Arc Flash Hazards, Incident Energy, PPE Ratings

and Thermal Burn Injury A Deeper Look

Copyright Material IEEE
Paper No. ESW2015-17
Tammy Gammon, P.E.
Senior Member, IEEE
John Matthews and Associates
P. O. Box 3229
Cookeville, TN 38502
tgammon@tds.net

Wei-Jen Lee, P.E.; Zhenyuan Zhang

Ben Johnson

Fellow, IEEE; Student Member, IEEE

University of Texas Arlington
Energy Systems Research Center
Arlington, TX 76019
w.lee@uta.edu, zhenyuan.zhang@mavs.uta.edu

Life Fellow, IEEE

Thermon
P. O. Box 609
San Marcos, TX 78666
ben.johnson@thermon.com

Abstract - Tremendous resources are being invested in arc

flash studies and personal protective equipment (PPE) to
protect workers from arc flash hazards. In the flurry to comply
with OSHA regulations and NFPA 70 and 70E Standards, real
understanding of the arc hazard and incident energy may be
lagging behind. The term arc flash does not adequately
convey the range of potential arc hazards light, pressure and
heat transmission, as well as others. The term arc flash also
fails to emphasize that arc flash injuries primarily arise from
thermal burns, and that the risk of a potentially severe or fatal
arc burn is often present when performing electrical work.
Worker risk assessment and the appropriate PPE are
2
represented as definitive quantities in cal/cm ; however, the
quantitative potential heat exposure and heat protection
afforded by PPE are usually less precise than the assigned
numerical value. Basic concepts of incident energy, PPE
ratings and burn injury are also explored in this paper to help
identify factors influencing the burn hazards posed by arcing
faults in electrical power systems.
Index Terms arc flash hazard, incident energy, PPE
I.

characteristic of an arcing event; it is often used as part of an

arc detection scheme in mitigation devices with relays
responding to light sensor input in less than 2.5 ms [3]. The
intensity and timing of the arc flash light hazard has been
studied. Figs. 1 and 2 are video frames of the light recorded
(1200 fps) at 10 ft (3m) from arc tests at approximately 5.83 ms
(Fig. 1) and 1.67 and 8.33 ms (Fig. 2) after the first light
generated by the arc was visible in the video. The times listed in
Table I for peak light emission reveal that the peak light usually
occurred in less than a half cycle (8.33 ms) for the 40-kA and
63-kA, bolted-fault tests conducted using a three-phase, 4.16kV supply and a 1.5-in (38-mm) electrode-gap width. The light
intensity increases rapidly; light intensities, easily surpassing 1
Mlux, were recorded within 1 to 2 ms for the majority of the
tests listed in the table. The images in Figs. 1 and 2 and the
light data results included in Table I have been derived from
video and light measurement data provided by the courtesy of
the IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash Project. For test setups associated
with 20-kA and 40-kA bolted-fault currents, light levels were
recorded for the vertical electrode, open air configuration. For
the 63-kA bolted-fault test setup, light levels were recorded for a
variety of configurations: open air and enclosures, as well as
vertical and horizontal electrodes. It was discovered after the
testing that the generator terminal voltage floated upward;
therefore, the actual bolted-fault currents were somewhat
higher than the magnitudes listed in Table 1 and Figs. 1 and 2.
The
enclosure
dimensions
were
26inx26inx26in
3
(660x660x660mm ) and the electrode tips were placed 4 in (10
mm) from the rear wall. The calorimeter distances listed in Figs.
1 and 2 are the distances between the calorimeter array and
the electrode tips. The light generated from the arc was
recorded from a side view so that the developing smoke cloud
(which thickens over arc duration) causes less obscuration in
the video. In Table II, published light measurement results are
compared with bright sunlight at noon.

INTRODUCTION

While industry is rushing to conform to OSHA and NFPA 70

and 70E requirements on labeling equipment and protecting
workers from arc flash hazards, those charged with the
responsibility may not have paused to reflect on the wide range
of human hazards created by arcing faults in power systems.
The push toward scientific accuracy may obfuscate the real
imprecision associated with quantifying the impact of thermal
arc energy on those in the vicinity of the arc. Section II of this
paper discusses the range of arc hazards. Section III addresses
incident energy concepts and rating personal protective
equipment (PPE). Section IV covers basic physiology and the
effects of burn injury, so that the nature of burns is better
understood by those not familiar with thermal injury. Finally
Section V briefly introduces some foundational burn research
and burn modeling.
II.

TABLE I
PEAK LIGHT TIME AFTER ARC INITIATION
Peak Light
Test Setup Bolted-Fault Currents
Time (ms)
Ibf = 20kA Ibf = 40kA Ibf = 63kA
Average
23.7
8.0
6.7
Maximum
44.4
10.7
9.6
Minimum
9.8
6.8
3.4
Standard Deviation
14.1
1.5
1.7
Median
26.6
7.5
6.6
Number of tests
5
6
28

ARC FLASH HAZARDS

The arc flash can be a serious light hazard known to cause

temporary blindness for several days, even for extremely shortduration arcs, without additional injury. Permanent visual loss
sometimes can also occur, as well as cataracts, perhaps due to
UV or infrared radiation [1] or even thermal energy. A flash,
defined as a sudden brief burst of bright light [2], is

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

Fig 1(a). Vertical electrodes, Ibf = 20kA, Calorimeters at 33.

Fig. 2(a). Ibf = 20kA, ~1.67 ms after first visible light.

Fig 1(b). Vertical electrodes, Ibf = 63kA, Calorimeters at 42.

Fig. 2(b). Ibf = 20kA, ~8.33 ms after first visible light.

Fig 1(c). Horizontal electrodes, Ibf = 63kA, Calorimeters at 24.

Fig. 2(c). Ibf = 40kA, ~1.67 ms after first visible light.

Fig 1(d). Vertical-barrier electrodes, Ibf = 63kA, Calor. at 42.

Fig. 2(d). Ibf = 40kA, ~8.33 ms after first visible light.

Fig. 1. Enclosure testing - Light generated by arc (recorded at

10ft), roughly 5.83 ms after light first visible (1200fps video).

Fig. 2. Open air testing - Vertical electrodes, Ibf = 20 & 40 kA,

1.67 & 8.33 ms after light visible (1200fps), 27-in. calorimeters.

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

Although the term arc flash effectively encapsulates the

light hazard, it does not effectively capture the other hazards
present. The term arc flash explosion [7], encompasses both
the light and explosive hazards. Often accompanied by a loud
boom, an arc flash can truly be an explosion, a rapid increase
in volume and release of energy in an extreme manner, usually
with the generation of high temperatures and the release of
gases [8]. Furthermore, explosions, as well as arc flash
explosions, often generate dangerous shrapnel and projectiles.
During an arc flash explosion, the vaporization of electrode
material also contributes to the pressures developed. The
pressure-driven projection of molten electrode material can also
ignite clothing and burn skin. Table III provides several pressure
measurements included in recent publications. Peak sound
pressure can occur within a half cycle of arc initiation and peak
pressure rise inside closed equipment typically occurs within
roughly one half-cycle. The high pressure waves can directly
injure body organs, causing concussion, traumatic brain injury
or collapsed lungs. Due to the rapid rise of the pressure wave in
short (or even long) duration incidents, a worker may appear
unharmed, but have temporary or permanent hearing loss.
Memory loss, difficulty concentrating and depression may
surface several weeks after an arc flash explosion. High
pressures can thrust a worker into a wall or equipment, onto the
floor or off a ladder or scaffolding.
Historically, worker safety concerns have been focused on
protecting workers from high magnitude events. But todays
industry is also very concerned about the potential hazards
associated with low magnitude faults, which may not generate a
bright, explosive arc flash. Low magnitude arcing results in
less electrical arc energy and less energy converted into bright
light, sound or high pressure waves. Although Neal and Parry
reported a three-phase, 5-kA arc generating roughly a decibel
sound pressure level (dB SPL) of 142 dB at 6 feet (1.8 m) [9],
low-magnitude fault currents are not as likely to create
deafening or life-threatening pressure waves. Using Ralph
Lees pressure estimation [10], a person standing 1.5 feet (0.46
m) from a 2.5-kA arcing fault might be subjected to a pressure
2
of 20 pounds/ft . Low magnitude arcs do not present the same
high-danger threat as high magnitude arcs, but they do
represent occupational hazards. Worker proximity to lowmagnitude arcs can certainly burn hands, wrists or forearms
(causing long term issues). In addition, although not
conventionally thought of as an arc flash hazard, fires initiated
from undetected low-magnitude arcing faults can result in injury
and death.

TABLE II
a
LIGHT LEVEL MEASUREMENTS IN RECENT PAPERS
Million Test Details, including Test Voltage, Arc or
Lux
Bolted-Fault Current (Iarc or Ibf)
12
2.7 kV, 3-phase, Ibf = 32 kA, 10 ft (3 m) distance,
Open air, Horizontal electrodes [4]
~20
Iarc = 20 kA, Open air, single-phase opposing
electrodes [5]
+0.1
Bright summer sun
a
Significantly higher light intensities have been recorded in
more recent IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash Project testing.
The brightness of visible light depends on the response of
the human eye, which is more sensitive (i.e., greatest
absorption by retina per watt emitted) to specific wavelengths
dependent on light (i.e., daytime) or dark (night vision)
conditions. CIE luminosity functions V() and V() in Fig. 3
show that the eye is most sensitive to 555 nm in a light
environment and 507 nm in a dark environment, respectively
[6]. The spectrogram of copper burning in Fig. 4 illustrates that
peak light emission occurs near 520 nm, near the human eyes
peak sensitivity for both light and dark conditions. Visible light
radiation covers wavelengths from 400 to 700 nm. The light
spectrum generated by an arc falls predominately in the range
of 200 to 600 nm [3], partially covering the UV spectrum (UVC
10-280 nm, UVB 280-315 nm, UVA 315-380 nm).

Fig. 3. Eye sensitivity to wavelength (data from [6], App. 16).

TABLE III
PRESSURES RECORDED IN RECENT PUBLICATIONS
Pressure
Distance
Peak Test Details
140
NA - OSHA limit for impulsive
dB SPL
noise
140-165 6 ft (1.8 m) 8-32 600 V, Iarc = 5-30 kA, Open
dB SPL
ms air, open-front enclosure [9]
150-170
10 ft (3 m)
2.7 kV, Ibf = 10-32 kA, Open
dB SPL
air, open enclosure [4]
1.7 psi
1.83ft (0.6m)
2.7 kV, Ibf = 32 kA, Openat opening
front enclosure tests [4]
4-11 psi
Enclosure
2-7 480V, Ibf = 25-68 kA, Inside
walls
ms MCC [11]
38 psi
Enclosure 10 ms 15 kV, Iarc = 50 kA, Inside
walls
vented, MV equipment [12]

Fig. 4. Intensity of light emission emitted by burning copper.

(Provided by courtesy of the IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash Project)

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

The term arc hazard in lieu of arc flash hazard more

simply and effectively encompasses the wide range of human
hazards presented by both low and high magnitude arcing
faults in AC and DC systems. Additional hazards, not discussed
at length in this paper, include potential chemical skin burns
from batteries and lung injury leading to asthma or lung disease
caused by inhaling chemical gasses and metallic vapors.
III.

incident energy density associated with a 50% probability of

breakopen occurring, is assigned as the arc rating [18].
ASTM F1959 specifies an open-air arc test with a 3-kV
supply and an 8-kA, single-phase-to-ground arc current; the
vertically oriented, series stainless steel electrodes are spaced
12 in. (30.5 cm) apart. Three sets of test panels are placed 12
in. from the electrodes at equal circumferential distances. The
F1959 [18] scope states: This test method is used to measure
the arc rating of materials intended for use as flame resistant
clothing for workers exposed to electric arcs that would
2
generate heat flux rates from 84 to 25,120 kW/m [2 to 600
2
cal/cm -s]. For calibration, ASTM F1959, Section 9.4.7 states,
the highest total heat measured from any single sensor from a
2
10 cycle, 8000 A fault current shall not exceed 11 cal/cm the
2
averageshall be at least 6 cal/cm The highest total
incident energy density generated should not exceed an
2
2
equivalent heat flux of 66 cal/cm -s (11 cal/cm x 60 cyc/s 10
cyc), about 10% of the maximum heat flux to which the F1959
rating system is applicable.
Different test conditions influence material performance. An
ASTM task group and independent researchers have
performed studies on the effect of current on the ASTM ratings
of materials. Arcs of 16-kA and 4-kA were tested using the
standard F1959 setup. The 16-kA arc resulted in increasing a
materials ATPV rating by more than 20%, while the 4-kA arc
resulted in decreasing a materials ATPV rating in the range of
8% to 21% [19]. The arc rating, as specified by ASTM 1959, is
determined from a numerical analysis of a minimum of 40

INCIDENT ENERGY AND PPE RATINGS

Although light, sound, pressure, toxic vapor and chemical

hazards are arc hazards which need recognition, the NFPA 70E
PPE categories [13] in Table IV are defined by incident energy
2
2
levels (in cal/cm or J/cm ), as a measure of the most serious
hazard thermal burn injury. PPE can even be purchased in 8
2
cal to 100 cal arc flash kits, where /cm has been omitted
for brevity. Simple terms and package purchases can be helpful
so that safety personal can effectively maneuver through the
choices and complexities of adequately protecting workers.
However, a deeper understanding of both PPE rating and
incident energy is also important. Calories and Joules are
2
2
units of energy. Incident energy, measured in cal/cm or J/cm ,
is not the total energy incident on the surface area exposed;
2
2
rather cal/cm and J/cm are units which describe the incident
energy density [14], [15], [16] over a surface area.
2
The unit, cal/cm , is an effective measure for heat
transmission to a calorimeter during an arc test and for
quantifying the arc rating of flame resistant materials. However,
the severity of a human burn injury depends on the percentage
of the body surface area (BSA) burned, and therefore, on the
total thermal energy (cal or J) sustained. The Rule of Nines in
Table V is a simple method to estimate the BSA percentage. As
an example, without PPE a person sustains burns on the head
and neck, anterior trunk and both arms. If the potential incident
2
energy from the arc hazard was calculated as 8 cal/cm at the
given working distance, the victim might have been subjected to
2
2
a total heat energy of 68,400 calories (8 cal/cm x 1.9 m ,
average male body surface area [17], x 45%). Therefore, the 8
2
cal/cm is the predicted maximum incident energy density
transmitted to the worker at the working distance. Even under
the assumption that all body surface areas are at the same
distance from the arc, arcing faults project heat directionally and
some surface areas would not experience the maximum, 8
2
cal/cm . Unfortunately, the working distance is usually assumed
to be the workers trunk; the workers hands and arms (or other
parts of the body) are sometimes at much closer distances. The
ignition or melting of clothing, not incorporated into the potential
heat exposure predicted during an arc flash assessment,
represents an additional heat load to the worker and can cause
more extensive burn injury.
Flame resistant fabrics and garments are tested in
accordance with ASTM F1959. The Arc Thermal Protective
Value (ATPV) is the incident energy density associated with a
2
50% probability of transferring 1.2 cal/cm to a surface (i.e.,
person) under the fabric. Most woven fabrics will remain intact
2
even for heat transfer above the 1.2 cal/cm . Some materials or
multi-layer material systems break open before the 1.22
cal/cm heat threshold has been surpassed. Breakopen has
2
occurred when one or more holes, at least 1.6 cm in area or
2.5 cm in length, have developed through each material layer.
For these materials the Breakopen Threshold Energy (Ebt), the

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

TABLE IV
NFPA 70E 2015 MINIMUM PPE REQUIREMENTS [13]
Category
1
2
3
4
2
cal/cm
4
8
25
40
Arc-Rated Clothing System
Long-sleeve shirt &
Long-sleeve shirt &
pants and coverall or
Body
pants or coverall
Flash suit jacket & pants
Hood or
Face
Face/Head
Hood
shield or shield &
Protection
hood balaclava
Outer gear
Arc-rated jacket, parka, hard-hat liner, rainwear
Other PPE
Head
Hard hat
a
Eyes
Safety glasses/goggles, selection required
Hearing
Hearing protection (ear canal inserts)
Gloves/inserts
Leather
Arc-rated
Leather work
As
9
9
9
shoes
needed
TABLE V
RULE OF NINES, BODY SURFACE AREA [20]
Anatomic Surface
Head and neck

% of Adult Body Surface Area

9%

Anterior trunk

18%

Posterior trunk

18%

Arms, including hands

9% each

Legs, including feet

18% each

incident energy density measurements. Neal and Lang [21]

compared the performance of arc rated materials using
standard F1959 setups with those of 480-V and 600-V, threephase setups generating arc currents between 20 and 50 kA.
The electrode configurations were: horizontal, open-tipped
vertical and vertical, solidly-terminated in an insulated barrier.
The electrodes, spaced 1.25 in (31.8 mm) apart, were placed in
3
a 20inx20inx20in (508x508x508mm ) metal enclosure with an
open front. The results are briefly summarized in Table VI,
which also includes published recommendations for adjusting
the ASTM F1959 PPE ratings.
The special ASTM task group also conducted several tests to
determine the impact of color on ATPV rating. They did not
reach any conclusive findings, other than the ATPV results
appear to be impacted by material type as well as color, and it
seems likely that other fabric parameters or processing factors
may also impact ATPV[19]. However, independent testing
performed in accordance with F1959 has demonstrated the
impact of color; selective results are listed in the Table VII.
The actual performance of flame resistant materials and
PPE, as well as untreated fabric, also varies from sample to
2
sample. An untreated dark blue cotton shirt (5.4 oz/yd ) is 10%,
50% and 90% likely to ignite when subjected to incident energy
2
densities of 5.4, 6.0, and 6.6 cal/cm , respectively. Heavier
weight fabrics, fabrics containing more perspiration, and lighter
colored cotton fabrics require more incident energy for ignition
[22]. The manner of care and repeated laundering of fabric and
garments may also affect performance.

caused blister formation, considered the onset of a seconddegree burn [26]. A blister forms when the temperature at the
base of the skins epidermal layer rises 30C (86F), and the
epidermis separates from the dermis [27].
Since electric arc flashovers have been associated with heat
2
fluxes up to 200 cal/cm -s (more recent testing has associated
even higher heat fluxes with arcing), Privette conducted two
sets of arc tests in 1987 to determine the relationship between
heat flux and burn injury. Rats with bare skin and rats covered
by protective fabrics were exposed to arcs lasting
approximately 30 to 200 ms. Based on the level of injury
sustained by the rats with protective fabric, Privette proposed
modifying the Stoll curve (as evident in Fig. 5) for exposure
2
periods less than 1 s, so that heat energy of 2 cal/cm
correlated with a second-degree burn in 0.01 seconds [28].
Scientific understanding on skin anatomy and burn injury has
advanced over the years. Basic knowledge about human skin is
necessary to understanding burn injury. Fig. 6 is an illustration
of the two layers of human skin, the epidermis and the dermis,
as well as the subcutaneous tissue (sometimes referred to as
the hypodermis and considered the third layer of skin [29]). The
epidermis varies from 75 to 150 m thick (typically considered
80 m). Since the epidermis is devoid of blood vessels,
lymphatic tissue and connective tissue, it obtains all
nourishment from the dermis. The epidermis transitions from
the outermost layer dead surface layer (10-20% water) to the
innermost basal layer (~70% water), which helps regulate body
heat [27].
The dermis (1 to 4 mm thick [29]), below and unlike the
epidermis, contains vascular, nervous and lymphatic tissue.
The dermis is comprised of about 10 to 30% fibrous protein
(mostly collagen) with the remainder, a polysaccharide complex
(viscoelastic gel). The redness visible in less serious burns is
due to the mastocyte production of histamine in the dermis. The
blood circulation in the skin, strongly influenced by nervous
system responses to local and systemic stress, is an essential
part of body temperature regulation. Hair follicles, located in the
dermis approximately 2 mm below the surface of the skin,
contain epithelial cells which stimulate growth after burn injury.
If the burn depth is greater than the follicular depth, then regrowth is slow or impossible. Below the dermis, subcutaneous
tissue consists of fat, followed by muscle. The thickness of the
fat varies from almost none in the human face to 1.5 or 2 cm in
the thigh. Fat influences the conductance of the skins surface
and its thickness plays an important role in maintaining body
temperature [27].

TABLE VI
ASTM RATING PERFORMANCE & 3-PH ENCLOSURE
CONFIGURATIONS
min 40
Face Shields
ASTM F1959
min 8
2
2
cal/cm
ATPV Ratings
cal/cm
Material
15 to 40% 45 to 70%
Significantly
Performance [21] lower
lower
higher
Recommendations 85% ASTM 50% ASTM 150% ASTM (for
2
for Effective
(for 40+
8-12 cal/cm
(for 11
2
2
rating and
Rating [23]
cal/cm
cal/cm
rating)
rating)
thickness >0.1)
TABLE VII
SINGLE AND TWO LAYER META-ARAMID FABRICS [24]
Black
Material Color
White
2
2
(4.8 oz/yd )
(4.8 oz/yd )
ATPV 5.3
Single-Layer
ATPV 4.6
2
2
cal/cm
cal/cm
2
EBT 9.9 cal/cm
Meta-aramid over
EBT 10.8
2
2
4.2oz/yd cotton t-shirt
cal/cm
IV. BURN THRESHOLD, HUMAN SKIN & BURN INJURY
Incident energy is the integration of the rate of heat transfer
over time. The rate of heat transfer during an arcing fault varies,
especially in the first milliseconds. Furthermore, human (and
animal) tissue does not behave as a linear function. Damage to
the skin depends not only on the cumulative incident energy but
also on the rate of heat transfer and exposure time, as shown in
Fig. 5. (Fig. 5 was developed from data found in [22, Table 3]
and [25, Table 1].) Stoll and Chianta found that exposing
2
human skin to a heat flux of 1.2 cal/cm -s for one second

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

Fig. 5. Second-degree burn Incident energy, heat flux & time.

heart, lungs, liver and kidneys [27]. Fig. 7 is a bar chart

displaying a persons chance of survival as a function of age
and percentage of the body burned.
TABLE VIII
Burn Depth Characteristics and Prognosis [20,27,29,30,32,33]
Burn Depth
Burned Skin Characteristics and Prognosis
st
1 - Superficial
Red skin without blistering, painful and
tender, only symptomatic treatment, 7 days
nd
2 - Superficial Red and moist blistering, very painful,
partial thickness blanches with pressure, 14-21 days,
minimal scarring
nd
2 - Deep
Possible blistering, pale white to yellow,
partial thickness pain sensation absent, no blanching with
pressure, 3-8 weeks, debridement and skin
grafting might be necessary, scarring
rd
3 - Full
Charred, pale leathery, painless, months,
thickness
surgical repair and skin grafting necessary,
severe scarring
th
4
Devastating, life threatening, months,
multiple surgeries usually required (often
amputation or extensive reconstruction)

Fig. 6. Layers of human skin. Alila Medical Media.

Reprinted under license agreement with shutterstock.com.

Burns cause the proteins inside cells to denature and to

coagulate, causing a form of cell death known as coagulative
necrosis [30]. When a burn injury results in significant cell
death, the skin can no longer continue to function as a
semipermeable barrier, resulting in infection due to bacteria
from the external environment [29]. As a barrier to water
permeation, the skin also maintains the internal environment by
protecting the body from excessive water loss [31]; burns can
cause water loss and burns covering a large area can result in
decreased blood volume [29].
Burn injuries are categorized by the depth of necrosis. First
degree (sometimes referred to as superficial [30]) burns affect
only the epidermis, the superficial or top skin layer. Second
degree burns affect both the epidermis and the dermis; they are
commonly classified as either superficial or deep partial
thickness, depending on whether the injury is limited to the
superficial, papillary layer of the dermis or extends deep into the
dermiss reticular layer. Infections may cause a superficial
partial-thickness burn to develop into a deep partial-thickness or
even a full-thickness burn [32]. The decrease in blood flow,
associated with deep partial-thickness burns, make the injury
susceptible to infection and conversion to deeper injury [33].
Significant burn injuries are often a mixture of second and
third degree, and it is often not possible to initially distinguish
between second (deep partial-thickness) and third degree
burns [30]. Accurately estimating burn depth may take up to 3
days, and can take as long as three weeks [32]. A full-thickness
(i.e., third degree) burn involves the complete destruction of the
dermis and epidermis, including its capillary network; it extends
into the subcutaneous tissue. With full destruction of the skin
and subcutaneous tissue, fourth degree burns involve the
underlying fascia, muscle, bone or other structures [29]. A
summary of burn types is provided in Table VIII. The American
Burn Associations Burn Classification is included as Table IX.
Whether a person survives a serious burn injury depends on
a number of factors, particularly the burn depth, burn location
on the body, age of the victim and extent of the burn. Other
survival factors include inhalation injury [20]; pre-existing health
conditions, such as cardiac, liver or lung disease; and
secondary burn effects, such as shock and pulmonary edema.
If a victim survives the initial period of shock, death may occur
in the subsequent weeks due to secondary effects on the brain,

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

TABLE IX
American Burn Association Classification [20],[32]
Classification
Description for Adults based on Age and
and Disposition Body Surface Area (BSA)
nd
Major burn
2 deg: >25% BSA or >20% over 50;
rd
Burn treatment 3 deg: > 10%; Burns involving hands,
face, feet, perineum, major joints; Electrical
Center
burns
nd
Moderate burn
2 deg: 15-25% BSA or 10-20% over 50;
rd
Hospitalization 3 deg: 10% BSA
nd
Minor burn
2 deg: <15% BSA or <10% over 50;
rd
Outpatient
3 deg: <2% BSA

Fig. 7. Burn survival: function of age and body percentage

burned. (Graph developed from data in [34].)
V.

QUANTIFICATION & MODELING OF BURN INJURY

After World War II, Henriques and Moritz performed heat

conduction experiments on pigs, which have skin more closely
resembling human skin than other common lab animals [35].
Heat flows to the layers below the skins surface when the skin
surface temperature is sufficiently hot. The rate of temperature

rise below the surface skin depends on the ability of the skin to
absorb heat (heat capacity) and to transport heat (thermal
conductivity). Human and animal tissues are not homogenous
material; heat capacity and thermal conductivity are affected by
tissue thickness and temperature gradients within the tissue
and blood flow [36].
Damage occurs to the skin when the basal layer
temperature, about 80 m below the skin surface, reaches
44C. The extent of tissue damage depends on the time
exceeding this temperature, which may occur during and after
the heat exposure while the basal temperature exceeds 44C.
Moritz and Henriques found that when the skin surface
temperature is maintained at 44C, irreversible damage at the
basal layer occurs in approximately six hours. However when
the skin surface temperature reaches 70C, irreversible
damage occurs in less than one second. The minimum time
required to destroy the epidermis at surface temperatures
above 70C was not determined. They did note [35]:

Thermal conductivity, k, is the constant of proportionality; it is a

materials ability to conduct heat and determined experimentally
[45]. The one-dimensional form of Pennes bioheat equation
without metabolic heat generation appears in (2) [46], where
the added term represents the convective cooling by blood

q = - k dT/dx
tissue Ctissue T/t = /x (ktissue t/x) + b b Cb (Tblood - T)

(1)
(2)

It was observed, however, with exposures at flame

temperatures (over 1000C), that the amount of time
required to raise the temperature at the epidermal-dermal
junction to a cell-killing level is so brief that the interposition
of anything capable of impeding heat transfer to the skin may
be sufficient to make the difference between burning and
absence thereof.

Artz used the work of Moritz to develop burn and

irreversible burn curves for exposure times lasting a second or
longer [37]. Fig. 8 shows Lees extrapolation of the available
data to extend Artzs original curves for exposure times
between 0.1 and one second. According to Lee, a skin surface
temperature of 96C (205F) for 0.1 second causes total
destruction of tissue, but skin can recover from temperatures
less than 80C (176F) [38]. Since normal skin surface
temperature is 32.5C (91F), a temperature of 80C represents
a surface temperature rise of approximately 47C (83F).
Using a 1000-W projection lamp controlled by a variable
2
resistor to obtain heat fluxes of 0.1 to 0.4 cal/cm -s [39], Stoll
predicted the time required for a given heat flux exposure to
produce a second-degree burn. Her experiments involved
blackening a persons forearm and exposing it to a known heat
source (pulsed as a rectangular wave) until unbearable pain or
2
blistering occurred. From the 0.4 cal/cm -s tests, Weaver and
Stoll determined that as much as 35% of the skin damage
occurred during the skins cooling phase when the heat source
was no longer energized. Fig. 9 shows the heating and cooling
pattern of skin exposed to a square-wave pulse of radiant
energy. The rise and fall in skin temperature resembles an
exponential function [40].
The skin temperature is affected by the thermal properties of
the skin, and these thermal properties are also affected by the
skins heating and cooling phases. Some average values are
listed in Table X. Thermal conductivity is also affected by heat
flux, but the variations are small (around 5%) for short-term,
large heat flux exposures [41].
Henriques modeled the tissue damage based on the
Arrhenius equation, a first-order chemical rate process. A
number of similar models with different coefficients have been
used over the years [27],[40],[41],[42],[43],[44]. Pennes bioheat
equation, with the conduction term based on Fouriers law, has
also been widely used to study thermal injury. According to
Fouriers law, the rate of heat conduction, q, per cross-sectional
area is proportional to the temperature gradient normal to the
cross-section. Fouriers law of heat conduction is defined in (1).

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

Fig. 8. Burn as a function of time and temp [38, Fig. 6].

1982 IEEE. Reprinted with permission from R. Lee [38].

Fig. 9. Skin temp. rise and fall after radiant heat.

Reprinted with permission from Weaver and Stoll [40].

TABLE X
SOME THERMAL PROPERTIES OF THE SKIN [27], [47]
Symbol Thermal Property
Value
3
c
Volumetric heat capacity
4,186,800 J/m -K
kh
Thermal conductivity (heating)
0.5878 W/m-K
kc
Thermal conductivity (cooling)
0.4518 W/m-K
2
1.3 kW/m
Convective cooling, skin surface
2
Radiative cooling, skin surface
0.80 kW/m
a
2
Convection heat transfer coefficient, 0.025 kW/m -K, 72C

acoustic energy effects in electrical arcs, Ann. New York

Academy Sci., vol. 888, pp. 19-32, 1999.
[2] Merrium-Webster dictionary. Flash, definition 1a. [Online].
Available:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dic-tionary/flash,
accessed on Oct. 25, 2013.
[3] R. A. Wilson, R. Harju, J. Keisala and S. Ganesan, Tripping with
the speed of light: arc flash protection, in Proc. 60th Annu. Conf.
Protective Relay Engineers, College Station, TX, Mar. 27-29,
2007, pp. 226-238.
[4] W.-J. Lee, T. Gammon, Z. Zhang, B. Johnson and S. Vogel,
IEEE/NFPA collaboration on arc flash phenomena research
project, in 2012 IEEE PES Transmission and Distribution Conf.
and Expo. Special Issue, Orlando, FL, May 7-10, 2012.
[5] A. D. Stokes and D. K. Sweeting, Electric arcing burn hazards,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 134-141, Jan./Feb.
2006.
[6] E. F. Schubert, Human eye sensitivity and photometric quantities,
in
Light-Emitting Diodes, 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2006, ch. 16, pp. 275-291.
[7] M. Capelli-Schellpfeffer, R. C. Lee, M. Toner and K. R. Diller,
Correlation between electrical parameters and injury, IEEE Ind.
Appl. Mag., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 25-31,41, Mar./Apr. 1998.
[8] Wikipedia. Explosion. [Online]. Available: http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Explosion, article modified on Apr. 24, 2013.
[9] T. E. Neal and R. F. Parry, Shrapnel, pressure, and noise, IEEE
Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 49-53, May/June 2005.
[10] R. H. Lee, Pressures developed by arcs, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
vol. IA-23, pp. 760-764, July/Aug. 1987.
[11] G. E. Heberlein, J. A. Higgins and R. A. Epperly, Report on
enclosure internal arcing tests, IEEE Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 2, no. 3,
pp. 35-42, May/June 1996.
[12] J. E. Bowen, M. W. Wachtor, G. H. Miller and M. CapelliSchellpfeffer, Catch the wave, IEEE Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 10, no.
4, pp. 59-67, July/Aug. 2004.
[13] Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, NFPA Standard
70E, 2015.
[14] R. Wilkins, M. Allison and M. Lang, Calculating hazards, IEEE
Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 40-48, May/June 2005.
[15] R. Wilkins, M. Lang and M. Allison, Effect of insulating barriers
in arc flash testing, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 44, no. 5, pp.
1354-1359, Sept./Oct. 2008.
[16] R. Wilkins, M. Lang and M. Allison, Effect of electrode orientation
in arc flash testing, in Conf Rec. 2005 Fourtieth IEEE IAS
Annual Meeting, Hong Kong, Oct. 2-6, 2005, vol.1, pp. 459-465.
[17] R. D. Mosteller, Simplified calculation of body-surface area,
New England J. Medicine, vol. 317, no. 17, pg. 1098, Oct. 22,
1987.
[18] Standard Test Method for Determining the Arc Rating of Materials
for Clothing, ASTM 1959/F 1959M - 06a, 2007.
[19] ASTM F18.65.01 Testing task group report on arc testing
analysis of the F 1959 standard test method, ASTM Committee
Task Force F18.65.01, West Conshohocken, PA, 2003.
[20] J. E. Tintinalli, J. S. Stapczynski, O. J. Ma, D. M. Cline, R. K.
Cydulka and G. D. Meckler, Eds., Thermal burns, in Tintinallis
Emergency Medicine, 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011, ch.
210, pp. 1374-1380.
[21] T. Neal and M. Lang, The impact of arc flash test conditions on the
arc rating of PPE, Proc. IEEE Electrical Safety Workshop, Dallas,
TX, March 2008, pp. 126-130.
[22] T. E. Neal, A. H. Bingham and R. L. Doughty, Protective clothing
guidelines for electric arc exposure, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.
33, no. 4, pp. 1041-1054, July/Aug. 1997.
[23] M. Lang, K. Jones and T. Neal, Impact of arc flash events with
outward convective flows on worker protection strategies, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1597-1604, July/Aug. 2011.
[24] R. L. Doughty, T. E. Neal, T. A. Dear and A. H. Bingham, Testing
update on protective clothing & equipment for electric arc
exposure, IEEE Ind. Appl. Mag., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 37-49,
Jan./Feb. 1999.
[25] Standard Test Method for Radiant Protective Performance of

perfusion [48]. Pennes equation has been thought to be very

effective for modeling the effects of blood flow to the skin [49].
Some of the parameters in (2) are listed in Table XI.
The density, specific heat and thermal conductivity (, C, and
k) in (2) depend on the tissue type; the constants differ for the
epidermis, dermis, subcutaneous and inner tissues. The
temperature, T, is the temperature at a specific distance, x,
from the skins surface and is dependent on the time [48]. Diller
noted that accurate modeling becomes more difficult when the
temperature exceeds 100C. He suggested inserting a term on
the right side of (2) to account for the change in latent energy
storage as the phase front moves through the tissue [49].
Furthermore, he stated:
In addition [to the nonlinear complexity of the added term], as
evaporation, boiling or ablation phase changes occur and/or
as the tissue is coagulated or charred, the constitutive
properties, including thermal conductivity and optical
parameters affecting interaction with incident irradiation, will
change dramatically, increasing the nonlinear character of
the problem. [49]

Other researchers have also recognized that Pennes

equation may have limited applicability for high heat fluxes [50],
[51]. Burn modeling has significantly advanced over the years.
Burn modeling aids in understanding the physiological
processes governing burn injury. But it has limited value in
quantifying the burn injuries associated with the high-magnitude
arcing faults that occur in the workplace today.

Symbol
b
Cb
b
a

TABLE XI
BLOOD THERMAL VALUES [50]
Thermal Property
Value
3
Density of the blood
1060 kg/m
Heat capacity of the blood 3770 J/kg-K
a
3
3
Blood perfusion rate
0.00125 m /s-m

b dermis, subcutaneous and inner tissue; none in epidermis.

VI. CONCLUSIONS
An arc flash presents a wide range of potential hazards,
and this paper has primarily addressed those associated with
bright light, pressure and heat. The term arc flash neither
effectively encapsulates the wide range of hazards present nor
reinforces the likelihood or the severity of thermal burn injury.
Since thermal hazards are quantified during arc flash studies
and in rating PPE, incident energy concepts and PPE ratings
have been further explored in this paper. The physiology and
modeling of burn injury have also been briefly examined. The
need for protecting workers from arc hazards is well understood
in industry. The reality of arc injuries, however, is still an
abstract concept for many unfamiliar with arc victims. Severe
burn injuries can be fatal, but can also tragically destroy a
persons health, independence, finances, self-worth, family life
and social relationships. Even relatively minor burn injuries,
requiring only an initial overnight hospital stay, can diminish
quality of life. Long term effects include: chronic pain and
itching (either can result in insomnia), limited dexterity of the
affected burned area, change in physical appearance, and
decreased ability to participate in leisure and social (including
family) activities.
VII. REFERENCES
[1]

M. Capelli-Schellpfeffer, G. H. Miller and M. Humilier, Thermo-

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

Flame Resistant Clothing Materials, ASTM F1939-99a, 1999.

[26] A. M. Stoll and M. A. Chianta, Method and rating system for
evaluation of thermal protection, Aerosp. Med., vol. 40, no. 11, pp.
12321238, Nov. 1969.
[27] Engineering Guide for Predicting 1st and 2nd Degree Skin Burns
from Thermal Radiation, Society of Fire Protection Engineers,
2000.
[28] A. Privette, Progress report for ASTM burn study, Rep. for ASTM
F-18 Committee Task Force F18.10.07, June 10, 1992.
[29] R. F. Edlich, D. B. Drake and W. B. Long III, Thermal Burns.
[Online.] Medscape reference 2011 WebMD, LLC, updated
Sept. 18, 2013. Available: http://emedicine.medscape.com/
1278244-overview.
[30] Burns, [Online.] Available: http://www.woundcarecenters.org/
article/wound-types/burns, accessed Oct. 20, 2014.
[31] K. C. Madison, Barrier function of the skin; la raison detre of
the epidermis, The Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 2003
pp. 231-241.
[32] E. D. Morgan, S. C. Bledsoe and J. Barker, Ambulatory
management of burns, American Family Physician, Nov. 1,
2000, vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 2015-2026.
[33] Burns, [Online.] Available: http://www.medskills.eu/index.php/
wiki/en/Body/level=3/topic=5/, accessed Oct. 20, 2014.
[34] 2012 National Burn Repository report of data for 2002-2011,
American Burn Association, National Burn Repository, Chicago,
Illinois, 2012, dataset version 8.0.
[35] A. R. Moritz and F. C. Henriques, Jr., Studies of thermal injury
II., Amer. J. Pathology, vol. 43, pp. 695-720, Sept. 1947.
[36] F. C. Henriques, Jr. and A. R. Moritz, Studies of thermal injury
I., Amer. J. Pathology., vol. 43, pp. 531-549, 1947.
[37] C. P. Artz, J. A. Moncrief and B. A. Pruitt, Burns. Philadelphia,
PA: W. B. Saunders Company, 1979.
[38] R. Lee, The other electrical hazard: electrical arc blast burns,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. IA-18, pp. 246-251, May/June 1982.
[39] J. M. Cavanagh, Clothing flammability and skin burn injury in
normal and micro-gravity. M.S. thesis, Dept. Mech. Eng., Univ.
Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, CA, 2004.
[40] J. A. Weaver and A. M. Stoll, Mathematical model of skin
exposed to thermal radiation, Aerosp. Med., vol. 40, no. 1, pp.
24-30, Jan. 1969.
[41] B. D. Gagnon, Evaluation of new test methods for fire fighting
clothing, M.S. thesis, Dept. Fire Protection Eng., Worcester
Polytechnic Inst., Worcester, MA, 2000.
[42] F. C. Henriques, Jr., Studies of thermal injury V, Amer. J.
Pathology, vol. 43, pp. 489-502, 1947.
[43] P. Chitrphiromsri, Modeling of thermal performance of firefighter
protective clothing during intense heat exposure, Ph.D.
dissertation, Dept. Mech. Eng., NC State Univ., Raleigh, NC,
2004.
[44] M. Capelli-Schellpfeffer, M. Toner, R. C. Lee and R. D. Astumian,
Advances in the evaluation and treatment of electrical and
thermal injury emergencies, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 31, no.
5, pp.1147-1152, Sept./Oct. 1995.
[45] Y. A. engel and M. A. Boles, Thermodynamics: An Engineering
Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998.
[46] S. C. Jiang, N. Ma, H. J. Li, X. X. Zhang, Effects of thermal
properties and geometrical dimensions on skin burn injuries,
Burns, vol. 28, pp. 713-717, 2002.
[47] J. E. Sipes, Development of an instrumented dynamic
mannequin test to rate the thermal protection provided by
protective clothing, M.S. thesis, Dept. Fire Protection Eng.,
Worcester Polytechnic Inst., Worcester, MA, 2004.
[48] K. R. Diller, The mechanisms and kinetics of heat injury
accumulation, Ann. New York Academy Sci., vol. 720 (R. C.
Lee, et al., Eds., Electrical injury: a multidisciplinary approach to
therapy, prevention and rehabilitation), pp. 38-55, 1994.
[49] K. Diller, Laser generated heat transfer, in Optical-Thermal
Response of Laser-Irradiated Tissue, A. Welch and M. J. C. van

978-1-4799-4782-9/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE

Gemert, Eds., New York: Springer, 2011, ch. 10, pp. 353-398.
[50] J. Liu, X. Chen and L. X. Su, New thermal wave aspects on burn
evaluation of skin subjected to instantaneous heating, IEEE
Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 420-428, Apr. 1999.
[51] F.-L. Zhu and W.-Y. Zhang, Evaluation of thermal performance
of flame-resistant fabrics considering the wave influence in
human skin model, J. Fire Sci., vol. 24, pp. 465-485, Nov. 2006.

VIII. VITA
Tammy Gammon earned a bachelor, a master of science and a
Ph.D. in electrical engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology
in the 1990s. She is licensed as a Professional Engineer in North
Carolina. Since 2003, Tammy has worked as senior electrical engineer
for John Matthews and Associates. She performs research and analysis
in power and power quality issues, in fires of electrical origin, in
electrical arc and shock injuries, and in product design and
manufacturing. Since 2006, Tammy Gammon has also served as the
research manager for the IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash Research Project.
Wei-Jen Lee (S85-M85-SM97-F07) received the B.S. and M.S.
degrees from National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C., and
the Ph.D. degree from the University of Texas, Arlington, in 1978, 1980,
and 1985, respectively, all in Electrical Engineering. He is currently a
professor of the Electrical Engineering Department and the director of
the Energy Systems Research Center. Prof. Lee has been involved in
research on arc flash and electrical safety, utility deregulation,
renewable energy, smart grid, microgrid, load forecasting, power
quality, distribution automation and demand side management, power
systems analysis, online real time equipment diagnostic and prognostic
system, and microcomputer based instrumentation for power systems
monitoring, measurement, control, and protection. Since 2008 he has
also served as the project manager for the IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash
Research Project. Prof. Lee is a Fellow of IEEE and registered
Professional Engineer in the State of Texas.
Zhenyuan Zhang received the B.S. degree from Changan University,
Xian, China in 2007. He is now pursuing a Ph.D. in electrical
engineering at the Energy Systems Research Center, Department of
Electrical Engineering, the University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington,
Texas, USA. His focus lies in arc flash research, but he has also been
involved in hybrid energy storage, smart grids, renewable energy,
electrical safety analysis and power systems analysis. Since 2010
Zhenyuan has served as the project associate for the IEEE/NFPA Arc
Flash Research Project.
Ben C. Johnson is presently Senior Consultant for Thermon
Manufacturing Company. His career spans a broad range of industrial
experience, including 44 years with Thermon and eight years in the
petrochemical industry with the Ethyl Corporation and the Diamond
Shamrock Corporation. Mr. Johnson was Thermons Vice President of
North American Sales for five years and Thermon's Vice President of
Engineering for twelve years, responsible for product application design,
field and construction services. He was previously Thermon's Vice
President of Research and Development. He is the holder of eight
patents in the field of surface heating, and is responsible for numerous
new product innovations. He has authored or co-authored 19 papers for
various societies. As United States delegate to the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), he is the Convener for TC31 Maintenance
Team 79-30, Electrical Equipment in Flammable Atmospheres,
Electrical Resistance Trace Heating and US Technical Advisor for IEC
TC27, Safety in Electroheat Installations. He is also a member of the
US Technical Advisory Committee for IEC TC31. Mr. Johnson is a Life
Fellow of the IEEE and is Co-Chair of the IEEE/NFPA Collaboration on
Arc Flash Research.