SoSo CAD
White paperFree to read2026

DC Arc Flash Analysis: A Practical Study on 800 VDC AI Data Centers

Schneider Electric · Tony Landry, Stuart Sheehan et al.

This paper simulates arc-flash incident energy for two 800 VDC architectures: rack-level sidecar and centralized conversion. It finds that existing methods are conservative for converter-fed systems.

Go to the original source
On this page

Overview

The paper simulates arc-flash incident energy for two 800 VDC architectures: rack-level sidecar and centralized conversion. The methods include NFPA 70E Annex D.5, Annex R for capacitor discharge, and ETAP DC tools. The aim is a realistic incident energy estimate for personnel safety in 800 VDC systems. Because DC arc-flash calculation is less established than its AC counterpart, the study places the results of different calculation methods side by side so that they can be compared.

The findings are that existing methods are conservative for converter-fed systems, and that the risk is often below the 1.2 cal/cm² second-degree-burn threshold. That threshold is also the limit for the arc-rated personal protective equipment (PPE) requirement. Example results are 0.09 cal/cm² at 3 ms and 0.50 cal/cm² at 30 ms clearing (ETAP), about 86-90% below the Annex D.5.1 estimates.

Inside an IT rack the results are 0.10 cal/cm² at 3 ms and 0.55 cal/cm² at 30 ms. In the rack-level case the Annex R capacitor method gave a result 96% below the 1.2 cal/cm² threshold. Centralized 800 VDC architectures, by contrast, show higher incident energy than rack-level ones. Rather than generalising, the paper recommends a system-specific evaluation. A limit is that the results belong to the two architectures and assumptions modelled in the study; other designs may give different values, and engineer verification is required.

Key points

  1. 1.2 cal/cm² is the threshold for second-degree burn and the arc-rated PPE requirement.
  2. Example results: 0.09 cal/cm² at 3 ms and 0.50 cal/cm² at 30 ms clearing (ETAP), about 86-90% below Annex D.5.1 estimates.
  3. Inside an IT rack: 0.10 cal/cm² at 3 ms and 0.55 cal/cm² at 30 ms.
  4. The Annex R capacitor method result is 96% below the 1.2 cal/cm² threshold in the rack-level case.
  5. Centralized 800 VDC architectures show increased incident energy versus rack-level.

Using it in design

  • Subject DC arc-flash outputs to engineer verification in expert mode.
  • Show 1.2 cal/cm² as the PPE threshold in any arc-flash label preview.
  • Prefer rack-level conversion in 800 VDC templates.

Monthly newsletter · free

Keep your reading list current

Once a month: new library sources, changes to Turkish regulations and upcoming data centre events.

SoSo CAD

Review your power design in SoSo CAD

Inspect supply paths, equipment loads and UPS failure scenarios in one model.

Request a demo
Single-line diagram in the SoSo CAD power and capacity workspace

Who should read it

Engineers assessing electrical safety and arc-flash risk in 800 VDC power distribution.

Related standards

  • NFPA 70E
  • IEEE 1584
  • IEC 61482

Publication details

Authors
Tony Landry; Stuart Sheehan; Wendy Torell; Maria A. Torres Arango
Publisher
Schneider Electric
Year
2026
Document number
WP 219
Document language
English
Source type
Manufacturer
Access
Free to read
Licence
Copyright retained; citation only — the publisher’s terms apply to the original document

Citation

Tony Landry; Stuart Sheehan; Wendy Torell; Maria A. Torres Arango (2026). DC Arc Flash Analysis: A Practical Study on 800 VDC AI Data Centers. Schneider Electric. WP 219. https://download.schneider-electric.com/files?p_Doc_Ref=SPD_WP219_EN

ElectricalSecurity

Events on this subject

Browse the events calendar

All content and rights belong to the respective authors and publishers. SoSo CAD provides only the citation, its own summary and a link to the source, and is not responsible for the sources' content.