DSH 588 Verification of main contact position, position of the handle
http://decisions.iecee.org/icons/ecblank.gif DSH 588
Verification of main contact position, position of the handle
8.2.5.3.2 of IEC60947-1 and 8.3.3.9 of IEC60947-2
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)
Standard(s): IEC60947-1, IEC60947-
2, IEC60947-3
Sub clause(s):
8.2.5.3.2 of IEC60947-1 and
8.3.3.9 of IEC60947-2
Sheet No.
DSH 588
Subject:
Verification of main contact
position, position of the handle
Key words:
- suitable for isolation
- indication of contact
position
Decision approved
during the CTL Plenary
Meeting 2006
Question:
Verification of the main contact position is conducted only on products suitable for isolation. This is an
additional requirement to be verified. With respect to this test, the following two questions gave rise to
discussions
Q1: When after the 3F test, the indicator comes to rest in a position between the trip and open position (which
is not the tripped or open position 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 or how
should section 7.1.6.1 (additional constructional requirements) be interpreted?
Decision:
There are two possibilities, depending on the features of the MCCB:
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 position of the
actuator.
Refer to IEC 60947-1, Clause 7.1.6.1
页:
[1]
