This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Double wound safety transformer for EV supply.

Hi everyone, I have only posted once before so thanks to anyone who replies!


I am following on from the earlier "70 volt PEN conductor not allowed to exceed post", and looking into supplying a client with an electric vehicle power supply from a three phase isolating transformer BS 7671 722.413 (1.2): " The circuit shall be supplied through a fixed isolating transformer.."


The general consensus seems to be that an external IP box with an RCD (Type B) and a tethered lead is the standard to follow, and this may be the only option with a 230 volt domestic supply, but why not use a 3 phase 400 volt step down or tapped, safety double wound isolation transformer in a standard 100 -200 ampere or above industrial units/sheds?

( Subject to load and diversity).


The answer often stated when I have asked sparks/engineers is that in-rush current are too high but a type D CB BS 60898 will 'let through' the in-rush ( the transformer manufacturer agrees), and will still give at 5 seconds- (final circuit exceeding 32 A) 0.44 ohm EL ( 10oC) , so is achievable in many situations local to Birmingham.


I was then going to run a fused cable out to an external isolated IP 65 box with a Type 2 socket to IP44 or above ( 722.55.101).


Isn't it better to engineer a solution to the upcoming electric charger deluge, rather than buying (insert well known manufacturer name here), and lots of single phase loads usually dumped onto L1?


I would be interested in any thoughts or problems you may consider....





Parents

  • People with metal garden sheds touching electric train line fences do not find their RCD trips every time a train passes although it is driving their house earth DC  positive; as far as I know?



    Slightly different situation - the stray d.c. traction currents (presumably you're think of the third rail systems they have down south) may well flow though the protective conductors, but (in a healthy installation) shouldn't affect the currents flowing in the live conductors (L&N) that the RCD sees. The problem with EVs (or indeed any equipment with power electronics that rectifies the mains or has other d.c. sources) is that the case of a simple earth fault a d.c. current can flow through the earth fault loop - which includes at least one of the live conductors through the RCD. Besides, the worry about d.c. fault (and leakage) currents isn't that they'll cause the RCD to nuisance trip, quite the reverse, d.c. can (like the old D-Loc loop testers) prevent some types of RCD tripping when there is a fault.


      - Andy.
Reply

  • People with metal garden sheds touching electric train line fences do not find their RCD trips every time a train passes although it is driving their house earth DC  positive; as far as I know?



    Slightly different situation - the stray d.c. traction currents (presumably you're think of the third rail systems they have down south) may well flow though the protective conductors, but (in a healthy installation) shouldn't affect the currents flowing in the live conductors (L&N) that the RCD sees. The problem with EVs (or indeed any equipment with power electronics that rectifies the mains or has other d.c. sources) is that the case of a simple earth fault a d.c. current can flow through the earth fault loop - which includes at least one of the live conductors through the RCD. Besides, the worry about d.c. fault (and leakage) currents isn't that they'll cause the RCD to nuisance trip, quite the reverse, d.c. can (like the old D-Loc loop testers) prevent some types of RCD tripping when there is a fault.


      - Andy.
Children
No Data