5 ms·
New electrical code could doom most common EV charging
- andrewfromx 2y agocan someone explain how this will likely play out?
- nickff 2y agoI think the idea is that these low ‘trigger levels’ on these new and mandatory devices will erroneously trip on a semi-regular basis, because EVs are often charged in adverse conditions. The erroneous trips will then be inconvenient enough so as to dissuade people from buying EVs.
- andrewfromx 2y agobut surely the millions of people that already own an EV will demand a solution?
- rogerrogerr 2y agoThe solution is easy: rip the GFCI/AFCI breaker out and put a normal one in. Keep the code-compliant one in a plastic sack and reinstall it before you sell or get inspected for another reason. Used to be the advice was to put in a hardwired charger and bypass this entirely, but now they’re ruining that. This is one of those cases where having a screwdriver and a phone with YouTube is a huge advantage.
- robocat 2y agoEasy except you should make sure you understand the implications for your insurance and liability (not so easy to judge that risk).
- rogerrogerr 2y agoAbsolutely. This is well within my comfort level for messing with inside my private home - I understand the underlying system, the problem they’re trying to solve, and why it’s a bad solution. Certainly don’t go screwing around with mains electricity until you can articulate all of the above, and have an electrician friend show you how to make proper connections and such. But for most of HN… it wouldn’t be hard at all. Stripping insulation off 6/3 wire would be the hardest part of the process for most people here to install a whole new outlet for their EV. Changing a breaker is nearly child’s play.
- toast0 2y agoStripping wire insulation isn't so bad, fishing the wire from the panel to the outlet is almost certainly much more difficult.
- toomuchtodo 2y agoInsurance (typically) covers negligence, but not intentional bad acts. Put a non GFCI breaker in post inspection (assuming you are comfortable doing so). “Breaker failed and I replaced it.” Change it before home inspection when you sell.
- rogerrogerr 2y ago“How did you know it went bad?” … “It kept flicking off every time I plugged my car in! Got a new one and it did the same thing, finally the helpful guy at the hardware store suggested using this one and now it works fine!” I’d argue you aren’t taking on much fire risk anyway. Your medical insurance would probably be more interested than your home insurance. Also, don’t bathe with a plugged in car charger. In case that needed to be said…
- rtkwe 2y agoEven that would probably be fine so long as you were only bathing with the plug end. The charger doesn't enable until it's established through the low power pins that it's connected to a car and has negotiated the charging parameters.
- forgetfreeman 2y agoOstensibly their solution already exists as anything they are currently using to charge their vehicle will be grandfathered in.
- xeonmc 2y agoI guess the solution is that only specific existing American EV makers will be exempt.
- skykooler 2y agoIt won't affect them, assuming that they already have an EV charger - this would apply to new installations.
- somerandomqaguy 2y agoAnyone that owns an EV currently won't be affected. New building codes usually allow for grandfathering in existing installations until the next time there's renovation requiring an update to the building's electrical. This only affects new builds after the codes come into force. EVSE manufacturers will just have to adapt.
- potato3732842 2y agoThe market for back-dated romex grows bigger every day...
- diggernet 2y agoTo elaborate a bit more, it sounds like the new rule would require the GFCI breaker (which requires a manual reset) to be more sensitive than the required protection already built into the EV charger (which auto-resets). So at any hint of a potential problem, the GFCI would trip first, before the EV charger could respond, forcing a manual reset.
- robocat 2y ago> the EV charger which auto-resets I wonder if there is any telemetry that gives statistics on how often the EV chargers already trip?
- spockz 2y agoNot sure about directly accessible metrics. However I have power metering in fronts of the charger so I can detect any power drops there. Also if my charger trips it doesn’t enable automatically I need to that cycling the power on it.
- NewJazz 2y agoIt says in the article that there is a comment period next month. NEC could backpedal / adjust the requirement to accommodate this particular use case. Failing that, states could create their own exception to the NEC. Failing that, EVSE manufacturers will need to change their product designs.
- pugworthy 2y agoThis quote from the article annoys me… > … it proposes to require the same exact ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection that makes you push that little button on your bathroom outlet every time the curling iron won’t heat up. Specifically if your GFCI in the bathroom (or anywhere) keeps tripping it’s because something is wrong with your wiring or something plugged into the outlet. It took some restraint to not use all caps in part of that sentence.
- jaggederest 2y agoAnd that GFCI might be the only thing keeping you from being electrocuted every time the curling iron won't heat up. Standing in a puddle touching a metal pipe casually confused by why it sometimes tingles.
- exmadscientist 2y ago> Specifically if your GFCI in the bathroom (or anywhere) keeps tripping it’s because something is wrong with your wiring or something plugged into the outlet. Unfortunately this is not quite true. For two-prong plugs, yes, it is 100% accurate. However larger devices with grounded plugs, especially heavier machinery, will typically contain a line filter with Y capacitors running line to ground. This shows up as a tiny leakage current, which some GFCIs will detect (because it really is leaking) even though this is a nuisance trip (because it is completely safe and normal operation). That's part of where the 30mA trip specification for certain types of non-normal-residential-circuit comes from.
- pugworthy 2y agoFair enough but it’s not the best example to use to introduce GFCI. Something like this? “Though you rarely will see your bathroom GFCI trip (unless you’re dropping the hair dryer into the bath water), some kinds of larger, more complicated machinery can cause nuisance trips.”
- exmadscientist 2y agoSure, I wouldn't normally go there, but the subject of this discussion is exactly the "larger, more complicated machinery"!
- exmadscientist 2y agoI have been convinced for years that the National Electrical Code is written first and foremost to serve the interests of electrical wiring device manufacturers, and not the needs of end users, or even the safety of end users. The way the AFCI mess played out lost them so much credibility that it is hard to take this seriously as being about "safety" any more.
- p0w3n3d 2y agoWhen driving a car with internal combustion engine, you pay a lot (in Europe especially a lot!) taxes in the gas price. This means that all the people driving EV would (so far) avoid this tax and this means that this must be put to an end!!!!1 So this move might be also about taxing the EVs (just a tin-foil-hat wearing conspiracy theory maker here, don't take my words too seriously)
- exmadscientist 2y agoI don't think you have to go that far. I think the NEC is beholden to the people who make this stuff. Right now I have a 14-50R in my garage (I don't even use it, I have it shut off at the panel; I don't have an EV, this is just new construction). The standard breaker is $18.98 right now at the big orange store. The GFCI version they're trying to make mandatory is $190.68. I think that says all you need to know. (And before anyone says they must cost that much more to make... they do not. I have designed GFI and AFI devices. You need to add a circuit board, yes, a pretty rugged one. The ordinary breaker is all mechanical. But that does not cost $170 more to do.)
- Ekaros 2y agoThat is amazing price for something that millions of will be made each year. Just calculate how many of them are needed in total and then take replacement even every 50 years or something. It scales to large number needed.
- eecc 2y agoIndeed, and this mass-produced stuff is pretty simple compared to an IC chip. Who are handcrafting these devices, blonde virgin maidens at night under the shine of a full moon? :D
- atoav 2y agoAs an electrical eningeer I can't help but thinking: Yeah then don't run equipment/infastructure that is so badly designed and/or in such bad shape that it produces 5mA of fault current at startup. It isn't as if it is unknown how to test and prevent such things. If your device is constantly tripping your GFCI, that was a decision some bean counter (or totally clueless contractor) was willing to make, not a god given inherent fact of the universe. All that you know is that the think could be saving your life as the fault current has to go somewhere that isn't back into the system. But of course now the US has an unelected car manufacturer in government, so it is important to let them reduce the quality of things so they can make more money. The actual solution is to test products before they hit the market and test/overhaul dangerously wrong wiring in houses. If your gas safety valve keeps shutting down the gas because your gas bottle is heating up next to the flame, vuess what: the solution isn't to remove the safety valve.
- NewJazz 2y agoWhy is it okay for marine vehicles to use the 30 mA standard but not terranean vehicles? Is there an EVSE that doesn't have this problem? This discussion might interest you: https://old.reddit.com/r/evcharging/comments/15blqlj/how_some_manufacturers_are_handling_gfci_breaker/jtrgm7s/ https://old.reddit.com/r/evcharging/comments/15blqlj/how_som...
- atoav 2y agoI would be very interested in "stray inductance and capacitance" are meant to produce a 5mA flow out of your circuit. Or let's phrase it like that: If the proper cables are used and if the wiring isn't absolute dogshit next to other absolute dogshit the cited reason isn't the reason. Try to induce 5mA of foreign circuit into a cable on purpose and you will see what I mean. Measuring equipment exists so we don't need to guess here.. The issue is more that manufactureres calculated with a 30mA threshold for ages and if they did a bad job, they produced equipment that just barely made that threshold. Typically such norm changes are known well ahead, I am more familar with European norms, but changes like these are known a decade ahead. So it isn't as if manufacturers of such equipment are suddenly surprised by new regulations. And if the new rule starts to work that should only affect newly built unints (or units where the electrical installation is renewed). So if your EV charger trips the GFCI because of bad electrical wiring, thr wiring likely had to be replaced due to new norms anyways.. Why the thresholds for different areas differ is usually a mix of historical reasons, lobbying and a "we didn't get around to that yet". It is hard to answer such questions in isolation, maybe marine equipment has other maintenance cycles, crazier cabling requirements, maybe there are fire suppression measures that allow to relax that requirement more, maybe it doesn't make sense at all. As someone who has read through nearly 100 GB of norm PDFs I can assure you that just comparing two thresholds in isolation is practically worthless if you ignore the other differences in the rules.
- mike_d 2y agoThe TLDR is EV chargers want an exemption from ground fault protection because they have ground fault protection built in. Lots of devices have built in protections for various electrical faults, but we still put them upstream because one of the things we are protecting against is the device itself faulting. It is like the people holding this view don't understand that Wish.com and Aliexpress exist.
- pkulak 2y agoSo then what’s protecting the protection? And that protection? At some point you have to stop. EVSEs have to be UL rated and conform to the J1772 spec. Their entire reason for existing is safety, and they basically don’t do anything else. They don’t modify the delivered power in any way. I guess they have a plug that’s rated for 1000s of connection cycles, but that’s really a safety thing too. Putting another GFCI behind that is a silly waste of time, money and another point of failure.
- mike_d 2y ago> So then what’s protecting the protection? Look out your window at the power pole, you'll see a transformer. That has breakers, differential relays, and other protections. > And that protection? Substations have RTUs and SCADA systems that are constantly monitoring everything for faults. They have cool shit like oil breakers that can kill even the large inputs to the substation. > At some point you have to stop. No, you don't. The protections go all the way back to the power generation site.
- pyrale 2y agoThe transport/distribution network is hardly comparable to consumer appliances, though. The risks and costs are not the same. You don’t pay people to monitor your home electric network 24/7. You don’t risk damaging a power plant when there’s a short-circuit at home.
- jcarreiro 2y agoThis must be facetious? A GFCI breaker in a house's electrical panel and any breakers present in the transformer on the utility pole are protecting against _very_ different scenarios -- the breaker in the house is to stop someone from accidentally electrocuting themselves, but the breaker on the pole won't even notice an amount of current that could easily kill someone.
- Reason077 2y agoWhen we had our EV charger installed in our garage the electrician put in a sort of mini-panel right next to the charger with just two breakers in it. I don't think the breaker for the EV charger has ever tripped, but if it did, it's very easy to access it and reset it.
- pkulak 2y agoThat’s odd. An EVSE doesn’t require protection. It is the protection.
- Reason077 2y agoYes, EV chargers typically include their own fault detection of course. But regulations here (Australia/NZ) require a GCFI ("Type B RCD") to be installed, even if it's redundant.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- spockz 2y agoSome chargers (older ones) don’t have protection against DC flowing back from the car due to a faulty car transformer built in. So we had to add one ourselves. I think that is the type B that was mentioned in sibling comment.
- cyberax 2y agoUhm... Why would it be a problem? A car is literally floating (electrically), so any ground fault would be within the charging circuit. My charger is connected via a NEMA 14-50 outlet, that uses regular GFCI breakers in the panel. They have not ever tripped, outside of me testing the outlet.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- rtkwe 2y agoIt's more of a problem for people and chargers at non single family residences. If the charger at a shopping mall, an apartment building or duplex trips the person charging is less likely to completely unable to go flip the breaker to resolve the issue. If it's at an apartment or mall it might be down for a week or more before someone bothers to go fix it.
- cyberax 2y agoThis can be alleviated by adding a subpanel within the garage space. NEC/NFPA doesn't require GFCI on the connection between the main panel and the subpanel.
- rtkwe 2y agoDoesn't really solve the issue for people in apartments or near businesses that provide level 2 chargers. Those users are still not going to have access to the panel to reset a GFCI breaker or likely even know where it is unless it's right there at the charger itself.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- amluto 2y agoMy pet peeve here is that the electrical code has done nothing about what I think is the actual coming danger in outdoor devices: GFCI in the wrong places. It’s very common to install a supposedly water resistant box 6" above grade outside, stick a “WR” (weather resistant) GFCI in the box, and call it a day. This, of course, provides absolutely to protection against problems caused by the receptacle or the wiring getting wet! Code should require GFCI protection indoors, or at least upstream in a NEMA 3R or better enclosure. Similarly, inadequately waterproofed wire splices in boxes in the ground are very common. Code should, but does not, require GFCI protection on these circuits. IMO outdoor circuits, with few exceptions, should be GFCI protected, possibly with the thresholds set based on circuit rating. So a 200A circuit could have a threshold of a few amps, and a 15 or 20A outdoor receptacle or lighting circuit should have a threshold no higher than 30mA. And of course the wires coming out of an EVSE should be protected at 30mA or less, which they already are. And the wires coming in should be protected based on circuit rating if the EVSE itself is in a location exposed to water.