Earthing

[needasparks]

answer is in the OP. "rent-a-roof". all they want is the income as fast as possible, for the minimum cost of installation.

Think you have in one on this tel, I've been to a few places now that have had solar done and to be fair they have looked ok if you like that sort of stuff. I asked a few questions to the owner and it was a knock on the door job. Found out the name of the company and it is a big one but I doubt i can say on here as i'm sure not all their installs are like this one. Well I hope not. There was no way they were a roofer or a sparks from what i could see. As far as i know its all signed off and owner had no idea of the points i raised.
Would not want to be the one answering the phone at that company on monday morning.

Oh and yes oracle, I did correct the over sight from the roof monkeys. I do like to sleep at night when i leave a job unlike these PV guys who fled the scene of the crime.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Not too ofey with PV, but as I understand things, a PV system wouldn't rely on either a main earth or bonding as protective measures.
Perhaps someone could clarify?
If that is the case that earthing and bonding is not required for the protective measures pplied to the PV system, then there is no requirement to ensure that they are adequate, or that they even exist.

 

[moggy1968]

incorrect
the inverter is earthed, as are all the other AC bits. It is part of the installation within the equipotential zone. You are therefore responsible for making sure the bonding and earth are in situ and satisfactory.
PV array earthing/bonding has been covered in considerable detail elsewhere on here. The jury is still out!

 

[BruceB]

Spin, The ac and dc sides sometimes have to be looked at separately and the solar pv circuit has to be considered from the perspective of a fault at either end and both when generation is taking place and not taking place. In essence that means the normal ADS regime is likely to apply which implies main bonding of any extraneous parts (often none but potentially the array framework) and earthing of any exposed conductive parts (ie the inverter)

 

[moggy1968]

either way, the bonding must be in and the earth must be upto the job

 

[IQ Electrical]

It is a requirement that before any electrical work is carried out on an installation the main equipotential bonding and earthing must be to the required standard. This applies wether your putting in an extra socket or a PV system
This is not supplementary bonding. It is main protective bonding. You seem to be confusing the two. Supplementary bonding is the cross bonding within the installation between pipwork and some other metal parts. Providing certain conditions are met this is no longer required. If it was required someone installing new circuits would not be required to install it unless it was relevant to the circuits they were working on. I would mention it on the installation certificate though. If you were doing bathroom circuits you would have fitted an RCD. This means that probably you have met the requirement to not need supplementary bonding provising all the circuits in the bathroom were RCD protected. I say probably because there are other requirements before supplementary bonding can be ommited.
You can get away with the existing being less than 10mm providing the resistance is below 0.05Ohms I believe.
An installation certificate and schedule of test results should have been issued on completion and these have a section for the installer to confirm main bonding and earthing are in place and satisfactory

A subject for another thread maybe but there is no resistance value stipulated for main protective bonding conductors.
The 0.05 Ohm value is mentioned in guidance Note 3 as a test 'between extraneous-conductive parts' and is referring to supplementary bonding.

 

[Leeb]

Hi I'm new to the forum, just looking at the above dissusion, would I be right in thinking that the general thought is that if all curcuits are protected via an RCBO then bonding is only required to the main gas and water services?

 

[Richard Burns]

Hi I'm new to the forum, just looking at the above discussion would I be right in thinking that the general thought is that if all circuits are protected via an RCBO then bonding is only required to the main gas and water services?

Hi welcome to the forum.
Regulation 411.3.1.2 states that supplementary bonding may be omitted if:
The main protective bonding to all incoming services and all extraneous conductive parts that may introduce an earth potetnial is correctly in place AND
The final circuits in the location all comply with the ADS requirements AND
The final circuits all have 30mA RCD additional protection AND
The extraneous conductive parts in the location are all connected to the main bonding.

It is only with all these conditions fulfilled that supplementary bonding can be omitted.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

Isn't that only applicable to loctaions containing baths or showers?