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

  • State Helpful Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 33 subscribers
  • Views 1466 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

Reduction of cross-sectional area between main isolator and auxiliary breaker

Pedro Cruz

Hello,

I have a question regarding a specific topic.

I need to create an isolation box with 2 specific goals:

1 - To ensure a specific load is off and locked

2 - To have a secondary supply for a secondary load ensuring it is always on

With that in mind, I have considered the solution as per example attached.

My question is related to the connection between the main isolator of the Distribution Board (-QB2) and the Auxiliary breaker (-FC3).

The protection to the Distribution Board is ensured by the breaker upstream at the External Switchboard (-QA3) which ensures both cables W1, W2 and the 3 phase load are protected.

The connections to the smaller breaker have a much reduced CSA than the main supply cable W1 (2,5 vs 50 mm2).

The breaker upstream will not protect the smaller CSA cable but that is the case on many situations when busbars are not used. The auxiliary breaker (-FC3) will protect the downstream cable W3 and the load because the rating is suitable from that point downwards. But not upstream this breaker. You can say it is unprotected.

I think this is still allowed in BS7671 on a specific article 434.2 Position of devices for protection against fault current (434.2.1) where some conditions need to be met including a limitation of length.

That is my question.

Am I interpreting this correctly?

The 3 phase load is a standard load not covered under the article 433.3.3.

Any feedback will be much appreciated.

Thank you

Kind regards

Parents
  • +1

    The wires you have shaded in yellow, only need to be continuously rated for the (16A) load connected via W3. However, in a normal extensive  installation they must not be so thin that if there was a short just prior to the 16a breaker, that the wiring may fail before the upstream devices (125A) would operate.

    However, there is a further clause that if the distance is short (usually 3m or less) and the mechanical arrangement means a fault anywhere along that thin link was not very likely, and if it did happen, then not an matter of life and  death, only more of an expensive nuisance, then even that condition need not always be met.

    We are allowed to accept a very small risk that if the short piece of thin cable suffers a fault in the unprotected length, then it will be damaged and have to be replaced, subject to those other considerations.

    Against a 125A breaker, assuming it is not an MCCB with a long delay, 2.5mm or 4mm will  meet 16 A load need and the tripping for shorts anyway,  however 1.5mm might be seen as pushing it !! .

    If that is how you read it, you are correct ..

    Mike.

Reply
  • +1

    The wires you have shaded in yellow, only need to be continuously rated for the (16A) load connected via W3. However, in a normal extensive  installation they must not be so thin that if there was a short just prior to the 16a breaker, that the wiring may fail before the upstream devices (125A) would operate.

    However, there is a further clause that if the distance is short (usually 3m or less) and the mechanical arrangement means a fault anywhere along that thin link was not very likely, and if it did happen, then not an matter of life and  death, only more of an expensive nuisance, then even that condition need not always be met.

    We are allowed to accept a very small risk that if the short piece of thin cable suffers a fault in the unprotected length, then it will be damaged and have to be replaced, subject to those other considerations.

    Against a 125A breaker, assuming it is not an MCCB with a long delay, 2.5mm or 4mm will  meet 16 A load need and the tripping for shorts anyway,  however 1.5mm might be seen as pushing it !! .

    If that is how you read it, you are correct ..

    Mike.

Children
  • 0 in reply to mapj1

    Thank you Mike,

    All answers useful and aligning with my expectations.

    I can use 434.2.1 as the way to "justify" not to have to increase the CSA, but ideally I could use a cross-section that can withstand a bit more S²k² in line with the external protection. But that can be a bigger task if I have an even bigger rating breaker upstream. Where do you draw a line?

    All clear in my view.

    Adding just one last point, which I consider relevant.

    Being something wired inside a distribution board, will this still be in the scope of BS 7671?

    Or if we are referring to a machine, should I be looking for BS 7671 or something else e.g. EN 60204?

    Where does one overlaps the other?

     

     

    Thank you also for your answers.

    Much appreciated.

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