Discuss Saftey before RCDs in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:   American Electrical Advice Forum

This is what I remembered seeing and was thinking of.


I don't like the look of those, I can understand the electronically controlled detection/tripping units operating a mechanicaly switching MCCB like the schneider ones I mentioned, but I don't like the idea of electronic switching at all.

You'd surely have to have an additional isolator for each circuit to be able to isolate it to work on it, and probably have to back them up with fuses.
 
I have also seen MCCB with adjustable parameters, both over-current and RCD, but never had to deploy one myself.

As for those new Atom Power breakers I am sceptical. It said:

Atom Power’s digital breaker works 3,000 times faster. It is essentially a large silicon carbide transistor circuit that measures load current and switches the transistor off when the current level is dangerous.

For a start the SiC device will have higher pass impedance than mechanical contacts, so likely dissipating a whole lot more heat. Secondly I doubt it would be approved here for isolation / safety interruption as no mention of physical separation. Under heavy fault conditions is there a back-up fuse in case the SiC device fails short? Finally while the remote control has its attractions, it is also a huge security hole if someone half way round the would can switch stuff on/off, or even just adjust trip levels.

My background is electronics, I have designed hardware and written software for control systems and always went for simple systems for fault protection that could be 100% tested. I will take a lot of persuasion!
 
Atom Power’s digital breaker works 3,000 times faster. It is essentially a large silicon carbide transistor circuit that measures load current and switches the transistor off when the current level is dangerous.

Do we need circuit breakers that are 3000 times faster?
The circuit breakers we have achieve the required 0.4 or 5 second disconnections perfectly well.

From what I've seen a lot of electricians struggle to understand setting an MCCB whne there are only 2 or maybe 3 settings to adjust, I doubt many will take the time to learn how to set up a whole adjustable tripping curve or whatever else these things will have. I suspect the vast majority would be set to 'default' and never adjusted.
 
Do we need circuit breakers that are 3000 times faster?
The circuit breakers we have achieve the required 0.4 or 5 second disconnections perfectly well.
The only case where you might want to disconnect faster than the ~5ms magnetic trip is for fault current limiting, which HRC fuses generally do well, but breakers struggle to achieve.

America has a big thing about arc-flash, there are a lot of injuries and deaths (comparatively speaking) related to that compared to here. I don't know why, maybe more high power machinery, maybe differences in electrical system design, etc.

In those cases limiting the total arc energy reduces the damage that burns/UV will do the the unfortunate observer, and fast disconnection helps achieve that. But in many cases that really is only an issue for seriously big systems and not domestic or light commercial stuff. There are already systems that help control it such as differential relays that spot an internal fault (to act fast instead of waiting for downstream breakers to clear which they wont), some that have optical sensors to "see" the arc in a busbar chamber, switchgear, etc, and react instantly.

So I am not convinced this is solving a problem that is not already pretty much handled in any well-designed system.

From what I've seen a lot of electricians struggle to understand setting an MCCB when there are only 2 or maybe 3 settings to adjust, I doubt many will take the time to learn how to set up a whole adjustable tripping curve or whatever else these things will have. I suspect the vast majority would be set to 'default' and never adjusted.
Yes, and no doubt it will be crappy software that is unsupported in 5-10 year forcing you to upgrade...
 
Last edited:
I will just ask while we're roughly in the area and saves me starting a new thread.

VOELCB sometimes you see these just been left as a main isolating switch and no earth connected anymore but is there any harm in leaving these connected up for what they were intended? they work differently from RCD and work on Voltage require quite a high voltage I think(i don't know?) and built like tanks, they just seem like another line of protection?

the principal of monitoring the Earth seems like a good idea but they don't seem to have been very popular.
 
VOELCB sometimes you see these just been left as a main isolating switch and no earth connected anymore but is there any harm in leaving these connected up for what they were intended? they work differently from RCD and work on Voltage require quite a high voltage I think(i don't know?) and built like tanks, they just seem like another line of protection?
If there is no (usable) earth connected they will not work! That is a fundamental difference compared to the modern style of RCD that generally only needs L-N volts present to trip. Also they only trip on faults from live to circuit CPC, they offer no protection for live to true Earth.

So I would say they are a safety hazard in that case because they might lead someone to think they are protected but are not.
[automerge]1588601388[/automerge]
Of course if the downstream board is RCD protected and it is only used as an isolator switch and labelled as such, then it would be OK.
 
If there is no (usable) earth connected they will not work! That is a fundamental difference compared to the modern style of RCD that generally only needs L-N volts present to trip.

So I would say they are a safety hazard in that case because they might lead someone to think they are protected but are not.
Yeah I mean you see them used for Isolation switches now not for Earth fault.

but I ask is there any harm having them connected for earth fault(earth connected) along side RCD? as means of extra protection? as they seem quite solid.
 
America has a big thing about arc-flash, there are a lot of injuries and deaths (comparatively speaking) related to that compared to here. I don't know why, maybe more high power machinery, maybe differences in electrical system design, etc.

It's because whenever a car has an accident in America it bursts into flames after it has hit the power pylon which collapses and falls onto a petrol station and everything explodes, you have not been paying attention. :eek:
 
It's because whenever a car has an accident in America it bursts into flames after it has hit the power pylon which collapses and falls onto a petrol station and everything explodes, you have not been paying attention. :eek:
Only for the Pinto!

(In fact the death rate was not so dramatically high but the PR impact was immense)
[automerge]1588602292[/automerge]
Yeah I mean you see them used for Isolation switches now not for Earth fault.
As an isolator fine, saved troubling the DNO when doing a CU change.

but I ask is there any harm having them connected for earth fault(earth connected) along side RCD? as means of extra protection? as they seem quite solid.
Depends. If the property has been moved to TN-S/TN-C-S you would be introducing an intolerable earth impedance by it and so depending on its action for any non-RCD circuits. As they are quite old and often not routinely tested I would not be happy with that.

If it is still on a TT system you have the same underlying issue, but now you would expect a new up-front RCD and/or all downstream to be 30mA protected, so the loss of low-Z earth is not as serious.

However, it would be hard to argue this was making things safer. Say you have a 100mA S-type RCD incomer for the house and no other RCD on something like a fixed heater. If the VOELCB coil goes open you are then depending on the 100mA to clear any fault on that circuit and without the CPC linked to ground that means any metalwork stays live unless some other path to Earth is low enough. And that is a shock hazard due to the trip threshold of the main RCD.
 
Last edited:
The idea of monitoring the actual earth conductor current has its places, for example the likes of the Zappi charger that has various PME fault protection steps as there it is the CPC itself presenting a shock risk if it becomes elevated in voltage.

But like many other issues of safely measuring potentially high currents in power circuits it is best to use a current transformer arrangement so the through-path is unlikely to fail or be damaged by high fault currents, then use some electronics to trigger on the smaller CT output.
 
America has a big thing about arc-flash, there are a lot of injuries and deaths (comparatively speaking) related to that compared to here. I don't know why, maybe more high power machinery, maybe differences in electrical system design, etc.
It has been alleged that the USA has a very casual approach to the importance of thoroughly testing electrical installations and that if the circuit breaker holds all is good, meaning that AFDDs are far more important there to prevent fires caused by poor terminations. That's not to say they wouldn't help in this country as well especially if they can disconnect the supply to appliances that are dangerous.
 
I don't know the requirements for testing in the USA, but have seen advertisements on e-bay for second hand MFT's in the USA so assume they do have a regime for testing?
 
It has been alleged that the USA has a very casual approach to the importance of thoroughly testing electrical installations and that if the circuit breaker holds all is good, meaning that AFDDs are far more important there to prevent fires caused by poor terminations. That's not to say they wouldn't help in this country as well especially if they can disconnect the supply to appliances that are dangerous.

Have you seen JWs video on the AFDDs, it would appear as if a few of them will allow enough arching to cause a fire before they trip :- S
[automerge]1588605235[/automerge]
Ok thanks, there probably more trouble than there worth then - I did think the principle seemed really good actually checking the Voltage of the Earth.
Thanks.

JW also does a very good video on pointing out the flaws behind the VOELCBs

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMh684HniF0
 

Reply to Saftey before RCDs in the Electrical Forum area at ElectriciansForums.net

OFFICIAL SPONSORS

Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Electrician Courses Green Electrical Goods PCB Way Electrical Goods - Electrical Tools - Brand Names Pushfit Wire Connectors Electric Underfloor Heating Electrician Courses
These Official Forum Sponsors May Provide Discounts to Regular Forum Members - If you would like to sponsor us then CLICK HERE and post a thread with who you are, and we'll send you some stats etc

Electrical Forum

Welcome to the Electrical Forum at ElectriciansForums.net. The friendliest electrical forum online. General electrical questions and answers can be found in the electrical forum.
This website was designed, optimised and is hosted by Untold Media. Operating under the name Untold Media since 2001.
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

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.

I've Disabled AdBlock