I should note that the connector is designed so that the pilot wire
(communication wire) is the very first to disconnect. If the regulation
is followed correctly, this should automatically de-energize the entire
circuit, before the connector comes apart completely.
>>>>> Locking connector rant <<<
From the inception of Article 625 in the NEC, I have disdained the
requirement that the connector(s) be of the locking type.
It makes _zero_ sense to have a locking connector on a object that is
mobile. If the vehicle moves somehow, the plug should simply disconnect
without indecent or damage. (The vehicle parking brake is not set
correctly. The vehicle is towed. The vehicle is accidentally hit by
another vehicle. The vehicle is somehow placed in drive. etc....)
Because the connector is locking, ("to prevent accidental disconnection"
which is _not_ a life-threatening hazard,) if the connector is strained
beyond its breaking point, either the cable conductors are dislodged and
exposed, or the connector housing in the vehicle is dislodged exposing
live conductors, or the cord is pulled out to the wall box exposing live
conductors. If plug were to simply disconnect, like on a vacuum cleaner,
or on an RV, then these hazards would be non-existent.
As the regulation is now implemented, you have to have (expensive and
troublesome) strain sensors on both the wall box and the vehicle
connector housing to (hopefully) de-energize the live conductors before
they become exposed.
The mandatory requirement for a locking connector should be dropped, or
at least made optional.
>>>> Soap box mode OFF <<< 🙂
Bill D.
On 9/24/2024 10:53 AM, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
I have discussed this here before, but neither the Lectron or the A2Z have
a proper mechanical interlock, meaning you can literally rip out the NACS
cable while HV is still present, which could result in an arc flashover
between the terminals with full pack voltage. This could generate over a
thousand amps of fault current and even completely destroy your EV!
The CCS standard requires a mechanical interlock that prevents the removal
of the CCS whip while HV is present. This is enforced by a motorized latch
in the car. But there is no mechanical interlock on either of these
adapters, which means the connector could be removed under load! So if
you ever use it, please supervise it the whole time (do not leave
unattended!) and do not disconnect the NACS able from the adapter until the
car unlatches the adapter from the inlet, only then is it safe to remove
the NACS cable.
On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 1:53 PM Jack Hill <jackh...@jackhill.us> wrote:
I'm one of the people who bought a Lectron adapter (although other than
testing I may never have to use it. We'll see how long CCS1 sticks around
I guess). Can you expand on why they're dangerous? I did read the report,
and can't argue with the recommendations, but didn't see it call out
what's specifically wrong with the Lectron adapter. Lectron's AC J3400
adapter has seen years of real world use and held up fine.
I'm happy to see standards. I'm kind of shocked that J3400 is being
rolled out without them. It seems to me like the right order would be to
do the standards first, and then a roll out (we have CCS and J1772 in the
meantime).
Thanks for posting this, Rush!
Indeed, thank you!
Best,
Jack
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20240923/31d32d61/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
_______________________________________________
Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
