[RE-wrenches] Rapid shutdown questions

Dave Click daveclick at fsec.ucf.edu
Fri Aug 29 10:08:26 PDT 2014


While I share Robin's optimism, I should also note the "NEC 2017 690.12 
committee" referred to is not the code making panel. While it does have 
(at least) one firefighter representative among a majority of PV 
industry personnel, there's no guarantee that the Code Making Panel 
approves this committee's proposal. There could very well be a competing 
proposal from firefighters that requires cell-level shutdown every time 
a red truck drives within 1/4 mile of an array, because "SAFETY!"

DKC


On 2014/8/28, 15:16, boB at midnitesolar.com wrote:
>
> [Robin chiming in, below]
>
> Dan, The 2014 690.12 is worded poorly. That is why there is so much 
> confusion. MidNite Solar is sitting on the NEC2017 690.12 committee. 
> There are a lot of smart people in this group. The 2017 version says 
> ALL PV SYSTEMS, not just on or in buildings. The 10 foot space gets 
> reduced to 1 foot like it always should have been.
>
> There will be a lot of other clarifications too. The systems that use 
> shunt trip breakers [with Remote Trip coil] and contactors are for 
> string inverters. Shunt trip breakers will be used for battery based 
> systems and grid tie inverters with an AC outlet like the SMA TL 
> series. Micro inverters do not require anything like what our system 
> is. They can use the existing backfed breaker in the main distribution 
> box as long as it is labeled accordingly.  Solar Edge has a system 
> that meets the Rapid Shutdown requirement also.
>
> The UL standard for Rapid Shutdown has been written. It is going to go 
> out to a task force for review, comment and changes soon. MidNite 
> Solar will be on that task force. The MidNite Birdhouse is going 
> through UL now and is being evaluated to this new standard. All of our 
> disconnecting combiners and SOBs are already ETL listed. UL is 
> modifying the new Rapid Shutdown Draft standard as they come upon 
> things in the Birdhouse that the standard didn't consider. One of the 
> biggies that has not been sorted out is a requirement for feedback. 
> Contactors, power supplies and a switch will meet the requirement for 
> 2014. The issue with this type of system is that when you push the 
> button to turn off the contactors, there is no way to tell that they 
> actually opened up. Without feedback that verifies that the contactors 
> are actually open, you are taking a chance with people's lives. 600VDC 
> contactors can weld themselves closed. If first responders don't trust 
> the Rapid Shutdown system, they are going to let the house burn. We do 
> have feedback on the birdhouse system. Contactors do not have 
> feedback. It is not simple to add this feature to a contactor based 
> system.
>
> Installing a switch 15 feet up on the side of a building or on the 
> roof is not the intent of 690.12. This will not be allowed in 2017. 
> The exact placement of the initiating device (Birdhouse) is not cast 
> in concrete due to the differences in where main panel boards are 
> located, but it will not allow things like mentioned here 15 feet up 
> in the air or in the attic or on the roof.
>
> Battery based systems are the most complicated to meet 690.12. The NEC 
> committee is deferring a lot of this to MidNite as we are already 
> doing it and have gone over all the different ways things can go 
> wrong. We started designing our system right after the Bakersfield 
> fire 5 years ago. The Bakersfield fire is what got the NEC to require 
> disconnecting combiners. We couldn't imagine why a fire fighter would 
> want to get up on the roof of a burning building to look for a 
> combiner? This is why we started the birdhouse project way before 
> anyone ever thought of the words Rapid Shutdown. Turns out this was a 
> good thing since battery backed up systems make the issue ten times 
> more complicated. We spent years working out issues and there were 
> lots of them that required a start from scratch approach numerous times.
>
> AC coupling to a battery based inverter does not automatically meet 
> 690.12 as someone mentioned in this thread. That battery based 
> inverter must also be shut off. The micro inverters would of course 
> shut off when the utility is shut down, but the battery based 
> inverters job is to keep things powered up when the grid is down. So 
> the battery based inverter has to be shut down also.
>
>  It would also make sense to shut off an auto start generator with the 
> Rapid Shutdown button. Some generators are designed to start up upon 
> loss of grid. Once the first responders have the meter pulled, that 
> could start up a generator and cause risk of shock. If the generator 
> is designed to start on low battery, it could start a day later when 
> the fire has been put out, but that also poses risk of electrical 
> shock when unexpectedly the part of the house that is left all of a 
> sudden comes live with juice.
>
> The cost for a Rapid Shutdown system will vary a lot depending on what 
> you want to shut down. You do not need to run conduit to all the boxes 
> and switches. There is 600V Cat5e 90C USE-2 cable available that will 
> suffice. I don't see a system being installed for less than $1500 though.
>
> Robin Gudgels
>
>
>
> On 8/27/2014 8:45 AM, Dan Fink wrote:
>> Hi Mac, all;
>> Since Colorado just adopted NEC2014 July 1, I have not heard any AHJ 
>> stories yet. But look at 690.12 (1):
>> "Requirements for controlled conductors shall apply only to PV system 
>> conductors of more than 5 ft in length inside a building, OR more 
>> than 10 ft from a PV array."
>> (my emphasis on "OR")
>>
>> I interpret this to mean that if a ground mount array is more than 10 
>> ft from the building, then any PV circuits that run up the outside of 
>> the building from their trench  (for example to penetrate the wall to 
>> the power center on the inside) must be controlled because they are 
>> "on" the building. And even if you penetrated right from the trench 
>> into the crawl space, then up to the power center on the inside wall, 
>> with less than 5 ft distance, still needs to be controlled if the 
>> array is more than 10 feet from the building because of that "OR"
>>
>> The logic and safety advantage of this for firefighters is another 
>> topic entirely. As a first-arriving firefighter, I would spot the PV 
>> racks on the ground, walk over to them, and throw the disconnects on 
>> the nicely-labeled combiner boxes located within 10 feet of the array.
>>
>> All thoughts appreciated, still puzzling this out.
>>
>> Dan Fink
>> Buckville Energy
>> Otherpower
>> NABCEP / IREC / ISPQ accredited Continuing Education Providers
>> 970.672.4342
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change listserver email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List-Archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out or update participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>




More information about the RE-wrenches mailing list