MCBs versus Fuses in Low-Voltage Applications: Critical ysis Using the
3-AND Convergence Classifier
Ishmael S. Msiza and Mehmood Haffejee
Rietvlei Installations Department
Electrical Engineering Section, Rand Water
P.O. Box 1127 Johanneurg 2000, South Africa
imsiza@randwater.co.za,
mhaffeje@randwater.co.zaAbstract
The protection of any electrical installation is one of the
most important considerations in the field of electrical
engineering. The electrical installation should be
protected against hazards such as overload current and
short circuit current conditions. The protection devices
studied in this paper are the Miniature Circuit Breaker
(MCB) and the High Rupturing Capacity (HRC) Fuse.
Using a new tool known as the 3-AND Convergence
Classifier, it was observed that the MCB is the most
reliable in terms of offering protection against the damage
caused by overload currents and the destruction caused by
short circuit currents.
Key Words: miniature circuit breaker, fuse, overcurrent,
overload current, short-circuit current, classifier
1 Introduction
Electrical installations have over the years demonstrated
the need for protection from the hazardous effects of the
over-current condition. This condition includes both
overload currents and short circuit currents. Overload
current flows for example, as a result of too many devices
connected to the same energy source at the same time.
Short circuit current flows when there is a zero resistance
path to ground. It proved to be very useful during the
formulation of Norton’s theorem; hence it also became to
be known as the Norton current [1]. The values of these
currents are both larger than the rated current value of the
device to be protected.
The primary objective of this paper is the
ysis and comparison of MCBs versus fuses as
protection devices in low voltage applications. The
secondary objective of this paper is to demonstrate the
feasibility of the new 3-AND Convergence Classifier.
This paper starts off by reflecting on some of the
work that has been done in the field of evaluating the
reliability of circuit protection devices. This is followed
by a brief theoretical background of MCBs and fuses. The
3-AND Convergence Classifier is introduced, and then
followed by its application. This paper concludes by
discussing the results obtained from the ysis.
2 Related Works
The protection of electrical installations has been
receiving a lot of attention due to the growing number of
protection schemes and devices that are available for use.
Some level of ysis has to go into the process of
selecting the most optimum and reliable protection device
for a particular application.
Work that has been done in this field includes
the decision ysis worksheet that was developed by
Sasol [2] to evaluate Moulded Case Circuit Breakers
(MCCBs) versus Combined Fuse Switches (CFS) in some
of their applications. The weakness of this worksheet is
that it assigns a weight to each parameter using a scale of
one to ten. This is prone to a lot of errors as the decision
on the weight may vary from one person to the next. It is
therefore better to have a weighting system that only has
two states, similar to the one introduced in this paper.
Emanuelson et al [3] formulated a “from cradle
to grave” life cycle assesent (LCA) of the miniature
circuit breaker (MCB) versus the diazed fuse in
household installations. This ysis was executed in
order to determine the environmental impacts of these
devices. A lot of assumptions went into this ysis and
could have been improved by replacing the assumptions
with real facts. This therefore implies that the need for the
development of better and efficient ysis tools is
sufficiently justified.
3 Theoretical Background
In terms of Rand Water’s operations, low voltage (LV),
alternating current (AC) applications are those
applications with voltage levels less than and including
1000V. Rand Water’s standardized voltages are 230V and
400V [4].
3.1 Miniature Circuit Breaker (MCB)
The MCB is an automatic, electrically operated switching
device that was designed to automatically protect an
electric circuit from overload currents and short circuit
currents. It is a complicated construction made up of
almost 100 individual parts [3]. It has the ability to
respond within milliseconds when a fault has been
detected. Westinghouse Electric introduced the World’s
first MCB and it initially had a porcelain base and cover
mounted in a metal housing [5].
3.1.1 Applications of MCBs
MCBs find wide application in residential, commercial
and industrial operations. These applications include but
are not limited to [6]:
• Power Supplies
• Programmable Logic Controller Input/Output (I/O)
Points
• Lighting circuits
• Solenoids
• Relay/Contactor coils
• Appliances
• Control circuits
• Motor circuits
3.1.2 MCB Characteristics
The most essential feature of the MCB is the inverse-time
tripping characteristic. This feature indicates the time
required to trip the breaker in order to clear the circuit of
any given level of overcurrent load. A typical inversetime
tripping characteristic is depicted in figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Inverse-time tripping feature of the MCB
3.1.3 MCB Operation
The operation of the MCB in order to ensure protection
against overload currents and short circuit currents is
summarized in figure 2 below.
Figure 2: The operation of the MCB
3.1.4 MCB Advantages over fuses
The advantages of the MCB can be summarized as
follows:
• Closed overload protection compared to HRC fuses
• Stable tripping characteristics
• Common tripping of all the phases of a motor
• Instant re-closing of the circuit after a fault has been
cleared
• Safety disconnect features for circuit isolation
• Terminal insulation for operator safety
• Ampere ratings that can be fixed and modified
compared to the possibility of introducing overrated
fuses
• It is reusable, hence very little maintenance and
replacement costs
• Lower power losses
• Simplicity of mounting and wiring
• Lower space requirements
• Provision of accessories e.g. auxiliary switch
• Stable arc interruption
• Discrimination can be achieved either based on
current or based on time
3.1.5 MCB Disadvantages
The disadvantages of the MCB can be summarized as
follows:
• More expensive than the fuse
• Difficult to identify where the fault occurred
• Fault can be cleared in any time up to 10 cycles of
the current waveform
• Large amount of energy “let through” (10 times that
released by the fuse)
3.2 High Rupturing Capacity (HRC) Fuse
The word fuse is a short form of “fusible link” and it is
also protection device capable of protecting a circuit from
overload currents and short circuit currents. In this paper,
the fuse is viewed as part of a switch and hence can be
referred to as a fuse switch. Fuses are rated in terms of
many aspects. These include voltage, current and the type
of application. A high rupturing capacity (HRC) fuse is a
fuse that has a high breaking capacity (higher kA Rating).
The minimum fault value for an HRC fuse is 80kA. A
fuse should be selected with a rating just above the
normal operating current of the device to be protected. A
general approach is that it should operate at 1.2 times the
rated current. A typical fuse is made of silver-coated
copper strips and granular quartz [7].
3.2.1 Fuse Applications
Fuses find application in systems where the load does not
vary much above the normal value (overload protection).
They also find application in systems where the loads
vary considerably (short-circuit protection). These
applications include but are not limited to [8]:
• Transformer circuits
• Capacitor banks
• Motor circuits
• Fluorescent lighting circuits
• Control circuits
3.2.2 Fuse Characteristics
The inverse time-current characteristic shows the time
required melting the fuse and the time required to clear
the circuit for any given level of over current load. A
simplified, but typical fuse time-current feature is
depicted in figure 3 below.
Figure 3: Typical time-current feature of a fuse
This curve is very important when determining an
application for a fuse as it allows the correct ratings to be
chosen.
3.2.3 Fuse Operation
When an over current condition occurs in the circuit, the
silver-coated metal strip melts. It subsequently melts the
surrounding quartz and this combination forms an
insulating material called fulgarite [7]. Like any perfect
insulator, fulgarite has an infinite resistance and hence it
creates an open circuit. This operation is summarized in
figure 4 below.
Figure 4: The operation of the fuse
3.2.4 Fuse Advantages over MCBs
The advantages of the fuse can be summarized as follows:
• Cheaper when compared to MCBs
• It is easy to identify where the fault is due to the open
air gap
• It can cut-off fault current long before it reaches its
first peak
• Hence, very little energy “let through” (I2t)
• Perfect discrimination easily achievable due to the
low cut-off value
3.2.5 Fuse Disadvantages
The disadvantages of the fuse can be summarized as
follows:
• The abrupt introduction of high resistance in the
circuit by a badly designed and assembled fuse can
create unwanted effects while clearing the fault
• Although this is very rare, fuses are likely to produce
high peak voltage which is much higher than the
system voltage and can puncture the insulation of the
rest of the circuit
• A lot of maintenance and replacement costs.
Maintenance in the form of continuously monitoring
the state of the fuse; and replacement after each and
every fault
• The cut-off current increases with the fuse rating
• Fuse of incorrect ratings can easily be installed in the
fuse holders
• In a three phase power circuit, if one fuse blows, all
the fuses must be replaced at the same time
4 The 3-AND Convergence Classifier
4.1 Detailed Description
The 3-AND Convergence Classifier is an innovative tool
that can be used to classify an object either as good or
bad, when it is compared with another object for a
particular application. This classifier has not been used
before; hence it is first introduced and implemented in
this paper.
This classifier has a discrete nature because it
only has two states to represent an outcome. These states
are the 0-state and the 1-state, where the 0-state indicates
that an object has been classified as bad when compared
with the second one. Consequently, the 1-state indicates
that an object has been classified as good when measured
against its counterpart. In this paper, the two objects are
obviously the MCB and the HRC Fuse. This classifier
consists of three layers; the ysis layer, the
convergence layer and the output layer, as shown in
figure 5 below.
Figure 5: The 3-AND Convergence Classifier
The ysis layer encapsulates a total of three ysis
paradigms. These ysis paradigms may vary from one
application to the next. In this paper, the ysis
paradigms considered are the Merit and De-merit
ysis (MDA), Life Cycle Assesent (LCA) and
Speed, Quality and Cost (SQC) evaluation.
4.2 Algorithmic Description
Algorithm 1: The 3-AND Convergence Classifier
do
│→Compare the two objects in each and every ysis
│ paradigm
enddo
if an object satisfies a paradigm
│ then it is allocated the 1-state for that particular
│ paradigm
│ else it is allocated the 0-state
endif
do
│→Converge all the outcomes of the individual
│ paradigms
enddo
if all the outcomes of the individual paradigms are of 1-
│state for the same object
│ then that object is classified as good
│ elseif all or one of the outcomes of the individual
│ │ paradigms is of 0-state for the same object
│ │ then that object is classified as bad
│ endelseif
endif
4.3 Classifier input and output
The 3-AND Classifier has a total of three inputs and a
single output. The inputs are the results from the
individual ysis paradigms. They are converged into a
model of an AND gate and classified as either good or
bad. The input-output functional mapping is given by (1).
y = x1ANDx2ANDx3 (1)
Where y is the output, x1 is the result of the first ysis
paradigm, x 2 is the result from the second ysis
paradigm and x3 from the third.
Since the classifier is modeled as an AND gate,
it is possible to use the concept of digital electronics [9]
to represent the input-output functional mapping. In other
to represent this functional mapping, a truth table is as
depicted below.
Table 1: Truth table of the 3-AND Convergence
Classifier
x1 x2 x3 y
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
0 1 1 0
1 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 0
1 1 1 1
It is evident from the truth table that the an object can
only be classified as good if and only if it passes the all
the individual ysis paradigms.
4.4 Properties of the Classifier
The properties taken into consideration are similar to
those considered in the study of signal and system
ysis [10]. These properties are memory, invertibility,
causality, stability and linearity.
This classifier is memoryless because an output
at n0, y[n0] does not depend on input values other than
x[n0]. It is also non-invertible because distinct inputs do
not produce distinct outputs. This can be observed from
the truth table. The output column has more than one
zero-state from many input combinations.
This classifier is not causal because it is not a
physical system; it is just an ysis tool. In terms of
bounded input bounded output (BIBO) stability, this
classifier is stable because the output remains bounded (0
or 1) for any bounded input (0 or 1). It is not linear
because it fails both the tests of additivity and
homogeneity.
4.5 Merits of the Classifier
The only limitation of the 3-AND Convergence Classifier
is that it can only be employed to compare two objects.
The advantages of using this classifier can be summarized
as follows:
• It is a stable system
• It is a discrete system
• Sampling of inputs is unnecessary as they only have
two possible states
• It is unaffected by time-invariance
• It is not complex (only 23 possible input
combinations)
5 ysis Using the Classifier
The MCB and the HRC Fuse are now yzed using the
3-AND Convergence Classifier.
5.1 Merit and De-merit ysis (MDA)
This ysis compares the advantages and disadvantages
of both objects. From section 3.1.4 and 3.2.4 it appears
that the MCB has a total of 14 advantages over the fuse
while the fuse only has 5 advantages over the MCB.
From section 3.1.5 and 3.2.5 it appears that the fuse has a
total of 6 disadvantages while the MCB only has a total
of 4.
Fuse MDA Score: 0
MCB MDA Score: 1
5.2 Life Cycle Assesent (LCA)
5.2.1 Lifespan
The fuse generally has a shorter lifespan than the MCB
[3]. This implies that the MCB lives longer than the fuse.
5.2.2 Financial Impacts
The initial cost of the fuse is less than that of the MCB.
However, the maintenance and replacement costs of the
fuse eventually exceed the cost of the MCB. This
therefore implies that the financial impact of the fuse is
more severe than the one of the MCB.
5.2.3 Short circuit withstands
The fuse can withstand only one short circuit, while the
MCB can withstand three to five short circuits [2].
5.2.4 Environmental Impacts
Emanuelson et al [3] concluded that porcelain (MCB) has
no known emissions and it can be used as landfill.
Fuse LCA Score: 0
MCB LCA Score: 1
5.3 Speed, Quality and Cost (SQC) ysis
The fuse reacts to a fault faster than the MCB because of
its low current cut-off value. It can be concluded that the
MCB has more quality than the fuse because of the many
advantages it has over the fuse. The MCB has a longer
lifespan than the fuse. This therefore implies that it is
more cost-effective when compared to the fuse. This is
due to the fact that the fuse has a shorter lifespan, and
hence has to be regularly replaced, and the cost of
replacement accumulates continually.
Fuse SQC Score: 0
MCB SQC Score: 1
6 Results and Discussion
The results from the individual ysis paradigms are
converged are converged into the AND gate structure.
According to table 1, the fuse is classified as bad and the
MCB is classified as good. The terms “good” and “bad”
are not used to classify these objects in a general sense,
but an object is “bad” relative to its counterpart, and the
other way round. The mathematics behind the
classification process is shown below.
For the fuse, y = 0AND0AND0 = 0
For the MCB, y =1AND1AND1=1
This implies that the MCB is the most reliable in terms of
providing protection against overload currents and short
circuit currents.
7 Conclusion
In this paper, two protection devices were yzed for
low voltage applications. These are the miniature circuit
breaker (MCB) and the high rupturing capacity (HRC)
fuse. A classifier approach was adopted for the ysis.
A new tool called the 3-AND Convergence Classifier was
introduced and tested. Making use of this tool, it was
demonstrated and observed that the MCB is a “good”
device for protection against the effects of over currents.
This includes overload currents and short circuit currents.
It is also acknowledged that the results obtained
from using the 3-AND Convergence Classifier may vary
depending on what the yst considers as an advantage
or a disadvantage, according to their application.
One way of improving the efficiency of
protection devices would be to built models of these
devices and use artificial intelligence techniques to
forecast and predict possible faults and hence be able to
put measures in place to prevent them.
8 Acknowledgements
The author hereby thanks Rand Water’s Electrical
Engineering Section for the opportunity to do the work.
References
[1] HE Hanrahan, “Electric Circuit Fundamentals”,
School of Electrical and Information Engineering,
University of the Witwatersrand, 2003
[2] Sasol, “Decision ysis Worksheet: MCCBs vs.
CFS”, Feb 2002
[3] K. Emanuelson, R. Eriksson, T. Johansson,
J. Kocher-Oberlehner, J. Lakhall, B. Lindholm, R.
Persson, S. Sundstrom, “Life Cycle Assesent of
the Miniature Circuit Breaker vs. the Diazed Fuse
in Household Installations”, Chalmers University
of Technology, Oct 2001
[4] Personal Communication, M. Haffejee, November
2006
[5] V Cohen, “Miniature and moulded case circuit
breakers: A historical review”, SAIEE Historical
Interest Group, Jan 1994
[6] GE Consumer and Industrial Electrical
Distribution, URL:
http://www.geindustrial.com/cwc/products?id=cbvdin,
Last Accessed: 07 December 2006
[7] Panicker,
URL:
http://www.panickker.net/article5.htm,
Last accessed: 07 December 2006
[8] L.G. Hewitson, M. Brown and R. Balakrishnan,
“Practical Power System Protection”, ELSEVIER,
2005
[9] W. Kleitz, “Digital and Microprocessor
Fundamentals: Principles and Applications”,
Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 2003
[10] C.L. Phillips, JM Parr and E.A. Riskin, “Signals,
Systems and Transforms”, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey, 2003
