|
| DSH 436& J# o# j1 ~% i) e9 y' B8 O$ u
$ ?* k3 B# y$ r R6 J) ]. m
| Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity IDm G- Z( ^4 i: m( z H; A* W+ \
| 9.11.2.3$ S* a0 j- h1 j$ D
| 61008-1(ed.2)/ g! e5 Z2 [8 H3 R9 Y0 N+ {
|
6 W: n' b& q$ C: }* b' S5 j- ]Standard:
+ Y+ J% E5 r) U5 ]; q& A8 {IEC 61008-1 (1996-12)
- U' c6 f) {1 d+ J" Q* `) DSub clause:0 x" ~* }- n' h3 K; s2 A+ q
9.11.2.3/ k) r$ P% i/ o1 g X: U
Sheet No. 4365 g8 j+ w& v$ f
Subject:2 T7 c2 I! p* J7 k
Verification of the rated residual+ q& W& \0 K" V+ u( F
making and breaking capacity IDm
- L8 h* b9 m) ?- T& ^Key words: Confirmed at 39th, Z. @ T( r5 Z8 [' f7 S
CTL Meeting
4 _9 d3 v$ v. n# ^Question:, Y- {& Z. x8 _; ~2 L0 N1 |
9.11.2.3 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.11.2.1 and states that the resistor R3 shall3 p/ w2 r% S* N. E h3 ~
not be used.
7 v# {- `! k# S, G! t9.11.2.1 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with resistor R2 to be used.
8 v1 t! B9 r* b) X8 cAccording to these figures, the following inconsistency appears:- L" o H1 U* Y9 H- U% U
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual
7 z" x8 n: k8 o; |making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
P% }5 W& v3 z, d7 ]For a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
/ }+ X6 [7 n' r& g4 E2 V' x2 Bcapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
! P- y F& S) F# T) _. a4 DFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking% C5 W) S$ K- e
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.
7 e, M& z+ z2 U, p: Z) `For a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for
8 U+ w& B- J/ g, `" O6 _5 Y400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.2 E7 x9 x0 S3 r
Due to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,
& w. ~% u1 ^2 t- Vthe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be; O) S' Z0 |' m( `# G! e
230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.! J( z' z; ~" s, v( r% p
Decision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:
. N/ H) A5 V: A8 r& ^1 ]1 sExtract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:! E; S" t$ y0 u& V% h' @: U5 s
SC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.32 Z0 ]* P; x' Q5 Z
The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting
) ^8 B2 W$ p. N. a5 }/ QWG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this0 ^/ k( ^# E; s# U$ t; Y+ M! |
important decision.0 _4 [& p) |& i# b! D3 T3 ]1 q
Therefore the following statement was drafted:. q- p: k" E9 {# m3 k/ X# p# [6 v
20 A- J0 @ E* a; a) r
Decision to be forwarded to CTL:
% R, L0 Z- c/ l. ^% c* [6 y& KIEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause
: t! R( K6 T( b$ o+ } v9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual6 M& D8 D/ L: O
making and breaking capacity IDm.
; Y/ u! N/ Y* ]" bThe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the. E# ^. J# O0 }. e. {& R
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will
4 n' k( [8 U; E# Mbe included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.! }2 t9 R+ H& t" Z& D, A$ C* z
The revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.
% r4 i% X4 F/ A- W8 ?, J
( x9 Q; Z" N8 b. U. s
. V9 n& ~5 |$ R7 r4 A |
本帖子中包含更多资源
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?注册安规
x
|