Home › Guides › ETAP Arc Flash & Motor Starting

ETAP Arc Flash Studies and Motor Starting Analysis

Two of the most practical studies in the ETAP set answer questions that directly affect people and plant operation. An arc flash study asks: if an arc fault happened at this board, how much thermal energy would a worker standing in front of it be exposed to, and what protection does that worker need? A motor starting study asks: when this large motor starts, will it actually get up to speed, and will the voltage dip it causes trip or stall anything else on the same bus? Both studies reuse the same model and the same fault levels as load flow and short-circuit work, which is why they come last in the study sequence — and why a model that was good enough for load flow must be checked again before it is trusted for safety calculations.

This is an advanced guide. It assumes you can already build a model, run a load flow study from our ETAP basics guide, and understand fault levels and coordination from our short-circuit and protection guide. The explanations here are generic educational material from standard engineering practice, not a reproduction of any software manual or proprietary content, and hands-on practice requires a licensed copy of the software, an authorised trial, or an academic licence from the vendor. Arc flash results in particular must be produced and checked under your company's safety procedures and the applicable standards for your region, because the labels and protective equipment requirements that come out of a study are safety-critical information.

What an arc flash actually is

An arc flash is an explosive release of energy caused by an arc fault — a short circuit through air between conductors or between a conductor and earth. Temperatures at the arc can reach many thousands of degrees, vaporising copper and producing a pressure wave, molten metal droplets and intense light. A worker standing in front of the equipment can suffer severe burns in a fraction of a second, which is why arc flash is treated as a serious occupational hazard rather than as a theoretical fault condition. The purpose of an arc flash study is to quantify that hazard at each location so that work can be planned, equipment can be labelled, and the right personal protective equipment can be specified.

The study does not eliminate the hazard; it makes it visible and manageable. The outputs — incident energy, arc flash boundary, and the required protective equipment category or rating — feed directly into safe work procedures: which tasks may be done live at all, what clothing and face protection must be worn, and how far unprotected people must stand back. An arc flash label on a board is therefore not a sticker for compliance; it is the summary of a calculation that a worker's safety depends on, and it must be based on a model that reflects the real, current plant.

Incident energy and the arc flash boundary

Incident energy is the thermal energy per unit area that would reach a worker at a given working distance if an arc occurred, usually expressed in calories per square centimetre. It depends on the fault current at that location, how long the arc lasts before protection clears it, the gap between conductors, and the type of equipment. Higher fault current does not always mean higher incident energy, because a higher current usually trips protection faster, shortening the arc duration — which is one reason arc flash results sometimes surprise beginners. The study must therefore consider both the maximum and the minimum fault current arrangements, since the worst incident energy often occurs at a lower fault current where protection is slower to operate.

The arc flash boundary is the distance from the equipment at which the incident energy falls to a level generally regarded as the onset of a second-degree burn. Inside that boundary, protective equipment is required; outside it, the thermal hazard is considered low enough for ordinary work clothing under the relevant standard. Both values are calculated for each bus and each equipment location, and they change whenever the plant changes: a new transformer, a changed protection setting, or a different utility fault level can all move the numbers. That is why arc flash labels must carry a study date and revision, and why they must be re-issued when the model changes rather than left on a board for years.

Running an arc flash study in ETAP

Start from the validated model, and confirm the protection data first, because arc duration — and therefore incident energy — is driven by how fast the upstream device clears the fault. A study run with default or incorrect relay settings will produce incident energies that look precise but are wrong, in either direction. Enter the working distances, equipment types and gap values that match the real installation and the study standard you are working to, select the buses to be studied, and run the study for both the maximum and minimum fault current cases. Review the results bus by bus, and look for the locations with the highest incident energy first, since those drive the most urgent actions.

Where incident energy is unacceptably high, the study itself points to the remedies: faster protection (for example, an instantaneous element or an arc-flash detection relay), a different protection setting, a change in operating arrangement, or remote operation so that nobody needs to stand in front of the equipment while it is energised. Each remedy changes the model, so the study must be re-run after the change to confirm the improvement. Producing the labels comes last: each label should show the equipment name, the incident energy, the arc flash boundary, the required protective equipment, and the study date, in the format your company's safety standard requires.

Motor starting: will it start, and what else suffers?

A motor at standstill looks almost like a short circuit to the supply: it draws a starting current several times its full-load current until it accelerates towards running speed. That current, flowing through the impedance of transformers and cables, causes a voltage dip across the system. Two questions follow. First, does the motor itself accelerate successfully? Acceleration depends on the torque the motor produces at the dipped voltage versus the torque the driven load demands, and a motor that cannot produce enough torque at the starting voltage will stall, overheat and trip. Second, does the dip disturb anything else? Contactors can drop out, sensitive electronics can reset, and other motors already running can stall if the dip is deep or long enough.

The starting method changes the picture completely. Direct-on-line starting gives the highest starting current and the deepest dip but the fastest acceleration. Star-delta starting reduces the starting current but also reduces starting torque, so it suits loads that start lightly. Soft starters ramp the voltage up and control the current, and variable frequency drives control both voltage and frequency for the smoothest start. The study must model the actual starting method, the actual load torque curve, and the actual system impedance; a study that assumes direct-on-line starting for a motor that actually starts through a soft starter will predict a dip that never happens, and the reverse error is worse.

Running a motor starting study in ETAP

Model the motor with its datasheet data: rated power and voltage, full-load current, locked-rotor current, and the speed-torque characteristics if available. Model the driven load honestly too: a pump, a fan and a compressor have very different torque curves, and a motor that starts a lightly loaded fan easily may struggle with a fully loaded conveyor. Select the starting case — which motors start, in what order, and what else is already running — and run the dynamic or static study as appropriate for the level of detail you need. A static study checks the voltage dip at the moment of starting; a dynamic study follows the acceleration over time and shows whether the motor reaches full speed and how long it takes.

Read the results as a story over time: bus voltage during the start, motor current decaying as speed rises, and motor speed climbing towards rated speed. A successful start shows voltage recovering as the motor accelerates and current falling to normal running values. A failed start shows voltage staying low, current staying high, and speed plateauing below rated speed — the signature of a motor that will trip on overload if left alone. Compare the dip against the limits your plant actually uses for sensitive loads, and if the dip is too deep, consider the remedies in order of practicality: a different starting method, a larger supply transformer, a dedicated feeder, or starting large motors one at a time rather than together.

Common mistakes in both studies

The most common arc flash mistake is studying only the maximum fault current case and missing the worst incident energy, which often occurs at minimum fault current where protection is slowest. The second is using protection settings from the design stage after the site has changed them during commissioning, so the labels describe a plant that no longer exists. The most common motor starting mistake is modelling the motor without the load: a motor on its own always looks easier to start than the same motor coupled to its real load. In both studies, the recurring lesson is the same as in every ETAP study: validate the model against reality, study the credible worst cases, and re-study when the plant changes.

Both studies also share a reporting lesson. An arc flash study report and a motor starting report should each state the cases studied, the assumptions and data sources, the results in clear tables, the locations or motors that need action, and the recommendations. A report that only a specialist can read will not change how anyone works on site, and a label that nobody understands will not protect anyone. The engineering is only complete when the people who operate and maintain the plant can act on it.

What to learn next

With the study set complete — load flow, short-circuit, coordination, arc flash and motor starting — the next skill is producing the design documents those studies support. See our AutoCAD Electrical basics, schematics and panel layouts, and reports and automation guides. For the control systems that start and protect these motors in real life, see our PLC basics, advanced ladder logic and analog signals, PID and troubleshooting guides, and our AI tools for engineers page for speeding up study documentation.

Frequently asked questions