Sorry for the length of this, but there are important points and distinctions to be made…
Hmm… as far as the voltages are concerned, it should be remembered that it’s the volts that jolts, but the mills that kills; in other words the voltage you feel is pretty much irrelevant – I have given myself a 25,000v shock before now (CRT EHT supply) and all it does, apart from producing a huge spark and making you jump, is to produce a small yellow spot on the skin, which soon fades. But there is virtually no current involved in this at all, and that’s why you survive.
But the moment you get a current somewhat in excess of 50 mA flowing through the body, then fibrillation is likely to occur. And under damp conditions, you don’t actually need that many volts across you for this to happen. But strangely, if the current gets up to about 5A you might survive, because of bone conduction effects. Wouldn’t actually want to try this though – the internal burning is significant! But it is the reason that in America, when they were using electric chairs, they had to go through a carefully set out series of different operating currents before they could officially declare somebody dead.
One somewhat perverse point about this is the whole low-voltage building site transformer thing (the 110v ones) seems to be inherently wrong – often you have wet conditions, and inherently twice as much current available. Okay, it’s completely isolated and that’s a good thing – but it would have been safer just to isolate on a 1:1 basis!
Okay, the inverters. Yes it’s quite possible to make an inverter which has ground-referenced outputs, and that may be what some people have, if they bought one of the posh, expensive 415v versions. It’s also possible to fit socking great filters to the outputs, which effectively get the voltage waveforms on the outputs to look like sine waves. If you have one of these systems, then to all intents and purposes it looks like ‘genuine’ three-phase again, and an ordinary RCD would work with it. I would still contend though that for a motor controller, if you have all of this stuff wired correctly and importantly, no plugs and sockets on the three-phase side, then you don’t have a situation that would warrant one, simply because of the considerably increased likelihood of damaging the inverter, and losing control of a rotating motor.
Why considerably increased? Well, there’s one thing I forgot to mention yesterday that is significant, and that was a bit remiss of me. It is that most of the inverters have two bits of internal switching that will cause havoc with an RCD; they have a braking mechanism that can switch in a socking great resistor (sometimes external ones are provided for), and even worse, use a system that injects DC into the motor windings when running to achieve additional braking, and on a good system (like Lenze ones), effectively lock the shaft when it’s still. The chances are that if the control system braking changes don’t trip the RCD when they occur, the DC injection certainly will. And that trip will occur exactly at the point that you really don’t want it to happen.
All manufacturers of inverter systems for single motors provide wiring diagrams with them. I’ve never seen one with an RCD on the secondary… They will all tell you that you get better control of the motor with shorter cables, and the recommendation to screen them is widespread. As far as I’m aware, the only systems that can safely run multiple motors are the fixed-frequency ones that effectively replicate the supply conditions (as I mentioned above), and these can do so because they aren’t actually motor controllers as such – and that’s an important distinction to make. Chances are that they will even cope with switched-speed motors, but only if you stick to the recommendation to rate the inverter at 3x the motor HP; this will give you massive active devices within the inverter that would actually be able to stand up to the reverse EMF without destroying themselves.
Edited By Steve Garnett on 15/12/2010 10:30:23