Carultch
Senior Member
- Location
- Massachusetts
Regarding 690.16, for a central inverter system that is ordered with fuses in the integrated DC subcombiner, this code section requires that you have a disconnecting means on both sides of the fuse. Or another way of isolating the fuse completely from all power sources. The disconnecting means needs to be "within sight"/50 ft from the fuse.
Consider numerous AFCI contactor combiners, scattered throughout an array field, much greater than 50 ft from the inverter's fused subcombiner.
Does it meet the NEC for the AFCI/contactor power supply's disconnecting means, to suffice as the disconnecting means for the fuses on the input side?
Or is it required for the physical blade of the disconnecting means to be located within 50 ft / sight of the fuse, as opposed to just the initiation means (contactor power supply switch) of that disconnecting means (contactor)?
I'm trying to determine if a "pre-disconnect" assembly is an unnecessary component. First of all, it is one extra component to work in to the project. Second of all, in the event that it is non-load-break rated, I feel like it would be counterproductive to include one. The maintenance worker might ignore the warning label and disconnect it under load.
I proposed a design with a breaker subcombiner, and my customer is reverting to the fuses.
Consider numerous AFCI contactor combiners, scattered throughout an array field, much greater than 50 ft from the inverter's fused subcombiner.
Does it meet the NEC for the AFCI/contactor power supply's disconnecting means, to suffice as the disconnecting means for the fuses on the input side?
Or is it required for the physical blade of the disconnecting means to be located within 50 ft / sight of the fuse, as opposed to just the initiation means (contactor power supply switch) of that disconnecting means (contactor)?
I'm trying to determine if a "pre-disconnect" assembly is an unnecessary component. First of all, it is one extra component to work in to the project. Second of all, in the event that it is non-load-break rated, I feel like it would be counterproductive to include one. The maintenance worker might ignore the warning label and disconnect it under load.
I proposed a design with a breaker subcombiner, and my customer is reverting to the fuses.
Last edited: