Yes.Originally Posted by Isetech
Yes.
6.1.12
Been looking and thinking on some of the points you raised
I don't find anywhere in the regs that says surge protection shall be fitted - Good practice, yes - insurance requirement , maybe - but not convinced you could fail it for not having surge arrestors
Grid power on indication - The reg states if it is supplied to circuits within a DB - if the DB is a separate DB does it still need power on indication ? If the DB's are separate and the inverter is visible while at the DB would that not be suitable indication ?
SANS 10142-1
7.12.2.1 Where any form of alternative supply (emergency supply, UPS, other
static inverters, or wind turbine inverter generators), is connected to an
electrical installation, a notice to this effect shall be displayed at the main
switch of the installation, and where such supply
a) supplies power only to certain circuits in a distribution board, a power-on
indicator (visible or audible) shall be provided on each such distribution
board as well as a notice indicating that the standby power main switch
shall also be switched off in an emergency,
b) only supplies a part of the electrical installation, the notice shall also be
displayed on each distribution board in that part of the installation
(see 6.6.1.1(d)).
Bootlace ferrules - I know it is stated as such under clause 6.1.12 - I feel the same as Isetech , with the advent of box terminals you tend to end up with loose connections with bootlace ferrules - also finding that wire twisted , like we were taught , tends to flatten in a box terminal and later cause a hot connection -When the CB were screw type terminals you had to twist the end of the wire - If you using a strip connector then definitely boot lace ferrules
CT coil - It makes no sense not to fit the coil so that the inverter can feed solar back to the house grid and supply non essential loads - If the set up is "limit to home" it will not need the CT but may not be as effective as it should - Don't think you could fail on a COC
Just my thoughts
Manufacturer's Specifications:
Pg 14. Recommended DC Surge Protector.
Pg 17. Recommended AC Surge Protector.
Pg 18. 3.4.1. Installing the CT Coil. The CT coil is one of the most important parts of the Sunsynk Parity inverter. ( Direct wording in manual )
I hear you regarding the bootlace ferrules.
AC combiner box with both grid power and inverter output in same DB requires indication as per the quoted regulation.
Personally, I prefer having indication for grid power and inverter output as in attached photo of one of my homemade combiners.
I think we are all sometimes guilty of forgetting the OHSA electrical regulations, Manufacturer's specifications as well as Local Authority guidelines
over and above SANS 10142.
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DH33e6d8-s
Just after the 5 min mark, the importance of the ct coil is mentioned.
Last edited by Derlyn; 19-Jun-24 at 05:01 PM.
Regulation attached...lets see if anyone can tell me why this regulation was added and when it is applicable. People need to start paying attention to why the regulation is added.
Shall I give you a clue or should we ask which circuit breaker dominated the market, and controlled the regulations, we can then go into why we wire DB's upside down.
If you understand how busbars fit on good quality din mount circuit breakers, you will understand why this brand has created a problem so huge, that even if they realized the way we do it is incorrect it would take years to convert to the correct way. A clue try fit a forked busbars, which by the way is designed to onto a din mount circuit breaker in such a way that it doesn't interfere with the wires added to the terminals. This by the way should be a regulations consider the amount of burnt terminals we find on sites, especially factory environments.
There is so much more to terminating wires in circuit breakers, but why waste time on shyte like that, we cant even get things like silly plugs right, imagine trying to tell people about important stuff like how a cable should be terminated.
I am at a point where I read posts on social media making me realize how bad this industry has got. The only reason I still waste time on this platform, is because I can see the stuff shared on this forum does filter out into the industry.
6.1.12 Where flexible cords are used, the strands of the conductors shall be mechanically protected with ferrules to prevent the strands from being cut off in terminations.
Comments are my opinion, unless regulations are attached to support the comment. This is social media, not a court room.
I suggest giving them a chance to fix things first. If they refuse, documenting everything with photos and details is key before considering legal options.
Not one second of my time on this forum has been wasted.
It's unbelievable the amount I've learn't here.
Often, it has also been pointed out that I am wrong about certain things. For this I am grateful, otherwise I would have carried on being wrong.
Logging in here is always a highlight of my day, to see if there's something new to learn.
I got up early this morning to review more COC's sent to me.
Maybe I am doing it wrong ?
Everything looks professional, the presentation, the fact that they even registered the system with the council.
Lets start at the top of Annexure 1
NM - which means non member of any association.
Initial certificate - ticked
New part to existing installation - ticked (how do you add an initial COC to and existing installation? )
The registered person and company details are not the same, which seems the norm with solar installations.
This is the part that gets interesting, the test report.
Test report for DB supply - 5 kw Sunsynk inverter
additional pages - blank
Section 2
Permanent or temp - blank
Type of earthing system - blank
Main switch type - blank
earth leakage tripping , number of poles, current rating - blank
Section 3
Alternate power supply - 1 (everything else has a line through it.)
Section 4
Seems to be be correct all the standard numbers used for an electrical installation.
Can we agree the document is incomplete, which makes it an illegal document. big deal nobody cares, the big question in fact the only question, would the insurance company pay out if the installation caught on fire?
Comments are my opinion, unless regulations are attached to support the comment. This is social media, not a court room.
Just when you thought that was it, because there is no mention of addition pages, well there is another page.
Here is the scary part, the council has approved the registration using this COC document which is also approved by a PR engineer. I know, just smile and shake your head, it gets worse.
We have an additional page - Additional test report for SSEG.
Test report for DB/supply - 5 kw inverter feed to main DB essential load
Section 2
Type of SSEG - blank
total size - blank
KW/KVA - blank
From point of control alternate supply - blank
Section 3
filled out, but information...mmm.
single line diagram - blank.
Section 4
Some parts filled in.
5. neutral loop - blank
7. elevated voltage blank
8. insulation resistance - blank
9. insulation resistance - blank
Where to from here, do I just tell the customer the COC incorrect and they shouldn't bother trying to sort it out because the industry is so F$%^& up that nobody knows there A$$ from elbow so just keep the COC just in case there is a problem, and play dumb.
The insurance company cannot reject a claim on the grounds that the COC is incorrect, how is the customer going to know the document is illegal.
As the responsible person for the electrical installation, they have done nothing wrong, they have taken steps to ensure they used a registered company (I would assume) , which has used a registered electrician (IE) who is registered with the DOL. They have even registered the installations with the council and a PR engineer has verified that all the information, documentation and installation is correct, who am I to tell them that there COC is not worth the paper it is written on.
Maybe we dont have to fill out all the parts of the COC and test report, or add pages maybe I need to go for training to find out how to fill out the COC ?
Maybe the fact that they have modified the main DB and added components means nothing, because there is no initial COC, you dont have worry about the details of the existing elctrical installation or carry out any reading for the circuits (essential) of test the ELU, according to the test report, there is no ELU.
I suppose this is how the elctrical industry operates, who am I to comment on silly things like COC/test reports, they create employment and make the public feel good, thinking their house is safe and insurance cant reject claims, because the responsible person has taken the correct steps by using a register electrical person.
Who wins at the end of the day, we all do, because its just means more money for everyone
The responsible person could contact a private company and a lawyer and spend more money
Comments are my opinion, unless regulations are attached to support the comment. This is social media, not a court room.
I got up early this morning to review more COC's sent to me - I get moaned at by the AiA guy if I say I write a report on an installations CoC - only he can write a report on a CoC - all one of him dealing with the whole country.... Alrightly then.
Maybe I am doing it wrong ? - Nope
Everything looks professional, the presentation, the fact that they even registered the system with the council - most likely
Lets start at the top of Annexure 1 - cool
NM - which means non member of any association - not surpising - don't really get much more than a logo.
Initial certificate - ticked - here we go....
New part to existing installation - ticked (how do you add an initial COC to and existing installation? ) - THIS!!! This is what gets me - you cannot MAKE a customer get a CoC on there whole property/commercial install/enourmous factory. There is no box for "customer refuses to pay for a full CoC on there entire property."
We get into trouble for not doing a CoC on new works and they won't pay for a CoC on the whole property.
And pleeeeeeease don't tell me we shouldn't do the work as no one would be working if we all followed that rule.
CoC for a property purchase gets taken by the lawyers doing the exchange new to be seen again.
The registered person and company details are not the same, which seems the norm with solar installations - standard - thats why they should stop dishing out wiremans license after buying it on a R12000 course.
Beside no one does Sh1t when some random signs of another randoms work..... So they will keep doing it - no one is stopping them
Stop that and you'll get more proper CoC's
The rest you mention - doesn't even sound like they have any testers (pick a number, any number)
I don't even let it bother me anymore - as long as I can sleep at night knowing my installs are done to the best of my ability - I'm fine with that.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.