Water ingress into Powerwall+ inverter in garage

[wwhitney]

My bet is only wwhitney's conduits have drain holes drilled in or some valve.

Actually the two systems I have any involvement with, the conduit goes through the roof and is then routed inside. One of them uses a SolarEdge inverter, and there it does come back outside just below the inverter; I think I neglected to provide any drain holes. But the exposure is just a couple inches and a pulling elbow. Maybe I'll go add some drain holes.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[BGbreeder]

@wwhitney "couplet" Yes, that was an autocorrect that I didn't catch. Thanks!

 

[Electrph]

so now you have some of us checking conduit .. this is bottom of run inside garage where it enters inverter on side (shot from bottom of course) .. looks like hole drilled in there

 

[Vines]

Yeah hopefully Tesla sends someone out to take a look soon.

The problem about putting a RSD right above your ESS is that if there ever was a fire with your ESS necessitating pushing the RSD... it will be in the fire zone and you won't want to get near it hah. I believe @Vines is a fan of putting RSD's, but California code interpretations kind of makes them non-starters

I haven't been around much lately, all these code changes giving me headaches. Lots of confusion on the AHJ sides, which hopefully will lessen over the next few weeks as AHJ get trained.

We finally have the UL9540A Fire test report and are waiting for jurisdictions to accept it, so we can go back to stacking as soon as they do.

I can't give out details of the fire test, but it's pretty safe to say that barring significant physical damage, a Tesla Powerwall is not going to propagate a fire if it fails. You have to send multiple adjacent cells (more than 3) into thermal runaway at once, and multiple simultaneous failures like that are pretty unlikely, barring someone shooting the thing or other massive physical damage.

As to the point, if the ESS unit were to be on fire, it's usually pretty easy to hit the button with a long stick, broom or whatever is available.

Water ingress issues are like @wwhitney mentions are usually mitigated by the way the conduit routing is designed. All conduit penetrations to the interior space need to be sealed with Duct Seal, sometimes weep holes need to be added to an LB or a Junction box. I agree with other responders that this issue should be addressed.

 

[wwhitney]

We finally have the UL9540A Fire test report and are waiting for jurisdictions to accept it, so we can go back to stacking as soon as they do.

I can't give out details of the fire test

I'd be interested to see the test report. Seems to me that Tesla can't use it for code compliance and permit submittals without making it public.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Vines]

I'd be interested to see the test report. Seems to me that Tesla can't use it for code compliance and permit submittals without making it public.

Cheers, Wayne

I am sure someone will leak it, or at least the "Test Report Supplemental Guide" before too long.

We have sent it to the local AHJ around here with our permit submissions, so it should be easy enough to get a copy. I know that with other products, listing and testing full reports are confidential, but the ATM or report summary will be made public.

Likely once Santa Clara Fire and Tesla get to an agreement, they will make the final recommendations public, without exposing the magic behind the public facing document.

 

[jimm01]

I'd be interested to see the test report. Seems to me that Tesla can't use it for code compliance and permit submittals without making it public.

Cheers, Wayne

Why doesn't UL make this information available to the general public?

 

[BGbreeder]

Why doesn't UL make this information available to the general public?

The exact details of how devices fail, and how specifically they are tested are considered confidential trade secrets. I believe that the logic is if competitors were to have access to them, the reports would be very helpful to the competitors and their design of new products. Certainly when faced with other UL type tests, I have been part of design teams that underwent more than a little head scratching about how a competitor managed a pass.

The summaries of the reports are, of course, not confidential, as the point of testing is to let others know that the device passed.

All the best,

BG

 

[holeydonut]

Why doesn't UL make this information available to the general public?

The UL eventually will list the compliance, and then they will provide a contact info for the person(s) who can choose to give up the full details. Presumably if you're some dumbazzz homeowner they'll tell you to stop being annoying. But if you're a reseller or some interested party they'll provide more deets.

 

[holeydonut]

I haven't been around much lately, all these code changes giving me headaches. Lots of confusion on the AHJ sides, which hopefully will lessen over the next few weeks as AHJ get trained.

We finally have the UL9540A Fire test report and are waiting for jurisdictions to accept it, so we can go back to stacking as soon as they do.

I can't give out details of the fire test, but it's pretty safe to say that barring significant physical damage, a Tesla Powerwall is not going to propagate a fire if it fails. You have to send multiple adjacent cells (more than 3) into thermal runaway at once, and multiple simultaneous failures like that are pretty unlikely, barring someone shooting the thing or other massive physical damage.

As to the point, if the ESS unit were to be on fire, it's usually pretty easy to hit the button with a long stick, broom or whatever is available.

Water ingress issues are like @wwhitney mentions are usually mitigated by the way the conduit routing is designed. All conduit penetrations to the interior space need to be sealed with Duct Seal, sometimes weep holes need to be added to an LB or a Junction box. I agree with other responders that this issue should be addressed.

TIL, this is also a disconnecting means...

So do I need to drill some weep-holes in my low-point LB conduit bends? I feel like PV+ESS is an infinite rat hole of so much weird stuff.

 

[Vines]

UL is just one of the many Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories (NRTL)
The Tesla Powerwall is tested by CSA, to the standard UL 9540A.

Intertek, CSA, UL are all examples of NRTL, and they can issue test reports to standards, and list to other standards which they are accredited to do so by OSHA

TIL, this is also a disconnecting means...

View attachment 684446


So do I need to drill some weep-holes in my low-point LB conduit bends? I feel like PV+ESS is an infinite rat hole of so much weird stuff.

If you have water ingress, then yes I'd address it. Do your penetrations have Duct Seal in them? If they do, and there's no water inside any of your enclosures I'd not worry about it.

If you do get water ingress or have no duct seal, then certainly have your installers address it, or do so yourself carefully. You don't want to nick a wire with a drill bit or leave a sharp edge inside the LB.

 

[jjrandorin]

so now you have some of us checking conduit .. this is bottom of run inside garage where it enters inverter on side (shot from bottom of course) .. looks like hole drilled in there

You are right that this made me think about looking at mine, as well, lol. My powerwalls, gateway etc are all in my garage. My inverters (installed in 2015) are outside. The conduit running from the roof, in between the two inverters, has a box / T junction where the conduit runs to both inverters. Thats the lowest point (that T junction, dont know the correct name), and there is a weep hole drilled into that junction that feels just like, and is in the same position as, the one in the screenshot @Electrph posted.

 

[Electrph]

TIL, this is also a disconnecting means...

View attachment 684446


So do I need to drill some weep-holes in my low-point LB conduit bends? I feel like PV+ESS is an infinite rat hole of so much weird stuff.

when i saw that cool red dissconnect button above his/her powerwall 1st thing i thought broomsticks in garage ... they're not just for egress out of the danger zone anymore !

 

[holeydonut]

You are right that this made me think about looking at mine, as well, lol. My powerwalls, gateway etc are all in my garage. My inverters (installed in 2015) are outside. The conduit running from the roof, in between the two inverters, has a box / T junction where the conduit runs to both inverters. Thats the lowest point (that T junction, dont know the correct name), and there is a weep hole drilled into that junction that feels just like, and is in the same position as, the one in the screenshot @Electrph posted.

Frack all ya'll have weep holes... my hyper thorough county inspector didn't even look for weep holes. He even red tagged me because my AC condensers are too close to my fence. But he didn't look for no weep holes.

UL is just one of the many Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories (NRTL)
The Tesla Powerwall is tested by CSA, to the standard UL 9540A.

Intertek, CSA, UL are all examples of NRTL, and they can issue test reports to standards, and list to other standards which they are accredited to do so by OSHA


If you have water ingress, then yes I'd address it. Do your penetrations have Duct Seal in them? If they do, and there's no water inside any of your enclosures I'd not worry about it.

If you do get water ingress or have no duct seal, then certainly have your installers address it, or do so yourself carefully. You don't want to nick a wire with a drill bit or leave a sharp edge inside the LB.

One oddity with my install is that the penetration that bridges between the exterior mounted TEG2 and an internally mounted gutterbox is behind the TEG2. So I can't actually see if they sealed that portion with anything. I'm assuming the TEG2 is itself waterproof so it shouldn't matter?


But as you can see, the rooftop conduit home run comes down into this LB and goes into the Enphase Envoy. I think based on what ya'll are saying, I need a weep hole or breather valve in this LB? Those are weep holes at the bottom of the Envoy, but that still means water has to get into the Envoy to weep out of it.

Also, you can see between the envoy and the TEG2 they put a U shaped conduit with mandrel bends (no LBs). This conduit has no weep holes. So if water ever got into the TEG2 or Enphase Envoy, it'd just pool in the big U with nowhere to go. Do I need to get these guys back out here for 2017 NEC 225?

PS, do you like those s3xy-azz placards? Lookin' good man.

 

[Electrph]

i suspect the weep hole i found was added later at req of inspector or by someone other than orig electrician .. only because i noticed one of the screws on plate cover of conduit elbow was visibly loose to point I could tigheten a few turns with my thumb nail .. checked all others including roof all snug ... maybe coincidence but i doubt it

 

[Vines]

Frack all ya'll have weep holes... my hyper thorough county inspector didn't even look for weep holes. He even red tagged me because my AC condensers are too close to my fence. But he didn't look for no weep holes.





One oddity with my install is that the penetration that bridges between the exterior mounted TEG2 and an internally mounted gutterbox is behind the TEG2. So I can't actually see if they sealed that portion with anything. I'm assuming the TEG2 is itself waterproof so it shouldn't matter?


But as you can see, the rooftop conduit home run comes down into this LB and goes into the Enphase Envoy. I think based on what ya'll are saying, I need a weep hole or breather valve in this LB? Those are weep holes at the bottom of the Envoy, but that still means water has to get into the Envoy to weep out of it.

Also, you can see between the envoy and the TEG2 they put a U shaped conduit with mandrel bends (no LBs). This conduit has no weep holes. So if water ever got into the TEG2 or Enphase Envoy, it'd just pool in the big U with nowhere to go. Do I need to get these guys back out here for 2017 NEC 225?

PS, do you like those s3xy-azz placards? Lookin' good man.


View attachment 684453

View attachment 684454

Those are some beautiful Placards!

You should be able to look from the gutter box side and see if there is duct seal inside there behind the gateway.

The interior components of the GW2 are not waterproof, but the design of them inside an enclosure makes them water-resistant. However, to accomplish the outdoor rating requires the equipment to be inside the enclosure.

 

[BGbreeder]

@holeydonut Given the conduit entry point in your Enphase enclosure and the four drain holes in the bottom, I don't think that I would sweat that one.

I am not a code expert, but I think that the duct seal is only required for crossing walls.

On the placards!

All the best,

BG

 

[holeydonut]

Those are some beautiful Placards!

You should be able to look from the gutter box side and see if there is duct seal inside there behind the gateway.

The interior components of the GW2 are not waterproof, but the design of them inside an enclosure makes them water-resistant. However, to accomplish the outdoor rating requires the equipment to be inside the enclosure.

There's no duct-seal on the interior-of-the-garage side of the gutterbox-LB-connector. I guess I need to remove the deadfront of these outdoor mounted things because I'm not 100% sure which of the 3 contraptions has an aperture in the back of their casing to route wires into the wall.

I wonder if they just put a big hole on the backside of the TEG2 or maybe the HOM2040L225PRB load center.

Man why the bloody hell did someone make a thread on TMC about water... blarrrgggghhh

 

[holeydonut]

@holeydonut Given the conduit entry point in your Enphase enclosure and the four drain holes in the bottom, I don't think that I would sweat that one.

I am not a code expert, but I think that the duct seal is only required for crossing walls.

On the placards!

All the best,

BG

Yeah I can't see the outside aperture without removing a deadfront. But the inside aperture that goes into the monster gutterbox doesn't look to have any putty stuff or duct seal.

Man I thought I was over with this project. Like I'm now putting this tiny little picnic table together for my daughter. I don't want to deal with this crappppppp goddamnittttttttttttt

 

[kairojya]

Update

I called the “maintenance” team at 650-546-8515 and spoke to an agent after a surprisingly brief wait. My project advisor gave me this number. The maintenance team and the install/operations team are arguing over who’s responsibility it is to fix the issue. Maintenance thinks the other team should fix it since I’m pre-PTO. Install/ops thinks maintenance should fix it since I’ve passed inspection. I’ve spoke to agents on both sides and I’m told that they’re going to figure it out and follow up with me.

Sounds like some typical stuff I’ve experienced working at large companies.

Man why the bloody hell did someone make a thread on TMC about water... blarrrgggghhh

It’s in my nature to find bugs ha. That and we’ve been getting more rainfall than usual since my install.