This site is now in read-only archive mode. Please move all discussion, and create a new account at the new Victron Community site.
Are Victron Inverters no longer approved for DNO grid connection in GB? All the previous G98/G99 approvals on https://www.ena-eng.org/gen-ttr/ are now showing Non-compliant for new installations. Im specifically looking to get DNO approval for the Multiplus ii 48/5000 but its no longer approved for GB. It is for NI
Thats bad news for the UK market, as in NZ and Aussie now to.
The only around it is to use a grid protection relays, Eg Tele NA003 which would be compliant.
Regards
Rob D
NZ
Can somebody from Victron please explain what the technical reasons are for this and when the position is likely to be rectified?
What i heard from Victron is there hardware is not compliant with the new standards coming up, The software is OK.
This is bullshit stuff from the power companies not wanting solar on there networks, and making it harder to comply with, The victron gear works very well and trips as required when you loose the grid etc.
In NZ and Aussie the same applies, The power companies are only in for profit there don't care about enviroment or saving power or being self efficient, They wnat control!!!
Regards
Rob D
NZ
This, in an email from Nigel Vincent, Victron UK, on 19/10/22.
“
We are confident they will pass, we are negotiating with the ENA to get approvals before they assess as our products were previously approved before this latest amendment to the certification, so we are not asking for a new product approval, just an update.
You can start the sign off process as it takes a few weeks even months for this to be completed.
Many installers are continuing to install but will not make that final connection to grid. When approval comes they simply turn the isolator switch.”
Same person later says, on 31/10/2022:
"We are working with NG on this, our type approval engineer in Holland has contact details for 3 NG guys who can help us.
We are working on the LFSM-O values
We do not have a date yet for approval, or indeed when the assessment will be completed by ENA.
Its an urgent issue for us to resolve."
Here, Victron say on 2nd Nov:
"Victron is working hard to get this fixed, but it's not easy.
Unfortunately I don't have any forecasts."
... and then adds:
"As you know the problem is that we don't have it in our own hands..."
Given the issue seems to be LFSM-O compliance (something to do with all power generating modules, including very small ones, now having to contribute to helping control overfrequency when a grid fault occurs), the big question is whether or not a firmware upgrade will solve the problem. I can understand why Victron are being coy about this but that's not helpful to customers. As for the cryptic "we don't have it in our own hands", does he mean that it is a hardware problem and that's all done elsewhere (India?)?
In September 2022 changes in Limited Frequency Sensitivity Mode — Overfrequency (LFSM-O) standards were introduced in the UK. These standards were restrospectively applied to existing G98/G99 certified products from all manufacturers for new installation after September. You can check the ENA type test register for G98/G99 certified products. The products that did not meet this new requirement were marked as "Non-compliant for new installations" and may impact some new installation DNO notifications/applications as of September 2022. It is fortunately expected the requirements can be met with firmware updates, however, depending on the number of impacted products from the various manufacturers, the level of change required, re-testing and then recertification that has to take place, it may not happen in a proverbial day.
Should changes of requirement like this not be communicated to manufacturers well in advance of introduction?
I am pretty sure that most UK retail outlets will also be uninformed and continue selling to unsuspecting customers?
A member of DNO staff who seems to know their stuff on this stated online "This change was announced two years ago in G99 amendment 6 where we are now on amendment 8".
I assume that Victron thought that they complied until they were told by the ENA that they are non-compliant (quite recently the ENA register was showing as compliant).
Victron recently reapplied for the Multiplus II 48/5000/70-50 GX, but not other models yet (despite the test certificate covering all 3000 and 5000 models - https://www.ena-eng.org/gen-ttr/TTf1l3s/VICEN_02558_220926115215.pdf). I've sent this to our DNO and asked them to review it themselves - no response yet.
The lack of any published response, or reply to emails about this, from Victron is poor.
https://www.ena-eng.org/gen-ttr/Index.aspx?Action=ViewDetail&EID=66037816&tab=search
This change in ENA compliance status has also caught me out right in the middle of a DNO G99 application for a Multiplus-II 48/5000/70-50 where I was somewhat shocked to be told the device was non-compliant despite it being compliant just a few days or weeks earlier when I first checked prior to ordering my kit.
My supplier has been very transparent and helpful and I still have the option to cancel my order but that's the last thing I want to do as it will put me to the back of the line in terms of getting an ESS solution procured and installed.
What I would really like to see is some sort of statement from Victron to say categorically what the situation is and give some sort of guarantee that anyone buying a Multiplus-II, and any other affected devices, now will get the necessary support whether it be hardware revisions or firmware updates, to become ENA/DNO G99 compliant. I don't mind buying a Multiplus-II just now and running it in some sort of "off grid" configuration for a few weeks until the DNO compliance is restored and I can then complete my G99 application and commissioning.
One thing I can add is that I contacted the ENA and asked when we might expect to see updates to the database. I was told the following on Sep 30th:
Typically we aim to review submissions within 4 weeks from the date of submission. The Type Test Register is due to be updated in the coming days as we update this both mid and end of month, but whether the submission in question is included is totally dependant on when it was submitted.
During times of significant submission uploads, we may exceed the 4 weeks but rest assured we are working through these as fast as we can.
Since then, the database has been updated but unfortunately the Multiplus-II 48/5000/70-50 GX which was awaiting assessment has apparently missed the cut-off and will presumably be updated mid-October. As someone said, the certificate attached to this item in the ENA register also covers the non-GX 5000VA variant as well as other capacities so it's a bit of a mystery why Victron didn't submit all device recertifications which are covered by this test certificate.
I'm sure this will all get sorted in the fullness of time but a few reassuring words from Victron would go a long way right now.
FYI all, further applications are now showing as Awaiting assessment with the ENA. These included the following: Manufacturer's Compliance Notes: Firmware update since previous version to meet LFSM-O requirements. The submission is in line with EREC G98 Issue 1 Amendment 6 and is fully compliant with the changes that apply from 01 September 2022 for electricity storage
The above provides some reassurance that it is a firmware update matter (as suggested above).
As alluded to in their reply above, there may well be delays to follow from the ENA. A quick look through their online database shows that they typically process around 100 device applications per month. In September there were 310, most are Awaiting assessment, and there have already been 91 device applications in the first 5 days of October.
I've sent the new G99 certificate to my DNO in the hope that they will at least progress the application to the point of pre-approval while we wait on the ENA assessment.
Hopefully the fact that this is the re-approval of a previously approved piece of hardware might permit some shortcuts in the ENA assessment, not just for Victron but also for other affected devices and manufacturers. Yeah I know it's probably wishful thinking...
Re DNO approval for the Multiplus II 48/5000/70-50, just received the following from nationalgrid (formerly WPD), names omitted.
I’ve only assessed the Multiplus II 48/5000/70-50 (with or without the GX on the end).
I don’t believe that the forms submitted demonstrate compliance with EREC G98 or G99 – i.e. I would suggest that the Multiplus II 48/5000/70-50 and the Multiplus II 48/5000/70-50 GX are non-compliant.
Policy Engineer (Design & Dissemination)
Engineering Policy
nationalgrid
They didn't even furnish you with a reason why they don't believe what they have, nor what you could offer them which would make them believe.
If they don't believe a certificate of compliance then I'm not sure what else you could offer them. The product model number and the applied standards and guidelines are boldly printed on the very first page of the certificate. Then all the test results that they could need are included for their perusal.
One thing I am sure of is that those DNO people are most overwhelmed at the moment. There are a record number of these systems being installed now and they simply cannot cope with all the applications. Instead of saying this and telling you that there is a delay, that just bounce the application without any reason.
Yes, v disappointing and I've no choice but to put my order on hold (which is a problem as I'm close to receiving 4 x pylon batteries, which aren't easy to get).
I agree that pressure from the number of applications is likely to be playing a part here.
Is it the case though, that the 'Policy Engineer' doesn't have the authority to decide on compliance - hence he's using language such as "believe" and "I would suggest". If ENA eventually approve the Victron docs supplied to them on 6th Oct, the device will show as 'Compliant' and that's that.
I've already had a "do it on G98, if it's compliant" from nationalgrid - surely, I can then install, submit the forms and an admin person will see it's complaint?
Would be good, though, to have some reassuring words from Victron themselves ...
Just to be clear on process: the manufacturer commissions a lab test to a certified lab and, if the device is compliant, receives in return a certificate which is passed on to the certificate holding body, ENA. Is is the case that ENA then verify that what has been submitted does indeed demonstrate compliance? Hence, they currently list the device as 'Awaiting assessment' because they haven't looked over what has been submitted.
Key qu.: do ENA make a technical assessment of the certificate or is it merely administrative? (got the right date, that sort of thing).
The certificate is issued from the lab to the manufacturer who then pass it on to other bodies if they so wish, like this:
Testing lab. -> Manufacturer -> a third party (like ENA).
It's the National Grid (DNOs) who define the parameters to which a product must comply. The testing laboratory assesses that a product either meets or exceeds these parameters and then issues a certificate to the manufacturer.
ENA simply opts to perform an administrative role of uploading the certificate to their own website as an easy "one-stop-shop" for the certificates of various manufacturers who may wish to participate. It's a good idea I think.
Ultimately, a DNO needs the certificate to ensure that the product conforms to the national grid requirements. If ENA is an acceptable source of this certificate then the manufacturer, higher up the certificate chain, would be an even better source.
@WKirby re "The certificate is issued from the lab to the manufacturer who then pass it on to other bodies if they so wish, like this:
Testing lab. -> Manufacturer -> a third party (like ENA).
... If ENA is an acceptable source of this certificate then the manufacturer, higher up the certificate chain, would be an even better source. "
Evidently, given the extensive process detail provide by the DNO (link below), the process is more sophisticated than that.
1. The ENA isn't only performing an admin role - they commission a company (WSP) to assess the docs the manufacturer provides. Hence, ENA approval is more authoritative than merely having docs the manufacturer provides.
2. Even if the ENA assesses a device to be compliant, the DNO has the right to decide for themselves if they want a particular device connected to their network.
3. Clearly, Victron need help in filling in the UK Grid forms - UK-based members of this community could/should help with this - surely there are members of the forum with the technical knowledge to recognise when/where Victron haven't filled in the (publicly available) forms correctly?
Then, people wanting to install a Victron ESS wouldn't be in the pickle they are now.
This still seems to be current even now. @Victron, when will this be resolved?
A few days ago the MP2's were showing as awaiting assesment, now they have slipped back to further information required again, not sure if that is good or bad but I wish they would get it sorted out
Thanks, @craigc. It's very interesting to compare the Kiwa test report attached to the 29 November submission with that attached to the recent 17 February submission.
Some aspects of it are quite different, particularly the plots of Tests 2, 3 and 5. The November one had some very peculiar transients and time-dependent behaviour (which did make me wonder, but not having anything to compare it with I drew no conclusions), where February's pretty much linear as I guess it always should have been. No wonder the ENA took issue with it.
It's clear Kiwa is not up to the job. The declarations on the front page of the certificate are the same, but the data are quite different. Not good enough. Frankly, it makes me wonder why the NI version was considered good enough to be compliant, on that basis, but I haven't looked closely at its test certificate and the NI version may not test in such extreme conditions as required by the GB version of EREC G99.
ENA still say the lead time is 4-6 weeks though, as previously noted, it might get turned around faster if only the non-compliant elements need be rechecked. Either way, I don't expect to see the TTR updated until the end of the Month at the earliest if the ENA only updates the Register twice a month.
Let's see what happens....
Why is it power companies and lines companys keep changing the rules to make it harder for solar to be on grid? It called competion and they will lose money, They do not help make it easy they make it harder and harder to comply, If we are going to be carbon neutral and to help so called global warming etc, why make it harder for solar to be more easier.
Look at South Africa and it issues they have big problems and corruption over there that why there power grid is failing every day, and you can't export as you get penalized etc. My rant for the day.
Aussie and NZ have new rules not allowing Victrons on the network but we have ways around that
it called a UPS install.
Regards
Rob D
NZ
@Rob Duthie The NZ/AU joint standards authorities aren't in competition with companies like Victron, so although it's possible there's something else like institutional inertia or resistance to change going on, the more likely explanation is technical or administrative.
I don't know the process for NZ/AU, but I imagine your EDNs have to approve connection of such gear to their network like our DNOs do. They're responsible for ensuring that LV service voltages never exceed their legal limit (I'm guessing 230V + 10%), and Transpower are responsible for maintaining grid frequency within the mandated limits. All of them have to comply with the combined authority standards.
As perhaps you know, solar voltage rise is increasingly a problem the more installations there are, and frequency stability is increasingly a problem the more generation comes from grid-synchronous sources that don't involve substantial spinning inertia.
So although the standards authorities could make a distinction between old school inverters that chuck out as much power as they can, especially when the owner is trying to generate feed-in revenue to offset the capital cost of the installation, writing and enforcing standards is hard enough and even most professional installers don't necessarily have deep understanding of what those standards mean, only whether something complies or doesn't.
For them, the simplest solution is to have as fewer standards to maintain and to train and certify industry on, from manufacturers to testing labs to tradies responsible for installing and complying with locale-specific issues.
This is really frustrating, I’ve spent time designing a system with Victron in mind, my aim was to start buying bits of the system every month or so but it’s hard to invest in a company if you can’t even wire it to the UK grid. Although the below statement is a glimmer of hope still find it hard to invest thousands of pounds on the reply from Victron.
Hi xxxxxxx
Yes that would work as you specify
It’s explained in the ESS manual in our web site, series connection
www.victronenergy.com/media/pg/Energy_Storage_System/en/index-en.html
Also think about having and MPPT if you can add more PV modules to directly charge the battery
Type approval eat by end Feb but we are relying on test house reports being sent and ENA approval to be completed and approved for use of course
I have Solis, Multiplus II 5 kva ESS in my home
It was installed by Select Solar Upminster if you are looking for an MCS approved company, they use Solis and are Victron dealers
Kind regards
Nigel
Thankfully I bought my inverter in the UK.
So I can return it as not fit for purpose and buy another one that is.
I would strongly encourage Victron to remove these products from sale if they are not permitted to be connected. Or at least have all distributors label the clearly as unconnectable to a DNO.
It will save you on returns.
Several models are now back in the approved list, but the 5kW model is still showing 'Further information required', so hopefully its just a clarical error holding up the 5kW versions, I can not believe the 3k and 5k differ operationally....
Dupe....
So, if you want to get into a legal fight with your supplier/Victron then go ahead but I think the path of minimum resistance is to just ask you DNO for permission to connect. They might say YES.
"The ENA Type Test Register enables all visitors to view the verification information for generation products designed to be installed in GB. Please note that it is not mandatory for manufacturers of generation products with a capacity greater than 3.68kW/phase to use this register to declare compliance information about their generation products there." also "Compliance is the responsibility of the customer who is quite often, but not always, the owner of the generation. Owners are required to make sure that generation equipment they purchase and install on their premises complies with the law."
"I have purchased a never Multiplus 24/800" (the newer model?) from your other post which I personally do not recall ever having had a G98 certificate, so given you made an assumption at the time of purchase or unless you can explicity prove it was sold to you for this specific purpose by the seller, I am not confident of an outcome in your favour. You can however still use it without a grid code and assistant to feed the loads off the battery and use the AC to charge the batteries when depleted to a specific voltage or SOC and even supply the loads in passthru if it exceeds the inverter's output.
On returns. Point is moot. It was a distant sell. I have the right to return it with no reason.
It may have been my fault. My assumption. In fact as per my first post (IIRC) I don't actually WANT parallel grid.
I didn't expect Victron to make ALL of their inverters grid-tie by design.
It matters because that relay makes the device a "grid parallel" device. A generator connected "in parallel with" the DNO's grid. That I understand makes it a "Generator" in DNO eyes thus requiring G98.
I am open to suggestions on how to avoid but not evade the rules. Remembering that is was intended to be "off grid" and the charger functionality aka mains fall back was a serious bonus.
I could return the Multiplus and buy individual AC/DC charger and a phoenix inverter. My understanding is the issue is that AC-In relay. I understand why the architecture is appealing, when charging AND inverting it's far more efficient to couple the AC and reverse the net current into the battery, all using the same circuitry.
It's just it's bu88ered me up now :(
I am familiar with distance selling rules and the 14 days etc. etc, but I will not comment further on it as I believe it is out of the scope of this forum ;) Setting it up as mentioned above means the ACIN is disconnected, so not grid parallel or capable of using the grid for any power deficit as a grid parallel ESS would while it is inverting. The inverter will only invert to the ACOUT and when one of the chosen assistant conditions are met e.g. low SOC, the inverter actually stops and the ACIN is activated, enabling AC to supply the loads via passthru AND also start charging the battery. At no time will the device therefore produce power in parallel to the grid. If you are using an MPPT, it is DC2DC and the inverter's charger is not involved. Considering this is how non Victron systems often operate in caravans etc, but with automatic transfer switches, separate chargers and inverters only, I'd be very surprised if the DNO will start taking an interest in them or expect them to do G98 notifications ;)
Part of me regrets asking, if it is covered it's such a marginal case I could probably have got away with pleeding ignorance asking for forgiveness rather than permission.
I can't use the inverter, outside of the electronics bench anyway, as I don't have the full 8S pack yet.
I do have other 24V sources though.
Wow, wasn't sure this day would ever come...
Thank you.
@ewan-bain Hi, I have just received an email from my DNO, saying "The export must be limited to 4.5KW if the inverter is issue2 compliant". "If they are not issue2 compliant, then you cannot connect the proposed (Multiplus 2 48-5000) inverter under G100 issue1".
As the Issue1, has only just been released, should we be expecting another long delay?
Thank you.
For what it is worth. My DNO accepted the multiplus without notification under G98 if it is only connected as a consumer device to a standard plug socket for grid fall back or charging. It is not "grid coded" and is never used "grid-tie" or export.
The G98 is only required if you are hardwiring it to your low voltage consumer unit. If it's on a plug socket (off-grid caravan like) they are happy to accept it as such without notification.
Having spent 20 minutes on the call with them I would encourage people who also do so, to be very careful and very specific about how you answer their questions particularly the units you use.
They will be looking for VA and maximum DC generation from solar AND batteries. Which they will combine. So a 3.6kW limit will be completely blown through with 1kW panels and 3kW inverter. That's 4kW generation capacity connected to their network.
(Your specific DNO may be different. It's up the individual DNO about what 'risk' they accept).
It doesn't matter how many PV panels you have on your roof if you only have a 3kW inverter. The generation capacity is still only 3kW, not 4kW.
On the other hand, if you have a separate inverter for your PV panels and another inverter for your battery storage then yes, you would need to add them together. Is that what you meant?
My own inverter is a hybrid inverter (Multiplus-II 48/5000/70-50, and so it has a registered power output of 4.4kW regardless of how many PV panels I choose to attach to it, or how many kWh of batteries I attach. It will never be able to push more than 4.4kW into the grid. My DNO don't really care about the DC side of my installation, only the AC generation capacity.
To me it sounded like they would add panels + battery power output. Regardless of inverter capacity. He even said, "To us a battery capable of 5kW output is 5kW generation capacity sitting on our network, if it's connected to our network, we absolutely need to know about that."
Maybe I picked him up wrong.
EDIT: It does, however, ring a bell from reading the high level briefs for G98/G99 regarding energy storage. It recall it states that it is considered regardless of AC or DC or low voltage or high voltage.
EDIT: Looking at it another way. A battery capable of putting out 5kW at 48V STILL isn't very nice for line engineers and will still cause havoc on the network, even if it's just DC. What if the batteries are 120V?
Bear in mind that you might be dealing with an admin clerk and not an engineer at your DNO. No disrespect to the admin clerks intended.
When I first sent in my G99 application, I stated 4.4kW hybrid inverter with 16x 425w PV panels (6.8kWp - kilowatt peak) attached via DC coupling and a 9.6kWh (kilowatt hour not kilowatt) battery system. The admin clerk interpreted this as 4.4kW PV + 9.6kW (battery) because they didn't know the different between kW and kWh. So that was 14kW of potential export in their eyes.
So going through the numbers, I have:
So what is the maximum possible export to grid? It's 4.4kW. I could have 20kWp of PV and all it would do is let me charge my batteries and run the inverter with less available sunlight. It doesn't change the max export power. Same with the batteries, I could (and probably will) add more batteries but that won't change the 4.4kW max export.
It's different when maybe you have a legacy solar array on an existing grid tie inverter with a feed-in tariff so you don't want to mess with that. In that case you need to add that max export to your new installation max export to get the total.
My advice is to be very careful with your kW, kWh and kWp and be correct and consistent in the way you use them on all correspondence. My other advice is to talk on the phone to DNOs where it's easier to realise that you are not on the same page and correct as you go.
Oh, and the thing about protecting the line engineers - that's covered by either the inverter being configured to only operate when grid power is present, or by the inverter being configured to satisfy whatever grid code it is connected to and using the inbuilt islanding protections.
@Paul Campbell i think you are confused by what they mean, @Craig Chamberlain is correct. Oversizing an array is common practise and an array can be 133% larger than its inverter ie if you have a 3kW inverter you can oversize the array to 3.99kW it will still only ever convert 3kW useable energy. Oversizing is a way to make the inverter start its morning cycles early and finish later good for low light conditions. Hope this makes sense. your inverter determines how much you can dump to the grid. PS if one system is AC PV and the other DC not on a hybrid inverter then the two sums of the inverters need to be added to get the overall total of potential power that can go to the grid.
Yes they over compensate building safety margins in, likely hood of you dumping your whole setup into the grid well the stars and the moon would need to align, but over engineering is what we do best in this county and most of the time pays off. Always good to have a buffer margin hope this makes sense?
I have just been though the process of DNO application but its taken a bit longer than some about a month and a half but approved G99 7kW system just because i wanted to build some redundancy into my install for higher load services eventually EV charger so i wanted 100amp supply instead of my 60amp supply. They only approved it after they changed the fuse
To be honest there was a bit of miss understanding back and forth with him and I believe it was an engineer.
He may have been accounting for AC Inverted panels.
I had a feeling this was occuring, so I stopped the train of discussion and put it to him,
"I know you are familiar with full roof top solar, AC inverters, grid-tie systems and now people adding batteries to them. What I have is a caravan inverter I'd like to run a plug socket extension to run some PCs off grid and save money. The only time it will be connected to the grid is if the batteries run flat. Does that change anything?"
Which is when he lightened completely and basically said in that case we don't care. "We would treat that as we would treat someone charging the caravan batteries in the driveway or running a local generator for some power tools. We don't need notified as long as it is never hardwired to your low-voltage private network."
If it's connected "consumer side" via a consumer plug socket, they don't care it seems. As long as I run it in "off grid" "caravan" style which is it perdominantly off grid and not grid tied. Even if the unit is capable of same.
I even reaffirmed that the device is capable through configurations to export, but it requires the grid code selection and passwords, which I will not be applying. He just said, "yes, that fine." and then added, "If you do want to notify under G98 and hardwire it you can do so later and if approved it will give you a 5kW export allowance at your property."
Consider that paraphrasing and there may still be miss interpretation, however I have taken it as a green light to operate the equipment as it was explained to them.
... I did find a local, off grid away, solar installer who is willing to come out, inspect, give me a quote on anything I missed to make it notifyable. I also want to them to propose a roof top solution for commission this winter and have asked their opinion on how best to integrate the two or whether we just don't integrate them.
Its been less than a week and I haven't heard from them. Hopefully they haven' changed their minds.
