DSH 597 Verificaton of main contact position, position of the actuator
http://decisions.iecee.org/icons/ecblank.gif DSH 597
Verificaton of main contact position, position of the actuator
8.3.3.9
60947-1(ed.1);am1 & 60947-1(ed.2) & 60947-1(ed.2);am1;am2 & 60947-1(ed.3) & 60947-1(ed.3);am1;am2 & 60947-1(ed.3);am2 & 60947-1(ed.4) & 60947-1(ed.5) & 60947-1(ed.5);am1 & 60947-2(ed.1);am1 & 60947-2(ed.2) & 60947-2(ed.2);am1;am2 & 60947-2(ed.3) & 60947-2(ed.4) & 60947-2(ed.4);am1
Standard(s): IEC60947-1, IEC60947-
2
Sub clause(s):
8.2.5.3 of IEC60947-1 and
8.3.3.9 of IEC60947-2
DSH
597
Subject:
Verification of main contact
position, position of the actuator
Key words:
- suitable for isolation
- indication of contact
position
Decision approved by
the 44th CTL Plenary
meeting 2007
Question:
Verification of the main contact position is conducted only on products suitable for isolation. This is an
additional requirement to be verified.
Q1: After the 3F test, the actuator comes to rest in a position between the trip and open position (which is
neither consistent with the tripped nor with the open position markings as indicated on the product). Is this a
pass when tested according 8.2.5.3 of IEC60947-1?
Q2: If the answer of Q1 is yes, is this in conflict with the general constructional requirements of 7.1.5? How
should section 7.1.6.1 (additional (constructional) requirements) be interpreted?
Proposal:
There are two possibilities, depending on the features of the breaker:
1) The indicator is the actuator, and it is the only position indicator, or
2) There is an actuator that may show the operating position, but in addition there is a
separate position indicator.
For construction per item 1, this result is not acceptable
For construction per item 2, the result described is acceptable if the separate position
indicator unambiguously shows the closed position, irrespective of the rest position of the
actuator.
Refer to IEC 60947-1, Clause 7.1.6.1
页:
[1]
