Bonding Control panel

[edexlab]

Currently building a system for a PITA customer
Did stage 1 last year
( I only did onsite install)
They snagged and changed totally nonsensical things at a whim and my company let them
Resulted in job being completed 4 mths late

This year stage 2 only had 4 electrical snags versus 176 last time ,which is good as I've been in charge of electrical build this time

So it looks like they've been told not to delay the job and it's been done better this time

2 snags bother me
First is we have earth studs on back plate of panel with wiring to an earth block, the door , and to din rail earth terminal

They don't like the stud having more than 1 wire connected by ring crimp
I can't think of anything preventing this as long as there isn't so many as to cause a bad connection



2nd is
We are using an existing machine integrated into the system has it's own Drawing from manufacturer (German)
We've been asked to copy these drawings and allocate our own core numbers , So 2 numbering styles in one panel

Any thoughts?

 

[Bobster]

If this is machinery covered by the machinery directive, and thus EN 60204-1, then the customer is totally correct. EN 60204-1 limits 1 protective conductor to 1 connecting point. Multiple crimped connections to the same stud are NOT acceptable. Multiple (2) protective conductors in a 2 way bootlace ferrule is NOT acceptable. More than 1 protective conductor in a screwed connection such as a DIN rail terminal is NOT acceptable.
This should be known by the designer and builder. It's not new and has been in the last couple of versions of EN 60204.

I presume you are referring to 13.1.1?

I would argue that a double ferrule is designed to take 2 conductors, and that din rails are designed to take double ferrules.

 

[netblindpaul]

How do you split the circuits for maintenance and retain continuity in the protective conductor?
Also when you reconnect you then have 2 circuits to test.
I agree that bootlaces are designed for 2 wires, and a DIN rail terminal will take that and possibly 2 ends.
However 13.1.1 para 3, second sentence prohibits multiple cpc's. It is also a “shall”.
I'll stick with my interpretation which most of the guys & NB’s that I'm working with agree, and we can disagree if you choose.

 

[Megawatt]

Currently building a system for a PITA customer
Did stage 1 last year
( I only did onsite install)
They snagged and changed totally nonsensical things at a whim and my company let them
Resulted in job being completed 4 mths late

This year stage 2 only had 4 electrical snags versus 176 last time ,which is good as I've been in charge of electrical build this time

So it looks like they've been told not to delay the job and it's been done better this time

2 snags bother me
First is we have earth studs on back plate of panel with wiring to an earth block, the door , and to din rail earth terminal

They don't like the stud having more than 1 wire connected by ring crimp
I can't think of anything preventing this as long as there isn't so many as to cause a bad connection



2nd is
We are using an existing machine integrated into the system has it's own Drawing from manufacturer (German)
We've been asked to copy these drawings and allocate our own core numbers , So 2 numbering styles in one panel

Any thoughts?

Lab I can’t speak for other countries but in the USA we are not allowed to put more than 1 wire under 1 screw which has to be a threaded hole or with a nut on it no self tapping screws and the same on terminals