8 V! _2 |- [5 c$ ]7 n% X0 M 0 V# E% l' {" c, J. T) u' M' {Standard: |, I5 O" f* y( F& b) j7 J3 G
IEC 61010-1:1990! \3 m. ^( q5 O( b
+A1:1992+A2:1995 * ^/ D1 ~! I6 {! O. B; ISub clause: 6 @. m; V, l$ M' v+ d6.5.3 ( ~; x, u( b- Q) |Sheet n. 300 9 |, V3 b( n3 F, j' VPage 1(1) # D2 H2 Y7 |) r( z( USubject:" T/ i9 O+ G! x( h
Protective Impedance) e0 x+ g d' o5 u8 E( r% Q) g
Key words:/ u" B; u B$ v
- Shock/ z* ` r9 j5 h" R
- Impedance ; V% M3 Y1 F( y4 N/ _- Protective& A4 d- D" v D/ Q; M( G# r' u
Decision taken by# s* E& x6 [3 l" D& ^; a6 Y9 Y' n
ETF3 and confirmed7 ~8 e; s% ^/ X8 M6 r1 K
by CTL at its 38th2 U* b6 P9 u( _/ V3 G* Y
meeting, in Toronto1 W' G9 z7 s; x+ i/ `. ]
Question: % s$ ]- z6 `" bWhere a component acts as protective impedance in single fault condition, should it be rated6 v' z2 d( c5 I' G/ {1 w% A9 W
for this function? An example is a component in an accessible secondary circuit which may# e0 |- h* @7 B& D" r
be made hazardous live by the failure of a creepage or clearance distance.- B, l! Y3 T( }" a; w' C
Decision:) E3 g- H# l0 s! h( {: J
Such components should be rated for the single fault condition.3 y2 D& ~. i1 K
Explanation:% N- ?( [: `; M! q4 S' Y
The safety of the user will be dependent on the operation of these devices. It will, however,4 Z. ~# t: l3 R7 N5 b' Q
be preferable for the design to avoid this circumstance as the integrity of the components is " i. T1 T$ d& W# x. f5 B+ hnot defined.8 H* q9 I! b; R& d
" m# C- U6 H% x0 l6 v+ f0 S
[attach]76249[/attach]* V5 I, j( Z Y: z( z, s