SMA Transformerless inverter- ungrounded arrays

Status
Not open for further replies.

electro7

Senior Member
Location
Northern CA, US
Occupation
Electrician, Solar and Electrical Contractor
Hi,
I will be installing my first SMA TL series inverters. In this case the array is to be ungrounded and both positive and negative source circuit wires are to be disconnected. Do I need to add any sort of Ground fault protection on the source circuit side? Or on the inverter output side, such as a GFCI circuit breaker? The inverters have arc-fault protection.
Thanks ahead of time for your help!
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
The array needs ground fault detection, but not protection. But that is part of the circuitry of the SMA TL US inverter.
There is no need for GFCI on the output side, IMHO.

Tapatalk!
 

SolarPro

Senior Member
Location
Austin, TX
Here's a relevant excerpt from a SolarPro magazine article about Ungrounded PV Power Systems:

Ground-Fault Protection in Non-Isolated Inverters

Since AHJs occasionally question the safety of ungrounded PV systems, it is helpful to understand how the ground-fault protection system works in a non-isolated inverter. UL developed the increased ground-fault protection requirements for non-isolated inverters in concert with the PV inverter industry. These requirements address the unique conditions that ground faults can present in an ungrounded PV system. The process is under way to formally add these requirements for the testing and listing of non-isolated inverters to the published UL 1741 standard.

The ground-fault protection system used in non-isolated inverters includes a regular test of PV array insulation resistance. This test is performed by an isolation monitor interrupter (IMI), which UL defines as ?a device that monitors the insulation resistance of a PV array circuit to ground and prevents energization of the inverter ac output circuit or disconnects an energized output circuit when the PV array input resistance drops below a predetermined level.? The IMI performs the PV array insulation resistance test in the early morning hours, when the PV source-circuit voltage is high but there is not enough current for the inverter to begin operating.

The IMI measures any current leakage between all the conductors in the PV circuit to ground and identifies levels of leakage current above set values. This technique is very similar to the insulation tests that electricians perform on unenergized electrical conductors using portable megohm meters. If the tested source-circuit conductor insulation resistance is below a minimum level, the inverter will not interconnect with the utility. If the source-circuit conductor passes the test, the inverter will initiate its normal startup procedures.

It is common for ground-fault protection systems in nonisolated inverters to use what UL refers to as a functional ground, which is an intentional high-impedance connection between the ungrounded circuits that are being monitored and the equipment-grounding system. This connection exists for the sole purpose of fault detection. Since this intentional high-impedance path only exists when the inverter is operating, the PV system is not solidly grounded, according to the definition in Article 100 of the NEC. UL allows this strategy since it recognizes the role that these detection circuits play in reducing the potential for property damage due to stray ground-fault currents. An NRTL evaluates a non-isolated inverter?s ground-fault protection system, including any functional ground, as part of the product testing and listing.

As described previously, once the inverter is online, if it measures ground-fault current above the maximum level allowed or if it measures a sudden increase in fault current, even at very low levels, it will cease operating and indicate the presence of a fault.

Residual-current detector. Rather than using GFDI fuses to identify and interrupt ground-fault current as is typically done in isolated inverters, non-isolated inverters include a residual-current detector to continuously monitor the PV array. This detector circuit is similar to the ac ground-fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) devices with which most electrical professionals are familiar. Like a GFCI, the residual-current detector in a non-isolated PV inverter is an electronic monitoring circuit that identifies ground-fault current before it reaches destructive levels. Unlike a common household GFCI, this device functions to identify fault currents that could cause damage to property and is not specifically set to levels to protect people from electrical shock.

Residual-current detectors constantly monitor the current in an operating PV power circuit, and associated software looks for any imbalance. The outgoing and returning current in the dc circuit should be offsetting?equal in intensity but opposite in direction. In an ideal circuit, the sum of these currents would equal zero. If the residual-current detector indicates that the currents are imbalanced, then the control logic interprets this as a fault. The most likely fault path is to ground through the equipment-grounding system, but stray current in any other parallel circuit path would also be detected. If an imbalance is indicated, then the inverter ceases to operate and indicates that a ground fault has occurred.

In practice, all PV arrays have some small amount of residual leakage current due to a capacitance effect that is dependent on the specific module, the mounting system and the environmental conditions. This means that a residual-current detector system used in non-isolated inverters cannot actually be set at zero, as this would result in nuisance tripping, especially on very large arrays. However, since the residual-current detector is an electronic protection device, its trip points are much lower than the conventional GFDI fuse ratings commonly found in isolated PV inverters. The UL 1741 Standards Technical Panel, which includes manufacturer representatives, determined that the 300 mA ground-fault trip limit for nonisolated inverters up to 30 kW was adequate to prevent groundfault arcs that could ignite fires.

Note that residual-current detection does not provide overcurrent or short-circuit protection. On the ac side of the system, this protection is provided by the overcurrent-protection device required in NEC Section 705.12(D). Overcurrent protection for the PV source or output circuits may be required according to Section 690.9.

NEC Section 690.35 contains specific requirements for ungrounded PV systems. These requirements have implications for what products are used and how, from the inverter upstream to the PV array. It is important that electrical engineers and PV system designers understand these requirements so that they can specify the right components in their plans for ungrounded PV systems. Similarly, electricians and PV system installers need to understand these requirements well enough to verify that the correct components are called out in the plans and that suitable materials are available. The inventory requirements for ungrounded and grounded PV systems are meaningfully different. Many common mistakes can be avoided by ensuring that the components called for in ungrounded PV system designs meet the requirements outlined in NEC Section 690.35.
 

Zee

Senior Member
Location
CA
Hi,
I will be installing my first SMA TL series inverters. In this case the array is to be ungrounded and both positive and negative source circuit wires are to be disconnected. Do I need to add any sort of Ground fault protection on the source circuit side? Or on the inverter output side, such as a GFCI circuit breaker? The inverters have arc-fault protection.
Thanks ahead of time for your help!

Additionally, as yuo surely know :)) ,

-no white wire on dc side!
-no additional gr. fault detection needed ac or dc side
- for secure power supply outlet, IF OUTSIDE:
TR and WR GFCI outlet......and use a current NEC compliant bubble cover (in-use cover)
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
I guess you would have to provide contacts to interrupt the "enable" switch for that function.
If power is on when the POCO power is disconnected, the output will not go live until the switch transitions from open to closed. But if you are already working in secure power mode I guess you would need to provide a central shutdown switch connection.
?

Tapatalk!
 

jaggedben

Senior Member
Location
Northern California
Occupation
Solar and Energy Storage Installer
The Secure Power supply requires a manual single pole switch to enable it (this is connected signal terminals in the inverter). I wonder if one could use a two pole switch and wire an auxiliary contact that would remotely reconnect the source conductors? Or would this not work because the inverter would be off when the switch is thrown?

It certainly makes the issue more complicated.
 

ggunn

PE (Electrical), NABCEP certified
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Occupation
Consulting Electrical Engineer - Photovoltaic Systems
Those SMA TL accessory receptacles won't work to good with the 2014 Rapid Shutdown Function...
This is no different from a Sunny Island/Sunny Boy system. There is an internal transfer switch that disconnects the AC section of the inverter from the grid in the event of a grid outage.
 

jaggedben

Senior Member
Location
Northern California
Occupation
Solar and Energy Storage Installer
This is no different from a Sunny Island/Sunny Boy system. There is an internal transfer switch that disconnects the AC section of the inverter from the grid in the event of a grid outage.

You're missing the point. One of the simpler ways to implement the new 2014 requirement for Rapid Shutdown is to have a DC disco that is remotely closed by a connection to the AC side of the inverter. That way if a first responder shuts down the service disconnect (which is typical), the Rapid Shutdown requirement is fulfilled.

If you want to use the the SMA Secure Power Supply then you can't use this solution. You need a separate control.
 

ggunn

PE (Electrical), NABCEP certified
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Occupation
Consulting Electrical Engineer - Photovoltaic Systems
You're missing the point. One of the simpler ways to implement the new 2014 requirement for Rapid Shutdown is to have a DC disco that is remotely closed by a connection to the AC side of the inverter. That way if a first responder shuts down the service disconnect (which is typical), the Rapid Shutdown requirement is fulfilled.

If you want to use the the SMA Secure Power Supply then you can't use this solution. You need a separate control.
How is that different from a SI/SB system in that respect?
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
It is not except for the degree of automation, and the SB/SI combination will have to deal with the same Rapid Shutdown requirement somehow.

Tapatalk!
 

jaggedben

Senior Member
Location
Northern California
Occupation
Solar and Energy Storage Installer
How is that different from a SI/SB system in that respect?

I think it's actually a different issue with a different set of solutions.

For one thing, a code compliant SI/SB system would typically have a separate (from the service) battery disconnect for first responders. On such a system, a Rapid Shutdown contactor could be powered from anything (DC or backed up AC) on the load side of that disconnect.

On the SMA Secure Power Supply, you're Rapid Shutdown disco, if it's not simply a disco on the roof, has to be remotely powered from something that will stay on in case of a utility outage. The only thing that could be is the PV array. So the wiring arrangement is going to be quite different.

In any case, the way the 2014 code is currently written, a DC disco on the roof meets the requirements in both cases.
 

SolarPro

Senior Member
Location
Austin, TX
It will be interesting to see how many AHJs accept a roof-mounted manual disconnect as means of meeting 690.12. It doesn't seem like a "rapid" way of controlling dc conductors to me?certainly not on large commercial rooftops. But it could prove acceptable on residences.

A manual disconnecting means would work much better (meaning less cost and complexity) with SMA's secure power system inverters than an automated solution.
 

Zee

Senior Member
Location
CA
Those SMA TL accessory receptacles won't work to good with the 2014 Rapid Shutdown Function...
I guess i am not understanding your short point. Is this a real problem? I am trying to understand, maybe you could clarify.

Right, the SMA secure power supply won't be on, if DC source circuits are shut down under any circumstance.
Under normal operation the secure power supply receptacle is "never" on. The inverter, instead, is grid connected.
It may never be used in the life of a system.
In the odd case that it is needed in a power outage, the ac output circuit must be shut off AND the SPS must be manually turned on. In this case, the inverter cannot grid connect for that time. That is "STANDALONE" operation, and precludes grid tie.

So, yes, in the one millionth of the cases where
1. a fire is burning,
2. and a grid outage was also underway,
3. and the homeowner was running a laptop off the secure power supply, it will not work.
 

SolarPro

Senior Member
Location
Austin, TX
Here's the potential problem as I understand it:

Section 690.12 (added in NEC 2014) says that you must provide a means of controlling dc conductors within 10' feet of a rooftop PV array or within 5' of entering a building (whichever distance is less). If you install contactor combiners as a way of meeting the rapid shutdown requirements, whenever the grid fails or a fire fighter pulls a meter or opens a main disconnecting means, the contactor on the roof will open for safety. But SMA's secure power supply requires that dc input as a power source; you can't charge your cell phone if the array is shut down in the event of a power outage. So, in effect, the secure power inverters want a smarter control system or manual control system to comply with 690.12. You don't want the dc power to be interrupted every time ac power to the inverter is lost?just those specific instances when fire fighters need to control the energized dc conductors.
 

GoldDigger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Occupation
Retired PV System Designer
And one way to do that would be to put in a designated Rapid Shutdown switch which is a POCO disconnect and has auxiliary contact(s) to interrupt the closed to enable loop of the Secure Power control switch.
Or else, if allowed, an RS button that only did the secure power disable and the combiner contactor opening on the assumption that the AC main would get opened too.
The power to close the combiner disconnect or hold it closed if a manual reset was required would have to come from the array though (as long as the RS was closed) rather than from POCO power alone.
Dual source maybe since the array would lose power at least once a day.
And finally, if the RS was actuated before dawn it would have to prevent the array power from coming on at dawn too.
Not simple. Not at all.....


Tapatalk!
 
Last edited:

jaggedben

Senior Member
Location
Northern California
Occupation
Solar and Energy Storage Installer
And one way to do that would be to put in a designated Rapid Shutdown switch which is a POCO disconnect and has auxiliary contact(s) to interrupt the closed to enable loop of the Secure Power control switch.
Or else, if allowed, an RS button that only did the secure power disable and the combiner contactor opening on the assumption that the AC main would get opened too.
The power to close the combiner disconnect or hold it closed if a manual reset was required would have to come from the array though (as long as the RS was closed) rather than from POCO power alone.
Dual source maybe since the array would lose power at least once a day.
And finally, if the RS was actuated before dawn it would have to prevent the array power from coming on at dawn too.
Not simple. Not at all.....

I agree, not simple.

Ultimately, I still think the most elegant solution for residential (i.e. non combiner) systems would be a power-electronic relay sold in a NEMA rated junction box meant to go on the roof. The relay would receive a signal from the inverter to either pass full power, or limit power to something below the requirements of the Rapid Shutdown code if the grid voltage is not present. In the case of the SMA SPS, the manual activation of the power supply would also cause the inverter to signal the j-box to pass full power. The limited power under the RS mode would be sufficient to control the signaling circuitry in the inverter.

From the installer's point of view...no extra wiring for the Rapid Shutdown!

But I don't work for SMA and I'm not going to be the one to design and patent this solution. :weeping:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top