Well, it is an interesting question,  and one where pragmatism meets history and ideal engineering.

The only shock risk from a PEN fault is when metalwork connected to the PEN is simultaneously accessible as other metalwork at true earth (terra-firma) potential.

EVs greatly increase the no of locations where the PEN problem might arise, and is far less easy to control compared to the traditional prohibitions that are all  fixed installation such as mobile telecom equipment, static caravan sites, farms and so forth, as those are very fixed and quite large with clear boundaries, whereas cars may be driven in at different angles,leads trailed into front gardens etc, making controlling access and accidental overlap with other earthing systems and things very tricky.

Until very recently the O-PEN sensing was not possible, and is very specific for the problems of the EV case.

For things where the aim is to keep the step voltage very low - e.g. dairy farms  where cows are very sensitive, a far lower limit is desirable than that needed just for protection of life.

Also electrode-less PEN fault sensing  relies on detecting the L-N voltage going wild during the fault. It is not perfect - there will be a range of conditions where the earth voltage rise may be dangerous without the LN voltage going far enough out of limits to guarantee the fault being detected.

It may well be that the same ideas could be extended into some areas of traditional prohibition, but it would need a bit of a sea change in mentality and a reversal of precedent.

Mike

Is there a BSEN or a letter of conformity or product standard for the Pen fault detector?

Also is there a defined way to test it?

Not yet.

The technology is best described as in development, and in general product standards can only follow after something is pretty much fully developed. Of course all equipment still has to meet all the usual LVD and EMC type safety stuff, but there is no standard for proof of PEN fault detection function.

To truly test it requires one to be able to fake  a floating PEN, which one can do by interrupting the supply with a suitable transformer. As far as I know, apart from  factory testing, no-one does this, it would not be an easy thing to do in the field.

Mike.

Not yet.

The technology is best described as in development, and in general product standards can only follow after something is pretty much fully developed. Of course all equipment still has to meet all the usual LVD and EMC type safety stuff, but there is no standard for proof of PEN fault detection function.

To truly test it requires one to be able to fake  a floating PEN, which one can do by interrupting the supply with a suitable transformer. As far as I know, apart from  factory testing, no-one does this, it would not be an easy thing to do in the field.

Mike.

I wonder if the EVSE Code of Practice out in 2 weeks will still recommend the use of a Pen fault detector?  I do think the concept is good but

without BSEN or a letter of conformity or product standard and without a defined way to test it seems rather counter intuitive.  It seems that a BS EN for Pen fault detectors needs to be expedited as in effect it is a dependancy of the PEN fault detector. 

Once this is in place (BS EN) the PEN fault detector can be

Designed, Selected and Errected

Installed

Comissioned

Tested

Signed off

Sergio Fernandez said:

and without a defined way to test it

The only protective device we do test with an independent instrument is an RCD.

Even RDC-DDs are not mandated to be tested by BS 7671.

Sergio Fernandez said:

Is there a BSEN or a letter of conformity or product standard

No product standard as yet, but the IET is working on one.

In terms of legislation, the manufacturer would have a DofC (Declaration of Conformity) regardless of whether the 'standards route' was used.

mapj1 said:

To truly test it requires one to be able to fake  a floating PEN, which one can do by interrupting the supply with a suitable transformer.

It seems to me that the O-PEN relay is in essence some form of over/undervoltage protection relay. Could one therefore not use voltage sources akin to test devices used to test G59/99 relays? Not that they're cheap, but in principle the kit and procedures to do it in the field exist already.

I suppose one challenge in cases where it's integrated into a charge point might be encouraging the box to do the PEN test without a load (car) attached, but if the principle were sound and demand were there I'm sure someone would invent a box emulating a vehicle only requesting a trickle charge that a portable voltage source could meet.