AC Type RCD No PV or Car Charger C3 or C2

Yesterday's announcement from the Government: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-go-further-and-faster-in-becoming-energy-secure

If plug-in PV is being pushed as a way forward, and these are to have a UK standard plug (although BS 1363-1:2023 Clause 5 states that the UK plug shall not be used for connecting generators) then certainly in rented homes, and in flats (rented or otherwise), for the installation to be considered safe, surely:

1. RCDs (RCCBs and RCBOs) for socket-outlet circuits (and upstream distribution circuits if applicable) would have to be at least Type A (because of the way inverters operate, but also for the existing PV inverter standard BS EN 62109-1, this is stated as a requirement for 'pluggable type A' equipment (i.e.. with a standard plug) to be compatible with Type A RCDs; and

2. RCDs (RCCBs and RCBOs) for socket-outlet circuits (and upstream distribution circuits if applicable) would have to be bidirectional (Regulation 530.3.201 introduced in Amendment 3); and

3. RCDs (RCCBs and RCBOs) for socket-outlet circuits would have to disconnect all live conductors (see Regulation 551.7.1)?

gkenyon said:

It has certainly been stated in expert evidence that RCD could have saved a life if one had been fitted.

A very valid point!

Perhaps more difficult to convince a court that a type A instead of type AC would have made a difference?

Chris Pearson said:

Perhaps more difficult to convince a court that a type A instead of type AC would have made a difference?

I can see it would be difficult if the burden of proof was 'beyond reasonable doubt' ... where 'balance of probabilities' applies, it would be easier, especially if the evidence showed an RCD didn't operate when (all things being equal) you would have expected it to do so.

There is plenty of information on the internet that a type AC can/may get blinded so a type A or B or F would be a better choice.  A judge or a jourer could look it up and ask their prefered AI engine

I am sure you family would rather pay £10 per RCBO in the CU and have you still there and very much alive.

That may indeed be true or not, and they don't know it but they already have paid for some RCBOs in our home CU. However they are not going to want to pay for lots of RCDs that never get called on to do anything in properties that none of us will ever visit, especially if it takes money from other safety activities like putting winter tyres on the car or boiler checks.. And more generally is not wise to ask family members to estimate your value, as it may be less than that megapound.
Mike

Sergio Fernandez said:

I am sure you family would rather pay £10 per RCBO in the CU and have you still there and very much alive.

What a kind assumption! :-)

Whether the RCD failure rate be 3% or 7%, I'd like to know whether the more expensive brands are more reliable. By and large, I think that a free market decides the question, but I really do not know. £1k SP DBs do exist - are they worth it?

That 3% - 7% failure rate might scupper a charge of corporate manslaughter, but you would still have the difficulty of causation and foreseeability in a civil case. Only the lawyers would benefit.

The other factor is that one should not, by increase of safety, remove the need for the expert practitioners such that safety is ultimately lost.

Thus we need extra activities for those very expert practitioners...  I feel a new set of regulations coming on, just to keep the practitioners engaged .

Sergio Fernandez said:

information on the internet that a type AC can/may get blinded

There's a lot of evidence free assertions, but minimal, hard to find, technical explanations.

We've had discussions in the forum about it. Along with the confusions between effective currents for AC and DC (rms vs sad [sum of absolute deviation]).

And no one openly admitting that their product was badly blinded..

Chris Pearson said:

I think that a free market decides the question,

In these areas of safety, the market is rarely able to decide. Placebos are a lot cheaper, and value is difficult to determine. 

Second hand car sales has a similar value-price-consequence problem.

Chris Pearson said:

I'd like to know whether the more expensive brands are more reliable.

Brands set their testing percentage at point of manufacture.  Some like Hager test about 5 to 15% of the RCBO they make,  Some cheap imports made in China test less than 1%.  Other brands like Navitascp do a far batter job and test every RCBO before shipping.  On top of that they are a UK company.

https://www.navitascp.co.uk/

Chris Pearson said:

I'd like to know whether the more expensive brands are more reliable.

Brands set their testing percentage at point of manufacture.  Some like Hager test about 5 to 15% of the RCBO they make,  Some cheap imports made in China test less than 1%.  Other brands like Navitascp do a far batter job and test every RCBO before shipping.  On top of that they are a UK company.

https://www.navitascp.co.uk/