Discuss Array bonding needed? in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
I think in general I'm largely in agreement with you, Malc.
Unfortunately, with regards to this issue PV installers must go by the decision tree - whether they like it or not.
As for bonding and earthing, I know what you mean. The Dti guide itself refers to it as both bonding and earthing in different instances which confuses people even further. Bonding IS, for reasons that escape me, badly misunderstood.
tbf to the dti guide, this was a problem with your tutor, not the guide.What amazes me here is the complete lack of electrical knowledge in this
When I did my PV course and this came up, and the tutor said yes you bond back to the MET unless it is PM-E, which it wouldn't be, but I let it pass it is TNC-S in the installation, when it is TNC-S you stake it .................what!!!!
Why ........because the DTI say so....ahhhhhh so if you had a stainless steel boiler flue that could be touched while also touching the frame, that flue is obviously connected to the boiler, pipework is connected back to the MET via main equipotential bonding, and you then bond your frame to an earth stake ................how safe is that when you have 2 potentials within touching distance on the roof ...................blank stares we shall move on
strange how when managing projects it's the time served apprenrice trained electricians who have tried to insist everything has to go on an RCD under 17ed, and that it's fine for the PV to go on a shared RCD, and aren't prepared to listen to anyone telling them different. At least the short course guys tend to be willing to listen and learn, unlike the arrogance of some time served sparks.
Well you always get some. Tend to be the ones who hate updates and testing there own work as they know it's good LOL
This reminds me of an example. Would you bond your knife and fork, there metal. And you can touch them and a bonded pipe..... LOL
tbf to the dti guide, this was a problem with your tutor, not the guide.
The guide says bond to MET if it's in the equipotential zone to avoid this issue.
yep, I'm afraid it's not how you trained that matters, it's how good you are at your job
potential difference to what though?All you will do is cause a potential difference.
you're wrong.Are you a PV installer, becasue even though i'm not I still know that the current DTi guide tells you that if you have a TNC-S system that needs bonding it must be spiked ....................or am I wrong
mostly we are, but in this case no we're not because we believe it to be unsafe, and the draft guidance gave me sufficient support for what I was already thinking to take the decision to stop doing something that was unnecessary and potentially dangerous just because some 6 year old guidance written when TL inverters had only just hit the market said we should.Are you still not following the 2006 guide, as the new guide is still under consultation I believe ..............or have you started working to it?
it's in the equipotential zone if some other bonded metal system is already bringing the equipotential zone on to the roof within reach of the frame (eg gas flue), or it's below a velux and within touching distance of a radiator etc. (or by some interpretations of it, just being within touching distance of a velux itself).How is something on a roof in the equipotential zone, unless you extend the zone out to it which the 2006 guide tells you can't ?
yes it is, yes I am. To a point. As before, lets stay on topic. Start a seperate thread if you want to discuss this.Is that a serious remark .................... your telling me that it is irrelvant how you are trained
Spoke to someone who is influencial in the MCS arena and in conversation asked him about bonding of the array for TL inverters and he told me to read the new version of GN7. Yet to read it but lead to believe it states no need to bond.
He also when onto to say the DTI guide is 'guidance' only and then started on about lockable ac isolators, dc isolators when you've got integral isolators in the inverter and type A RCDs!
My point exactly. These publications are only guides. BS7671 holds all the answers for the requirements.
I don't see the need to bond them. Unless maybe they require a functional earth. This is earthing not bonding anyhow.
This would be to the MET and never to an electrode.
All the confusion seems to be caused by people listening and trusting too much to what there told and not checking for themselves.
Good to see everyone on here is trying to get this confusion sorted
For the purposes of this standard, all double-ticked items in the DTI guide are mandatory. Compliance with all single ticked items is also expected unless reasonable justification can be given.
well if there's no ticks then there's no ticks.But having said that there are no ticks, single or double, against the tree diagram itself.
Reply to Array bonding needed? in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net
We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.