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

  • Zoomup:

    Easy peasey, just use this method using the support pole as an earth electrode. You are all overthinking the matter. Run your three phase supply cable in a nice colourful buried plastic tube and all's well.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSO9vrjmGZo


    Z.




    Interesting. It looks to me that the earthing of the post was simply earthing it as an exposed-conductive-part, rather than as a TT electrode - he seemed to be using  the supply cable armour/screen as the main earth. If all the protective devices (including RCD) are built into the pod and the supply isn't PME then it really shouldn't be that much more complicated than that.


    The underground cable looked interesting - termination looked a lot simpler than SWA (although I might have preferred G/Y sleeving rather than tape)- I wonder if it was this type: https://www.nexans.nl/eservice/Netherlands-en/navigate_340594/VO_YMvKas_Dca_0_6_1_kV.html#description which seems to be a sort of cross between SY and CY and appears ro be designed for direct burial.


       - Andy.

Reply

  • Zoomup:

    Easy peasey, just use this method using the support pole as an earth electrode. You are all overthinking the matter. Run your three phase supply cable in a nice colourful buried plastic tube and all's well.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSO9vrjmGZo


    Z.




    Interesting. It looks to me that the earthing of the post was simply earthing it as an exposed-conductive-part, rather than as a TT electrode - he seemed to be using  the supply cable armour/screen as the main earth. If all the protective devices (including RCD) are built into the pod and the supply isn't PME then it really shouldn't be that much more complicated than that.


    The underground cable looked interesting - termination looked a lot simpler than SWA (although I might have preferred G/Y sleeving rather than tape)- I wonder if it was this type: https://www.nexans.nl/eservice/Netherlands-en/navigate_340594/VO_YMvKas_Dca_0_6_1_kV.html#description which seems to be a sort of cross between SY and CY and appears ro be designed for direct burial.


       - Andy.

Children
No Data