Installing home charger

WattsUp

Thinking of importing a Golf GTE. Just wondering approx how much to install a home charger point?

Do I also have to get the ESB to install a night saver meter ? Anyone know how much that might cost ?

Thanks

KCross

Some threads on that subject already...
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=101089116
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=100706332

Another thread worth reading relevant to home charging...
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057648438


No charge to change the meter. Just ask your provider (Energia, Bord Gais etc) for it and they will get ESB Networks to come out and put it in for you. You will be paying a slightly higher monthly standing charge for it but its worth it if you have an EV as most of your charging will be on the night rate.

n97 mini

KCross wrote: »

No charge to change the meter.

Correct, but potential minefield. We were on nightsaver years ago and had a nice modern multirate meter installed. When we wanted to switch back to a 24 hour tariff in 2011 we were told we'd need an old meter installed and pay €250 for the privilege, which is bollox. That was from Airtricity. Fast forward to 2016 and we bought a Leaf and want to go back onto nightsaver. Again despite our meter being 6 years old Airtricty tell us we need a new meter, for €170. More bollox. After 2 months of threatening the CER on them we're finally on nightsaver, and guess what, we didn't need a new meter, and the cost was zero, like it was last time.

TL;DR -- if you're switching to nightsaver, and especially if you already have a modern multirate meter, phone ESBN after you contact your supplier. Your supplier will not believe you, even if you send them photos of your meter. They will only believe ESBN and will probably try to charge you "for a new meter" even if you don't need one.

WattsUp

Does anyone know if it is permissible or even advisable to have a second distribution board in the garage as well as the main one in the house. They would both be fed by the meter and isolated by the main switch on the meter.

Advantage is that I could easily get access to 32A, or more in future, as the meter is on outside wall of garage. Saves cabling from main board to the garage would could be unsightly.

Disadvantage is that even pulling the main breaker in the house panel would still leave the garage panel and so the EVSE live.

cros13

Provided you have an isolation switch at the meter so that you can cut power to install the extra panel. I've pulled power from the meter at an isolation switch before the CU for the 32A chargepoint at my Dublin apartment's underground car park. And in my place in Portlaoise I added an intermediate box between the meter and CU which is where I take power for the 32A chargepoint on the side wall.

When you get a nightsaver meter you can request that the new meter have an accessible customer side isolation switch. They are not required to provide it but one of the models of meter ESB fits for nightsaver does have one.

BoatMad

20rothmans wrote: »

Does anyone know if it is permissible or even advisable to have a second distribution board in the garage as well as the main one in the house. They would both be fed by the meter and isolated by the main switch on the meter.

Advantage is that I could easily get access to 32A, or more in future, as the meter is on outside wall of garage. Saves cabling from main board to the garage would could be unsightly.

Disadvantage is that even pulling the main breaker in the house panel would still leave the garage panel and so the EVSE live.

you can install ( or rather a RECI sparks can ) as many distribution panels as you like downstream of the meter, virtually any modern installation has a disconnect switch before the meter these days.

Your dis-advantage is actually an advantage , as disconnects in the house will leave the EVSE unaffected

WattsUp

Just as a follow up the ESB Engineer today said it is acceptable to have a second distribution board in the garage fed from the meter. However he said that if the boards were wired in parallel the combined breaker ratings on the 2 boards could not exceed 63A (in my case).
This ensures there is no scenario where each board can be drawing close to their max load and combined together would blow the main ESB fuse (80A).


If the garage became main distributions board, with a 63A breaker, and supplied the car charge circuit as well as supplying the "sub board" in the house this would be okay too. If both house and car drew their max capacity then the 63A would blow which is the case in most houses today anyway. However the main ESB fuse would now blow.

KCross

20rothmans wrote: »

Just as a follow up the ESB Engineer today said it is acceptable to have a second distribution board in the garage fed from the meter. However he said that if the boards were wired in parallel the combined breaker ratings on the 2 boards could not exceed 63A (in my case).
This ensures there is no scenario where each board can be drawing close to their max load and combined together would blow the main ESB fuse (80A).


If the garage became main distributions board, with a 63A breaker, and supplied the car charge circuit as well as supplying the "sub board" in the house this would be okay too. If both house and car drew their max capacity then the 63A would blow which is the case in most houses today anyway. However the main ESB fuse would now blow.

Do you know if you have an "increased supply" from ESB Networks?
https://esbnetworks.ie/existing-connection/increasing-decreasing-supply

Im not sure a standard supply could go above 63A:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101101023&postcount=40

WattsUp

I have the standard supply. There's a 63A breaker in the distribution board. There is an 80A fuse on the ESB side of the meter.

I guess the 12kVA, standard connection MIC, is an average of 52A over 10 minutes but there must be an allowance of slightly over that for shorter periods. Not sure how the 10 minute average might be checked, maybe even the old meters are smarter than I thought.

KCross

20rothmans wrote: »

I have the standard supply. There's a 63A breaker in the distribution board. There is an 80A fuse on the ESB side of the meter.

I guess the 12kVA, standard connection MIC, is an average of 52A over 10 minutes but there must be an allowance of slightly over that for shorter periods. Not sure how the 10 minute average might be checked, maybe even the old meters are smarter than I thought.

Can you see the ESB side fuse to know that it is 80A?

I supposedly have the increased supply but I cant see the fuse inside the meter so I dont know what its rated at. Is there a way to see it in the new digital meters?

WattsUp

On mine the meter was changed but the ESB fuse stayed in place. It's a gray plastic block and on the casing says 80A. Located below the meter in my setup.

Maybe that is enough for an "enhanced supply" and would not need to be changed.

KCross

20rothmans wrote: »

On mine the meter was changed but the ESB fuse stayed in place. It's a gray plastic block and on the casing says 80A. Located below the meter in my setup.

Maybe that is enough for an "enhanced supply" and would not need to be changed.

I had a look at mine. I notice the grey block now. Mine says 60A/80A.
I believe the standard connection will have a 63A fuse in there and the enhanced supply will have the 80A fuse.

This seems to match what their enhanced supply form says.... 52A for standard connection and 70A for increased supply with the obvious ~10A to allow some headroom for peaks/bursts.

If yours is a standard supply maybe you dont have 80A in that grey block?

KCross

Do you have any other high amp devices like heat pumps, electric shower etc?

That will determine how you decide to wire the 2nd board(series or parallel)

Also, the Golf GTE can only utilise a 16A EVSE. I know you might like to future proof it for 32A but you need to think about how you can support it on a standard
supply of 63A.

andrew163

If it helps, I made the same choice (mistake? wise future proof decision? we'll see) in the last three weeks. Got a used 3.3kW Leaf, but bought a 7kW (32A) charger for if/when I get my next EV. It was the same price as the 16A from the supplier.

Except I have an 8kW electric shower too, and after it arrived, realised I'd also need a non-priority switch to be wired in, which added quite a bit of cost. Derp. PM me if you want prices

A nice RECI wired it all together this morning and it works great, but it really cost more than it should have. If I'd put 2+2 together while ordering I think I would have just gone for 16A. Excitement of shiny toys for a shiny new EV took over I guess.

The other thing to consider is the mechanics of the priority/non-priority switch. A priority switch is probably better from the perspective of the shower always being available, but the car will be cut off if it is working at the time. Not sure what effect that has on the battery/car/charger itself. The other option is a non-priority switch which works first-come-first-served - so if the charger is on, the shower is unavailable until it's finished, and if the shower is on, the charger is unavailable until its finished. That will let the car do its thing without interruption for the most part, but may cause issues with shower availability depending on how charge/climate control timers are set.

BoatMad

andrew163 wrote: »

If it helps, I made the same choice (mistake? wise future proof decision? we'll see) in the last three weeks. Got a used 3.3kW Leaf, but bought a 7kW (32A) charger for if/when I get my next EV. It was the same price as the 16A from the supplier.

Except I have an 8kW electric shower too, and after it arrived, realised I'd also need a non-priority switch to be wired in, which added quite a bit of cost. Derp. PM me if you want prices

A nice RECI wired it all together this morning and it works great, but it really cost more than it should have. If I'd put 2+2 together while ordering I think I would have just gone for 16A. Excitement of shiny toys for a shiny new EV took over I guess.

The other thing to consider is the mechanics of the priority/non-priority switch. A priority switch is probably better from the perspective of the shower always being available, but the car will be cut off if it is working at the time. Not sure what effect that has on the battery/car/charger itself. The other option is a non-priority switch which works first-come-first-served - so if the charger is on, the shower is unavailable until it's finished, and if the shower is on, the charger is unavailable until its finished. That will let the car do its thing without interruption for the most part, but may cause issues with shower availability depending on how charge/climate control timers are set.

Im currently developing ( have developed) an EVSE that "loads sheds", in that it reduced the cars demands if it detects a rise in the rest of houses demands. Ive a fair bit more testing to do to determine if it worth commercialising. Also I have reports that some cars dont actually change rate if the EVSE signal changes during charging, in effect you have to break the cycle and restart at the new rate. Thats not a problem in software of course .

priority switching is a poor substitute

DublinDilbert

BoatMad wrote: »

Im currently developing ( have developed) an EVSE that "loads sheds", in that it reduced the cars demands if it detects a rise in the rest of houses demands. Ive a fair bit more testing to do to determine if it worth commercialising. Also I have reports that some cars dont actually change rate if the EVSE signal changes during charging, in effect you have to break the cycle and restart at the new rate. Thats not a problem in software of course .

priority switching is a poor substitute

Interesting concept. For people with PV panels it would be nice if it could set the imported power to the house to as close to zero as possible. So excess power from the PV would be sent to charge the vehicle.

BoatMad

DublinDilbert wrote: »

Interesting concept. For people with PV panels it would be nice if it could set the imported power to the house to as close to zero as possible. So excess power from the PV would be sent to charge the vehicle.

cant see the point of that . I mean the house draws what the house draws , in the case of grid tied PV, it matters not where the PV power is sent

in the case of a non grid PV system, then yes, but surely you would prioritise the house usage of PV over the car, ?

DublinDilbert

Well with no export tariff, if you have excess PV power it makes sense to send it to charge the car (if it needs it), once the demand in the house is met.

BoatMad

DublinDilbert wrote: »

Well with no export tariff, if you have excess PV power it makes sense to send it to charge the car (if it needs it), once the demand in the house is met.

where else would the electrons go !!!.

PS: you dont "send" electricity anywhere, thats merely a figure of speech, the loads determines the current drawn up to the maximum power of the generator

so if you have a car plugged in to a house, assuming you have no feed-in, then all PV power will be consumed , unless the loads have no requirement for the potential PV power available. where you have a FIT ( a good one ) , it typically makes better sense to send all PV power to the grid and buy back any power needed as and when from the grid .

what you could do in a very sophisticated setup is have domestic loads that load shed or switch off, so as to prioritise car charging, But I fail to see the point as a unit is a unit , whether is consumed by your cooker or your car. Most people might only have one or two loads that they could load shed in a house ( hot water may be , space heaters ) , most loads in a house are required when they are needed

KCross

BoatMad wrote: »

Im currently developing ( have developed) an EVSE that "loads sheds", in that it reduced the cars demands if it detects a rise in the rest of houses demands. Ive a fair bit more testing to do to determine if it worth commercialising. Also I have reports that some cars dont actually change rate if the EVSE signal changes during charging, in effect you have to break the cycle and restart at the new rate. Thats not a problem in software of course .

priority switching is a poor substitute

Is the main purpose of your load shedding EVSE to allow max charging current to the car (upto 32A) but to allow it to reduce if required to stop the main fuse blowing? Or what parameters would you set on the shedding? Are you monitoring whole house load and shedding when it approaches 63A?

That would be useful. Most people do not have the increased supply from ESB networks so the max current they can have is 63A on their distribution board.

Add in an electric shower, an oven, a dryer etc and you can quickly hit 63A if you have a 32A EVSE. Shedding the EVSE load back would be very useful, I think.

WattsUp

BoatMad wrote: »

Im currently developing ( have developed) an EVSE that "loads sheds", in that it reduced the cars demands if it detects a rise in the rest of houses demands. Ive a fair bit more testing to do to determine if it worth commercialising. Also I have reports that some cars dont actually change rate if the EVSE signal changes during charging, in effect you have to break the cycle and restart at the new rate. Thats not a problem in software of course .

priority switching is a poor substitute

Great idea and best of luck with it. I have some technical background, not sure if useful, but if looking for somebody to bounce an idea off etc. feel free to pm me.

BoatMad

KCross wrote: »

Is the main purpose of your load shedding EVSE to allow max charging current to the car (upto 32A) but to allow it to reduce if required to stop the main fuse blowing? Or what parameters would you set on the shedding? Are you monitoring whole house load and shedding when it approaches 63A?

That would be useful. Most people do not have the increased supply from ESB networks so the max current they can have is 63A on their distribution board.

Add in an electric shower, an oven, a dryer etc and you can quickly hit 63A if you have a 32A EVSE. Shedding the EVSE load back would be very useful, I think.

Yes. That's exactly what it does , I'm monitoring car current and total house current and shedding begins at 50A at present

KCross

BoatMad wrote: »

Yes. That's exactly what it does , I'm monitoring car current and total house current and shedding begins at 50A at present

One thought and I know your are in development mode here but something to keep in the back of your mind... the 50A figure should be configurable somehow without getting out a soldering iron.

If a user has an "increased supply" from ESB they wont want the shedding to happen at 50A. They will likely want it to shed at 70A.

Its a useful idea. I'd say a stumbling block will be to convince people they need it. Most people would not even be aware of the need for it. If you could patent the implementation and get it into an existing manufacturers product, like Rolec, you'd be minted!

BoatMad

KCross wrote: »

One thought and I know your are in development mode here but something to keep in the back of your mind... the 50A figure should be configurable somehow without getting out a soldering iron.

If a user has an "increased supply" from ESB they wont want the shedding to happen at 50A. They will likely want it to shed at 70A.

Its a useful idea. I'd say a stumbling block will be to convince people they need it. Most people would not even be aware of the need for it. If you could patent the implementation and get it into an existing manufacturers product, like Rolec, you'd be minted!

The design is wifi enabled and can be controlled and reports stats to an iPhone or web browser . so all the parameters ( within reason ) are configurable

patents are a joke, for the small entrepreneur , you will never have the necessary financial resources to mount a defence and hence patents just consume considerable costs and return virtually nothing.


As for people needing it , as we transition to higher AC home charging rates as battery banks get bigger, then load shedding will be a key requirement. priority switching is a very crude alternative and has very limited applicability ( especially where there are more then one other high current load)