a function of distance from the arc point (and as
function of system voltage and bolted fault current).
E 2.142 10 6VI bf 2
t
Equation 2-5
D
where:
E = incident energy (J/cm2)

t = arcing time (seconds)
D = distance from possible arc point to person (mm)
Ibf = bolted fault current
Equation 2-6 (which results from rearrangement of Equation 2-5 to give D as

function of E) is used to determine the boundary beyond which thermal exposure
is considered acceptable.
t
DB 2.142 106VIbf Equation 2-6
EB
where:
DB = distance of the boundary from the arcing point (mm)

Ibf = bolted fault current (kA)
2-5
EB = incident energy in J/cm2 at the boundary distance
t = time (seconds)
Limitations of Lees Method
The Lees model is generally found to be too conservative for high voltage
scenarios. It assumes that all of the arc power dissipated is converted into
radiation, although it is estimated that only 10% to 20% of arc power escapes as
radiation. Most arc power is delivered to, and stored in, the plasma cloud as
high-temperature plasma enthalpy [5]. Also, the optimal arc gap length is
assumed so that the maximum power is produced and the maximum arc wattage
is 0.5 times the maximum kVA bolted fault capability of the system. In addition,
because voltage is an equation parameter, calculated incident energies for
transmission level voltages come out to be extremely high.
As seen from Figure 2-1, for Ralph Lees model, the incident energy levels do
not change in accordance to the gap length because G (the gap length) is not a
parameter in Equation 2-5. Theoretically, under the condition that the arc is
sustainable, a large gap length would result in a higher incident energy level.
Another more significant feature of the Lee Method can be seen in Figure 2-2.
Incident Energy vs. Voltage
30
25
20
Incident Energy (cal/cm2)
15
10
0
600 4,160 13,800 27,600
Voltage (V)
Arcpro without Factors Arcpro with Factors IEEE 1584 Equations Ralph Lee's Equation
Figure 2-2
Incident Energy vs. Voltage Calculated with Various Methods
Figure 2-2 was generated with all parameters being constant, except the system
voltages. When the voltage exceeds 4.16 kV, the incident energy levels calculated
using Lees equation become unreasonable because the incident energy is
assumed to be proportional to system voltage (see Equation 2-5). Thus, totally
2-6
unrealistic values will be produced for transmission voltage levels of 69 kV to 500
kV.
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 70E

Doughtys Equations
In the IEEE paper Predicting Incident Energy to Better Manage the Electric
Arc Hazard on 600-V Power Distribution Systems [6], the authors developed
two equations, described below to predict the incident energy in air as well as in a
box. These equations are also used in the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) Standard 70E [7].
Arc in Air Equation:
EMA 5271DA1.9593 t A (0.0016F 2 0.0076F 0.8398) Equation 2-7
where:
DA = distance from arc electrodes, in (DA 18)

EMA = maximum open-arc incident energy, cal/cm2
F = bolted fault current, kA (16-50 kA range)
tA= arc duration, seconds
Arc In-a-Box Equation:
EMB 1038.7 DB1.4738 t A (0.0093F 2 0.3453F 5.9675) Equation 2-8
where:
DB = distance from arc electrodes, in (DB 18)

EMB = maximum 20-in cubic box incident energy, cal/cm2
F = bolted fault current, kA (16-50 kA range)
tA= arc duration, seconds
Both curve-fit equations are derived based on test results at 600V, 6-cycle arcs
with an electrode gaps of 1.25 inches.
Limitations of Doughtys Equations
The most significant limitation of the equations is that they were derived
empirically based on a fixed gap length of 1.25 inches; hence, the gap length is
not included in the equations as a parameter. As a result, it is impossible to
extend the model to generate realistic incident energy values for larger gap
lengths.
As mentioned previously, the equations were validated only for 600V open and
in-box arcs with arc gap length of 1.25 inches and arc durations of 6 cycles.
2-7
Physics and Engineering Based Arc Modeling (ARCPRO
Software)
The ARCPRO software [8] utilizes physics-based models of arc plasma to

determine incident thermal energy at various distances from arc axis. Models are
based on principles of thermal physics, electrical conduction, and heat transfer.
A number of assumptions are made in the derivation of the basic energy equation
used in ARCPRO. These include (the numbering of the assumptions does not
necessarily suggest an order of importance, but is used to facilitate referencing
specific assumption in subsequent Sections of the report):
1. The arc is considered to be vertical and free burning in air
2. Arc length is assumed to be the same as the gap length
3. Arc length is assumed to be much greater than arc diameter
4. Heat transfer around the electrode region is not significant and the
temperature field is one-dimensional inside the arc
5. There is only one temperature field under local thermodynamic equilibrium
6. Thermodynamic functions and transport properties are temperature-
dependent only
7. Volumetric and homogenous radiation energy losses are assumed
8. The effects of the electrode vapor on the plasma radiated and gas properties
can be neglected
9. The melting and shortening of electrodes is not considered
10. The wire and gas explosion during ignition is not considered
11. The arc current and voltage are defined as their corresponding root-mean-
square (rms) values
12. The electrical circuit is resistive, which is appropriate for modeling long
primary arcs
Based on these assumptions, the equations used by ARCPRO are listed below.
Power Density Equation for a Unit of Height in a Vertical Arc Column
T 1 T
c p E 2 enet r Equation 2-9
t r r r
where:
r= radial distance from the arc (m)

t = time (s)
T= temperature (K)
= gas density (kg/m3)
= gas thermal conductivity (W/(mK))
2-8
cp = gas specific heat at constant pressure (J/(Kkg))
= gas electrical conductivity (S/m)
E= electric field in the arc column (V/m)
enet= net radiation heat transfer from electrical arc to its surroundings (W/m3), it
is a function of plasma viscosity, which in turn, is a function of temperature. enet
values are presented in a lookup table in ARCPRO.
At atmospheric pressure, the thermodynamic and transport properties of gas can

be considered as temperature dependent only, therefore:
= (T)
= (T)
cp= cp(T)
= (T)
enet= enet(T)
The electrical field strength can be calculated using Ohm's Law:
J (t ) E (t ) Equation 2-10
and the electric current continuity equation:

I (t ) J (t ) 2r dr Equation 2-11
0
or

I (t ) E t 2r dr Equation 2-12
0
where
I(t)= arc current (A)

J(t) = arc current density (A/m2)
Equation 2-12 also assumes that the electric field, E, in the arc is one-
dimensional, i.e., it is not a function of radial distance from the arc axis (although
it may be a function of location along the arc axis). This is a reasonable
assumption based on Assumption 3 above.
Re-writing the above equation gives:
E (t ) I (t ) R (t ) Equation 2-13
where R(t) is the arc resistance of a unit length of the arc column:
2-9
1
R(t )
Equation 2-14

0
2 dr
If the arc length is assumed to be equal to the gap length, G, see Assumption 2
above, the arc voltage is given by:
Varc (t ) E (t ) G Va Vc Equation 2-15
where:
G = gap length (in appropriate unit of length)

Va = Arc Anode Fall Voltage (V)
Vc= Arc Cathode Fall Voltage (V)
The total power of the arc is:
PT (t ) Varc I (t ) Equation 2-16
The Total Heat is HT given by:
H T PT (t ) dt Equation 2-17
where the time integral is over the duration of the arc. It is conservatively
assumed that the total power of the arc is converted to heat.
The Radiated Heat is HR given by:
H R PR (t ) dt Equation 2-18
where the time integral is over the duration of the arc, and
PR(t) = enet d Equation 2-19
where d is a volume element and the volume integral is over the whole arc.
The Total Convected Heat is HC given by:
HC = HT - H R Equation 2-20
The radiated and convected heat received at a test surface remote from the arc is
determined by the position (and orientation) of the surface with respect to the
arc.
Furthermore, the convected heat at any test surface is a function of time, based
on the speed of movement of the hot air away from the arc column.
2-10
The arc is defined as a conducting core where the gas temperature is higher than
6000 K.
The diameter of the core is twice the radius r0, where r0 is defined by the solution
of:
T (r0 , t) = 6000 K
where T(r0,t) is the temperature field in the arc as a function of radius and time
(see Assumption 4 above).
A finite difference method is used in ARCPRO to determine T(r0,t) and E(t).

From these quantities, all other heat-related parameters are obtained in the
manner indicated by the above equations 2-9 through 2-20.
Limitations of ARCPRO
As mentioned previously, ARCPRO is meant to model single phase, open air

arcs. For 3- phase or in-box arcs, multiplying factors for ARCPRO single-arc
results are used so that the software total output will match those measured in
IEEE 1584 tests. Since the IEEE 1584 data sets were primarily for voltages less
than 13.8 kV and arc gaps of less than 152 mm (6), calculations for voltages over
13.8 kV have not been validated. To date, the authors of ARCPRO are not
aware of any test data upon which to verify ARCPRO computations for 13.8 kV
or above.
Arc Fault Modeling Techniques
Long arcs that occur in free air, particularly arc faults on transmission systems,
are complex and nonlinear by nature. These arcs are influenced by many factors,
including magnetic forces produced by the supply current, the convection of the
plasma and the surrounding air, and atmospheric conditions [9]. Determining a
suitable and comprehensive representation for such arcs is important, as models
are used to design protection systems or to determine incident energies that will
dictate what PPE are required. This section describes the modeling and testing
reported in the literature on high voltage and long gap arcs. However, all papers
discussed below attempt to model the conductance of the arcs but do not include
calculations of incident thermal energy. They are included here only for
completeness.
Johns, Aggarwai and Song Study
From a modeling perspective, a fault arc can be classified into a high current
primary arc and low current secondary arc. The primary arc occurs during the
fault; the secondary arc occurs after the breakers trip and is sustained by mutual
coupling between the faulted and un-faulted phases. The study (Improved
Techniques for Modeling Fault Arcs on Faulted EHV Transmission Systems) by
A.T. Johns, R.K. Aggarwai, and Y.H. Song [10] proposes a time dependent
dynamic resistance representation of the primary arc, with emphasis on an
2-11
empirical approach for determining parameters concerned. Dynamic conducting
characteristics of the secondary arc model were also addressed.
The authors first develop a method to determine all the parameters of the arc
model. The method is based on experimental data which is then used to develop
an empirical relationship between the parameters and the fault current.
Primary Arc Model
The primary arc can be assumed to behave similarly to the constrained switching
arc. In [11], Strom experimentally obtained volt-ampere cyclograms that define
the arc hysteresis effect for arcs with peak currents of 1.4 kA and 14 kA. Figure
2-1 below shows his findings.
Peak current of 1.3 kA Peak current of 14 kA
Figure 2-3
Volt-Ampere Cyclograms of Heavy Current (Primary) Arc
According to [12], the dynamic arc characteristics can be simulated by the

following equation:
dg p 1
(G p g p ) Equation 2-21
dt Tp
where:
gp = time varying arc conductance
Tp = time constant
Gp= stationary primary arc conductance
Gp is a static characteristic of the arc and can be calculated by:
|i|
Gp Equation 2-22
V pl p
Vp = constant voltage parameter per unit length of primary arc
lp = arc length
2-12
|i|= absolute value of arc current
Experiments have shown that the voltage drop along the main arc column is
substantially independent of the current and that the voltage drop per unit length
is nearly constant for much of the arc cycle. According to Strom [11] and
Maikopar [13], over the range of current 1.4 kA to 24 kA, the average constant
arc voltage gradient is approximately 15 V/cm. As such,
V p 15 V/cm Equation 2-23
where
Vp = constant voltage parameter per unit length of primary arc
The time, Tp, and arc length, lp, are constants for the primary arc. Further,
according to [12], the rate of rise of voltage to reach the stationary voltage
characteristics, Vp, to which the time constant Tp is inversely proportional is given
by:
15lp/0.27Ip
where Ip is the value of the primary arc current.
This is used to empirically derive the time constant for arc current as:
I p
Tp Equation 2-24
lp
where is approximately 2.5 x 10-5 for heavy current arcs.
This is empirically obtained by fitting Equation (2-21) with Equations (2-22)

and (2-24) to match the experimental cyclograms of the arc currents ranging
from 1.4 kA to 24 kA.
The arc voltage drop is very small for high current primary arcs, so to estimate
the peak value of the primary arc current, Ip, a bolted fault is assumed and fault
analysis is used to determine the fault current at this condition.
Secondary Arc Model
The secondary arc is considerably more complex. It is associated with voltage

reversals and, before being permanently extinguished, can cause repeated
successive partial arc extinctions and restrikes as the arc current and voltage pass
through zero. In a previous study by Johns and Aggarwai [14, 15], the secondary
arc was modeled as empirically derived equations based on experimental data.
The Johns, Aggarwai and Song study [10] proposes an improvement over the
previous model.
2-13
Figure 2-4 shows the hysteresis characteristics of the volt-ampere cyclograms for
long low current arcs. This was found experimentally by Strom [11].
Figure 2-4
Volt-Ampere Cyclograms of Low Current (Secondary) Arcs
In the Johns, Aggarwai and Song study [10] study it was determined that the
characteristics in the figure can be defined by the following equations:
dg s 1
(Gs g s ) Equation 2-25
dt Ts
where:
gs= time varying arc conductance

Ts = time constant
Gs = stationary secondary arc conductance
and Gs is found by
|i|
Gs Equation 2-26
Vsls (tr )
where:
Vs = constant voltage parameter per unit length of secondary arc
ls = arc length
|i|= absolute value of arc current
tr = time from the initiation of secondary arc to a current zero
In [13], it was found that in the range of 1A to 55 A, the constant voltage

parameter Vs is a function of the current Is and can be approximated by:
Vs 75 Is 0.4 Equation 2-27
2-14
Vs = constant voltage parameter per unit length of secondary arc, V/cm
Is= peak value of secondary arc current
From Figure 2-4, the rate of rise of secondary voltage is Vsls(tr)/(0.15Is). This is
used to empirically find the time constant Ts:
I s 1. 4
Ts Equation 2-28
ls (tr )
where = is approximately 2.51 x 10-3 for low current arcs.
This is empirically obtained by fitting equation (2-25) with equations (2-27) and
(2-28) to match the experimental cyclograms of the arc currents ranging from 1A
to 55 A.
The current value, Is, determined from a steady-state calculation in which arc
resistance is assumed to be zero, is taken as the peak value of the secondary arc
current. The assumption of zero resistance is made because the impedance,
coupling the faulted and un-faulted phases, is very high and steady state estimates
of Is have little variance for all values of secondary arc resistance.
The arc re-ignition voltage characteristic was empirically found in Equation 2-

29. This was determined by iteratively performing simulation runs for lines of
various lengths.
Vr (tr ) [5 1620Te /(2.15 Is )](tr Te)h(tr Te) 103 Equation 2-29
where:
Te = time from the initiation of secondary arc to a current zero

tr = time from the initiation of secondary arc to a current zero
The secondary arc extinction time also depends on the rate of rise of the
secondary arc path length. According to Anjo [16], the increase in typical
secondary arc lengths as a function of time enables the arc length variation for
low wind velocities (0 to 1 m/s) to be approximated by:
10tr tr 0.1s
ls (tr ) / ls 0
1 tr 0.1s Equation 2-30
Testing and Simulation
In the Johns study [10], the models were simulated using the EMTP
(ElectroMagnetics Transients Program). The primary arc is modeled using a
TACS (Transient Analysis of Control Systems) controlled time varying
resistance. The secondary arc is modeled by a TACS controlled time varying
resistance switch, which controls the open (extinction) or close (reignition) of the
2-15
switch to the arc conducting characteristics by the given TACS variable. The
variable is determined by a comparison of the actual arc voltage with the
computed arc withstand voltage from one current zero to the next.
The typical 400 kV single-circuit and double-circuit transmission lines of the

British system were used to test the models, see Figure 2-5.
Figure 2-5
Line and System Configuration
Tests revealed that the models are a significant improvement over models that
existed prior to the time of the study, and that the primary and secondary arc
characteristics are more adequately defined.
Terzija and Koglin Study
This study (Long Arc in Free Air: Laboratory Testing, Modelling, Simulation
and Model-Parameters Estimation) by V.V. Terzija and H.J. Koglin [9] derives
the main features of a long arc that was initiated under laboratory conditions at
the FGH-Mannheim high power test laboratory in Germany. For this particular
experiment, an arc gap length of 60 cm is selected. A new model, where the arc
is reduced to a current-dependent voltage source with the characteristics of a
distorted rectangular waveform, was developed. The model was tested through
computer simulation. Unknown model parameters were successfully estimated
from the computer-simulated and laboratory-obtained data.
The objective is to model long arcs in free air in the simplest possible way, while
still retaining their dominant features.
Features of a Long Arc in Free Air
The main time and spectral domain features of a long arc in free air were derived
from the arc voltage and current data records collected from the simulated arc at
the laboratory.
Time-varying conductance is calculated as:
ia (t )
g a (t ) Equation 2-31
ua (t )
where:
2-16
ga = time varying arc conductance
ia = arc current
ua = arc voltage
Instantaneous electrical power of the arc is:
pa (t ) ia (t )ua (t ) Equation 2-32
where pa = instantaneous electrical power
Because the arc is non-linear, it is a source of harmonics and will cause

distortions to other network currents and voltages. Thus, the voltages and
currents at the terminals of the faulted line also contain harmonics. It was found
that the arc-voltage total harmonics distortion (THD) factor is THDua = 41.1%
and the value for the THD factor in % is:
M
100
THD
X1
X
h2
h
2
Equation 2-33
where Xh(h=1,M) = amplitude of the hth harmonic
Arc-voltage spectral analysis showed that the dominant spectral components are
odd harmonics. A small amount of even harmonics confirms that the arc-voltage
is slightly unsymmetrical. Also, the line-terminal voltages and currents contain
odd harmonics induced by the arc voltage odd harmonics.
Modeling the Long Arc in Free Air
In this study [9], a new arc-voltage model is proposed to be a current dependent

voltage source with the characteristic shape of its waveform. The model order
and complexity depend on the shape selected, with the simplest model being a
rectangular arc-voltage waveform. The model was developed by observing the
arc-voltage waveforms and their relation the corresponding arc currents. As
shown on Figures 2-6 and 2-7, it was found that the arc-voltage waveforms have
an almost rectangular form.
2-17
Figure 2-6
Recorded Arc Voltage
Figure 2-7
Recorded Arc Voltage and Current
It follows that the arc model can be represented by the following equation:
I0
ua (t ) (Ua Ub R | ib (t ) |) sgn(ia ) (t ) Equation 2-34
i b (t )
where:
2-18
ia(t)= arc current
ua(t)= arc voltage
I 0 | ia (t ) | I 0
ib(t )
| ia (t ) | | ia (t ) | I 0
Ua, Ub, I0, (<>0) and R are parameters defining the shape of the voltage.
The function sgn in equation 2-34 is the sign function sgn(x) = 1 if x >= 0; sgn(x)
= -1 if x < 0.
The function (t) is the zero-mean Gaussian noise.
The value of Ua can be obtained as the product of the arc-voltage gradient and
the length of the path (the flashover length of a suspension insulator string or the
flashover length between the conductors). For currents 100 A to 20 kA, the
average arc-voltage gradient is between 1.2 and 1.5 kV/m [13].
The term UbI0/ib(t) models the arc ignition voltage.
The term R|ib| is an additional quasi-linear part determined by arc current ia.
R is determined mainly by Ua, and will be called arc resistance, although it is

only a small part of the actual arc resistance.
Testing and Simulation
The Terzija and Koglin [9] study determined that the new arc model possessed
the dominant features of a real arc, and that such a model could be useful in
modeling arcing faults on overhead transmission lines. The arcing fault on a 110
kV overhead transmission line was computer simulated. Unknown parameters
were estimated by computer simulation and laboratory obtained data. It was
found that the arc produces harmonics which distort other voltages in the
network.
The study focuses on long arcs with nearly constant column length; ways to
model arc elongation effects are being investigated.
Darwish and Elkalasy Study
The study (Universal Arc Representation Using EMTP) by H.A. Darwish and
H.I. Elkalasy [17] presents a breaker arc representation in the form of controlled
voltage source in the ElectroMagnetic Transients Program (EMTP). SF6
breakers with experimentally defined arc parameters are used. The thermal
limiting curve is calculated by the proposed model and compared with the
measured characteristic. Although the model was intended for breaker arcs, the
universality of the model was evaluated by circuit breaker and transmission-line
arcing faults.
2-19
Proposed Arc Representation
The proposed model is described with reference to Figure 2-8. The generator is
used to provide the breaker with a short-circuit current level and the Rc Cc
branch is used to control the rate of rise of the recovery voltage (RRRV). A
Transient Analysis Control System (TACS) controlled voltage source type 60
represents the breaker arc. The value of the voltage is computed in the TACS
field by multiplying the computed arc resistance by the arc current measured by
sensor 91. The corresponding arc voltage is then fed back into the power network
by controlled voltage source type 60. The controlled voltage source is connected
to the system during pre-zero current periods because the switch SW is normally
closed until current zero crossing. The switch is opened and the breaker voltage
is transported into TACS field by sensors 90. RRRV against the zero current
conductivity states the interruption/re-ignition conditions according to post zero
dynamic arc equations. Control signals are generated to distinguish between the
pre- and post-zero current periods.
Figure 2-8
EMTP Network of Synthesizer Generator and Breaker
To represent arcing faults with the universal representation, the Kizilcay [12]
model is used. In this model, a synthetic test circuit is developed to obtain the
parameters of primary and secondary phases of the arc along a 380 kV insulation
string. The arcing fault equations are as follows:
1
g (G g ) dt Equation 2-35

|i|
G Equation 2-36
u st
ust (u0 r | i |)l Equation 2-37
2-20
where:
g = time varying conductance

G = stationary arc conductance
= arc time constant
r= resistive component per arc length
u0= constant voltage per arc length
l = time dependent arc length
i= arc current
Primary arc parameters are as follows:
= 1.3 ms
r= 1.3 m/cm
u0= 12 V/cm
l =350 cm
Secondary arc parameters are given in [12]. Control signals are generated to
distinguish between primary and secondary arc periods.
The computed results using the universal model are the same as those described
by the experimental setup and consecutive Alternative Transient Program (ATP)
simulation in [12]. It was therefore concluded that the universal arc
representation using EMTP is suitable for the long arc model.
Goda, Iwata, Ikeda, and Tanaka Study
The study (Arc Voltage Characteristics of High Current Fault Arcs in Long
Gaps) by Y. Goda, M. Iwata, K. Ikeda, and S. Tanaka [18] describes arc voltage
characteristics of high current arcs representative of arcs on 500-kV class
transmission lines and the simulation result of the 50-kArms class fault arcs.
During a high power arc test the arc voltage in a 3.4 m gap was measured. The
high current fault arc voltages were calculated using numerical arc models and the
arc parameters for the numerical arc model of 50-kArms class ultra high current
arcs were investigated.
Arc Models
Equation 2-38 describes the voltage gradient of an arc [11, 18, 19]:
E a bI n Equation 2-38
where:
E = Voltage gradient (kV/m)

a, b= constant
I= current (kA)
n = exponent
2-21
From data collected from [13] and data from the Goda, Iwata, Ikeda, and
Tanaka study [18], it was found that the voltage gradient of a long arc is:
E 0.95 0.005 / I Equation 2-39
The mathematical models are used according to [12] and are as follows:
dg 1
(G g ) Equation 2-40
dt
where:
g = time varying arc conductance

= time constant
G = stationary arc conductance
G is a static characteristic of the arc and can be calculated by:
iarc
G (t ) Equation 2-41
u st l
where:
ust= stationary arc voltage

l = arc length
iarc = arc current
The stationary voltage gradient used by Johns [10] is 15 V/cm. Kizilcay et al.
[12] used the following equation as the stationary arc voltage for stationary arc
conductance:
ust (u0' r0' iarc ) Equation 2-42
where:
u0' = constant voltage parameter per arc length

r0' = resistive component per arc length
It follows that the stationary conductance is given by
iarc
G (i ) Equation 2-43
(u0 ' r0 'iarc )l
Determination of Parameters
According to the stationary arc conductance model of Kizilcay [12], arc

parameters are assumed constant during a half period of arc current and voltage.
The unknown parameters u0 and r0 are determined by solving equations 2-44 and
2-22
2-45. These are derived from equation (2-42) and are solved with limits shown
on Figure 2-9.
t5 t5
1
u0 dt r0 gdt t 5 t1 Equation 2-44
t1
[uarc ] t1
t4 t4
1
u0 dt r0 gdt t 4 t 2 Equation 2-45
t2
[uarc ] t2
where:
u0= constant voltage parameter

uarc = measured arc voltage
r0 = resistive arc component
Figure 2-9
Arc Conductance
Integrating the equation below from either t1 to t3 or t3 to t5 gives the arc

constant .
t3 t3
Gdt gdt
t1 t1
Equation 2-46
g 3 g1
Arc Voltage Simulation
The arc voltage is calculated by the following:
uarc iarc / g Equation 2-47
2-23
where:
iarc = arc current measured in tests

uarc = arc voltage
g= conductance obtained from the arc model
Stationary conductance parameters were decided using Equations 2-40 through

2-43.
For the case of simulation using the stationary arc voltage with a resistive
component per arc length, the following parameters were used: u0 = 2.23 kV; =
0.625 ms; r0 = 0.0137 . In another case, the stationary arc voltage is 3 kV for
3.4 m and = 0.625 ms. It was found that the calculated values were in good
agreement with the measured data.
Summary of Main Features of Existing Methods for Incident

Thermal Energy and Arc Fault Current Calculations
The IEEE-1584 equations calculate the amount of incident energy released from
3 phase arcs on systems below 15 kV. The equations are empirically derived and
they produce rational results until the arc gap length is not more than 24 inches.
For longer gaps, the incident energy predicted is likely to be conservative. Due to
this reason, IEEE-1584 equations cannot provide reasonable results for arc gaps
that are longer than 24 inches which are typical at transmission level voltages.
Lees method is recommended for systems 15 kV and above or when the arc gap
length is larger than 6 inches. Lees method is found to be well conservative
across the industry as Lee assumes all of the arc power is converted into radiation.
Hence, the system voltage has a great impact on the amount of incident energy
released. However, Lees equation does not take the arc gap length into
consideration, which is a drawback based on many tests and experiments. Since
Lees method does not take arc gap length into considerations and over-
emphasize the effect of the system voltage, it is difficult to extend this algorithm
to long gaps at high voltages.
Doughtys equations are also experimentally derived and are suggested for 600V,
3 phase arcs. The equations do not use the arc gap length as a variable because
they are formulated based on a fixed arc gap of 1.25 inches. As the equations
disregard the arc gap length, they cannot accurately predict the incident energy
levels at long gaps.
ARCPRO was developed based upon arc physics and was its calculated results
were verified against test data for single phase and open arcs less than 15 kV.
Factors can be applied to convert single phase and open arcs to three-phase
and/or in-box arcs. Likewise, it is anticipated that factors can be utilized to
estimate incident energy levels for high voltage arcs with long arc gap distances.
The studies dealing with high voltage, long arcs discussed in this Section assist in
determining characteristics of the arcs such as conductance, voltages and lengths.
2-24
These parameters can be used to calculate the total energy of the arcs, which can
then be used to predict the amount of incident energy absorbed by an object at
certain distances away from the arcs.
In the Johns study [14], the primary arcs (both dynamic and static) were modeled
based on the assumption that the time constant and arc length are constant. The
average constant arc voltage gradient is assumed to be 15 V/cm. Secondary arcs,
which are more complex, were also modeled. Out of the four literatures
examined, it is the only one that provides equations for modeling secondary arcs.
The Terzija and Koglin study [9] models long arcs in free air. The authors agree
that the average arc voltage gradient can be as high as 1.5 kV/m (15 V/cm). It
provides equations for time-varying arc conductance as well as arc voltage.
The dynamic and static primary arc equations of the Kizilcay model are presented
in Darwish and Elkalashy's paper [17]. This model is identical to the model
mentioned in the Johns study. Secondary arc parameters are referenced, but no
modeling equations are provided.
The Goda study [18] offers an equation to solve for the voltage gradient of an arc
in air. This paper also provides an equation for stationary arc voltage in addition
to the dynamic and static arc conductance equations. The calculated values are
said to be in good agreement with the experimentally measured data.
2-25
Section 3: Test Setups for High Current Arc
Test in Long Air Gaps in an Arc
Cage
Background
In view of the lack of data for long arcs, tests were performed first in the
standards arc cage, but with the cage enlarged to allow longer gaps, and then on
full-scale mock-ups of transmission structures.
This Section describes the arc cage tests. Section 4 discusses the general features
and form of the test data. Section 5 contains detailed analysis of the arc cage data
and derivation of the version of the simplified equation for estimating the
incident thermal energy produced by high-current arcs in long arc gaps. Section 6
presents an analysis of the effects of variability of the arc path and calorimeter
orientation relative to the arc (calorimeter line-of-sight). Section 7 presents
comparisons between test data and ARCPRO calculated results. Section 8
includes conclusions of this study and recommendations for future work.
Appendices contain raw test data and other supporting materials.
Tests on full-scale mock-ups of transmission structures are presented in a

separate report 1022633.
The testing work was performed by the Kinectrics North America Inc. high
current laboratory in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Analysis of test results was
performed by the Kinectrics laboratory and by the EPRI-Lenox High Voltage
Laboratory in Lenox, MA, USA.
Analysis of available literature presented in Section 2 showed that there is no data

on incident energy from high voltage arcs in long gaps that could be used as basis
for formulating or verifying models of arcs on long air gaps. To develop such
data, a controlled set of laboratory tests was defined and executed. The
laboratory tests led to an enhanced understanding of the high voltage arc
phenomena and provided controlled data for modeling. Also, the testing
provided a body of fundamental test results for verification of modeling
techniques.
3-1
There are several differences between the low voltage arcs in short air gaps that
have been the subject of past testing and the high voltage arc in long gaps which
are the subject of this project. These differences include:
Length of the arc, including bowing, i.e., deviation from a linear path (gap
axis)
Motion of the arc, relative to the gap axis, including possible travel
(motoring) on the electrodes
Free arc regions of arcs in longs gaps
Configuration of the arcing electrodes
Contact with plasma in the case of arcs in enclosures as opposed to radiated
or convected thermal energy
Position of the worker relative to the arc in a long gap
In general, high voltage arcs on transmission equipment are expected to occur in

one of the following scenarios:
Single-phase arcs, such as those between a conductor and ground across an
insulator or a live working tool
Three-phase arcs that could occur at bushings of outdoor equipment,
depending on electrode configuration, direction of source, and configuration
of cable or bus
Testing described in this report addresses only vertical single-phase arc situations.
Investigation and testing of three-phase arcs is not included.
Description of the Test Set-up for Arcs in Long Gaps
The arc testing program was performed at the Kinectrics High Current
laboratory (HCL). Two sessions of testing were performed: 3 days of lab testing
in September 2009, and 4 days of lab testing in November 2009.
Description of Apparatus and Equipment
The tests were performed indoors in the HCL test cell. The dimensions of the
test cell are: 16 m x 5 m x 8 m (length x width x height). A new test arc cage
with electrode clamps was built for this project to accommodate vertical arcs and
gap lengths up to 5 ft (1.5 m). The general arrangement of the test cage, the
current supply busswork and the arc electrodes is shown in Figure 3-1.
The aluminum test cage is designed to reduce, as much as possible, the external
electromagnetic forces (from supply busswork, for example) on the arc and to
centre the rotation of the arc along the vertical gap axis. The dimensions of the
cage are:
2.13 m x 2.13 m (7 ft. x 7 ft.) square base plate
0.91 m (3 ft.) top plate diameter
3-2
3.34 m height (top plate square base)
Six aluminum pipes symmetrically placed around the vertical electrodes, at
approximately 1.09 m from the electrode axis.
Up to nine copper slug calorimeters were used for measurement of incident

energy at various locations relative to the gap axis, see Figure 3-2.
The copper slug calorimeters were fabricated from C11000 ETP copper 99.9%
pure. The 1.6 mm sheet copper was precision cut into circular disks using EDM
process to a diameter of 40.00 mm. The nominal weight of a copper disk is 18 g.
The thermocouple installation and assembly of the calorimeter is in accordance
with Clause 6.7 of IEC61482-1-1:2009 [20].
Figure 3-1
Photograph of the Test Cage Showing the Arrangement of Arc Electrodes for a 1-ft
Long Vertical Air Gap
3-3
The exposed surface of the copper calorimeters is painted with a thin coating of a
flat black high temperature spray paint. The surface coating condition is regularly
maintained throughout the testing session as per Clause 10.1 of IEC61482-1-
1:2009 [20].
CALORIMETERS
Figure 3-2
Photograph Showing Calorimeters Used for Measurement of Incident Energy at
Various Radial Distances from the Electrode Axis
The details of the data acquisition system used by Kinectrics for recording
voltage, current and calorimeter outputs are given in Table 3-1.
The test apparatus was designed and built as per the latest version of the ASTM
F1959/F 1959M [21] and IEC 61482-1-1 [20] standards.
3-4
Table 3-1
Equipment List
Equipment Make Model Asset # or Test Use

Description Serial #
Resistive 0.5 ohm HCL-SP 15029-0 Non inductive
Instrumentation Shunt
Shunt
Current Raccal-Decca CT2463-2 Z014565 Resistive Shunt
Instrumentation for current
Transformer measurements
Waveform LeCroy 6810 A61181 Recording
Recorder Current and
Voltage
Waveform LeCroy 6810 A60497 Recording
Recorder Current and
Voltage
Waveform Kinetics 4008/4054 - Recording 0-
Recorder Systems 5V voltage
from isolator
Thermal Kinectrics KTHL-1&2 KTHL-1&2 Thermocouple
Isolation Unit conditioner
0-500C in, 0-
5V out
Voltage GE PV JVW.3 19709-0 / Arc Voltage
Transformer 5225718
Calibration and Quality Control
All measurement equipment used in this project is calibrated at regular intervals

(1 year). Calibration and functional checks are performed every morning before
commencement of testing and periodically during the day.
All data recorded by the data acquisition system is stored digitally using a unique
Test ID number, in the format 09-XXXX (09 last two digits of the year in
which the test was performed, XXXX four-digit test ID number), for each test.
This ID number links the video files, data files, the test cage set-up and the test
circuit.
Description of the Test Configurations and Parameters
In addition to the unique shot ID number, a naming system for each record was
used to identify and describe the configuration tested. The description of the
Record ID naming system and the tested configurations and parameters are given
in Table 3-2.
3-5
Each test was recorded using a normal and a high speed camera. The positions of
the cameras are shown in Figure 3-3 for the September tests and in Figure 3-12
for the November tests. The HS camera was set up to record at 1000fps or
2000fps.
The fuse wire used for most of the tests was AWG #28. When it was not
possible to initiate the arc with the AWG #28 wire, a thicker wire was used
(AWG #18 or #16).
Table 3-2
Record ID Naming System for EPRI Tests and Description of Test Configurations
Cage
Calorime
and Gap Target Arc
Single- ter Shot
Electrode Length current duration
Phase Configu- number
Configu- (ft) (kA) (cycles)
ration
ration
Record
ID 1PH VFC SH 1 8 6 1
VFC2 SV 2 20 2 2
VFC3 SVa 4 40 12 etc.
VFC4 SH2 5
VFC5 SV2
VFC23
VFC2i
Note: Table 3-2 provides examples only. Not all combinations of electrode
configurations, calorimeter configurations, electrode gap lengths, current values
and arc durations were used.
Legend:
Cage and Electrode Configuration:
VFC - vertical -diameter cylindrical stainless steel electrodes in the cage
VFC2 - vertical -diameter cylindrical stainless steel electrodes in the

asymmetric cage (no return pipes); distance between the vertical rods and return
cable is 42 (1.07 m)
VFC3 - same as VFC but the electrodes are -diameter cylindrical graphite
Jetrods
VFC4 - same as VFC but the electrodes -diameter cylindrical aluminum rods
VFC5 - same as VFC but the electrodes -diameter cylindrical copper rods
VFC23 - same as VFC2 but the electrodes are -diameter cylindrical graphite
Jetrods
3-6
VFC2i - same as VFC2 but a polymer insulator was inserted in the
interelectrode gap; insulator length 31 (0.79 m) metal to metal
Calorimeter configuration:
SH - 9 calorimeters placed in horizontal configuration (see Figure 3-1)
SV - 9 calorimeters placed in vertical configuration (details of the configuration

described later)
SVa- 9 calorimeters placed in vertical configuration with sensor 1, 3, 7, and 9

looking at the center of the interelectrode gap (details of the configuration
described later)
SH2 - 8 calorimeters placed in horizontal configuration (similar to SH)
SV2- 8 calorimeters placed in vertical configuration (similar to SVa)
Electrode gap (ft): 1, 2, 4, 5
Bolted fault current (kA): 8, 20, 40
Arc duration (cycles): 2, 6, 12
Shot number: 1, 2, 3, etc
3-7
Table 3-3 lists the test numbers in each test configuration.
Table 3-3
Cross-Reference of Test Numbers for Each Test Configuration
Cage and Calorimeter Test Numbers

Electrode Configuration
Configuration
VFC - vertical - SH - 9 calorimeters 09-3757, 09-3758, 09-3759, 09-

diameter cylindrical placed in horizontal 3760, 09-3761, 09-3762, 09-3763,
stainless steel configuration (see 09-3764, 09-3765, 09-3766, 09-
electrodes in the Figure 3-1) 3768, 09-3769, 09-3770, 09-3771,
cage 09-3773 09-3774, 09-3775, 09-
3776, 09-3777, 09-3778, 09-3779,
09-3780, 09-3781, 09-3782, 09-
3783, 09-3784, 09-3785, 09-3786,
09-3787, 09-3788, 09-3789, 09-
3790
SV - 9 calorimeters 09-3791, 09-3792, 09-3793, 09-
placed in vertical 3794, 09-3795, 09-3796, 09-3797,
configuration (details 09-3798, 09-3799, 09-3800, 09-
of the configuration 3801, 09-3802, 09-3803, 09-3804,
described later) 09-3805, 09-3806, 09-3807, 09-
3808, 09-3809
SVa - 9 calorimeters 09-3810, 09-3811, 09-3812, 09-
placed in vertical 3813, 09-3814, 09-3815
configuration with
sensor 1, 3, 7, and
9 looking at the
center of the
interelectrode gap
(details of the
configuration
described later)
SH2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5121, 09-5122, 09-5123, 09-
placed in horizontal 5124, 09-5125, 09-5126, 09-5127,
configuration (similar 09-5128, 09-5129, 09-5130, 09-
to SH) 5131, 09-5132, 09-5133, 09-5134,
09-5135, 09-5136, 09-5138, 09-
5137, 09-5139, 09-5140, 09-5141,
09-5142, 09-5143, 09-5144, 09-
5145, 09-5146, 09-5147, 09-5148,
09-5149, 09-5150
3-8
Table 3-3 (continued)

Configuration
SV2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5207, 09-5208, 09-5209, 09-

placed in vertical 5210
configuration (similar
to SVa)
VFC2 - vertical - SH2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5179, 09-5180, 09-5181, 09-
diameter cylindrical placed in horizontal 5182, 09-5183, 09-5184, 09-5185,
stainless steel configuration (similar 09-5186, 09-5187
electrodes in the to SH)
asymmetric cage (no
return pipes);
distance between the
vertical rods and
return cable is 42
(1.07 m)
VFC3 - same as VFC SH2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5151, 09-5152, 09-5153, 09-
but the electrodes placed in horizontal 5154, 09-5155, 09-5156, 09-5157,
are -diameter configuration (similar 09-5158
cylindrical graphite to SH)
Jetrods
SV2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5193, 09-5194, 09-5195, 09-
placed in vertical 5196, 09-5197, 09-5198
to SVa)
VFC4 - same as VFC SH - 9 calorimeters 09-5164, 09-5165, 09-5166, 09-
but the electrodes placed in horizontal 5167, 09-5168, 09-5169
-diameter configuration (see
cylindrical aluminum Figure 3-1)
rods
SV2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5199, 09-5200, 09-5201, 09-
to SVa)
3-9

Configuration
VFC5 - same as VFC SH2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5170, 09-5171, 09-5172, 09-

but the electrodes placed in horizontal 5173, 09-5174, 09-5175, 09-5176,
-diameter configuration (similar 09-5177, 09-5178
cylindrical copper to SH)
rods
SV2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5203, 09-5204, 09-5205, 09-
to SVa)
VFC23 - same as SH2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5188, 09-5189
VFC2 but the placed in horizontal
electrodes are - configuration (similar
diameter cylindrical to SH)
graphite Jetrods
VFC2i - same as SH2 - 8 calorimeters 09-5190, 09-5191, 09-5192
VFC2 but a polymer placed in horizontal
insulator was configuration (similar
inserted in the to SH)
interelectrode gap;
insulator length 31
(0.79 m) metal to
metal
VFC Test Configuration with SH Calorimeter Configuration
Figures 3-3 and 3-4 show the locations of calorimeters for the horizontal
calorimeter configuration SH. A photograph of the VFC test configuration and
SH calorimeter configuration is given in Figure 3-5.
3-10
Figure 3-3
Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH and Cage Location and Orientation
Inside HCL Test Cell Used in the First Session of Testing Top View
Figure 3-4
Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH Used in the First Session of Testing
Elevation View
3-11
Figure 3-5
Photograph Showing the Vertical Stainless Steel Electrodes in the Cage (VFC
Configuration) with 9 Calorimeters Placed in Horizontal Configuration (SH); Setup
for 4-ft Long Air Gap.
VFC Test Configuration with SV Calorimeter Configuration
Figures 3-6 shows the locations of the calorimeters for the VFC test
configuration and vertical (SV) calorimeter configuration for 4-ft gap, and Figure
3-7 shows the configuration for the 2-ft gap. As it can be seen in the figures, the
3-12
placement of the calorimeters remained the same for the 2-ft and the 4-ft gap
tests in the SV configuration. Testing with vertical configuration SV was not
performed for the 1-ft air gap.
Figure 3-6
Vertical Calorimeter Configuration SV Used in the First Session of Testing
Elevation View; 4-ft Gap Configuration Shown
3-13
Figure 3-7
Figure 3-8 shows two photographs of the VFC electrode configuration and SV
calorimeter configuration for the 4-ft air gap. Figure 3-9 shows two photographs
of the configuration for the 2-ft air gap.
3-14
Figure 3-8
Vertical Stainless Steel Electrodes in the Cage (VFC) with 9 Calorimeters
Placed in Vertical Configuration (SV); Setup for 4-ft Long Air Gap Shown
Figure 3-9
Vertical 3/4" Stainless Steel Electrodes in the Cage (VFC) with 9 Calorimeters
Placed in Vertical Configuration (SV); Setup for 2-ft Long Air Gap Shown
3-15
VFC Test Configuration with SVa Calorimeter Configuration
Six tests were performed with the 2-ft gap VFC test configuration and a variation
of the calorimeter vertical configuration designated as SVa. In this configuration,
calorimeters #1, #3, #7, and #9 were rotated to face the middle (the mid-point)
of the gap. This testing was performed to compare the incident energy readings
with the SV with 2-ft gap case depicted in Figure 3-7 in which the calorimeter
were orientated towards the regions near the upper and lower electrodes. The
description of this set-up is given in Figure 3-10, and a photograph of this
configuration in Figure 3-11.
4'-0"
2'-0"
Calorimeters:
1'-0"
Group A: 1, 2, 3 @ 12"
Group B: 4, 5, 6 @ 24"
Group C: 7, 8, 9 @ 48"
electrode
7
1
4
3"
4 1/2"
8
2
24 5
in.
4 1/2"
9
3
6
3"
electrode
Project: K-015022 EPRI TL Arc Modeling and Testing

4 1/2"
Description: Testing 1st Session, September 2009

Placement of calorimeters - Vertical configuration
(SVa) - sensor #1, 3, 7 and 9 looking at the center of
the arc
Figure 3-10
SVa Calorimeter Configuration: 9 Calorimeters Placed in Vertical Configuration
with Calorimeters 1, 3, 7, and 9 Pointed at the Mid-Point of the Gap
3-16
Figure 3-11
Placed in SVa Configuration for 2-ft Long Gap
VFC Test Configuration with SH2 Calorimeter Configuration
During the second session of testing performed in November 2009, the SH2
horizontal calorimeter configuration was used in the VFC test configuration. The
description of this configuration is given in Figure 3-12 and Figure 3-13. Eight
calorimeters are employed in this configuration. A photograph of the VFC
electrode configuration and SH2 calorimeter configuration is given in Figure3-
14.
3-17
Figure 3-12
Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH2 Used in the Second Session of Testing,
and Cage Position Inside the HCL Test Cell Top View
Figure 3-13
Horizontal Calorimeter Configuration SH2 Used in the Second Session of Testing
Elevation View
3-18
6
1 4 7
8 5 2
Figure 3-14
Placed in Horizontal Configuration (SH2); Setup For 1-ft Long Gap Shown.
VFC Test Configuration with SV2 Calorimeter Configuration
The description of the calorimeter vertical configuration SV2 and the VFC test
configuration used in the second testing session is given in Figure 3-15. This
configuration was used only with the 4 ft gap. A photograph of the SV2
calorimeter configuration is given in Figure 3-16.
3-19
Figure 3-15
Vertical Calorimeter Configuration SV2 Used in the Second Session of Testing
(Gap Length: 4 ft) Elevation View
3-20
Figure 3-16
Calorimeter Vertical Configuration SV2 for the 4-ft Long Gap
Figure 3-17 compares the cage positions inside the test cell and the placement of
the calorimeters between the first and the second testing session.
3-21
Figure 3-17
Cage Position Inside the HCL Test Cell for the First and Second Testing Sessions.
VFC2 Test Configuration (Asymmetrical Cage) with SH2

Calorimeter Configuration
To evaluate the effectiveness of the cage in reducing the effects of external

electromagnetic forces on the arc movement, nine tests were performed (test 09-
5179 to 09-5187) with an asymmetrical cage configuration VFC2, in which the
current return path was through an insulated cable attached to one of the
aluminum pipes, at 42 inches away from the electrode axis (see Figure 3-18).
The calorimeters were in the SH2 configuration (8 calorimeters only).
Other Test Configurations and Calorimeter Configurations

Tested
Additional tests were performed, outside the original scope of work, using
different types of electrodes as described below.
VFC3 Test Configuration with SH2 Calorimeter Configuration
Tests were performed in the VFC3 test configuration with SH2 calorimeter
configuration using " graphite Jetrods as electrodes (see Figure 3-19) tests 09-
5151 to 09-5158 (8 tests).
VFC3 Test Configuration with SV2 Calorimeter Configuration
Tests were performed in the VFC3 test configuration with SV2 calorimeter
configuration using " graphite Jetrods as electrodes (see Figure 3-19) tests 09-
5193 to 09-5198 (6 tests).
3-22
configuration using " aluminum rods as electrodes (Figure 3-20) tests 09-
5159 to 09-5169 (11 tests).
configuration using " aluminum rods as electrodes (Figure 3-20) tests 09-
5199 to 09-5202 (4 tests).
configuration using " copper rods as electrodes (see Figure 3-21) tests 09-
5170 to 09-5178 (9 tests).
configuration using " tests 09-5203 to 09-5206 (4 tests).
VFC23 Test Configuration (Asymmetrical Cage) with SH2 Calorimeter

Configuration
Tests were performed in the VFC23 test configuration (asymmetrical cage) with
SH2 calorimeter configuration using " graphite Jetrods as electrodes (see Figure
3-19) tests 09-5188 and 09-5189 (2 tests).
VFC2i Test Configuration (Asymmetrical Cage) with SH2 Calorimeter

Configuration
Tests were performed in the VFC2i test configuration (asymmetrical cage) with
SH2 calorimeter configuration using a polymer insulator inserted in the gap
between and attached to the steel electrodes (see Figure 3-22) tests 09-5190 to
09-5192 (3 tests).
3-23
Return cable @ 42 away
from electrodes
Figure 3-18
Testing Performed with the Asymmetrical Cage (No Return Pipes); Distance
Between the Vertical Gap Axis and the Return Cable Is 42"
3-24
Figure 3-19
Configuration VFC3: Testing Performed with Graphite Jetrods
Figure 3-20
Configuration VFC4: Testing Performed with Aluminum Rods
Figure 3-21
Configuration VFC5: Testing Performed with Copper Rods
3-25
Figure 3-22
Configuration VFC2i: Testing Performed with Asymmetrical Cage (VFC2) and a
Polymer Insulator Inserted in the Gap between and Attached to the Electrodes
(Insulator Length 31" Metal to Metal)
3-26
Section 4: Test Results and Test Data
Structure
Summary of Tests
The total number of tests performed was 150, from which 100 useful tests were
performed using stainless steel electrodes as follows:
32 tests performed using SH calorimeter configuration
19 tests performed using SV calorimeter configuration
6 tests performed using the SVa calorimeter configuration
29 tests performed using SH2 calorimeter configuration
9 tests performed using SH2 calorimeter configuration and asymmetrical
cage
4 tests performed using SV2 calorimeter configuration
1 cage calibration test with the electrodes short-circuit with and steel bar (no
arc; test #09-3817)
An Excel file containing the test summary (test number and description,
parameters, results obtained, and test notes) was constructed for Data analysis
Photos, normal speed videos, and high speed videos and data files were also
populated during testing.. Appendix A contains printouts of results (raw data)
from all tests. Tables 4-1 and 4-2 show samples of raw test data contained in
Appendix A.
Each test produced 3 data files: 1 bmp file and two text files. The bmp files
contain all the recorded waveforms plotted by the data acquisition system
software together with the important calculated parameters given on the right
side of the plots. These records are included in Appendix B. The raw data
corresponding to these waveforms are given in the text files: Voltage (V) and
current data (I) are in 09-xxxxi.txt files and incident energy data in the 09-
xxxxT.txt files. Figure 4-1 shows a sample of the recorded waveforms. Tables 4-
3 and 4-4 show samples of the contents of the text files.
The time duration for these two measurements (voltage and current on one side,
and incident energy on the other) is very different. The time scale for the arc
voltage and current is in milliseconds with t = 0.1 ms (10,000 samples/sec). The
4-1
incident energy was measured at a much slower rate because calorimeter response
is much slower. The time scale for incident energy measurements is in seconds t
=5 ms (200 samples/sec). These details are clearly specified in the txt files.
The same trigger signal was used for measurement of all quantities, so the
records are automatically synchronized. Negative time values in the incident
energy files indicate pre-trigger information. There is no pre-trigger data for V
and I (there is no need for it). However, the initial temperature of the
calorimeters is very important so pre-trigger information is required. The initial
temperature of the calorimeters is also given in the txt file see Start
Temperature (C) line.
The ambient conditions in the test cell (temperature (C) and relative humidity
(%)) were monitored and recorded at regular intervals during testing.
4-2
Table 4-1
Sample of Raw Test Data (VFC Cage and Electrode Configuration, SH Calorimeter Configuration)
KIN Record ID (Test Name) Bolted Arc Arc Arc Arc Incident Arc Energy (cal/cm^2) Notes Testing Ambient
Test fault current duration voltage energy date conditions
ID current (kArms) (ms) (Vrms) (kJ)
1ft away 2ft away 4 ft away
(kA)
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 Temp. RH (%)
(C)
09- 1PH VFC SH 1 8 6 1 8 7.83 101.5 500 377 4.4 4.5 3.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.3 2-Sep-09 24.2 39.6
3757
09- 1PH VFC SH 1 8 6 2 8 7.85 101.5 485 372 4 4.5 3.8 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.3 no hs video 2-Sep-09
3758 (trigger
problem)
09- 1PH VFC SH 1 8 6 3 8 7.91 101.5 469.7 364 4.7 4 4.1 0.8 1 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 dark filter on hs 2-Sep-09
3759 camera
09- 1PH VFC SH 1 8 12 1 8 7.98 201.5 477 713 8.5 8.4 8 1.6 1.7 1.9 0.5 0.6 0.6 with reduced 2-Sep-09
3760 exposure time
on hs camera
09- 1PH VFC SH 1 8 12 2 8 7.88 201.5 475.6 713 7.5 8.7 6 1.8 2.1 1.5 0.7 0.7 0.6 2-Sep-09 24 44.5
3761
09- 1PH VFC SH 2 8 6 1 8 8.78 106 793.5 652 7.4 5.8 4.9 1.7 1.5 1.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 voltage to be 3-Sep-09 19.1 71.6
3762 modified this
will be
repeated.
09- 1PH VFC SH 2 8 6 2 8 7.85 99.7 737.3 527 6.2 5 4.2 1.4 1 1.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 3-Sep-09
3763
09- 1PH VFC SH 2 8 6 3 8 7.76 100.3 755.8 537 4.6 5 3.8 1.3 1.1 1.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 3-Sep-09
3764
09- 1PH VFC SH 2 8 12 1 8 7.95 200 723 1000 9.7 8.8 9.3 2.6 2.1 2.1 1 0.8 0.9 3-Sep-09
3765
09- 1PH VFC SH 2 8 12 2 8 7.95 200 723 1060 10.1 8 11.2 2.3 2.4 2.9 0.9 1 1 3-Sep-09
3766
09- 1PH VFC SH 4 8 6 2 8 7.62 99.5 1436.2 997 7.3 8 7.7 2.1 2.2 2.1 0.7 0.8 0.8 valid test 3-Sep-09 21.9 60
3768
09- 1PH VFC SH 4 8 6 3 8 7.48 100 1448.7 995 8.4 7.1 7.5 2.1 2.4 2.1 0.8 0.8 0.8 3-Sep-09
3769
09- 1PH VFC SH 4 8 12 1 8 7.79 201.2 1353.1 2000 15.9 14.3 13.9 5.6 4.6 4 1.5 1.6 1.7 3-Sep-09
3770
09- 1PH VFC SH 4 8 12 2 8 8.05 200.5 1235.2 1830 15 14.6 15.4 3.3 4.1 3.5 1.3 1.5 1.5 3-Sep-09
3771
4-3
Table 4-2
Sample of Raw Test Data (VFC Cage and Electrode Configuration, SV Calorimeter Configuration)
#1T #2C #3B #4T #5C #6B #7T #8C #9B
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 8 6 1 8 6 100 1459.1 786 1.9 7 2.2 1.4 1.6 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.5 see sensor diagram 4-Sep-09 20 57
3791 for exact placement of
he sensors
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 8 6 2 8 8.26 100 1257.9 909 3.1 7.1 3 1.8 2.5 1 0.6 0.8 0.7 4-Sep-09
3792
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 8 6 3 8 7.65 100 1500.7 1040 3.1 7 2.9 1.6 2.3 1.1 0.6 0.8 0.7 4-Sep-09
3793
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 8 12 1 8 8.01 200 1326.9 1960 6.6 14.7 5.7 3.5 3.8 1.8 1.2 1.5 1.3 4-Sep-09
3794
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 8 12 2 8 7.81 200 1392.1 1990 6.1 15.1 5.4 3.3 4.4 2.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 4-Sep-09
3795
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 20 2 1 20 20.64 33.3 1356.9 709 2.7 4.7 2.7 1.3 1.7 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.5 4-Sep-09
3796
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 20 2 2 20 20.42 33.3 1363.5 701 2.3 5.2 2.6 1.3 1.4 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.5 4-Sep-09
3797
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 20 6 1 20 21.57 100 1200.3 2210 9.2 18 9.5 4.7 4.8 3.4 1.5 1.9 1.5 4-Sep-09
3798
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 20 6 2 20 21.85 100 1218.5 2300 10 26 7.9 6.1 8.3 2.8 1.7 1.8 1.6 4-Sep-09
3799
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 40 2 1 40 41.31 32.1 1420.8 1470 5.2 9.8 5.8 2.2 2.5 1.4 0.8 1 0.8 fuse wire was AWG 4-Sep-09
3800 18; duration: 1.9
cycles
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 40 2 2 40 41.01 32.1 1501.3 1430 4.8 9.4 6 2.3 2.5 1.7 0.7 0.9 0.8 fuse wire was 4-Sep-09
3801 changed back to
AWG 28; duration
1.9 cycles
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 40 6 1 40 39.42 98.5 1368.7 4580 17.6 32.7 15.8 6.2 6.6 4.1 2.1 2.8 2.4 duration 5.9 cycles 4-Sep-09
3802
09- 1PH VFC SV 4 40 6 2 40 39.87 98.9 1358.4 4540 22.5 45.5 16.8 12.5 15.7 8.1 2.6 3.5 3.1 4-Sep-09
3803
09- 1PH VFC SV 2 40 2 1 40 42.66 33.3 1021.8 1340 1.9 9.7 2.4 1.5 3.3 1.5 0.6 0.9 0.8 arc length 24"; the 4-Sep-09 25.9 39.1
3804 sensors were placed
as before (same config
as for 48" arc)
09- 1PH VFC SV 2 40 6 1 40 41.92 100.3 965.4 3730 11.4 34.7 4.6 9.2 5.7 2.3 2.1 2.4 1.9 4-Sep-09
3805
4-4
Table 4-3
Sample of the Contents of the Voltage and Current Text Files
09-5124
EPRI Transmission Line Arc
Distance profile: Calorimeters aligned with mid arc.
Calorimeters group A at 12", group B at 18", group C at 36" from center of arc,
Test Level: 12 " arc, 8 kA, 12 cycles
November 2, 2009
Vertical Arc in Cage
7.88kA 12.1 12 12
Column A is the acquisition period information.
Negative time indicates pre-trigger information.
Time (ms)Current (A) Voltage (V)
0.000419.996-6.347
0.100419.996-6.347
0.200419.996-7.597
0.300419.996-6.347
0.400419.996-6.347
0.500435.995-6.347
0.600419.996-7.597
0.700419.996-7.597
0.800435.995-6.347
0.900435.995-6.347
1.000515.996-7.597
1.100403.997-6.347
1.200419.996-6.347
1.300419.996-7.597
1.400435.995-6.347
1.500483.995-7.597
1.600403.997-6.347
1.700419.996-6.347
1.800435.995-6.347
1.900419.996-6.347
2.000419.996-7.597
2.100339.994-6.347
2.200451.997-6.347
4-5
Table 4-4
09-5124
EPRI Transmission Line Arc
Distance profile: Calorimeters aligned with mid arc.
Calorimeters group A at 12", group B at 18", group C at 36" from center of arc,
Test Level: 12 " arc, 8 kA, 12 cycles
November 2, 2009
Vertical Arc in Cage
7.88kA 12.1 12 12
Column A is the acquisition period information.
Negative time indicates pre-trigger information.
21174
4-6
Start Temperature (C): 22 22 21 0 16 18 17 0 15 16 0 00 0 0
Time ( sec) Sen #1 Sen #2 Sen #3 none Sen #4 Sen #5 Sen #6 none Sen #7 Sen #8 Sen #9 none
-1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.995 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.990 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.985 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.980 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.975 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.970 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.965 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.960 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.955 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.950 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.945 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.940 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.935 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.930 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.925 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.920 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.915 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.910 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.905 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.900 -0.001 0.000 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.895 -0.001 0.000 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.890 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.885 -0.001 0.000 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.880 -0.001 0.001 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
-0.875 -0.001 0.001 -0.000 0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.000
4-7
Figure 4-1
Sample of Recorded Waveforms
4-8
Section 5: Analysis of Test Data and
Development of a Simplified
Equation for Calculation of
Incident Thermal Energy
This section contains analysis of the data obtained from the laboratory testing
and development of a simplified equation that can be used to estimate the
incident thermal energy at a working distance from the arc. The analysis is
focused on arc tests that satisfy setup parameters listed in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1
Arc Test Parameters
Parameter Description
Gap Orientation Vertical
Gap Length (ft) 15
Gap Length (m) 0.31 1.5
Current (kA rms) 8 - 40
Duration (s) 0.033 - 0.2
Duration (cycles) 2 - 12
Electrode Material Stainless Steel
Working Distance (ft) 14
Working Distance (m) 0.31 1.2
The analysis is presented in the following steps:

Arc Voltage-Current (V-I) and Arc Resistance Characteristics. This deals
with observations related to the behavior of the arcs.
Average Arc Voltage Gradient Analysis. Analysis of arc voltage gradient is
presented. Comparisons are made between the test results and findings of
past studies. A voltage gradient equation based on the test results is derived.
Finally, an equation for RMS voltage, as related to voltage gradient, is
formulated. Subsequently, the RMS voltage will be used to estimate total arc
energy.
5-1
Incident Thermal Energy Analysis. Analysis of the incident energy as
function of working distance is presented. The effect of arc duration and the
characteristics of the incident thermal energy are discussed.
Development of a simplified equation for incident thermal energy flux as
function of working distance. An empirical formula for incident thermal
energy flux as function of working distance from the arc is derived.
Development of a simplified equation for incident thermal energy as
function of working distance. An empirical formula for incident thermal
energy as function of working distance from the arc is derived from the
equation of the incident thermal energy flux, and validated. The final
simplified equation for incident thermal energy as function of working
distance is presented.
Analysis of additional data collected during the cage tests. This section
discusses vertical incident thermal energy profiles, incident thermal energy
from arcs between electrode of various materials, and the incident thermal
energy measured when a polymer insulator is installed between the
electrodes.
Arc Voltage-Current (V-I) and Arc Resistance Characteristics
This section presents observations related to arc voltage-current and resistance

characteristics.
Arc Voltage-Current Characteristics
The Voltage-Current curves for varying gap lengths and currents are given below
in Figures 5-1 through 5-4. As found by Goda et al [18], the general
characteristic is a hysteresis loop. When the current increases, the voltage levels
off at a certain current and remains approximately constant at that value. When
the current decreases, the voltage decreases almost linearly. Also, the arc voltage
at the same current is higher during the increasing current portion than during
the decreasing current portion of the curve. This is because the temperature of
the arc rises due to the accumulated energy of the arc while the current is
increasing, which increases the conductivity of the arc. On the decreasing
portion of the loop, the arc temperature and conductivity remain elevated. In all
four figures (5-1 through 5-4), the arc is in the first and third quadrants, which
indicates that the arc is resistive in nature.
5-2
Figure 5-1
Voltage-Current Characteristics of Arcs in the 1-ft Gap
Figure 5-2
Voltage-Current characteristics of Arcs in 2-ft Gap
5-3
Figure 5-3
Voltage-Current Characteristics of Arcs in 4-ft Gap
Figure 5-4
Voltage-Current Characteristics of Arcs in 5-ft Gap
Arc Resistance Characteristics
Calculation of arc resistance is a complicate task. It is done in this report by

calculating the following quantities:
Impedance of the test cage from the calibration test in which the test cage is
short-circuited (short-circuit test 09-3817)
Voltage drop across the test cage for each test, calculated by multiplying the
cage impedance by the measured test current (this waveform of this voltage is
sinusoidal because the source current is sinusoidal)
5-4
Arc voltage waveform, obtained by subtracting the calculated (sinusoidal)
cage voltage from the total measured source voltage
Arc rms voltage, obtained from the calculated arc voltage at arc current peak,
for each test
Arc resistance obtained by dividing the calculated rms arc voltage by the
measured rms current
In the Strom study [11], the arc voltage was estimated by subtracting a constant
value of 35 V from the measured voltage to account for the electrode voltage
contribution. In the Kinectrics study, the equivalent circuit of the cage and the
arc is represented as shown in Figure 5-5.
Figure 5-5
Equivalent Circuit used in Kinectrics Tests
The cage has fixed impedance. Increasing current should therefore increase the
voltage drop across the cage impedance, and this voltage must be subtracted from
the total voltage measured during arc tests to obtain the actual arc voltage. Thus,
using the calculated cage impedance, the voltage contribution of the cage can be
subtracted from the total measured voltage.
Varc Vtotal Vcage Vtotal Z cage I arc Equation 5-1
where:
Varc, Vtotal, Vcage and Iarc are rms quantities in V and kA, respectively
Zcage is in m
Voltage Drop across the Test Cage Calculated from the Kinectrics Data
To determine the voltage drop across the cage, the gap between the electrodes
was shorted with a metal bar (bolted fault) and current was applied. The
measured data are included in Table 5-2.
5-5
Table 5-2
Bolted Fault across the Kinectrics Cage
KIN Record ID Bolted Arc Arc Arc Arc

Test (Test fault current duratio voltage energy
ID Name) current (kArms) n (ms) (Vrms) (kJ)
(kA)
09- Short-circuit 8 7.89 100 62 44.3
3817 across cage
The resulting short-circuit current and voltage waveforms are shown in Figure 5-
6. It can be seen that the cage voltage leads the current, suggesting inductive
impedance of the cage.
Figure 5-6
Short Circuit Voltage and Current Waveforms across the Cage
Impedance of the Kinectrics Test Cage
To determine the cage impedance, steady state equations for the cage voltage and
current were determined. Because the waveforms do not center on the abscissa,
the peak voltage and peak current magnitudes were determined by finding peak-
to-peak magnitudes. The peak-to-peak value was found for each consecutive
peak point of the waveforms (ignoring the first negative peak). The phase shift
between the voltage and current was also determined.
Figure 5-7 illustrates the peak-to-peak magnitude and voltage-current phase shift
along the voltage and current curves. Table 5-3 shows the magnitudes of voltage
5-6
and current at peaks, the peak-to-peak magnitude for both voltage and currents,
and the phase shift between voltage and current.
Figure 5-7
Peak to Peak Magnitude and Phase V-I Phase Shift
The following conclusions are derived from Table 5-3:

The average phase between the voltage and current is found to be 1.6 ms
(lagging). For a 60 Hz source frequency, 1.6 ms corresponds to 34.56o [1.6
ms x (360o/cycle) x (60 cycles/s)/(1000 ms/s)] = 34.56o). That is, the current
lags the voltage by 34.56o or 0.603 radians.
The average peak-to-peak voltage magnitude is 167.1 V. The peak voltage is
therefore 83.55 Vpk (167.1 / 2 = 83.55 Vpk).
The average peak-to-peak current magnitude is 22.3 kA. The peak current is
therefore 11.15 kApk (22.3 / 2 = 11.15 kApk).
5-7
Table 5-3
Peak Cage Voltage, Cage Current, and Phase Shift
Cage Voltage Cage Current Phase Shift
# Time (ms) Peak Magnitude Time Peak Magnitude Phase Shift

Voltage Between (ms) Current Between between
Magnitudes Peaks Magnitudes Peaks Voltage
(V) Points (V) (kA) Points and
(kA) Current
(ms)
1 21.9 -113.8 23.6 6700.012 1.70
2 30.6 56.8 170.6 32 -15099.991 21800.003 1.40
3 38.6 -108 164.8 40.33333 7700.012 22800.003 1.73
4 47 63.2 171.2 48.65 -14099.991 21800.003 1.65
5 55.45 -100 163.2 56.85 8500 22599.991 1.40
6 63.75 68.2 168.2 65.35 -13500 22000 1.60
7 72 -98.8 167 73.71667 9100.006 22600.006 1.72
8 80.35 71.6 170.4 81.95 -12899.994 22000 1.60
9 88.65 -92.8 164.4 90.3 9600.006 22500 1.65
10 97.1 74 166.8 98.65 -12500 22100.006 1.55
11 105.4 -90.8 164.8 106.9667 9900.009 22400.009 1.57
Average 167.1 22260 1.60
Values
5-8
The expressions for the cage voltage and the cage current in time domain are
then (shifting the reference start time of voltage):
v (t )cage 83.55 cos(t ) Equation 5-2
i(t )cage 11.15cos(t 34.56o ) Equation 5-3
where:
v(t)cage is in V
i(t)cage is in kA
= 2f
f = 60 Hz
In phasor domain the expressions are:
Vcage 83.440o Equation 5-4
I cage 11.15 34.56o Equation 5-5
Then the impedance of the cage, Zcage, is:
Vcage 83 .550 o
Z cage 0.00749 34 .56 o Equation 5-6
I cage 11 .15 34 .56 o
where Zcage is in .
The cage impedance is 0.00749 34.56o or 7.49 34.56o m in polar

notation, or 6.17 + j4.25 m in rectangular notation. The cage is mostly resistive
but with a significant inductive component.
Calculation of the Arc Voltage Waveform
With the cage impedance calculated above, the arc voltage can be determined.
Figure 5-8 shows the voltage and current waveforms for a 1-ft gap, 8 kA test.
Portions of the total measured voltage and current waveforms are shown. The
cage voltage was calculated using the cage impedance obtained from Equation 5-
6. The arc voltage waveform was determined by subtracting the sinusoidal
voltage contributed by the cage from the total measured source voltage.
5-9
Figure 5-8
Voltage and Current Curves for 1-ft Gap and 8 kA Current Test
Figure 5-9 shows an example of a calculated arc voltage waveform superimposed

on the measure arc current. Note that the arc voltage and the arc current are in
phase.
Figure 5-9
Sample Arc Voltage Waveform
5-10
Calculation of the rms Arc Voltage from the Calculated Arc Voltage at Arc
Current Peak
In this section, a relationship between the rms arc voltage and the calculated arc
voltage at arc current peak is derived. The procedure is as follows:
For each group of tests with the same test conditions, calculate the arc
voltage at the arc current peak, using a curve-fit equation for the calculated
arc voltage gradient, Earc, (discussed later) and the gap length. Note that this
calculation produces averaged curve-fit values which may not coincide exactly
with calculations using individual recorded voltage waveforms. This
approach is taken to help desensitize the resulting equations from the
observed great variability in test data due to erratic behavior of the arc itself.
This issue is discussed in detail in a later section.
For each test, calculate the rms arc voltage using Equation 5-7
Determine the general ratio between the calculated rms arc voltage, and the
calculated arc voltage at current peak
Derivation of the curve-fit equation for the arc voltage gradient, Earc, is described
in a later section. Using the calculated arc voltage gradient, the arc voltage at
each arc current peak was calculated. These n values {varc,1, varc,2, varc,3,. varc,n}
were used in Equation 5-7 to calculated the rms arc voltage.
,1 varc , 2 ...varc , n
2 2 2
varc
Varc , rms Equation 5-7
n
The calculated rms values are summarized on Table 5-4.
5-11
Table 5-4
RMS Voltage to Arc Voltage Comparison
Kinectrics RMS Arc Gap Calculations Using Calculated RMS Ratio of

Test ID Current Voltage Gradient Arc Voltage Arc
(kArms) Equation (Vrms) Voltage at
Arc Arc Current
(ft) (m) Voltage Voltage Peak to
Gradient at rms
(kV/m) Current Voltage
Peak (V) (V/Vrms)
3757 7.83 1 0.3048 1.4768 450.13 440.58 1.0217

3758 7.85 1 0.3048 1.4772 450.24 429.09 1.0493
3759 7.91 1 0.3048 1.4782 450.56 406.57 1.1082
5121 7.94 1 0.3048 1.4787 450.72 426.95 1.0557
5122 7.9 1 0.3048 1.4780 450.50 414.05 1.0880
3760 7.89 1 0.3048 1.4779 450.45 420.64 1.0709
3761 7.88 1 0.3048 1.4777 450.40 419.19 1.0744
5123 7.88 1 0.3048 1.4777 450.40 394.90 1.1405
5124 7.88 1 0.3048 1.4777 450.40 420.15 1.0720
3786 22.15 1 0.3048 1.7270 526.39 478.49 1.1001
3786 21.76 1 0.3048 1.7202 524.31 451.09 1.1623
5140 21.45 1 0.3048 1.7148 522.66 499.86 1.0456
3785 23.22 1 0.3048 1.7457 532.09 480.98 1.1063
5141 21.98 1 0.3048 1.7240 525.48 477.39 1.1007
3781 40.31 1 0.3048 2.0443 623.10 582.10 1.0704
3782 40.93 1 0.3048 2.0551 626.40 531.68 1.1782
5142 40.18 1 0.3048 2.0420 622.40 525.10 1.1853
5-12

Arc Arc Current
Gradient at Current rms
(kV/m) Peak (V) Voltage
(V/Vrms)
5143 40.3 1 0.3048 2.0441 623.04 510.15 1.2213
3783 41.36 2 0.6096 1.1964 729.32 538.73 1.3538
3784 40.69 2 0.6096 1.1963 729.26 553.89 1.3166
3762 8.78 2 0.6096 1.1918 726.53 689.84 1.0532
3763 7.85 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.45 665.40 1.0918
3764 7.76 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.44 692.37 1.0492
3808 7.98 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.46 634.29 1.1453
3810 7.98 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.46 626.53 1.1595
5125 7.51 2 0.6096 1.1916 726.42 591.68 1.2277
5126 7.87 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.45 633.24 1.1472
5127 8.02 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.47 579.24 1.2542
3765 7.95 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.46 657.36 1.1051
3766 7.95 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.46 657.36 1.1051
3809 8.02 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.47 611.08 1.1888
3811 7.93 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.46 643.94 1.1282
5128 7.94 2 0.6096 1.1917 726.46 603.27 1.2042
3787 22.43 2 0.6096 1.1937 727.70 636.07 1.1441
5-13

Arc Arc Current
(V/Vrms)
3806 21.06 2 0.6096 1.1935 727.58 680.25 1.0696
3812 21.08 2 0.6096 1.1935 727.58 653.37 1.1136
5135 23.55 2 0.6096 1.1939 727.79 645.89 1.1268
5138 21.8 2 0.6096 1.1936 727.65 652.60 1.1150
3788 22.7 2 0.6096 1.1938 727.72 677.72 1.0738
3807 21.13 2 0.6096 1.1935 727.59 692.93 1.0500
3813 20.98 2 0.6096 1.1935 727.58 698.37 1.0418
5137 21.94 2 0.6096 1.1937 727.66 705.94 1.0308
3777 40.21 2 0.6096 1.1962 729.22 661.03 1.1032
3777 40.6 2 0.6096 1.1963 729.25 637.74 1.1435
3804 42.66 2 0.6096 1.1966 729.43 703.74 1.0365
3814 39.53 2 0.6096 1.1961 729.16 724.27 1.0068
5144 40.95 2 0.6096 1.1963 729.28 602.24 1.2109
5145 40.17 2 0.6096 1.1962 729.22 663.58 1.0989
3779 40.49 2 0.6096 1.1963 729.24 695.32 1.0488
3780 41.49 2 0.6096 1.1964 729.33 642.46 1.1352
3805 41.92 2 0.6096 1.1965 729.37 664.39 1.0978
5-14

Arc Arc Current
(V/Vrms)
3815 41.2 2 0.6096 1.1964 729.30 672.76 1.0841
3768 7.62 4 1.2192 1.1351 1383.94 1348.88 1.0260
3769 7.48 4 1.2192 1.1361 1385.17 1366.09 1.0140
3791 6 4 1.2192 1.1468 1398.16 1376.86 1.0155
3792 8.26 4 1.2192 1.1305 1378.32 1169.29 1.1788
3793 7.65 4 1.2192 1.1349 1383.67 1464.83 0.9446
5129 7.73 4 1.2192 1.1343 1382.97 1249.60 1.1067
5130 7.62 4 1.2192 1.1351 1383.94 1235.81 1.1199
5131 7.72 4 1.2192 1.1344 1383.06 1221.64 1.1321
5209 8.08 4 1.2192 1.1318 1379.90 1321.14 1.0445
5210 8.53 4 1.2192 1.1286 1375.95 1167.55 1.1785
3770 7.79 4 1.2192 1.1339 1382.45 1291.15 1.0707
3771 8.05 4 1.2192 1.1320 1380.16 1167.09 1.1826
3794 8.01 4 1.2192 1.1323 1380.51 1255.85 1.0993
3795 7.81 4 1.2192 1.1338 1382.27 1325.26 1.0430
3789 22.64 4 1.2192 1.0269 1252.05 968.12 1.2933
3796 20.64 4 1.2192 1.0413 1269.61 1031.01 1.2314
5-15

Arc Arc Current
(V/Vrms)
3797 20.42 4 1.2192 1.0429 1271.54 1036.05 1.2273
5132 22.28 4 1.2192 1.0295 1255.21 1059.66 1.1845
5133 22.17 4 1.2192 1.0303 1256.17 1006.09 1.2486
5207 22.94 4 1.2192 1.0248 1249.41 909.87 1.3732
5208 22.58 4 1.2192 1.0274 1252.57 908.13 1.3793
3790 22.64 4 1.2192 1.0269 1252.05 963.55 1.2994
3798 21.57 4 1.2192 1.0346 1261.44 987.71 1.2771
3799 21.85 4 1.2192 1.0326 1258.98 1013.83 1.2418
5134 22.24 4 1.2192 1.0298 1255.56 1003.07 1.2517
3775 40.2 4 1.2192 0.9005 1097.85 1015.39 1.0812
3776 40.33 4 1.2192 0.8995 1096.71 946.13 1.1591
3800 41.31 4 1.2192 0.8925 1088.10 1075.32 1.0119
3801 41.01 4 1.2192 0.8946 1090.74 1044.33 1.0444
5146 41.21 4 1.2192 0.8932 1088.98 1069.10 1.0186
5147 40.82 4 1.2192 0.8960 1092.40 1110.57 0.9836
3773 38.63 4 1.2192 0.9118 1111.64 1025.04 1.0845
3774 38.91 4 1.2192 0.9098 1109.18 1032.97 1.0738
5-16

Arc Arc Current
(V/Vrms)
3802 39.42 4 1.2192 0.9061 1104.70 1029.79 1.0727
3803 39.87 4 1.2192 0.9028 1100.75 1002.31 1.0982
5148 40.4 4 1.2192 0.8990 1096.09 966.89 1.1336
5149 38.47 5 1.524 0.8628 1314.86 1163.30 1.1303
5150 36.92 5 1.524 0.8760 1334.95 1187.88 1.1238
5-17
Using the calculated arc voltage at arc current peak and the calculated arc rms
voltage, the general ratio between the two quantities was calculated for each test.
The resulting ratios are listed in Table 5-4 and plotted in Figure 5-10.
Figure 5-10
Voltage at Arc Current Peak to RMS Voltage Ratio
The overall average ratio of the arc voltage at arc current peak to the calculated
rms voltage is 1.1255, as shown in Equation 5-8:
Varc , peak 1.1255 Varc , rms Equation 5-8
where, as mentioned earlier, Varc,peak is obtained as the product of the curve-fit arc
gradient, Earc, and the gap length, G. This is discussed later.
It should be noted that this ratio does not correspond to a sinusoidal wave. If the
arc voltage waveform were sinusoidal, the ratio would simply be 2 = 1.4142.
Also, if the arc voltage were a square wave, the ratio would be 1.0
Arc Resistance
The arc resistance can now be calculated using the calculate arc rms voltage,
Varc,\rms and the measured rms arc current:
Varc , rms
Z arc Equation 5-9
I rms
where:
5-18
Varc,rms and Irms are rms quantities in V and kA, respectively
Zarc is in m
The arc resistance values calculated using Equation 5-9 are listed in Table 5-5
and plotted in Figure 5-11. The two right-most columns in Table 5-5 show the
averaged arc current, Irms, and the averaged arc resistance, Zarc, for each group of
tests with a specific set of conditions.
Figure 5-11
More Accurate Arc Resistance as Function of Arc Current
5-19
Table 5-5
Calculation of Arc Resistance
Kinectrics RMS Gap Length, Calculated RMS Zarc Avg Iarc Avg Zarc
Test ID Current G Arc Voltage (V (m) (kA) (m)
(kA rms) (ft) (m) rms)
3757 7.83 1 0.3048 440.58 56.2682
3758 7.85 1 0.3048 429.09 54.6611
3759 7.91 1 0.3048 406.57 51.3995
5121 7.94 1 0.3048 426.95 53.772
5122 7.9 1 0.3048 414.05 52.4114
3760 7.89 1 0.3048 420.64 53.3131
3761 7.88 1 0.3048 419.19 53.1967
5123 7.88 1 0.3048 394.9 50.1142
5124 7.88 1 0.3048 420.15 53.3185 7.88444 50.0057
3786 22.15 1 0.3048 478.49 21.6023
3786 21.76 1 0.3048 451.09 20.7302
5140 21.45 1 0.3048 499.86 23.3035
3785 23.22 1 0.3048 480.98 20.714
5141 21.98 1 0.3048 477.39 21.7193 22.112 21.61386
3781 40.31 1 0.3048 582.1 14.4406
3782 40.93 1 0.3048 531.68 12.99
5142 40.18 1 0.3048 525.1 13.0687
5143 40.3 1 0.3048 510.15 12.6588 40.43 13.28952
3762 8.78 2 0.6096 689.84 78.5695
3763 7.85 2 0.6096 665.4 84.7643
3764 7.76 2 0.6096 692.37 89.2229
3808 7.98 2 0.6096 634.29 79.485
3810 7.98 2 0.6096 626.53 78.5125
5125 7.51 2 0.6096 591.68 78.7856
5126 7.87 2 0.6096 633.24 80.4625
5127 8.02 2 0.6096 579.24 72.2244
5-20
3765 7.95 2 0.6096 657.36 82.6868
3766 7.95 2 0.6096 657.36 82.6868
3809 8.02 2 0.6096 611.08 76.1945
3811 7.93 2 0.6096 643.94 81.203
5128 7.94 2 0.6096 603.27 75.9786 7.96462 80.05973
3787 22.43 2 0.6096 636.07 28.358
3806 21.06 2 0.6096 680.25 32.3006
3812 21.08 2 0.6096 653.37 30.9948
5135 23.55 2 0.6096 645.89 27.4263
5138 21.8 2 0.6096 652.6 29.9358
3788 22.7 2 0.6096 677.72 29.8555
3807 21.13 2 0.6096 692.93 32.7937
3813 20.98 2 0.6096 698.37 33.2874
5137 21.94 2 0.6096 705.94 32.1759 21.8522 30.792
3783 41.36 2 0.6096 538.73 13.0254
3784 40.69 2 0.6096 553.89 13.6124
3777 40.21 2 0.6096 661.03 16.4394
3777 40.6 2 0.6096 637.74 15.7079
3804 42.66 2 0.6096 703.74 16.4965
3814 39.53 2 0.6096 724.27 18.322
5144 40.95 2 0.6096 602.24 14.7067
5145 40.17 2 0.6096 663.58 16.5193
3779 40.49 2 0.6096 695.32 17.1726
3780 41.49 2 0.6096 642.46 15.4847
3805 41.92 2 0.6096 664.39 15.849
5-21
3815 41.2 2 0.6096 672.76 16.3291 40.9392 15.80543
3768 7.62 4 1.2192 1348.88 177.018
3769 7.48 4 1.2192 1366.09 182.632
3791 6 4 1.2192 1376.86 229.477
3792 8.26 4 1.2192 1169.29 141.561
3793 7.65 4 1.2192 1464.83 191.481
5129 7.73 4 1.2192 1249.6 161.656
5130 7.62 4 1.2192 1235.81 162.18
5131 7.72 4 1.2192 1221.64 158.244
5209 8.08 4 1.2192 1321.14 163.507
5210 8.53 4 1.2192 1167.55 136.876
3770 7.79 4 1.2192 1291.15 165.745
3771 8.05 4 1.2192 1167.09 144.98
3794 8.01 4 1.2192 1255.85 156.785
3795 7.81 4 1.2192 1325.26 169.688 7.73929 167.2735
3789 22.64 4 1.2192 968.12 42.7615
3796 20.64 4 1.2192 1031.01 49.952
3797 20.42 4 1.2192 1036.05 50.737
5132 22.28 4 1.2192 1059.66 47.561
5133 22.17 4 1.2192 1006.09 45.3807
5207 22.94 4 1.2192 909.87 39.663
5208 22.58 4 1.2192 908.13 40.2183
3790 22.64 4 1.2192 963.55 42.5596
3798 21.57 4 1.2192 987.71 45.7909
5-22
3799 21.85 4 1.2192 1013.83 46.3995
5134 22.24 4 1.2192 1003.07 45.1021 21.9973 45.10235
3775 40.2 4 1.2192 1015.39 25.2585
3776 40.33 4 1.2192 946.13 23.4597
3800 41.31 4 1.2192 1075.32 26.0305
3801 41.01 4 1.2192 1044.33 25.4653
5146 41.21 4 1.2192 1069.1 25.9427
5147 40.82 4 1.2192 1110.57 27.2065
3773 38.63 4 1.2192 1025.04 26.5348
3774 38.91 4 1.2192 1032.97 26.5477
3802 39.42 4 1.2192 1029.79 26.1235
3803 39.87 4 1.2192 1002.31 25.1395
5148 40.4 4 1.2192 966.89 23.9329
5149 38.47 5 1.524 1163.3 30.2391 40.0483 25.99006
5150 36.92 5 1.524 1187.88
5-23
The following conclusions are derived from Figure 5-11 and Table 5-5:
The rate the decrease of the arc resistance for increasing current appears to be
greater for longer gaps than for shorter gaps.
Arc resistance is impacted by arc temperature and diameter of the arc. The
above analysis suggests that longer arcs are on average cooler or have a smaller
diameter at lower currents than at higher current and, as such, have a higher
resistance.
For shorter arcs, the results suggest that current level has less of an impact on
arc temperature and diameter than for longer arcs.
The behavior and characteristics of arcs in long gaps are studied on more detail in
another EPRI report (1022633) and are used to develop more accurate and more
generally applicable equations for incident thermal energy from arcs long in long
gaps.
Average Arc Voltage Gradient Analysis
In this section, an analysis of arc voltage gradient is presented. Findings of past

studies are summarized and comparisons are made between the test results and
findings of past studies. An empirically derived voltage gradient equation based
on the test results is proposed. Finally, an equation for RMS voltage, as related
to voltage gradient, is proposed. It will then be shown in a subsequent section
how the RMS voltage is used to estimate total arc energy and thermal incident
energy at various working distances.
Background - Existing Studies on Voltage Gradient of Long

Arcs
In Arc Voltage Characteristic of High Current Fault Arcs in Long Gaps by

Goda et al. [18] and Long 60-Cycle Arcs in Air by Strom [11], the voltage
gradients of long arcs in air were determined. Findings from these studies are
compared below with the findings from the Kinectrics-EPRI long arc tests. The
named studies are summarized in the following sections.
Goda et al. Arc Voltage Characteristic of High Current Fault Arcs in Long
Gaps
In the study by Goda et al. [18], the voltage gradient of a long arc was found
from experimental data. The test parameters are listed in Table 5-6.
5-24
Table 5-6
Parameters of the Goda Study

Gap Length (m) 3.4
Duration (s) 0.1 - 0.3
Applied Voltage (kV rms) 12, 24
Electrode Material Fe, Cu, Al
Electrode Diameter (mm) 20, 40
The voltage gradient was calculated by dividing the arc voltage at current peaks,
as shown in Figure 5-12, by the electrode gap length. It was found that the
voltage gradient of an arc in air, E, can be expressed by the following general
equation:
E I n Equation 5-10
where and are constants, n is the exponent, and I is the arc current
Figure 5-12
Voltage Gradient Calculation
From the data obtained by Goda et al [18] and that by Handa [19], Figure 5-12
shows that the average voltage gradient, E, of an arc in a long gap in air, for arc
currents in the range of 7 to 80 kApeak (5 to 56.6 kA rms) was found to be almost
a constant as given by Equation 5-11 that shows very weak dependence on the
arc current.
E 0.95 0.005 / I Equation 5-11
where E is in kV/m and I is in kA.
5-25
Comparing Equations 5-10 and 5-11, the values of the parameters , and n are:
= 0.95, = 0.05 and n = -1.
The arc was observed to consist of several regions, notably a jet region at each
electrode, and a plasma cloud region between the jets. The voltage gradient of
the arc jet was also investigated. The arc jet was defined as the nearly cylindrical
(vertical) column at each electrode and was assigned a length of 0.5 m. It was
found that the jet region of the arc exhibited a voltage gradient that is
approximately 1.4 times larger than the average voltage gradient of the arc.
Electrode material (Fe, Cu, and Al) at 20 and 40 mm diameter had little effect
on the average voltage gradient.
Strom Long 60-Cycle Arcs in Air
Voltage gradients of in 12 - 48 inch gaps were determined by Strom [11] from

experimental data. Arcs were initiated by means of fuse wires, drawn along the
vertical axis of the gap to prevent arc elongation. To eliminate (as far as possible)
any looping of the arc (due to outside magnetic fields produces by busswork), the
current leads to the terminals were placed along the longitudinal axis for a
distance of 2 - 4 feet. The test parameters are listed in Table 5-7.
Table 5-7
Parameters of the Strom Study
Gap Dimension Vertical

Gap Length (inches) 12 - 48
Current (kA peak) .0685 - 21.75
Electrode Material Brass (typical)
The total voltage contribution of both electrodes was approximated as Velectrodes =

35 V. Strom determined this by measuring the voltage drop in arcs in of 1/8 inch
long gaps. The measured voltages were between 34.8 and 42.6 V. A small
portion of the voltage was attributed to the arc, but it was found that 30 - 40 V
can be attributed to the drop at the electrodes, hence an approximated value of
Velectrodes = 35 V. It then follows that the positive column average voltage gradient
was calculated by Equation 5-12.
Earc, average (Vsource 35) / G Equation 5-12
where Earc,average is in V/m, Vsource is in V, and G is the gap length in m.
Tests showed that the value of the average voltage gradient, calculated using the
recorded arc voltage at the arc current peak, appeared to rise from about 31
V/inch at currents below 5 kA peak to 38 V/inch in the 10 - 20 kA range. (i.e.
1.2 kV/m at 3.5 kA rms, to 1.5 kV/m at 7.07 - 14.04 kA rms). The average of
the gradients appeared to remain constant at 31 - 33 V/in for all currents up to
5-26
5kA. Gradient rose slowly to 38 V/in at 10 kA, and remained constant up to and
over 20 kA.
Extreme voltage gradient variation was from 21.5 V/in to 50 V/in (0.85 kV/m to
1.97 kV/m). Variation was greater for low current arcs. This was possibly due to
magnetic forces acting on the arc which tended to shift the arc core into new arc
paths that were less highly ionized and required higher arc voltage to maintain
the current.
For currents from 0.0685 kA to 21.75 kA peak (0.048 15.38 kA rms), the
average voltage gradient was E = 34 V/in (1.34 V/m), with 35% of samples
within 5V/in (0.197 V/m) of average.
The voltage gradient values are given for 1-, 2-, and 4-ft gaps, but the study did
not break down the findings in terms of gap length. Table 5-8 summarizes the
results.
Table 5-8
Summary of Results from the Strom Study
Strom Study: Gap Length Range 1 - 4 ft

Arc Current Range Average Minimum Maximum
(kArms) Gradient Gradient Gradient
(kV/m) (kV/m) (kV/m)
0.048 - 15.38 1.34 0.85 1.97

Additional < 3.535 1.2
Details 7.07 - 1.5
15.38
Determination of Average Arc Voltage Gradient Using

Kinectrics-EPRI Experimental Data
As part of the process in deriving the equation for the incident thermal energy,
voltage gradient analysis was conducted on data from EPRI-Kinectrics test
sessions on September 2009 and November 2009.
Arc behavior with respect to variations in the following parameters is considered:

Gap Length: varied from 1 ft to 5 ft; note that for this analysis arc length is
assumed to be equal to the gap length, G.
Arc Current: varied from approximately 8 kA to 40 kA (actual: 6 kA to 42.66
kA)
Duration: varied from 2 cycles to 12 cycles
The values measured during the experiment include:
- Total Arc Current, rms and discrete values of the waveform
5-27
Total Voltage (arc plus cage), rms and discrete values of the waveform
Short-Circuit Current in the Cage when the electrodes are shorted together
with a bar, rms and discrete values of the waveform
Short-Circuit Voltage across the Cage when the electrodes are shorted
together with a bar, rms and discrete values of the waveform
The subsequent sections describe how the average voltage gradient equation was
determined from the experimental data. It is shown how the voltage drop across
the cage is accounted for. Observations and comparisons with the existing
studies are also given.
In order to enable a direct comparison with the Strom and Goda studies, the
voltage gradient was calculated in the same manner. As with the named studies,
the magnitude of the voltage gradient for this analysis was found by dividing the
calculated arc voltage at the arc current peak (as shown on Figure 5-13 by the gap
length.
Figure 5-13
Voltage and Current Measurement Points
Consider, for example, a 1 ft. (0.3048m), 8 kA rms gap with the following
instantaneous values recorded at current peak: Ipeak = 11.31 kA and Vtotal at I peak =
530 V. Recall the previously calculated impedance of 0.00749 34.56o or
7.49 34.56o m in polar notation, or 6.17 + j4.25 m in rectangular notation..
Shifting the time axis to place the current peak at 0o, the calculated instantaneous
cage voltage at the given current peak is then Vcage at I peak =
(11310)(0.00749)cos(34.56o) = 69.8 V. The arc voltage at that instant is
therefore Varc = 530 69.8 = 460.2 V. Note that the same result is obtained by
subtracting the resistive component of the calculated cage voltage from the total
voltage: Vcage at I peak = (11310)(0.00617) = 69.8 V. This is because the slope of the
arc current is 0 at the arc current peak, and therefore the imaginary component of
the cage contribution at that instant is zero, i.e., only the resistive component of
the cage impedance is important at the instant of current peak (positive peak and
negative peak).
The average voltage gradient, E, is then calculated as E = 0.4602 / 0.3048 = 1.51

kV/m.
5-28
Appendix C summarizes the average voltage gradient calculations for different
gap lengths and arc currents. For each test, the total and arc voltages at half cycle
current peaks are given. Also shown are the total and arc voltage gradients.
The data in Appendix C are plotted in Figure 5-14 which shows the arc voltage
(obtained by removing the contribution of the cage impedance) for as function of
arc currents.
Figure 5-14
Arc Voltage at Current Peaks vs. Arc Current for Different Gap Lengths
The following observations are noted:

1. In general, the duration of the arc had little effect on arc voltage and on the
thermal energy. This is discussed demonstrated later.
2. For shorter gaps, the arc voltage at current peak increases as current
increases. The impact of increasing current on voltage diminishes as the gap
length increases, i.e. for the 1-ft gap, there is an increase in voltage as current
increases. For the 2-ft gap, the voltage is almost independent of the arc
current. For the 4-ft gap, the voltage appears to be decreasing as current
increases. However, subsequent studies lead to the conclusion that arcs in
long gaps consist of several regions, and this effects of individual regions
become more visible as current increases. Careful analysis of the data for the
4-ft gap suggests that the arc voltage decreases as current increases in the
region between 8 kA and 20 kA, while if increases as current increases in the
region above 20 kA. That is, a quadratic polynomial (parabolic) curve fit
would match the data better. For shorter (1-ft and 2-ft gaps) the polynomial
practically reduces to a first-order, i.e., linear variation with current (the
coefficient of the square term is very small). However, for purposes of this
simplified approach in this report, the linear fit is used. This point is,
however, explored in greater detail the second EPRI report 1022633, which
5-29
includes results of special tests to study various regions of the arc and analysis
of the effects of these regions.
3. The arc voltage gradients calculated as shown in Appendix C are plotted in
Figure 5-15 through Figure 5-19. Figure 5-15 shows the average arc voltage
gradient for various currents, and Figure 5-16 to Figure 5-19 show the
average arc voltage gradients for various currents for each gap length
considered.
4. Table 5-0 shows a summary of results for various gaps lengths and arc
currents. Note that the arc voltage gradients calculated for a specific current
and gap length are fairly consistent. No extraneous values were found within
the relatively small spread in the voltage gradient values.
Figure 5-15
Arc Voltage Gradient vs. Arc Current for Different Gap Lengths (Cage Voltage
Removed)
5-30
Figure 5-16
Arc Voltage Gradient vs. Arc Current for 1 ft Gap (Cage Voltage Removed)
Figure 5-17
5-31
Figure 5-18
Figure 5-19
5-32
Table 5-9
Summary of Arc Voltage Gradients for VArious Gap Lengths and Arc Currents
Voltage Gradient Summary
Gap Target Average Median Minimum Maximum Arc

Length RMS Arc Voltage Arc Arc Arc Voltage
(ft) Current Gradient Voltage Voltage Voltage Gradient
(kA) (kV/m) Gradient Gradient Gradient Variation
(kV/m) (kV/m) (kV/m) (kV/m)
1 8 1.43 1.42 1.22 1.88 0.67

1 20 1.70 1.70 1.46 1.82 0.35
1 40 2.06 2.07 1.76 2.34 0.57
2 8 1.12 1.11 0.88 1.45 0.57
2 20 1.12 1.11 1.01 1.34 0.33
2 40 1.19 1.19 0.97 1.41 0.44
4 8 1.15 1.13 0.81 1.75 0.94
4 20 0.90 0.88 0.76 1.22 0.46
4 40 0.89 0.88 0.74 1.13 0.38
5 40 0.84 0.84 0.87 0.78 0.10
Comparisons of Kinectrics-EPRI Findings with Goda and Strom Studies
According to Goda et al [18], the voltage gradient of an arc in a 3.4-m (133.85-

in or 11.15-ft) gap is nearly constant at 0.95 kV/m. The Kinectrics-EPRI test
results did not support this finding. For the longest gap (4-ft gap) tested at
Kinectrics with varying currents, the voltage gradient appeared to decrease as
current increased (However, note the previous comments on this point. Also, the
data from the 5-ft gap tests is insufficient to provide conclusions because only
one arc current value was used.) This suggests that for the 4-ft gap, there is
significant decrease in resistance with increasing current, as shown previously.
The near constant voltage gradient observed by Goda implies a more gradual
decrease in resistance.
In addition to studying the voltage gradient of the entire arc, Goda et al also
found that the arc jet region exhibits a voltage gradient that is approximately 1.4
times that of the entire arc. Data was not collected during the Kinectrics-EPRI
test to enable a similar analysis. However, subsequent selected tests in full-size
tower mockups and tests designed specifically to study the arc gradients, see
EPRI Report 1022633, provide additional information on this issue.
Strom [11] presents the voltage gradient data findings as averages.

Eaverage = 1.2 kV/m for Iarc = 3.535 kA rms
5-33
Eaverage = 1.5 kV/m for Iarc = 7.07 to 14.14 kA rms
Eaverage = 1.34 kV/m for Iarc = 0.048 - 15.38 k Arms
The Strom finding showed an increasing trend with increasing current, however,
data is categorized by current only (i.e., the length of the gap was not considered
when determining average gradients, and all data, regardless of gap length, were
averaged). Kinectrics test data shows that gap length has a significant impact on
the voltage gradient. Thus, form the Kinectrics test results, it is appears that it is
not sufficient to use a single, average value to characterize the voltage gradient for
arcs in long gaps as suggested by Strom. The difference between the gradients
found by Strom and Goda (Strom: 1.34 kV/m for 1-ft to 4-ft gaps versus Goda:
0.95 kV/m for 3.4m or 11.15-ft gap) further illustrates the impact of gap length.
This is discussed further in the EPRI Report 1022633.
Strom also noted that the variation in the voltage gradient is greater for low-
current arcs and that this is possibly due to magnetic forces acting on the arc
which tend to shift the arc core into new arc paths that are less highly ionized
and require higher arc voltage to maintain the current. Kinectrics test data also
show the largest variations for the lowest current tested (8 kA rms). This is
discussed in more detail in Section 6. However, subsequent selected tests in full-
size tower mockups and tests designed specifically to study the arc gradients, see
EPRI Report 1022633, provide additional information on this issue.
Proposed Equation for the Average Voltage Gradient in the

Arc
Because the existing studies do not fully describe the voltage gradients in arcs in
long gaps, an empirically derived equation for the voltage gradient is developed
from the Kinectrics-EPRI test data. As the Kinectrics-EPRI tests only measured
the voltage of the entire arc (i.e. voltage between electrodes) and not of certain
regions of the arc (e.g., arc jets), the proposed equation describes the average
voltage gradient for the entire arc. Differences between arc characteristics
(length, current, proportion of arc jets, etc.) will be accounted for in the
dependence of the voltage gradient on current and on gap length.
Development of Voltage Gradient Model
Figure 5-20 shows the arc voltage gradient values versus current for 1-, 2-, and 4-
ft gaps. It can be seen from the graph that the best (or most convenient for this
simplified analysis) fit curve to describe the voltage gradient as function of arc
current is a straight line. Also, it can be observed that variation of the voltage
gradient with the current value, or the slope of each line is significantly impacted
by the gap length. Thus, similarly to the general Equation 5-10 proposed by
Goda et al, the approximate arc voltage gradient for arcs in long gaps can be
described as a linear function (n = 1):
E I Equation 5-13
5-34
Where:
E = voltage gradient in kV/m)

Iarc = arc current in kA rms
and = factors that depend on gap length
The best fit linear equations are shown and summarized in Figure 5-20 and in
Table 5-10. A curve or linear fit for data from tests with the 5-ft gap could not
be derived, because only one set of tests (at 40 kA) was performed.
Figure 5-20
Arc Voltage Gradient vs. Arc Current for Different Gap Lengths
Table 5-10
Parameters and in Equation 5-13 as Function of Gap Length
Gap Length, G Intercept Slope Linear Fit Equation from

(inches) (meters) Figure 5-20
12 0.3048 1.34 0.0175 E = 0.0175Iarc + 1.34

24 0.6096 1.190 0.0001 E = 0.0001Iarc + 1.19
48 1.2192 1.190 -0.0072 E = -0.0072Iarc + 1.19
The linear fits in Figure 5-20 and the resulting values of and in Table 5-10
require further discussion and study. The data in Figure 5-20 are the same as in
5-15. When one attempts to fit a straight line into the clusters of data points
obtained from tests, the fit lines tend to intersect each other at non-zero current
values. For example, the arc voltage fit line for the 4-ft gap tends to intersect the
fit line for the 2-ft gap at about arc current of 8 kA, suggestions that the arc
voltage in the 2-ft gap for lower currents would exceed the arc voltage in the 4-ft
gap. This is also not supported by physical considerations and is partly a result of
the erratic behavior of the arc and the limited number of data points at each test
5-35
conditions, which then leads to significant broad scatter of the data points.
Another important reason is the observation that the multi-region structure of
arcs becomes evident in long gaps and is subdued in shorted gaps. To
overcome this apparent anomaly of test data, detailed analysis was conducted,
including:
Deleting the high and low outliers and using only test data point that are
grouped closely together. This approach, however, result in much smaller
population of data points, which in itself raises issues with repeatability of
results
Attempting to take into account the observed meandering of the arc, i.e.,
significant deviations of the arc from the straight line connecting the
electrodes (the gap axis)
Attempting to take into account the directionality of the calorimeters when
the arc moves to one or another region of the test cage away from the gap
axis
Various averaging methods to render test data less sensitive to extreme values
These details are discussed in Section 6, where it is also concluded that a

statistical approach needs to be considered in predicting the arc behavior and
location. For the purpose of the analysis in this report, however, the linear fits
are constructed to avoid intersecting fit lines. This is achieved by setting ordinate
(vertical) axis intercepts (i.e., at arc current equal to zero, or the parameters ) in
non-increasing order as gap length decreases: 1-ft 2-ft 4-ft. This approach
and other steps in the derivation of the gradient equation also render the
resulting equation not usable for gaps shorted than 1 ft (12 inches).
As shown in Table 5-10, the intercept, , and the slope, , are different for
different gap lengths. Thus, the values for and are functions of the gap
length, G.
Figure 5-21 plots the values of the intercepts with respect to gap length, G.
Using a curve of best fit approximation, the variation of the intercept with respect
to gap length was found to be best described by the power function in Equation
5-14.
0.0000112G 8 1.19 Equation 5-14
where:
is the intercept
G is the gap length in m
Figure 5-22 plots the values of the slope with respect to the gap length, G.
Using a curve of best fit approximation, the variation of the slope with respect to
gap length was found to be best described by the power function in Equation 5-
15.
5-36
0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 Equation 5-15
where:
is the slope
Figure 5-21
Intercept vs. Gap Length
Figure 5-22
Slope vs. Gap Length
5-37
Combining Equations 5-13, 5-14 and 5-15, the average voltage gradient for gaps
between 1 ft (0.305 m) and 5 ft (1.5 m) in length, 8 kA 40 kA rms arc current,
produced using stainless steel rods as electrodes, can be approximated by
Equation 5-16.
Eave I arc 0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc

Equation 5-16
where:
Eave is the average voltage gradient in kVpeak/m

Iarc is the arc current in kA rms
Validation of the Average Arc Voltage Gradient Equation 5-16
Using the developed Equation 5-16 for the average voltage gradient of the arc,
the voltage gradients for the four gaps lengths (1-ft, 2-ft, 4-ft and 5-ft) were
calculated for the three test arc currents. Table 5-11 compares the average
voltage arc gradient calculated using Equation 5-16 with the linear fit equations
in Figure 5-20. The average arc voltage gradient values calculated using
Equation 5-16 for the 5-ft long gap are also included in Table 5-11, although a
curve (linear) fit could not be obtained in Figure 5-20 for this gap length because
only one set of tests (at 40 kA) was performed. However, assuming the same
intercept value as for the 2-ft and 4-ft gaps, the slope, = 0.0085 is estimated
from the intercept value and the test data. This linear equation for the average
arc voltage gradient for the 5-ft gap is also included in Table 5-11 for
completeness purposes.
5-38
Table 5-11
Comparison between Average Voltage Gradient Calculated Using the Linear Fits from Figure 5-20 and the Derived Equation
5-16
Gap Length, Linear Fit Equation Iarc (kA) =8 Iarc (kA) = 20 Iarc (kA) = 40
G from Figure 5-20
(in) (m) E from E from E from E from E from E from
Fig 5-20 Eq 5-16 Fig 5-20 Eq 5-16 Fig 5-20 Eq 5-16
Fit Fit Fit
12 0.3048 E = 0.0175 Iarc + 1.34 1.48 1.48 1.69 1.69 2.04 2.04
24 0.6096 E = 0.0001 Iarc + 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.20
48 1.2192 E = -0.0072 Iarc + 1.19 1.13 1.13 1.05 1.05 0.90 0.90
60 1.524 E = -0.0085 Iarc + 1.19 1.12 1.12 1.02 1.02 0.85 0.85
5-39
Figure 5-23 shows plots versus arc current of the average arc gradients calculated
using the test data and also using Equation 5-16. Solid lines in Figure 5-23
represent the gradient values calculated using Equation 5-16, and the data points
in Figure 5-23 are gradients values obtained from test data. A straight line for
the 5-ft gap is also plotted using the equation shown in Table 5-11. Figure 5-24
through 5-27 show the calculated gradients for individual gap lengths, plotted
against the arc current.
From the figures, it can be seen that the empirically derived Equation 5-16
reasonably predicts the average arc voltage gradient for gap lengths between 1 ft
and 5 ft and for arc currents ranging from 8 kA rms to 40 kA rms, using stainless
steel rods. It should be noted that Equation 5-16 provides a single value for the
gradient of an entire arc between the electrodes. It does not account for the
differences in voltage gradients in different regions of an arc. Hence, Equation
5-16 provides values of the average arc voltage gradient.
Also, Equation 5-16 was not derived using data for shorter gaps, and
consequently should not be used for shorter gaps because it will produce
unreasonable values. For example, for a 0.5 ft gap length, the calculated gradient
is greater than 40 kV/m -- an unrealistic value. This is because of the very large
(negative) exponent used to fit the intercept data in Figure 5-21 and Equation 5-
14. However, the test data suggest that the Equation 5-16 can be used for gaps
longer than 5 ft because the calculated gradient seems to become relatively
insensitive to the gap length above 4 ft or so. This is supported by physical
considerations when one takes into account the roles played by the various
regions of the arc. This subject is discussed in greater details in the EPRI Report
1022633.
Figure 5-23
Linear Approximation of Calculated Average Arc Voltage Gradient for Different
Gaps
5-40
Figure 5-24
Arc Voltage Gradient from Test Data and from Equation 5-16 for 1 ft Gap
Figure 5-25
5-41
Figure 5-26
Figure 5-27
Relationship between the Average Arc Voltage Gradient and

rms Arc Voltage
The next major step in the derivation of an equation for incident thermal energy
as function of distance from the arc requires calculation of the total arc energy.
5-42
The total arc energy is the integral of total arc power over the duration of the arc.
The total arc power is determined as the product of rms arc current and rms arc
voltage.
The arc voltage was determined previously in connection with the estimation of
the arc resistance by subtracting the voltage drop across the cage from the
recorded total source voltage. The arc rms voltage can then be calculated from
the peak arc voltage by rearranging the previously derived Equation 5-8. This
leads to Equation 5-17.
Varc, peak Eave G

Varc, rms 0.8885 Eave G Equation 5-17
1.1255 1.1255
Recalling that the average arc voltage gradient was determined using peak voltage
values in Equation 5-7, and that by definition this gradient is the arc voltage
divided by the gap length, or, conversely, the arc voltage is the gap length times
the average arc voltage gradient, the expression for the average (i.e., averaged over
data from all tests) rms arc voltage in terms of the arc current, Iarc, and the gap
length, G, is obtained by combining Equations 5-16 and 5-17:
[0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc ]G

Varc , rms Equation
1.1255
5-18
where:
Varc,rms is the arc voltage, in kV rms, derived as a quantity averaged over all test
data
Discussion of Equation 5-18
For a fixed gap length, Equation 5-18 can be written in the form of a first-degree
(linear) polynomial:
Varc aI arc b Equation 5-19
This form of the equation clearly shows that the arc voltage is not constant but,
for a fixed gap length, increases with arc current.
The arc resistance can be expressed from Equation 5-19 in the form of Equation
5-20:
Varc b
Z arc a Equation 5-20
I arc I arc
5-43
The form of Equation 5-20 clearly shows that the arc resistance decreases as arc
current increases, as was observed earlier in this Section.
Equation 5-19 also predicts that the arc voltage would be non-zero for zero arc
current (i.e., if Iarc is set to zero), which is not a realistic result. Hence, it is
observed that the expression for arc voltage breaks down for small arc currents.
Arc Power
The total arc power, Parc, can now be obtained from Equation 5-21:
Parc Varc , rms I arc Equation 5-21
Substituting Equation 5-18 into Equation 5-21, we obtain the expression for the
arc power, Parc, in terms of gap length, G, rms arc voltage, Varc,rms and arc current:
[0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc ]G

Parc I arc
1.1255
Equation 5-22
For a fixed gap length, Equation 5-22 can be written in the form or a second-
degree (quadratic) polynomial:
Parc fI arc
2
gI arc h Equation 5-23
The form of Equation 5-23 clearly shows that the arc power is a highly non-
linear function of the arc current Iarc. Equation 5-22 contains the term (Iarc)2, as
an expression for power in a linear circuit does, but it also contains a term
proportional to Iarc because the arc voltage gradient, and consequently the arc
voltage depends on the arc current as discussed above.
Incident Thermal Energy Analysis
In this section, an analysis of the incident thermal energy, W, measured by the

calorimeters installed at various working distances is presented. The effects of arc
duration, T, (number of cycles, N) on the incident thermal energy characteristics
are discussed. A conservative empirically derived formula for incident thermal
energy at various working distances is proposed. The calculations and derivations
are based on the vertical cage scenario with steel electrodes, where in most tests
the thermal energy was measured as function of radial distance from the gap axis
by sets of calorimeters located at various distances from the gap axis on a
horizontal plane at the mid-point of the gap, see Section 3 for descriptions of the
test setups. In addition, as described in Section 3, some tests were performed
with calorimeters located at various heights relative to the gap electrodes to
obtain an indication of vertical profiles of the thermal incident energy.
5-44
For the analysis in this section, the incident energy levels were measured using
vertically oriented calorimeters, positioned axially at mid-gap and radially at
various distances from the gap axis, as shown in Figure 5-28.
Figure 5-28
Schematic Test Setup for Measuring Radial Profiles of Incident Thermal Energy
Plots of Measured Incident Thermal Energy
The incident thermal energy recorded by the calorimeters placed at different

working distances relative to the gap axis for tests with different gap lengths, arc
current values, arc current durations are plotted in Figures 5-29 through 5-38.
The gap length ranges from 1 to 5 ft, nominal arc current values vary from 8 to
40 kA, arc current nominal durations vary from 2 to 12 cycles, and working
distance varies from 1 ft to 4 ft. Curves of best fit for the measured incident
thermal energy versus the working distance are also shown in Figures 5-29
through 5-38.
5-45
Figure 5-29
Incident Thermal Energy for 1-ft Gap Length, 2 Cycles
Figure 5-30
5-46
Figure 5-31
Incident Energy for 1-ft Gap Length, 12 Cycles
Figure 5-32
5-47
Figure 5-33
Figure 5-34
5-48
Figure 5-35
Figure 5-36
5-49
Figure 5-37
Figure 5-38
Incident Thermal Energy for 5-ft Gap Length, 2 Cycles. Change gap to gap length
5-50
Analysis of the Characteristics of the Incident Thermal Energy
Measured Data
Analysis of Figures 5-29 through 5-38 leads to the following observations:

1. In general, as expected, the smaller the working distance, D, the larger the
variation in incident thermal energy recorded by the various calorimeters.
For example, the average (mean) incident thermal energy measured by
calorimeters at the 1-ft working distance is 4.12 cal/cm2 in the target 20 kA
rms, 2-cycle tests. The measured data points in this test range from a
maximum of 5.7 cal/cm2 to a minimum of 3.1 cal/cm2, i.e., the spread (range)
is 2.6 cal/cm2 or 63% of the average. At the working distance of 4 ft, the
maximum and minimum recorded incident thermal energy values are 0.3
cal/cm2 and 0.2 cal/cm2 respectively, giving a much narrower range of 0.1
cal/cm2, which is 37% of the average (mean) of 0.267 cal/cm2.
The variation in the incident thermal energy readings by calorimeters located

at the same working distance from the gap axis but at various azimuth
positions around the cage is discussed in great detail in Section 6.
2. In general, the higher the current, the larger the variation in recorded
incident thermal energy, with other test conditions remaining the same. For
example, for tests with 1-ft gap, target 20 kA rms arc current and 2 cycle arc
current duration, the maximum and minimum recorded incident energy
values at the 2-ft working distance are 0.9 cal/cm2 and 0.6 cal/cm2
respectively, giving a range of 0.3 cal/cm2 or 38% of the average (mean) of
0.8 cal/cm2. For tests with 1-ft gap, target 40 kA rms arc current and 2 cycle
arc current duration, the maximum and minimum recorded incident thermal
energy values at the 2-ft working distance are 2.9 cal/cm2 and 1.4 cal/cm2
respectively, giving a larger variation of 1.5 cal/cm2 or 76% of the average
(mean) of 1.98 cal/cm2.
The possible causes of differences in the incident thermal energy readings,

measured by calorimeters at the same distance from the gap axis are discussed
in great detail in Section 6.
3. The trend that best describes the characteristic of recorded incident energy
with respect to working distance appears to be a decaying power function.
This observation is used to develop the relationship for incident thermal

energy as function of working distance.
For each data set in Figures 5-29 through 5-38, the line of best-fit follows a
power function with exponential decay as in Equation 5-24. The best-fit
equations for the individual curves in Figures 5-29 through 5-38 are shown in
Table 5-12.
W W1 D x Equation 5-24
where:
5-51
W1 is the incident thermal energy at some point D1
x is the exponent, i.e., the decay factor
Table 5-12
Equations of Best-Fit Curves of Incident Thermal Energy, W, versus Working
Distance, D
Gap Target Arc Target Best Fit Equation for

Length (ft) Current (kA) Duration Incident Energy, W
(Cycles) (cal/cm2) at Working
Distance, D (ft)
1 20 2 W = 4D-1.92
1 40 2 W = 8.53D-1.98
1 8 6 W = 3.88D-1.87
1 20 6 W = 12.11D-1.82
1 40 6 W = 23.07D-2.11
1 8 12 W = 7.44D-1.87
Average Decay Factor for 1-ft Gap: x = 1.93 W = W1D-1.93
2 20 2 W = 4.74D-1.69
2 40 2 W = 8.19D-1.63
2 8 6 W = 4.79D-1.67
2 20 6 W = 12.34D-1.6
2 40 6 W = 23.58D-1.75
2 8 12 W = 8.86D-1.66
4 20 2 W = 4.74D-1.46
4 40 2 W = 8.1D-1.46
4 8 6 W = 6.74D-1.57
4 20 6 W = 15.2D-1.53
4 40 6 W = 24.98D-1.53
4 8 12 W = 14.21D-1.66
5 40 2 W = 9.5D-1.5
Decay Factor for 5 ft-Gap: x = 1.5 W = W1D-1.5
As expected, the measured incident thermal energy decreases as the working

distance increases. It is observed, however, that the rate of incident thermal
energy decay, x, is dependent on the gap length. For example, for the 1-ft gap,
5-52
the average decay factor, x, is x = 1.93. For the 2-ft gap, the average factor is x =
1.67, and for the 4-ft gap, the average factor is x = 1.54.
If the arc were an omnidirectional point source and the total radiated thermal
energy were given by W, the inverse square law would describe the decays of the
incident thermal energy as working distance increases. The total energy would
be distributed over a spherical surface area and the density, J1, at radial distance r1
would be given by Equation 5-25:
W1
J1 Equation 5-25
4r12
Similarly, the density, J2, at radial distance r2 would be give by Equation 5-26:
W2
J2 Equation 5-26
4r22
and the relation between J1 and J2 would be given by Equation 5-27:
J1 W1 r22
Equation 5-27
J 2 W2 r12
where:
J1 is the incident thermal energy density at radial distance r1

J2 is the incident thermal energy density at radial distance r2
As can be seen from Table 5-12, the recorded test data for the shortest gap (1 ft)
best approximates the inverse-square-law relationship (the average decay factor,
x, is x = 1.93, which is very close to 2).
However, as the gap length increases, the value of the decay factor, x, deviates
from 2, and continues to decrease as the gap length, G, increases further.
Therefore, for longer gaps the observed decay is not a square function (i.e., the
value of the decay factor, x, for longer gaps is not close to 2). This suggests that
the arc in long gaps cannot be approximated by a point source.
This is illustrated graphically in Figure 5-39, which compares the gap length, G,
with the 1-ft working distance, D1. Figure 5-39 shows a circle (sphere in three
dimensions) with radius equal to the working distance D1 = 1 ft, centered on the
midpoint of the gap for gaps of various lengths. Figure 5-39 (a) shows an arc in a
1-ft-long gap (G = 1 ft). The arc is completely enclosed by the circle (sphere)
and, as a consequence, the arc appears short to the observer (calorimeter) located
at the 1-ft working distance. This graphical representation shows that an arc in a
short gap (for example, a 1-ft long gap) may with reasonable accuracy be
represented by a point source, which is characterized by (inverse) square-law
relationship, as seen by an observer removed from the arc.
5-53
However, when the same analysis is applied to an arc in a long gap, for example,
a 5-ft gap, see Figure 5-39 (c), observed (measured) by a calorimeter located at
the same 1-ft working distance, it is clear that the arc extends well beyond the
circle of D1 = 1 ft radius. Hence, the arc in a 5-ft gap can no longer be
considered short relative to the working distance of 1 ft, and, consequently, the
arc cannot be approximated by a point source. As a result, the value of the decay
factor for the 5-ft gap is much smaller than 2, and shown in Table 5-12.
Figure 5-39
Sketch of Working Distance, D, Relative to Gap Length, G, for Various Values of
G.
For the 5-ft gap, the arc extends well beyond the circle (sphere) with D1 = 1 ft
radius, and contributions from the end-portions of the arc need to be considered
(the directionality or the line-of-sight of the calorimeters also comes into play;
this is discussed in Section 6). In fact, the above discussion and the observation
that the value of x decreases from 2 towards 1, suggests that arcs in long gaps
tend to behave more like cylindrical (line) sources of thermal energy. In the
cylindrical (line) source representation of an arc, J would be inversely
proportional to the first power of r ( J 1 / r ). However, representation of an
arc in a long gap by a line (cylindrical) source is also not the most appropriate
approach, because this would suggest that the incident thermal energy is
independent of the longitudinal position along the gap axis. Data from several
tests, discussed later performed in the arc cage where the calorimeters were
arranged at three different longitudinal locations between the top and bottom
electrodes, see Figure 3-6, indicate that the measured incident thermal energy is a
function of location along the gap axis, and, consequently, a line-source
representation of an arc in a long gap is also not fully appropriate.
5-54
As pointed out earlier, the value of the decay factor, x, decreases from very close
to 2 and settles at x = 1.5 for the longest gap tested of 5 ft. This suggests that the
appropriate model for an arc in a long gap is somewhere between a point
(spherical) source and a line (cylindrical) source, depending of course on the
measurement location, i.e., the working distance.
Developing the most appropriate (but not too complicated) models for arcs in
long gaps is one of the main topics of the EPRI report 1022633. Furthermore,
the test data and the above analysis do not provide means of distinguishing
between or studying the radiated and convected portions of the incident thermal
energy. Special test setups were subsequently constructed and tests performed to
focus on these issues, as discussed in the EPRI report 1022633.
Incident Thermal Energy Flux
Derivation of a generalized formula for incident thermal energy as function of

working distance requires one more preparatory step. Namely, it must be
recalled that the total thermal energy depends not only on the arc current, Iarc, the
gap length, G, and the distance from the arc (i.e., the working distance), D, but
also on the duration, T (or number of cycles, N) of the arc current. Also, from
the testing viewpoint, it is very difficult to control the duration, T, precisely.
Therefore, in the next section, the dependence of the incident thermal energy in
the arc duration is analyzed in detail and it is shown that for all practical purposes
it is possible to define the incident thermal energy flux, , that is mathematically
expressed as the measured incident thermal energy, W, divided by the recorded
duration, T, of the arc current, see Equation 5-28:
W
Equation 5-28
T
where:
W is the incident thermal energy in cal/cm2

is the incident thermal energy flux in cal/(scm2)
T is the duration of the arc current in s
Development of a Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal

Energy Flux as Function of Working Distance
In this section, the effect of arc current duration on the incident thermal energy
is first analyzed, and it is shown that the measured incident thermal energy (in
units of energy per area, such as cal/cm2) is for all practical purposes proportional
to the arc duration.
Therefore, further development of the formula for incident thermal energy versus
working distance is carried out by first developing an equation for flux . The
incident thermal energy can then be calculated by re-arranging Equation 5-28 to
obtain W by multiplying by T.
5-55
Next, a simplified equation for incident thermal energy flux as function of
working distance is developed.
General Steps in the Derivation of a Simplified Equation for Incident

Thermal Energy Flux
In this section, the general steps in the derivation of the incident thermal energy
flux, , equation at various working distances, D, are described. The derivation
of the expression for proceeds according to the steps listed in Table 5-13.
The equations used in the derivation are listed below:
1 D x Equation 5-30
1 Parc Equation 5-31
1 / Parc Equation 5-32
where:

x is the exponent
1 is the incident thermal energy flux at some point D1 in cal/(scm2)
is a parameter relating 1 to the total arc energy, Parc
Note that:
We can use the incident thermal energy measured by calorimeters at the 1-ft
working distance, divided by the arc current duration, to obtain values for 1
Parc is calculated from Equation 5-22 and is a function of arc current, Iarc, and
gap length, G
Because the parameter is an empirical quantity whose values are derived
from measured data using Equation 5-32, the units of are not defined.
Instead, can be thought of as the portion of the total arc power that is
measured by calorimeters at the working distance of 1 unit of length (for
example, 1 ft)
5-56
Table 5-13
Steps in the Derivation of the Expression for
Step Description
#
1 The incident thermal energy, W, measured in the tests by calorimeters is plotted versus the distance of the
calorimeters from the gap axis, i.e., versus the working distance, D, for various test conditions (gap length, arc
current, duration)
2 The decay plots of W versus D are fitted with exponential curves of the form in Equation 5-29 (or 5-24)
3 The decay versus D of the incident thermal energy flux, , is assumed to follow the same pattern (Equation 5-
30) versus working distance as does W, based on the previous conclusion that W is proportional to the arc
current duration, T
4 The incident thermal energy flux at 1-ft distance (D = 1 ft), i.e., 1, is taken as a known reference point on the
exponential curve of versus D
5 An expressions for the decay exponent, x, in terms of gap length, G, is derived
6 1 is related to the arc power, Parc, derived in Equation 5-22, through the parameter as shown in Equation 5-
31 for various gap lengths, G
7 An expressions for in terms of the gap length, G, is derived from Equation 5-32
8 The expression for is substituted into the expression for 1
9 The expression for 1 is substituted into the exponential decay equation for
10 The derived equation for is checked against measured values of the incident thermal energy flux, obtained
using the measured incident thermal energy, W, divided by the arc current duration, T, Equation 5-28
11 Final adjustments are made to ensure that the majority of measured data are reproduced by the derived
equation for as function of D, Iarc and G
12 The incident thermal energy at working distance, D, can then calculated by re-arranging Equation 5-28, i.e.,
by multiplying the flux by the arc duration, T
5-57
Effect of Arc Duration (Number of Cycles)
This section investigates the effect of arc duration, T, on the arc energy, A, and
the incident thermal energy, W.
It was found that increasing the arc duration, T, (number of cycles, N) increases
nearly proportionally the arc energy, A, and therefore the incident thermal
energy, W, for a given working distance. For example, if the arc duration for a
given current and gap length is doubled, the incident thermal energy measured at
various distance also approximately doubles. This is expected, if the voltage and
current remain constant for the duration of the arcing event. In actual field
conditions, however, fault asymmetry and other factors may introduce deviations
from proportionality.
Table 5-14 groups the test data in terms of the following parameters:
Gap length, G
Working distance, D
Arc current, Iarc
Duration, T, or number of half-cycles, N
The average values of the following quantities were determined for each data
group:
Incident thermal energy
Number of actual cycles and actual duration
Arc current
Arc energy
Then, the duration multiplier, MT, the arc energy multiplier, MA, incident
thermal energy multiplier, MW, ratio factor for arc energy, FA, and ratio factor
for incident thermal energy, FW, were determined for each data set. A data set is
defined by two adjacent groups of data in Table 5-14 where all target test
measurement parameters listed above except for the working distance were the
same.
For example, referring to Table 5-14, row 1 (data group 1) and row 2 (data group
2) form a set of data. The first row of Table 5-14 refers to averages taken of 15
data points where the gap length is 1 ft, the calorimeters are located 1 ft away
from the gap axis, and the test controls were adjusted to produce target arc
current of 8 kA, 6 cycles. The average actual duration for these tests was T =
101.3 ms or N = 6.08 cycles; the average arc energy was 370.2 kJ and the average
incident thermal energy measured by the calorimeters at the 1-ft working
distance (D = 1 ft) was 3.99 cal/cm2. The second row of Table 5-14 refers to
averages taken in the tests with the target duration of 12 cycles with the same gap
length, target current, and working distance as for the first row. The average
actual duration for these tests was T = 201.25 ms or N = 12.07 cycles; the average
5-58
arc energy was 701.5 kJ and the average incident thermal energy measured by the
calorimeters at the 1-ft working distance (D = 1 ft) was 7.68 cal/cm2.
Duration Multiplier
The duration multiplier, MT, is the factor by which the duration, T, of the arc
current increased between tests in group 1 and tests in group 2 in the data sets in
Table 5-15. In this case (the first two rows in Table 5-15), the duration
multiplier is:
M T 201.25 / 101.30 1.987 Equation 5-33
Arc Energy Multiplier
Similarly, the arc energy multiplier, MA, is the factor by which the arc energy
increased between tests in group 1 and tests in group 2 in the set 1 of data in
Table 5-15. In this case, the arc energy multiplier is:
M A 701.5 / 370.2 1.895 Equation 5-34
Incident Thermal Energy Multiplier
Continuing, the incident thermal energy multiple, MW, is the factor by which the
incident thermal energy increased between tests in group 1 and tests in group 2
in the set 1 of data in Table 5-15. In this case, the incident thermal energy
multiplier is:
M W 7.68 / 3.99 1.925 Equation 5-35
Ratio Factor for Arc Energy
The ratio factor for the arc energy, FA, is a measure of the change in arc energy
with respect to the change in the duration multiplier, as defined in Equation 5-
36:
FA M A / M T Equation 5-36
For set 1 of the data in Table 5-15, FA is:
FA, set1 1.895 / 1.987 0.954 Equation 5-37
Therefore, the number 0.954 represents the factor by which the arc energy
multiplier changed with respect to the change in the duration multiplier. A
result of 1.0 would mean that the arc energy changed proportionately to the
change in arc duration (number of cycles).
5-59
Ratio Factor for Incident Thermal Energy
Similarly, ratio factor for the incident thermal energy, FW, is a measure of the
change in incident thermal energy with respect to the change in the duration
multiplier, as defined in Equation 5-38:
FW M W / M T Equation 5-38
For set 1 of the data in Table 5-15, FW is:
FW , set1 1.925 / 1.987 0.969 Equation 5-39
Observations on and Summary of the Effect of Arc Duration (Number of

Cycles)
As can be seen from Table 5-14, the ratio factors for arc energy, FA, and incident
thermal energy, FW, are typically close to 1. On occasion, the factors (particularly
the incident thermal energy ration factor, FW) noticeably deviate from unity, and
this is attributed to the erratic behavior of the arc.
The above analysis indicates that when the number of cycles is changed by a
certain factor, the arc energy, and consequently the incident thermal energy, is
also changed by the same factor. Hence, the incident thermal energy is for all
practical purposes proportional to the arc duration.
Conversely, it is possible to remove the arc duration from the analysis by defining
the concept of the incident thermal energy flux, which is obtained from the
incident thermal energy according to Equation 5-28 (i.e., by dividing the
incident thermal energy values by the duration of the arc current).
Effect of Arc Duration (Number of Cycles)
This section investigates the effect of arc duration, T, on the arc energy, A, and
the incident thermal energy, W.
It was found that increasing the arc duration, T, (number of cycles, N) increases
nearly proportionally the arc energy, A, and therefore the incident thermal
energy, W, for a given working distance. For example, if the arc duration for a
given current and gap length is doubled, the incident thermal energy measured at
various distance also approximately doubles. This is expected, if the voltage and
current remain constant for the duration of the arcing event. In actual field
conditions, however, fault asymmetry and other factors may introduce deviations
from proportionality.
Table 5-14 groups the test data in terms of the following parameters:
Gap length, G
Working distance, D
5-60
Arc current, Iarc
Duration, T, or number of half-cycles, N
The average values of the following quantities were determined for each data
group:
Incident thermal energy
Number of actual cycles and actual duration
Arc current
Arc energy
Then, the duration multiplier, MT, the arc energy multiplier, MA, incident
thermal energy multiplier, MW, ratio factor for arc energy, FA, and ratio factor
for incident thermal energy, FW, were determined for each data set. A data set is
defined by two adjacent groups of data in Table 5-14 where all target test
measurement parameters listed above except for the working distance were the
same.
For example, referring to Table 5-14, row 1 (data group 1) and row 2 (data group
2) form a set of data. The first row of Table 5-14 refers to averages taken of 15
data points where the gap length is 1 ft, the calorimeters are located 1 ft away
from the gap axis, and the test controls were adjusted to produce target arc
current of 8 kA, 6 cycles. The average actual duration for these tests was T =
101.3 ms or N = 6.08 cycles; the average arc energy was 370.2 kJ and the average
incident thermal energy measured by the calorimeters at the 1-ft working
distance (D = 1 ft) was 3.99 cal/cm2. The second row of Table 5-14 refers to
averages taken in the tests with the target duration of 12 cycles with the same gap
length, target current, and working distance as for the first row. The average
actual duration for these tests was T = 201.25 ms or N = 12.07 cycles; the average
arc energy was 701.5 kJ and the average incident thermal energy measured by the
calorimeters at the 1-ft working distance (D = 1 ft) was 7.68 cal/cm2.
Duration Multiplier
The duration multiplier, MT, is the factor by which the duration, T, of the arc
current increased between tests in group 1 and tests in group 2 in the data sets in
Table 5-15. In this case (the first two rows in Table 5-15), the duration
multiplier is:
M T 201.25 / 101.30 1.987 Equation 5-40
Arc Energy Multiplier
Similarly, the arc energy multiplier, MA, is the factor by which the arc energy
increased between tests in group 1 and tests in group 2 in the set 1 of data in
Table 5-15. In this case, the arc energy multiplier is:
5-61
M A 701.5 / 370.2 1.895 Equation 5-41
Incident Thermal Energy Multiplier
Continuing, the incident thermal energy multiple, MW, is the factor by which the
incident thermal energy increased between tests in group 1 and tests in group 2
in the set 1 of data in Table 5-15. In this case, the incident thermal energy
multiplier is:
M W 7.68 / 3.99 1.925 Equation 5-42
Ratio Factor for Arc Energy
The ratio factor for the arc energy, FA, is a measure of the change in arc energy
with respect to the change in the duration multiplier, as defined in Equation 5-
36:
FA M A / M T Equation 5-43
For set 1 of the data in Table 5-15, FA is:
FA, set1 1.895 / 1.987 0.954 Equation 5-44
Therefore, the number 0.954 represents the factor by which the arc energy
multiplier changed with respect to the change in the duration multiplier. A
result of 1.0 would mean that the arc energy changed proportionately to the
change in arc duration (number of cycles).
Ratio Factor for Incident Thermal Energy
Similarly, ratio factor for the incident thermal energy, FW, is a measure of the
change in incident thermal energy with respect to the change in the duration
multiplier, as defined in Equation 5-38:
FW M W / M T Equation 5-45
For set 1 of the data in Table 5-15, FW is:
FW , set1 1.925 / 1.987 0.969 Equation 5-46
Observations on and Summary of the Effect of Arc Duration (Number of

Cycles)
As can be seen from Table 5-14, the ratio factors for arc energy, FA, and incident
thermal energy, FW, are typically close to 1. On occasion, the factors (particularly
the incident thermal energy ration factor, FW) noticeably deviate from unity, and
this is attributed to the erratic behavior of the arc.
5-62
The above analysis indicates that when the number of cycles is changed by a
certain factor, the arc energy, and consequently the incident thermal energy, is
also changed by the same factor. Hence, the incident thermal energy is for all
practical purposes proportional to the arc duration.
Conversely, it is possible to remove the arc duration from the analysis by defining
the concept of the incident thermal energy flux, which is obtained from the
incident thermal energy according to Equation 5-28 (i.e., by dividing the
incident thermal energy values by the duration of the arc current).
5-63
Table 5-14
Groupings of Test Data and
EffectofDurationonArc EffectofDurationon
Count IncidentThermalEnergy(cal/cm2) Cycles Duration Current Energy IncidentEnergy
Gap Working Average
(Number Duration
Length Distance Range (ms) (kA) ArcEnergy
ofData Avg Multip.MT Incident
(ft) (ft) Average Median Max Min (Max- Target (kJ)
Points) Actual Avg Avg ArcEnergy FA= Energy FW=
Min) Target Actual Target Actual Multip.MA MA/MT Multip.MW MW/MT
1 1 15 3.99 3.95 4.70 3.20 1.50 6 6.08 100 101.30 8 7.89 370.20
1 1 12 7.68 7.35 8.70 6.00 2.70 12 12.07 200 201.25 8 7.91 701.50 1.987 1.895 0.954 1.925 0.969
1 1 9 4.12 4.40 5.70 3.10 2.60 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 21.79 456.67

1 1 6 13.23 14.20 20.60 7.80 12.80 6 6.01 100 100.15 20 22.60 1355.00 3.008 2.967 0.987 3.210 1.067
1 1 12 9.18 10.50 14.40 6.60 7.80 2 2.00 33 33.33 40 40.43 1097.50

1 1 6 25.97 27.30 33.00 21.60 11.40 6 6.00 100 100.00 40 41.03 3215.00 3.001 2.929 0.976 2.830 0.943
1 1.5 6 1.98 1.98 2.20 1.80 0.40 6 6.06 100 101.00 8 7.92 369.00
1 1.5 6 3.70 3.70 4.60 3.10 1.50 12 12.06 200 201.00 8 7.88 690.00 1.990 1.870 0.940 1.866 0.937
1 1.5 6 1.95 1.95 2.20 1.60 0.60 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 21.61 451.00
1 1.5 3 6.30 6.30 9.10 4.00 5.10 6 6.02 100 100.30 20 21.98 1300.00 3.012 2.882 0.957 3.231 1.073
1 2 9 0.92 0.95 1.10 0.80 0.30 6 6.09 100 101.50 8 7.86 371.00
1 2 6 1.77 1.80 2.10 1.50 0.60 12 12.09 200 201.50 8 7.93 713.00 1.985 1.922 0.968 1.916 0.965
1 2 3 0.80 1.35 2.10 0.60 1.50 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 22.15 468.00

1 2 3 3.20 3.60 5.00 2.20 2.80 6 6.00 100 100.00 20 23.22 1410.00 3.003 3.013 1.003 4.000 1.332
1 2 6 1.95 2.15 2.90 1.40 1.50 2 2.00 33 33.30 40 40.62 1145.00
1 2 6 4.42 4.80 6.30 3.30 3.00 6 6.00 100 100.00 40 41.03 3215.00 3.003 2.808 0.935 2.265 0.754
1 3 4 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 6 6.06 100 101.00 8 7.92 369.00
1.990 1.870 0.940 1.850 0.930
1 3 4 0.93 0.81 0.93 0.70 0.23 12 12.06 200 201.00 8 7.88 690.00
1 3 4 0.58 0.55 0.60 0.50 0.10 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 21.61 451.00
3.012 2.882 0.957 2.870 0.953
1 3 2 1.65 1.65 2.10 1.20 0.90 6 6.02 100 100.30 20 21.98 1300.00
1 4 9 0.31 0.35 0.40 0.30 0.10 6 6.09 100 101.50 8 7.86 371.00
1.985 1.922 0.968 1.982 0.998
1 4 6 0.62 0.60 0.70 0.50 0.20 12 12.09 200 201.50 8 7.93 713.00
5-64
Gap Working Average
(Number Duration
1 4 3 0.27 0.25 0.30 0.20 0.10 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 22.15 468.00

3.003 3.013 1.003 4.000 1.332
1 4 3 1.07 1.05 1.20 0.90 0.30 6 6.00 100 100.00 20 23.22 1410.00
1 4 6 0.57 0.60 0.70 0.50 0.20 2 2.00 33 33.35 40 40.62 1145.00
2.999 2.808 0.936 2.441 0.814
1 4 6 1.38 1.35 1.60 1.10 0.50 6 6.00 100 100.00 40 41.03 3215.00
2 1 20 4.91 5.60 7.40 3.80 3.60 6 6.07 100 101.13 8 7.97 528.75
1.982 1.924 0.971 1.963 0.990
2 1 11 9.64 10.20 13.50 6.90 6.60 12 12.02 200 200.40 8 7.96 1017.40
2 1 14 4.85 5.65 7.90 3.40 4.50 2 2.00 33 33.32 20 21.89 561.25
2.999 2.824 0.942 3.157 1.053
2 1 8 15.31 15.90 23.10 8.70 14.40 6 6.00 200 99.93 20 21.68 1585.00
2 1 14 8.59 8.65 11.70 5.60 6.10 2 2.00 33 33.32 40 40.69 1228.33
3.002 2.988 0.995 3.383 1.127
2 1 7 29.04 31.15 42.40 19.90 22.50 6 6.00 200 100.03 40 41.28 3670.00
2 1.5 9 2.63 2.63 3.10 2.00 1.10 6 6.06 100 101.00 8 7.80 496.33
1.990 2.015 1.012 1.835 0.922
2 1.5 3 4.83 4.83 6.00 3.90 2.10 12 12.06 200 201.00 8 7.94 1000.00
2 1.5 9 2.51 2.43 3.30 2.10 1.20 2 1.99 33 33.20 20 22.25 581.50
3.003 2.820 0.939 3.027 1.008
2 1.5 3 7.60 7.60 11.20 5.50 5.70 6 5.98 100 99.70 20 21.90 1640.00
2 2 11 1.39 1.40 1.80 1.00 0.80 6 6.07 100 101.20 8 8.07 548.20
1.979 1.864 0.942 1.815 0.917
2 2 8 2.53 2.60 3.10 2.10 1.00 12 12.01 200 200.25 8 7.96 1021.75
2 2 5 1.46 1.40 1.80 1.00 0.80 2 2.01 33 33.43 20 21.53 541.00
2.991 2.896 0.968 2.658 0.889
2 2 5 3.88 4.30 6.50 2.10 4.40 6 6.00 100 100.00 20 21.60 1566.67
2 2 8 2.43 2.60 3.30 1.90 1.40 2 2.00 33 33.33 40 40.75 1247.50
3.002 2.942 0.980 3.129 1.042
2 2 8 7.59 10.00 15.20 4.80 10.40 6 6.00 100 100.03 40 41.28 3670.00
2 3 6 0.77 0.70 0.80 0.60 0.20 6 6.06 100 101.00 8 7.80 496.33
1.990 2.015 1.012 1.891 0.950
2 3 2 1.45 1.45 1.60 1.30 0.30 12 12.06 200 201.00 8 7.94 1000.00
5-65
Gap Working Average
(Number Duration
2 3 6 0.80 0.85 1.00 0.70 0.30 2 1.99 33 33.20 20 22.25 581.50

3.003 2.820 0.939 3.250 1.082
2 3 2 2.60 2.60 2.90 2.30 0.60 6 5.98 100 99.70 20 21.90 1640.00
2 4 9 0.49 0.50 0.60 0.40 0.20 6 6.12 100 102.00 8 8.13 572.00
1.961 1.801 0.918 1.909 0.974
2 4 6 0.93 0.90 1.00 0.80 0.20 12 12.00 200 200.00 8 7.95 1030.00
2 4 3 0.43 0.45 0.50 0.40 0.10 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 22.43 568.00
3.003 2.887 0.961 3.308 1.101
2 4 3 1.43 1.40 1.70 1.10 0.60 6 6.00 100 100.00 20 22.70 1640.00
2 4 6 0.90 0.95 1.20 0.70 0.50 2 2.00 33 33.40 40 40.41 1215.00
2.991 3.021 1.010 2.556 0.854
2 4 6 2.30 2.30 2.80 1.80 1.00 6 5.99 100 99.90 40 40.99 3670.00
4 1 15 6.80 6.75 8.40 5.10 3.30 6 6.01 100 100.21 8 7.48 935.71
2.000 2.079 1.039 2.186 1.093
4 1 8 14.86 14.90 15.90 13.90 2.00 12 12.03 200 200.43 8 7.92 1945.00
4 1 11 4.76 5.00 6.20 3.80 2.40 2 1.99 33 33.18 20 21.63 735.60
3.021 3.106 1.028 3.477 1.151
4 1 8 16.56 16.56 26.00 10.50 15.50 6 6.01 100 100.25 20 22.08 2285.00
4 1 14 8.69 9.55 12.40 6.70 5.70 2 2.00 33 33.35 40 40.64 1492.50
2.969 3.002 1.011 3.402 1.146
4 1 11 29.57 32.70 45.50 19.90 25.60 6 5.94 100 99.02 40 39.44 4480.00
4 1.5 6 2.58 169.42 2.90 2.30 0.60 2 1.98 33 33.00 20 22.23 756.50
3.061 3.054 0.998 2.735 0.894
4 1.5 3 7.07 7.07 7.90 6.50 1.40 6 6.06 100 101.00 20 22.24 2310.00
4 1.5 6 3.98 3.98 4.40 3.50 0.90 2 2.00 33 33.30 40 41.02 1495.00
2.979 2.883 0.968 4.176 1.402
4 1.5 3 16.63 16.63 25.60 11.90 13.70 6 5.95 100 99.20 40 40.40 4310.00
4 2 9 2.16 2.05 2.50 1.60 0.90 6 5.99 100 99.90 8 7.40 945.40
2.006 2.057 1.025 1.931 0.963
4 2 8 4.16 4.45 5.60 3.30 2.30 12 12.03 200 200.43 8 7.92 1945.00
4 2 5 1.58 1.55 1.70 1.40 0.30 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 21.23 721.67
3.003 3.155 1.051 3.468 1.155
4 2 5 5.48 6.10 8.30 3.90 4.40 6 6.00 100 100.00 20 22.02 2276.67
5-66
Gap Working Average
(Number Duration
4 2 8 2.76 2.95 3.40 2.50 0.90 2 1.96 33 32.75 40 40.71 1470.00

3.047 3.021 0.991 2.750 0.903
4 2 6 7.03 7.30 8.70 4.80 3.90 6 5.94 100 98.98 40 39.21 4522.50
4 3 6 1.00 1.00 1.10 0.90 0.20 2 1.99 33 33.15 20 22.49 764.75
3.047 3.021 0.991 2.750 0.903
4 3 2 2.75 2.75 2.90 2.60 0.30 6 6.06 100 101.00 20 22.24 2310.00
4 3 4 1.63 1.65 1.80 1.50 0.30 2 2.00 33 33.30 40 41.02 1495.00
2.979 2.883 0.968 4.585 1.539
4 3 2 7.45 7.45 10.10 4.80 5.30 6 5.95 100 99.20 40 40.40 4310.00
4 4 6 0.78 0.75 0.80 0.70 0.10 6 5.98 100 99.75 8 7.55 996.00
2.014 1.923 0.955 1.936 0.962
4 4 6 1.52 1.50 1.70 1.30 0.40 12 12.05 200 200.85 8 7.92 1915.00
4 4 3 0.67 0.65 0.70 0.60 0.10 2 2.00 33 33.30 20 22.64 755.00
3.003 3.073 1.023 2.900 0.966
4 4 3 1.93 1.95 2.00 1.90 0.10 6 6.00 100 100.00 20 22.64 2320.00
4 4 6 2.97 2.95 3.40 2.50 0.90 6 5.95 100 99.25 40 38.77 4485.00
0.337 0.332 0.987 0.404 1.202
4 4 6 1.20 1.20 1.30 1.10 0.20 2 2.00 33 33.40 40 40.27 1490.00
5-67
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy Flux as Function of
Working Distance
The previously discussed Equation 5-30, which was derived from Equation 5-29
by removing the dependence on arc current duration, together with Equations 5-
31 and 5-32 shows that two quantities need to be determined:
The decay factor, x
The parameter
The Decay Factor x
To determine the average decay factor, x, the readings of the calorimeters were
first divided by the arc duration in the corresponding tests, and the calculated
incident thermal energy flux values were plotted versus working distance in
Figures 5-40 through 5-43 for the 1-ft, 2-ft, 4-ft and 5-ft gaps, respectively. The
figures also display best-fit trend lines and their equations.
The equations of the best-fit trend lines are summarized in Table 5-15.
Figure 5-40
Incident Thermal Energy Flux for 1-ft Gap
5-68
Figure 5-41
Figure 5-42
5-69
Figure 5-43
5-70
Table 5-15
Equations of Best-Fit for Variation of Incident Thermal Energy Flux, , with
Working Distance, D
Gap Target Arc Current Best Fit Equation for Incident Thermal
(ft) (kA) Energy Flux () at Working Distance (D)
1 8 = E1D-1.87
1 20 = E1D-1.87
1 40 = E1D-2.01
2 8 = E1D-1.67
2 20 = E1D-1.67
2 40 = E1D-1.66
4 8 = E1D-1.60
4 20 = E1D-1.49
4 40 = E1D-1.49
5 40 = E1D-1.50
Table 5-16 shows the range of values of the decay factor for various arc currents
for each gap length, and the average values of the decay factor for each gap
length. The average values were obtained by averaging the individual decay
factor values for each gap length.
Table 5-16
Comparison of Average and Individual Values of the Decay Factor, x
Gap Arc Range of Values Average

(ft) Current of x in Table 5- Values of x
Range (kA) 15
1 840 1.872.01 1.92
2 840 1.671.67 1.67
4 8 1.491.60 1.53
5 40 1.5 1.50
Tables 5-15 and 5-16 show that the values of the decay factor depend rather
weakly on the arc current. For example, as current increases by a factor of 5
(from 8 kA to 40 kA) for the 1-ft gap length, the decay factor value changes
(increases) from 1.87 to 2.01, i.e., by about 7.5%. For the 4-ft gap, the change
(decrease) is from 1.60 to 1.49, or about 7% when the arc current increases by a
factor of 5.
However, the decay factor exhibits a significant dependence on the gap length,
G. For example, as the gap length increases from 1 ft to 4 ft (i.e., increase by a
factor of 4) for target arc current of 8 kA, the decay factor value changes
(decreases) from 1.87 to 1.60, or by about 14%. For the 40 kA results, the decay
5-71
factor value decreases from 2.01 for the 1-ft gap to 1.50 for the 5-ft gap, i.e.,
change (decrease) of about 25%.
Consequently, considering other factors that influence the measured incident

thermal energy (or flux), using an average value of the decay factor for each gap
length should suffice to determine the functional dependence of the decay factor
on the gap length. Table 5-17 lists the average values of the decay factor for
various gap lengths, and Figure 5-44 shows a plot of the data.
Table 5-17
Average Decay Factor Values x from Table 5-16
Gap (ft) Decay Factor (x)
1 1.92
2 1.67
4 1.53
5 1.50
Figure 5-44
Average Decay Factor x as Function of Gap Length
From Figure 5-44, the best-fit equation is for the decay factor as function of gap
length is:
x 1.89G 0.152 Equation 5-47
where G is in ft
When G is expressed in m, Equation 5-41 is used:
5-72
x 1.58G 0.152 Equation 5-48
where G is in m
The Parameter
To determine the equation for the parameter , values for 1 are derived
empirically. This is done by noting the recorded incident thermal energy values
measured with the calorimeters at the 1-ft working distance and dividing these
values by the arc current duration. The values of 1 calculated in this way are
then divided by the arc power to obtain the parameter according to Equation 5-
32. The values of are plotted in Figures 5-45 through 5-49 versus the arc
current for each gap length.
The values of calculated in this manner represent the (small) portion of the
average incident thermal energy that is detected and measured by a calorimeter at
the reference working distance D1, which is 1 ft in this case. The measuring
surface, round in shape, of the calorimeter is 1 cm2. Consequently, the values of
are very small. For plotting purposes, the ordinate (vertical) axis shows values of
multiplied by 1,000 (i.e., 103).
Analysis of Figures 5-45 through 5-49 shows that is not a strong function of
the arc current but varies significantly with gap length. The calculated values of
(multiplied by 103) are then plotted versus the gap length, G, and a best-fit trend
line is obtained. Details of calculations of the values of 1 and are contained in
Appendix D.
Figure 5-45
Parameter versus Arc Current for all Gap Lengths
5-73
Figure 5-46
Parameter versus Arc Current for Gap Length G = 1 ft
Figure 5-47
5-74
Figure 5-48
Figure 5-49
The plots of values versus arc current for each test are shown in Figures 5-45
through 5-49. As with all data in this project, the plots show considerable spread
but the data clusters do not exhibit a significant variation with current.
Therefore, it is sufficient for practical purposes to derive one average value of
for each gap length, G. Figure 5-50 shows plotted versus gap length, G.
5-75
Figure 5-50 shows that decreases as G increases, and the variation of with G is
described by a power function, Equation 5-42.
0.031 103 G 0.42 Equation 5-49
where G is the gap length in m
For G in ft, the equation is:
0.050 103 G 0.42 Equation 5-50
where G is the gap length in ft
Figure 5-51 shows the plot of versus G for G in ft.
Figure 5-50
Parameter versus Gap Length G in m
5-76
Figure 5-51
Parameter versus Gap Length G in ft
Fundamental Limitation of the Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal

Energy Flux as Function of Working Distance
In should be noted that, in the derivation of all equations in this report, the
values of the decay factor, x, the parameter and the arc voltage gradient, E, are
functions of the gap length, G, along with arc current, Iarc, and working distance,
D.
However, neither x, nor E are functions of the position along the gap length in
this simplified study. This implicitly creates a model of the arc to be of
cylindrical (line) nature where location along the axis of the cylinder is not taken
into account, i.e., the same incident thermal energy (or flux) is expected at all
longitudinal locations relative to the gap axis for given radial working distance D.
As mentioned elsewhere, more refined modeling of the arc structure and its
several regions is treated in the EPRI report 1022633.
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy Flux and

Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy as Function of
Working Distance Putting it All Together
The relevant equations are reproduced below for convenience, using new
consecutive equation numbers.
0.0000112G 8 1.19 Equation 5-51
where:
5-77
is the intercept
Note: this is the same as Equation 5-14.
0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 Equation 5-52
where:
is the slope
Eave I arc 0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc

Equation 5-53
where:

Varc, peak Eave G

Varc, rms 0.8885 Eave G Equation 5-54
1.1255 1.1255
[0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc ]G

Varc , rms
1.1255
Equation 5-55
where:
data
Eave is the average voltage gradient in kV/m
Parc Varc , rms I arc Equation 5-56
Note: This is the same as Equation 5-21
[0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc ]G

Parc I arc
1.1255
Equation 5-57
5-78
where:

x is the exponent, i.e., the decay factor
W
Equation 5-59
T
where:

T is the duration of the arc current in kA
1 D x Equation 5-61
1 Parc Equation 5-62
1 / Parc Equation 5-63
where:

x is the exponent
is a parameter relating 1 to the total arc energy, Parc
x 1.89G 0.152 Equation 5-64
where G is in ft. Note: this is the same as Equation 5-40.
When G is expressed in m, Equation 5-41 is used:
x 1.58G 0.152 Equation 5-65
where G is in m. Note: this is the same as Equation 5-41.
5-79
0.031 103 G 0.42 Equation 5-66
where G is the gap length in m. Note: this is the same as Equation 5-42.
For in ft, the equation is:
0.050 103 G 0.42 Equation 5-67
where G is the gap length in ft. Note: this is the same as Equation 5-43.
Substituting Equation 5-47 into 5-49, the expression for Parc is:
Eave I arc G
Parc Varc, rms I arc Equation 5-68
1.1255
Substituting Equations 5-59 and 5-61 into Equation 5-55 and simplifying,
Eave I arc G
1 0.031 10 3 G 0.42 0.028 10 3 Eave I arc G 0.58
1.1255
Equation 5-69
where:
1 is the incident thermal energy flux at some point D1 in MJ/(scm2)

Alternately,
1 28 Eave I arc G 0.58 Equation 5-70
where:
1 is the incident thermal energy flux at some point D1 in J/(scm2)

and
1 6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 Equation 5-71
where:
5-80
Substituting Equations 5-64 and 5-58 into Equation 5-54, the expression for
is:
0.152
6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 D 1.58 G Equation 5-72
where:

D is in ft
For D in m, the equation is:

0.152
6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 (3.281 D) 1.58G Equation 5-73
where:

D is in m
To express in J (Joules), the equation is:

0.152
4.184 (6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 ) (3.281 D ) 1.58G Equation 5-74
where:

D is in m
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy
The equations for the incident thermal energy, W, are obtained using Equation
5-68 which is derived by re-arranging Equation 5-52 and substituting equations
5-65 or 5-66 or 5-67 for , i.e., multiplying by the duration, T:
5-81
W T Equation 5-75
where:

T is the duration of the arc current in kA
Summary of Test Conditions and Range of Application of the

Derived Equations
It is recalled that the analysis in this report is focused on arc tests that satisfy
setup parameters listed in Table 5-1, and repeated below in Table 5-18.
Table 5-18
Arc Test Parameters
Gap Length (ft) 15
Duration (s) 0.033 - 0.2
In particular, the equations derived in this Section should not be used for gap
lengths less that the lower tested limit of 1 ft.
Verification of the Simplified Incident Thermal Energy Equation

against Test Data
Figures 5-52 through 5-55 show comparisons of the calculated incident thermal
energy flux, , with the data obtained from tests. These comparisons confirm
that the derived equations provide good estimates of the incident flux values.
However, it must be remembered that the equations for incident thermal energy
flux, , and arc voltage gradient, Eave, were derived from test data by averaging
calorimeter readings. The equations were not specifically intended to provide
maximum values. It is therefore not surprising that the results of these
calculations fall somewhere within the maximum and minimum test data, as
shown in Figures 5-55 through 5-58.
From the worker safety viewpoint, however, basic protective measures and
equipment ratings on average values is prudent. While using maximum energy
5-82
levels measured in laboratory tests may also not be the best practical approach,
some indication of reasonably expected worst-case conditions is needed.
Figure 5-52
Comparison of Calculated Incident Thermal Energy Flux (Equation 5-65) and
Measured Data, G = 1 ft
Figure 5-53
5-83
Figure 5-54
Figure 5-55
5-84
This Section contains simplified analysis of test data collected in two sessions of
tests in a vertical arc test cage with steel electrodes. Equations for the incident
thermal energy flux and incident thermal energy are derived and validated.
Analysis also leads to the conclusions that the erratic behavior of the arc requires
statistical treatment a more refined modeling of arcs in long gaps is needed
because of the complex multi-region structure of the arc and. Statistical
treatment is addressed in the next Section to the extent possible with the
available data. Multi-region arc representation and advanced statistical approach
are the topics covered in the companion EPRI report 1022633.
5-85
Section 6: Analysis of the Effects of
Variability of the Arc Path and
Calorimeter Orientation
Background
This Section contains a detailed analysis of the effects of variability of the arc
path and calorimeter orientation relative to the arc (calorimeter line-of-sight),
and presents a statistical approach to the treatment of data variability.
Tests at the Kinectrics laboratory were performed in two sets: September 2009
and November 2009. In these test set, three sets of calorimeters were arranged at
the mid-plane of the arc gap, at 120o azimuth locations from each other, and at
radial distances of 1 ft, 2 ft, 4 ft (September tests) or 1 ft, 1.5 ft, 3 ft (November
tests) from the vertical axis of the arc gap.
Trends in the test data from the two sets of tests are not identical. In particular,
the tests data suggest that the cage exhibits an apparent bias, or apparent
preferred paths for the arc, that are dissimilar in the September and the
November tests.
Only tests using steel electrodes and with calorimeters arranged as described
above are analyzed in this Section.
Comparison of September 2009 and November 2009 Test

Setups
Figure 6-1 shows the plan view of the test cage and the calorimeters in the
September tests. Calorimeters 1, 2 and 3 are disposed circumferentially at 120o
from each other and 1 ft from the vertical gap axis, calorimeters 4, 5 and 6 are at
the same azimuth locations as 1, 2 and 3 but are 2 ft from the vertical gap axis,
and, similarly, calorimeters 7, 8 and 9 are 4 ft from the gap axis.
6-1
Figure 6-1
Plan View of the Test Setup in September Tests
Figure 6-2 shows the plan view of the test setup for the November tests. Only 8
calorimeters were used, and the radial distances from the vertical gap axis were:
Calorimeters 1, 2 and 3 at 1 ft from the axis, disposed circumferentially at
120o from each other
Calorimeters 4, 5 and 6 at 1.5 ft from the axis, disposed circumferentially at
120o from each other
Calorimeters 7 and 8 at 3 ft from the axis, calorimeter 7 was at the same
azimuth as calorimeters 1 and 4, while calorimeter 8 was at the same azimuth
as calorimeters 2 and 5
6-2
Figure 6-2
Plan View of the Test Setup in November Tests
Figure 6-3 shows a superposition of Figures 6-1 and 6-2 to illustrate the small
differences in the location and orientation of the test setup and calorimeters in
the two sets of tests, relative to the test cell walls and door.
September set up Black

7
November set up - Red
V V
4
6 7
3 1 4
9 6 3
2
2
5
5
open door
Figure 6-3
Comparison of the Locations and Orientations of the Test Setup in the September
(Black Lines) and November (Red Lines) Tests
6-3
Analysis of Test Results
Analysis of the test data reveals a trend in recorded values that suggests the
following possibilities:
The test conditions may not have been the same in the two sets of tests,
The number of tests was too small to suppress unavoidable scatter in test
results.
Tests were performed in a specially designed cylindrical cage, see Figure 6-4.
The cage is designed to approximate a vertical coaxial system where the current
flows along the central vertical axis (the arc gap) and returns through the six steel
busses dispersed uniformly (i.e., at 60o azimuth angles from each other). The
objective of this design is twofold:
Symmetrical cage interior: The current return through outer busses disposed
symmetrically around the arc should produce a magnetic field that is nearly
independent of azimuth position around the arc axis, and the resulting
magnetic forces on a vertical axial arc centered on the vertical axis of the gap
should ideally be nil.
Centering magnetic force: Residual forces on an arc that is displaced from
the vertical axis of the gap should be small and they should be directed
towards the center of the cage. The centering forces should grow with radial
displacement from the axis.
It should be noted that the cylindrical arrangement of individual return busses

does not provide a significant amount of shielding for the interior of the cage
from magnetic fields and forces that are produced by external current paths
(supply busswork). The total actual force acting on the arc in the cage will be a
vector superposition of the forces produced by external magnetic field (produces
by the supply busswork) and the (centering) forces produced by currents in the
return busses of the cage. The external forces should be small due to the large
distance between the cage and the supply busswork. The centering forces are nil
on the vertical axis of the cage, so the arc or any portion of it that resides on the
vertical axis would be under the influence of only the externally produced forces.
When the arc or portions thereof are off-center, the sum of the centering and
external forces acts on it.
However, this coaxial (symmetric) cage design has limited control over the
inherent behavior of the arc itself. The arc channel and the plasma cloud are very
dynamic structures that continually change shape, meander, twist and turn, jet
out away from the vertical axis, and in general occupy a large volume of space
rather than a narrow channel along the gap axis. Figures 6-5 and 6-6 show
several frames from high-speed video records.
As a result, the calorimeter readings show a large spread, especially the units close
to the arc (1 ft radial distance).
6-4
Figure 6-4
General View of the Test Cage
Figure 6-5
Sequence of Still Photographs from a High-Speed Video of a 40 kA, 6 Cycle Arc
Test in a 4 ft Gap
6-5
Figure 6-6
Additional Examples of Arc Behavior
Recognizing the unavoidable spread in calorimeter readings, the hope was that
statistically meaningful average values could be obtained from a sufficiently large
number of tests, and the average data would then form the basis for simplified
empirical arc models.
However, as mentioned earlier, analysis of averaged calorimeter readings

disclosed additional unexpected difficulties:
Calorimeters at a specific azimuth recorded consistently higher values than at
other locations, suggesting a bias or preferred path for the arc
The high-reading azimuth was not consistent between the September and
November tests.
This observed behavior raises two general questions that are related to:
Repeatability of test data
Reasons for change in the preferred azimuth between the two sets of tests.
The calorimeter data from the two sets of tests are analyzed below. The analysis
is focused on the calorimeters closest (1 ft) to the gap axis.
Calorimeter Readings versus Gap Length
Test data were grouped into three sets based on gap length: 1-ft gap, 2-ft gap
and 4-ft gap data, and analyzed.
Analysis of Test Data from the 1-ft Gap Tests
Analysis of calorimeter data from the September and the November tests with a
1-ft gap length are summarized below. There were 11 tests performed in
September and 9 tests in November. Test conditions varied as follows:
6-6
September test session (11 tests):
- 3 tests at 8 kV, 6 cycles,
- 2 tests at 8 kA, 12 cycles
- 1 test at 20 kA, 2 cycles
November test session (9 tests):
The results are summarized below and shown in Figure 6-7:

September tests (11 tests):
- In 6 of 11 (54.5%), calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading of the
three calorimeters at 1 ft radial distance
- In 5 tests (45.5%), calorimeter #2 provided the highest reading
- In 0 tests (0%), calorimeter #3 provided the highest reading
November tests (9 tests):
- In 1 test (11.1%), calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading
6-7
Figure 6-7
Highest Calorimeter Readings for 1-ft Gap
This leads to the observation that the arc resided mostly between calorimeters #1
and 2 (possibly closer to #1) in the September tests, while it resided mostly close
to calorimeter #2 in the November tests.
Figures 6-1 through 6-3 show that calorimeter #1 in the September tests is nearly
diametrically opposite from calorimeter #2 in the November tests.
It is not known whether the exact same units were placed and numbered
consistently in the September and November test sessions. It is also not known
when and how the various calorimeters were calibrated.
Furthermore, while a spread in recorded calorimeter values among units at the

same distance from the gap axis is present in each test, the largest spread among
calorimeters #1, 2 and 3 (all at 1-ft radial distance) in September tests is 12.2
cal/cm2 (test 09-3785: 1 ft gap, 20 kA, 6 cycles, calorimeter #1 reads 20.6, cal. #2
reads 8.4, cal. #3 reads 12.5). That is, the highest reading is 48.9% above the
average of 13.8 cal/cm2 for the three values, and the lowest reading is 39.3%
below the average. The spread is in fact 88.2% of the average. For other tests,
the spread ranges from 0.5 (6.0% of the average of 8.3 cal/cm2; test 09-3760: 1 ft
gap, 8 kA, 12 cycles) to 6.8 (23.5% of the average of 29 cal/cm2; test 09-3783: 1
ft gap, 40 kA, 6 cycles).
Observation 1: Calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading in this September

test (09-3785). This test also provided the greatest spread in values measured by
calorimeters at the 1-ft radial distance from the gap axis.
6-8
If the test 09-3785 is regarded as an anomaly and is eliminated from the analysis,
the largest spread is 6.8 (test 09-3783, 40 kA, 6 cycles: calorimeter #1 reads 33.0,
cal. #2 reads 26.2, cal. #3 reads 27.8). The spread is 23.5% of the average of 29
cal/cm2, the highest reading (calorimeter #1) is +13.8%, and the lowest reading
(calorimeter #2) is -9.7%.
Observation 2: This again shows that calorimeter #1 provided the highest

reading in this September test, consistent with the previous Observation 1.
For November tests, the largest spread is 9.3 (test 09-5141: 20 kA, 6 cycles,
calorimeter #1 reads 13.0, cal. #2 reads 17.1, cal. #3 reads 7.8). The spread is
73.8% of the average of 12.6 cal/cm2, the highest reading (calorimeter #2) is
+35.7%, and the lowest reading (calorimeter #3) is -38.1%. For other tests, the
spread ranges from 0.3 (test 09-5122: 1 ft gap, 8 kA, 6 cycles; average 3.7, spread
8.1% of average, highest +5.4%, lowest -2.7%) to 4.2 (test 09-5143:1 ft gap, 40
kA, 2 cycles; average 8.2, spread 51.2% of average, highest +31.7%, lowest -
19.5%).
Observation 3: Calorimeter #2 provided the highest reading in this October test

(09-5141). This test also provided the greatest spread in values measured by
calorimeters at the 1 ft radial distance from the gap axis.
cal. #2 reads 10.8, cal. #3 reads 7.1, see percentage values above).

reading in this October test, consistent with the previous Observation 3.
Summary Observation 1: In summary, for the 1-ft gap tests, in most tests
calorimeter #1 provides the highest readings in the September tests, while
calorimeter #2 provides the highest readings in most November tests, see Figure
6-7.
6-9

This leads to the observation that the arc resided mostly near calorimeter #1 in
the September tests, while it resided mostly between calorimeters #2 and 3
(possibly closer to cal. #3) in the November tests.
6-10
Figure 6-8
Highest Calorimeter Readings for 2 ft Gap

cal/cm2 (test 09-3779: 40 kA, 6 cycles, calorimeter #1 reads 51.3, cal. #2 reads
20.1, cal. #3 reads 19.9; average 30.4, spread 103.3% of average, maximum
+68.8%, minimum -34.5%). For other tests, the spread ranges from 0.9 (test 09-
3765: 2 ft gap, 8 kA, 12 cycles; average 9.3, spread 9.7% of average, highest
+4.3%, lowest -5.4%) to 5.2 (test 09-3788: 2 ft gap, 20 kA, 6 cycles; average 14.1,
spread 36.9% of average, highest +18.4%, lowest 18,4%).

calorimeters at the 1 ft radial distance from the gap axis. This is consistent with
Observations 1 and 2.
cal. #2 reads 14.2, cal. #3 reads 11.5, see above for percentages).

reading in this September test, consistent with the previous Observations 1, 2
and 5.
calorimeter #1 reads 10.8, cal. #2 reads 16.9, cal. #3 reads 8.7; average 12.1,
6-11
spread 67.8% of average, highest +39.7%, lowest -28.1%). For other tests, the
spread ranges from 0.2 (test 09-5125: 2 ft gap, 8 kA, 6 cycles; average 4, spread
5% of average, highest +2.5%, lowest -2.5%) to 3.4 (test 09-5128: 2 ft gap, 8 kA,
12 cycles; average 8.4, spread 40.5%, highest +22.6%, lowest -17.8%).

calorimeters at the 1-ft radial distance from the gap axis. This is consistent with
Observations 3 and 4.

reading in this October test, consistent with the previous Observation 3, 4 and 7.
Summary Observation 2: In summary, for the 2 ft gap tests, in most tests

6-8.

- In 6 of 10 (60%), calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading of the
6-12
- In 1 test (12.5%), both calorimeters #2 and 3 provided the same highest
values
Figure 6-9
the September tests, while it resided mostly near calorimeter #3 in the November
tests.

cal/cm2 (test 09-3774: 40 kA, 6 cycles, calorimeter #1 reads 45.1, cal. #2 reads
25.6, cal. #3 reads 22.4). The average is 31.0, spread is 73.2% of average, highest
reading is + 45.5%, lowest reading is -27.7%. For other tests, the spread ranges
6-13
from 0.7 (test 09-3768: 4 ft gap, 8 kA, 6 cycles; average 7.7, spread 9.1% of
average, highest +3.9%, lowest is -5.2%) to 10.2 (test 09-3790: 4 ft gap, 20 kA, 6
cycles; average 17.3, spread 59% of average, highest +35.8%, lowest 23.1%).

Observations 1 and 2, 5 and 6.
the largest spread is 10.2 (test 09-3790, 20 kA, 6 cycles: calorimeter #1 reads
23.5, cal. #2 reads 15.1, cal. #3 reads 13.3, see above for percentages).
reading in this September test, consistent with the previous Observations 1, 2, 5,
6 and 9.
calorimeter #1 reads 22.2, cal. #2 reads 36.7, cal. #3 reads 20.3). The average is
26.4, the spread is 62.1% of average, highest is +29.0%, lowest is -23.1%. For
other tests, the spread ranges from 0.3 (worst case test 09-5133: 4 ft gap, 20 kA,
2 cycles; average 3.9, spread 7.7% of average, highest +5.1%, lowest -2.6%) to 3.1
(test 09-5134: 4 ft gap, 20 kA, 6 cycles; average 12.2, spread 25.4% of average,
highest +11.5%, lowest -13.9%) .
Observations 3, 4, 7 and 8.
reading in this October test, consistent with the previous Observation 3, 4, 7, 8
and 11.
Summary Observation 3: In summary, for the 4 ft gap tests, in most tests

6-9.
Summary of Calorimeter Readings versus Gap Length
In summary:
For the 1-ft gap tests, in most tests calorimeter #1 provides the highest
readings in the September tests, while calorimeter #2 provides the highest
readings in most November tests.
6-14
Figures 6-10 through 6-12 (copies of Figures 6-7 through 6-9) compare theses
results side-by-side.
Figure 6-10
6-15
Figure 6-11
Figure 6-12
6-16
Calorimeter Readings versus Arc Current
Test data were grouped into three sets based on test current: 8-kA data, 20-kA
data and 40-kA data, and analyzed.
Analysis of Test Data from the 8-kA Current Tests
Analysis of calorimeter data from the September and the November tests with 8
kA arc current are summarized below. There were 14 tests performed in
- 3 tests with 1 ft gap, 6 cycles,
- 2 tests with 1 ft gap, 12 cycles
- 3 test with 2 ft gap, 6 cycles
- 2 tests with 1 ft gap, 6 cycles,

- In 0 test (0%), calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading
the September tests, while it resided between calorimeters #2 and 3 in the
November tests.
6-17
Figure 6-13
Highest Calorimeter Readings for 8 kA Arcs

calorimeters #1, 2 and 3 (all at 1 ft radial distance) in September tests is 3.2
cal/cm2 (test 09-3766: 2 ft gap, 12 cycles, calorimeter #1 reads 10.1, cal. #2 reads
8, cal. #3 reads 11.2). The average is 9.8, spread is 32.7% of average, highest
reading is +14.2%, lowest reading is -18.4%. For other tests, the spread ranges
from 0.5 to 2.7.
Observation 13: This shows that the largest spread in calorimeter readings
occurred in a September test in which calorimeter #3 rather than cal. #1 provided
the highest reading. This is not consistent with the Summary Observations 1, 2
and 3 listed above, which suggest that cal. #1 provided the highest reading in
most cases when the data is parsed according to gap length.
the largest spread is 2.7 (test 09-3761, 1 ft gap, 12 cycles: calorimeter #1 reads
7.5 cal. #2 reads 8.7, cal. #3 reads 6). The average is 7.4, spread is 36.5% of
average, highest reading is +17.6%, lowest reading is -18.9%.
6-18
Observation 14: This shows that calorimeter #2 provided the highest reading in
this September tests. This again is not consistent with the Summary
Observations 1, 2 and 3 listed above, which suggest that cal. #1 provided the
highest reading in most cases when the data is parsed according to gap length.
For November tests, the largest spread is 3.4 (test 09-5128: 2 ft gap, 12 cycles:
calorimeter #1 reads 6.9, cal. #2 reads 10.3, cal. #3 reads 8.1). The average is 8.4,
spread is 40.5% of average, highest reading is +22.6%, lowest reading is -17.8%.
For other tests, the spread ranges from 0.2 to 1.9.
occurred in a November test in which only calorimeter #2 provided the highest
reading. This is consistent with Summary Observations 1, 2 and 3 when the data
is parsed according to gap length.
7.2, cal. #2 reads 8.3, cal. #3 reads 6.4; and test 09-5131, 4 ft gap, 6 cycles:
calorimeter #1 reads 5.1, cal. #2 reads 5.5, cal. #3 reads 7). For worst case test
09-5131, the average is 5.9, the spread is 32.2% of eh average, the highest
reading is +18.6%, the lowest reading is -13.6%.
Observation 16: This shows that, when test 09-5128 is excluded from the
analysis, calorimeter #2 provides the highest reading in one November test that
also shows the largest spread in readings, while cal. #3 gives the highest reading
in another November test that also shows the largest spread in readings. This is
not fully consistent with Summary Observations 1, 2 and 3 when the data is
parsed according to gap length.
Summary Observation 4: In summary, see Figure 6-13, the results from 8 kA

show lack of consistency, or rather a degree of randomness in calorimeter
readings in the September tests. This is most likely due to the rather erratic
nature of long high current arcs. The November 8 kA tests also show a lack of
consistency, or rather a degree of randomness in calorimeter readings. The likely
reasons for this are that since the cage is magnetically compensated, any bias may
be due to other than magnetic causes such as jetting, which introduces
momentum based on the geometry of the surface under the arc footprint. This is
supported by the observations that results of 8 kA tests are less influenced by jets,
and results from the 4-ft gap tests are less influenced by jets. The jetting bias
hypothesis suggests that observed bias should be least pronounced in tests on 1-ft
gaps with 8 kA current, and most pronounced in tests on 4-ft gaps with at 40 kA
current.
6-19
- 1 test with 4ft gap, 6 cycles

- In 2 of 10 tests (20%), calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading
6-20
Figure 6-14
the September tests, while it resided between calorimeters #2 and #3 in the
November tests.

8.4, cal. #3 reads 12.5). That is, the highest reading is 48.9% above the average
of 13.8 cal/cm2 for the three values, and the lowest reading is 39.3% below the
average. For other tests, the spread ranges from 0.8 to 10.2.
occurred in a September test in which calorimeter #1 provided the highest
reading. This is consistent with the Summary Observations 1, 2 and 3 listed
above, which suggest that cal. #1 provided the highest reading in most cases
when the data is parsed according to gap length.
6-21
23.5 cal. #2 reads 15.1, cal. #3 reads 13.3; average 17.3, spread 59% of average,
highest +35.8%, lowest -23.1%)
analysis, calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading in this September tests.
This again is consistent with the Summary Observations 1, 2 and 3 listed above,
which suggest that cal. #1 provided the highest reading in most cases when the
data is parsed according to gap length.
calorimeter #1 reads 13, cal. #2 reads 17.1, cal. #3 reads 7.8). The spread is
73.8% of the average of 12.6 cal/cm2, the highest reading (calorimeter #2) is
+35.7%, and the lowest reading (calorimeter #3) is -38.1%. For other tests, the
spread ranges from 0.2 to 1.9.
10.8, cal. #2 reads 16.9, cal. #3 reads 8.7; average 12.1, spread 67.8% of average,
highest +39.7%, lowest -28.1%).
also shows the largest spread in readings. This is consistent with Summary
Observations 1, 2 and 3 when the data is parsed according to gap length.
Summary Observation 5: In summary, see Figure 6-14, for the 20-kA tests, in
most tests calorimeter #1 provides the highest readings in the September tests,
while calorimeter #2 provides the highest readings in most November tests. As
discussed earlier, the likely reasons for this are that since the cage is magnetically
compensated, any bias may be due to other than magnetic causes such as jetting,
which introduces momentum based on the geometry of the surface under the arc
footprint. This is supported by the observations that results of 8 kA tests are less
influenced by jets, and results from the 4-ft gap tests are less influenced by jets.
The jetting bias hypothesis suggests that observed bias should be least
pronounced in tests on 1-ft gaps with 8 kA current, and most pronounced in
tests on 4-ft gaps with at 40 kA current.
6-22
- 1 test with 4ft gap, 6 cycles

- In 1 of 10 tests (14.3%), calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading
- In 1 test (14.3%), calorimeter #2 and #3 provided the highest reading
the September tests, while it resided between calorimeters #2 and #3 in the
November tests.
6-23
Figure 6-15

25.6, cal. #3 reads 22.4). The average is 31.0, spread is 73.2% of average, highest
reading is + 45.5%, lowest reading is -27.7%. For other tests, the spread ranges
from 1.8 to 10.2.
occurred in a September test in which calorimeter #1 provided the highest
reading. This is consistent with the Summary Observations 1, 2 and 3 listed
above, which suggest that cal. #1 provided the highest reading in most cases
when the data is parsed according to gap length.
51.3 cal. #2 reads 20.1, cal. #3 reads 19.9; average 30.4, spread 103.3% of
average, maximum +68.8%, minimum -34.5%).
6-24
analysis, calorimeter #1 provided the highest reading in this September tests.
This again is consistent with the Summary Observations 1, 2 and 3 listed above,
which suggest that cal. #1 provided the highest reading in most cases when the
data is parsed according to gap length.
calorimeter #1 reads 22.2, cal. #2 reads 36.7, cal. #3 reads 20.3). The average is
26.4, the spread is 62.1% of average, highest is +29.0%, lowest is -23.1%. For
other tests, the spread ranges from 0.7 to 4.2.
the largest spread is 4.2 (test 09-5143, 1 ft gap, 2 cycles: calorimeter #1 reads 6.6,
cal. #2 reads 10.8, cal. #3 reads 7.1; average 8.2, spread 51.2% of average, highest
+31.7%, lowest -19.5%)
also shows the largest spread in readings. This is consistent with Summary
Observations 1, 2 and 3 when the data is parsed according to gap length.
Summary Observation 6: In summary, see Figure 6-15, for the 40 kA tests, in

most tests calorimeter #1 provides the highest readings in the September tests,
while calorimeter #2 provides the highest readings in most November tests. As
discussed earlier, the likely reasons for this are that since the cage is magnetically
compensated, any bias may be due to other than magnetic causes such as jetting,
which introduces momentum based on the geometry of the surface under the arc
footprint. This is supported by the observations that results of 8-kA tests are less
influenced by jets, and results from the 4-ft gap tests are less influenced by jets.
The jetting bias hypothesis suggests that observed bias should be least
Summary of Calorimeter Readings versus Test Current
In summary:
For the 8-kA current tests, the results show lack of consistency, or rather a
degree of randomness in calorimeter readings in the September tests. This is
most likely due to the rather erratic nature of long high current arcs. The
November 8-kA tests also show a lack of consistency, or rather a degree of
randomness in calorimeter readings. The likely reasons for this are that since
the cage is magnetically compensated, any bias may be due to other than
magnetic causes such as jetting, which introduces momentum based on the
geometry of the surface under the arc footprint. This is supported by the
6-25
observations that results of 8-kA tests are less influenced by jets, and results
from the 4-ft gap tests are less influenced by jets. The jetting bias
hypothesis suggests that observed bias should be least pronounced in tests on
1-ft gaps with 8 kA current, and most pronounced in tests on 4-ft gaps with
at 40 kA current.
For the 20-kA current tests, in most tests calorimeter #1 provides the highest
readings in most November tests. As discussed earlier, the likely reasons for
this are that since the cage is magnetically compensated, any bias may be due
to other than magnetic causes such as jetting, which introduces momentum
based on the geometry of the surface under the arc footprint. This is
supported by the observations that results of 8-kA tests are less influenced by
jets, and results from the 4-ft gap tests are less influenced by jets. The
jetting bias hypothesis suggests that observed bias should be least
For the 40-kA current tests, in most tests calorimeter #1 provides the highest
readings in most November tests. As discussed earlier, the likely reasons for
this are that since the cage is magnetically compensated, any bias may be due
to other than magnetic causes such as jetting, which introduces momentum
based on the geometry of the surface under the arc footprint. This is
supported by the observations that results of 8 kA tests are less influenced by
jets, and results from the 4-ft gap tests are less influenced by jets. The
jetting bias hypothesis suggests that observed bias should be least
Figures 6-16 through 6-18 (copies of Figures 6-13 through 6-15) compare theses
results side-by-side.
6-26
Figure 6-16
Figure 6-17
6-27
Figure 6-18
Effects of Variability of the Arc Path
The data presented here support the observation that a slight cage radial position
bias is detectable in each of the test sets in September and November. However,
the data sets are not large enough to claim with confidence that much larger
populations would exhibit similar biases.
High-speed video records (see Figures 6-5 and 6-6) confirm that the arc does not
follow the straight-line axis of the gap but rather meanders, spreads out, turns
and twists and follows unpredictable and erratic paths (Note: Experience with
arcs in non-cage tests shows that the non-cage behavior is much more erratic).
Consequently, from the viewpoint of a particular calorimeter, the arc may occupy
space directly in front of it on the line-of-sight perpendicular to the flat surface of
the calorimeter, or at any location away from the perpendicular line-of-sight. As
calorimeters are directional devices, the measured incident energy values are
dependent not only on the distance between the arc and the calorimeter, but also
on the location of the arc relative to the perpendicular line-of-sight. Also,
presumably, the greater the deviation of the arcs location from the perpendicular
line-of-sight, the lower the measured incident energy value. No calibration data
are available to account for this, and such data would not be very useful anyway
since the arc is not stationary. A copper calorimeter has significant heat capacity
and, therefore, acts as an integrator over time of the incident energy.
6-28
Consequently, a high reading provided by one calorimeter compared to other
calorimeters at the same radial distance from the gap axis may result from a
number of factors, including:
The arc residing close to the calorimeter throughout the entire test - this
would suggest a permanent cage bias, but video records show this to be an
unlikely situation
The arc moving rapidly within the cage but spending a greater proportion of
time near the high-reading calorimeter this could result from the erratic
nature of the arc and/or from a number of other uncontrollable factors
Drift and/or random expansion of the plasma cloud
Electrode surface geometry/jetting bias
Magnetic forces produced by supply busses. The fact that biases were in
different directions in the September and November data sets makes this an
unlikely factor.
External influences such as wind, and draft or air movement
The above (and possibly other) factors could be present throughout the entire
duration of the test (number of cycles), or only some portion of the test duration.
The maximum calorimeter reading deviation from the 3 calorimeter average at 1

ft working distance was +68.8% (test 09-3779, 2 ft gap, 6 cycles: calorimeter #1
reads 51.3 cal. #2 reads 20.1, cal. #3 reads 19.9; average 30.4, spread 103.3% of
average, maximum +68.8%, minimum -34.5%). Calculations detailed in the
following section indicate that this represents a radial arc offset of 0.6 inches.
Past experience with arc movement in non-coaxial geometries suggest that much
greater movement is typical. Therefore though a slight radial arc position bias
may be evident in the September and November tests, the cage has prevented
such bias from bootstrapping to large distances and has provided test data from
which meaningful information may be extracted.
In conclusion, since arcs have proved to be dynamic structures it is unlikely that

any single shot will produce data of exact radial symmetry. Therefore a method
of accommodating calorimeter spread is desirable in order to normalize these
data for use as a predictor of incident energy. Ideally such a method should be
effective regardless if the calorimeter spread is random or exhibits a slight bias.
The following section discusses possible techniques.
Effect of the Calorimeter Line-of-Sight
Calorimeters are directions devices and their readings depend on the location of
the arc relative to their line-of-sight.
The effect of arc location relative to the perpendicular line-of-sight of a

calorimeter can be visualized as follows: Figure 6-19 shows a sketch of the test
cage, plan view, with three calorimeters, C1, C2 and C3, located at 1 ft (unit)
distance from the center of the cage (i.e., the vertical axis of the gap), and
6-29
disposed 120o apart around the circumference of the unit circle. The abscissa (x-
axis) and the ordinate (y-axis) are indicated in black. The perpendicular lines-of-
sight of each calorimeter, L1, L2 and L3, are indicated in black, but they are
hidden underneath the green distance lines.
Calorimeter Line-of-Sight - Case a: Arc at the center of the cage (green

color in Figure 6-19).
This case is used as reference. The readings of the three calorimeters for this case
are W1a, W2a and W3a, respectively, with all readings equal to 1 (i.e., W1a =
W2a = W3a = 1).
The location of the arc at the center of the cage is indicated in green in Figure 13
(dot marked a). The distances, D1a, D2a and D3a, from the calorimeters to
the arc are also indicated in green. It is noted that the distances are equal and are
1 ft (1 unit). Also, the arc is located on the perpendicular line-of-sight of each
calorimeter.
Calorimeter Line-of-Sight - Case b: Arc on the positive y-axis (red color in

Figure 6-19).
When the arc is located along the positive y-axis (i.e., the arc is located at x = 0
and y greater than 0 in the upper half-plane), the arc remains on the
perpendicular line-of-sight of calorimeter C2, but it is no longer on the
perpendicular line-of-sight of calorimeters C1 and C3.
In this case, the distance between the arc and calorimeter C2, distance D2b (in
red) is greater than 1 unit, so its reading should be lower than in Case a.
6-30
y
C3 D3b b D1b C1
L3
D1a
L1
D3a D2b D1c
D3c
x
a
D2a
c
L2
D2c
C2
Figure 6-19
Sketch of the test cage
Effect of distance
The effect of increasing arc-calorimeter distance on the calorimeter reading is in

general a decrease in the reading. The converse is also true: the closer the arc, the
higher the reading.
If the arc is represented as a point source or a spherical structure, the inverse-

square relation would apply, and the reading should be W2bp = W2a *(1/D2b)2.
For long arcs where gap length >> distance to the calorimeter, it may be more
realistic to assume a cylindrical structure with Dcyl<<<D, approximated as a line
source. In that case, the inverse relation would apply and the reading should be
W2bc = W2a *(1/D2b).
6-31
Effect of angular deviation
Considering calorimeter C1, the situation is more complicated because the arc is
no longer on the perpendicular line-of-sight of calorimeter C1. However, the
distance between the arc and calorimeter C1 is smaller than 1 unit.
Hence, the reading of calorimeter C1 should be greater than in Case a due to

the closer location of the arc, but this increase is tempered by the angular location
of the arc away from the perpendicular line-of-sight. An approximate assessment
of the effect of the angular location of the arc may be made by considering the
projection of the calorimeter plane on the direction of distance vector D1b. This,
together with the assumed inverse-square or inverse relation of incident energy
distribution with distance can provide a reasonable estimate of the expected
reading of calorimeter C1.
Interpretation of the expected readings of calorimeter C3 follows the same

reasoning.
Calorimeter Line-of-Sight - Case c: Arc on the negative y-axis (blue color

in Figure 6-19).
Analysis of this case follows the same process as Case b, but negative y-values
are used.
Effect of distance
If the arc is represented as a point source or a spherical structure, the inverse-

square relation would apply, and the reading should be W2cp = W2a *(1/D2c)2.
For long arcs, it may be more realistic to assume that the arc can be approximated
by a cylindrical structure for small distances. In that case, the inverse relation
would apply and the reading should be W2cc = W2a *(1/D2c)
Effect of angular deviation
The reading of calorimeter C1 should be smaller than in Case a due to the

further location of the arc, but this increase is tempered by the angular location of
the arc away from the perpendicular line-of-sight. An approximate assessment of
the effect of the angular location of the arc may be made by considering the
projection of the calorimeter plane on the direction of distance D1c. This,
together with the assumed inverse-square or inverse relation of incident energy
distribution with distance can provide a reasonable estimate of the expected
reading of calorimeter C1.
Interpretation of the expected readings of calorimeter C3 follows the same

reasoning.
6-32
Modeling the observed calorimeter spread
Using these geometric relationships, calculations were made to estimate the arc
radial offset in the tests with the most extreme spreads in calorimeter readings.
Table 6-1 summarizes the spread data and the resulting estimated arc offset for
the extreme shots identified in the preceding sections:
6-33
Table 6-1
Summary of the Spread Data and the Resulting Estimated Arc Offset for the Extreme Shots
Calorimeter Deviation from Average (%) Estimated Arc Offset (ft)

Reading
Shot # 1 2 3 Average 1 2 3 Cylinder (Line) Point (Sphere)
Radiation Radiation
Source Model Source Model
09-3774 45.1 25.6 22.4 31.033 145.3% 82.5% 72.2% 0.32 0.18
09-3785 20.6 8.4 12.5 13.833 148.9% 60.7% 90.4% 0.35 0.19
09-3779 51.3 20.1 19.9 30.433 168.6% 66.0% 65.4% 0.41 0.23
09-5141 13 17.1 7.8 12.633 102.9% 135.4% 61.7% 0.50 0.40
09-5137 10.8 16.9 8.7 12.133 89.0% 139.3% 71.7% 0.29 0.15
09-5148 22.2 36.7 20.3 26.400 84.1% 139.0% 76.9% 0.29 0.15
6-34
These data indicate that the extreme calorimeter spreads represent a radial
deviation of the arc position from the cage axis of 6 inch or less. The observed
calorimeter biases are much less than the extremes confirming that any radial arc
position bias introduced by the cage setup is no more than a few inches.
Averaging of Calorimeter Readings
As seen from the above analysis, arc movement within the cage has several
influences on the readings of individual calorimeters within a test, and on
readings from tests to test under the same (identical) test conditions.
Therefore, some sort of averaging of calorimeter readings is necessary to provide
meaningful inputs for calculation of incident energy.
Four averaging methods are explored:

1. Method 1: Simple arithmetic average, Equation 6-1:
(W 1 W 2 W 3)
Wave a Equation 6-1
3
2. Method 2: RMS (root-mean-square - square root of sum of squares),
Equation 6-2:
2
W1 W 2 W 3
Wave2
Equation 6-2
3
3. Method 3: Cube of sum of cube roots, Equation 6-3:
3
3 W1 3 W 2 3 W 3
Wave3
Equation 6-3
3
4. Method 4: Simple geometric average, Equation 6-4:
Waveg 3 W 1 W 2 W 3 Equation 6-4
Example
Table 6-2 shows the calculated deviations from reference in the measured
incident energy for various locations of the arc relative to the calorimeters, using
a point source representation of the arc (inverse-square dependence on distance,
1/D2), and various averaging methods listed above. Figure 6-20 shows the plots
of the deviations for various arc locations on the y-axis over the range y = -0.5 to
+0.5.
Table 6-3 shows the calculated deviations from reference in the measured
incident energy for various locations of the arc relative to the calorimeters, using
a cylindrical (infinite cylinder) source representation of the arc (inverse
dependence on distance, 1/D), and various averaging methods listed above.
6-35
Figure 6-21 shows the plots of the deviations for various arc locations on the y-
axis over the range y = -0.5 to +0.5.
Significant differences are observed in Figures 6-20 and 6-21 among the trends
represented by the various curves.
It is not known at this time which averaging method is preferred. It is noted that
Method 1 (simple arithmetic average) is most sensitive to arc location
(movement), while Method 4 (simple geometric average is least sensitive).
Also, some curves exhibit inflection points this is thought to be due to the
opposing influences of distance change and deviation from line-of-sight change.
Finally, the cylindrical representation of the arc produces less sensitivity of the
calculated deviation from reference than the spherical representation.
6-36
Table 6-2
Calculated Variation of Normalized Calorimeter Readings as Function of Arc Location; Arc Represented by a Point Source
(Spherical Structure; Variation 1/d2)
arc arc Simple RMS Cube of Simple D1 D2 D3 W1 W2 W3

x y arithmetic sum of geometric
average cube roots average
0 1.0 0.4167 0.4071 0.4038 0.3969 1.0000 2.0000 1.0000 0.5000 0.2500 0.5000
0 0.9 0.5147 0.4986 0.4928 0.4809 0.9539 1.9000 0.9539 0.6336 0.2770 0.6336
0 0.8 0.6224 0.5986 0.5901 0.5723 0.9165 1.8000 0.9165 0.7793 0.3086 0.7793
0 0.7 0.7325 0.7014 0.6902 0.6668 0.8888 1.7000 0.8888 0.9257 0.3460 0.9257
0 0.6 0.8346 0.7985 0.7855 0.7583 0.8718 1.6000 0.8718 1.0565 0.3906 1.0565
0 0.5 0.9179 0.8810 0.8677 0.8399 0.8660 1.5000 0.8660 1.1547 0.4444 1.1547
0 0.4 0.9750 0.9422 0.9304 0.9061 0.8718 1.4000 0.8718 1.2075 0.5102 1.2075
0 0.3 1.0043 0.9799 0.9713 0.9536 0.8888 1.3000 0.8888 1.2105 0.5917 1.2105
0 0.2 1.0108 0.9972 0.9924 0.9827 0.9165 1.2000 0.9165 1.1690 0.6944 1.1690
0 0.1 1.0051 1.0009 0.9995 0.9966 0.9539 1.1000 0.9539 1.0944 0.8264 1.0944
0 0 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
0 -0.1 1.0101 1.0041 1.0022 0.9984 1.0536 0.9000 1.0536 0.8979 1.2346 0.8979
0 -0.2 1.0519 1.0235 1.0145 0.9972 1.1136 0.8000 1.1136 0.7966 1.5625 0.7966
0 -0.3 1.1481 1.0705 1.0464 1.0017 1.1790 0.7000 1.1790 0.7017 2.0408 0.7017
0 -0.4 1.3365 1.1637 1.1112 1.0176 1.2490 0.6000 1.2490 0.6159 2.7778 0.6159
0 -0.5 1.6933 1.3376 1.2319 1.0526 1.3229 0.5000 1.3229 0.5399 4.0000 0.5399
0 -0.6 2.3992 1.6698 1.4572 1.1194 1.4000 0.4000 1.4000 0.4738 6.2500 0.4738
0 -0.7 3.9814 2.3759 1.9145 1.2446 1.4799 0.3000 1.4799 0.4166 11.1111 0.4166
0 -0.8 8.5782 4.2878 3.0620 1.4997 1.5620 0.2000 1.5620 0.3673 25.0000 0.3673
0 -0.9 33.5500 13.7894 8.0669 2.1942 1.6462 0.1000 1.6462 0.3250 100.0000 0.3250
6-37
Table 6-3
Calculated Variation of Normalized Calorimeter Readings as Function of Arc Location; Arc Represented by an Infinite
Cylindrical Structure (Line Source; Variation 1/d)
arc arc Simple RMS Cube of Simple D1 D2 D3 W1 W2 W3

x y arithmetic sum of geometric
average cube roots average
0 1.0 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 1.0000 2.0000 1.0000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000
0 0.9 0.5784 0.5778 0.5776 0.5772 0.9539 1.9000 0.9539 0.6044 0.5263 0.6044
0 0.8 0.6614 0.6592 0.6584 0.6569 0.9165 1.8000 0.9165 0.7143 0.5556 0.7143
0 0.7 0.7446 0.7402 0.7387 0.7357 0.8888 1.7000 0.8888 0.8228 0.5882 0.8228
0 0.6 0.8224 0.8160 0.8138 0.8094 0.8718 1.6000 0.8718 0.9211 0.6250 0.9211
0 0.5 0.8889 0.8814 0.8788 0.8736 0.8660 1.5000 0.8660 1.0000 0.6667 1.0000
0 0.4 0.9398 0.9326 0.9301 0.9250 0.8718 1.4000 0.8718 1.0526 0.7143 1.0526
0 0.3 0.9737 0.9680 0.9661 0.9621 0.8888 1.3000 0.8888 1.0759 0.7692 1.0759
0 0.2 0.9921 0.9887 0.9876 0.9853 0.9165 1.2000 0.9165 1.0714 0.8333 1.0714
0 0.1 0.9990 0.9980 0.9976 0.9969 0.9539 1.1000 0.9539 1.0440 0.9091 1.0440
0 0 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
0 -0.1 1.0010 0.9995 0.9990 0.9981 1.0536 0.9000 1.0536 0.9459 1.1111 0.9459
0 -0.2 1.0081 1.0012 0.9989 0.9945 1.1136 0.8000 1.1136 0.8871 1.2500 0.8871
0 -0.3 1.0277 1.0096 1.0038 0.9926 1.1790 0.7000 1.1790 0.8273 1.4286 0.8273
0 -0.4 1.0684 1.0303 1.0183 0.9954 1.2490 0.6000 1.2490 0.7692 1.6667 0.7692
0 -0.5 1.1429 1.0709 1.0485 1.0068 1.3229 0.5000 1.3229 0.7143 2.0000 0.7143
0 -0.6 1.2755 1.1449 1.1049 1.0322 1.4000 0.4000 1.4000 0.6633 2.5000 0.6633
0 -0.7 1.5221 1.2814 1.2090 1.0820 1.4799 0.3000 1.4799 0.6164 3.3333 0.6164
0 -0.8 2.0492 1.5634 1.4199 1.1807 1.5620 0.2000 1.5620 0.5738 5.0000 0.5738
0 -0.9 3.6900 2.3770 1.9974 1.4199 1.6462 0.1000 1.6462 0.5351 10.0000 0.5351
6-38
Figure 6-20
Plots of Variation of Normalized Calorimeter Readings as Function of Arc Location;
Arc Represented by a Point Source (Spherical Structure)
6-39
Figure 6-21
Plots of Variation of Normalized Calorimeter Readings as Function of Arc Location;
Arc Represented by a Cylindrical Source (Cylindrical Structure)
Experimental Confirmation of the Effect of Calorimeter Line-of-

Sight
Several tests were performed where calorimeters were placed near the top and
bottom of the gap in the test cage. In some tests, all calorimeters were oriented
with their line-of-sight perpendicular to the gap axis, as in Figure 6-22 for the 2-
ft gap. In other tests, the top and bottom calorimeters were tilted so that their
line-of-sight pointed approximately at the center of the gap, as shown in Figure
6-23 for the 2-ft gap.
Ideally, the calorimeters marked Middle should record the same values of
incident energy in the two setups when tests are conducted with the same test
conditions (gap length, current level, and current duration). However,
calorimeters marked Top and Bottom should read lower values than the
Middle calorimeters. Also, the Top and Bottom calorimeters in Figure 6-
23 are expected to provide higher values (depending on gap length) than
corresponding calorimeters in Figure 6-22, with all other test conditions being
the same.
6-40
Figure 6-22
6-41
Figure 6-23
SVa Calorimeter Configuration: 9 Calorimeters Placed in Vertical Configuration
with Calorimeters 1, 3, 7, and 9 Pointed at the Mid-Point of the Gap
Table 6-4 compares calorimeter readings from tests with tilted top and bottom
calorimeters as in Figure 6-23 (tests 09-3810, 09-3811, 09-3812, 09-3813, 09-
3814 and 09-3815) with those with calorimeters in vertical orientation as in
Figures 6-22 (tests 09-3808, 09-3809, 09-3806, 09-3807, 09-3804, 09-3805),
that were performed with the same remaining test parameters, respectively.
These tests were performed with 2-ft gap.
The following observations are derived from Table 6-4:

Indeed, the middle calorimeters on average provide similar readings in both
cases
The tilted top calorimeters closest to the gap axis (i.e., 1-ft distance)
provide noticeably higher readings than the vertical top calorimeters
The tilted bottom calorimeters closest to the gap axis (i.e., 1-ft distance)
provide significantly higher readings than the vertical top calorimeters
6-42
Table 6-4
Effect of Calorimeter Line-of-Sight
Ratio of Incident Energy Tilted/Vertical

1ft away 2ft away 4 ft away
Gap Target Approx #1T #2M #3B #4T #5M #6B #7T #8M #9B
(ft) Curr (kA) Duration (cycles)
2 8 6 1.50 0.85 2.57 0.89 0.78 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00
2 8 12 1.91 1.34 2.07 0.90 0.87 1.14 0.88 0.90 1.17
2 20 2 2.60 1.18 1.19 1.00 1.00 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00
2 20 6 0.80 1.12 3.48 0.70 1.76 1.55 1.11 1.00 1.10
2 40 2 1.53 0.74 1.00 1.07 0.70 0.47 1.00 0.89 0.88
2 40 6 1.31 1.22 2.72 1.01 1.95 1.70 1.10 1.04 1.11
Avg Ratio 1.61 1.07 2.17 0.93 1.17 1.09 0.97 0.97 1.04
6-43
For the 2-ft gap in these tests, and calorimeters at 1-ft radial distance, the line of
sight of the tilted calorimeters makes an angle of approximately 37o relative to the
abscissa. Consequently, the vertical calorimeter at the same location is estimated
to read approximately tan(37o) = 0.75 of the reading that the tilted calorimeter
provides, and the distance between each (tilted and vertical) calorimeter and the
center of the gap is approximately 1.67 ft. Hence (since the distance of both
calorimeters is the same) the ratio of the tilted to the vertical calorimeter
readings, per earlier discussions, is estimated to be (tilted reading) * 0.75, or the
ratio top tilted/vertical is estimated to be 1.33. The value listed in Table 6-4 is
1.61.
At the same time, bottom tilted calorimeters at the 1-ft distance read
significantly higher (ratio of 2.17) than the bottom vertical calorimeters. One
possible explanation for this trend is related to natural convection. For the
bottom tilted calorimeters, the plasma cloud rises into view, while for the bottom
vertical calorimeters the plasma cloud rises out of view.
Table 6-4 also shows that the ratio tilted/vertical is close to 1 for all other
calorimeters (those located at the 2-ft and the 4-ft distance from the gap axis).
As noted earlier and shown in Section 5, the equation for incident thermal
energy flux provides values that fall within the range of measured data, but the
equation does not give an estimate of maximum anticipated flux levels. To
obtain a statistically meaningful estimate of maximum flux levels, the following
analysis is performed:
Relative differences between the individual test flux values (measured
incident thermal energy divided by duration) and the corresponding
calculated flux values are computed per Equation 6-5
All computed differences are collected to form an error population
The average, , and the standard deviation, , values are computed for the
difference population
A multiplicative adjustment factor, k, for the flux equation is derived using a
multiple, n, of the standard deviation as in Equation 6-6
( i ,measured i ,calculated )
difference i Equation 6-5
i ,calculated
k (1 n ) Equation 6-6
The selection of the multiplier, n, in Equation 6-6 is left up to the user. Often,
in other electrical applications, a value of 3 (i.e., n = 3) is used.
Table 6-5 summarizes the computed differences and standard deviation data.
6-44
Table 6-5
Computed Average Difference and Standard Deviation of the Difference between
Measured and Calculated Incident Thermal Energy Flux
Population Average Difference Standard

Deviation of
the Difference
Gap Length = 1 ft -0.068 0.200
Gap Length = 2 ft 0.023 0.192
Gap Length = 4 ft -0.047 0.187
Gap Length = 5 ft 0.044 0.158
Entire Population (all gap lengths) -0.027 0.196
Analysis of differences between the test and calculated (using Equation 5-65 in
Section 5) flux data shows that the measured flux values range above (positive
difference) and below (negative difference) the calculated flux values. The values
of and computed for the entire data population are given in Table 6-5 and in
Equations 6-7 and 6-8.
0.027 Equation 6-7
0.196 Equation 6-8
Using n = 3, the value of k is given in Equation 6-9.
k (1 n ) (1 3 0.196) 1.588 Equation 6-9
Figures 6-24 through 6-27 show comparisons of the measured incident thermal
energy flux and the calculated flux adjusted using the multiplicative adjustment
factor, k with n = 3. Review of measured and calculated data show that only 4
measured data points (out of total of 578 measured data points for all gap lengths
and arc current values) exceed the calculated values. For n = 2, about 10
measured data points exceed the calculated values.
6-45
Figure 6-24
Comparison of Adjusted Calculated Incident Thermal Energy Flux (Using Equation
6-9) and Measured Data, G = 1 ft
Figure 6-25
6-46
Figure 6-26
Figure 6-27
6-47
This Section has analyzed the apparent observed cage bias in the results from
September and November tests, and developed a statistical approach to handling
data variability.
The observed behavior of the collected data raised two general questions related
to:
Repeatability of test data
Reasons for change in the preferred azimuth between the two sets of tests.
Factors that could affect calorimeter readings were analyzed and quantified to
some extent. Various methods of handling test data and calculating averages
were investigated. The sensitivity of test data and averaged results was assessed,
and the effects of modeling of the arc itself on measured data were considered.
It was found that the arc behaves in a very erratic manner and its location at any
time cannot be determined exactly through deterministic methods. Analysis of
tests that resulted in very high readings by one calorimeter showed that a slight
trend or bias representing a radial arc displacement of a few inches is indicated
with low confidence that it would persist in a larger data set. For example, when
outliers are removed from the analysis, the apparent bias pattern shifts or
becomes much less pronounced. Further analysis is made difficult because of the
small number of repeated tests performed in the September and November
session.
It is therefore concluded that, while the test data may contain some bias (which
often proves unavoidable and/or uncontrollable in practical tests), a statistical
treatment (such as averaging of some sort, and a randomized arc location) rather
than a deterministic approach is needed to interpret and use the available test
data.
6-48
Section 7: Comparisons of Test Data with
Results Calculated using Arcpro
This Section provides comparisons between test data obtained as part of this
project and the values of incident thermal energy calculated by the ARCPRO
software.
As discussed in Section 2, the ARCPRO software [8] utilizes physics-based

models of arc plasma to determine incident thermal energy at various distances
from arc axis. Models are based on principles of thermal physics, electrical
conduction, and heat transfer.
used in ARCPRO (see Section 2). The program is meant to model single phase,
open air arcs and was previously validated only for small gap lengths. For this
reason, it is reasonable to expect that incident thermal energy values for short
gaps calculated with ARCPRO would match the test data quite well for short
gaps. However, as shown in the comparison figures in this Section, the
agreement between calculated and measured data falls apart as gap length
increases. For arcs in long gaps, comparisons show that ARCPRO tends to
predict much greater incident thermal energy levels than those measured in the
tests.
Figures 7-1 through 7-6 show comparisons for gap length G = 1 ft.
Figure 7-19 shows comparisons for gap length G = 5 ft.
7-1
Comparisons for Gap Length G = 1 ft
Figure 7-1
Comparison of Measured Incident Thermal Energy with ARCPRO Calculation, Iarc =
8 kA, Duration = 6 Cycles, Gap Length = 1 ft
Figure 7-2
7-2
Figure 7-3
Figure 7-4
7-3
Figure 7-5
Figure 7-6
7-4
Figure 7-7
Figure 7-8
7-5
Figure 7-9
Figure 7-10
7-6
Figure 7-11
Figure 7-12
7-7
Figure 7-13
Figure 7-14
7-8
Figure 7-15
Figure 7-16
7-9
Figure 7-17
Figure 7-18
7-10
Comparison for Gap Length G = 5 ft
Figure 7-19
7-11
Section 8: Summary of Derived Equations,
Conclusions and
Recommendations
In this project, tests were conducted in a vertical arc cage to study arcs in long
gaps ranging in length from 1 ft to 5 ft, with currents magnitudes between 8 kA
to 40kA rms, and durations of 2 to 12 cycles. The arc was initiated using a thin
wire shorting rods electrodes. The incident thermal energy at distances ranging
from 1 to 4 ft away from the gap vertical axis was measured.
The test data were analyzed and equations for incident thermal energy flux and
incident thermal energy was function of working distance from the gap axis were
developed. The equations are based on several simplifying assumptions, the most
important of which is that an average voltage gradient in the arc region is
sufficient for development of reasonable arc models. Subsequent research has
shown that this assumption is not adequate because, as evidenced by high-speed
photography, the arc in a long gap consists of at least three distinct regions with
very different characteristics and properties. Nevertheless, it was possible in this
project to develop simplified equations for incident thermal energy flux and
energy. The equations are reproduced below.
Summary of Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy

Flux and Incident Thermal Energy as Function of Working
Distance
The simplified equations derived as part of this project are summarized below.
Simplified Average Voltage Gradient Equation
Eave I arc 0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc

Equation 8-1
where:

8-1
Simplified Arc Voltage Equation
[0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc ]G

Varc , rms
1.1255
Equation 8-2
where:
data
Simplified Arc Power Equation
[0.0000112 G 8 1.19 (0.0069G 1.239 0.0126 ) I arc ]G

Parc I arc
1.1255
Equation 8-3
where:


0.152
6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 D 1.58 G Equation 8-4
where:

D is in ft
For D in m, the equation is:

0.152
6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 (3.281 D) 1.58G Equation 8-5
where:

D is in m
To express in J (Joules), the equation is:

8-2
0.152
4.184 (6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 ) (3.281 D ) 1.58G Equation 8-6
where:

D is in m
The equations for 1 are:
Substituting Equations 5-59 and 5-61 into Equation 5-55 and simplifying,
Eave I arc G
1 0.031 10 3 G 0.42 0.028 10 3 Eave I arc G 0.58
1.1255
Equation 8-7
where:
1 is the incident thermal energy flux at some point D1 in MJ/(scm2)

Alternately,
1 28 Eave I arc G 0.58 Equation 8-8
where:

and
1 6.7 Eave I arc G 0.58 Equation 8-9
where:

8-3
Simplified Equation for Incident Thermal Energy
W T Equation 8-10
where:

T is the duration of the arc current in s
As the equations derived in this project are based on averaged test results, they do
not give estimates of maximum anticipated flux or energy levels. Hence, some
test data fall below the calculated values, and some above. Statistically
meaningful estimate of maximum energy (flux) values were obtained by
calculating the mean (average), , and standard deviation, , for the entire data
population:
0.027 Equation 8-11
0.196 Equation 8-12
Then, the statistical adjustment factor, k, can be obtained as:
k (1 n ) Equation 8-13
The factor k is used as a multiplier for calculated values of incident thermal

energy (flux).
The selection of the multiplier, n, in Equation 8-13 is left up to the user. Often,
in other electrical applications, a value of 3 (i.e., n = 3) is used.
Using n = 3, the value of k is given in Equation 8-14.
k (1 n ) (1 3 0.196) 1.588 Equation 8-14
Review of measured results and levels calculated using the factor k of Equation 8-
14 shows that only 4 measured data points (out of total of 578 measured data
points for all gap lengths and arc current values) exceed the calculated values. For
n = 2, about 10 measured data points exceed the calculated values.
Summary of Test Conditions and Range of Application of the

Derived Simplified Equations
It is recalled that the analysis in this report is focused on arc tests that satisfy
setup parameters listed in Table 8-1.
8-4
In particular, the equations derived in this Section should not be used for gap
lengths less that the lower tested limit of 1 ft.
Table 8-1
Arc Test Parameters
Gap Length (ft) 15
Duration (s) 0.033 - 0.2
Comparison with ARCPRO
Comparisons were also made between test data and energy values calculated
using ARPRO (see Section 7). As discussed in Section 2, the ARCPRO
software [8] utilizes physics-based models of arc plasma to determine incident
thermal energy at various distances from arc axis. Models are based on principles
of thermal physics, electrical conduction, and heat transfer.
used in ARCPRO (see Section 2). The program is meant to model single phase,
open air arcs and was previously validated only for small gap lengths. For this
reason, it is reasonable to expect that incident thermal energy values for short
gaps calculated with ARCPRO would match the test data quite well for short
gaps. However, as shown in the comparison figures in this Section, the
agreement between calculated and measured data falls apart as gap length
increases. For arcs in long gaps, comparisons show that ARCPRO tends to
predict much greater incident thermal energy levels than those measured in the
tests.
Conclusions
Arc flashes are a serious hazard that may potentially put people in life threatening
situations and cause great damage to existing assets. NESC and OSHA safety
rules have introduced requirements for electric utilities to perform arc flash
hazard analysis of all electric facilities operating at and above 1000 volts.
Most methods available at this time for analyzing the arc flash incident thermal
energy were developed for low and medium-voltage industrial and commercial
settings. EPRI testing and analysis summarized in this report shows that the
currently available methods for calculation of incident thermal energies are not
8-5
applicable to practical transmission situations and lead to inaccurate estimates of
incident thermal energy.
A new empirical arc model was formulated in this stage of the project and more
realistic curves of incident thermal energy versus arc energy (current magnitude
and duration), arc gap length and distance from the arc gap axis (working
distance) based on long gap tests (arc gaps up to 5 ft long [1.5 m]) were
developed. A statistical adjustment factor, k, was derived that allows the user to
determine the average expected energy levels by selecting, for example, n = 1 in
determination of k, or determine the expected worst-case levels by selecting, for
example, n = 3 in the equation for k.
Alternately, the user may choose to take advantage of the fact that ARCPRO
tends to provide overestimates of incident thermal energy, at least for long gaps
and vertical arcs. It must be recognized, however, that ARCPRO has not been
validated for situations outside the tested conditions listed in Section 2 and in
Table 8-1.
A more general determination of incident thermal energy as function of working

distance for a range of arc conditions is needed to meet NESC and OSHA rules.
The research performed as part of this project is expected to enhance the safety of
live work on overhead lines and in substations.
Recommendations for Further Work
As stated, the equations developed in this project are based on empirical (test)
data. Analysis of obtained test data and high-speed video records indicate a need
for further refinement of the arc model and incident thermal energy equations for
arcs in long gaps that are different from the tested vertical gaps (i.e., for
situations corresponding to deadend or V insulator arrangements, and gaps
containing insulators and live working tools). The following general lines of
research are recommended:
Investigation of voltage gradient and resulting arc power at various regions of
the arc
Investigation and modeling the physical relationship between arc power and
incident thermal energy for live working situations
Investigation of the contribution of various sections of the arc to incident
energy, i.e., structure of the arc
Tests on full-size transmission and substation structures with high fault
current
Further development of statistical methods to predict the probability of
exposure to given incident energy levels in live working situations.
The proposed research is summarized in the EPRIs Project Opportunity Sheet

(PID 1023211) and proposed tasks are listed below.
8-6
Task 1: Improve the Computation of Incident Radiated and
Convected Thermal Energies
Targeted tests in specially designed test setups will be performed to help develop
arc models which are representative of transmission and substation applications,
and the arc models will be subsequently improved. Monte Carlo methods will be
adapted to develop arc energy and incident thermal energy models for tower
substation structure geometries.
Task 2: Conduct Tests on Full-Scale Mockups of Transmission

and Substation Structures
Selected high-current tests will be performed on full-scale mockups of selected

transmission and substation structures to confirm the applicability and accuracy
of the computations developed in Task 1.
Task 3: Develop Guidelines for Handling Situations with

Multiple Arc Current Sources
Guidelines on how to address situations where the arcs are fed from two sources
with dissimilar currents as is commonly the case in transmission situations.
Benefits to Project Participants
The expected benefits of this project will greatly improve the understanding of
the impact of arcing on personnel in various work situations. Application of the
results of this research may also allow live work in cases where this was previously
not permissible or practical based on currently available computation methods.
This may allow the utilities to perform necessary maintenance and inspection
operations live, thus increasing the overall availability and reliability of the
transmission grid.
8-7
Section 9: References
1. R. F. Ammerman, P.K. Sen, J. P. Nelson, Electrical Arcing Phenomena: A
Historical Perspective and Comparative Study of the Standards IEEE 1584
and NFPA 70E, IEEE Industry Applications Magazine, pp. 42-52,
May/June 2009.
2. Guide for performing Arc-Flash Hazard Calculations, IEEE 1584-2002.
3. T. L. Gammon and J. H. Matthews, IEEE 1584-2002: Incident Energy
Factors and Simple 480-V Incident Energy Equations, IEEE Industry
Applications Magazine, pp. 23-31, Jan/Feb 2009.
4. R. Lee, The Other Electrical Hazard: Electric Arc Blast Burns, United
States, 1982.
5. A. D. Stokes & D. K. Sweeting, Electric Arcing Burn Hazards, Australia,
2006.
6. Doughty, R., Neal, T. and Floyd, L., Predicting Incident Energy to Better
Manage the Electric Arc Hazard on 600 V Power Distribution Systems,
United States.
7. Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, NFPA 70E.
8. Users Guide for ARCPRO, Kinectrics Inc.
9. V.V. Terzija and H.J. Koglin, Long arc in free air: laboratory testing,
modelling, simulation and model-parameters estimation, IEEE Proc Gener
Transm Distrib, Vol 149, No. 3, May 2002.
10. A.T. Johns, R.K. Aggarwai, and Y.H. Song Improved techniques for
modelling fault arcs on faulted EHV transmission systems, IEE Proc Gener
Transm Distrib, Vol 141, No. 2, March 1994.
11. A. P. Strom, "Long 60-Cycle Arcs in Air," American Institute of Electrical
Engineers, Transactions of the, vol. 65, pp. 113-118, 1946.
12. M. Kizilcay, Digital simulation of fault arcs in power systems, Eur Trans
Electrical Power System, ETEP, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 55-59, Jan/Feb 1991.
13. A.S. Maikopar, The quenching of an open Arc, Electrichestvo, 1964, No.
4, pp. 64-69.
14. A.T. Johns and R.K. Aggarwai, Digital simulation of EHV systems under
secondary arcing conditions associated with single-pole autoreclosures, Proc
IEE C, 1982, 129, (2), pp. 49-59.
9-1
15. A.T. Johns and R.K. Aggarwai, Developments in the simulation of long-
distance single pole-switched EHV systems, Proc IEE C, 1984, 131, (2),
pp. 67-77.
16. K. Anjo, H. Terase, and Y. Kawaguchi, Self-extinction of arcs crated in
long air gaps, Elec Eng Jpn, 1968, 88, pp. 83-93.
17. H.A. Darwish and H.I. Elkalasy, Universal Arc Representation Using
EMTP, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 20, No. 2, April 2005.
18. Y. Goda, M. Iwata, K. Ikeda, and S. Tanaka, "Arc voltage characteristics of
high current fault arcs in long gaps," Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 15, pp. 791-795, 2000.
19. S. Handa, A study of high-speed reclosing from the point of view of arc
characteristics, CRIEPI Report 111, January 1982.
20. IEC 61482-1-1: 2009 Live working - Protective clothing against the thermal
hazards of an electric arc - Part 1-1: Test methods - Method 1:
Determination of the arc rating (ATPV or EBT50) of flame resistant
materials for clothing.
21. ASTM F 1959/F 1959M 05a Standard Test Method for Determining the
Arc Rating of Materials for Clothing.
9-2
Appendix A: Results (Raw Data) from all
Tests
September 2009 Test Data
A-1
Incident Arc Energy (cal/cm^2) Ambient
conditions
Bolted
KIN Arc Arc Arc Arc
fault
Test Record ID (Test Name) current duration voltage energy 1ft away 2ft away 4 ft away Notes Testing date
current
ID (kArms) (ms) (Vrms) (kJ)
(kA)
Temp. RH
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 (C) (%)
09-
3757 1PH VFC SH 1 8 6 1 8 7.83 101.5 500 377 4.4 4.5 3.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.3 2-Sep-09 24.2 39.6
09-
3758 1PH VFC SH 1 8 6 2 8 7.85 101.5 485 372 4 4.5 3.8 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.3 no hs video (trigger problem) 2-Sep-09
09-
3759 1PH VFC SH 1 8 6 3 8 7.91 101.5 469.7 364 4.7 4 4.1 0.8 1 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 dark filter on hs camera 2-Sep-09
09- with reduced exposure time on

3760 1PH VFC SH 1 8 12 1 8 7.98 201.5 477 713 8.5 8.4 8 1.6 1.7 1.9 0.5 0.6 0.6 hs camera 2-Sep-09
09-
3761 1PH VFC SH 1 8 12 2 8 7.88 201.5 475.6 713 7.5 8.7 6 1.8 2.1 1.5 0.7 0.7 0.6 2-Sep-09 24 44.5
09- voltage to be modified this will

3762 1PH VFC SH 2 8 6 1 8 8.78 106 793.5 652 7.4 5.8 4.9 1.7 1.5 1.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 be repeated. 3-Sep-09 19.1 71.6
09-
3763 1PH VFC SH 2 8 6 2 8 7.85 99.7 737.3 527 6.2 5 4.2 1.4 1 1.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 3-Sep-09
09-
3764 1PH VFC SH 2 8 6 3 8 7.76 100.3 755.8 537 4.6 5 3.8 1.3 1.1 1.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 3-Sep-09
09-
3765 1PH VFC SH 2 8 12 1 8 7.95 200 723 1000 9.7 8.8 9.3 2.6 2.1 2.1 1 0.8 0.9 3-Sep-09
09-
3766 1PH VFC SH 2 8 12 2 8 7.95 200 723 1060 10.1 8 11.2 2.3 2.4 2.9 0.9 1 1 3-Sep-09
09- invalid test - arc touched the

3767 1PH VFC SH 4 8 6 1 8 7.06 99.5 1405.2 870 NA 4.2 NA 1.4 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 sensors placed @ 12" 3-Sep-09
09-
3768 1PH VFC SH 4 8 6 2 8 7.62 99.5 1436.2 997 7.3 8 7.7 2.1 2.2 2.1 0.7 0.8 0.8 valid test 3-Sep-09 21.9 60
09-
3769 1PH VFC SH 4 8 6 3 8 7.48 100 1448.7 995 8.4 7.1 7.5 2.1 2.4 2.1 0.8 0.8 0.8 3-Sep-09
09-
3770 1PH VFC SH 4 8 12 1 8 7.79 201.2 1353.1 2000 15.9 14.3 13.9 5.6 4.6 4 1.5 1.6 1.7 3-Sep-09
09-
3771 1PH VFC SH 4 8 12 2 8 8.05 200.5 1235.2 1830 15 14.6 15.4 3.3 4.1 3.5 1.3 1.5 1.5 3-Sep-09
arc cleared (hs video saved); in

09- hs video the file is called 1PH-
3772 1PH VFC SH 4 40 6 1 40 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA VFC-SH-4-20-6-1 3-Sep-09
A-2
with the current setup the arc
current was 38.6 kA the test
will be renamed 40 kA (in hs
09- video the file is called 1PH-
3773 1PH VFC SH 4 40 6 2 40 38.63 98.3 1319 4350 26.1 28.8 19.9 7.5 8.7 4.8 3.3 2.5 2.5 VFC-SH-4-20-6-2) 3-Sep-09 23.3 56.5
sensor #1 much more exposed

to the arc (arc pushed by the
electromagnetic forces towards
09- sensor #1). Next test duration
3774 1PH VFC SH 4 40 6 3 40 38.9 100.2 1338 4620 45.1 25.6 22.4 13.8 7.3 7.3 2.8 3.4 3.3 is 2 cycles 3-Sep-09
09-
3775 1PH VFC SH 4 40 2 1 40 40.2 33.4 1429 1550 12.4 10 8.9 3 2.7 2.9 1.2 1.2 1.3 3-Sep-09
09-
3776 1PH VFC SH 4 40 2 2 40 40.33 33.4 1378.8 1430 10.8 7.1 8.7 3.4 2.6 2.5 1.3 1.1 1.1 3-Sep-09 24.3 53.3
09-
3777 1PH VFC SH 2 40 2 1 40 40.21 33.4 962.9 1220 10.1 5.6 9.4 2.8 2 2.2 1.2 0.8 0.7 3-Sep-09
09-
3778 1PH VFC SH 2 40 2 2 40 40.6 33.4 951.3 1210 9.1 11.7 8.1 1.9 2.6 2.3 0.7 1 1 3-Sep-09
!! measured arc energy by #1

unusually high (the fabric
placed to protect the sensor
09- was on fire for a short period of
3779 1PH VFC SH 2 40 6 1 40 40.49 99.9 983.8 3710 51.3 20.1 19.9 15.2 4.9 6 2.6 2.2 2.5 time 3-Sep-09
09-
3780 1PH VFC SH 2 40 6 2 40 41.49 99.9 936.4 3630 29.8 28 28.4 7.9 4.8 5.1 2.8 1.8 1.9 3-Sep-09 24.6 46
09-
3781 1PH VFC SH 1 40 2 1 40 40.31 33.4 865.4 1180 14.4 8.6 9.4 2.9 1.4 1.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 3-Sep-09
09-
3782 1PH VFC SH 1 40 2 2 40 40.93 33.3 833.8 1110 8.8 12.4 9.4 1.9 2.2 1.8 0.5 0.6 0.6 3-Sep-09
09-
3783 1PH VFC SH 1 40 6 1 40 41.36 100 821.2 3220 33 26.2 27.8 5.4 4 4.1 1.6 1.4 1.4 3-Sep-09
09-
3784 1PH VFC SH 1 40 6 2 40 40.69 100 829.8 3210 24.7 22.5 21.6 6.3 3.3 3.4 1.3 1.5 1.1 3-Sep-09
09-
3785 1PH VFC SH 1 20 6 1 20 23.22 100 645 1410 20.6 8.4 12.5 5 2.4 2.2 1.2 1.1 0.9 3-Sep-09
09-
3786 1PH VFC SH 1 20 2 1 20 22.15 33.3 652.3 468 3.7 5.7 3.1 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.2 3-Sep-09
09-
3787 1PH VFC SH 2 20 2 1 20 22.43 33.3 865.9 568 7.9 4.5 4.5 1.3 1 1.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 3-Sep-09
A-3
09-
3788 1PH VFC SH 2 20 6 1 20 22.7 100 797.3 1640 16.7 14.2 11.5 3.2 2.1 3.9 1.5 1.1 1.7 3-Sep-09
09-
3789 1PH VFC SH 4 20 2 1 20 22.64 33.3 1296.6 755 5.4 6.2 5.4 1.6 1.7 1.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 3-Sep-09
09-
3790 1PH VFC SH 4 20 6 1 20 22.64 100 1169.2 2320 23.5 15.1 13.3 5.7 3.9 4.7 1.9 1.9 2 3-Sep-09 24.3 44
#1T #2C #3B #4T #5C #6B #7T #8C #9B
09- see sensor diagram for exact

3791 1PH VFC SV 4 8 6 1 8 6 100 1459.1 786 1.9 7 2.2 1.4 1.6 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.5 placement of he sensors 4-Sep-09 20 57
09-
3792 1PH VFC SV 4 8 6 2 8 8.26 100 1257.9 909 3.1 7.1 3 1.8 2.5 1 0.6 0.8 0.7 4-Sep-09
09-
3793 1PH VFC SV 4 8 6 3 8 7.65 100 1500.7 1040 3.1 7 2.9 1.6 2.3 1.1 0.6 0.8 0.7 4-Sep-09
09-
3794 1PH VFC SV 4 8 12 1 8 8.01 200 1326.9 1960 6.6 14.7 5.7 3.5 3.8 1.8 1.2 1.5 1.3 4-Sep-09
09-
3795 1PH VFC SV 4 8 12 2 8 7.81 200 1392.1 1990 6.1 15.1 5.4 3.3 4.4 2.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 4-Sep-09
09-
3796 1PH VFC SV 4 20 2 1 20 20.64 33.3 1356.9 709 2.7 4.7 2.7 1.3 1.7 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.5 4-Sep-09
09-
3797 1PH VFC SV 4 20 2 2 20 20.42 33.3 1363.5 701 2.3 5.2 2.6 1.3 1.4 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.5 4-Sep-09
09-
3798 1PH VFC SV 4 20 6 1 20 21.57 100 1200.3 2210 9.2 18 9.5 4.7 4.8 3.4 1.5 1.9 1.5 4-Sep-09
09-
3799 1PH VFC SV 4 20 6 2 20 21.85 100 1218.5 2300 10 26 7.9 6.1 8.3 2.8 1.7 1.8 1.6 4-Sep-09
09- fuse wire was AWG 18;

3800 1PH VFC SV 4 40 2 1 40 41.31 32.1 1420.8 1470 5.2 9.8 5.8 2.2 2.5 1.4 0.8 1 0.8 duration: 1.9 cycles 4-Sep-09
09- fuse wire was changed back to

3801 1PH VFC SV 4 40 2 2 40 41.01 32.1 1501.3 1430 4.8 9.4 6 2.3 2.5 1.7 0.7 0.9 0.8 AWG 28; duration 1.9 cycles 4-Sep-09
09-
3802 1PH VFC SV 4 40 6 1 40 39.42 98.5 1368.7 4580 17.6 32.7 15.8 6.2 6.6 4.1 2.1 2.8 2.4 duration 5.9 cycles 4-Sep-09
09-
3803 1PH VFC SV 4 40 6 2 40 39.87 98.9 1358.4 4540 22.5 45.5 16.8 12.5 15.7 8.1 2.6 3.5 3.1 4-Sep-09
arc length 24"; the sensors were

09- placed as before (same config
3804 1PH VFC SV 2 40 2 1 40 42.66 33.3 1021.8 1340 1.9 9.7 2.4 1.5 3.3 1.5 0.6 0.9 0.8 as for 48" arc) 4-Sep-09 25.9 39.1
09-
3805 1PH VFC SV 2 40 6 1 40 41.92 100.3 965.4 3730 11.4 34.7 4.6 9.2 5.7 2.3 2.1 2.4 1.9 4-Sep-09
A-4
09-
3806 1PH VFC SV 2 20 2 1 20 21.06 33.7 886.7 535 0.5 5 1.6 0.8 1.8 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.4 4-Sep-09
09-
3807 1PH VFC SV 2 20 6 1 20 21.13 100 808.9 1540 4.4 20.6 2.3 2.7 3.7 1.1 0.9 1.3 1 4-Sep-09
09-
3808 1PH VFC SV 2 8 6 1 8 7.98 100 701.3 510 1 6.5 0.7 0.9 1.8 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 4-Sep-09
09-
3809 1PH VFC SV 2 8 12 1 8 8.02 200.5 683.5 997 2.2 10.1 1.5 2 3.1 0.7 0.8 1 0.6 4-Sep-09
sensors#1, #3 and #7, #9 are

09- rotated to face the center of the
3810 1PH VFC SVa 2 8 6 1 8 7.98 100 701.8 515 1.5 5.5 1.8 0.8 1.4 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.4 arc 4-Sep-09
09-
3811 1PH VFC SVa 2 8 12 1 8 7.93 200.5 711.7 1030 4.2 13.5 3.1 1.8 2.7 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.7 4-Sep-09
09-
3812 1PH VFC SVa 2 20 2 1 20 21.09 33.3 873.9 520 1.3 5.9 1.9 0.8 1.8 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 4-Sep-09
09-
3813 1PH VFC SVa 2 20 6 1 20 20.98 100 812.5 1520 3.5 23.1 8 1.9 6.5 1.7 1 1.3 1.1 4-Sep-09
09-
3814 1PH VFC SVa 2 40 2 1 40 39.53 33.2 1019.9 1220 2.9 7.2 2.4 1.6 2.3 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.7 4-Sep-09
09-
3815 1PH VFC SVa 2 40 6 1 40 41.2 100 959 3610 14.9 42.4 12.5 9.3 11.1 3.9 2.3 2.5 2.1 4-Sep-09 24.5 50.5
09-
3817 Short-circuit across cage 8 7.89 100 62 44.3
A-5
November 2009 Test Data
A-6
Incident Arc Energy (cal/cm^2) Ambient
conditions
Bolted
KIN Arc Arc Arc Arc
fault
Test Record ID (Test Name) current duration voltage energy 1ft away 1.5ft away 3 ft away Notes Testing date
current
ID (kArms) (ms) (Vrms) (kJ)
(kA)
Temp RH
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 (C) (%)
hs camera:
1000fps &
09- exposure 70
5121 1PH VFC SH2 1 8 6 1 8 7.94 101 490.2 377 3.2 4.1 3.6 1.8 2 2.2 0.5 0.5 microsec 2-Nov-09
hs camera:
2000fps &
09- exposure 20
5122 1PH VFC SH2 1 8 6 2 8 7.9 101 470.9 361 3.6 3.9 3.6 2 2 1.9 0.5 0.5 microsec 2-Nov-09
09-
5123 1PH VFC SH2 1 8 12 1 8 7.88 201 455.1 677 7.2 8.3 6.4 3.1 4.6 3.9 0.8 1.1 2-Nov-09
09-
5124 1PH VFC SH2 1 8 12 2 8 7.88 201 470.2 703 6.6 7.9 8.6 3.5 3.4 3.7 1.1 0.7 2-Nov-09
09-
5125 1PH VFC SH2 2 8 6 1 8 7.51 101 673.4 472 4 3.9 4.1 2.4 2.6 2.6 0.8 0.8 2-Nov-09
09-
5126 1PH VFC SH2 2 8 6 2 8 7.87 101 718.2 528 3.9 5.7 4.3 2 2.7 3.1 0.6 0.8 2-Nov-09
09-
5127 1PH VFC SH2 2 8 6 3 8 8.02 101 663.1 489 4.1 4.5 4.8 2.7 2.7 2.9 0.8 0.8 2-Nov-09 12.8 57
09-
5128 1PH VFC SH2 2 8 12 1 8 7.94 201 677.5 1000 6.9 10.3 8.1 3.9 6 4.6 1.3 1.6 2-Nov-09
arcing rod to
sensor stands
(arms) - no
valid
measurement;
sensor stands
placed on
09- insulating
5129 1PH VFC SH2 4 8 6 1 8 7.73 101 1333.6 924 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A blankets 2-Nov-09
09-
5130 1PH VFC SH2 4 8 6 2 8 7.62 101 1327 910 5.6 5.5 6.2 3.3 4 3.3 1.2 1.3 2-Nov-09
09-
5131 1PH VFC SH2 4 8 6 3 8 7.72 101 1321.9 913 5.1 5.5 7 3.6 3.5 4.4 1.2 1.1 2-Nov-09
09-
5132 1PH VFC SH2 4 20 2 1 20 22.28 33 1355.9 772 4.7 4.6 4.4 2.6 2.9 2.7 1.1 1 2-Nov-09
09-
5133 1PH VFC SH2 4 20 2 2 20 22.17 33 1306.5 741 3.9 3.8 4.1 2.4 2.6 2.3 1 0.9 2-Nov-09
A-7
09-
5134 1PH VFC SH2 4 20 6 1 20 22.24 101 1204.2 2310 12.5 13.6 10.5 6.5 7.9 6.8 2.9 2.6 2-Nov-09
!!!current
waveform
09- saturated; test
5135 1PH VFC SH2 2 20 2 1 20 23.55 33 849.2 610 4.9 5.4 4.3 2.1 3.3 2.8 0.7 1 will be repeated 2-Nov-09
hs camera
exposure
changed to 10
microseconds;
error: data not
09- recorded in raw
5136 1PH VFC SH2 2 20 2 2 20 21.41 33.3 875.8 574.5 3.4 4.1 5.1 2.2 2.3 2.6 0.8 0.7 format 2-Nov-09
09- this 2 cycle test

5138 1PH VFC SH2 2 20 2 3 20 21.8 33.3 855 560 4.3 3.6 5 2.7 2.2 2.4 0.8 0.8 was recorded ;) 2-Nov-09
09-
5137 1PH VFC SH2 2 20 6 1 20 21.9 99.7 814.9 1640 10.8 16.9 8.7 6.1 11.2 5.5 2.3 2.9 2-Nov-09
09-
5139 1PH VFC SH2 1 20 2 1 20 21.76 33.3 606.4 440 3.1 4.9 4.6 1.6 2.2 2.1 0.5 0.6 2-Nov-09
09-
5140 1PH VFC SH2 1 20 2 2 20 21.45 33.3 652 462 4.9 3.7 3.4 2 1.9 1.9 0.6 0.6 2-Nov-09
09-
5141 1PH VFC SH2 1 20 6 1 20 21.98 100.3 620.2 1300 13 17.1 7.8 4 9.1 5.8 1.2 2.1 2-Nov-09 10.8 64
09-
5142 1PH VFC SH2 1 40 2 1 40 40.18 33.3 806.9 1060 7.7 6.8 8.1 3.8 3 3.6 1.2 1 3-Nov-09 12.6 41.5
09-
5143 1PH VFC SH2 1 40 2 2 40 40.3 33.3 782.4 1040 6.6 10.8 7.1 2.8 4.5 4.3 0.9 1.2 3-Nov-09
09-
5144 1PH VFC SH2 2 40 2 1 40 40.95 33.3 904.8 1150 9.3 7.7 10.7 4.8 3.7 4.1 1.7 1.4 3-Nov-09
09-
5145 1PH VFC SH2 2 40 2 2 40 40.17 33.3 963 1230 8.3 6.7 6.6 4.1 3.9 3.6 1.4 1.4 3-Nov-09
09-
5146 1PH VFC SH2 4 40 2 1 40 41.21 33.3 1407.7 1490 7.9 7.1 8.1 4.4 3.7 4.4 1.8 1.5 3-Nov-09
09-
5147 1PH VFC SH2 4 40 2 2 40 40.82 33.3 1447 1500 6.7 7.4 7.4 3.8 4.1 3.5 1.6 1.6 3-Nov-09 10.6 44.7
09-
5148 1PH VFC SH2 4 40 6 1 40 40.4 99.2 1267.9 4310 22.2 36.7 20.3 12.4 25.6 11.9 4.8 10.1 3-Nov-09
the arc gap is 5
ft; fuse wire was
changed from
09- awg 28 to awg
5149 1PH VFC SH2 5 40 2 1 40 38.47 32.5 1565.1 1610 8.9 11.8 7.9 4.5 5.9 4.7 1.8 1.9 16 3-Nov-09
09-
5150 1PH VFC SH2 5 40 2 2 40 36.92 32.7 1614.7 1570 8.9 10.9 8.5 5.1 7.1 4.8 1.6 2 3-Nov-09
A-8
changed back
to 4 ft arc gap
with arc jet rods
09- 3/4 "; fuse wire
5151 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 8 6 1 8 9.37 100.7 940 764 2.9 5.3 3.6 1.6 2.3 1.8 0.6 0.6 is awg 28 3-Nov-09
hs camera
exposure time
was changed to
09- 20
5152 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 8 6 2 8 7.82 100.7 928.7 626 2.4 2.8 2.8 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.5 0.4 microseconds 3-Nov-09
arc jet rods tip
was cut to have
3/4" diam as for
steel electrodes;
hs camera
interval 500
microsec,
09- exposure 20
5153 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 8 6 3 8 7.71 100.8 915.9 610 2.2 3.2 2.3 0.9 1.6 1.4 0.4 0.4 microsec; 3-Nov-09
09-
5154 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 8 6 4 8 7.88 100.8 862.8 587 1.5 3.5 2 0.9 1.9 1 0.3 0.4 3-Nov-09
09-
5155 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 20 2 1 20 22.19 33.3 1196.2 596 1.6 2 2.4 0.9 1.1 1.5 0.4 0.4 3-Nov-09
09-
5156 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 20 2 2 20 22.34 33.3 1162.1 607 1.6 3.2 2.5 1.1 1.4 1.4 0.4 0.5 3-Nov-09
arc jet rods
destroyed;
arcing to the
sensor stand
(sensor #2) 6
cycles is too
much for these
rods. This
measurement
09- cannot be
5157 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 20 6 1 20 19.79 99.7 1297.2 2290 6.2 N/A 7.7 3.6 6 4.2 1.4 1.6 considered valid 3-Nov-09
can't be
initiated with
fuse wire awg
28. will use awg
16; rods
destroyed; hs
09- exposure was
5158 1PH VFC3 SH2 4 40 2 1 40 32.76 32 1597 1440 5.6 N/A 5.3 3.3 3 2.9 1 1.4 20 microsec 3-Nov-09
3/4" Al Rods
(VFC4); fuse
wire awg 16; hs
camera
exposure time
10 microsec;
09- sensor#2 can be
5159 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 40 2 1 40 40.91 33.7 1169.2 1300 6.7 N/A 6.1 3.4 5.4 3.3 1.3 1.9 damaged 3-Nov-09 12 40.4
A-9
sensor#2
09- replaced : good
5160 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 40 2 2 40 41.4 33.7 1127.3 1270 9.4 7.5 7.9 5.7 5.5 4.5 1.9 1.7 measurement 3-Nov-09
voltage
waveform not
recorded
correctly (pt
09- was not well
5161 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 40 2 3 40 40.85 33.7 N/A N/A 10.9 11.6 7.9 5.1 8.6 5 1.8 2.7 connected??) 3-Nov-09
09-
5162 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 40 2 4 40 40.45 33.7 1128.5 1270 8.4 12.1 10.5 4.9 7.4 6.6 1.8 2 3-Nov-09
09-
5163 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 40 6 1 40 40.21 100.3 1007.8 3630 36.3 29.7 22 17.4 21.4 13 5.1 7.9 3-Nov-09
hs camera
exposure 10
09- microsec; fuse
5164 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 20 2 1 20 21.09 33.5 1112.3 681 5.4 5 4.8 3.4 3 2.9 0.9 1 wire awg 28 4-Nov-09
09- no hs video
5165 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 20 2 2 20 21.65 33.5 1051.9 651 4.1 5.1 4.1 2.3 3.4 2.7 0.8 1 recorded 4-Nov-09
09-
5166 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 20 6 1 20 21.21 100 960 1850 13.2 16.7 12.4 7.2 12 7.3 3 4.3 4-Nov-09
hs camera
09- exposure time
5167 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 8 6 1 8 7.46 100 1121 785 5 5.8 7.7 3.6 3.1 4 1.1 0.9 20 microsec 4-Nov-09
09-
5168 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 8 6 2 8 7.77 99.7 1203.5 871 6.6 6.2 5.7 4.3 4.3 3.2 1.2 1 4-Nov-09
09-
5169 1PH VFC4 SH2 4 8 6 3 8 7.9 99.7 1189.6 875 6.7 7.1 5.8 4.1 4.2 3.5 1.1 1.1 4-Nov-09 6.6 52.5
cu rods used
(VFC5), cal
data shifted but
09- measurement
5170 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 8 6 1 8 8.45 99.7 1074.4 828 3.6 4 2.4 1.4 2.3 1.6 0.5 0.7 valid 4-Nov-09
09-
5171 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 8 6 2 8 7.63 99.7 1129.8 753 2.4 2.9 3.4 1.5 1.3 1.7 0.6 0.5 4-Nov-09
09-
5172 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 8 6 3 8 7.99 99.7 1021.5 753 2.5 2.6 3.3 1.4 1.4 1.9 0.6 0.5 4-Nov-09
09-
5173 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 20 2 1 20 19.48 33.3 1163.2 652 2.3 3.1 2.3 1.3 1.9 1.2 0.6 0.5 4-Nov-09
09-
5174 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 20 2 2 20 22.6 33.3 1104.7 707 3.6 3.9 2.6 2.7 2.2 1.4 0.6 0.6 4-Nov-09
hs exposure
time was
09- changed to 10
5175 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 20 6 1 20 21.69 100 1017.9 2020 8.5 11.1 7.4 4.2 7.8 4.1 1.5 2.2 microsec 4-Nov-09
A-10
09-
5176 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 40 2 1 40 38.91 33 1174.3 1200 4.2 6.9 6 2.1 3.3 3.6 1 1.1 4-Nov-09 7.6 57
09-
5177 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 40 2 2 40 40.03 33 1110 1220 5.6 7.3 5.1 2.8 3.9 2.9 1.1 1.5 4-Nov-09
09-
5178 1PH VFC5 SH2 4 40 6 1 40 39.25 100 1046.4 3720 11.9 18.2 19.7 6.9 7.3 13.1 3 2.9 4-Nov-09 8.6 53.7
Cage not
symmetrical:
the cable was
connected to
the top plate.
See pics for
detailed
configuration.
Hs camera
exposure time
09- will be kept @
5179 1PH VFC2 SH2 1 8 6 1 8 8.16 100.7 489.9 373 3 5.2 4 1.6 1.7 2.2 0.5 0.5 10 microsec 4-Nov-09
09-
5180 1PH VFC2 SH2 1 20 2 1 20 21.72 33.7 638.1 456 2.8 5.6 3.6 1.5 2.2 2.6 0.5 0.6 4-Nov-09
09-
5181 1PH VFC2 SH2 1 40 2 1 40 38.65 33.7 820 1010 5.8 11.6 5.2 2.5 5.8 3 0.9 1.7 4-Nov-09
09-
5182 1PH VFC2 SH2 2 40 2 1 40 37.55 33.7 1045.2 1230 5 14.3 5.3 3.3 8.4 4.3 1.3 2.2 4-Nov-09 9.7 49.1
09-
5183 1PH VFC2 SH2 2 20 2 1 20 21.97 33.7 854 557 3.2 4.7 4.9 2.1 2.1 3.5 0.8 0.6 4-Nov-09
09-
5184 1PH VFC2 SH2 2 8 6 1 8 8.23 100.3 724 541 3.3 6 3.1 2.3 3.4 2.3 0.9 0.8 4-Nov-09
09-
5185 1PH VFC2 SH2 4 8 6 1 8 7.68 100.3 1408.4 991 5.9 7.4 5.8 3.7 5.6 4.4 1.2 1.4 4-Nov-09
09-
5186 1PH VFC2 SH2 4 20 2 1 20 21.5 33 1297.9 815 3.8 7.6 3.7 2.1 5.6 2.7 0.8 1.5 4-Nov-09
09-
5187 1PH VFC2 SH2 4 40 2 1 40 38.63 33 1373 1510 5.4 16.8 5.6 3 8.4 4.2 1.4 1.9 4-Nov-09
cage not
symmetrical
(VFC2) and arc
jet rods are used
(VFC3); hs
camera
09- exposure time
5188 1PH VFC23 SH2 4 20 2 1 20 20.9 33 1161.5 677 1.7 4.8 1.9 1.1 2.3 1.4 0.5 0.7 20 microsec 4-Nov-09
hs camera
09- exposure time
5189 1PH VFC23 SH2 4 20 2 2 20 21.01 33 1143.7 671 2.1 4.8 2 1.4 3 1.2 0.5 0.8 10 microsec 4-Nov-09
A-11
insulator used
(see picture)
insul. ends
connected to
steel rods; hs
camera
09- exposure time
5190 1PH VFC2i SH2 4 20 2 1 20 18.55 32.7 1546 740 2 3.2 1 1.9 3.7 1.1 0.5 1 20 microsec 4-Nov-09 9.2 50
09-
5191 1PH VFC2i SH2 4 20 2 2 20 16.94 33 1663.9 829 3.1 4 1.7 2.4 2.6 1.7 0.8 0.7 4-Nov-09
09-
5192 1PH VFC2i SH2 4 40 2 1 40 35.25 33 1612.1 1560 6.5 4.2 5.1 4.8 3.7 2.5 1.8 1.1 4-Nov-09
#1T #2C #3B #4T #5C #6B #7T #8C
sensors placed
SV2 (see
picture) jet rods
used; hs camera
exposure 20
microsec; error:
only the 80
09- frames were
5193 1PH VFC3 SV2 4 8 6 1 8 7.64 100.3 950.8 671 2 3.2 1.5 1.3 2.1 1.2 0.6 0.7 saved 5-Nov-09 10 50
09-
5194 1PH VFC3 SV2 4 8 6 2 8 8.06 100.3 907.4 660 1.8 2.9 1.8 1.2 1.5 1.3 0.6 0.6 5-Nov-09
09-
5195 1PH VFC3 SV2 4 20 2 1 20 21.84 33.3 1059.6 643 1.9 2.2 1.9 1 1.6 1.6 0.5 0.7 5-Nov-09
sensor#2
measurement
unusually high:
this test will be
repeated.
Waveform
recorded by
09- sensor#1
5196 1PH VFC3 SV2 4 20 2 2 20 21.13 33.3 1181 705 2.4 4.2 2 1.5 2.2 1.9 0.6 0.7 unusual 5-Nov-09
measurement
taken by
sensor#1
09- unusual: sensor
5197 1PH VFC3 SV2 4 20 2 3 20 21.41 33.3 1103.3 664 1.8 3.2 2.3 1.4 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.7 will be changed 5-Nov-09
sensor#1 was
09- replaced: good
5198 1PH VFC3 SV2 4 20 2 4 20 21.31 33.3 1128.5 685 2.6 2.4 1.4 1.1 1.3 1 0.5 0.5 measurement 5-Nov-09
09-
5199 1PH VFC4 SV2 4 20 2 1 20 22.12 33.3 1015 648 3.5 4.5 2.3 2.1 3 1.8 0.9 1.1 Al rods 5-Nov-09
09-
5200 1PH VFC4 SV2 4 20 2 2 20 22.28 33.3 1036.1 641 4.3 3.8 2.8 2 2.6 2 0.9 1 5-Nov-09
A-12
09-
5201 1PH VFC4 SV2 4 8 6 1 8 8.01 100.3 1118.1 840 3.2 6.1 2.9 1.7 3.8 2.5 1 1 5-Nov-09
09-
5202 1PH VFC4 SV2 4 8 6 2 8 7.93 100.3 1123.6 844 3.4 7.8 2.5 2.2 4.1 2.1 1 1.1 5-Nov-09 6.5 57.9
09-
5203 1PH VFC5 SV2 4 8 6 1 8 7.92 100.3 1074.3 784 2.1 3.2 1.9 1.1 1.8 1.3 0.5 0.5 Cu rods 5-Nov-09
09-
5204 1PH VFC5 SV2 4 8 6 2 8 8.06 100.3 1039.7 769 2.3 3.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1 0.5 0.5 5-Nov-09
09-
5205 1PH VFC5 SV2 4 20 2 1 20 22.65 33.3 1058.3 673 2.2 2.5 1.9 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.5 0.5 5-Nov-09
09-
5206 1PH VFC5 SV2 4 20 2 2 20 22.73 33.3 1056.8 674 2.7 3.6 2.8 1.8 2.3 1.5 0.7 0.7 5-Nov-09
09-
5207 1PH VFC SV2 4 20 2 1 20 22.94 33.3 1170.2 782 4.2 4.7 2.9 2.1 3.2 2.1 0.9 1 Steel Rods 5-Nov-09
09-
5208 1PH VFC SV2 4 20 2 2 20 22.58 33.3 1170.4 764 3.7 4.9 3.2 2.1 3.1 2.4 0.9 1 5-Nov-09
09-
5209 1PH VFC SV2 4 8 6 1 8 8.08 100 1390.8 1050 3.8 7.2 3 1.8 5.4 2 1.1 1.3 5-Nov-09
09-
5210 1PH VFC SV2 4 8 6 2 8 8.53 100 1244 989 4.6 5.6 4.1 2.8 3.5 3.4 1.2 1.3 5-Nov-09 10.4 44.5
A-13
Appendix B: Test Records (Voltage, Current,
Calorimeter Energy)
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
B-10
B-11
B-12
B-13
B-14
B-15
B-16
B-17
B-18
B-19
B-20
B-21
B-22
B-23
B-24
B-25
B-26
B-27
B-28
B-29
B-30
B-31
B-32
B-33
B-34
B-35
B-36
B-37
B-38
B-39
B-40
B-41
B-42
B-43
B-44
B-45
B-46
B-47
B-48
B-49
B-50
B-51
B-52
B-53
B-54
B-55
B-56
B-57
B-58
B-59
B-60
B-61
B-62
B-63
B-64
B-65
B-66
B-67
B-68
B-69
B-70
B-71
B-72
B-73
B-74
B-75
B-76
B-77
B-78
B-79
B-80
B-81
B-82
B-83
B-84
B-85
B-86
B-87
B-88
B-89
B-90
B-91
B-92
B-93
B-94
B-95
B-96
B-97
B-98
B-99
B-100
B-101
B-102
B-103
B-104
B-105
B-106
B-107
B-108
B-109
B-110
B-111
B-112
B-113
B-114
B-115
B-116
B-117
B-118
B-119
B-120
B-121
B-122
B-123
B-124
B-125
B-126
B-127
B-128
B-129
B-130
B-131
B-132
B-133
B-134
B-135
B-136
B-137
B-138
B-139
B-140
B-141
B-142
B-143
B-144
B-145
B-146
B-147
Appendix C: Voltage Gradients at Current
Peaks
Appendixes present material too detailed to be included in the main report text
for example, computer printouts or lengthy comparative data.
This Appendix shows measured voltages at current peaks and the corresponding
voltage gradients at the current peaks for different gaps lengths and currents.
Each table corresponds to a different gap length (1 ft, 2 ft, 4 ft, 5 ft). Each row
shows values at half cycle current peaks. The columns in Table C-1 are as
follows:
1. Kinectrics Test ID - test number
2. Gap Length (ft)
3. Current - Measured RMS current (kA)
4. Total Peak Voltage measured total voltage (arc and cage) at current peak
(V)
5. Total Peak Voltage Gradient measured total voltage (arc and cage) at
current peak divided by length of the arc gap (V/m)
6. Total Peak Voltage Gradient Magnitude measured total voltage magnitude
(arc and cage) at current peak divided by length of the arc gap (kV/m)
7. Arc Peak Voltage measured total voltage (total - cage) at current peak (V)
8. Arc Peak Voltage Gradient measured total voltage (total - cage) at current
peak divided by length of the arc gap (V/m)
9. Arc Peak Voltage Gradient Magnitude measured total voltage magnitude
(total - cage) at current peak divided by length of the arc gap (kV/m)
C-1
Table C-1
Voltage Gradients at Current Peaks for 1-ft Gap
Arc
Peak
Total Total Peak Voltage
Peak Total Peak Voltage Arc Peak Arc Peak Gradie
RMS Voltage Voltage Gradient Voltage Voltage nt
Kinectrics Gap
Current at Gradient at Magnitude at Current Gradient at Magnit
Test ID (ft)
(kArms) Current Current Peak at Current Peak Current Peak ude at
Peak (Vpk/m) Peak (Vpk_arc) (Vpk_arc/m) Current
(Vpk) (kVpk/m) Peak
(kVpk/
m)
3757 1 7.83 -542.5 -1779.856 1.780 -428.090 -1404.494 1.404
515 1689.633 1.690 472.171 1549.118 1.549
-543.75 -1783.957 1.784 -459.290 -1506.857 1.507
518.75 1701.936 1.702 463.342 1520.151 1.520
-536.25 -1759.350 1.759 -456.582 -1497.973 1.498
486.25 1595.308 1.595 419.461 1376.184 1.376
-545 -1788.058 1.788 -475.216 -1559.107 1.559
525 1722.441 1.722 457.013 1499.386 1.499
-530 -1738.845 1.739 -463.211 -1519.721 1.520
546.25 1792.159 1.792 474.669 1557.312 1.557
-467.5 -1533.793 1.534 -395.619 -1297.964 1.298
472.5 1550.197 1.550 404.213 1326.159 1.326
3758 1 7.85 -561.25 -1841.371 1.841 -447.439 -1467.975 1.468
478.75 1570.702 1.571 439.216 1440.996 1.441
-576.25 -1890.584 1.891 -486.100 -1594.815 1.595
492.5 1615.814 1.616 436.792 1433.046 1.433
-513.75 -1685.531 1.686 -439.473 -1441.841 1.442
510 1673.228 1.673 446.206 1463.930 1.464
-506.25 -1660.925 1.661 -436.466 -1431.974 1.432
473.75 1554.298 1.554 402.169 1319.451 1.319
-462.5 -1517.388 1.517 -392.416 -1287.455 1.287
506.25 1660.925 1.661 438.562 1438.853 1.439
-500 -1640.420 1.640 -429.317 -1408.521 1.409
515 1689.633 1.690 448.810 1472.473 1.472
3759 1 7.91 -570 -1870.079 1.870 -461.879 -1515.353 1.515
478.75 1570.702 1.571 437.419 1435.100 1.435
-510 -1673.228 1.673 -421.946 -1384.338 1.384
C-2
Table C-1 (continued)
Arc
Peak
Voltag
Total Total Peak
e
Peak Total Peak Voltage Arc Peak Arc Peak
Gradie
RMS Voltage Voltage Gradient Voltage Voltage
Kinectrics Gap nt
Current at Gradient at Magnitude at Current Gradient at
Test ID (ft) Magnit
(kArms) Current Current Peak at Current Peak Current Peak
ude at
Peak (Vpk/m) Peak (Vpk_arc) (Vpk_arc/m)
Current
(Vpk) (kVpk/m)
Peak
(kVpk/
m)
508.75 1669.127 1.669 455.139 1493.238 1.493
-507.5 -1665.026 1.665 -426.335 -1398.736 1.399
560 1837.270 1.837 499.201 1637.798 1.638
-512.5 -1681.430 1.681 -434.929 -1426.931 1.427
477.5 1566.601 1.567 410.711 1347.477 1.347
-518.75 -1701.936 1.702 -445.072 -1460.211 1.460
466.25 1529.692 1.530 398.862 1308.602 1.309
-453.75 -1488.681 1.489 -383.966 -1259.730 1.260
475 1558.399 1.558 406.414 1333.379 1.333
5121 1 7.94 -528.75 -1734.744 1.735 -414.819 -1360.955 1.361
536.25 1759.350 1.759 500.429 1641.829 1.642
-576.25 -1890.584 1.891 -488.675 -1603.265 1.603
501.25 1644.521 1.645 443.386 1454.679 1.455
-572.5 -1878.281 1.878 -496.187 -1627.909 1.628
493.75 1619.915 1.620 430.974 1413.957 1.414
-513.75 -1685.531 1.686 -441.510 -1448.523 1.449
522.5 1714.239 1.714 455.172 1493.346 1.493
-508.75 -1669.127 1.669 -438.187 -1437.622 1.438
510 1673.228 1.673 442.911 1453.121 1.453
-507.5 -1665.026 1.665 -436.697 -1432.734 1.433
478.75 1570.702 1.571 412.979 1354.918 1.355
5122 1 7.9 -557.5 -1829.068 1.829 -442.371 -1451.349 1.451
497.5 1632.218 1.632 458.684 1504.870 1.505
-528.75 -1734.744 1.735 -439.498 -1441.923 1.442
505 1656.824 1.657 450.251 1477.201 1.477
-502.5 -1648.622 1.649 -425.348 -1395.499 1.395
508.75 1669.127 1.669 443.219 1454.130 1.454
C-3
Arc
Total Peak
Peak Voltage
Voltage Gradient
Gradient Magnitu
Total Peak Magni- Arc Peak Arc Peak de at
Total Peak Voltage tude at Voltage at Voltage Current
RMS Voltage at Gradient at Current Current Gradient at Peak
Kinectrics Gap Current Current Current Peak Peak Peak Current Peak (kVpk/
Test ID (ft) (kArms) Peak (Vpk) (Vpk/m) (kVpk/m) (Vpk_arc) (Vpk_arc/m) m)
-523.75 -1718.340 1.718 -447.556 -1468.361 1.468
488.75 1603.510 1.604 424.057 1391.264 1.391
-461.25 -1513.287 1.513 -390.328 -1280.603 1.281
473.75 1554.298 1.554 406.781 1334.584 1.335
-447.5 -1468.176 1.468 -377.656 -1239.029 1.239
480 1574.803 1.575 410.515 1346.835 1.347
5124 1 7.88 -532.5 -1747.047 1.747 -417.491 -1369.721 1.370
523.75 1718.340 1.718 485.893 1594.137 1.594
-523.75 -1718.340 1.718 -442.525 -1451.853 1.452
510 1673.228 1.673 452.735 1485.351 1.485
-517.5 -1697.835 1.698 -442.265 -1451.000 1.451
620 2034.121 2.034 563.094 1847.423 1.847
-476.25 -1562.500 1.563 -398.858 -1308.591 1.309
508.75 1669.127 1.669 448.730 1472.210 1.472
-498.75 -1636.319 1.636 -430.943 -1413.853 1.414
508.75 1669.127 1.669 442.620 1452.164 1.452
-501.25 -1644.521 1.645 -429.249 -1408.299 1.408
483.75 1587.106 1.587 414.265 1359.138 1.359
-553.75 -1816.765 1.817 -483.546 -1586.439 1.586
513.75 1685.531 1.686 445.224 1460.708 1.461
-497.5 -1632.218 1.632 -427.296 -1401.891 1.402
465 1525.591 1.526 399.948 1312.165 1.312
-462.5 -1517.388 1.517 -392.656 -1288.241 1.288
488.75 1603.510 1.604 422.380 1385.762 1.386
-493.75 -1619.915 1.620 -423.187 -1388.409 1.388
523.75 1718.340 1.718 456.542 1497.840 1.498
-457.5 -1500.984 1.501 -383.103 -1256.901 1.257
C-4
Arc
Total Peak
Peak Voltage
Voltage Gradient
Gradient Magnitu
495 1624.016 1.624 427.073 1401.157 1.401
-460 -1509.186 1.509 -390.995 -1282.790 1.283
480 1574.803 1.575 410.635 1347.228 1.347
3760 1 7.89 -560 -1837.270 1.837 -447.087 -1466.822 1.467
608.75 1997.211 1.997 568.317 1864.557 1.865
-547.5 -1796.260 1.796 -456.152 -1496.560 1.497
576.25 1890.584 1.891 524.136 1719.608 1.720
-515 -1689.633 1.690 -434.434 -1425.307 1.425
488.75 1603.510 1.604 422.859 1387.334 1.387
-492.5 -1615.814 1.616 -419.122 -1375.071 1.375
527.5 1730.643 1.731 461.310 1513.484 1.513
-476.25 -1562.500 1.563 -405.567 -1330.601 1.331
490 1607.612 1.608 422.612 1386.522 1.387
-492.5 -1615.814 1.616 -420.320 -1379.002 1.379
512.5 1681.430 1.681 444.812 1459.358 1.459
-485 -1591.207 1.591 -414.317 -1359.309 1.359
528.75 1734.744 1.735 457.468 1500.880 1.501
-475 -1558.399 1.558 -404.317 -1326.500 1.327
482.5 1583.005 1.583 415.711 1363.881 1.364
-498.75 -1636.319 1.636 -428.666 -1406.385 1.406
495 1624.016 1.624 423.119 1388.187 1.388
-485 -1591.207 1.591 -414.617 -1360.291 1.360
520 1706.037 1.706 448.718 1472.173 1.472
-495 -1624.016 1.624 -423.419 -1389.169 1.389
515 1689.633 1.690 446.114 1463.630 1.464
-485 -1591.207 1.591 -415.515 -1363.239 1.363
495 1624.016 1.624 422.221 1385.239 1.385
C-5
Arc
Peak
Total Voltage
Peak Gradien
Voltage t
Gradient Magnitu
3761 1 7.88 -589.903 -1935.377 1.935 -476.541 -1563.455 1.563
493.847 1620.233 1.620 451.467 1481.192 1.481
-537.403 -1763.133 1.763 -451.296 -1480.629 1.481
522.597 1714.557 1.715 460.151 1509.681 1.510
-569.903 -1869.760 1.870 -496.675 -1629.510 1.630
561.347 1841.690 1.842 495.007 1624.039 1.624
-491.153 -1611.394 1.611 -418.823 -1374.091 1.374
505.097 1657.142 1.657 435.463 1428.683 1.429
-472.403 -1549.879 1.550 -405.464 -1330.263 1.330
510.097 1673.547 1.674 439.564 1442.139 1.442
-453.653 -1488.363 1.488 -386.115 -1266.782 1.267
491.347 1612.031 1.612 420.215 1378.658 1.379
-497.403 -1631.900 1.632 -428.967 -1407.371 1.407
551.347 1808.881 1.809 477.819 1567.648 1.568
-509.903 -1672.910 1.673 -439.071 -1440.520 1.441
532.597 1747.365 1.747 460.567 1511.045 1.511
-477.403 -1566.283 1.566 -415.256 -1362.389 1.362
525.097 1722.759 1.723 454.864 1492.335 1.492
-516.153 -1693.415 1.693 -451.910 -1482.643 1.483
537.597 1763.770 1.764 461.973 1515.658 1.516
-484.903 -1590.889 1.591 -414.969 -1361.447 1.361
463.847 1521.808 1.522 391.218 1283.522 1.284
-472.403 -1549.879 1.550 -403.667 -1324.367 1.324
5123 1 7.88 -583.75 -1915.190 1.915 -474.012 -1555.158 1.555
478.75 1570.702 1.571 439.335 1441.389 1.441
-585 -1919.291 1.919 -497.186 -1631.187 1.631
478.75 1570.702 1.571 424.839 1393.830 1.394
C-6
Total Arc Peak

Peak Voltage
Voltage Gradient
Gradient Magnitu
-477.5 -1566.601 1.567 -402.025 -1318.980 1.319
480 1574.803 1.575 414.948 1361.378 1.361
-480 -1574.803 1.575 -406.442 -1333.471 1.333
498.75 1636.319 1.636 435.735 1429.575 1.430
-477.5 -1566.601 1.567 -404.661 -1327.627 1.328
465 1525.591 1.526 396.354 1300.374 1.300
-467.5 -1533.793 1.534 -395.499 -1297.570 1.298
452.5 1484.580 1.485 383.495 1258.184 1.258
-440 -1443.570 1.444 -370.875 -1216.780 1.217
470 1541.995 1.542 398.359 1306.952 1.307
-476.25 -1562.500 1.563 -408.443 -1340.035 1.340
486.25 1595.308 1.595 420.599 1379.918 1.380
-468.75 -1537.894 1.538 -402.740 -1321.324 1.321
506.25 1660.925 1.661 441.198 1447.500 1.447
-476.25 -1562.500 1.563 -405.328 -1329.815 1.330
493.75 1619.915 1.620 423.067 1388.016 1.388
-461.25 -1513.287 1.513 -391.885 -1285.712 1.286
468.75 1537.894 1.538 399.145 1309.532 1.310
-456.25 -1496.883 1.497 -383.770 -1259.089 1.259
475 1558.399 1.558 402.880 1321.784 1.322
3786 1 22.15 -730 -2395.013 2.395 -485.905 -1594.177 1.594
677.5 2222.769 2.223 503.788 1652.848 1.653
-727.5 -2386.811 2.387 -514.853 -1689.150 1.689
682.5 2239.173 2.239 486.325 1595.556 1.596
5139 1 21.76 -730 -2395.013 2.395 -489.499 -1605.968 1.606
668.75 2194.062 2.194 495.937 1627.089 1.627
-698.75 -2292.487 2.292 -492.093 -1614.478 1.614
C-7
Arc
Total Peak
Peak Voltage
Voltage Gradient
Gradient Magnitu
636.25 2087.434 2.087 445.766 1462.487 1.462
5140 1 21.45 -753.75 -2472.933 2.473 -519.539 -1704.523 1.705
683.75 2243.274 2.243 512.135 1680.232 1.680
-725 -2378.609 2.379 -518.942 -1702.565 1.703
732.5 2403.215 2.403 542.316 1779.251 1.779
3785 1 23.22 -787.5 -2583.661 2.584 -532.922 -1748.433 1.748
715 2345.801 2.346 539.791 1770.967 1.771
-732.501 -2403.219 2.403 -513.864 -1685.905 1.686
685 2247.375 2.247 479.840 1574.280 1.574
-742.5 -2436.024 2.436 -536.592 -1760.471 1.760
672.5 2206.365 2.206 469.587 1540.639 1.541
-715 -2345.801 2.346 -504.599 -1655.509 1.656
727.5 2386.811 2.387 520.094 1706.346 1.706
-750 -2460.630 2.461 -540.348 -1772.795 1.773
732.5 2403.215 2.403 522.848 1715.380 1.715
-735 -2411.417 2.411 -525.348 -1723.582 1.724
735 2411.417 2.411 532.835 1748.148 1.748
5141 1 21.98 -708.75 -2325.295 2.325 -465.554 -1527.407 1.527
698.75 2292.487 2.292 529.231 1736.323 1.736
-727.5 -2386.811 2.387 -526.833 -1728.455 1.728
690 2263.780 2.264 503.110 1650.624 1.651
-707.5 -2321.194 2.321 -520.311 -1707.056 1.707
C-8
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
Total Peak Voltage Gradient
Voltage Gradient Arc Peak Arc Peak Magni-
Total Peak Gradient at Magnitude Voltage at Voltage tude at
RMS Voltage at Current at Current Current Gradient at Current
Kinectrics Gap Current Current Peak Peak Peak Current Peak Peak
Test ID (ft) (kArms) Peak (Vpk) (Vpk/m) (kVpk/m) (Vpk_arc) (Vpk_arc/m) (kVpk/m)
727.5 2386.811 2.387 539.113 1768.742 1.769
-731.25 -2399.114 2.399 -529.085 -1735.845 1.736
700 2296.588 2.297 504.425 1654.936 1.655
-725 -2378.609 2.379 -528.826 -1734.992 1.735
710 2329.396 2.329 513.526 1684.797 1.685
-712.5 -2337.598 2.338 -522.915 -1715.599 1.716
696.25 2284.285 2.284 509.061 1670.146 1.670
3781 1 40.31 -1012.5 -3321.850 3.322 -588.703 -1931.441 1.931
1015 3330.052 3.330 691.537 2268.821 2.269
-1017.5 -3338.255 3.338 -641.624 -2105.065 2.105
1029.999 3379.262 3.379 675.837 2217.312 2.217
3782 1 40.93 -997.5 -3272.638 3.273 -587.930 -1928.903 1.929
954.999 3133.199 3.133 604.580 1983.532 1.984
-1017.5 -3338.255 3.338 -646.116 -2119.804 2.120
1002.5 3289.042 3.289 629.619 2065.678 2.066
5142 1 40.18 -1003.75 -3293.143 3.293 -592.233 -1943.021 1.943
957.5 3141.404 3.141 617.864 2027.111 2.027
-978.75 -3211.122 3.211 -616.950 -2024.115 2.024
925 3034.777 3.035 570.987 1873.318 1.873
5143 1 40.3 -949.999 -3116.795 3.117 -544.771 -1787.308 1.787
C-9
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
Total Peak Gradient at Magnitude Voltage at Voltage tude at
RMS Voltage at Current at Current Current Gradient at Current
937.5 3075.787 3.076 596.366 1956.581 1.957
-961.25 -3153.707 3.154 -592.262 -1943.118 1.943
3783 1 41.36 -1012.5 -3321.850 3.322 -592.447 -1943.724 1.944
1015 3330.052 3.330 673.567 2209.864 2.210
-947.5 -3108.596 3.109 -561.890 -1843.471 1.843
1027.5 3371.063 3.371 671.840 2204.200 2.204
-940 -3083.990 3.084 -566.370 -1858.169 1.858
1025 3362.861 3.363 674.581 2213.194 2.213
-950 -3116.798 3.117 -565.887 -1856.586 1.857
942.499 3092.188 3.092 577.854 1895.847 1.896
-937.5 -3075.787 3.076 -581.840 -1908.924 1.909
1032.5 3387.467 3.387 668.604 2193.582 2.194
-942.5 -3092.192 3.092 -598.072 -1962.177 1.962
1042.499 3420.272 3.420 683.844 2243.583 2.244
3784 1 40.69 -985 -3231.627 3.232 -586.661 -1924.741 1.925
1020 3346.457 3.346 684.557 2245.921 2.246
-935 -3067.585 3.068 -559.124 -1834.395 1.834
975 3198.819 3.199 617.843 2027.043 2.027
-982.501 -3223.428 3.223 -613.363 -2012.347 2.012
960 3149.606 3.150 602.094 1975.374 1.975
-982.501 -3223.428 3.223 -622.349 -2041.826 2.042
992.499 3256.230 3.256 639.085 2096.737 2.097
-995.001 -3264.439 3.264 -628.110 -2060.728 2.061
1029.999 3379.262 3.379 676.585 2219.769 2.220
-1047.5 -3436.680 3.437 -682.855 -2240.338 2.240
1065 3494.094 3.494 716.079 2349.340 2.349
C-10
Table C-2
Total Peak Arc Peak Arc Peak

Total Total Peak
Voltage Arc Peak Voltage Voltage
Peak Voltage
RMS Gradient Voltage Gradient Gradient
Kinectrics Gap Voltage Gradient
Current Magnitude at Current at Current Magni-tude
Test ID (ft) at Current at Current
(kArms) at Current Peak Peak at Current
Peak Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) (Vpk_arc/ Peak
(Vpk) (Vpk/m)
(kVpk/m) m) (kVpk/m)
-
3762 2 8.78 -957.5 1570.702 1.571 -859.862 -1410.535 1.411
742.5 1218.012 1.218 682.000 1118.767 1.119
-
-818.75 1343.094 1.343 -734.590 -1205.036 1.205
951.25 1560.449 1.560 878.770 1441.552 1.442
-
-847.5 1390.256 1.390 -767.832 -1259.567 1.260
750 1230.315 1.230 670.332 1099.626 1.100
-
-812.5 1332.841 1.333 -736.426 -1208.048 1.208
812.5 1332.841 1.333 732.233 1201.170 1.201
-
-800 1312.336 1.312 -725.124 -1189.508 1.190
712.5 1168.799 1.169 635.827 1043.024 1.043
-
-705 1156.496 1.156 -630.124 -1033.668 1.034
791.25 1297.982 1.298 711.882 1167.785 1.168
-
3763 2 7.85 -898.75 1474.327 1.474 -841.245 -1379.996 1.380
770 1263.123 1.263 692.129 1135.383 1.135
-
-808.75 1326.690 1.327 -744.057 -1220.567 1.221
750 1230.315 1.230 681.114 1117.313 1.117
-
-748.75 1228.264 1.228 -681.362 -1117.720 1.118
757.5 1242.618 1.243 686.817 1126.669 1.127
-
-821.25 1347.195 1.347 -756.857 -1241.563 1.242
755 1238.517 1.239 681.622 1118.146 1.118
C-11

Total Total Peak
Peak Voltage
Current Magnitude at Current at Current Magnitude
Peak Peak
(Vpk) (Vpk/m)
-
-862.5 1414.862 1.415 -792.416 -1299.896 1.300
785 1287.730 1.288 711.023 1166.376 1.166
-
-715 1172.900 1.173 -649.109 -1064.812 1.065
747.5 1226.214 1.226 677.117 1110.756 1.111
-
3764 2 7.76 -783.75 1285.679 1.286 -718.458 -1178.573 1.179
779.999 1279.526 1.280 714.108 1171.438 1.171
-
-771.25 1265.174 1.265 -701.466 -1150.698 1.151
736.249 1207.758 1.208 669.759 1098.687 1.099
-
-772.5 1267.224 1.267 -701.218 -1150.293 1.150
815 1336.942 1.337 750.008 1230.328 1.230
-
-801.25 1314.386 1.314 -733.562 -1203.350 1.203
795 1304.134 1.304 724.617 1188.676 1.189
-
-802.5 1316.437 1.316 -736.010 -1207.366 1.207
888.75 1457.923 1.458 822.859 1349.835 1.350
-
-898.75 1474.327 1.474 -831.961 -1364.765 1.365
793.75 1302.083 1.302 728.758 1195.469 1.195
-
3808 2 7.98 -805 1320.538 1.321 -724.883 -1189.112 1.189
725 1189.304 1.189 656.114 1076.303 1.076
-
-727.5 1193.406 1.193 -656.368 -1076.719 1.077
C-12

Total Total Peak
Peak Voltage
Peak Peak
(Vpk) (Vpk/m)
700 1148.294 1.148 626.622 1027.923 1.028
-
-762.5 1250.820 1.251 -687.624 -1127.993 1.128
727.5 1193.406 1.193 652.624 1070.578 1.071
-
-692.5 1135.991 1.136 -620.619 -1018.076 1.018
704.999 1156.494 1.156 635.365 1042.265 1.042
-
-705 1156.496 1.156 -637.612 -1045.951 1.046
882.5 1447.671 1.448 812.866 1333.441 1.333
-
-702.5 1152.395 1.152 -632.117 -1036.937 1.037
712.5 1168.799 1.169 642.117 1053.341 1.053
-
3810 2 7.98 -790 1295.932 1.296 -712.878 -1169.419 1.169
727.5 1193.406 1.193 656.368 1076.719 1.077
-
-792.5 1300.033 1.300 -722.117 -1184.575 1.185
787.5 1291.831 1.292 719.363 1180.057 1.180
-
-750 1230.315 1.230 -679.617 -1114.857 1.115
704.999 1156.494 1.156 641.355 1052.091 1.052
-
-755 1238.517 1.239 -686.114 -1125.516 1.126
752.5 1234.416 1.234 678.373 1112.817 1.113
-
-665 1090.879 1.091 -596.863 -979.106 0.979
682.5 1119.587 1.120 616.609 1011.498 1.011
C-13

Total Total Peak
Peak Voltage
Peak Peak
(Vpk) (Vpk/m)
-
-702.5 1152.395 1.152 -627.624 -1029.567 1.030
712.5 1168.799 1.169 642.117 1053.341 1.053
-
5125 2 7.51 -751.25 1232.365 1.232 -663.196 -1087.920 1.088
726.25 1191.355 1.191 674.735 1106.850 1.107
-
-691.25 1133.940 1.134 -616.254 -1010.916 1.011
708.75 1162.648 1.163 648.969 1064.582 1.065
-
-698.75 1146.243 1.146 -630.463 -1034.225 1.034
746.25 1224.163 1.224 684.433 1122.757 1.123
-
-703.75 1154.446 1.154 -635.583 -1042.623 1.043
692.5 1135.991 1.136 627.807 1029.868 1.030
-
-656.25 1076.526 1.077 -587.364 -963.524 0.964
710 1164.698 1.165 643.750 1056.020 1.056
-
-642.5 1053.970 1.054 -573.135 -940.182 0.940
687.5 1127.789 1.128 626.761 1028.151 1.028
-
5126 2 7.87 -776.25 1273.376 1.273 -682.565 -1119.694 1.120
706.25 1158.547 1.159 651.141 1068.145 1.068
-608.75 -998.606 0.999 -537.468 -881.674 0.882
805 1320.538 1.321 742.104 1217.363 1.217
-
-727.5 1193.406 1.193 -656.458 -1076.867 1.077
816.25 1338.993 1.339 750.240 1230.708 1.231
C-14

Total Total Peak
Peak Voltage
Peak Peak
(Vpk) (Vpk/m)
-
-815 1336.942 1.337 -742.880 -1218.635 1.219
796.25 1306.184 1.306 725.088 1189.449 1.189
-
-710 1164.698 1.165 -640.994 -1051.500 1.052
780 1279.528 1.280 715.068 1173.011 1.173
-
-880 1443.570 1.444 -808.718 -1326.638 1.327
733.75 1203.658 1.204 661.749 1085.547 1.086
-
5127 2 8.02 -760 1246.719 1.247 -660.924 -1084.194 1.084
806.25 1322.589 1.323 754.017 1236.904 1.237
-
-786.25 1289.780 1.290 -703.348 -1153.785 1.154
695 1140.092 1.140 632.703 1037.899 1.038
-
-668.75 1097.031 1.097 -596.749 -978.920 0.979
675 1107.283 1.107 602.880 988.976 0.989
-
-658.75 1080.627 1.081 -590.463 -968.608 0.969
698.75 1146.243 1.146 628.666 1031.277 1.031
-
-631.25 1035.515 1.036 -559.848 -918.387 0.918
703.75 1154.446 1.154 637.260 1045.375 1.045
-
-667.5 1094.980 1.095 -598.135 -981.193 0.981
637.5 1045.768 1.046 567.776 931.391 0.931
- -
3765 2 7.95 -787.5 1291.831 1.292 -721.609 1183.742 1.184
C-15
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
Total Total Peak Voltage Arc Peak Gradient
Peak Voltage Gradient Voltage Arc Peak Magni-
Voltage Gradient Magnitude at Voltage tude at
RMS at Current at Current at Current Current Gradient at Current
Kinectrics Gap Current Peak Peak Peak Peak Current Peak Peak
Test ID (ft) (kArms) (Vpk) (Vpk/m) (kVpk/m) (Vpk_arc) (Vpk_arc/m) (kVpk/m)
765 1254.921 1.255 694.317 1138.972 1.139
- -
-822.5 1349.245 1.349 -758.107 1243.614 1.244
750 1230.315 1.230 676.322 1109.452 1.109
- -
-778.75 1277.477 1.277 -713.758 1170.863 1.171
768.75 1261.073 1.261 698.966 1146.597 1.147
- -
-718.75 1179.052 1.179 -647.468 1062.120 1.062
870 1427.165 1.427 800.216 1312.690 1.313
- -
-761.25 1248.770 1.249 -691.466 1134.294 1.134
679.999 1115.484 1.115 610.814 1001.991 1.002
- -
-732.5 1201.608 1.202 -662.117 1086.150 1.086
931.25 1527.641 1.528 861.166 1412.674 1.413
- -
-856.25 1404.610 1.405 -784.669 1287.186 1.287
756.25 1240.568 1.241 690.659 1132.971 1.133
- -
-717.5 1177.001 1.177 -646.817 1061.052 1.061
692.499 1135.989 1.136 620.618 1018.075 1.018
- -
-813.75 1334.892 1.335 -748.758 1228.277 1.228
722.5 1185.203 1.185 649.421 1065.324 1.065
- -
-772.5 1267.224 1.267 -703.015 1153.240 1.153
752.5 1234.416 1.234 682.117 1118.958 1.119
C-16
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
Total Total Peak Voltage Gradient
Peak Voltage Gradient Arc Peak Arc Peak Magni-
Voltage Gradient Magnitude Voltage Voltage tude at
RMS at Current at Current at Current at Current Gradient at Current
- -
-776.25 1273.376 1.273 -705.867 1157.918 1.158
754.999 1238.515 1.239 685.215 1124.040 1.124
- -
-833.75 1367.700 1.368 -763.966 1253.225 1.253
879.999 1443.568 1.444 808.717 1326.636 1.327
- -
3766 2 7.95 -787.5 1291.831 1.292 -721.609 1183.742 1.184
765 1254.921 1.255 694.317 1138.972 1.139
- -
-822.5 1349.245 1.349 -758.107 1243.614 1.244
750 1230.315 1.230 676.322 1109.452 1.109
- -
-778.75 1277.477 1.277 -713.758 1170.863 1.171
768.75 1261.073 1.261 698.966 1146.597 1.147
- -
-718.75 1179.052 1.179 -647.468 1062.120 1.062
870 1427.165 1.427 800.216 1312.690 1.313
- -
-761.25 1248.770 1.249 -691.466 1134.294 1.134
679.999 1115.484 1.115 610.814 1001.991 1.002
- -
-732.5 1201.608 1.202 -662.117 1086.150 1.086
931.25 1527.641 1.528 861.166 1412.674 1.413
- -
-856.25 1404.610 1.405 -784.669 1287.186 1.287
756.25 1240.568 1.241 690.659 1132.971 1.133
- -
-717.5 1177.001 1.177 -646.817 1061.052 1.061
C-17
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
692.499 1135.989 1.136 620.618 1018.075 1.018
- -
-813.75 1334.892 1.335 -748.758 1228.277 1.228
722.5 1185.203 1.185 649.421 1065.324 1.065
- -
-772.5 1267.224 1.267 -703.015 1153.240 1.153
752.5 1234.416 1.234 682.117 1118.958 1.119
- -
-776.25 1273.376 1.273 -705.867 1157.918 1.158
754.999 1238.515 1.239 685.215 1124.040 1.124
- -
-833.75 1367.700 1.368 -763.966 1253.225 1.253
879.999 1443.568 1.444 808.717 1326.636 1.327
- -
3809 2 8.02 -775 1271.325 1.271 -703.119 1153.411 1.153
745 1222.113 1.222 673.868 1105.427 1.105
- -
-732.501 1201.609 1.202 -659.123 1081.238 1.081
827.5 1357.448 1.357 757.866 1243.218 1.243
- -
-750 1230.315 1.230 -674.376 1106.259 1.106
760 1246.719 1.247 689.617 1131.261 1.131
- -
-750 1230.315 1.230 -675.873 1108.716 1.109
875 1435.367 1.435 809.109 1327.279 1.327
-
-647.5 1062.172 1.062 -576.368 -945.486 0.945
682.5 1119.587 1.120 613.614 1006.585 1.007
C-18
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
- -
-735 1205.709 1.206 -662.371 1086.566 1.087
720 1181.102 1.181 648.119 1063.188 1.063
- -
-687.5 1127.789 1.128 -615.619 1009.874 1.010
650 1066.273 1.066 579.617 950.815 0.951
- -
-697.5 1144.193 1.144 -624.122 1023.822 1.024
732.5 1201.608 1.202 657.624 1078.780 1.079
- -
-715 1172.900 1.173 -642.371 1053.757 1.054
687.5 1127.789 1.128 615.619 1009.874 1.010
-
-670.001 1099.083 1.099 -593.628 -973.799 0.974
667.499 1094.979 1.095 589.628 967.238 0.967
-
-662.5 1086.778 1.087 -592.866 -972.549 0.973
710 1164.698 1.165 642.612 1054.153 1.054
- -
-707.501 1160.599 1.161 -634.123 1040.228 1.040
707.5 1160.597 1.161 638.614 1047.595 1.048
- -
3811 2 7.93 -800 1312.336 1.312 -728.119 1194.421 1.194
750 1230.315 1.230 690.099 1132.053 1.132
- -
-760 1246.719 1.247 -684.376 1122.663 1.123
740 1213.911 1.214 674.858 1107.051 1.107
- -
-747.5 1226.214 1.226 -672.624 1103.386 1.103
C-19
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
729.999 1197.505 1.198 664.857 1090.645 1.091
-
-827.5 1357.448 1.357 -759.363 -1245.674 1.246
777.5 1275.427 1.275 708.614 1162.425 1.162
-
-767.5 1259.022 1.259 -698.614 -1146.021 1.146
725 1189.304 1.189 650.873 1067.705 1.068
-
-790 1295.932 1.296 -721.114 -1182.930 1.183
737.5 1209.810 1.210 662.624 1086.982 1.087
-
-645.001 1058.073 1.058 -577.613 -947.528 0.948
797.5 1308.235 1.308 725.619 1190.320 1.190
-
-685 1123.688 1.124 -617.612 -1013.143 1.013
740 1213.911 1.214 667.370 1094.768 1.095
-
-715 1172.900 1.173 -638.627 -1047.616 1.048
745 1222.113 1.222 676.863 1110.340 1.110
-
-815 1336.942 1.337 -740.124 -1214.115 1.214
720 1181.102 1.181 647.370 1061.959 1.062
-
-717.5 1177.001 1.177 -650.112 -1066.456 1.066
715 1172.900 1.173 646.863 1061.127 1.061
-
-700 1148.294 1.148 -631.114 -1035.293 1.035
745 1222.113 1.222 672.370 1102.970 1.103
C-20
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
-
5128 2 7.94 -835 1369.751 1.370 -743.951 -1220.392 1.220
766.25 1256.972 1.257 710.063 1164.802 1.165
-
-705 1156.496 1.156 -628.687 -1031.310 1.031
683.75 1121.637 1.122 617.021 1012.173 1.012
-
-716.25 1174.951 1.175 -643.411 -1055.464 1.055
723.75 1187.254 1.187 655.463 1075.235 1.075
-
-713.75 1170.850 1.171 -646.901 -1061.189 1.061
746.25 1224.163 1.224 677.245 1110.965 1.111
-
-700 1148.294 1.148 -632.073 -1036.865 1.037
762.5 1250.820 1.251 693.495 1137.622 1.138
-
-761.25 1248.770 1.249 -688.531 -1129.479 1.129
778.75 1277.477 1.277 712.380 1168.603 1.169
-
-741.25 1215.961 1.216 -673.562 -1104.925 1.105
735 1205.709 1.206 664.557 1090.152 1.090
-
-687.5 1127.789 1.128 -620.052 -1017.146 1.017
707.5 1160.597 1.161 636.338 1043.862 1.044
-
-692.5 1135.991 1.136 -622.416 -1021.024 1.021
748.75 1228.264 1.228 686.813 1126.661 1.127
-
-755 1238.517 1.239 -680.603 -1116.475 1.116
C-21
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
710 1164.698 1.165 643.630 1055.824 1.056
-
-770 1263.123 1.263 -695.843 -1141.475 1.141
787.5 1291.831 1.292 718.974 1179.419 1.179
-
-712.5 1168.799 1.169 -644.573 -1057.370 1.057
718.75 1179.052 1.179 649.625 1065.657 1.066
-
3787 2 22.43 -857.501 1406.662 1.407 -641.859 -1052.918 1.053
842.499 1382.052 1.382 648.571 1063.928 1.064
-
-830 1361.549 1.362 -630.082 -1033.599 1.034
877.5 1439.469 1.439 678.330 1112.747 1.113
-
3806 2 21.06 -925 1517.388 1.517 -737.062 -1209.091 1.209
912.5 1496.883 1.497 723.064 1186.129 1.186
-
-865 1418.963 1.419 -683.052 -1120.492 1.120
947.5 1554.298 1.554 764.054 1253.370 1.253
-
3812 2 21.08 -852.5 1398.458 1.398 -657.823 -1079.106 1.079
872.5 1431.266 1.431 689.803 1131.567 1.132
-
-840 1377.953 1.378 -654.308 -1073.340 1.073
900 1476.378 1.476 718.052 1177.907 1.178
-
5135 2 23.55 -940 1541.995 1.542 -694.647 -1139.513 1.140
861.25 1412.812 1.413 665.734 1092.084 1.092
C-22
Total
Peak Arc Peak
Voltage Voltage
Total Peak Gradient Gradient
Voltage Magnitud Arc Peak Arc Peak Magni-
Total Peak Gradient e at Voltage Voltage tude at
RMS Voltage at at Current Current at Current Gradient at Current
-
-977.5 1603.510 1.604 -732.147 -1201.029 1.201
930 1525.591 1.526 686.444 1126.057 1.126
-
5138 2 21.8 -905 1484.580 1.485 -698.043 -1145.084 1.145
880 1443.570 1.444 692.511 1136.009 1.136
-
-873.75 1433.317 1.433 -678.774 -1113.474 1.113
891.25 1462.024 1.462 704.660 1155.938 1.156
-
3788 2 22.7 -870.001 1427.167 1.427 -653.610 -1072.195 1.072
840 1377.953 1.378 652.811 1070.884 1.071
-
-820.001 1345.146 1.345 -613.344 -1006.142 1.006
857.5 1406.660 1.407 662.074 1086.080 1.086
-
-852.5 1398.458 1.398 -655.577 -1075.421 1.075
860 1410.761 1.411 666.821 1093.866 1.094
-
-812.5 1332.841 1.333 -618.572 -1014.718 1.015
872.5 1431.266 1.431 672.582 1103.316 1.103
-
-820.001 1345.146 1.345 -625.324 -1025.794 1.026
852.5 1398.458 1.398 653.330 1071.736 1.072
-
-870.001 1427.167 1.427 -674.575 -1106.587 1.107
-
3807 2 21.13 -852.5 1398.458 1.398 -667.557 -1095.074 1.095
875 1435.367 1.435 687.062 1127.070 1.127
C-23
Total
Peak Arc Peak
Voltage Voltage
-
-865 1418.963 1.419 -685.298 -1124.177 1.124
885 1451.772 1.452 700.806 1149.615 1.150
-
-865 1418.963 1.419 -678.559 -1113.122 1.113
845 1386.155 1.386 665.298 1091.368 1.091
-
-815 1336.942 1.337 -627.062 -1028.645 1.029
854.999 1402.557 1.403 674.548 1106.543 1.107
-
-832.501 1365.651 1.366 -647.558 -1062.267 1.062
845 1386.155 1.386 660.806 1083.999 1.084
-
-835 1369.751 1.370 -650.806 -1067.595 1.068
822.5 1349.245 1.349 631.567 1036.035 1.036
-
3813 2 20.98 -825 1353.346 1.353 -642.303 -1053.647 1.054
870 1427.165 1.427 690.298 1132.379 1.132
-
-820.001 1345.146 1.345 -628.319 -1030.707 1.031
854.999 1402.557 1.403 679.790 1115.141 1.115
-
-837.5 1373.852 1.374 -645.069 -1058.185 1.058
867.499 1423.063 1.423 690.792 1133.189 1.133
-
-830 1361.549 1.362 -649.549 -1065.534 1.066
865 1418.963 1.419 686.796 1126.633 1.127
-
-860 1410.761 1.411 -675.806 -1108.605 1.109
C-24
Total
Peak Arc Peak
Voltage Voltage
860 1410.761 1.411 680.298 1115.975 1.116
-
-835 1369.751 1.370 -650.057 -1066.366 1.066
852.5 1398.458 1.398 678.788 1113.498 1.113
-
5137 2 21.94 -865 1418.963 1.419 -655.048 -1074.554 1.075
895 1468.176 1.468 714.400 1171.915 1.172
-
-933.75 1531.742 1.532 -746.561 -1224.673 1.225
890 1459.974 1.460 692.328 1135.709 1.136
-
-876.25 1437.418 1.437 -686.964 -1126.910 1.127
878.75 1441.519 1.442 681.078 1117.254 1.117
-
-828.75 1359.498 1.359 -633.175 -1038.672 1.039
906.25 1486.631 1.487 708.578 1162.365 1.162
-
-893.75 1466.125 1.466 -704.165 -1155.126 1.155
896.25 1470.226 1.470 717.147 1176.423 1.176
-
-843.75 1384.104 1.384 -644.880 -1057.874 1.058
881.25 1445.620 1.446 697.655 1144.447 1.144
-
3777 2 40.21 -1027.5 1685.531 1.686 -628.412 -1030.860 1.031
1085 1779.856 1.780 751.803 1233.272 1.233
-
-1030 1689.633 1.690 -658.616 -1080.407 1.080
1090 1788.058 1.788 738.833 1211.996 1.212
C-25
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
Total Peak Gradient Magnitude Voltage Voltage tude at
RMS Voltage at at Current at Current at Current Gradient at Current
- -
3778 2 40.6 1045.001 1714.240 1.714 -646.662 -1060.797 1.061
1012.5 1660.925 1.661 662.830 1087.320 1.087
- -
1045.001 1714.240 1.714 -688.592 -1129.581 1.130
1112.499 1824.966 1.825 761.332 1248.904 1.249
-
3804 2 42.66 -1117.5 1833.169 1.833 -697.447 -1144.106 1.144
1087.499 1783.955 1.784 724.352 1188.241 1.188
- -
1107.501 1816.767 1.817 -736.117 -1207.542 1.208
1197.5 1964.403 1.964 834.353 1368.689 1.369
- -
3814 2 39.53 1050.001 1722.443 1.722 -707.819 -1161.120 1.161
1192.499 1956.199 1.956 854.809 1402.246 1.402
-
-1090 1788.058 1.788 -747.069 -1225.507 1.226
1065 1747.047 1.747 715.330 1173.442 1.173
- -
5144 2 40.95 1006.249 1650.671 1.651 -626.479 -1027.689 1.028
1016.251 1667.078 1.667 665.533 1091.754 1.092
-
-973.75 1597.359 1.597 -606.859 -995.503 0.996
1045.001 1714.240 1.714 695.780 1141.372 1.141
- -
5145 2 40.17 1062.499 1742.945 1.743 -698.004 -1145.019 1.145
1087.501 1783.958 1.784 740.676 1215.020 1.215
- -
1124.999 1845.471 1.845 -773.083 -1268.181 1.268
C-26
Total
Peak Arc Peak
Voltage Voltage
1107.501 1816.767 1.817 752.889 1235.055 1.235
- -
3779 2 40.49 1075.001 1763.453 1.763 -678.908 -1113.695 1.114
1117.499 1833.168 1.833 783.553 1285.356 1.285
-
-1135 1861.877 1.862 -775.596 -1272.304 1.272
1185 1943.898 1.944 828.591 1359.238 1.359
- -
1075.001 1763.453 1.763 -729.824 -1197.218 1.197
1187.499 1947.997 1.948 824.352 1352.283 1.352
- -
1100.001 1804.464 1.804 -746.587 -1224.717 1.225
1132.5 1857.776 1.858 779.835 1279.257 1.279
- -
1082.501 1775.756 1.776 -711.866 -1167.759 1.168
1152.5 1890.584 1.891 798.338 1309.609 1.310
-
-1165 1911.089 1.911 -816.079 -1338.712 1.339
-
3780 2 41.49 -1115 1829.068 1.829 -727.892 -1194.049 1.194
1192.499 1956.199 1.956 840.583 1378.909 1.379
- -
1145.001 1878.282 1.878 -777.361 -1275.199 1.275
1062.499 1742.945 1.743 697.105 1143.545 1.144
-
-962.5 1578.904 1.579 -610.584 -1001.614 1.002
1017.499 1669.126 1.669 661.839 1085.694 1.086
-
-1042.5 1710.138 1.710 -682.348 -1119.337 1.119
C-27
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
1132.5 1857.776 1.858 752.880 1235.039 1.235
-
-980 1607.612 1.608 -608.616 -998.386 0.998
1107.5 1816.765 1.817 733.121 1202.627 1.203
-
-1072.5 1759.350 1.759 -710.850 -1166.093 1.166
1152.5 1890.584 1.891 784.860 1287.500 1.287
-
3805 2 41.92 -1080 1771.654 1.772 -696.636 -1142.776 1.143
1025 1681.430 1.681 669.340 1097.999 1.098
-
-1035 1697.835 1.698 -669.606 -1098.436 1.098
1082.5 1775.755 1.776 714.860 1172.671 1.173
-
-1005 1648.622 1.649 -639.606 -1049.223 1.049
1097.5 1800.361 1.800 726.865 1192.364 1.192
-
-1092.5 1792.159 1.792 -715.126 -1173.107 1.173
1107.5 1816.765 1.817 736.116 1207.540 1.208
- -
1087.501 1783.958 1.784 -731.092 -1199.299 1.199
1142.499 1874.178 1.874 763.628 1252.670 1.253
- -
1095.001 1796.261 1.796 -738.592 -1211.602 1.212
1154.999 1894.683 1.895 797.093 1307.567 1.308
- -
3815 2 41.2 1075.001 1763.453 1.763 -715.597 -1173.880 1.174
1127.5 1849.573 1.850 786.815 1290.708 1.291
C-28
Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage
- -
1087.501 1783.958 1.784 -740.078 -1214.038 1.214
990 1624.016 1.624 618.616 1014.790 1.015
-
-980 1607.612 1.608 -614.606 -1008.212 1.008
1067.499 1751.147 1.751 694.618 1139.465 1.139
-
-1022.5 1677.329 1.677 -659.353 -1081.615 1.082
1132.5 1857.776 1.858 768.604 1260.833 1.261
-
-1090 1788.058 1.788 -743.325 -1219.366 1.219
1140 1870.079 1.870 779.848 1279.278 1.279
-
-1042.5 1710.138 1.710 -683.845 -1121.793 1.122
1165 1911.089 1.911 819.823 1344.854 1.345
C-29
Table C-3
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Voltage Arc Peak Voltage
Total Peak Voltage Voltage
RMS Gradient Voltage at Gradient
Kinectrics Gap Voltage at Gradient Gradient at
Current Magnitude Current Magnitude
Test ID (ft) Current at Current Current
(kArms) at Current Peak at Current
Peak (Vpk) Peak Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
3768 4 7.62 -1468.75 -1204.683 1.205 -1415.139 -1160.711 1.161
1558.75 1278.502 1.279 1485.971 1218.808 1.219
-1518.75 -1245.694 1.246 -1455.255 -1193.615 1.194
1422.499 1166.748 1.167 1360.202 1115.652 1.116
-1621.25 -1329.765 1.330 -1557.156 -1277.195 1.277
1331.25 1091.905 1.092 1264.461 1037.123 1.037
-1703.75 -1397.433 1.397 -1638.458 -1343.880 1.344
1466.249 1202.632 1.203 1397.363 1146.131 1.146
-1491.25 -1223.138 1.223 -1425.060 -1168.848 1.169
1516.249 1243.643 1.244 1448.262 1187.879 1.188
-1438.75 -1180.077 1.180 -1370.763 -1124.313 1.124
1852.5 1519.439 1.519 1788.406 1466.869 1.467
3769 4 7.48 -1633.75 -1340.018 1.340 -1581.337 -1297.028 1.297
1405 1152.395 1.152 1328.327 1089.507 1.090
-1580 -1295.932 1.296 -1515.008 -1242.625 1.243
1630 1336.942 1.337 1561.414 1280.687 1.281
-1482.5 -1215.961 1.216 -1423.498 -1167.567 1.168
1440 1181.102 1.181 1376.805 1129.269 1.129
-1655.001 -1357.448 1.357 -1589.110 -1303.404 1.303
1542.5 1265.174 1.265 1479.305 1213.341 1.213
-1618.751 -1327.716 1.328 -1549.566 -1270.969 1.271
1513.75 1241.593 1.242 1445.763 1185.829 1.186
-1643.751 -1348.221 1.348 -1581.754 -1297.370 1.297
1447.499 1187.253 1.187 1383.405 1134.683 1.135
3791 4 6 -1927.5 -1580.955 1.581 -1893.057 -1552.704 1.553
1649.999 1353.346 1.353 1593.093 1306.671 1.307
-1360 -1115.486 1.115 -1303.094 -1068.811 1.069
1607.5 1318.488 1.318 1552.092 1273.041 1.273
-1542.5 -1265.174 1.265 -1488.589 -1220.956 1.221
C-30
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
1665 1365.650 1.366 1608.843 1319.589 1.320
-1547.5 -1269.275 1.269 -1496.585 -1227.514 1.228
1645 1349.245 1.349 1591.838 1305.642 1.306
-1822.5 -1494.833 1.495 -1776.077 -1456.756 1.457
1549.999 1271.325 1.271 1497.586 1228.335 1.228
-1535 -1259.022 1.259 -1479.592 -1213.576 1.214
1859.999 1525.590 1.526 1809.832 1484.442 1.484
3792 4 8.26 -1607.501 -1318.488 1.318 -1570.812 -1288.396 1.288
1370 1123.688 1.124 1292.878 1060.431 1.060
-1260 -1033.465 1.033 -1192.612 -978.192 0.978
1374.999 1127.788 1.128 1303.867 1069.445 1.069
-1302.5 -1068.323 1.068 -1228.373 -1007.524 1.008
1235 1012.959 1.013 1160.124 951.545 0.952
-1235 -1012.959 1.013 -1164.617 -955.230 0.955
1377.5 1129.839 1.130 1302.624 1068.425 1.068
-1192.5 -978.100 0.978 -1119.871 -918.529 0.919
1260 1033.465 1.033 1192.612 978.192 0.978
-1217.5 -998.606 0.999 -1145.619 -939.648 0.940
1229.999 1008.857 1.009 1153.626 946.215 0.946
3793 4 7.65 1457.5 1195.456 1.195 1390.861 1140.798 1.141
-1530 -1254.921 1.255 -1463.361 -1200.263 1.200
1462.499 1199.556 1.200 1390.618 1140.599 1.141
-1392.5 -1142.142 1.142 -1321.368 -1083.799 1.084
1505 1234.416 1.234 1442.853 1183.443 1.183
-1665 -1365.650 1.366 -1607.346 -1318.361 1.318
1702.5 1396.407 1.396 1635.861 1341.749 1.342
-1567.5 -1285.679 1.286 -1503.856 -1233.477 1.233
1445 1185.203 1.185 1381.356 1133.002 1.133
-1635 -1341.043 1.341 -1570.607 -1288.227 1.288
C-31
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
1672.499 1371.800 1.372 1610.352 1320.827 1.321
5129 4 7.73 1406.25 1153.420 1.153 1336.646 1096.330 1.096
-1370 -1123.688 1.124 -1304.109 -1069.643 1.070
1503.75 1233.391 1.233 1443.011 1183.572 1.184
-1310 -1074.475 1.074 -1230.332 -1009.131 1.009
1348.75 1106.258 1.106 1284.177 1053.295 1.053
-1758.75 -1442.544 1.443 -1691.661 -1387.517 1.388
1613.75 1323.614 1.324 1553.730 1274.385 1.274
-1422.5 -1166.749 1.167 -1352.057 -1108.971 1.109
1666.25 1366.675 1.367 1604.313 1315.873 1.316
-1833.75 -1504.060 1.504 -1763.187 -1446.184 1.446
1380 1131.890 1.132 1307.640 1072.539 1.073
5130 4 7.62 1336.25 1096.006 1.096 1258.499 1032.233 1.032
-1223.75 -1003.732 1.004 -1161.334 -952.537 0.953
1605 1316.437 1.316 1538.990 1262.295 1.262
-1447.5 -1187.254 1.187 -1381.010 -1132.718 1.133
1597.5 1310.285 1.310 1532.328 1256.831 1.257
-1485 -1218.012 1.218 -1417.911 -1162.985 1.163
1423.75 1167.774 1.168 1360.016 1115.498 1.115
-1738.75 -1426.140 1.426 -1669.265 -1369.148 1.369
1311.25 1075.500 1.076 1237.213 1014.774 1.015
-1390 -1140.092 1.140 -1327.224 -1088.603 1.089
5131 4 7.72 1237.5 1015.010 1.015 1162.265 953.301 0.953
-1297.5 -1064.222 1.064 -1235.563 -1013.421 1.013
1343.75 1102.157 1.102 1271.510 1042.905 1.043
-1543.75 -1266.199 1.266 -1481.813 -1215.398 1.215
1373.75 1126.763 1.127 1305.583 1070.852 1.071
-1487.5 -1220.062 1.220 -1422.807 -1167.001 1.167
1380 1131.890 1.132 1310.036 1074.505 1.075
C-32
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
-1557.5 -1277.477 1.277 -1497.360 -1228.149 1.228
1713.75 1405.635 1.406 1647.740 1351.492 1.351
-1521.25 -1247.744 1.248 -1461.469 -1198.712 1.199
1361.25 1116.511 1.117 1287.932 1056.374 1.056
5209 4 8.08 -2203.751 -1807.539 1.808 -2128.276 -1745.633 1.746
1451.25 1190.330 1.190 1382.963 1134.320 1.134
-1213.75 -995.530 0.996 -1135.280 -931.168 0.931
1395 1144.193 1.144 1323.718 1085.727 1.086
-1401.25 -1149.319 1.149 -1330.867 -1091.590 1.092
1722.5 1412.812 1.413 1655.711 1358.030 1.358
-1442.501 -1183.154 1.183 -1368.823 -1122.723 1.123
1653.75 1356.422 1.356 1583.666 1298.939 1.299
-1511.251 -1239.543 1.240 -1441.766 -1182.551 1.183
1508.75 1237.492 1.237 1440.463 1181.482 1.181
-1481.25 -1214.936 1.215 -1415.958 -1161.383 1.161
5210 4 8.53 -1872.5 -1535.843 1.536 -1793.731 -1471.236 1.471
1333.75 1093.955 1.094 1261.270 1034.506 1.035
-1261.251 -1034.491 1.034 -1186.076 -972.831 0.973
1445 1185.203 1.185 1375.815 1128.457 1.128
-1257.5 -1031.414 1.031 -1184.421 -971.474 0.971
1240 1017.060 1.017 1165.124 955.647 0.956
-1180.001 -967.849 0.968 -1112.313 -912.331 0.912
1326.25 1087.803 1.088 1252.572 1027.372 1.027
-1263.75 -1036.540 1.037 -1192.468 -978.074 0.978
1345 1103.182 1.103 1270.723 1042.260 1.042
-1208.75 -991.429 0.991 -1138.666 -933.945 0.934
1301.25 1067.298 1.067 1233.263 1011.534 1.012
3770 4 7.79 -1118.75 -917.610 0.918 -1063.641 -872.409 0.872
1451.25 1190.330 1.190 1373.679 1126.705 1.127
C-33
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
-1401.25 -1149.319 1.149 -1335.958 -1095.766 1.096
1467.5 1203.658 1.204 1401.310 1149.368 1.149
-1500 -1230.315 1.230 -1430.515 -1173.323 1.173
1441.249 1182.127 1.182 1374.460 1127.346 1.127
-1668.751 -1368.726 1.369 -1607.652 -1318.613 1.319
1658.75 1360.523 1.361 1598.550 1311.147 1.311
-1428.75 -1171.875 1.172 -1360.763 -1116.111 1.116
1328.749 1089.853 1.090 1255.970 1030.159 1.030
-1467.5 -1203.658 1.204 -1403.406 -1151.088 1.151
1368.75 1122.662 1.123 1298.966 1065.425 1.065
-1525 -1250.820 1.251 -1458.510 -1196.285 1.196
1481.25 1214.936 1.215 1409.968 1156.470 1.156
-1528.75 -1253.896 1.254 -1462.560 -1199.606 1.200
1558.75 1278.502 1.279 1493.758 1225.195 1.225
-1551.25 -1272.351 1.272 -1482.364 -1215.850 1.216
1411.25 1157.521 1.158 1339.669 1098.810 1.099
-1375 -1127.789 1.128 -1305.216 -1070.551 1.071
1281.25 1050.894 1.051 1213.862 995.622 0.996
-1523.75 -1249.795 1.250 -1458.159 -1195.996 1.196
1415 1160.597 1.161 1348.211 1105.816 1.106
-1540 -1263.123 1.263 -1472.312 -1207.605 1.208
1250 1025.262 1.025 1172.728 961.883 0.962
3771 4 8.05 -1041.25 -854.044 0.854 -984.644 -807.615 0.808
1345 1103.182 1.103 1277.911 1048.156 1.048
-1572.5 -1289.780 1.290 -1506.609 -1235.736 1.236
1283.75 1052.945 1.053 1208.575 991.285 0.991
-1280 -1049.869 1.050 -1209.317 -991.894 0.992
1245 1021.161 1.021 1175.515 964.169 0.964
-1440 -1181.102 1.181 -1370.815 -1124.356 1.124
C-34
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
1256.25 1030.389 1.030 1189.161 975.362 0.975
-1490 -1222.113 1.222 -1424.109 -1168.069 1.168
1322.5 1084.728 1.085 1249.122 1024.542 1.025
-1266.25 -1038.591 1.039 -1200.060 -984.301 0.984
1238.75 1016.035 1.016 1168.067 958.060 0.958
-1378.75 -1130.865 1.131 -1309.864 -1074.364 1.074
1512.5 1240.568 1.241 1444.513 1184.804 1.185
-1290 -1058.071 1.058 -1216.921 -998.131 0.998
1271.25 1042.692 1.043 1201.166 985.209 0.985
-1281.25 -1050.894 1.051 -1208.471 -991.200 0.991
1242.499 1019.110 1.019 1173.314 962.364 0.962
-1658.75 -1360.523 1.361 -1591.062 -1305.005 1.305
1293.75 1061.147 1.061 1221.570 1001.944 1.002
-1327.5 -1088.829 1.089 -1260.112 -1033.556 1.034
1425 1168.799 1.169 1355.515 1111.807 1.112
-1447.5 -1187.254 1.187 -1375.320 -1128.051 1.128
1221.25 1001.681 1.002 1148.770 942.233 0.942
3794 4 8.01 -1887.501 -1548.147 1.548 -1835.088 -1505.157 1.505
1445 1185.203 1.185 1369.375 1123.175 1.123
-1612.501 -1322.589 1.323 -1542.118 -1264.860 1.265
1390 1140.092 1.140 1321.114 1083.591 1.084
-1305 -1070.374 1.070 -1235.366 -1013.259 1.013
1390 1140.092 1.140 1318.868 1081.749 1.082
-1477.5 -1211.860 1.212 -1404.871 -1152.289 1.152
1359.999 1115.485 1.115 1294.108 1061.441 1.061
-1567.5 -1285.679 1.286 -1498.614 -1229.178 1.229
1390 1140.092 1.140 1322.612 1084.819 1.085
-1325.001 -1086.779 1.087 -1261.357 -1034.577 1.035
1572.499 1289.779 1.290 1502.865 1232.664 1.233
C-35
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
-1332.501 -1092.931 1.093 -1261.369 -1034.587 1.035
1599.999 1312.335 1.312 1535.606 1259.519 1.260
-1342.5 -1101.132 1.101 -1267.624 -1039.718 1.040
1374.999 1127.788 1.128 1300.872 1066.988 1.067
-1527.5 -1252.871 1.253 -1452.624 -1191.457 1.191
1432.5 1174.951 1.175 1363.614 1118.450 1.118
-1355 -1111.385 1.111 -1278.627 -1048.742 1.049
1307.5 1072.425 1.072 1234.122 1012.239 1.012
-1322.5 -1084.728 1.085 -1250.619 -1025.770 1.026
1332.5 1092.930 1.093 1260.619 1033.972 1.034
-1517.5 -1244.669 1.245 -1449.363 -1188.782 1.189
1359.999 1115.485 1.115 1289.616 1057.756 1.058
3795 4 7.81 -2012.501 -1650.673 1.651 -1957.093 -1605.227 1.605
1562.499 1281.577 1.282 1485.377 1218.321 1.218
-1487.501 -1220.063 1.220 -1417.118 -1162.334 1.162
1412.499 1158.546 1.159 1341.367 1100.203 1.100
-1460 -1197.507 1.198 -1388.119 -1138.549 1.139
1392.5 1142.142 1.142 1322.117 1084.413 1.084
-1580 -1295.932 1.296 -1517.104 -1244.344 1.244
1452.5 1191.355 1.191 1378.373 1130.555 1.131
-1420.001 -1164.699 1.165 -1347.372 -1105.128 1.105
1480 1213.911 1.214 1409.617 1156.182 1.156
-1472.5 -1207.759 1.208 -1405.112 -1152.487 1.152
1342.5 1101.132 1.101 1269.870 1041.560 1.042
-1367.5 -1121.637 1.122 -1306.851 -1071.892 1.072
1527.5 1252.871 1.253 1459.363 1196.984 1.197
-1832.501 -1503.036 1.503 -1769.605 -1451.448 1.451
1370 1123.688 1.124 1299.617 1065.959 1.066
-1867.5 -1531.742 1.532 -1800.861 -1477.084 1.477
C-36
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
1412.499 1158.546 1.159 1335.377 1095.289 1.095
-1612.501 -1322.589 1.323 -1551.103 -1272.230 1.272
1517.5 1244.669 1.245 1443.373 1183.869 1.184
-1680 -1377.953 1.378 -1608.868 -1319.610 1.320
1447.499 1187.253 1.187 1379.362 1131.366 1.131
-1540 -1263.123 1.263 -1474.858 -1209.693 1.210
1434.999 1177.000 1.177 1362.369 1117.429 1.117
3789 4 22.64 1357.5 1113.435 1.113 1153.089 945.775 0.946
-1225.001 -1004.758 1.005 -1029.575 -844.468 0.844
1260 1033.465 1.033 1057.835 867.647 0.868
3796 4 20.64 -1322.5 -1084.728 1.085 -1214.679 -996.292 0.996
1424.999 1168.798 1.169 1242.302 1018.949 1.019
-1270.001 -1041.667 1.042 -1096.289 -899.187 0.899
1262.499 1035.514 1.036 1072.315 879.523 0.880
3797 4 20.42 1447.499 1187.253 1.187 1256.566 1030.648 1.031
-1372.5 -1125.738 1.126 -1194.296 -979.573 0.980
1315 1078.576 1.079 1142.786 937.324 0.937
5132 4 22.28 -1582.5 -1297.982 1.298 -1478.153 -1212.396 1.212
1553.75 1274.401 1.274 1342.301 1100.969 1.101
-1271.25 -1042.692 1.043 -1081.964 -887.438 0.887
1275 1045.768 1.046 1077.687 883.930 0.884
5133 4 22.17 -1143.75 -938.115 0.938 -1032.095 -846.535 0.847
1420 1164.698 1.165 1192.857 978.393 0.978
-1322.5 -1084.728 1.085 -1139.324 -934.485 0.934
1291.25 1059.096 1.059 1096.573 899.420 0.899
5207 4 22.94 -1220 -1000.656 1.001 -1057.370 -867.265 0.867
1287.5 1056.020 1.056 1089.229 893.396 0.893
-1181.25 -968.873 0.969 -973.694 -798.634 0.799
1228.75 1007.833 1.008 1033.175 847.420 0.847
C-37
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
5208 4 22.58 -1560 -1279.528 1.280 -1399.167 -1147.611 1.148
1265 1037.566 1.038 1066.429 874.696 0.875
-1173.751 -962.722 0.963 -969.789 -795.431 0.795
1182.5 969.898 0.970 992.316 813.907 0.814
3790 4 22.64 1297.499 1064.222 1.064 1087.847 892.263 0.892
-1267.5 -1039.616 1.040 -1072.074 -879.326 0.879
1257.5 1031.414 1.031 1043.355 855.770 0.856
-1225.001 -1004.758 1.005 -1016.098 -833.413 0.833
1242.499 1019.110 1.019 1050.068 861.276 0.861
-1220.001 -1000.657 1.001 -1028.319 -843.438 0.843
1207.5 990.404 0.990 1010.577 828.885 0.829
-1152.5 -945.292 0.945 -944.345 -774.562 0.775
1177.5 965.797 0.966 981.325 804.893 0.805
-1250.001 -1025.263 1.025 -1062.063 -871.115 0.871
1207.5 990.404 0.990 1003.838 823.358 0.823
3798 4 21.57 1499.999 1230.314 1.230 1309.066 1073.709 1.074
-1360 -1115.486 1.115 -1179.549 -967.478 0.967
1287.499 1056.020 1.056 1092.822 896.344 0.896
-1202.5 -986.302 0.986 -1019.803 -836.453 0.836
1254.999 1029.363 1.029 1079.790 885.654 0.886
-1125.001 -922.737 0.923 -932.570 -764.903 0.765
1147.5 941.191 0.941 964.803 791.341 0.791
-1152.5 -945.292 0.945 -959.321 -786.844 0.787
1222.5 1002.707 1.003 1030.818 845.487 0.845
-1132.501 -928.889 0.929 -936.327 -767.984 0.768
1117.499 916.584 0.917 917.581 752.609 0.753
3799 4 21.85 1449.999 1189.304 1.189 1253.076 1027.785 1.028
-1442.5 -1183.153 1.183 -1259.054 -1032.689 1.033
1384.999 1135.990 1.136 1191.071 976.928 0.977
C-38
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
-1320.001 -1082.678 1.083 -1130.565 -927.301 0.927
1267.499 1039.615 1.040 1078.812 884.852 0.885
-1200.001 -984.253 0.984 -1003.078 -822.734 0.823
1222.5 1002.707 1.003 1035.311 849.172 0.849
-1215 -996.555 0.997 -1018.077 -835.037 0.835
1190 976.050 0.976 993.077 814.531 0.815
-1190 -976.050 0.976 -1004.308 -823.744 0.824
1254.999 1029.363 1.029 1074.548 881.355 0.881
5134 4 22.24 1522.5 1248.770 1.249 1299.909 1066.199 1.066
-1393.75 -1143.168 1.143 -1216.205 -997.543 0.998
1331.25 1091.905 1.092 1139.688 934.783 0.935
-1268.75 -1040.641 1.041 -1073.833 -880.769 0.881
1257.5 1031.414 1.031 1065.459 873.900 0.874
-1275 -1045.768 1.046 -1087.870 -892.282 0.892
1256.25 1030.389 1.030 1066.485 874.742 0.875
-1223.75 -1003.732 1.004 -1027.995 -843.172 0.843
1188.75 975.025 0.975 990.120 812.106 0.812
-1187.5 -973.999 0.974 -1002.168 -821.988 0.822
1297.5 1064.222 1.064 1119.715 918.401 0.918
3775 4 40.2 -1360 -1115.486 1.115 -1099.432 -901.765 0.902
1587.499 1302.083 1.302 1218.362 999.312 0.999
-1425.001 -1168.800 1.169 -1082.819 -888.139 0.888
1459.999 1197.506 1.198 1091.610 895.350 0.895
3776 4 40.33 1470 1205.709 1.206 1099.365 901.710 0.902
-1397.5 -1146.243 1.146 -1054.569 -864.968 0.865
1452.5 1191.355 1.191 1099.086 901.482 0.901
3800 4 41.31 -1525.001 -1250.821 1.251 -1352.038 -1108.955 1.109
1474.999 1209.809 1.210 1098.374 900.897 0.901
-1347.5 -1105.233 1.105 -993.338 -814.746 0.815
C-39
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
1372.499 1125.737 1.126 1018.337 835.250 0.835
3801 4 41.01 1620 1328.740 1.329 1232.892 1011.231 1.011
-1412.501 -1158.547 1.159 -1075.560 -882.185 0.882
1312.499 1076.525 1.077 959.834 787.266 0.787
5146 4 41.21 -1368.749 -1122.662 1.123 -1203.723 -987.305 0.987
1618.75 1327.715 1.328 1242.874 1019.417 1.019
-1456.249 -1194.430 1.194 -1110.623 -910.944 0.911
1432.501 1174.952 1.175 1071.300 878.691 0.879
5147 4 40.82 -1447.5 -1187.254 1.187 -1300.744 -1066.883 1.067
1656.25 1358.473 1.358 1289.059 1057.299 1.057
-1524.999 -1250.819 1.251 -1181.170 -968.807 0.969
1428.751 1171.876 1.172 1073.241 880.283 0.880
3773 4 38.63 -1510 -1238.517 1.239 -1381.963 -1133.499 1.133
1432.5 1174.951 1.175 1060.367 869.724 0.870
-1375.001 -1127.790 1.128 -1066.513 -874.765 0.875
1380 1131.890 1.132 1037.069 850.614 0.851
-1362.501 -1117.537 1.118 -1031.550 -846.088 0.846
1357.5 1113.435 1.113 1023.554 839.529 0.840
-1342.5 -1101.132 1.101 -1020.534 -837.052 0.837
1305 1070.374 1.070 961.320 788.484 0.788
-1255 -1029.364 1.029 -904.582 -741.947 0.742
1337.499 1097.030 1.097 990.075 812.070 0.812
-1450.001 -1189.305 1.189 -1125.789 -923.383 0.923
1365 1119.587 1.120 1011.586 829.713 0.830
3774 4 38.91 -1457.501 -1195.457 1.195 -1211.909 -994.020 0.994
1445 1185.203 1.185 1079.606 885.504 0.886
-1322.5 -1084.728 1.085 -992.298 -813.893 0.814
1372.499 1125.737 1.126 1031.814 846.304 0.846
-1410 -1156.496 1.156 -1084.290 -889.346 0.889
C-40
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
1390 1140.092 1.140 1047.069 858.816 0.859
-1417.5 -1162.648 1.163 -1088.047 -892.427 0.892
1459.999 1197.506 1.198 1122.309 920.529 0.921
-1457.501 -1195.457 1.195 -1124.304 -922.165 0.922
1480 1213.911 1.214 1151.295 944.304 0.944
-1495.001 -1226.215 1.226 -1152.819 -945.553 0.946
1449.999 1189.304 1.189 1110.812 911.099 0.911
3802 4 39.42 1702.5 1396.407 1.396 1350.584 1107.762 1.108
-1410 -1156.496 1.156 -1051.345 -862.324 0.862
1390 1140.092 1.140 1051.561 862.501 0.863
-1375.001 -1127.790 1.128 -1022.336 -838.530 0.839
1395 1144.193 1.144 1061.803 870.901 0.871
-1440 -1181.102 1.181 -1098.567 -901.055 0.901
1409.999 1156.495 1.156 1066.319 874.606 0.875
-1407.501 -1154.446 1.154 -1077.299 -883.611 0.884
1412.499 1158.546 1.159 1069.568 877.270 0.877
-1437.501 -1179.053 1.179 -1106.550 -907.603 0.908
3803 4 39.87 1642.5 1347.195 1.347 1261.382 1034.598 1.035
-1427.5 -1170.850 1.171 -1112.273 -912.298 0.912
1437.499 1179.051 1.179 1081.090 886.721 0.887
-1307.501 -1072.425 1.072 -957.831 -785.623 0.786
1299.999 1066.272 1.066 969.048 794.823 0.795
-1385 -1135.991 1.136 -1049.557 -860.857 0.861
1380 1131.890 1.132 1032.576 846.929 0.847
-1365 -1119.587 1.120 -1008.591 -827.257 0.827
1365 1119.587 1.120 1007.843 826.643 0.827
-1447.5 -1187.254 1.187 -1108.313 -909.049 0.909
1417.5 1162.648 1.163 1076.067 882.600 0.883
C-41
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
5148 4 40.4 -1358.75 -1114.460 1.114 -1222.476 -1002.687 1.003
1613.751 1323.615 1.324 1250.454 1025.635 1.026
-1419.999 -1164.697 1.165 -1084.855 -889.809 0.890
1432.501 1174.952 1.175 1076.392 882.867 0.883
-1287.499 -1056.020 1.056 -928.994 -761.970 0.762
1310.001 1074.476 1.074 955.689 783.866 0.784
-1337.499 -1097.030 1.097 -984.385 -807.402 0.807
1306.251 1071.400 1.071 956.132 784.229 0.784
-1349.999 -1107.283 1.107 -999.281 -819.620 0.820
1293.751 1061.147 1.061 944.530 774.713 0.775
-1294.999 -1062.171 1.062 -937.392 -768.859 0.769
1316.251 1079.602 1.080 960.741 788.009 0.788
C-42
Table C-4
Total Peak Arc Peak

Total Peak Arc Peak
Total Peak Voltage Arc Peak Voltage
Voltage Voltage
RMS Voltage at Gradient Voltage at Gradient
Kinectrics Gap Gradient Gradient at
Current Current Magnitude Current Magnitude
Test ID (ft) at Current Current
(kArms) Peak at Current Peak at Current
Peak Peak
(Vpk) Peak (Vpk_arc) Peak
(Vpk/m) (Vpk_arc/m)
(kVpk/m) (kVpk/m)
5149 5 38.47 1650 1082.677 1.083 1305.572 856.674 0.857

-1622.5 -1064.633 1.065 -1287.955 -845.115 0.845
1605.001 1053.150 1.053 1267.461 831.667 0.832
5150 5 36.92 1657.501 1087.599 1.088 1351.409 886.751 0.887
-1582.5 -1038.385 1.038 -1251.548 -821.226 0.821
1528.751 1003.117 1.003 1195.704 784.582 0.785
C-43
Appendix D: Determination of Parameter
Table D-1
Determination of Parameter
Incident
Energy Percentage
Arc at of Arc
KIN Arc Voltage Arc Arc Arc
Gap Current 1 ft Flux Flux Power on 1
Test Duration Gradient Voltage Voltage Power
(ft) (kA Working (cal/scm2) (J/scm2) cm2 one ft
ID (ms) (kV/m) (V) (V rms) (W = J/s)
rms) Distance
Away ()
(cal /
cm2)
3757 1 7.83 101.5 3.8 37.44 156.64 1.477 450 400 3131508 0.005002%
3757 1 7.83 101.5 4.4 43.35 181.38 1.477 450 400 3131508 0.005792%
3757 1 7.83 101.5 4.5 44.33 185.50 1.477 450 400 3131508 0.005924%
3758 1 7.85 101.5 3.8 37.44 156.64 1.477 450 400 3140249 0.004988%
3758 1 7.85 101.5 4 39.41 164.89 1.477 450 400 3140249 0.005251%
3758 1 7.85 101.5 4.5 44.33 185.50 1.477 450 400 3140249 0.005907%
3761 1 7.88 201.5 6 29.78 124.59 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.003951%
5123 1 7.88 201 6.4 31.84 133.22 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.004225%
5124 1 7.88 201 6.6 32.84 137.39 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.004357%
5123 1 7.88 201 7.2 35.82 149.87 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.004753%
3761 1 7.88 201.5 7.5 37.22 155.73 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.004939%
5124 1 7.88 201 7.9 39.30 164.45 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.005215%
5123 1 7.88 201 8.3 41.29 172.77 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.005479%
5124 1 7.88 201 8.6 42.79 179.02 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.005677%
3761 1 7.88 201.5 8.7 43.18 180.65 1.478 450 400 3153369 0.005729%
5122 1 7.9 101 3.6 35.64 149.13 1.478 451 400 3162120 0.004716%
5122 1 7.9 101 3.6 35.64 149.13 1.478 451 400 3162120 0.004716%
5122 1 7.9 101 3.9 38.61 161.56 1.478 451 400 3162120 0.005109%
3759 1 7.91 101.5 4 39.41 164.89 1.478 451 400 3166497 0.005207%
3759 1 7.91 101.5 4.1 40.39 169.01 1.478 451 400 3166497 0.005337%
3759 1 7.91 101.5 4.7 46.31 193.74 1.478 451 400 3166497 0.006118%
5121 1 7.94 101 3.2 31.68 132.56 1.479 451 400 3179633 0.004169%
5121 1 7.94 101 3.6 35.64 149.13 1.479 451 400 3179633 0.004690%
5121 1 7.94 101 4.1 40.59 169.85 1.479 451 400 3179633 0.005342%
D-1
Table D-1 (continued)
Incident
Energy at Percentage of
Arc Arc 1 ft Voltage Arc Arc Arc Power on
KIN Gap Flux Flux Arc Power
Current Duration Working Gradient Voltage Voltage 2
1 cm one ft
Test ID (ft) (cal/scm2) (J/scm2) (W = J/s)
(kA rms) (ms) Distance (kV/m) (V) (V rms)
Away ()
(cal /
cm2)
3760 1 7.98 201.5 8 39.70 166.11 1.479 451 401 3197162 0.005196%
3760 1 7.98 201.5 8.4 41.69 174.42 1.479 451 401 3197162 0.005455%
3760 1 7.98 201.5 8.5 42.18 176.50 1.479 451 401 3197162 0.005520%
5140 1 21.45 33.3 3.4 102.10 427.20 1.715 523 464 9960954 0.004289%
5140 1 21.45 33.3 3.7 111.11 464.89 1.715 523 464 9960954 0.004667%
5140 1 21.45 33.3 4.9 147.15 615.66 1.715 523 464 9960954 0.006181%
5139 1 21.76 33.3 3.1 93.09 389.50 1.720 524 466 10136829 0.003842%
5139 1 21.76 33.3 4.6 138.14 577.97 1.720 524 466 10136829 0.005702%
5139 1 21.76 33.3 4.9 147.15 615.66 1.720 524 466 10136829 0.006074%
5141 1 21.98 100.3 7.8 77.77 325.38 1.724 525 467 10262195 0.003171%
5141 1 21.98 100.3 13 129.61 542.29 1.724 525 467 10262195 0.005284%
5141 1 21.98 100.3 17.1 170.49 713.32 1.724 525 467 10262195 0.006951%
3786 1 22.15 33.3 3.1 93.09 389.50 1.727 526 468 10359382 0.003760%
3786 1 22.15 33.3 3.7 111.11 464.89 1.727 526 468 10359382 0.004488%
3786 1 22.15 33.3 5.7 171.17 716.18 1.727 526 468 10359382 0.006913%
3785 1 23.22 100 8.4 84.00 351.46 1.746 532 473 10977369 0.003202%
3785 1 23.22 100 12.5 125.00 523.00 1.746 532 473 10977369 0.004764%
3785 1 23.22 100 20.6 206.00 861.90 1.746 532 473 10977369 0.007852%
5142 1 40.18 33.3 6.8 204.20 854.39 2.042 622 553 22219585 0.003845%
5142 1 40.18 33.3 7.7 231.23 967.47 2.042 622 553 22219585 0.004354%
5142 1 40.18 33.3 8.1 243.24 1017.73 2.042 622 553 22219585 0.004580%
5143 1 40.3 33.3 6.6 198.20 829.26 2.044 623 554 22308827 0.003717%
5143 1 40.3 33.3 7.1 213.21 892.08 2.044 623 554 22308827 0.003999%
5143 1 40.3 33.3 10.8 324.32 1356.97 2.044 623 554 22308827 0.006083%
3781 1 40.31 33.4 8.6 257.49 1077.32 2.044 623 554 22316270 0.004827%
3781 1 40.31 33.4 9.4 281.44 1177.53 2.044 623 554 22316270 0.005277%
3784 1 40.69 100 21.6 216.00 903.74 2.051 625 555 22599803 0.003999%
3784 1 40.69 100 22.5 225.00 941.40 2.051 625 555 22599803 0.004166%
3784 1 40.69 100 24.7 247.00 1033.45 2.051 625 555 22599803 0.004573%
3782 1 40.93 33.3 8.8 264.26 1105.68 2.055 626 557 22779581 0.004854%
3782 1 40.93 33.3 9.4 282.28 1181.07 2.055 626 557 22779581 0.005185%
3783 1 41.36 100 26.2 262.00 1096.21 2.063 629 559 23103046 0.004745%
D-2
Incident
1 cm one ft
Away ()
(cal /
cm2)
3783 1 41.36 100 27.8 278.00 1163.15 2.063 629 559 23103046 0.005035%
3783 1 41.36 100 33 330.00 1380.72 2.063 629 559 23103046 0.005976%
5125 2 7.51 101 3.9 38.61 161.56 1.192 726 645 4847125 0.003333%
5125 2 7.51 101 4 39.60 165.70 1.192 726 645 4847125 0.003419%
5125 2 7.51 101 4.1 40.59 169.85 1.192 726 645 4847125 0.003504%
3764 2 7.76 100.3 3.8 37.89 158.52 1.192 726 645 5008628 0.003165%
3764 2 7.76 100.3 4.6 45.86 191.89 1.192 726 645 5008628 0.003831%
3764 2 7.76 100.3 5 49.85 208.57 1.192 726 645 5008628 0.004164%
3763 2 7.85 99.7 4.2 42.13 176.26 1.192 726 645 5066771 0.003479%
3763 2 7.85 99.7 5 50.15 209.83 1.192 726 645 5066771 0.004141%
3763 2 7.85 99.7 6.2 62.19 260.19 1.192 726 645 5066771 0.005135%
5126 2 7.87 101 3.9 38.61 161.56 1.192 726 645 5079692 0.003181%
5126 2 7.87 101 4.3 42.57 178.13 1.192 726 645 5079692 0.003507%
5126 2 7.87 101 5.7 56.44 236.13 1.192 726 645 5079692 0.004648%
5128 2 7.94 201 6.9 34.33 143.63 1.192 726 645 5124916 0.002803%
5128 2 7.94 201 8.1 40.30 168.61 1.192 726 645 5124916 0.003290%
5128 2 7.94 201 10.3 51.24 214.40 1.192 726 645 5124916 0.004184%
3766 2 7.95 200 8 40.00 167.36 1.192 726 645 5131376 0.003262%
3765 2 7.95 200 8.8 44.00 184.10 1.192 726 645 5131376 0.003588%
3765 2 7.95 200 9.3 46.50 194.56 1.192 726 645 5131376 0.003791%
3765 2 7.95 200 9.7 48.50 202.92 1.192 726 645 5131376 0.003955%
3766 2 7.95 200 10.1 50.50 211.29 1.192 726 645 5131376 0.004118%
3766 2 7.95 200 11.2 56.00 234.30 1.192 726 645 5131376 0.004566%
3808 2 7.98 100 6.5 65.00 271.96 1.192 726 645 5150758 0.005280%
5127 2 8.02 101 4.1 40.59 169.85 1.192 726 645 5176601 0.003281%
5127 2 8.02 101 4.5 44.55 186.42 1.192 726 645 5176601 0.003601%
5127 2 8.02 101 4.8 47.52 198.84 1.192 726 645 5176601 0.003841%
3809 2 8.02 200.5 10.1 50.37 210.77 1.192 726 645 5176601 0.004071%
3762 2 8.78 106 4.9 46.23 193.41 1.192 727 646 5667659 0.003413%
3762 2 8.78 106 5.8 54.72 228.94 1.192 727 646 5667659 0.004039%
3762 2 8.78 106 7.4 69.81 292.09 1.192 727 646 5667659 0.005154%
3806 2 21.06 33.7 5 148.37 620.77 1.194 728 646 13614281 0.004560%
D-3
Incident
1 cm one ft
Away ()
(cal /
cm2)
5136 2 21.41 33.3 3.4 102.10 427.20 1.194 728 646 13841109 0.003086%
5136 2 21.41 33.3 4.1 123.12 515.15 1.194 728 646 13841109 0.003722%
5136 2 21.41 33.3 5.1 153.15 640.79 1.194 728 646 13841109 0.004630%
5138 2 21.8 33.3 3.6 108.11 452.32 1.194 728 647 14093881 0.003209%
5138 2 21.8 33.3 4.3 129.13 540.28 1.194 728 647 14093881 0.003833%
5138 2 21.8 33.3 5 150.15 628.23 1.194 728 647 14093881 0.004457%
5137 2 21.9 99.7 8.7 87.26 365.10 1.194 728 647 14158699 0.002579%
5137 2 21.9 99.7 10.8 108.32 453.23 1.194 728 647 14158699 0.003201%
5137 2 21.9 99.7 16.9 169.51 709.22 1.194 728 647 14158699 0.005009%
3787 2 22.43 33.3 4.5 135.14 565.41 1.194 728 647 14502255 0.003899%
3787 2 22.43 33.3 4.5 135.14 565.41 1.194 728 647 14502255 0.003899%
3787 2 22.43 33.3 7.9 237.24 992.60 1.194 728 647 14502255 0.006844%
3788 2 22.7 100 11.5 115.00 481.16 1.194 728 647 14677291 0.003278%
3788 2 22.7 100 14.2 142.00 594.13 1.194 728 647 14677291 0.004048%
3788 2 22.7 100 16.7 167.00 698.73 1.194 728 647 14677291 0.004761%
5135 2 23.55 33 4.3 130.30 545.19 1.194 728 647 15228402 0.003580%
5135 2 23.55 33 4.9 148.48 621.26 1.194 728 647 15228402 0.004080%
5135 2 23.55 33 5.4 163.64 684.65 1.194 728 647 15228402 0.004496%
5145 2 40.17 33.3 6.6 198.20 829.26 1.196 729 648 26026299 0.003186%
5145 2 40.17 33.3 6.7 201.20 841.83 1.196 729 648 26026299 0.003235%
5145 2 40.17 33.3 8.3 249.25 1042.86 1.196 729 648 26026299 0.004007%
3777 2 40.21 33.4 5.6 167.66 701.51 1.196 729 648 26052338 0.002693%
3777 2 40.21 33.4 9.4 281.44 1177.53 1.196 729 648 26052338 0.004520%
3777 2 40.21 33.4 10.1 302.40 1265.22 1.196 729 648 26052338 0.004856%
3779 2 40.49 99.9 19.9 199.20 833.45 1.196 729 648 26234613 0.003177%
3779 2 40.49 99.9 20.1 201.20 841.83 1.196 729 648 26234613 0.003209%
3778 2 40.6 33.4 8.1 242.51 1014.68 1.196 729 648 26306224 0.003857%
3778 2 40.6 33.4 9.1 272.46 1139.95 1.196 729 648 26306224 0.004333%
3778 2 40.6 33.4 11.7 350.30 1465.65 1.196 729 648 26306224 0.005572%
5144 2 40.95 33.3 7.7 231.23 967.47 1.196 729 648 26534091 0.003646%
5144 2 40.95 33.3 9.3 279.28 1168.50 1.196 729 648 26534091 0.004404%
5144 2 40.95 33.3 10.7 321.32 1344.41 1.196 729 648 26534091 0.005067%
D-4
Incident
1 cm one ft
Away ()
(cal /
cm2)
3780 2 41.49 99.9 28 280.28 1172.69 1.196 729 648 26885693 0.004362%
3780 2 41.49 99.9 28.4 284.28 1189.45 1.196 729 648 26885693 0.004424%
3780 2 41.49 99.9 29.8 298.30 1248.08 1.196 729 648 26885693 0.004642%
3805 2 41.92 100.3 34.7 345.96 1447.51 1.196 729 648 27165704 0.005328%
3804 2 42.66 33.3 9.7 291.29 1218.76 1.197 729 648 27647650 0.004408%
3791 4 6 100 7 70.00 292.88 1.147 1398 1242 7453561 0.003929%
3769 4 7.48 100 7.1 71.00 297.06 1.136 1385 1231 9205735 0.003227%
3769 4 7.48 100 7.5 75.00 313.80 1.136 1385 1231 9205735 0.003409%
3769 4 7.48 100 8.4 84.00 351.46 1.136 1385 1231 9205735 0.003818%
5130 4 7.62 101 5.5 54.46 227.84 1.135 1384 1230 9369712 0.002432%
5130 4 7.62 101 5.6 55.45 231.98 1.135 1384 1230 9369712 0.002476%
5130 4 7.62 101 6.2 61.39 256.84 1.135 1384 1230 9369712 0.002741%
3768 4 7.62 99.5 7.3 73.37 306.97 1.135 1384 1230 9369712 0.003276%
3768 4 7.62 99.5 7.7 77.39 323.79 1.135 1384 1230 9369712 0.003456%
3768 4 7.62 99.5 8 80.40 336.40 1.135 1384 1230 9369712 0.003590%
3793 4 7.65 100 7 70.00 292.88 1.135 1384 1229 9404810 0.003114%
5131 4 7.72 101 5.1 50.50 211.27 1.134 1383 1229 9486650 0.002227%
5131 4 7.72 101 5.5 54.46 227.84 1.134 1383 1229 9486650 0.002402%
5131 4 7.72 101 7 69.31 289.98 1.134 1383 1229 9486650 0.003057%
3770 4 7.79 201.2 13.9 69.09 289.05 1.134 1382 1228 9568415 0.003021%
3770 4 7.79 201.2 14.3 71.07 297.37 1.134 1382 1228 9568415 0.003108%
3770 4 7.79 201.2 15.9 79.03 330.64 1.134 1382 1228 9568415 0.003456%
3795 4 7.81 200 15.1 75.50 315.89 1.134 1382 1228 9591762 0.003293%
3794 4 8.01 200 14.7 73.50 307.52 1.132 1381 1227 9824891 0.003130%
3771 4 8.05 200.5 14.6 72.82 304.67 1.132 1380 1226 9871442 0.003086%
3771 4 8.05 200.5 15 74.81 313.02 1.132 1380 1226 9871442 0.003171%
3771 4 8.05 200.5 15.4 76.81 321.36 1.132 1380 1226 9871442 0.003255%
5209 4 8.08 100 7.2 72.00 301.25 1.132 1380 1226 9906339 0.003041%
3792 4 8.26 100 7.1 71.00 297.06 1.131 1378 1225 10115424 0.002937%
5210 4 8.53 100 5.6 56.00 234.30 1.129 1376 1223 10428105 0.002247%
3797 4 20.42 33.3 5.2 156.16 653.36 1.043 1272 1130 23069606 0.002832%
3796 4 20.64 33.3 4.7 141.14 590.53 1.041 1270 1128 23282725 0.002536%
D-5
Incident
1 cm one ft
Away ()
(cal /
cm2)
3798 4 21.57 100 18 180.00 753.12 1.035 1261 1121 24175292 0.003115%
3799 4 21.85 100 26 260.00 1087.84 1.033 1259 1119 24441379 0.004451%
5133 4 22.17 33 3.8 115.15 481.79 1.030 1256 1116 24743980 0.001947%
5133 4 22.17 33 3.9 118.18 494.47 1.030 1256 1116 24743980 0.001998%
5133 4 22.17 33 4.1 124.24 519.83 1.030 1256 1116 24743980 0.002101%
5134 4 22.24 101 10.5 103.96 434.97 1.030 1256 1116 24809961 0.001753%
5134 4 22.24 101 12.5 123.76 517.82 1.030 1256 1116 24809961 0.002087%
5134 4 22.24 101 13.6 134.65 563.39 1.030 1256 1116 24809961 0.002271%
5132 4 22.28 33 4.4 133.33 557.87 1.030 1255 1115 24847630 0.002245%
5132 4 22.28 33 4.6 139.39 583.22 1.030 1255 1115 24847630 0.002347%
5132 4 22.28 33 4.7 142.42 595.90 1.030 1255 1115 24847630 0.002398%
5208 4 22.58 33.3 4.9 147.15 615.66 1.027 1253 1113 25129352 0.002450%
3789 4 22.64 33.3 5.4 162.16 678.49 1.027 1252 1112 25185528 0.002694%
3789 4 22.64 33.3 5.4 162.16 678.49 1.027 1252 1112 25185528 0.002694%
3789 4 22.64 33.3 6.2 186.19 779.00 1.027 1252 1112 25185528 0.003093%
3790 4 22.64 100 13.3 133.00 556.47 1.027 1252 1112 25185528 0.002209%
3790 4 22.64 100 15.1 151.00 631.78 1.027 1252 1112 25185528 0.002509%
3790 4 22.64 100 23.5 235.00 983.24 1.027 1252 1112 25185528 0.003904%
5207 4 22.94 33.3 4.7 141.14 590.53 1.025 1249 1110 25465566 0.002319%
3773 4 38.63 98.3 19.9 202.44 847.02 0.912 1112 988 38154122 0.002220%
3773 4 38.63 98.3 26.1 265.51 1110.91 0.912 1112 988 38154122 0.002912%
3773 4 38.63 98.3 28.8 292.98 1225.83 0.912 1112 988 38154122 0.003213%
3774 4 38.9 100.2 22.4 223.55 935.35 0.910 1109 986 38338852 0.002440%
3774 4 38.9 100.2 25.6 255.49 1068.97 0.910 1109 986 38338852 0.002788%
3802 4 39.42 98.5 32.7 331.98 1389.00 0.906 1105 982 38691422 0.003590%
3775 4 40.2 33.4 8.9 266.47 1114.90 0.900 1098 975 39212367 0.002843%
3775 4 40.2 33.4 10 299.40 1252.69 0.900 1098 975 39212367 0.003195%
3775 4 40.2 33.4 12.4 371.26 1553.34 0.900 1098 975 39212367 0.003961%
3776 4 40.33 33.4 7.1 212.57 889.41 0.900 1097 974 39298268 0.002263%
3776 4 40.33 33.4 8.7 260.48 1089.84 0.900 1097 974 39298268 0.002773%
3776 4 40.33 33.4 10.8 323.35 1352.91 0.900 1097 974 39298268 0.003443%
5148 4 40.4 99.2 20.3 204.64 856.20 0.899 1096 974 39344413 0.002176%
D-6
Incident
Current Duration Working Gradient Voltage Voltage 1 cm2 one ft
Away ()
(cal /
cm2)
5148 4 40.4 99.2 22.2 223.79 936.34 0.899 1096 974 39344413 0.002380%
5148 4 40.4 99.2 36.7 369.96 1547.91 0.899 1096 974 39344413 0.003934%
5147 4 40.82 33.3 6.7 201.20 841.83 0.896 1092 971 39619678 0.002125%
5147 4 40.82 33.3 7.4 222.22 929.78 0.896 1092 971 39619678 0.002347%
5147 4 40.82 33.3 7.4 222.22 929.78 0.896 1092 971 39619678 0.002347%
3801 4 41.01 32.1 9.4 292.83 1225.22 0.895 1091 969 39743299 0.003083%
5146 4 41.21 33.3 7.1 213.21 892.08 0.893 1089 968 39872818 0.002237%
5146 4 41.21 33.3 7.9 237.24 992.60 0.893 1089 968 39872818 0.002489%
5146 4 41.21 33.3 8.1 243.24 1017.73 0.893 1089 968 39872818 0.002552%
3800 4 41.31 32.1 9.8 305.30 1277.36 0.892 1088 967 39937343 0.003198%
5150 5 36.92 32.7 8.9 272.17 1138.76 0.876 1335 1186 43790698 0.002600%
5150 5 36.92 32.7 10.9 333.33 1394.67 0.876 1335 1186 43790698 0.003185%
5150 5 36.92 32.7 8.5 259.94 1087.58 0.876 1335 1186 43790698 0.002484%
5149 5 38.47 32.5 8.9 273.85 1145.77 0.863 1315 1168 44942353 0.002549%
5149 5 38.47 32.5 11.8 363.08 1519.11 0.863 1315 1168 44942353 0.003380%
5149 5 38.47 32.5 7.9 243.08 1017.03 0.863 1315 1168 44942353 0.002263%
D-7
The Electric Power Research Institute Inc., (EPRI, www.epri.com)
conducts research and development relating to the generation, delivery
and use of electricity for the benefit of the public. An independent,
nonprofit organization, EPRI brings together its scientists and engineers
as well as experts from academia and industry to help address challenges
in electricity, including reliability, efficiency, health, safety and the
environment. EPRI also provides technology, policy and economic
analyses to drive long-range research and development planning, and
supports research in emerging technologies. EPRIs members represent
more than 90 percent of the electricity generated and delivered in the
United States, and international participation extends to 40 countries.
EPRIs principal offices and laboratories are located in Palo Alto, Calif.;
Charlotte, N.C.; Knoxville, Tenn.; and Lenox, Mass.
Together...Shaping the Future of Electricity
Programs:
Overhead Transmission
Substations
2011 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved. Electric Power
Research Institute, EPRI, and TOGETHER...SHAPING THE FUTURE OF ELECTRICITY are
registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
1022632
Electric Power Research Institute

3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA
800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com

EPRI Arc Flash Issues in Transmission and

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

EPRI Arc Flash Issues in Transmission and

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

2011 TECHNICAL REPORT

Arc Flash Issues in Transmission and

EPRI Project Manager

3420 Hillview Avenue

THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF

THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS PREPARED THIS REPORT:

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)

Windsor Bush Consulting

This publication is a corporate

Arc Flash Issues in Transmission and

American Electric Power Service Corporation

The support of the staff at the EPRI High Voltage Laboratory in

Most methods available at this time for analyzing the arc-flash

The research performed as part of this project is expected to enhance

Investigation of voltage gradient and resulting arc power at

Section 1: Introduction ..............................................1-1

Section 2: Assessment of Existing Arc Models for

Section 4: Test Results and Test Data Structure ..........4-1

Section 5: Analysis of Test Data and Development

Section 6: Analysis of the Effects of Variability of

Section 7: Comparisons of Test Data with Results

Appendix A: Results (Raw Data) from all Tests..........A-1

Appendix B: Test Records (Voltage, Current,

Appendix C: Voltage Gradients at Current Peaks ...... C-1

Appendix D: Determination of Parameter ...............D-1

Figure 2-1 Incident Energy vs. Gap Length Calculated with

Table 2-1 Typical Gap Lengths for Various Equipment

Kinectrics has developed a software package (ARCPRO) for calculation of arc

Objectives of the Project

Scope of the Kinectrics Project

The scope of work performed by Kinectrics consisted in the following tasks:

RMS Arc Voltage

Bolted current is equivalent to the short-circuit current. It is defined as the

When an arc flash hazard exists, an approach limit at a distance from a

Incident Thermal Energy

WORKING DISTANCE is used to describe the physical radial distance

Structure of the Report

This report consists of 9 Sections and 4 Appendices.

Section 1, Introduction, contains the background and description of the

Section 2, Assessment of Existing Arc Models for Applications to Arcs on

Section 5, Analysis of Test Data and Development of a Simplified Equation for

Section 7, Comparisons of Test Data with Results Calculated Using ARCPRO

Section 8, Conclusions and Recommendations includes conclusions of this

Section 9, References, lists applicable references used in the report.

Appendices contain raw test data and other supporting materials:

Existing Models for Incident Thermal Energy

Unlike the IEEE-1584 equations and Doughtys equations, ARCPRO [8] is

Several methods are discussed in detail next.

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standard

log I a 0.00402 0.983 log I bf Equation 2-1

Ia = arcing current (kA)

log I a 0.00402 0.983 log I bf Equation 2-2

The incident energy is then calculated using the following:

log E n K 1 K 2 1.081 log I a 0.0011G Equation 2-3

E = incident energy (J/cm2)

Classes of Equipment Typical Bus Gaps (mm)

System Voltage (kV) Equipment Type Distance x Factor

Incident Energy vs. Arc Gap

E = incident energy (J/cm2)

Equation 2-6 (which results from rearrangement of Equation 2-5 to give D as

DB = distance of the boundary from the arcing point (mm)

Limitations of Lees Method

Incident Energy vs. Voltage