|
| PDSH 854# e# P/ K+ J* r3 T3 {+ E$ I
. ]! S7 X( `1 u1 I* t' a* x0 F, o$ v | Screw connections
* [6 w0 i5 o0 e% i/ D- x0 `% }. S$ J | 4.11.3; ]/ @$ ?' c; |( i q
| 60598-1(ed.3);am1 & 60598-1(ed.4);am1 & 60598-1(ed.5) & 60598-1(ed.6);am1 & 60598-1(ed.7)
5 E) Z& g I9 K& H |
. [1 N$ c {3 y2 K q3 A+ ?. M( z7 A+ HStandard(s):
' y$ ?( [$ h' RIEC 60598-1 All editions7 L% N$ u8 G# {4 M9 L* t3 U/ E
Subclause(s): 4.11.3
. l' N: e8 ]' J7 mNo. Year PDSH 0854 20104 x- E3 w1 p3 g1 p* Z" V
Category: LITE Developed by: ETF5 OSM/LUM
4 W1 y7 v* i' v" x0 V6 a- rSubject:4 _3 B0 q* f/ g
Screw connections5 ~: r; w7 I" r' z# l& k
Key words:4 f, `8 T) W/ I; R8 f
- Small “spikes”
2 q3 F3 S) z' E. |8 X! ]; o- Locking of screw connections5 l# J: v8 |1 G$ ]+ r. y% O, i
- Ballast
3 M' b" j5 e% tTo be approved at the 49th CTL Plenary Meeting, in 2012
& h. m# G9 Q% m" b! l9 IQuestion:( B% e6 U0 _" K* F$ k W, z
Are two small “spikes” for locking of screw connections of a ballast acceptable?
6 e* X3 ~3 S9 g# b" IDecision:
4 f% `6 h! V* k$ }' K' O" w* U' SThe solution is acceptable. Each case has to be judged on its own merits.
# @$ o9 k- n4 p0 M6 d9 q6 ^, F, @; w p5 F4 |
2 q! t; Q6 h/ ]6 I
; b) [0 |6 t) B8 _
0 L8 j% e- Y% F3 A# \
) B5 e- l8 O7 q. o/ h
4 d2 |$ L: {9 X- `0 J |
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
|