ieee p1584.1 working group meeting slidessagroups.ieee.org/1584-1/wp-content/uploads/sites/... ·...

IEEE P1584.1Working Group Meeting Slides

IEEE Guide for the Specification of Scope and Deliverable Requirements for an Arc-Flash

Hazard Calculation Study in Accordance withIEEE Std 1584™

Reno, NVMarch 2, 2020

10:00 AM - 12:00 PM

P1584.1 WG Meeting | 2020 ESW | Reno, NV 1

1. Call to Order / Safety Announcements

Daleep Mohla


2. Introductions and Affiliations

Membership Update

Jim Phillips/Ray Crow


3. Establishment of quorumJim Phillips / Ray Crow


4. Information on RosterGDPR Requirements

Ray Crow


5. Approval of Draft AgendaPosted on 1584.1 website

https://sagroups.ieee.org/1584-1/

Daleep Mohla


6. Approval of September 7, 2019 draft meeting notes

Ray Crow


P1584.1 WG Meeting | 2020 ESW | Reno, NV

(Draft of meeting notes and slides

used during the September 7, 2019

meeting were posted on the 1584-1

website


8


7. IEEE-SA Patent SlidesCopyright Policy Slides

No Recording Policy Slides

Daleep Mohla


The IEEE-SA strongly recommends that at each WG meeting the chair or a designee:

• Show slides #1 through #4 of this presentation• Advise the WG attendees that:

• IEEE’s patent policy is described in Clause 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws;• Early identification of patent claims which may be essential for the use of standards under

development is strongly encouraged; • There may be Essential Patent Claims of which IEEE is not aware. Additionally, neither IEEE, the WG,

nor the WG Chair can ensure the accuracy or completeness of any assurance or whether any such assurance is, in fact, of a Patent Claim that is essential for the use of the standard under development.

• Instruct the WG Secretary to record in the minutes of the relevant WG meeting:• That the foregoing information was provided and that slides 1 through 4 (and this slide 0, if applicable)

were shown; • That the chair or designee provided an opportunity for participants to identify patent claim(s)/patent

application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) of which the participant is personally aware and that may be essential for the use of that standard

• Any responses that were given, specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that were identified (if any) and by whom.

• The WG Chair shall ensure that a request is made to any identified holders of potential essential patent claim(s) to complete and submit a Letter of Assurance.

• It is recommended that the WG Chair review the guidance in IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual6.3.5 and in FAQs 14 and 15 on inclusion of potential Essential Patent Claims by incorporation or by reference.

Note: WG includes Working Groups, Task Groups, and other standards-developing committees with a PAR approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board.

Instructions for the WG Chair

(Optional to be shown)

Participants have a duty to inform the IEEE

• Participants shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the identity of each holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents

• Participants should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the identity of any other holders of potential Essential Patent Claims

Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is encouraged

Slide #1

Ways to inform IEEE

• Cause an LOA to be submitted to the IEEE-SA ([email protected]); or

• Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible; or

• Speak up now and respond to this Call for Potentially Essential Patents

If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance, please respond at this time by providing relevant information to the WG Chair

Slide #2

Other guidelines for IEEE WG meetings

• All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws.

• Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims.

• Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions.

• Relative costs of different technical approaches that include relative costs of patent licensing terms may be discussed in standards development meetings.

• Technical considerations remain the primary focus

• Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets.

• Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation.

• Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object.---------------------------------------------------------------

For more details, see IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 and Antitrust and Competition Policy: What You Need to Know at

http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/antitrust.pdf

Slide #3

Patent-related information

The patent policy and the procedures used to execute that policy are documented in the:

• IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws(http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6)

• IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual(http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/opman/sect6.html#6.3)

Material about the patent policy is available at http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/materials.html

If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at [email protected]

Slide #4

IEEE SA COPYRIGHT POLICY

NOVEMBER 2019

INSTRUCTIONS FOR CHAIRS OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

At the beginning of each standards development meeting the chair or a designee is to:

▪Show the following slides (or provide them beforehand)

▪Advise the standards development group participants that:

▪IEEE SA’s copyright policy is described in Clause 7 of the IEEE SA Standards Board Bylaws and Clause 6.1 of the IEEE SA Standards Board Operations Manual;

▪Any material submitted during standards development, whether verbal, recorded, or in written form, is a Contribution and shall comply with the IEEE SA Copyright Policy;

▪Instruct the Secretary to record in the minutes of the relevant meeting:

▪That the foregoing information was provided and that the copyright slides were shown (or provided beforehand).

16


By participating in this activity, you agree to comply with the IEEE Code of Ethics, all applicable laws, and all IEEE policies and procedures including, but not limited to, the IEEE SA Copyright Policy.

▪Previously Published material (copyright assertion indicated) shall not be presented/submitted to the Working Group nor incorporated into a Working Group draft unless permission is granted.

▪Prior to presentation or submission, you shall notify the Working Group Chair of previously Published material and should assist the Chair in obtaining copyright permission acceptable to IEEE SA.

▪For material that is not previously Published, IEEE is automatically granted a license to use any material that is presented or submitted.

17


▪The IEEE SA Copyright Policy is described in the IEEE SA Standards Board Bylaws and IEEE SA Standards Board Operations Manual

﹣IEEE SA Copyright Policy, see Clause 7 of the IEEE SA Standards Board Bylawshttps://standards.ieee.org/about/policies/bylaws/sect6-7.html#7Clause 6.1 of the IEEE SA Standards Board Operations Manualhttps://standards.ieee.org/about/policies/opman/sect6.html

▪IEEE SA Copyright Permission﹣https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-

standards/standards/web/documents/other/permissionltrs.zip

▪IEEE SA Copyright FAQs﹣http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/copyrights.html/

▪IEEE SA Best Practices for IEEE Standards Development ﹣http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/best_practices_for_ieee_standards_development_051215.pdf

▪Distribution of Draft Standards (see 6.1.3 of the SASB Operations Manual)﹣https://standards.ieee.org/about/policies/opman/sect6.html

18

https://standards.ieee.org/about/policies/bylaws/sect6-7.html#7

https://standards.ieee.org/about/policies/opman/sect6.html

https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-standards/standards/web/documents/other/permissionltrs.zip

http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/copyrights.html/

http://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/best_practices_for_ieee_standards_development_051215.pdf

https://standards.ieee.org/about/policies/opman/sect6.html

In order to allow the free exchange of ideas, audio and video recording of this meeting is prohibited.

Except for personal use or internal company use, detailed written transcriptions of the proceedings are also prohibited from being published

Audio and Video Recording PolicyPublic written transcriptions Policy


8. SA Process and MyProjectsite update

Pat Roder


9. IEEE P1584.1 Subgroup Report

Tony Parsons


IEEE Standard Classification

• IEEE standards are classified as:

• Standards: documents with mandatory requirements.• Mandatory requirements are generally characterized by use of the verb

“shall,” whereas recommended practices normally use the word “should”

• Recommended practices: documents in which procedures and positions preferred by the IEEE are presented.

• Guides: documents in which alternative approaches to good practice are suggested but no clear-cut recommendations are made.

•1584. 1 is a Guide

22

1584.1 PAR Details

• Title: Guide for the Specifications of Scope and Deliverable Requirements for an Arc-Flash Hazard Calculation Study in Accordance with IEEE Std. 1584™

• Scope: This standard provides guidance for the specification and performance of an arc-flash hazard study, in accordance with the process defined in IEEE 1584, Guide for Performing Arc-Flash Hazard Calculations. It provides the minimum scope and deliverable for an arc-flash study.

• Purpose: The purpose of this standard is to enable stakeholders to understand the minimum scope of work and deliverables required for an arc-flash study. Stakeholders are responsible for personnel in facilities and installations with electrical energy as a potential hazard to employees and other personnel. Stakeholders include but are not limited to employers, facility owners, operators, and contractors as well as those who are responsible for the specification or the performance of a study.

23

Revision Principles (1)

• 1584.1 WG authorized the Subgroup to revise the document based on the discussion at the WG Meeting in Jacksonville (2019 ESW), and in accordance with the approved scope of the PAR

• Focus on minimum information required to conduct an Arc Flash study and the associated deliverables• Other docs address short-circuit studies and coordination studies – no need to reinvent that

guidance

• Take a narrow view of “deliverables” and what we say about them• Arc-flash labels are a typical “deliverable” – but they’re covered in NFPA 70E, not IEEE 1584• Another example: one-line diagrams

• Be consistent with IEEE 1584-2018

• Don’t duplicate text/requirements in IEEE 1584-2018• It’s already there• Duplication leaves the possibility that the documents get “out of sync”• Possible exception: definitions

Revision Principles (2)

• Technical information needed to perform an incident energy analysis should be in IEEE 1584 and not IEEE 1584.1• Example: determining specific electrode configuration(s) for a piece of

equipment• There is already specific guidance in 1584.

• Assumption: all equipment is properly installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with its listings, ratings, manufacturer’s instructions, etc.• To do otherwise opens up too many avenues to get distracted from the Scope• There’s already a similar statement in 1584.1-2013

• Recommendations for PPE are not a part of 1584.1

Team 1 – Scope & System

• Address issues around high-level Scope of Work, as well as “system level” data – e.g., utility info and/or Modes of Operation

• Clause 3 – Arc-flash study general guidelines

• Clause 4 – Complexity of System

• Some input to Clause 5 (Data Collection), Annex B (Task Matrix)

• Arunkumar Aravamudhan

• Patrick Baughman

• George Cole

• Thomas Domitrovich

• Mike Farrell

• Walter Gonzalez – team editor

• Ken Jones

• Greg Pagello

• David Rewitzer – subgroup Secretary

26

Team 2 - Site

• Address gathering/verifying data on the site itself. Component nameplate data, impact of assumptions. New inputs?

• Clauses 5-8, Annex B• 5 – Data Collection

• 6 – Short-Circuit study

• 7 – Coordination study

• 8 – Arc-flash hazard location considerations

• Steve Adams

• Terry Becker

• Daniel Doan

• Ryan Downey

• Robert Fuhr

• Lloyd Gordon

• Mike Lang

• Steve Park

• Zarheer Jooma – team editor

27

Team 3 - Study

• Address what is needed with respect to the deliverables. What is an adequate level of documentation to provide in the study report?

• Clause 9 – Equipment Labels (goes away)

• Clause 10 – Report, results, and recommendations

• Annex C – Equipment label (Other documents address this)

• Annex D – Deliverables for arc-flash study

• Jim Babcock – team editor• Ken Cheng• Paul Dobrowsky• Mark Fisher• Bill Gnan• Jason Jonas• Albert Marroquin• Adam Reeves

28

Current State

• Completed Draft 2• Incorporated comments based on Subgroup review of D1• Input from Pat Roder, Editorial help from Lisa Perry (IEEE)• Much progress in terms of cleanup, consistency in terminology, and overall

structure and content of standard

• Final structure:• 1 – Overview• 2 – Normative References• 3 – Definitions• 4 – Arc-flash analysis General Guidelines• 5 – System Scenarios and Configurations

29

Current State (cont.)

• Final structure:• 6 – Data Collection

• 7 – *Short-Circuit Study-

• 8 – *Protective Device Coordination Study* Consult other IEEE or IEC standards for these studies

• 9 – Location Considerations

• 10 – Report, results

• Annex A: Arc-flash analysis scope of work considerations

• Annex B: Task Matrix of work items for arc-flash hazard analysis

• Annex C: Deliverables for arc-flash study

• Annex D: Bibliography

30

Key Issues / Changes: Universal

• Global changes to certain terminology:• Qualified persons who are knowledgeable about power system studies,

power distribution equipment, and equipment installation practices (who is doing it)

• We’re (still) not perfect yet, but we are more consistent

31

Other Key Issues / Changes

• 7.3 Equipment Evaluation – deleted

• 8 – Coordination study – added language to 8.1 regarding how to handle complex relaying systems – i.e., account for all sources of delay.

• New Clause 9 – Location considerations• 9.1 – Main Protective Device isolation – used

existing language• 9.2 – Electrode Configuration – e.g., may need to

look at more than one EC in a given equipment enclosure

• 9.3 – Equipment Data – actual or default?

32

Actual vs. Typical data

• IEEE 1584-2018 Table 8 – typical values

• Sometimes, this is OK

• Other times, define your own “typical”

• Examples:• 15kV switchgear – little difference

based on enclosure size• LV MCC – multiple enclosure sizes

can cause confusion and complexity

33

Other Key Issues / Challenges

• Deleted old Clause 9, which dealt with equipment labels• Consult other documents such as NFPA 70E for guidance on contents

• Clause 10 – Report, Results & and suggested mitigation if a part of the scope• Tabulated list of what can be in the report

• Annex C – Checklist for Deliverables

34

TEAM 1 EDITS

35

• Arunkumar Aravamudhan

• Patrick Baughman

• George Cole

• Thomas Domitrovich

• Mike Farrell

• Walter Gonzalez – team editor

• Ken Jones

• Greg Pagello

• David Rewitzer – subgroup Secretary

Snapshot of focus areas edited from 2013

Clause 3 – Definitions

36

• New Definitions clause

Clause 4 – Arc-flash study general guidelines

37

• Clause 3 as been moved and is now clause 4

• Removal of specific recommendations for methodologies applied for electrical equipment outside of the scope of 1584

• Added fault current criteria for the evaluation of equipment below 240 V (line-to-line)

• Removed the section “3.3 Shock Hazard Analysis” (NFPA 70E Domain)

Clause 4 – Arc-flash study general guidelines

38

• 4.1 Default Data:• Replacement for the existing "Working Distance” section

• Lists key input data which can either be based on actual or default data

• Default Data reference to Clause 6 of IEEE 1584

• Requirement to identify locations which apply default data in the arc flash report

• 4.2 Results:• Minor cleanup and re-arrangement

5. System Scenarios & Configurations

• Replacement for “Section 4: Complexity of system ”

• Description of the characteristics of simple and complex power systems

• Identification of the effects multiple modes of the operation

• Reference IEEE 1584 Clause 6.3 to provide examples of various system modes

39

TEAM 2 EDITS

40

• Steve Adams

• Terry Becker

• Daniel Doan

• Ryan Downey

• Robert Fuhr

• Lloyd Gordon

• Mike Lang

• Steve Park

• Zarheer Jooma – team editor

Snapshot of focus areas edited from 2013

Note 1: Inclusion of Definitions -> Numbers above advance by 1 –Technically Team 2 edits 6-9 + Annex B…Note 2: Cross-referenced IEEE 1584

6. Data Collection

• Introductory paragraph followed by new layout:• New note: “…not all information may be available or applicable…judgment

may be required regarding the level of detail…”

• 6.1 Collection of system data:• Rearranged for better flow a) Documentation, b) Site information

• 6.2 Responsibility of data verification• First two paragraphs largely unchanged

• Removed requirements for coordination, panel isolation (segregation), and wording “encouraging manufacturers to provide specific information”

42

6. Data Collection

• 6.3 Data assumptions:• Note: Previously placed responsibility for problematic equipment on the owner, now

requires bi-directional communication + removed the clause to exclude from study if problematic

• Expanded language of bus gaps, enclosure dimensions, and electrode configurations: Best to use actual, but not at the expense of safety – may use typical values and communicate the use thereof. Also cross-referenced IEEE 1584 Clause 6.6 “6.6 Step 5: Determine the equipment electrode configuration”

• 6.4 Owner supplied information – largely unchanged

43

7. Short-circuit study

• Introduction largely unchanged

• The following sections removed:• Verification of system: Discussed elsewhere

• Number of calculations: Discussed elsewhere

• Equipment Evaluation: Not central to standard

44

8. Protective device coordination study

• Title changed from “Overcurrent device clearing times/protective device coordination study”

• Introduction largely unchanged

• Verification of existing study header was removed - addressed elsewhere

• 8.1 Complexity of study • Included wording to consider newer technology e.g., optical, ZSI, etc. and

consideration of communications delays

• 8.2 Optimizations of settings – largely unchanged

45

Annex B

• Changed from Normative to Informative

• Removed broader references to labeling and added clarity on the “type” of labels instead

• Added options for capturing:• Scenarios, electrode configurations, enclosure dimensions, busbar gaps,

and considerations for equipment (<240V + short circuit currents > 2000A)

End of TEAM 2 feedback46

Team 3 Report – Dave Rewitzer (for Jim Babcock)

47

Team Members

Jim Babcock, LeadKen ChengPaul DobrowskyMark FisherBill GnanJason JonasAlbert MarroquinAdam ReevesLloyd Gordon

Team 3 Scope-Tasks

Address what is needed with respect to the deliverables. What is an adequate level of documentation to provide in the study report?

• Clause 9 – Equipment Labels (probably goes away)• Clause 10 – Report, results, and recommendations• Annex C – Equipment label checklist (probably goes away)• Annex D – Deliverables for arc-flash study

Summary of Action/work completed

• Harmonize definitions between sections

• Eliminate duplication of information between sections except where thst piece of

information added to the content of the sections.

• Clause 9 and Annex C were eliminated as the information was based on NFPA 70E

and OSHA requirements. Those documents are referred to in other sections of

1584.1.

Summary of Action/work completed

• Wording, where necessary, was modified for clarity, correctness, and directness in

Section 10. Some lines were eliminated and others added to accomplish this. This

section became Section 9.

• The focus in Annex D was a matrix of deliverables of a study, not requirements of a

study (Annex B – Task matrix of work items for arc-flash analysis. Wording, where

necessary, was modified for clarity, correctness, and directness. Some lines were

eliminated and others added to accomplish this. This Section became Annex C.

The Path Forward Preliminary - Dates may change as needed

52

Task Who? Start Date End Date Notes

Send 1584.1_D2 to WG for review

WG Secretary 3/13/2020 3/13/2020Send draft document

and comments spreadsheet

WG Review P1584.1 WG 3/13/2020 4/17/2020

Send comments back on spreadsheet.

Comments in any other format will be

ignored.

Update DocumentSubgroup Chair,

Secretary, Editors4/17/2020 7/31/2020

Produce D3 based on WG comments.

Subgroup Review P1584.1 Subgroup 7/31/2020 8/14/2020Make sure we didn’t “break” something

Prepare D3Subgroup Chair,

Secretary, Editors8/14/2020 9/11/2020

(hopefully) Minor Fixes based on

Subgroup review

WG Approval P1584.1 WG (after PCIC) + 2 weeksYes/No vote: OK to

send to ballot?

10. Future TestingMike Lang/Dr. Lee


11. Next Meeting

Atlanta GeorgiaSeptember, 2020 Time: TBD

In conjunction with: PCIC


12. Adjourn


ieee p1584.1 working group meeting slidessagroups.ieee.org/1584-1/wp-content/uploads/sites/... ·...

Documents