I had an incident recently where the type of transformer installed had wildly different impedance values from the "standard" dry type which caused some arc flash values to to multiply between 4-fold to 6-fold (from below 1 to over 6 Cals). I found files for both Square D and Siemens that lists all the impedances (%Z) and X/R (and %X and %R) based on the transformer exact name and entered all that info myself into SKM. It was a pain in the ass and took almost a whole day, and the whole time I was swearing at SKM that this should already be done. The information is publicly available on the internet, and has been for 4-5 years. Why hasn't SKM gotten around to doing this?!? Why hasn't anyone in the "top 40 electrical engineering firms" requested this from them before? And if they have, why is that not part of the standard SKM library yet?

The same is true of breakers. I have breakers ALL THE TIME that don't have the correct files, or no file at all. And these may have existed for 5 years or more. I'm thinking of some of the EATON PXR breakers, the Siemens WL (they don't even have the VL modeled yet?!) and the G&W VI Controls vacuum interrupter switch (just to name a few recent ones). They STILL don't have the G&W switch modeled correctly after 3 attempts. Is there no R&D department at SKM?

Is there a library file that I'm not getting?

How often do you have to actually REQUEST a library update from SKM?

Right or wrong I don't use the exact manufacturers in the library for dry types. I just enter the primary and secondary voltage, the kva, and the impedance and click the button for typical X/R.

RE: breakers, yes, I often find that the library doesn't have a breaker I need. When that happens I put in a ticket with support and they send me the CAPTOR file for it usually within a day. There have been a few times when the library did have the curves, I just couldn't find them or overlooked them. I've also had some old stuff they didn't have curves for but I was able to find paper copies in old shop drawing files to scan or found them online or got from the manufacturer and send to SKM and they built the library files for them quickly.

In general I've found it to be a minor inconvenience once on awhile.

I just looked up the Siemens VL as I didn't recognize it off hand. According to this: https://contractor.compas.siemens-info. ... t-breakers the VL family is comprised of the DG, FG, JG, NG etc. breakers. All of these are in the SKM library as near as I can tell.

RE: The Eaton PXR trip units, I'd need to know exactly which ones you are referring too and in what breakers. It looks like they have a lot of the PD / Power defense breakers in the library with PXR trip units. I also know that they do for sure have the NRX breakers with PRX trip units CAPTOR files available, although I'm not sure if it is in their standard library. I just did a peer review of another engineer's model and study and he had a 1600A NXR breaker with PXR trip unit in the project library so I know it exists.

Be careful modifying your SKM library. In my experience when a new release, say from version 10 to version 11, SKM may incorporate a new library and your efforts will be somewhat lost. You'll have to go back and update the new library with your old modifications. This can be messy. To make this more difficult, if you have multiple users at your company this will need to be done on all machines.

I also submit tickets when I come across equipment not yet in the library. SKM is pretty good about providing an updated library file within a day. I dream of the day SKM's library is as easy to navigate as EasyPower's.

I try to keep a custom library and merge with new libraries as SKM publishes new ones. Usually, my custom libraries are odd devices not in the standard library, so risk of overwriting is minimized. Can't say that it hasn't happened a time or two tho'...

Mike

This is a good practice if you've added a lot of curves from last version, or added your own library data like #3 copper or disconnects as busses etc. but as you say, make a backup first! Or a few backups saved in different locations just to be sure. I must admit, it's a little scary.

I advise against using the SKM standard library. Always copy in the device you need from the standard library to a custom library for your project, then edit all those fields they use to describe the element to create consistency in how the fields are used. The problem is SKM is inconsistent in how they use the descriptive fields, and when you put data blocks on the one line or TCC that show the element, it is hard to set up a datablock that shows pertinent descriptive fields, as the relevant info appears in different fields. This is particularly a problem when you show fuses, molded case circuit breakers, and relays on your one line. SKM forces you to use the same datablock for each element, but then their library uses the same fields differently in each element. It is a royal PITA to get consistency in one line layouts in SKM due to how protective elements are stored in their standard library. I have asked going back 20 years to make fuses, molded case breakers, and relays have a different data block setting, but they have deaf ears to the matter.

Sorry, but I don't really follow you on this. Can you provide an example of the issue and I'll see if I can help. You sound like you're more experienced with SKM so probably not, but I'll try.

Here are some bogus PD's with the Settings parameter turned on in the datablock.

I know exactly what John-Jack is talking about, E-Rated fuses is a great example. Sometimes "E-rated" it is in Type, sometimes it is in Description. Sometimes the description contains only Amperage.

Or when I had them model the G&W TNI switch with VI Controls, they modeled each fuse curve as a different type. So if you wanted to see how a different curve would look, all the settings would get changed when you changed the type. But the curves for the G&W are like those for the SEL-751, all contained in the same device... It's not a different type. I told SKM that they could use the SEL example to model the G&W, but they still sent the lazy version that they did.

And before Brent says that "there is a workaround for that, so it's not an issue for me" I would say this shouldn't even be an issue in the first place. If there are 40,000 users of this program, that's 40,000 workarounds. Or alternatively, one person at SKM (Sherman) could actually model the equipment correctly in the first place and then 0 workarounds are required.

I guess I'm just thankful it doesn't crash all the time like it used too. Now it only seems to crash when I've had it open for hours. Used crash several times per day.