This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

EVs, Street furniture, PME and TT configurations

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
Good afternoon all,


I'm part of one of the teams installing the EV charging points around London and we keep running into the same situations and problems when going through the site selection process - proximity of other electrified street furniture to the units we are installing (as well as potentially plugged in cars which is measured to the edge of the parking bay.)

Regs say that any EV installation cannot be connected to a PME system and must be converted to a TT in case of a damaged/faulty PEN conductor. Naturally if you're converting something to a TT system and not using the DNO TN-C-S earthing arrangement, there must be a reasonable distance between the TT and any other TN-C or TN-C-S systems (2m or so is reasonable).

If there were other services in the vicinity but can be proven that these have also been converted to TT and are 100% confirmed to not be using the DNO earth, would it be reasonable to say that the requirement for the 2m distance can be reduced or ignored completely? Another thought I've had is to bond the cabinets together - being on the same type of system, it makes logical sense that this would in turn reduce the Ze and improve disconnection times, both units have their methods of ADS and incorporate an RCD/RCBO of a 61008 or 61009 standard respectively.


Any other thoughts or ideas would be much appreciated as I try and figure a workaround for this issue. I understand this could work for smaller cabinets and for individual supplies, and not necessarily for street lighting which might not be adequately equipped for being converted to TT (bit of a bigger job to start installing RCDs and then giving a minor works cert etc.).
Parents
  • Outdoor bonding/equipotential zone always has been a bit of an oddity. Take regulation 714.411.3.1.2 in (the rather mis-named section on Outdoor Lighting Installation - it actually applies to lots of outdoor things, including highways power supplies and street furniture, not just lighting). That says a metallic structure such as a fence (or non-electrified sign post) need not be bonded even though it might be within easy reach of metalwork connected to the PE of the outdoor circuit (which will very likely be PME). Given that the metallic fences etc, rooted in the ground, will likely be at true earth potential - just like a a typical TT earthing system. So if a PME'd lamppost is allowed to be within reach of a effectively TT'd fence (or cycle stand or bench), what can't it be within reach of a TT'd car? People might be more likely to be touching a car than a fence, but are they any more likely to be touching the lamppost?

       - Andy.
Reply
  • Outdoor bonding/equipotential zone always has been a bit of an oddity. Take regulation 714.411.3.1.2 in (the rather mis-named section on Outdoor Lighting Installation - it actually applies to lots of outdoor things, including highways power supplies and street furniture, not just lighting). That says a metallic structure such as a fence (or non-electrified sign post) need not be bonded even though it might be within easy reach of metalwork connected to the PE of the outdoor circuit (which will very likely be PME). Given that the metallic fences etc, rooted in the ground, will likely be at true earth potential - just like a a typical TT earthing system. So if a PME'd lamppost is allowed to be within reach of a effectively TT'd fence (or cycle stand or bench), what can't it be within reach of a TT'd car? People might be more likely to be touching a car than a fence, but are they any more likely to be touching the lamppost?

       - Andy.
Children
No Data