EVSE and GFCI PROTECTION

[Rjryan]

Am I reading 625.54 correctly, if EVSE is plug and cord connected it must be GFCI protected, but if direct connected only if the manufacture specifies in the instructions? So in direct connecting an outlet for an EVSE it would be possible to skip the GFCI, UNLESS CALLED FOR BY THE MANUFACTURE. This could be a big cost savings in time and material if true. What am I missing?

 

[infinity]

Do hard wired units already have the protection built-in?

 

[Rjryan]

Do hard wired units already have the protection built-in?

Don’t know, but some do, but if not specified to require a GFCI if hard wired can you Skip, the GFCI?

 

[wwhitney]

What am I missing?

See the discussion here: https://forums.mikeholt.com/threads/hard-wired-ev-chargers.2579819/

Cheers, Wayne

 

[jim dungar]

Do hard wired units already have the protection built-in?

I know of no EV charging station/connector/whatever that meets the NEC compliant GFCI requirements, like 5mA, for personal protection.

 

[curt swartz]

Am I reading 625.54 correctly, if EVSE is plug and cord connected it must be GFCI protected, but if direct connected only if the manufacture specifies in the instructions? So in direct connecting an outlet for an EVSE it would be possible to skip the GFCI, UNLESS CALLED FOR BY THE MANUFACTURE. This could be a big cost savings in time and material if true. What am I missing?

I'm curious how using a standard breaker vs a GFCI breaker is a big saver on time and material. Sure the breaker is ~$100 more but this gets charged to the customer. Time wise the only difference is landing the line neutral on the neutral buss which should take less than a minute.

 

[Rjryan]

Don’t know, but some do, but if not specified to require a GFCI if hard wired can you Skip, the GFCI?

I'm curious how using a standard breaker vs a GFCI breaker is a big saver on time and material. Sure the breaker is ~$100 more but this gets charged to the customer. Time wise the only difference is landing the line neutral on the neutral buss which should take less than a minute.

Your are right on time, but if you can underbid someone by a hundred dollars and avoid the possibility of nuisance trips on the EVSE I think you are ahead.

 

[ramsy]

I know of no EV charging station/connector/whatever that meets the NEC compliant GFCI requirements, like 5mA, for personal protection.

I posted this link here in January
The RDC-DD will detect any DC residual current of over 6mA and ..(IEC 61851-1:2017) section 8.5 refers to the EV supply equipment requiring either:

• RCD Type B or;
• A Type A RCD and appropriate equipment that ensures the disconnection of the supply in case of DC fault current above 6mA

 

[Rjryan]

I posted this link here in January
The RDC-DD will detect any DC residual current of over 6mA and ..(IEC 61851-1:2017) section 8.5 refers to the EV supply equipment requiring either:

• RCD Type B or;
• A Type A RCD and appropriate equipment that ensures the disconnection of the supply in case of DC fault current above 6mA

I looked at your post and frankly don’t see how this applies to my question. Explanation in 625.54:”Portable and fastened-in-place EVSE and WPTE that are permitted to be cord-in-plug connected must be supplied through a GFCI protected receptacle. This includes all single and three-phase receptacles configurations specified in 625.44 (A) and (B). The outlet supplying direct-connected EVSE is not required to be GFCI protected, unless specified in the manufacture’s instructions.” 2023 NEC 625.54. Please explain I am missing something, my question was: Do you need GFCI protection if the outlet for the EVSE is direct connected with no requirements by the manufacturer? It seem so, looking to see if I am missing something.

 

[jaggedben]

This question comes up, like, every day. The CMPs really need to decide that hard-wired EVSEs can meet a standard that makes additional GFCI protection unnecessary, and make that clearer in the code.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

This question comes up, like, every day. The CMPs really need to decide that hard-wired EVSEs can meet a standard that makes additional GFCI protection unnecessary, and make that clearer in the code.

The code users need to submit Public Inputs to make that change. It is not often that the CMPs write rules on their own. Most often they only act on the Public Inputs that have been submitted.

 

[Rjryan]

This question comes up, like, every day. The CMPs really need to decide that hard-wired EVSEs can meet a standard that makes additional GFCI protection unnecessary, and make that clearer in the code.

The code users need to submit Public Inputs to make that change. It is not often that the CMPs write rules on their own. Most often they only act on the Public Inputs that have been submitted.

I am not understanding, the code does not say if the EVSE is internally protected it does not need to be GFCI protected, it says if it is hard wired and not specified by the manufacture to have GFCI It does not need to be GFCI.

 

[ramsy]

I looked at your post and frankly don’t see how this applies to my question.

I believe the link I posted here in January answers your question.

Here is the link again

Notice the 6mA ground fault setting of type A, B and DD RCD.

 

[jim dungar]

I posted this link here in January
The RDC-DD will detect any DC residual current of over 6mA and ..(IEC 61851-1:2017) section 8.5 refers to the EV supply equipment requiring either:

• RCD Type B or;
• A Type A RCD and appropriate equipment that ensures the disconnection of the supply in case of DC fault current above 6mA

How does sensing 6mA of residual DC current on the output of the EVSE correspond to sensing 6mA of AC current on the input and the enclosure?

Your reply says in Europe the EVSE needs to be on a circuit protect by a device similar to.a NEC GFCI.

 

[ramsy]

How does sensing 6mA of residual DC current on the output of the EVSE correspond to sensing 6mA of AC current on the input and the enclosure?

The compatible wave forms of each RCD are shown in the second link I posted in January.

Here it is again

Notice type AC, A, F, and B, RCD's work with alternating current.

RCD Type B is used with Tesla wall chargers.

 

[jim dungar]

The compatible wave forms of each RCD are shown in the second link I posted in January.

Here it is again

Notice type AC, A, F, and B, RCD's work with alternating current.

RCD Type B is used with Tesla wall chargers.

Nothing in this link mentions compliance with the UL trip curve for Class A GFCI as required by the NEC.

The curves shown, in the link, are types of possible curves sensed by the RCD not curves of how they respond.

 

[ramsy]

Nothing in this link mentions compliance with the UL trip curve for Class A GFCI as required by the NEC.

The curves shown, in the link, are types of possible curves sensed by the RCD not curves of how they respond.

Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment is UL category FFWA
Tesla's equipment file is shown on Product IQ

 

[jaggedben]

.., it says if it is hard wired and not specified by the manufacture to have GFCI It does not need to be GFCI.

The code does not say that. The 2020 and 2023 codes says that in certain circumstances - outside, up to 50A - GFCI is required. And it is very unclear to most people whether the EVSE can provide that. (It can't, but imo that's only because no EVSE has equivalent protection.)

 

[brycenesbitt]

You can get around the entire mess by installing 60A EVSE, or for that matter 277 Volt J3400 EVSE.

Happy to talk PM with anyone interested in attempting a code based fix.

That said the vast number of electrocutions in Europe and worldwide from EVSE is argument enough for requiring the redundant GFCI, don't you think? Though frankly I'm not sure how those injured kids are managing to activate the EVSE, perhaps by flicking their little tongues at 1khz to simulate a pilot signal?

(The EVSE is off until the handshake with the car is complete, then performs a variety of checks including for ground continuity, then flips a relay to connect the car to the premisis wiring. The GFCI false trips are vehicle dependent and condition dependent). The protections from an EVSE have the same goal as a NEC GFCI.

Anyone wanting a deep dive into EVSE could pony up for some light reading:

• UL 2251 Standard for Plugs, Receptacles and Couplers for Electric Vehicles
• UL 2231 Standard for Personnel Protection Systems for Electric Vehicle (EV) Supply Circuit
• SAE J1772 and J3400 Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler Standards
• IEC 62196 International Electrotechnical Commission Standard
• NEC Article 625 Electric Vehicle Charging System Equipment

 

[Rjryan]

I looked at your post and frankly don’t see how this applies to my question. Explanation in 625.54:”Portable and fastened-in-place EVSE and WPTE that are permitted to be cord-in-plug connected must be supplied through a GFCI protected receptacle. This includes all single and three-phase receptacles configurations specified in 625.44 (A) and (B). The outlet supplying direct-connected EVSE is not required to be GFCI protected, unless specified in the manufacture’s instructions.” 2023 NEC 625.54. Please explain I am missing something, my question was: Do you need GFCI protection if the outlet for the EVSE is direct connected with no requirements by the manufacturer? It seem so, looking to see if I am missing something.

625.54 GFCI PROTECTION FOR PERSONNEL. All receptacles installed for connection of electric vehicle charging shall have GFCI for personnel.
The explanation under this code section,(typed above) there is a distinction made between hard wired and a receptacle connection. My question really was why GFCI needed receptacles but left up to the manufacturer if hard wired. If I am understanding this right, RCD (European name for GFCI) are built into EVSE's by industry standards. My next question is, no GFCI can be attached to the load side of another or they will interfere with each other? A little confusing.The NEC seems straight forward, but in reality this seems confusing. Straighten me out.