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 32 subscribers
  • Views 20405 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question 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
    I was recently asked to install an external 3-pin socket for a Misubishi PHEV car. The lead that comes with the car, made by Yazaki, is CE marked and has "residual current limit I(delta)n 20mA" on the data plate. I asked Yazaki for details of the device and they replied they were under contract with Mitsubishi not to divulge details of the lead. I asked Mitsubishi UK for details of it and they confirmed there was an RCD in it but did not know any more details, such as type. In the maufacture's handbook for the car (if I downloaded the right one) there is no DOC for the lead, there are some for radio, tyres etc 

    The property presents as TNS, but as it is in London, and UKPN cannot confirm that the supply cable is not PME (as the majority in London are), it must be treated as PME. The curtilage is not huge around the property and where the car will be parked there is an electric gate within 2 metres.

    This would be my first EV charging point and I am a bit stuck as to what to suggest.

    It would be good to have a lead that complies with the new 722

  • 0
    Andy, are you ever surprised by such folk? Never, I suspect you`d say, at least not these days, maybe when you started out.


    In another vein but still pertinent perhaps, just look at attitudes and actions recently ref the virus, if you`d written a book beforehand listing such behaviour folk woulda` found it unbelieveable


    There`s nowt as daft as folk!
  • 0

    OlympusMons:

    I was recently asked to install an external 3-pin socket for a Misubishi PHEV car. The lead that comes with the car, made by Yazaki, is CE marked and has "residual current limit I(delta)n 20mA" on the data plate. I asked Yazaki for details of the device and they replied they were under contract with Mitsubishi not to divulge details of the lead. I asked Mitsubishi UK for details of it and they confirmed there was an RCD in it but did not know any more details, such as type. In the maufacture's handbook for the car (if I downloaded the right one) there is no DOC for the lead, there are some for radio, tyres etc 

    The property presents as TNS, but as it is in London, and UKPN cannot confirm that the supply cable is not PME (as the majority in London are), it must be treated as PME. The curtilage is not huge around the property and where the car will be parked there is an electric gate within 2 metres.

    This would be my first EV charging point and I am a bit stuck as to what to suggest.

    It would be good to have a lead that complies with the new 722

     



    If it's just a normal 13A socket, does it matter to you?


    If someone wants a new outdoor socket to plug in their lawnmower, do you check that the lawnmower is CE marked and comes with a Certificate of Conformity, or do you just install the socket to BS7671?  Whatever plugs into it is just an appliance, and beyond the scope of the standard.
     

  • 0
    A 13 amp socket used for charging an EV is supposed to be marked as being suitable for the purpose, so that’s something to check for compliance.


    Then there’s the bathroom mirror with the built in LED lighting and the shaver socket that the customer bought through EBay, that’s got its own tick box on the schedule of inspections to confirm it complies with British Standards.


    Chances are you will often struggle even to identify the manufacturer of either.


    Andy B.
  • 0
    Yes Simon, it matters to me. I take your point about just installing a socket and I agree up to a point, The charger is not the only appliance I can foresee being plugged in there, vacuum, pressure washer etc.

    But I know that the primary use will be to plug in the car overnight. I don't know the characteristics of the RCD in the charging lead, therefore don't know whether the upstream RCD I install will be blinded by any DC leakage currents. 722.1 Scope says "..circuits intended to supply electric vehicles for charging purposes", it will be a new circuit.

    Andy B, exactly. The socket should be labelled "EV" and "suitable for electric vehicle charging", 722.55.101.0.201.1 (i) so with such a label the client could feel inclined to invite friends with other vehicles and charging leads to use it. 


    Edit; I know I could take it out of the scope of 722 by spurring off an existing ring circuit, but that does not feel right to me.
  • 0
    Option 1

    Option 2


    No matter how neatly option 1 is installed with its own TT earthing system and double pole Type B RCD it cannot comply with the regulations can it?


    Option 2 can be installed to comply with the regulations, how much supporting documentation should be provided with it?


    Andy Betteridge

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Option 1.

    It can, IF it is marked EV on the rear, and this information is confirmed in the instructions for the unit.


    Option 2.

    See option 1.
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    John Peckham:

    Andy


    Down to the contractor I think as they should have provided an EIC that one or more individuals has designed the installation to BS 7671, installed the installation to BS 7671 and has been inspected and tested the installation for compliance with BS 7671 and those person(s) have certified compliance with their signatures.



    I would only FI an apparent non-compliance if I was unsure if the EV charging equipment was not compliant after I had made inquiries with the equipment manufacturer. Using an FI without making reasonable inquires because the inspector cannot make an effort is not exercising due diligence in my book.

     




    What are reasonable enquiries though John?

    Do you spend a day or two chasing through emails and documents, unpaid, or drop off an email, see if you get a timely reply, and if not issue the report with FI.

    I know which I would do, and it wouldn't be spending days unpaid chasing information.

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    OlympusMons:

    I was recently asked to install an external 3-pin socket for a Misubishi PHEV car. The lead that comes with the car, made by Yazaki, is CE marked and has "residual current limit I(delta)n 20mA" on the data plate. I asked Yazaki for details of the device and they replied they were under contract with Mitsubishi not to divulge details of the lead. I asked Mitsubishi UK for details of it and they confirmed there was an RCD in it but did not know any more details, such as type. In the maufacture's handbook for the car (if I downloaded the right one) there is no DOC for the lead, there are some for radio, tyres etc 

    The property presents as TNS, but as it is in London, and UKPN cannot confirm that the supply cable is not PME (as the majority in London are), it must be treated as PME. The curtilage is not huge around the property and where the car will be parked there is an electric gate within 2 metres.

    This would be my first EV charging point and I am a bit stuck as to what to suggest.

    It would be good to have a lead that complies with the new 722

     




    Mitsubishi must specify the RCD type required, if they do not, then one has to take worst case scenario and install a B type, you can't even rely on an A type being suitable without data from the vehicle OEM.

    Another case of a manufacturer not complying with their responsibilities.

    I have lost count of the number of automotive clients I have spoken to that do not know the IEC definition of High Voltage!

    They seem to believe that 48 or so volts & above is high voltage!

    The automotive industry have created this problem to keep the initial costs of the vehicle to the minimum and pass on the associated costs to the buyer.

    With the buying power of that industry, they could easily have designed the vehicles such that the cost increase would have been minimal and the increase in vehicle mass the same, and this would have done away with all of the installation issues we are seeing, but no, profit for them first and foremost.

     

  • 0

    Paul Skyrme:

    Option 1.

    It can, IF it is marked EV on the rear, and this information is confirmed in the instructions for the unit.


    Option 2.

    See option 1.




     

    So something as simple as an outdoor plug socket needs to be dismantled for identification purposes, rather than just plugging a tester into it.


    Okay, we need to take some things apart anyway for inspection, but stripping down a 13-amp outdoor plug socket to try and find the name of the manufacturer and if it is marked EV seems a bit over the top, but actually we could be going further and contacting the manufacturer for documentation.


    Surely these sockets could all be marked with the standards they are manufactured to on their face along with the information that they are intended for EV charging, after all they are a specialised item.


    Not that the majority of people who actually use 13-amp sockets for charging EVs are likely to understand the risks of using an unmarked socket anyway.


    Andy Betteridge

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines