Snoooorm
Member
- Location
- Henderson, CO
- Occupation
- Electrical Engineer
I see that low voltage switches are to be sized at least 115% of the full load current. Does this also apply to medium voltage switches?
Note that 115% figure only applies to motor applications, not generally.I see that low voltage switches are to be sized at least 115% of the full load current. Does this also apply to medium voltage switches?
I don't know a whole lot about PV connectivity to MV, but do the same rules not apply? In LV connections, OCP fuses must be rated at 125% of the inverter maximum output current, and a switch cannot be rated less than the fuses it contains.Note that 115% figure only applies to motor applications, not generally.
At least 125%, of course.I don't know a whole lot about PV connectivity to MV, but do the same rules not apply? In LV connections, OCP fuses must be rated at 125% of the inverter maximum output current, and a switch cannot be rated less than the fuses it contains.
I was envisioning a NF switch. But still I do not see any NEC rule supporting your statement, can you provide a reference? (Yes from up practical standpoint you can't physically put larger fuses in a less rated switch).a switch cannot be rated less than the fuses it contains.
Part IX of article 240 would cover MV. There is no specific requirement for continuous load derating. Fuses may be three times the ampacity of the conductor, circuit breakers six times, with the general requirement that protection be analyzed with a proper analysis to prevent conductor damage.I don't know a whole lot about PV connectivity to MV, but do the same rules not apply? In LV connections, OCP fuses must be rated at 125% of the inverter maximum output current, and a switch cannot be rated less than the fuses it contains.
Is this code or from product white paper? Can you provide data for reference? Thanks.ALL MV equipment is 100% rated. A 1200A breaker can handle 1200A continuously. A 600A \sectionalizer can handle 600A continuously.
Logically I would say the burden of proof is on you to provide a counter example showing that There IS MV gear that is 80% ratedIs this code or from product white paper? Can you provide data for reference? Thanks.
It is from manufacturing standards, like UL and ANSI.Is this code or from product white paper? Can you provide data for reference? Thanks.
There is no such thing as “80% rated” gear, never has been. All gear is rated 100%.Logically I would say the burden of proof is on you to provide a counter example showing that There IS MV gear that is 80% rated
Yes I fully agree. The 80% rule only applies to conductors and then ocpds as a consequence. Many people think it applies to everything and start applying it to panel boards, switches, and pretty much everything. I was using "gear" generally referring to conductors and ocpds, not actual switch gear.There is no such thing as “80% rated” gear, never has been. All gear is rated 100%.
CONDUCTORS must be rated for 125% of continuous loads, so indirectly, a breaker protecting that conductor will never see more than 80% of its rated load. BECAUSE of that, when breakers are crowded into low voltage panelboards and load centers, the breaker mfrs use that fact when determining the heat rise in the panel, resulting in the “80% rating” of the breakers AS USED in panels. You can use a breaker marked as 100% rated, but only if listed as such, which means it will be in its own stand-alone enclosure or cubicle, or directly stabbed onto bus (like I-Line panels) where the bus can help dissipate the heat.
Once you get away from the crowded LV breaker panel concept, as you do in MV Switchgear, everything is rated at 100%. It’s part of the design criteria.
It can't? Can you cite a code reference for that?In LV applications an unfused disconnect on a feeder protected by a breaker cannot be rated lower than the breaker. Is that true for MV as well?
Remember while a MV breakers have 1200A contacts, it's trip rating is based on the CTs and protective relay settings.In LV applications an unfused disconnect on a feeder protected by a breaker cannot be rated lower than the breaker. Is that true for MV as well?
Once we connected a PV system with (I'm just making up the numbers for illustration because it was so long ago) where the inverter output current was 98A. We interconnected in an MDP with a 125A backfed breaker per code, and we figured that we could use a 100A unfused disconnect since it was rated higher than the inverter Imax. An inspector called us on it and said he would only allow it if we got it in writing from the switch manufacturer that it was OK. The manufacturer told us that the switch must be rated equal or greater than the breaker.It can't? Can you cite a code reference for that?
I'll just add that the manufacturer's position was understandable, since in the event of a fault on the inverter side of the switch, the OCPD would allow 125A to flow through the 100A switch.Once we connected a PV system with (I'm just making up the numbers for illustration because it was so long ago) where the inverter output current was 98A. We interconnected in an MDP with a 125A backfed breaker per code, and we figured that we could use a 100A unfused disconnect since it was rated higher than the inverter Imax. An inspector called us on it and said he would only allow it if we got it in writing from the switch manufacturer that it was OK. The manufacturer told us that the switch must be rated equal or greater than the breaker.