ICE Breaker J1772 extension cable technical discussion

MODERATORS NOTE: This thread was split off of this thread: ICE Breaker J1772 extension cable for sale. 30A 52A, 30 foot. Please continue technical discussion here and sales discussion there. -drees

Brad, those plugs are NOT rated at 70 amp by any recognized body. Actually, DoStar derated them to 50 amps after presenting them for UL approval.

How do I know? I've sold well over 1000 of them.

It's nice to see that our original JLong is being copied yet again! That's great for the EV movement, but unfortunately, every example that I've seen has come up short on SAFETY.

So, here's a few simple questions:

1) Do you pass through the proximity wire?

2) Do you solder the pins?

3) What gauge is your wire?


We've been selling our fully J1772 compliant JLong for almost two years now, and I have to say that it is flattering to be copied so many times!

Our's never has an asterisk or a liability disclaimer... it's actually fully warranted. Also, it's rated at 40 amps, instead of the lesser 30 amps of our competition.

http://shop.quickchargepower.com/JLONG-40-Amp-J1772-extension-cable-JL40A.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


JLong vs competition

For our JLong J1772 extension, we started by designing the very best cable for the job, and we have those cables built in California, USA. Since we pioneered this niche product, there are now at least two others available, both using preassembled Chinese plugs and cables that were intended for EVSE charging stations only.

We recognize that there's always a market for the cheaper product, but unfortunately we won't use products that don't meet our high standards:

1) Our JLong is the only J1772 extension that gives you 100% of the protections of J1772 (proximity disconnect, ground fault, pilot signal, etc). I personally think it's absolutely critical not to substitute lower price and quality for safety standards. Others may claim that they follow all J1772 protocols, but only JLong does.

The Chinese cables used by competitors do not carry proximity detection at all. The reason that they can't do this is because the cables don't even have the wire inside to perform this critical task. That means that every time you disconnect the J1772 charge station from the extension while the car is charging, there will be a "hot" disconnect which can damage equipment and cause a spark / arcing. Not my idea of a smart or safe design.

2) Because we build our own cables, we make numerous improvements. First, all the power wires are doubled... instead of two, we have four parallel power wires in the cable. This allows us to build an ultra light weight and super flexible cable. Secondly, we include all the communication wires necessary for safety. There are actually 8 conductors in each of our cable assemblies. The Chinese cables use half.

3) Chinese cables are HEAVY and clunky, and not very flexible. We don't even offer them anymore as a resale item.

4) At least one competitor was soldering his wires to the power pins. We absolutely have NEVER done this, even from the first one built. All of our connections are crimped to aerospace / mil-spec standards using commercial air powered and calibrated tooling, dies and locators. We have never had a failure of these parts. As you might imagine, failure in this area can burn your car or house down. I just learned of a homemade charging station wiring job that caused almost $3000 in damages just yesterday, and this was a VERY experienced hobbyist.

5) The competition doesn't use a handle at all on the inlet end. NONE. There is a cheap plastic "dust cap" that I can compress with my fingers. Our inlet handle is built from 6061-T6 aircraft grade aluminum alloy, cut on a water jet, and TIG welded. Then, we powder coat with a slip resistant finish and laser etch our logo. You can DRIVE YOUR CAR OVER OUR HANDLE and it will not crush. Since these are designed to lay on the ground, this seemed like a smart design requirement to us.

6) The competition uses either a 32 amp version or 50 amp version. Our current model is 40 amp capable, which means that every known J1772 vehicle in the world can safely use it. Tesla Model S/3/X can also use JLong with the Tesla adaptor, however "twin charger" equipped cars and Roadster will have to limit their charge rate to 40 amps.

Within a few months, we will have an 80 amp JLong (the maximum of the J1772 standard in USA only... the rest of the world only recognizes 30 amp maximum).

7) Again, because we build our own cables, you can get JLong in any length you like. Believe it or not, 40 feet is the most popular (and we have custom built longer). The Chinese cables only come in 25 feet or less.

Here are some of the industry articles written about JLong:

http://insideevs.com/review-quick-charge-power-JLong" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://bmwi3.blogspot.com/2015/03/featured-ev-product-jlong.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1095906_electric-car-charging-station-blocked-get-an-extension-cord" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

shop.quickchargepower.com/JLONG-40-Amp-J1772-extension-cable-JL40A.htm

40 feet - $349 retail

30 feet - $319 retail

20 feet - $279 retail

10 feet - $229 retail

5 feet - $199 retail

TonyWilliams said:

DoStar defeated them to 50 amps

Click to expand...

I assume you meant derated not defeated.

dhanson865 said:

TonyWilliams said:

DoStar defeated them to 50 amps

Click to expand...

I assume you meant derated not defeated.

Click to expand...

Thanks! Fixed.

Brad uses different gauge wires for different J1772 cables. His 52A cable has 12 conductors total, four for each of the L1 and L2 hots. One for ground and one for pilot. As I understand it, he custom makes each of these cables and doesn't use Chinese made preassembled ones. As such, I think he added another conductor to pass through proximity on his J1772 extension cord.

He sent me a 52A J1772 cable which I found to be very lightweight, flexible, and portable - similar to Tony's 40A J1772 cable (I have both). Brad's cable looks well-made but I have not opened up the J1772 handle to know whether it has been crimped, soldered, or both. In fact, I think I will replace Tony's 40A cable on my home EVSE with it so that my Tesla friends can charge at 52A; I already have a 70A breaker for this circuit (The original idea was to put the ITT 75A cable on it but that cable was just so big and heavy I opted to go lighter). I'll put Tony's 40A cable on my backup EVSE and sell one of my ITT cables.

On a side note, he sent me some extra 12 conductor cable so that I can use it on the outlet end of my portable EVSE; it's more lightweight and flexible than anything I can buy at the local Home Depot and at less than two dollars a foot, much more affordable than Tony's 8 conductor version.

First, I can't emphasize enough NOT TO RUN THE DOSTAR PLUG ABOVE 50 Amps !!!

We rate it at 40 amps for that very reason. For us to make our 80 amp plug required our own complete redesign and production of the power pins. I sincerely doubt Brad (or anybody that sells these) has done that.

It appears that the cables are built with multi strand wires and wrapped in abrasion resistant expanded sleeves? No insulator, rubber or otherwise?

I'm happy to test these under load with my IR thermometer.

Certainly, all the low cost options beat our price! Yes, our product is more expensive, and will remain the premium, high quality, safe, warranted, tested, fully compliant product in the market that we pioneered.

eHelmholtz said:

Brad uses different gauge wires for different J1772 cables. His 52A cable has 12 conductors total, four for each of the L1 and L2 hots. One for ground and one for pilot. As I understand it, he custom makes each of these cables and doesn't use Chinese made preassembled ones. As such, I think he added another conductor to pass through proximity on his J1772 extension cord.

He sent me a 52A J1772 cable which I found to be very lightweight, flexible, and portable - similar to Tony's 40A J1772 cable (I have both). Brad's cable looks well-made but I have not opened up the J1772 handle to know whether it has been crimped, soldered, or both. In fact, I think I will replace Tony's 40A cable on my home EVSE with it so that my Tesla friends can charge at 52A; I already have a 70A breaker for this circuit (The original idea was to put the ITT 75A cable on it but that cable was just so big and heavy I opted to go lighter). I'll put Tony's 40A cable on my backup EVSE and sell one of my ITT cables.

On a side note, he sent me some extra 12 conductor cable so that I can use it on the outlet end of my portable EVSE; it's more lightweight and flexible than anything I can buy at the local Home Depot and at less than two dollars a foot, much more affordable than Tony's 8 conductor version.

Click to expand...

TonyWilliams said:

Brad, those plugs are NOT rated at 70 amp by any recognized body. Actually, DoStar derated them to 50 amps after presenting them for UL approval.

How do I know? I've sold well over 1000 of them.

It's nice to see that our original JLong is being copied yet again! That's great for the EV movement, but unfortunately, every example that I've seen has come up short on SAFETY.

So, here's a few simple questions:

1) Do you pass through the proximity wire?

2) Do you solder the pins?

3) What gauge is your wire?


We've been selling our fully J1772 compliant JLong for almost two years now, and I have to say that it is flattering to be copied so many times!

Our's never has an asterisk or a liability disclaimer... it's actually fully warranted. Also, it's rated at 40 amps, instead of the lesser 30 amps of our competition.

http://shop.quickchargepower.com/JLONG-40-Amp-J1772-extension-cable-JL40A.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


JLong vs competition

For our JLong J1772 extension, we started by designing the very best cable for the job, and we have those cables built in California, USA. Since we pioneered this niche product, there are now at least two others available, both using preassembled Chinese plugs and cables that were intended for EVSE charging stations only.

We recognize that there's always a market for the cheaper product, but unfortunately we won't use products that don't meet our high standards:

1) Our JLong is the only J1772 extension that gives you 100% of the protections of J1772 (proximity disconnect, ground fault, pilot signal, etc). I personally think it's absolutely critical not to substitute lower price and quality for safety standards. Others may claim that they follow all J1772 protocols, but only JLong does.

The Chinese cables used by competitors do not carry proximity detection at all. The reason that they can't do this is because the cables don't even have the wire inside to perform this critical task. That means that every time you disconnect the J1772 charge station from the extension while the car is charging, there will be a "hot" disconnect which can damage equipment and cause a spark / arcing. Not my idea of a smart or safe design.

2) Because we build our own cables, we make numerous improvements. First, all the power wires are doubled... instead of two, we have four parallel power wires in the cable. This allows us to build an ultra light weight and super flexible cable. Secondly, we include all the communication wires necessary for safety. There are actually 8 conductors in each of our cable assemblies. The Chinese cables use half.

3) Chinese cables are HEAVY and clunky, and not very flexible. We don't even offer them anymore as a resale item.

4) At least one competitor was soldering his wires to the power pins. We absolutely have NEVER done this, even from the first one built. All of our connections are crimped to aerospace / mil-spec standards using commercial air powered and calibrated tooling, dies and locators. We have never had a failure of these parts. As you might imagine, failure in this area can burn your car or house down. I just learned of a homemade charging station wiring job that caused almost $3000 in damages just yesterday, and this was a VERY experienced hobbyist.

5) The competition doesn't use a handle at all on the inlet end. NONE. There is a cheap plastic "dust cap" that I can compress with my fingers. Our inlet handle is built from 6061-T6 aircraft grade aluminum alloy, cut on a water jet, and TIG welded. Then, we powder coat with a slip resistant finish and laser etch our logo. You can DRIVE YOUR CAR OVER OUR HANDLE and it will not crush. Since these are designed to lay on the ground, this seemed like a smart design requirement to us.

6) The competition uses either a 32 amp version or 50 amp version. Our current model is 40 amp capable, which means that every known J1772 vehicle in the world can safely use it. Tesla Model S/3/X can also use JLong with the Tesla adaptor, however "twin charger" equipped cars and Roadster will have to limit their charge rate to 40 amps.

Within a few months, we will have an 80 amp JLong (the maximum of the J1772 standard in USA only... the rest of the world only recognizes 30 amp maximum).

7) Again, because we build our own cables, you can get JLong in any length you like. Believe it or not, 40 feet is the most popular (and we have custom built longer). The Chinese cables only come in 25 feet or less.

Here are some of the industry articles written about JLong:

http://insideevs.com/review-quick-charge-power-JLong" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://bmwi3.blogspot.com/2015/03/featured-ev-product-jlong.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1095906_electric-car-charging-station-blocked-get-an-extension-cord" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

shop.quickchargepower.com/JLONG-40-Amp-J1772-extension-cable-JL40A.htm

40 feet - $349 retail

30 feet - $319 retail

20 feet - $279 retail

10 feet - $229 retail

5 feet - $199 retail

Click to expand...

Hi Tony, Thanks for bringing up a couple points.

Brad, those plugs are NOT rated at 70 amp by any recognized body. Actually, DoStar derated them to 50 amps after presenting them for UL approval.

I didn't purchase these plugs from DoStar. It's interesting a lot of manufactures I contacted make this same looking plug with small variations. The manufacture rated these 70A and that's whats on my invoice from them.

It's nice to see that our original JLong is being copied yet again! That's great for the EV movement, but unfortunately, every example that I've seen has come up short on SAFETY.

So, here's a few simple questions:

1) Do you pass through the proximity wire?

2) Do you solder the pins?

3) What gauge is your wire?

I had the idea for a j1772 extension a long time ago when I read about charging stations being ICE'ed online. It was cool to see someone actually made such a thing when I found your website. You did a nice job on it. That metal handle is very custom!

1. Yes as I mention in my listing "The ICE Breaker is a extension cable that maintains the safety features and functions of the J1772 protocol. Specifically the proximity safety interlock works end to end on both the extension’s plug and the EVSE it is used with."
this is a must, you have to support the proximity line. I run extra conductors through and use one for the proximity.

2. I can crimp it or solder it. or both. Blink had a lot of trouble with crimped only connections. soldering will keep moisture out of the connection. This has been a big discussion on the web in other threads.

3. multiple 16ga. 3x per phase for the 40A version

Our's never has an asterisk or a liability disclaimer... it's actually fully warranted. Also, it's rated at 40 amps, instead of the lesser 30 amps of our competition.

Yes I found it here under terms and conditions: http://shop.quickchargepower.com/termsandconditions.sc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

here is a snipit: "QUICK CHARGE POWER SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NONINFRINGEMENT WITH RESPECT TO THESE WEB PAGES AND CONTENT. IN NO EVENT WILL QUICK CHARGE POWER BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES EVEN IF COMPANY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. QUICK CHARGE POWER is not liable for any damages, including any consequential damages, of any kind that may result to the user from the use of the materials on this Web site or of any of the products or services described hereon. "

I think because of the world we live in unfortunately we need to add these things even if a guy only sell tennis balls.

I see we both offer a 1 year warranty, It's only right to stand by our stuff.

eHelmholtz said:

Brad uses different gauge wires for different J1772 cables. His 52A cable has 12 conductors total, four for each of the L1 and L2 hots. One for ground and one for pilot. As I understand it, he custom makes each of these cables and doesn't use Chinese made preassembled ones. As such, I think he added another conductor to pass through proximity on his J1772 extension cord.

He sent me a 52A J1772 cable which I found to be very lightweight, flexible, and portable - similar to Tony's 40A J1772 cable (I have both). Brad's cable looks well-made but I have not opened up the J1772 handle to know whether it has been crimped, soldered, or both. In fact, I think I will replace Tony's 40A cable on my home EVSE with it so that my Tesla friends can charge at 52A; I already have a 70A breaker for this circuit (The original idea was to put the ITT 75A cable on it but that cable was just so big and heavy I opted to go lighter). I'll put Tony's 40A cable on my backup EVSE and sell one of my ITT cables.

On a side note, he sent me some extra 12 conductor cable so that I can use it on the outlet end of my portable EVSE; it's more lightweight and flexible than anything I can buy at the local Home Depot and at less than two dollars a foot, much more affordable than Tony's 8 conductor version.

Click to expand...

eHelmholtz, Thanks for the help clarifying I try to give people a good deal and keep my prices low. You are right in the extension I added extra conductors to cover the proximity plus 2 spares.

TonyWilliams said:

It appears that the cables are built with multi strand wires and wrapped in abrasion resistant expanded sleeves? No insulator, rubber or otherwise?

Click to expand...

Yes they are jacketed, I'll add more language emphasizing that. it's just mentioned once right now: "The the double insulated wires are then covered in high temp PET Braided Sleeving."

I wouldn't just put wires in a open braid sleeve, seems naked to me

1) DoStar produces these, regardless of where you bought them (in China, or elsewhere). They are 50 amp rated, from a previous 70 amp rating. Clearly, if you're comfortable selling folks this, then good luck!!! I've actually tested dozens of them. We will not exceed 40 amps with the so called 50a/70a DoStar plug that you are using. Our 80 amp assembly uses our own design plug, inlet and cable:

80 amp cable:
http://shop.quickchargepower.com/Cable-80-Amp-C8-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

40 amp cable:
http://shop.quickchargepower.com/Cable-40-Amp-C8-40A.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2) Blink (actually REMA, who built the cords) didn't have a problem that soldering fixes. I know it almost seems fashionable to solder stuff in the hobbyist world, but ask yourself why thousands of airliners, spacecraft, satellites, etc, are over your head daily without soldered power conductors? I'm confident that I'm beating a dead horse, but it's just not proper or prudent. I could list lots of reasons why, so I want to make sure that I'm not misunderstanding; does this mean that you actually solder the wires in the pins?

By the way, I was a point guy on the REMA issues, having the first melted pins in Nov 2012. It was part of the reason that when we started building JESLA and JLong in the summer of 2013, that they were PROPERLY terminated with a calibrated crimp (ours are certified to mil-spec).

My melted pins on the Blink EVSE with REMA plug:
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=10749" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I can't overemphasis that improperly terminated connections can and will do EXACTLY what happened with the UL listed REMA plug at only 30 amps.

If you need advice or help in the safety areas, I'm happy to provide guideance. Please don't become the person that has to be publicaly shamed to do it correctly.

DO NOT OFFER THESE PLUGS AT OVER 50 AMPS BECAUSE YOU HAVE A PIECE OF PAPER. IT IS NOT SAFE.

I can offer testing and "pieces of paper" that can refute your 70 amp claim, and since this is a safety issue (and not merely a marketing thing, like Nissan offering a "100 mile range" car), I have to be insistent.

I can think of several cases on this forum where publicaly outing a serious safety issue was necessary:

A) the EVSE being offered without GFCI
B) the J1772 extension guy soldering pins (that guy finally got with the program and got a proper crimper)
C) offering a "quick 220" with LIVE VOLTAGE for the consumer to grab

I'm happy to report that in all three of the above cases, the issues were fixed and all are succesfully selling their (now much safer) products.

There actually was a "D" who was going to copy the work of EVSEupgrade, but he didn't last long!

Please don't be "D".

Will somebody check my math in this?

16 gauge - 0.0508" diameter - 0.00258"^2 area

14 gauge - 0.0640" = 0.00411"

12 gauge - 0.0808" = 0.00653"

10 gauge - 0.1018" = 0.0104"

8 gauge - 0.1284" = 0.0165"

6 gauge - 0.184" = 0.0263"

4 gauge - 0.232" = 0.0417"


National Electrical Code (NEC) maximum amperage with 90C insulation:

27 amps - 13 gauge = three 16 gauge - 0.005"^2

40 amps - 10 gauge = four 16 gauge - 0.010"^2

47 amps max: 9 gauge = two 12 gauge - 0.01306"^2

85 amps: 5 gauge = two 8 gauge - 0.033"^2


For JLong, our 40 amp is two 12 gauge and our 80 amp is two 8 gauge conductors.

As you can see, having grossly undersized conductors would certainly make them both cheaper and more flexible in a poorly designed cable.

JUST NOT SAFE. THIS ISSUE IS EVEN MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE PLUG ISSUE.

Using three 16 gauge conductors for 40 amps continuous is unsafe.
Using four 16 gauge conductors for 52 (or 64!!!) amps is also unsafe.

If more wire won't fit in the 50/70 amp "rated" DoStar plug, that should be telling you something! Again, there is LOTS of expertise on this forum... REALLY A LOT... let's get you up to speed before something not very nice happens.

TonyWilliams said:

Will somebody check my math in this?

16 gauge - 0.0508" diameter - 0.00258"^2 area

14 gauge - 0.0640" = 0.00411"

12 gauge - 0.0808" = 0.00653"

10 gauge - 0.1018" = 0.0104"

8 gauge - 0.1284" = 0.0165"

6 gauge - 0.184" = 0.0263"

4 gauge - 0.232" = 0.0417"


National Electrical Code (NEC) maximum amperage with 90C insulation:

27 amps - 13 gauge = three 16 gauge - 0.005"^2

40 amps - 10 gauge = four 16 gauge - 0.010"^2

47 amps max: 9 gauge = two 12 gauge - 0.01306"^2

85 amps: 5 gauge = two 8 gauge - 0.033"^2


For JLong, our 40 amp is two 12 gauge and our 80 amp is two 8 gauge conductors.

As you can see, having grossly undersized conductors would certainly make them both cheaper and more flexible.

JUST NOT SAFE. THIS ISSUE IS EVEN MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE PLUG ISSUE.

Using three 16 gauge conductors for 40 amps continuous is unsafe.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that you might not be able to just take the cross-sectional area of the copper to determine the current allowed, because the heat won't conduct the same way through multiple wires as it would through a single wire. At 90C, my reading of the NEC (based on a brief online search) says 16AWG is good for 18A if there are no more than 3 conductors in the cord. Now, the question is, when these conductors get doubled/tripled/quadrupled up, you've definitely got more than 3 conductors, and the NEC rules of thumb become far more complex and difficult to apply.

If a single 16AWG is good for 18A, downrating it 20% says it can carry 14.4A, and 14.4A * 3 = 43.2A. But now it comes down to the cable size and the ability for each wire to disperse its heat. It might be able to carry the ampacity, but if the heat gets trapped within other (potentially non-conducting) wires, then that could be an issue.

Here's where the math could be flawed... you've got 16AWG with 1/4 the cross-sectional area as 10AWG. There's no way that 10AWG can carry 4x the current of 16AWG (it's closer to double, with 10AWG rated @ 40A, so it seems like it's more closely related to diameter, rather than area), so there's obviously a reason why summing the area doesn't make sense. Maybe the safety concerns are more related to circumference of the wire (i.e. the area where heat can be dispersed) rather than area? That makes some intuitive sense to me, if you think of the wires as heatsinks (it's all about surface area in that case).

Now, my disclaimer: I'm not saying that this is safe, I just find it an interesting discussion, and this is my two cents. I think Tony's comment of "run the tests and see if it's really safe" earlier in the thread is appropriate.

ishiyakazuo,

You are correct, a person can't just add up cross sectional area as Tony is trying to do to discredit me.

ishiyakazuo said:

It seems to me that you might not be able to just take the cross-sectional area of the copper to determine the current allowed, because the heat won't conduct the same way through multiple wires as it would through a single wire.

Click to expand...

That's right. The ampacity of a conductor is determined by the requirement that the resistive heating from the current should not cause the conductor insulation to exceed its rated temperature. For a given area of copper, if you split it up into multiple conductors, you increase the total surface area and hence the ability of the conductors to reject heat. So for example, decreasing AWG by 6 halves the diameter of the conductor, quarters the area, but reduces the ampacity by a factor smaller than 4.

However, if then put multiple conductors into a single cable assembly, the surface area of the bundle is reduced, so you have to take a reduction factor for the ampacity of the assembly. For 4-6 conductors, the NEC specifies this as 80% of the ampacity with 3 conductors.

ishiyakazuo said:

At 90C, my reading of the NEC (based on a brief online search) says 16AWG is good for 18A if there are no more than 3 conductors in the cord.

Click to expand...

Not sure where you got this info, the 2011 NEC (in force in California) specifies in Table 400.5(A)(1) that for many common cable insulation types, the ampacity for 16AWG copper in a 3 conductor cable is 10A.

I doubt that the product Brad is selling is subject to the NEC, and I'm not sure that the insulation type he is using is listed in Table 400.5(A)(1). The NEC is more concerned with building wire than utilization equipment. [For example, it prohibits paralleling conductors smaller than 1/0 AWG.] There is probably some UL standard that governs the ampacity of cords in utilization equipment.

However, under the NEC the ampacity of each 16AWG in a six conductor cable (with one of the common insulation types) would be 8A, for a total of 24A for each set of three.

Cheers, Wayne

VegasBrad said:

ishiyakazuo,

You are correct, a person can't just add up cross sectional area as Tony is trying to do to discredit me.

Click to expand...

I'm not trying to "discredit you". I'm trying to understand if you have calculated the load carrying ability of the conductors in the arrangement that you have presented. Why don't you show us your calculations?

All the points brought up in addition to mine also need addressing. The bottom line... you are not going to sweep this under the carpet. Let's air it out and get it fixed.

I know that you were doing "dual relays" without any knowledge of how inadequate that was either, so again, please don't get defensive, and instead, let us help you make a safe product. This one, in my not very humble opinion, is not safe.

My back of the napkin calculations that I presented above show a LOT less actual conducting material than is normally associated with those loads. Generally speaking, less metal means higher heat at the same amperage. Enough heat means a really bad day.

Also, keep in mind that continuous loads are a much bigger hurdle to overcome than intermittent. Your product would most definitely fall under "continuous".

wwhitney said:

ishiyakazuo said:

It seems to me that you might not be able to just take the cross-sectional area of the copper to determine the current allowed, because the heat won't conduct the same way through multiple wires as it would through a single wire.

Click to expand...

That's right. The ampacity of a conductor is determined by the requirement that the resistive heating from the current should not cause the conductor insulation to exceed its rated temperature. For a given area of copper, if you split it up into multiple conductors, you increase the total surface area and hence the ability of the conductors to reject heat. So for example, decreasing AWG by 6 halves the diameter of the conductor, quarters the area, but reduces the ampacity by a factor smaller than 4.

However, if then put multiple conductors into a single cable assembly, the surface area of the bundle is reduced, so you have to take a reduction factor for the ampacity of the assembly. For 4-6 conductors, the NEC specifies this as 80% of the ampacity with 3 conductors.

Click to expand...

That's a huge variable (multiple conductors) that you really don't know the answer to until you actually test it. If Brad doesn't have the equipment, I do, plus a whole bunch of experience doing this. If three 16 gauge insulated conductors bundled in a jacket can handle a normal hot day in Phoenix with direct sun light coiled up at 40 amps continuous without melting or catching on fire, that's great.

Of course, standards are to PREVENT a situation where it works fine in an easy environment and causes harm in another very likely scenario.

So, if Brad needs an assembly that operates at 40-62 amps (that is "no bullshit" energy, BTW), then either build an adequate one or stop selling inadequate ones. If Brad doesn't need to sell 40-62 amps (honestly, I'm in this industry, and don't see the market for a 62 amp cable beyond a few isolated situations), he could just lower the rating to something more appropriate. Let's face it, unless he can show us his calculations, I suspec that the "ratings" we're plucked out of thin air.

In the danger department. ahouse in Irvine, California burnt from one of 30,000 Tesla UMC plugs, and Tesla recalled the entire group. That's a big company with INSURANCE and teams of degrees engineers.

ishiyakazuo said:

At 90C, my reading of the NEC (based on a brief online search) says 16AWG is good for 18A if there are no more than 3 conductors in the cord.

Click to expand...

Not sure where you got this info, the 2011 NEC (in force in California) specifies in Table 400.5(A)(1) that for many common cable insulation types, the ampacity for 16AWG copper in a 3 conductor cable is 10A.

I doubt that the product Brad is selling is subject to the NEC, and I'm not sure that the insulation type he is using is listed in Table 400.5(A)(1). The NEC is more concerned with building wire than utilization equipment. [For example, it prohibits paralleling conductors smaller than 1/0 AWG.] There is probably some UL standard that governs the ampacity of cords in utilization equipment.

However, under the NEC the ampacity of each 16AWG in a six conductor cable (with one of the common insulation types) would be 8A, for a total of 24A for each set of three.

Cheers, Wayne

Click to expand...

Beyond standards becomes "is it safe". Maybe Brad's setup is the future of JLong, because honestly, if I can make a cheaper, lighter cord with 16 gauge wires do the same work that our existing 8 gauge and 12 gauge cable assemblies, I'm in !!!

But, I predict that won't be the case.

wwhitney said:

ishiyakazuo said:

At 90C, my reading of the NEC (based on a brief online search) says 16AWG is good for 18A if there are no more than 3 conductors in the cord.

Click to expand...

Not sure where you got this info, the 2011 NEC (in force in California) specifies in Table 400.5(A)(1) that for many common cable insulation types, the ampacity for 16AWG copper in a 3 conductor cable is 10A.

Click to expand...

Hence my disclaimer that such info came from a quick online search! I did think that 18A seemed awfully generous for a 16AWG wire at the time.
I just find this discussion to be an interesting one in terms of determining proper wire gauges. In another thread, a comment was made that 14AWG in a J1772 cable was good for 16A, which seemed a bit high to me at the time, but I was directed to some info somewhere that seemed to indicate that it was indeed OK.

TonyWilliams said:

VegasBrad said:

ishiyakazuo,

You are correct, a person can't just add up cross sectional area as Tony is trying to do to discredit me.

Click to expand...

I'm not trying to "discredit you". I'm trying to understand if you have calculated the load carrying ability of the conductors in the arrangement that you have presented. Why don't you show us your calculations?

Click to expand...

@TonyWilliams

just my 2 cents on how you came across in this thread:

1. Your first post in this thread was chock full of advertisements for your own products and you have continued that tone to a lesser extent in subsequent posts.

2. You have asked him about the build of his product. This seems neutral on its own and should have been but in combination with 1 takes on another tone.

3. You have started discussion about possible deficiencies in his product. This seems negative on it's own, more so in combination with 1.

I think 2 is where you should have started, and used that information to decide if 3 was warranted or not. You may feel that 3 was a necessity from the beginning but if so lead with that.

I also think 1 should have been avoided or minimized to the level needed to support points in the vein of 2 or 3 where a comparison is needed.

In short I think your tone in this thread has overstepped what is socially acceptable and I could see why Brad would see your posts in a negative light.

Oh and even if you think you have to advertise the heck out of your products you don't have to post a screen full, a simple statement or two with a URL to the full text gets the point across to anyone that wants to read it. I mean why have a multi-line signature with URL below a post that has the entire text of what I'd read at the URL?

TonyWilliams said:

That's a huge variable (multiple conductors) that you really don't know the answer to until you actually test it.

Click to expand...

So how did you test/analyze your choice of using (4) #12 in two parallel sets of two to carry 40A?

In quickly perusing the 2011 NEC, UL 817 and UL 62, I don't see anything about paralleling conductors in cords. The UL documents don't seem to address more than 3 current carrying conductors in a cord, and the NEC specifies an 80% derating factor for 4-6 conductors.

2011 NEC said:

625.17 Cable. The electric vehicle supply equipment cable shall be Type EV, EVJ, EVE, EVJE, EVT, or EVJT flexible cable as specified in Article 400 and Table 400.4. Ampacities shall be as specified in Table 400.5(A)(1) for 10 AWG and smaller, and in Table 400.5(A)(2) for 8 AWG and larger. The overall length of the cable shall not exceed 7.5 m (25 ft) unless equipped with a cable management system that is listed as suitable for the purpose. Other cable types and assemblies listed as being suitable for the purpose, including optional hybrid communications, signal, and composite optical fiber cables, shall be permitted.

Click to expand...

This would suggest that for #12 copper, one is stuck with the 20A rating for 3 current carrying conductors per Table 400.5(A)(1). With the 80% derating factor, a pair of #12s in a 4 current carrying conductor cable would have a combined ampacity of 32A.

Cheers, Wayne

TonyWilliams said:

I'm not trying to "discredit you".

Click to expand...

Oh good, because that would sound petty, and you have a lot of respect on here.. and..

TonyWilliams said:

I know that you were doing "dual relays" without any knowledge of how inadequate that was either.

Click to expand...

Oh.. er.. um.. never mind then..

desiv

dhanson865 said:

In short I think your tone in this thread has overstepped what is socially acceptable and I could see why Brad would see your posts in a negative light.

Oh and even if you think you have to advertise the heck out of your products you don't have to post a screen full, a simple statement or two with a URL to the full text gets the point across to anyone that wants to read it. I mean why have a multi-line signature with URL below a post that has the entire text of what I'd read at the URL?

Click to expand...

Really, this is about me? My signature line isn't good enough? PLEASE, put me on your "ignore list", and I will do the same for you. You can join "OrientExpress" and "edoakrun". Please don't suffer any longer!!!

I'm not going to play into your hand; that Brad's equipment is somehow my problem for pointing out the shortcomings. I'm more than qualified to make these observations, and will continue to do so where I find a product "unsafe" or a "ripoff".