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

  • Replies 21 replies
  • Subscribers 47 subscribers
  • Views 1170 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in

Solar PV Installations & EICR's

Gordon Routledge

I'd be interested to hear how others are handling solar PV installations as part of an EICR, especially the DC side.

The AC connection to the inverter is relatively straightforward to include, but the DC wiring, roof array, connectors and DC isolators are more challenging, particularly where access is limited or the inspector does not have specific PV competence.

The question was prompted by recent press reports of a school fire where the solar installation was reported as a possible cause. The system was said to have been installed around 10 to 12 years earlier, so in theory may have been through more than one periodic inspection cycle.

So, in practice:

Do you include the PV DC side within the EICR, or limit the inspection to the AC supply circuit and inverter connection?

If excluded, how do you word the limitation?

Would visible PV defects still be coded if outside the agreed scope?

Where roof access is not available, do you recommend a separate specialist PV inspection?

And more broadly, should PV systems have their own defined periodic inspection regime, especially on schools, commercial buildings and higher-risk sites?

I’m interested in how this is being handled in the real world, because there seems to be a possible gap between a building having an EICR and the PV system being meaningfully inspected.

Parents

  • An interesting topic, and I am afraid that I do not have the answers, but in the absence of any other responses, here are some thoughts (from a domestic perspective).

    Gordon Routledge said:
    The AC connection to the inverter is relatively straightforward to include, but the DC wiring, roof array, connectors and DC isolators are more challenging, particularly where access is limited or the inspector does not have specific PV competence.

    I think that a visual inspection is all that could reasonably be expected. You could go up in a cherry picker, but there seem to be plenty of people online offering inspection by drone. (I might add that my insurer will not cover my flat roof unless it is subject to periodic inspection, which seems to be by drone nowadays.)

    Gordon Routledge said:
    If excluded, how do you word the limitation?

    Along the lines of, "Equipment in spaces which are not readily accessible (e.g. loft spaces) is not included."

    Gordon Routledge said:
    Do you include the PV DC side within the EICR, or limit the inspection to the AC supply circuit and inverter connection?

    The model form in Appendix 6 and the schedule of inspections give little guidance - see page 555 of BOB.

    Gordon Routledge said:
    Would visible PV defects still be coded if outside the agreed scope?

    No, but I do wonder why the scope would not include defects which were visible from the ground.

    Given that batteries should be installed outdoors (PAS 63100), is it better to have them outdoors but inaccessible, or indoors, but accessible. My feeling is the latter.

    Gordon Routledge said:
    And more broadly, should PV systems have their own defined periodic inspection regime, especially on schools, commercial buildings and higher-risk sites?

    Perhaps larger ones should, but I would expect that such premises would have a maintenance schedule in any event.

Reply

  • An interesting topic, and I am afraid that I do not have the answers, but in the absence of any other responses, here are some thoughts (from a domestic perspective).

    Gordon Routledge said:
    The AC connection to the inverter is relatively straightforward to include, but the DC wiring, roof array, connectors and DC isolators are more challenging, particularly where access is limited or the inspector does not have specific PV competence.

    I think that a visual inspection is all that could reasonably be expected. You could go up in a cherry picker, but there seem to be plenty of people online offering inspection by drone. (I might add that my insurer will not cover my flat roof unless it is subject to periodic inspection, which seems to be by drone nowadays.)

    Gordon Routledge said:
    If excluded, how do you word the limitation?

    Along the lines of, "Equipment in spaces which are not readily accessible (e.g. loft spaces) is not included."

    Gordon Routledge said:
    Do you include the PV DC side within the EICR, or limit the inspection to the AC supply circuit and inverter connection?

    The model form in Appendix 6 and the schedule of inspections give little guidance - see page 555 of BOB.

    Gordon Routledge said:
    Would visible PV defects still be coded if outside the agreed scope?

    No, but I do wonder why the scope would not include defects which were visible from the ground.

    Given that batteries should be installed outdoors (PAS 63100), is it better to have them outdoors but inaccessible, or indoors, but accessible. My feeling is the latter.

    Gordon Routledge said:
    And more broadly, should PV systems have their own defined periodic inspection regime, especially on schools, commercial buildings and higher-risk sites?

    Perhaps larger ones should, but I would expect that such premises would have a maintenance schedule in any event.

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines