Arc 

Flash – Fault Clearing Time Determination
10/5/2017

1 © 2016 ETAP
S.NO CONTENTS

1. FCT not determined message
2. Cause – 1 : No Protective device
3. Solution – 1 
4.  Cause – 2 : Interlocks are missing
5. Solution – 2  
6.  Cause – 3 : Missing Library information
7. Solution – 3
8. Cause – 4: Magnitude of arc current is low
9. Solution – 4 
10. Cause – 5: Bus Levels and Source current contribution.

11. Solution – 5 

12. Symptoms and diagnosis

13. Tools and debugging techniques  from ETAP  

2 © 2016 ETAP
 Definitions

• FCT – Fault Clearing Time in seconds or cycles
• LVCB – Low Voltage Circuit Breaker
• HVCB – High Voltage Circuit Breaker
• Ibf – Bolted fault current
• Ia – Arc current
• PD – Protective device
• OCR – Overcurrent Relay
• TCC – Time Current Characteristics
• CT – Current Transformer
• PT – Potential Transformer
• SQOP – Sequence of Operation
3
© 2016 ETAP
 “FCT not determined” message

ETAP eliminates the manual work related to determining the

protective device(s) that clear arc faults and FCT. In some
situations, the program provides a message that reads: “FCT
not determined.” This message indicates that ETAP did not find
source protective device(s) to de‐energize every single
energizing branch.

This article summarizes the causes of why ETAP will display this
message and how to troubleshoot the system to pinpoint the
reason(s).
NOTE: The problem can be caused by a single item or
combination of any of the issues described in this document

4 © 2016 ETAP
 Causes for FCT not determined

3. Missing Library 
information

4. Magnitude of 
2. Interlocks are 
arc current is too 
missing
low

5. Bus levels away 
1. No Protective  FCT Not  to find Source PD 
device in  and Multiple 
energizing path Determined source 
contribution levels

5 © 2016 ETAP
 CAUSE – 1 
NO PROTECTIVE DEVICE IN ENERGIZING PATH

6 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause – 1

• If there is no protective device to de‐energize the fault, the

message is displayed.
• In this example , the utility source is directly connected to
the “Main Bus” without any protective device.

7 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause ‐ 1
• The message will appear If the option “User‐defined from
Bus Editor” is enabled from the study case AF FCT page (as
shown below), and the bus user‐defined FCT value is set to
zero.
• In the images below, the User defined FCT section has no
values and the study case shows FCT is based on “User‐
defined from bus editor”

8 © 2016 ETAP
 SOLUTION – 1
ADDING PROTECTIVE DEVICE IN THE ENERGIZING 
PATH

9 © 2016 ETAP
 Solution ‐1
• The following protective devices are available in ETAP that
can be added in the energizing path to trip the circuit in the
event of a fault

1. Disconnect  Switch interlocked to a Relay
2. Fuse
3. LVCB with self trip unit or interlocked to a Relay
4. HVCB interlocked to a Relay
5. Contactor interlocked to a Relay
6. Overload Heater & In‐Line Overload Relay
7. Recloser

10 © 2016 ETAP
 Solution ‐1
• In this case, CB29 (HVCB) is introduced between Utility and
Main Bus in order to de‐energize the circuit in the event of a
fault at the bus, with FCT as 0.236 seconds, which includes the
relay and breaker trip time.

• Note that the message “FCT Not Determined” will still be

displayed for a arc fault on the line‐side (source‐side) of the
newly added protective device.
11 © 2016 ETAP
 CAUSE – 2   
INTERLOCKS ARE MISSING

12 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause ‐2
• Protection schemes with relay devices require an interlock
between the relay and the protective device.
• ETAP will not determine the clearing time if the interlock is
missing since the overall fault clearing time is the sum of the
PD opening time plus the relay trip time.

13 © 2016 ETAP
 SOLUTION – 2
DEFINE INTERLOCKS

14 © 2016 ETAP
am2
Solution ‐2
• Interlocks are defined in the Output page of the Relay editor.
• In this example, the OCR 1 (Overcurrent Relay) is interlocked
with CB29 , such that on the event of the fault, the relay
sends the trip signal to Open the circuit breaker.

• The following interlocks are available for a relay

– Interlock to HVCB, LVCB, Switch, Contactor.

15 © 2016 ETAP
Slide 15

am2 Show connecting arrow between the relay and the CB

albert.marroquin, 5/30/2014
 CAUSE – 3 
MISSING LIBRARY INFORMATION

16 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause ‐3
• If the protective device from the library is missing then the
program cannot find the FCT. See image below.
• This applies to all protective devices with curves in the library
such as LVCB, Fuses, Relays, Reclosers, etc .

17 © 2016 ETAP
 SOLUTION – 3 
SELECT LIBRARIES

18 © 2016 ETAP
 Solution ‐3
• Select the model from the library from the “OCR” page of the
Relay editor to provide TCC information for the determination
of trip time.

19 © 2016 ETAP
 Solution ‐3
• Check that the relays, protective devices, current transformers
that are involved in fault clearing have data defined from the
library.
• Relays – Definition of CT and Breaking Device
1. TCC curves for the trip signal
2. CT – Turns Ratios and Burden
3. LVCB – TCC curves from the Trip Unit
4. Recloser ‐ TCC curves from the Controller
5. Fuser – Melting curves from the manufacturer rating
6. Overload Heater ‐ TCC curves from the Heating Unit
7. In‐line overload – TCC curves from the Thermal library

20 © 2016 ETAP
 CAUSE – 4
MAGNITUDE OF ARC CURRENT IS TOO LOW 

21 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause‐4
• The arc current “Ia” is typically less than the available bolted
short – circuit current; especially in low voltage systems
(Typically less than 1kV).
• ETAP displays “FCT not determined” if the arc current is too
low such that it falls below the long‐time pick up value of the
trip unit.
• In this example, when Bus1 is faulted, the arc current is too
low and it lies on the left‐hand‐side region of the Fuse TCC
below any possible pickup time

22 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause – 4 

The magnitude of arc

current is 10.87kA at
0.48 kV and does not
intersect with the
available TCC curve in
order to clear the
fault.

23 © 2016 ETAP
 SOLUTION – 4 
CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE PROTECTIVE DEVICE SIZES 
OR INCIDENT ENERGY MITIGATION SCHEMES 

24 © 2016 ETAP
 Solution – 4 
• Make sure that the protective device selected is capable of
tripping under the arc fault current conditions.
• If the fault clearing time of the selected protective device is
high, a message which indicates high incident energy value
may appear on the one‐line diagram.

25 © 2016 ETAP
 CAUSE – 5
BUS LEVELS AWAY TO FIND SOURCE PD AND 
MULTIPLE SOURCE CONTRIBUTION LEVELS

26 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause – 5 
• The search for source protective devices has some definable
capability limits. This section describes how those limits are
applied.

• The main reason for these limits is to “optimize the

calculation time by reducing memory consumption by
excluding unnecessary data”

• Bus Levels Away to Find Source PD ‐ This limit indicates the

number of bus levels away from the faulted location that
ETAP will search to find the source PD. The source PD is then
used to determine the FCT.

27 © 2016 ETAP
 Cause – 5

• The default value for this entry is ten(10). The maximum level is
fifty (50). It is recommended that this entry be left as default,
unless the source PD is located more than 10 levels away.

• The circled PDs has to be within the Bus levels away to Find
source PD , Otherwise, ETAP cannot determine the FCT

• Note that protective devices which are considered as Load PDs

are not considered for determining the bus FCT as they cannot
isolate the fault at the bus as mentioned in the image below.

28 © 2016 ETAP
Cause – 5

29
© 2016 ETAP
 Cause – 5 
• Multiple Source Contribution ‐ This value indicates the
number of multiple sources contribution levels to be
considered. A level is encountered every time two sources
mesh upstream from the fault location.

• If the corresponding sources are not seen by the limit that is

set up, the program still displays the message. The default for
multiple source level search is two (2) as can be seen in the
following image.

• However, there may be some systems in which the source PDs

are located further away in higher levels of multiple source
contributions

30 © 2016 ETAP
Cause – 5 

31 © 2016 ETAP
Cause – 5 

32 © 2016 ETAP
 SOLUTION ‐5
OPTIONS (PREFERENCES)

33 © 2016 ETAP
 Solution ‐5 
• The Tools –Options(Preferences) – Arc Flash Section has the
following two entries that can help to determine the FCT for
Cause – 5.

• The number of levels can be changed by modifying the entry

in Tools/Options (Preferences) Bus Levels Away to Find
Source PD = 10 (default).

• Multiple Source Contribution Levels : The searchable area of

the program is limited by the number of meshed source fault
current contributions and the number of bus levels away.

• The search area can be increased by modifying the following

entry under Tools\Options (Preferences) section: Multiple
Source contribution levels = 2 (default)
34 © 2016 ETAP
 Solution ‐5 

• Using a very high number for both above options can cause
performance issues with arc flash calculations.

• The Highest level of meshed source contribution is level 4 .

Multiple utility sources energize this location.

• In a real system, the individual sources could be wind

turbines, PV arrays or synchronous generators.

• Whatever the case may be, every time a source contribution

is meshed, the program will require a higher level number as
shown in the image (which requires Level 5)

35 © 2016 ETAP
Solution ‐5

36 © 2016 ETAP
SYMPTOMS AND DIAGNOSIS

37 © 2016 ETAP
 Symptoms

3.Single 
2. Decay 
Phase 
Method 
Breaker 

4. Back feed 
1. Main PD 
from Tie‐
Isolation
breaker 
Symptoms

38 © 2016 ETAP
 Main PD Isolation
Symptom
– The program reports “FCT Not Determined” for a
particular bus, yet the main protective device has been
properly configured with libraries, interlocks, etc.
• The main PD may not be properly isolated from the main bus
or individual compartments (i.e. the line side of the main PD is
exposed or there is chance the arc fault will expand into this
section. If the upstream PD is not properly configured, the FCT
may not be determined.
• Note 1: This option is applicable only for systems rated 15kV
or less.
• Note 2: The main PD isolation option can be removed by un‐
checking it from the Study Case editor ‐> AF FCT tab.
• The following link gives more detailed analysis for the same.
https://helpdesk.etap.com/cgi‐in/wonderdesk.cgi?do=faq_view_record&faq=1&view_detail=1&faq_id=490&queue=Default

39 © 2016 ETAP
 Decay Method
Symptom
‐FCT is determined using either the 1/2 Cycle or 1.5‐4 cycle
methods
‐FCT is no longer determined when using the decay method

• The FCT for decay method is obtained by integrating the

currents from three different stages (subtransient, transient
and steady‐state). The integration using IEEE Std C37.2
equation as shown.

40 © 2016 ETAP
 Decay Method

• In this example, The decay method is used on “Bus 20”

• The steady state arc current falls below the relay long
time pickup setting and the magnitude and duration of
subtransient and transient currents were not enough to
cause the relay to trip 41 © 2016 ETAP
 Decay Method

• To correct this situation, protective device settings adjustments 
which cause relay operation need to be implemented
42 © 2016 ETAP
 Arc Flash 1‐Phase
Symptom
• Single‐phase system has upstream
protective device in 3‐phase region
which is outside the searchable area
when the fault occurs in the 1‐phase
system
• For 1‐phase & panel sub‐systems, the
program cannot search the source PD
that is in the three phase system (i.e. it
only searches all 1‐phase PDs feeding
the system
• The image shows Fuse 1 cannot de‐
energize the Bus2 as it is single phase.

43 © 2016 ETAP
 Arc Flash Single Phase

• Adding a source protective device in

the single phase system as shown in
the image (Fuse2) will help to de‐
energize the faulted bus and determine
the fault clearing time.

44 © 2016 ETAP
 Back Feed from Tie‐Breaker
Symptom
‐ All source PDs appear to be tripping, but the program fails
to find the FCT
• In case of Meshed or Loop system with tie‐PDs involved, there
is a possibility of small arc current flowing back through the
looped path. The magnitude of this back‐feed arcing current
may not be enough to trip feeder relay
• ETAP requires that all sources of current be de‐energized to
determine the final FCT (regardless of how small of a
contribution they make to the fault location). This is a
conservative method since it is not known exactly at what
point an arc fault will self extinguish as multiple sources de‐
energize at different times.

45 © 2016 ETAP
 Back Feed from Tie‐ Breaker

Small Magnitude of Ia

•In this example , The upstream breakers clear the fault but
there is a small arc current that is back fed from the source
which prevents the fault from being completely de‐energized

46 © 2016 ETAP
 Back Feed from Tie‐ Breaker

• If the relay is set to pick up this small magnitude of Ia that 
is back fed, then the total fault clearing time can be 
determined.

47 © 2016 ETAP
TOOLS AND DEBUGGING TECHNIQUES FROM ETAP

48 © 2016 ETAP
 Faulting only one bus
Faulting only one bus is a great way to troubleshoot the “FCT not
determined” condition.

• It marks the source protective devices by showing the arc

current next to them. This allows you to graphically see which
source PDs lie on the energizing branches.

• Only source PDs are marked with current flows (even though all
the contributions are considered) as shown in the image below.

49 © 2016 ETAP
 Tools

50 © 2016 ETAP
 Using the AF SQOP Tool

The SQOP tool indicates two very important items for 
“FCT not determined” troubleshooting:

1) It lists only the source PDs which energize the fault 
location
2) It also lists the source PDs which did not trip. These 
are the PDs which are causing the FCT not Determined 
condition

51
© 2016 ETAP
Using the AF SQOP Tool

52 © 2016 ETAP
Using the AF SQOP Tool

53 © 2016 ETAP