New Standards for Electrical Installations.
Submitted: Monday, Dec 04, 2023 at 20:20
ThreadID:
146605
Views:
5151
Replies:
10
FollowUps:
36
This Thread has been Archived
Allan B (Sunshine Coast)
.
Several weeks ago in
Thread 146543 there was some discussion about the new Australian Standard AS/NZS 3001 - Part 2, titled Electrical Installations — Connectable electrical installations and supply arrangements. This came into effect on the 18th November.
I have now had the opportunity to peruse this Standard and would make some expressions about it and the effects it may have on our RV community.
The Standard is extensive and specific so I will not embark on a comprehensive review but some points are……..
1) For starters let's look at its application. The Standard applies to "Connectible Electrical Installations" which are defined in the Standard as being for (those vehicles) that are intended for connection to external low voltage a.c. by either a detachable supply lead or one directly connected to the vehicle. It refers to that term "connectable" repeatedly". So if your vehicle… car, trailer, caravan or motorhome does not have the facility to plug in to a power source e.g caravan park power outlet, then I believe it is not subject to this Standard even if it has low voltage d.c.
services or a 230vac inverter installed. Provided there is no 'connectibility' to an external "low voltage ac power source". Of course, most camper trailer/van or motorhome do have such facility.
2) Installers of electrics will need to be
well informed and abide by the Standard where it is being referred to by State or Federal legislation.
3) In particular it lays down requirements for both the 230vac wiring and also some aspects of the dc installation.
4) I was confused by some expressions in Section 5 where it makes specifications for "Lead Acid battery requirements" and separately for "Lithium ion battery requirements". no mention is made of Lithium Iron phosphate batteries. Because it is expressed as "Lithium ion" and not simply "Lithium" I was left to wonder if LiFePO4 are excused from this Section. I have written to Standards Australia to seek clarification on this point.
5) In the earlier thread I referred to above there were some expressions regarding the 'legal' aspects when changing to a revised battery type. In general with electrical installations covered by the Australian Standards, upgrading the whole installation is only required when there is a 'substantial' change being made to the installation, however it is always moot as to what 'substantial' may mean. I would not believe that simply replacing the battery with a different type would require any upgrading with respect to the Standard. If however the location and housing arrangement of their battery was being changed then I expect that it would be viewed as necessary to adopt the requirements of this Standard.
So apart from some things such as battery housing and ventilation the Standard id mainly defining requirements which are already recognised as "Good Practice".
Part 1 of this Standard applies to the requirements for the power supply source such as van parks.
I'll post more when I hear back from Australian Standards about the Lithium confusion.
Reply By: StormCamper - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 02:43
Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 02:43
I cant say I really understand any of this, it seems to me its written in such a pretentious way. I mean I understand how to calculate the losses in a solar cell with the detailed balance technique, I undertsand exactly what pump and filter to use with 60meters of hose and wanting to get 13LPM. But this is just not making sense to me. Must be written by those guys how require a
orange color lead instead of a red one.
In my mind when I think standards I think vibration dampening, making sure stuff doesn't come loose, making sure cells dont get dangerously warm from internal defects, the size of cells as larger ones might be a
hazard on the rough bumps. Making sure my lithium charger can actually run at it's rated high output in hot conditions.
Pretty much all none LiFePO4 (usually NMC) is is a commercial package and so Id be wondering what the deal is with these in many touring setups? Some portable power setups use NMC as it has alot higher energy density and this chemistry is alot more dangerous.
Further, we are now entering an age where NMC variants are now able to last as long as the best LiFePO4 and so this will surely mean a huge increase in their usage.
AnswerID:
644848
Follow Up By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 08:06
Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 08:06
.
Hi StormCamper.
What do you not understand? The Standard or my expressions above? I certainly do not aim to be "pretentious". I strive to communicate clearly and simply but sometimes the subject needs to be in a form that cannot be misunderstood.
If you find any point I make is not clear, just ask me…. I would be happy to clarify it without being derisive.
FollowupID:
925016
Reply By: RMD - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 08:33
Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 08:33
I love how they call 240vac, LOW VOLTAGE, they are referring to caravans in the regulations and caravans use 240vAC as a power source frequently connected. A caravan is hardly likely, I haven't seen one yet, with a 40,000vac power input which is a high voltage.
Anyone receiving a shock from 240vac wouldn't term it LOW VOLTAGE.
In my alternator it rectifies around 14vac to charge a dc battery. I see that as low voltage.
My house solar has an open circuit of 385v DC and it has a "high voltage dc" sticker to tell it is so. It can kill along with 240vac, so called low voltage. Who rates low and high.
Perhaps the voltage rating should be called DANGEROUS VOLTAGE, as this low voltage 240vac I am not going to touch. To me, I have a HIGH VOLTAGE 240vac lead to my caravan.
AnswerID:
644853
Follow Up By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 09:41
Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 09:41
Hi RMD,
I appreciate your confusion. The terms came about historically and have been re-defied from time-to-time.
And the 'official' definitions are not always applied accurately. Although the placard "High Voltage Inside" may
well be good advice even though it is technically defined as 'Low Voltage' by Australian Standards.
And many appliances do use the term "Dangerous Voltages Inside" as you recommend.
Just for the record, here are the current (no pun) 'official' definitions in Australia:
Extra Low Voltage (ELV): Less than 50vac or 120vdc.
Low Voltage (LV): Above ELV but not more than 1000vac or 1500vdc.
High Voltage (HV): Above LV.
In all cases of dc voltage it applies to 'ripple free' otherwise it is classed the same as ac voltages.
Earlier definitions of "Medium Voltage"and "Extra High Voltage" have been discarded.
Expressions using these terms by overseas equipment manufacturers are often not in accord with the Australian Standard of course.
And, as being someone who has received many hostile encounters with 240 volts, I certainly agree with you that I would not have termed it LOW voltage.
FollowupID:
925019
Follow Up By: RMD - Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 11:58
Tuesday, Dec 05, 2023 at 11:58
Thanks Allan.
I suspected something like that was at play here. Yes it is LOW VOLTAGE but it WILL KILL YOU, we won't mention that bit will we.
I too have had some delightful experiences with my local power transformer.
Years back, I stopped a colleague from loosening the main terminal on an electric vehicle 144vdc, more when charged, pack, with a shifter while kneeling on the negative floor while wearing shorts. He went white when he realized what he was about to do and seemed quite thankful afterwards.
If I want to get rid of someone, I will simply tell them it is LOW VOLTAGE and it is ok.
The people who make the classification apparently haven't ever touched a decent voltage to know, insulated by plastic biro I presume.
FollowupID:
925022
Follow Up By: qldcamper - Wednesday, Dec 06, 2023 at 10:00
Wednesday, Dec 06, 2023 at 10:00
Even elv can be dangerous, 48 vdc is quite capable of fatal shocks.
Working with elv you do become complacent with its very low, almost non existant potential for harm at the bottom half of it but I remember 3 very painful slaps in the face as if they happened yesterday.
Two were 24vdc and one 12vdc.
FollowupID:
925039
Reply By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Thursday, Dec 07, 2023 at 15:20
Thursday, Dec 07, 2023 at 15:20
.
I have received a reply from Standards Australia to my request for clarification of the Lithium battery type referred to in the Standard. A copy of their response is below:
"Thanks for contacting Standards Australia.
Just regarding your enquiry below, just regarding your enquiry for clarification, Unfortunately Standards Australia does not offer a consultancy or technical advice service for Standards to answer questions on relevance, use or interpretation of publications.
Why we can’t provide this information.
For clarification on standards, unfortunately this is out of our area of expertise as we are not a government agency or involved with any regulatory advice. Although Standards Australia is involved in the creation of standards, we primarily provide the facilities and support throughout the development process. The experts involved in writing our standards are specially selected volunteers from all over Australia and are unemployed by Standards Australia.
Where you can receive clarification.
For clarification, I can provide options that I would recommend you explore:
Contact the government bodies involved with regulation for the industry and ask to get in touch with an expert. In this case, I would recommend you contact the Electrical department of regulators . I will provide their contact number below, however, I would recommend you to have a look at the contact list in case there is another department/ state you deem is more relevant."
Well that was a waste of my time. The reply continued with a list of Government and industry agencies who may be able to assist. No thanks, not going down that "rabbit hole".
After careful reading and consideration, I have determined that this Standard addresses "Lead acid batteries" and "Lithium ion batteries" with no mention of other types. It can then be assumed that other battery types are not a subject of constraint to this Standard as they do not pose the risks of Li-ion or Lead-acid batteries. After all, a standard would hardly list all the items and circumstances of stuff that does not apply. I should have realised that in the first place.
AnswerID:
644863
Follow Up By: Genny - Thursday, Dec 07, 2023 at 16:20
Thursday, Dec 07, 2023 at 16:20
Unemployed by Standards Australia, eh? Let me ponder that.
FollowupID:
925047
Follow Up By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Thursday, Dec 07, 2023 at 17:16
Thursday, Dec 07, 2023 at 17:16
.
EDIT to AnswerID: 644863 above:
I said……"they do not pose the risks of Li-ion or LiFePO4 batteries."
I meant to say….. Li-ion or lead acid batteries.
Sorry about that 99. This thing is getting me jumpy!
NOTE: Mistake corrected by Mods - 8 December 2023.
FollowupID:
925048
Follow Up By: Banjo (WA) - Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 08:47
Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 08:47
So, many aspects of our life are governed by Standards created by unnamed volunteers and once created those Standards can’t be queried or explained.
The Standards Australia business wasn’t founded in 1984 by chance?
FollowupID:
925052
Follow Up By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 11:14
Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 11:14
.
Banjo, the "volunteers" are considered experts in their field. The problem is that the more expert they are, the less likely they will compose standards intelligible to mere mortals.
FollowupID:
925053
Follow Up By: Member - Warren H - Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 14:00
Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 14:00
Lithium ion battery definition
Alan the chemist in me suspects that Li ion refers to the Li+ ion being the means of charge storage/transport and the term captures all the variations. It's a pity that the standard doesn't have a glossary of terms.
FollowupID:
925054
Follow Up By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 15:03
Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 15:03
.
Warren, thank you for that. The Wikipedia reference to Lithium ion batteries is exhaustive, and I might say, exhausting.
What concerns me more is that Wikipedia's page for "Lithium iron phosphate battery" begins with "The lithium iron phosphate battery (LiFePO4 battery) or LFP battery (lithium ferrophosphate) is a type of lithium-ion battery."
……………….."LiFePO4 IS A TYPE OF LITHIUM-ION BATTERY"……………….
Warren, thank you for your perception. I only wish I had received it prior to my publishing my interpretations of the Standard.
So there it is. I had searched on this but found no result. I failed to use Wikipedia as one of my search
places.
As Warren said…." It's a pity that the standard doesn't have a glossary of terms."
Well it does have "Terms and Definitions" but on batteries, all it describes is a battery in kindergarten terms.
Considering the public's general understanding on distinction of Li-ion and Lithium iron phosphate batteries, it is a failing of the Standard that they were not more explicit rather than pedantic.
Ladies & gentlemen, boys & girls, I have been totally wrong in my interpretations of this Standard. Please disregard anything I have said about Lithium batteries. In fact, just disregard me completely.
FollowupID:
925055
Follow Up By: Member - McLaren3030 - Saturday, Dec 09, 2023 at 07:16
Saturday, Dec 09, 2023 at 07:16
Well there you go Allan, the boffins who write these standards assume that everyone has the same understanding of things as they do.
They also quite often use the word “should” when they actually mean “must”. Using the word “should” leaves it open to the interpretation of the reader, because “should” is not a mandatory instruction where as “must” is. To put this into context, when writing instructions the next step might be written, “Next you should connect A to B”. This implies that whilst this is the appropriate step, you can choose to ignore it and do something else instead.
The definition of the word “should” is the most appropriate action. Where as the definition of the word “must” is a compulsory action.
Macca.
FollowupID:
925058
Follow Up By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Saturday, Dec 09, 2023 at 08:58
Saturday, Dec 09, 2023 at 08:58
.
Thanks Macca. But about the word "should". It's as you say. It infers an advice of obligation. And in the case of standards that is all it is….. an advice that you "should" observe if you wish to avoid offending a legislation imposed by someone other than the standard publisher. At least, that is the way they view it. You see how pedantic they are?
I was always in awe by the "No Parking" signs at
Woomera…… an authoritative military precinct.
The signs proclaimed…. "Vehicles WILL Not Park Here". Not "Should" or "Must" but "WILL".
Not advising that it was not allowed, but that it simply was not going to happen. No disobedience even possible!!
FollowupID:
925059
Follow Up By: AlbyNSW - Sunday, Dec 10, 2023 at 08:18
Sunday, Dec 10, 2023 at 08:18
Did you park there to prove it can happen ?
FollowupID:
925068
Reply By: Allan B (Sunshine Coast) - Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 13:44
Friday, Dec 08, 2023 at 13:44
.
Regarding battery direct type replacement or change from AGM lead-acid to LiFePO4 two Sections in the Standard are pertinent.
In Section 1.5.1.1 "Alterations—General" says: "Alterations to electrical installations in connectible electrical installations shall comply with AS/NZS 300except as varied heron and with the additional requirements of this Standard."
Section 1.5 .2.1 "Repairs—General" says …… "Repairs to existing electrical installations in connectable electrical installations or parts thereof may be effected using methods, fixtures and fittings that were acceptable when that part of the electrical installation was originally installed or with methods, fixtures and fittings currently available as a direct replacement, provided that the methods satisfy the fundamental safety principles of AS/NZS 3000."
My interpretation of that is that, in an installation completed before 18 November 2023, an AGM lead-acid battery could be replaced with like without the installation being required to be upgraded to a specified vented enclosure. Also that the battery type could be changed, ("using methods, fixtures and fittings that were acceptable when that part of the electrical installation was originally installed") to LiFePO4, which I have determined, is not subject to the current Standard requirement of a ventilated enclosure in any case.
Requirements of vented enclosure and spill trays are only referenced to "Lead-acid" batteries (which would include AGM type) and to "Lithium-ion" batteries. In this respect, the Standard only addresses these two types and makes no such requirements for other battery types such as Gel or LiFePO4. It is obvious (although unstated) that there is concern only for Lead-acid and Lithium-ion batteries in respect to venting or spilling hazardous vapours or liquids.
AnswerID:
644870