Protecting cables carrying high earth leakage currents located in walls and partitions against impact

I am investigating options for getting solar PV installed at home, thinking about how I would like the system installing ready for when I get installers round to quote.

The house was built with a service void (plasterboard boxing-in) which runs vertically from above the consumer unit in the garage, up through the first floor into the attic and this void already carries a number of other cables, within a safe zone created by the void running up the corner of the 1st floor room and with an electric shower mounted onto the void. Using this void to run the AC cables from the CU to the inverter in the attic, protecting the cables from the weather/elements seems a neater long term option than running conduit or cable externally, given the 25+ year life of the solar installation.

The cable route from the attic to CU is a vertical drop, but its not a perfect straight drop down the back wall due to a joist and some pipework obstructions around garage ceiling level, requiring some change in depth as it passes through the floor. There's plenty of space to pull in a flexible conduit, following the route of the existing T&E cables. The void is quite deep, over 100mm, so fixing a flexible conduit to the wall in the attic should keep it comfortably more than 50mm from the surface from the attic through to the 1st-floor floor/garage ceiling. But where it passes around the joist and pipes, where distance from the surface is difficult to confirm, though at this stage it is passing through the floor/ceiling.

If it was a regular household circuit with additional protection from a 30mA RCD then singles in flexible insulated conduit, running in the safe zone created by the room corner and shower, appears to be acceptable, but with most solar inverters having high earth leakage currents which require 100mA or 300mA RCDs to prevent nuisance tripping, then this would not provide the additional protection from a 30mA RCD as required under 522.6.202 / 415.1.1.

Therefore the protection against impact would depend on the >50mm distance from surface, which while this is fine for most of the drop, is less clear where it passes through the floor. Using the options from 522.6.204; a rigid conduit (BSEN 61386-21), trunking, armoured cables or mechanical protection appears impossible because they are all very rigid and the nature of the route requires a cable system with greater flexibility.

So the permitted options if I want to get the cables run through the void, appear to be:
a) Satisfy the installer the distance from the surface will be >50mm so the additional protection from a 30mA RCD is not required and 522.6.204 does not apply, so allowing any inverter and all conduit/cable options.
b) Specify an inverter that can operate with a 30mA RCD for additional protection, the cable will be in a safe zone so fulfilling requirements of 522.6.202/415.1.1, though this appears to substantially limit the choice of inverter (I've only found one so far). Again all flexible conduit/cable choices become acceptable.

Are there any other solutions using a flexible conduit or flexible cable that I have missed?

One potential solution that is not stated as a permitted option in the Regs and I'm unsure why not, would be to use a flexible metallic conduit earthed at each end via a fixed gland, with a separate CPC, protected by a 100mA or 300mA RCD. And as per (a), clipped to keep it >50mm as far as possible.

This would be at no more risk of mechanical damage than the T&E cables next to it. In the event of a nail strike or impact, any penetration is earthed by the continuous metal conduit so ensuring tripping of the RCD without relying on a current to flow through the nail/screw/person causing the strike. The RCD reduces the required trip current to only 100mA/300mA so even though the flexible conduit does not satisfy the requirements of a protective conductor, it only needs to carry a very low current to trip the RCD. But that doesn't appear to be an permitted option, any suggestions why this combination would not be permitted? 

Parents
  • Could be worth looking at PV Ultra cable by docaster cables.

    Personally I would not recommend the invertor or a battery system in the loft space for several reason

    Fire hazard

    Weight

    Heat in summer and cold in winter

    Regular maintenance

  • If I had to choose a location for a battery fire I would say outside is best.

    Ah, but you presumably don't live in the kind of terrace houses that are common around here. You can hardly put such a thing over the pavement.

    Outside your front or back door is no good either as this will block your fire egress routes. 

    Depends on which way the escape path goes relative to the position of the unit, spacing and whether alternatives routes are available. We don't particularly worry about a petrol filled "bomb" being left on the drive after all. It all depends on the particular situation in hand  - hence the advisability of regs saying what needs to be achieved rather than rigid rules that won't work in many specific situations.

       - Andy.

  • Terrace houses could pose some interesting debate.

    Place in an existing outhouse or coal store or ouside toilet

    Place at the end of garden in a brick pigen house

    Maybe with some clever engineering put it in a chimney breast

  • I concur with your statement that terrace houses could pose some interesting debate for the installation of solar inverters and batteries. I think you have proposed some inventive and practical locations for them, such as an outhouse, a pigeon house, or a chimney breast. I also think that outdoor installation will always be better than the chance of the inverters and battery system catching fire inside the house. Most solar inverters can be installed outdoors, but they should be shielded from direct sunlight, rain, wind, dust, and corrosion. They should also have sufficient ventilation and heat dissipation, and be reachable for maintenance.

  • I shall take your remarks as being completely tongue in cheek. In England, the coal store will be rapidly depleted, so there will be no fire and a hearth could be removed to make way for an inverter or battery. Problem with the outhouses is that they may well be on the other side of the back yard - my grandparents' were.

    More seriously, if you put a battery outside, might it not be stolen?

    ETA: I am now wondering whether I missed a trick when I put distribution circuits through my coal store.

  • Terrace houses could pose some interesting debate.

    Well, any housing really. We should not forget that existing housing is unlikely to meet current building standards ... including those for fire safety and resistance to the spread of fire.

    Simply taking the cash to sling a battery system in the loft or one of the bedrooms just won't do really - especially with 'guilty knowledge' of how dangerous it can be due to the very rapid fire escalation with little warning. Compartmentation to habitable spaces is important, as is keeping the batteries away from means of escape.

    More seriously, if you put a battery outside, might it not be stolen?

    Back to terraced housing, the loft spaces of some terraced housing is "shared' and there's not always dividing walls to prevent the spread of fire between properties. Think also about weight of the batteries, and possibility of weakening floor/joists in a loft space.

    Properly tested EESS batteries are not as dangerous as some of the e-scooter batteries that have been discussed recently, BUT if they do go up, they are much larger, and the fire will happen in much the same way ... so that really doesn't leave anywhere inside some terraced houses where it might be considered safe to put a battery, so that there's time for the occupants to escape, which is all-important. The same perhaps goes for smaller semi's etc to be honest.

  • Battery theft may well become a thing of the future due to there cost.  However they are normally quite heavy.

  • Good point about the communal loft space in some dwellings

  • not sure that re-purposing a fire place is so silly  -it is after all one of the few parts of a modern (post 1900) house designed to withstand a fire. The only problem is that round our way quite a few houses have gas boilers or wood burners fitted in them, or have been opened out into book cases or removed altogether etc.

    I'm reminded of the problems of plastic water tanks falling through lofts when immersion heaters jam on, and falling hot batteries could become is a similar unexpected effect.

    Mike.

  • I have reminded many a person that the joists in a lot of lofts boarded or not were designed just to hold up the ceiling below.  This is normally a fairly eveningly distrubuted weight load.  If you look in the loft of an average dwelling and see the water tank it sits on top, or it should sit on top of a fairly thick board 1inch thick or 22mm in new money.  But water systems don't catch fire so I would say wood board is still used and then over boarded with a cement based board. 

  • Indeed , and I remember the plumbers surprise when I sistered up some 2 *6 joists to the existing that were little more than glorified battens, and laid on gloss painted 18mm ply for the water tank to stand on. ('no one bothers with that..') But that is my own house, and there are a number of unusually engineered features. I imagine that batteries on Hardibacker or similar over ply would be OK. The problem is not really the well engineered examples, it is the ones with little or no thought at all.

    M.

Reply
  • Indeed , and I remember the plumbers surprise when I sistered up some 2 *6 joists to the existing that were little more than glorified battens, and laid on gloss painted 18mm ply for the water tank to stand on. ('no one bothers with that..') But that is my own house, and there are a number of unusually engineered features. I imagine that batteries on Hardibacker or similar over ply would be OK. The problem is not really the well engineered examples, it is the ones with little or no thought at all.

    M.

Children
No Data