Discuss Was this the right decision? in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels 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

S

sambotc

Wired a P.V job today, TT system, old wylex rewirable board and a 100ma RCD on incoming tails. Ze of 50ohms but earth in old 2.5mm or something, black sheath which disappeared behind the spar dash which was obviously done at a later date and earth spike seems to have been tarmaced over!

I put a new sub board in off some henleys with a 16a mcb and a 30ma RCD, the idea being this will trip before the main 100ma so the P.V isn't sharing the 100ma RCD? I also ran a 10mm earth to a new rod that i put in, but left the old 2.5mm and rod (where ever it was) in. The new rod on it's own gave a Ze of 75ohms, but leaving them both connected Ze was down to 23ohms which I thought was pretty good and also main earth size now complied with correct size for meter tails (16mm tails)

Was the RCD the right idea, as obviously with such a high Ze the disconnection times would not have been satisfactory, but more importantly any faault on the P.V would have caused the main 100ma RCDto trip, and also potentially created a back feed situation and causing the 100ma RCD to fall outside of 0.40 disconnection from what I hear on here?


Just wondered what you would have done and if my thoughts were justified?

Thanks in advance
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In a word, no
You should have used a type B RCD as opposed to the more generally available type A which is probably the type you have used (note a type B MCB is not the same as a type B RCD).

The use of the PV may interfere with the operation of the main RCD or even stop it tripping at all.
PV should never be on a shared RCD of any type.

Also, unless you used a time delay 100ma RCD in the event of a fault on any other circuit it is likely that both the 30ma RCDs on those circuits and the main 100maRCD will trip. To get discrimination on your circuits (and therefore comply with the regs) a time delay main RCD should be used.

A 2.5mm earth is, bizzarely, fine as long as it is protected against corrosion and damage.
The Ze is about right for a TT, but did you do it without the bonding attached. I have seen good Ze on TT when there is no spike because the lad didn't disconnect the bonding, the only earth was the pipework!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok thanks for the replies, I see what you are saying now and it makes sense regarding a type B RCD. As for earth size, OSG (green) table 4.4ii, beneath this table it states

Notes:
1 assuming protected against mechanical corrosion by a sheath

2 The main protective bonding conductors shall have a cross sectional area at least of not less than half that required for the earthing conductor and not less than 6mm

Am I interpratating that wrong then?

Thanks in advnce
 
You do not mention it is a transformerless inverter so type B rcd might not come into it. And even if it is transformerless then most of them claim to be exempt the type B requirement.

You would have been alright if you had connected your solar pv box upstream of the existing rcd. But as Moggy says, downstream is a no-no because you are disobeying 712.411.3.2.1.1 and you would not have rcd discrimination unless you put in a time-delayed one upstream.

A 30mA rcd can be low for a pv inverter - check the manufacturer's instructions.

Regards
Bruce
 
In a word, no
You should have used a type B RCD as opposed to the more generally available type A which is probably the type you have used (note a type B MCB is not the same as a type B RCD).

even with an inverter with electrical separation i.e transformer inverter??
 
It's a TT system, you need an RCD

How would you meet your disconnection times with a Ze of 50 otherwise!! (even with a Ze of less you need an RCD because the earthing is variable depending on environmental conditions)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, should have stated that it was impossible to cut in upstream of 100ma RCD as it was fed from overhead lines which look like they are plastered into the walls. Its one of those 'house that jack built' type places, asbestos ceilings and all sorts of hidden surprises etc

What would be the best way around this situation as I will flag it up? and someone will have to go back, possibly not me depending on my employment situation.

I hate getting things wrong but its the first TT job i've done, and being one of these done in a day type set ups, had to think on my feet which is where i've come unstuck! Hopefully won't have to do this much longer, again depending on employment status over the next week or 2
 
Just to add its a fronius IG30 which as far as i'm aware has a transformer
 
I would recommend talking to Sibberts. I would say fitting a 100ma time delayed type B RCD might do the trick but your going to have to cut the meter tails and put them into a henley block in order to seperate it from the household electrics.
Good choice for your first one!! Welcome to the vertical learning curve society:banghead:
 
I would recommend talking to Sibberts. I would say fitting a 100ma time delayed type B RCD might do the trick but your going to have to cut the meter tails and put them into a henley block in order to seperate it from the household electrics.
Good choice for your first one!! Welcome to the vertical learning curve society:banghead:

I dont believe it needs to be type b as its an isolating transformer not transform-less inverter
 
Vertical learning curve sounds about right. Thrown in at the deep in is another way of putting it. In my defence I do at least try and get things right and safe even if it doesn't always work out that way!

So I take it the issue is the fact that a fault current of 100ma or more would effectively knock out both RCDs simultaneously or that any fault current from the PV could stop the 100ma RCD from tripping under fault conditions? Just trying to picture the chain of events but if i'm honest I cant figure it out in this loaf of mine.
 
I dont believe it needs to be type b as its an isolating transformer not transform-less inverter
Thats why I suggested talking to Sibberts as this is a bit beyond my level. I would think a type B but am quite happy to be proved wrong!
It would certainly keep the cost down!
 
Vertical learning curve sounds about right. Thrown in at the deep in is another way of putting it. In my defence I do at least try and get things right and safe even if it doesn't always work out that way!

So I take it the issue is the fact that a fault current of 100ma or more would effectively knock out both RCDs simultaneously or that any fault current from the PV could stop the 100ma RCD from tripping under fault conditions? Just trying to picture the chain of events but if i'm honest I cant figure it out in this loaf of mine.

basically yes, and well done for asking, most people would probably just stick their head in the sand and not give a ----!!
 
Thanks Moggy, is the 2.5mm CSA main earth OK then? If you notice I quoted a couple of lines out of the OSG in a previous post, could you just verify that I am wrong, or if I have misunderstood that sentence from the OSG?

To be honest, having to do what I did was a bit of a chore for the end result, and given the fact it was below 200ohms anyway, but still to high to get any results on disconnection times it did seem like a pointless exercise, but reg's are reg's after all!

Cheers, Sam
 
Last edited by a moderator:
depends what book you read but general recommendation is less than 100 ohms for tt system (some recommend 200 ) but in effect you are talking about bringing this down to allow an mcb to trip under earth fault conditions, this is almost impossible to achieve with TT systems unless you are next to the sub station.
any earth fault is dealt with by the rcd, this generally makes the zs readings a bit meaningless if you are trying to compare to max zs for the circuit. what you sometimes find is that the zs is so high that there is less prospective fault current available to trip the mcb than the mcb rating but it still complies!

Looking at the job you had to do I would have been tempted to fit the supply from the rcd switch into a henly which fed a 30ma rcd switch feeding the household circuits and then connected the inverter to a little cu also connected to the henly.

That way you are increasing the safety of the household circuits (albeit at risk of increasing nuisance tripping) and also avoiding using a 30ma for the inverter.
 
Ok thanks for the replies, I see what you are saying now and it makes sense regarding a type B RCD. As for earth size, OSG (green) table 4.4ii, beneath this table it states

Notes:
1 assuming protected against mechanical corrosion by a sheath

2 The main protective bonding conductors shall have a cross sectional area at least of not less than half that required for the earthing conductor and not less than 6mm

Am I interpratating that wrong then?


Thanks in advnce

It refers to protective bonding conductors not being less than 6mm (the ones going to the gas and water)

the earthing conductor can be quite small as long as its protected from corrosion and damage. It will only ever need to carry 100ma so it isn't really working too hard!
 
Thanks Moggy, is the 2.5mm CSA main earth OK then? If you notice I quoted a couple of lines out of the OSG in a previous post, could you just verify that I am wrong, or if I have misunderstood that sentence from the OSG?

Actually if the 2.5mm earth is buried it should have mechanical protection and protection against corrosion (sheath), if not should b larger (Table 54.1)

As to size of earth conductor, there are 2 methods -

1) Using Table 54.7. So if your tails were 16mm, earth conductor needs to be 16mm.

2) Other method is to use adiabatic equation (543.1.3), which is the more effecient in terms of copper useage. With a high Ze so fault current (I) will be restricted to a low value and hence CSA of earth will be very small, but your limited to 2.5 as a minimum.
 
So why the need for 6mm min for bonding, but 2.5mm for main earth, surely that doesn't make sense or am I missing something here?

Well had my first experience in fitting an earth spike at least, oh the joys of bouncing off the footings for the first 3 or 4 go's!
 

Reply to Was this the right decision? in the Solar PV Forum | Solar Panels 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
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