The disclosed concept pertains generally to circuit protection devices, such as, without limitation, a circuit breaker, and, in particular, to a method and apparatus for dynamically determining the prospective short-circuit current of the circuit in which a circuit protection device is provided.
Circuit protection devices, such as circuit breakers, are well known in the art. Circuit protection devices are used to protect the circuitry in an electrical system from damage due to an overcurrent condition, such as an overload condition or a relatively high level short circuit or fault condition. Such circuit protection devices have a short circuit current rating (SCCR), which identifies the maximum current the circuit protection device is rated to safely interrupt. When a circuit protection device is to be implemented in an electrical system, it is important to choose a circuit protection device that is properly rated for the system at the time of installation. The primary method for choosing a properly rated circuit protection device is to first determine what is known as the prospective short circuit (PSC) current for the electrical system, which is the highest electric current that can exist in the electrical system under short-circuit conditions, and then choose a circuit protection device that has an SCCR that is sufficient for the determined PSC current. In addition, the PSC current in an electrical system can dynamically change over time based on the source(s) present (e.g., PSC current may change due to a transfer from a utility feed to an inverter based distributed energy source). In such situations, it may be necessary to dynamically alter the settings of a circuit protection device to handle different PSC current levels as needed. It is therefore advantageous to be able to dynamically measure PSC current levels so that such adjustments can be made accordingly. PSC current is also used to calculate arc flash incident energy values in an electrical system, which values assist personnel by specifying arc flash hazards.
One known method for dynamically determining the PSC current in an electrical system is described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,493,012, owned by the assigned hereof. That method utilizes an existing switch (contactor) and the actual load in an electrical system in order to calculate the PSC current based on voltage and current measurements made before and after closing the switch to energize the load. More specifically, in that method, PSC current is calculated based on the resistance of the source, which results in a higher value of PSC current than the actual value based on total impedance (resistance+reactance). This is acceptable in terms of safety because it over-specifies the breaker rating and arc flash incident energy, but results in extra cost.
There is thus room for improvement in the field of dynamic measurement of PSC current.
In one embodiment, a method of determining a prospective short circuit current for an electrical system including a source is provided. The method includes connecting a test load between either: (i) a first phase line and a second phase line of the electrical system or (ii) the first phase line and the neutral line of the electrical system, employing a sensor coupled to the electrical system to measure a voltage drop across the test load, determining a voltage value based on at least the measured voltage drop across the test load, determining a total effective impedance for the first phase line to the source, and determining the prospective short circuit current based on the voltage value and the total effective impedance.
In another embodiment, an electrical device structured to be coupled to an electrical system between a source and a load and for determining a prospective short circuit current is provided. The electrical device includes a test load, a switch structured to selectively connect the test load between either: (i) a first phase line and a second phase line of the electrical system or (ii) the first phase line and the neutral line of the electrical system, a sensor structured to generate a signal indicative of a voltage drop across the test load, and a controller structured and configured to determining a voltage value based on at least the signal indicative of a voltage drop across the test load, determine a total effective impedance for the first phase line, determine a prospective short circuit current for the electrical system based on the voltage value and the total effective impedance.
A full understanding of the disclosed concept can be gained from the following description of the preferred embodiments when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:
Directional phrases used herein, such as, for example, left, right, front, back, top, bottom and derivatives thereof, relate to the orientation of the elements shown in the drawings and are not limiting upon the claims unless expressly recited therein.
As used herein, the term “number” shall mean one or an integer greater than one (i.e., a plurality).
As used herein, the statement that two or more parts are “coupled” together shall mean that the parts are joined together either directly or joined through one or more intermediate parts.
As used herein, the term “controller” shall mean a programmable analog and/or digital device (including an associated memory part or portion) that can store, retrieve, execute and process data (e.g., software routines and/or information used by such routines), including, without limitation, a field programmable gate array (FPGA), a complex programmable logic device (CPLD), a programmable system on a chip (PSOC), an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a microprocessor, a microcontroller, a programmable logic controller, or any other suitable processing device or apparatus. The memory portion can be any one or more of a variety of types of internal and/or external storage media such as, without limitation, RAM, ROM, EPROM(s), EEPROM(s), FLASH, and the like that provide a storage register, i.e., a non-transitory machine readable medium, for data and program code storage such as in the fashion of an internal storage area of a computer, and can be volatile memory or nonvolatile memory.
The disclosed concept provides two similar methods, namely a line-to-line method and a line-to-neutral method, that may be used to dynamically measure the PSC current (IPSC) in an electrical system. As described in detail herein, both methods determine the PSC current based on a voltage that is measured across a test load, such as a test resistor, and a calculated value of the impedance from the test point to the source. The disclosed concept thus enables PSC current determinations to be made directly within an electrical device such as, without limitation, a circuit breaker, a protective relay, or a meter, at any time.
The line-to-line method will be described in connection with an exemplary electrical system 2 shown in
A. Empirical Solution
According to an empirical solution of the present embodiment of the disclosed concept:
In the present empirical solution, ZL=RL, and Zeq is the total equivalent impedance in the loop shown including test resistor 14 in
whereas, the IPSC (Line to Line) is calculated as follows:
Equation (1) above is valid only if Zs contains negligible reactance. However, in practical cases, there is some source reactance (e.g., the reactance of the secondary of a transformer), so use of equation (1) can, in practice, produce erroneous results.
In order to address this potential for erroneous results, provided below, according to a further aspect of the disclosed concept, is a more a precise solution for power factors of 0.7 and 0.9 wherein the neglected reactance is incorporated for additional precision.
B. Precise Solution—Power Factor 0.7
In the precise solution of the present embodiment of the disclosed concept, instead of equation (1), IL will follow the relation below (see
From the measured results:
Now, in equation (4), there are two unknown variables, Rs and Xs. Zeq can be calculated from relation (6) and RL is known. In order to reduce the number of unknown variables from two to one, the distribution load power factor 0.7 is considered as follows: pf=cos ϕ=cos(tan−1(X/R)). If pf=0.7, from the above relation X/R=1, or X=R. Hence, putting Rs=Xs in equation (4), the following is obtained: 8Rs2+4RLRs+(RL2−Zeq2)=0. This is a simple quadratic equation, which is solved for positive values of Rs, so that Zs can be calculated from equation (7) below:
Zs=√{square root over ((Rs2+Xs2))}=√{square root over (2)}Rs, (7)
and subsequently line to line IPSC for the precise solution can be calculated from Equation (3) above.
C. Precise Solution—Power Factor 0.9
Alternatively, the distribution load power factor 0.9 is considered as follows: If pf=0.9, X/R=0.48, or X=0.48R; Hence putting Rs=0.48Xs in equation (5), the following is obtained: 4.92Rs2+4RLRs+(RL2−Zeq2)=0. This is again a quadratic equation, which is solved for positive value of Rs, so that Zs can be calculated from the following relation and subsequently line to line IPSC from equation (3),
Zs=√{square root over (Rs2=Xs2)}=1.23Rs (8)
Thus, in short, in the line-to-line method, IPSC is determined according to equation (3) based on VLine and ZS. VLine is determined by measuring the voltage across test resistor 14 that is provided between two phases. ZS (the total effective impedance for the phase) is calculated for the circuit from a value of RS (the total effective resistance for the phase) that is determined for the circuit. RS is calculated as described herein (by solving a simple quadratic equation) based on the known resistance, RL, of test resistor 14, and a value of Zeq (the total equivalent impedance in the loop) that is calculated as described herein based on the known nominal line voltage and the measured loop current for the circuit.
The line-to-neutral method will be described in connection with an exemplary electrical system 16 shown in
A. Empirical Solution
According to an empirical solution of the present embodiment of the disclosed concept:
In the present empirical solution, ZL=RL, and Zeq is the total equivalent impedance in the loop shown including test resistor 14 in
Solving equation (9) for Zs, the following is obtained:
Putting this value of Zs in equation (10), the following is obtained:
However, equation (9) is valid only if ZS contains negligible reactance. In practical cases, there is some source reactance (e.g., the reactance of the secondary of a transformer), so equation (9) can produce erroneous results. In order to address this potential for erroneous results, provided below, according to a further aspect of the disclosed concept, is a more a precise solution for power factors of 0.7 and 0.9 wherein the neglected reactance is incorporated for additional precision.
B. Precise Solution—Power Factor 0.7
In the precise solution of the present embodiment of the disclosed concept, instead of equation (9), IL will follow the following relation:
From the measured results:
Now, in equation (11), there are two unknown variables, Rs and Xs. Zeq can be calculated from relation (13) and RL is already known. In order to reduce the unknown variables from two to one, the distribution load power factor 0.7 is considered as follows: pf=cos ϕ=cos(tan−1(X/R)). If pf=0.7, X/R=1, or X=R. Hence, putting Rs=Xs in equation (11), the following is obtained: 2Rs2+2RLRs+(RL2−Zeq2)=0. This is a simple quadratic equation, which is solved for positive value of Rs, so that Zs can be calculated from the following relation (14) and Ipso from equation (10):
Zs=√{square root over (Rs2+Xs2)}=√{square root over (2)}Rs. (14)
C. Precise Solution—Power Factor 0.9
Alternatively, the distribution load power factor 0.9 is considered as follows: if pf=0.9, X/R=0.48, or X=0.48R. Hence, putting Rs=0.48Xs in equation (11), the following is obtained: 1.23Rs2+2RLRs+(RL2−Zeq2)=0. This is again a quadratic equation, which is solved for positive value of Rs, so that Zs can be calculated from the following relation (15) and IPSC from equation (10):
Zs=√{square root over (Rs2+Xs2)}=√{square root over (1.23)}Rs. (15)
Thus, in short, in the line-to-neutral method, IPSC is determined according to equation (10) based on VPh and ZS. VPh is determined by measuring the voltage across test resistor 14 that is provided between a phase line and the neutral line. ZS (the total effective impedance for the phase) is calculated for the circuit from a value of RS (the total effective resistance for the phase) that is determined for the circuit. RS is calculated as described herein (by solving a simple quadratic equation) based on the known resistance, RL, of test resistor 14, and a value of Zeq (the total equivalent impedance in the loop) that is calculated as described herein based on the known nominal phase voltage and the measured loop current for the circuit.
As described above, in the exemplary embodiment, in both the line-to-line method and the line-to-neutral method, the test load (e.g., test resistor 14 or 26) is connected through a solid state switch. The voltage drop across the solid state switch is not considered in the above calculations. However, for increased precision, the impedance of the solid state switch should be excluded from the total calculated impedance ZS. Specifically, in one particular embodiment, the impedance of the solid state switch is determined and that value is subtracted from the calculated ZS (see above) to create a modified ZS (i.e., ZS−Zswitch). The modified ZS is then used to calculate IPSC as described herein.
There are various ways to determine the impedance of the solid state switch. In the exemplary embodiment, the solid state switch is made up of two thyristors. The voltage drop across the thyristors (VT) is determined from the corresponding value of the loop current IL=IT (=voltage drop across loop resistor/loop resistor value in ohms). Then, the impedance of the solid state switch is determined from the following relation:
Since the curve of the forward characteristic of the thyristors is known to be non-linear, the switch impedance is not constant and needs to be determined for each loop current value.
Referring to
In addition, referring again to
Furthermore, according to an aspect of the exemplary embodiment, RAM 62 stores a number of routines which are executable by microprocessor 60 which implement the line-to-line method of the disclosed concept for determining PSC current using the circuitry of loop circuit 48 described above. In particular, the routines are structured and configured to control circuit breaker 36 to operate as follows. When PSC current is to be measured, electronic trip unit 44 will issue a switch control signal (
It will be appreciated that the exemplary embodiment just described that employs average values for nominal line-to-line voltage, IL and VLINE is meant to be exemplary only, and that single measurements of those values as opposed to averages may also be employed within the scope of the disclosed concept. Furthermore, while the exemplary embodiment makes measurements over multiple positive half cycle of the applied AC voltage, it will also be understood that that is meant to be exemplary only and that measurements may also be made over negative half cycles instead of or in addition to the positive half cycles. In fact, an implementation that uses both positive and opposite, negative half cycles may account for differences (i.e., imbalances) in the source impedance, and therefore may be advantageous.
In particular, electrical system 30′ includes an alternative circuit breaker 36′ that is similar to circuit breaker 36, except that it includes a loop circuit 48′ that is provided between phase line 40A and the neutral line. In this alternative embodiment, RAM 62 stores a number of routines which are executable by microprocessor 60 which implement the line-to-neutral method of the disclosed concept for determining PSC current using the circuitry of loop circuit 48′. In particular, the routines are structured and configured to control circuit breaker 36′ to operate as follows. When PSC current is to be measured, electronic trip unit 44 will issue a switch control signal (
As was the case with electrical system 30 described above, it will be appreciated that the exemplary embodiment just described that employs average values for nominal phase voltage, IL and VPh is meant to be exemplary only, and that single measurements of those values as opposed to averages may also be employed within the scope of the disclosed concept. Furthermore, while the exemplary embodiment makes measurements over multiple positive half cycle of the applied AC voltage, it will also be understood that that is meant to be exemplary only and that measurements may also be made over negative half cycle instead of or in addition to the positive half cycles.
In addition, in further alternative embodiments, electronic trip unit 44 in either circuit breaker 36 or circuit breaker 36′ is further structured and configured to adjust the functional trip settings stored in EEPROM 64 and used by the trip program of electronic trip unit 44 based on the determined IPSC.
Moreover, in still a further embodiment, circuit breaker 36 and circuit breaker 36′ may be combined to form a device that implements both the line-to-line method and the line-to-neutral method of the disclosed concept by including loop circuits 48 and 48′ described herein in a single device.
It will be understood that circuit breakers 36 and 36′ are described herein in order to provide exemplary implementations of an electrical device in which the disclosed concept may be implemented. It will be understood, however, that that is meant to be exemplary only and that the methods of the disclosed concept may alternatively be integrated into electrical devices other than circuit breakers, such as, without limitation, protective relays or metering devices.
While specific embodiments of the disclosed concept have been described in detail, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that various modifications and alternatives to those details could be developed in light of the overall teachings of the disclosure. Accordingly, the particular arrangements disclosed are meant to be illustrative only and not limiting as to the scope of the disclosed concept which is to be given the full breadth of the claims appended and any and all equivalents thereof.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4733321 | Lindeperg | Mar 1988 | A |
6271668 | Sehdev et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
7791351 | Raber | Sep 2010 | B2 |
8493012 | Kellis et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
20060071675 | Batten | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20080036472 | Collins, Jr. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080084213 | Waite et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2 097 942 | Nov 1982 | GB |
2 413 192 | Oct 2005 | GB |
Entry |
---|
Fluke (UK) Ltd, “Basic electrical installation testing”, 2014, pp. 1-4, www.fluke.co.uk. |
Fluke Europe B.V., “The importance of loop impedance testing”, 2003, pp. 1-2, http://www.fluke.com. |
John Frederic Whitfield, “The electrician's guide to the 16th edition of the IEE wiring regulations BS 7671”, 5th ed., Section 8.6.2, Wendens Ambo : EPA, 2000, obtained from https://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Book/8.6.2.htm. |
European Patent Office, “International Search Report and Written Opinion” (corresp. to PCT/IB18/058054), dated Jan. 7, 2019, 13 pp. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190128942 A1 | May 2019 | US |