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

EV CHARGING EQUIPMENT

I am hearing from my network of contractors, that have actually read the new 722, that they have been asking charging equipment manufactures for documentary proof to comply with Note 5 of 722.411.4.


They are getting knocked back for asking or in one case a Declaration that says the particular device complies with BS 7671. I think that is wrong to declare that as BS 7671 is an installation safety standard and not a product standard. I believe that as a minimum the equipment must comply with the Low Voltage Directive and be CE marked. I also believe that manufacturers have to issue a Declaration of Conformity. 


BS 7671 722 has numerous references to the various standards required such as BS EN 61851 that the equipment must comply with. I am thinking it may be illegal to offer the sale of equipment that does not comply with the Low Voltage Directive and is not CE marked?


I am hoping the countries top man of equipment safety standards, Paul Skyrme , sees this post and will come on and give us his expert view?


Has any forum member asked for a Declaration of Conformity from EV charging equipment manufacturers and received one?
Parents

  • I really don't see how these control signals in any reasonable system could cause additional risk Andy.



    It was just one theory - based on the apparent requirement in BS 7671 only applies to BS EN 62196 connectors - as these have CP and PP signals which as far as I can tell are 12V d.c., referenced to the c.p.c, and share the flex and connectors between the (mode 3) charge point and the vehicle. A simple short between one of these and say the N in the same connector would seem a possible source of d.c. within the loop the supply RCD sees.


    The other possibility is of course a fault between the vehicle's battery systems and mains - which I agree should be possible to design out. However I gather that at least one popular model currently on the market has a design that re-uses the same circuitry for both plug-in charging and while driving - so doesn't provide proper double-insulation between the a.c. and motive d.c. sides. Not ideal - and hopefully a bodge that VF drive or SMPSU manufacturers wouldn't have to resort to - but apparently where we are at the moment.

     

       - Andy.
Reply

  • I really don't see how these control signals in any reasonable system could cause additional risk Andy.



    It was just one theory - based on the apparent requirement in BS 7671 only applies to BS EN 62196 connectors - as these have CP and PP signals which as far as I can tell are 12V d.c., referenced to the c.p.c, and share the flex and connectors between the (mode 3) charge point and the vehicle. A simple short between one of these and say the N in the same connector would seem a possible source of d.c. within the loop the supply RCD sees.


    The other possibility is of course a fault between the vehicle's battery systems and mains - which I agree should be possible to design out. However I gather that at least one popular model currently on the market has a design that re-uses the same circuitry for both plug-in charging and while driving - so doesn't provide proper double-insulation between the a.c. and motive d.c. sides. Not ideal - and hopefully a bodge that VF drive or SMPSU manufacturers wouldn't have to resort to - but apparently where we are at the moment.

     

       - Andy.
Children
No Data