Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 185 replies
  • Subscribers 34 subscribers
  • Views 32953 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
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

EV CHARGING EQUIPMENT

John Peckham
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?
  • 0
    LOL.

    These tick a lot of boxes!

     
    Operating Voltage

    230V AC 50Hz

    Max Current

    13A

    Rated Trip Current

    30mA

    Trip Speed

    Less than 40ms at 150mA residual current

    RCD Type

    Double pole – Passive (Latching)

    Breaking Capacity

    250A (Earth leakage)

    Continues to protect with

    Lost neutral/pulsating DC earth fault

    Operating Temperature Range

    -5°C to 40°C

  • 0

    AJJewsbury:




    Hence the preference for a dedicated EV charging circuit, even if it is only a 13-amp socket?





    But BS 7671's idea of a circuit considers only overcurrent protective devices, not RCDs - so you could have a separate circuit for the EV point but still have the upstream RCD shared with other circuits (e.g. as in split load CUs).


    Yes but ...

    722.531.2.101 "... each charging point shall be protected by its own RCD ..."


    If the circuit is in say a garage, it might be clipped direct, in trunking, or in conduit, so no need for the RCD to be in the CU. If the EVCP is on the side of a house and the cable is buried in plaster, it will need an upstream RCD. If that is not an RCBO, there will have to be another one locally.

  • 0

    Hence the preference for a dedicated EV charging circuit, even if it is only a 13-amp socket?





    But BS 7671's idea of a circuit considers only overcurrent protective devices, not RCDs - so you could have a separate circuit for the EV point but still have the upstream RCD shared with other circuits (e.g. as in split load CUs).

       - Andy.
  • 0
    Hence the preference for a dedicated EV charging circuit, even if it is only a 13-amp socket?


    Andy Betteridge
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    Sparkingchip:

    So can they leak more than 6 mA D.C. ?




    As far as I remember the limit is 6 mA for IC-CPDs, but this is only a remedy if the RCD upstream is connected to this outlet only. Any other load could contribute DC-fault currents as well.

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    PeterT:



    The tripping curves are a little bit different from IEC61423 (type B RCD) to IEC 62955 (RDC-DD) to IEC 62752 (IC-CPD) but they all monitor DC-fault currents.




    Should be IEC 62423 for type B



     

  • 0
    So can they leak more than 6 mA D.C. ?
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    Sparkingchip:

    What are the standards for “granny leads”?




    IEC 62752 In-cable control and protection device for mode 2 charging of electric road vehicles (IC-CPD)

    or the localized BS EN 62752




    Can they and do they actually leak DC current, why don’t they have an inline RCD in their flex like some of the portable hot tubs?




    "Granny Leads" incorporate some kind of type B RCD, a 2-pole contactor for L and N, a contactor for CPC, a CPC-checker and some stuff to generate and monitor the CP-signal.


    Even though the tires are made of rubber they contain some carbon black.

    So an EV presents an earthing resistance of a few kOhms to some 100 kOhms.

    This impedance is far to high to provide a safe earthing but also far from insulation.

    So we have to verify the CPC connection by the charging cable.


    Before closing the CPC contact the "Granny Lead" can compare the voltages at both ends of the CPC conductor.

    If the voltages are almost the same then the upstream CPC is most likely connected to Earth and you can proceed by closing the CPC connection.

    After establishing a PE-connection to the EV the "Granny Lead" can communicate to the EV using the CP-Signal.

    If the EV requests charging the "Granny Lead" closes the second contactor and connects N and L to the EV.


    The charging current is now monitored by some kind of a type B RCD.

    The tripping curves are a little bit different from IEC61423 (type B RCD) to IEC 62955 (RDC-DD) to IEC 62752 (IC-CPD) but they all monitor DC-fault currents.


  • 0

    Just how safe are “granny leads”?



    To some extent they should be similar to a wall mounted mode 3 charge point - apart from the first few inches of lead (before the in-line box of tricks). The in-line box providing similar functionality to the gubbins inside a mode 3 charge point. PME earthing issues aside.

     

    What are the standards for “granny leads”?



    I'd hazard a guess at BS EN 61851-1 (but Graham probably knows better than me on that point),

     

    Can they and do they actually leak DC current, why don’t they have an inline RCD in their flex like some of the portable hot tubs?



    They do - an RCD of some sort in the lead (within the box of tricks - sorry "In-Cable Control and Protection Device (IC-CPD)") is a basic requirement. Exactly what kind of RCD seems less clear....


       - Andy.

  • 0
    Just how safe are “granny leads”?


    What are the standards for “granny leads”?


    Can they and do they actually leak DC current, why don’t they have an inline RCD in their flex like some of the portable hot tubs?


    There are millions of homes in the UK which will never progress beyond using a 13-amp socket for EV charging, unless a charger is installed without consulting the DNO and possibly paying for a supply upgrade as well as not getting the OLEV grant.


    As more secondhand EVs become available selling at lower prices than the new cars more people will be buying EVs and charging then using 10-amp cassette extension leads from a DIY store plugged into any available socket without any consideration for the safety of themselves or others; and it will become an issue that will require comments and observations when preparing an EICR. Particularly landlords EICRS as neither the landlord or tenant will want to pay for upgraded supplies, so the tenant will use what is there.


     Andy Betteridge 


Community Rules & Guidelines