The possibility of a kit for a Level 2 EVSE

[AndyH]

I have seen the 80A mentioned a few times now ... and am compelled to comment.

Yes, the spec allows up to 80A. But does not require it. And notice that the UL Listing is limited to 30A for the current J1772 connector. Personally I'd be happy (in the short-term) with a EU equivalent 13A/230V = 2.99kW portable EVSE. So ... the "danger" would be the equivalent of the EU "danger" -- perceived or real. I am NOT suggesting an 80A portable (plug-in) EVSE. I am not even asking for a 50A one either. But 6.6kW would be nice. That would mean drawing 27.5A at 240V. (And willing to compromise down to a standard 30A breaker, or pulling only 30*80%=24amps=5.76kW. Hey! That's like a dryer outlet ! using NEMA10-30R or NEMA14-30R)

(BTW, the Tesla portable EVSE pictured above is limited to draw 40A from a NEMA 14-50R (RV style) receptacle and contains a GFCI.)

I'm sorry but have to split some hairs for this.

I agree 100% that the J1772 spec has an 80A upper limit. But it's more than just allowing up to 80A. It actually specifies that the car - from connector thru charger - must be sized for the full 80A. It doesn't require that the EVSE be built to supply 80A, that's apparently true.

UL listing...can you show me a UL listing for a Jan 2010 J1772 compliant EVSE? I cannot. Word I have from two companies is that their L1 and L2 devices are in UL testing now and won't be marketable until September. I have seen EVSE products in the UL list from the Oct 1996 J1772 revision - and the earlier spec had a 40A limit for AC power. Another factor for UL testing is that according to the EPRI rep that spoke at the June J1772 meeting, they were still working on the EVSE test procedure. It was to be ready by the end of July meeting. If the procedure isn't done, what's the UL basing their evaluation on?

American's may have a challenge understanding the 'EU threat' as most haven't been there. My flat in England was equipped with 13A outlets and each outlet had a switch. The slots for the three prongs had auto-closing doors. The power panel had fuses and/or circuit breakers. The plugs had fuses. The pins on the plugs were 1/2 covered with something that looked like thin shrink wrap. It was absolutely impossible to touch live pins when inserting the plug into the socket. If one used the switch, it was super double impossible!

Here's a shot from one of my old German extension cords from 1990. The wall receptacles are recessed the same way the female extension cord receptacle is.

We don't have this level of redundant safety on our 120V or 240V plugs and outlets! Again - apples and oranges because of both design and the gap between 13A and 80A.

The US NEC appears to have set the standard based on max power for the range of devices per J1772. We could lobby for split standards (to allow plugs for units that draw 40A or less, for example) but that doesn't appear to be what we have today. That's likely why there were older EVSE devices with mains plugs while the new units - rated for twice the power - require hard wiring.

I understand that we want what we want when we want it. But don't expect a commercial L2 EVSE with a plug anytime soon unless one makes their own.

Andy

 

[LEAFer]

I'm sorry but have to split some hairs for this.

No problem … I love “splitting hairs” so long as it’s constructive and achieves something, which, with your knowledge and what I have learned on this forum from your posts, I believe will be true.

I agree 100% that the J1772 spec has an 80A upper limit. But it's more than just allowing up to 80A. It actually specifies that the car - from connector thru charger - must be sized for the full 80A.

I am not sure this is true. Ok, maybe it's in the spec, but just look at the J1772 cable from EVSE to LEAF … I don’t think that will carry 80A. Now look at the Tesla HPC’s cable … that one is spec’ed for and will do 70A ! Total (incl. insulation) diameter = 1.1" ( I don't know the gauge/wire size. ) I doubt the LEAF's EVSE is that "thick". But correct me if I'm wrong.

UL listing...can you show me a UL listing for a Jan 2010 J1772 compliant EVSE? I cannot.

Neither can I. And I know the testing procedure isn’t done yet. I was referring just to the connector, which I have previously researched and posted about on this forum (can’t find the thread right now … will update when/if I can).

UPDATE: here it is: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=265&hilit=30a&start=33

Here's a shot from one of my old German extension cords from 1990. The wall receptacles are recessed the same way the female extension cord receptacle is.

I received a 220V shock from a Schuko receptacle in Switzerland as a teenager while (stupidly) reaching behind a chest of drawers jammed against the wall … and trying to unplug the plug, with my fingers touching the partially removed plug. Obviously I am still around but I had to lay down and rest for about 30 minutes. Boy, that wasn’t fun! Being so long ago … it doesn’t seem too bad now … but it also sounds like UK (and I’ve been there and know the switched receptacles you are talking about) seems a little safer (shrink wrap).

Anyways … still hoping for a commercially produced L2 EVSE (like Tesla’s).

 

[AndyH]

Might have found the offending NEC requirement for hardwired L2 devices.

Gory details here: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=10893#p10893

Short answer:

Section 625.13 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment.
Electric vehicle supply equipment rated at 125 volts, single phase, 15 or 20 amperes or part of a system identified and listed as suitable for the purpose and meeting the requirements of 625.18, 625.19, and 625.29 shall be permitted to be cord-and-plug-connected. All other electric vehicle supply equipment shall be permanently connected and fastened in place.

This section has three phrases - L1, other approved systems that also meet other sections, and hard-wired. The green section is where we're getting hung-up.
BUT - only if identified and listed as suitable for the purpose AND meeting requirements of these three other sections.

Here's 625.18, .19, and .29:

Section 625.18 Interlock.
Electric vehicle supply equipment shall be provided with an interlock that de-energizes the electric vehicle connector and its cable whenever the electrical connector is uncoupled from the electric vehicle. An interlock shall not be required for portable cord-and-plug-connected electric vehicle supply equipment intended for connection to receptacle outlets rated at 125 volts, single phase, 15 and 20 amperes

Section 625.19 Automatic De-Energization of Cable.
The electric vehicle supply equipment or the cable-connector combination of the equipment shall be provided with an automatic means to de-energize the cable conductors and electric vehicle connector upon exposure to strain

Section 625.29 Indoor Sites
(B) Height. Unless specifically listed for the purpose and location, the coupling means of the electric vehicle supply equipment shall be stored or located at a height of not less than 450 mm (18 in.) and not more than 1.2 m (4 ft) above the floor level.

Here's 625.14:

Section 625.14 Rating:
Level 1. 125vac. This method, which allows broad access to charge an EV, permits plugging into a common, grounded 125-volt electrical receptacle (NEMA 5-15R or 5-20R) when cord-and-plug is approved.
Level 2. 240 VAC, 40 amp. electric vehicle supply equipment shall be permanently connected and fastened in place.

 

[LEAFer]

Short answer:

Section 625.13 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment.
Electric vehicle supply equipment rated at 125 volts, single phase, 15 or 20 amperes or part of a system identified and listed as suitable for the purpose and meeting the requirements of 625.18, 625.19, and 625.29 shall be permitted to be cord-and-plug-connected. All other electric vehicle supply equipment shall be permanently connected and fastened in place.

This section has three phrases - L1, other approved systems that also meet other sections, and hard-wired. The green section is where we're getting hung-up.
BUT - only if identified and listed as suitable for the purpose AND meeting requirements of these three other sections. There's nothing useful in 625.18, .19, or .29, but here's 625.14:

Actually there is useful stuff in 625.18, .19, .29. But more imortant for now is the word "or" in the green part. Does this "or" remove the requirement of the plug-in EVSE being 125V/15A/20A rated (which is the blue part) ? Or is the "or" inserted to allow for "part of a system" to qualify under the definiton of an EVSE ? If it is the FORMER, then 240V equipment meeting the three sections WOULD qualify for plug-in treatment despite a sepcific L2 240V/40A mention in 625.14.

I'll let y'all mull that one over. In the meantime ... I have updated my post made above at 11:46am today with the reference to the UL listing for the connector.

 

[garygid]

I believe the 625.14 section's Level2 language quoted above is obsolete, and no longer contains "permanently connected ..." in the 2008 NEC.

 

[AndyH]

Obsolete is relative. This apparently IS the language that was in effect when California adopted it's safety procedures, and when Canada defined it's procedures, and when J1772 Jan 10 was created and approved.

It also appears that the NEC was modified a number of times since the 2008 version was published. One modification appears to be authorization to put a plug on L2 EVSE that meets other requirements.

I have no idea how long it will take to get this change into the NEC, have no idea when it might trickle down to the states, and have no idea if or when it'll force a wording change in J1772.

More here: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=10915#p10915