I note that Andy suggests that a DC fault is introduced to trip the RCD if the CPC to the vehicle is not operational. This is contrary to BS7671 and therefore immediately non compliant, and in my view a code 1 on inspection. I made my comment on control signals as they should be designed to provide negligible current in case of a fault, but it is suggested this is not the case. Again the whole system appears to be a terrible piece of engineering which should not be accepted. I also stated that the battery must be completely isolated from the mains. Again it is suggested above that certain (Renault) cars may use shared electronics in the drive and charging circuits. If they do not provide full isolation the car body will be live during charging, so clearly is very dangerous. Such isolation needs to be to class 2 standards as Earthing faults are relatively likely in the grand scheme of things with plugs and sockets, and are the whole reason for these RCDs in the first place! It appears that adding a few pounds to the cost of a car has been transferred to the charging point at considerably more cost.


Wireless charging is pretty much 'pie in the sky' at the power levels needed, it may be possible-ish for a mobile, but the coupling coils need to be virtually touching which would be difficult for a car. The reason is getting an effective magnetic circuit needs no air gaps and even tiny ones have big effects on the coupling. At the high end of say 50kW one would have a very large and effective induction heater of anything lossy over a significant distance, let alone the car body (unless plastic).


The car industry is famous for designing poorly engineered products, although they do seem to have improved considerably over my lifetime. This entirely new product seems to have set them back years, and I really do not see why they should not have to change, perhaps with a little assistance from statute. We bow to IEC regulation all the time, perhaps a little fight back would be a good idea?

I note that Andy suggests that a DC fault is introduced to trip the RCD if the CPC to the vehicle is not operational. This is contrary to BS7671 and therefore immediately non compliant, and in my view a code 1 on inspection. I made my comment on control signals as they should be designed to provide negligible current in case of a fault, but it is suggested this is not the case. Again the whole system appears to be a terrible piece of engineering which should not be accepted. I also stated that the battery must be completely isolated from the mains. Again it is suggested above that certain (Renault) cars may use shared electronics in the drive and charging circuits. If they do not provide full isolation the car body will be live during charging, so clearly is very dangerous. Such isolation needs to be to class 2 standards as Earthing faults are relatively likely in the grand scheme of things with plugs and sockets, and are the whole reason for these RCDs in the first place! It appears that adding a few pounds to the cost of a car has been transferred to the charging point at considerably more cost.


Wireless charging is pretty much 'pie in the sky' at the power levels needed, it may be possible-ish for a mobile, but the coupling coils need to be virtually touching which would be difficult for a car. The reason is getting an effective magnetic circuit needs no air gaps and even tiny ones have big effects on the coupling. At the high end of say 50kW one would have a very large and effective induction heater of anything lossy over a significant distance, let alone the car body (unless plastic).


The car industry is famous for designing poorly engineered products, although they do seem to have improved considerably over my lifetime. This entirely new product seems to have set them back years, and I really do not see why they should not have to change, perhaps with a little assistance from statute. We bow to IEC regulation all the time, perhaps a little fight back would be a good idea?