|
| DSH 436( Q: \; H5 F& g1 M; @% X
# E! s3 V* m# b4 H, Q8 F4 V | Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity IDm
* k6 t; g* l2 |# H2 b& ^+ j, x | 9.11.2.3
! Q8 S: D% D1 f | 61008-1(ed.2)
2 h% R9 v) _; h2 ^7 t) g | ( c# r( Y U1 f. {
Standard:
8 y2 N' ]" f( f; f0 k/ P' JIEC 61008-1 (1996-12)
% v9 b" D' u2 E8 h, iSub clause:
" ^) n% ^. b( Y2 l$ ?; E, J7 f9.11.2.3
7 n" [1 \7 I3 ?2 U1 r5 L D6 JSheet No. 436
9 s% ]4 R1 F& ]Subject:
! ? G% e1 g% qVerification of the rated residual8 c+ Y7 e/ ?$ t: z; f" X1 y# Y
making and breaking capacity IDm( U# H; w0 _4 y& O' c1 f" ]0 ]
Key words: Confirmed at 39th. [$ K4 V, {2 A. ?- q( V/ L3 a
CTL Meeting
& Q+ {& r# y1 FQuestion:
& M$ B. R u+ L4 W8 {3 S; ]; ~/ s9.11.2.3 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.11.2.1 and states that the resistor R3 shall5 t. M1 U& }, Q: g! H
not be used.
: _9 H9 c- b2 w9 k1 s$ g9.11.2.1 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with resistor R2 to be used.
) L* r8 Q3 b* _* yAccording to these figures, the following inconsistency appears:
7 c+ ^. k) O! \3 W7 YFor a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual
; P& D3 P9 ]# [3 j/ d! J e6 F8 [making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
; j9 X: x2 N6 V; D# uFor a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking1 Y3 R( J0 L3 s; V
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.
. a/ S( S I. } {# dFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
* m+ O; l `9 K$ S, ycapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
+ N& n/ R0 B# t$ V2 O: LFor a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for
" b) p# H- E' S& n400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.. N/ p) P0 }0 N- P
Due to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,/ [9 t. U: n( s. a
the test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
/ [$ W- F% D' Q- W1 s; b230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.
+ w& ^% N$ }) C- ?' yDecision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:
* z* |6 h: J* R$ E( q9 D1 `( YExtract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:% z S& s. K* ?/ O# |
SC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.3
( f' B6 Z# R$ y$ c* N+ [) |The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting# M1 f) a1 @3 a
WG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this
. L; |1 I# t. `) f" d. Gimportant decision.
: B7 D3 G2 `+ `7 m! p6 B. yTherefore the following statement was drafted:
# p5 O a( f/ i3 U+ n: K V' e2* O6 I* k$ p$ R: U7 J
Decision to be forwarded to CTL:
; ^0 g6 D, ?2 D" U+ CIEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause
# b* ~' J- O& L+ \0 ^5 Q9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual9 a$ X; ?! v9 o/ S' y7 y9 H h. s
making and breaking capacity IDm.) I$ ]% [+ Q( H# ?, Z1 O) L
The test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the( h9 Y- g! M5 N# p W: g
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will
% y, w4 F6 j% B# Qbe included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.7 | y# I$ ]; r8 P# D8 }
The revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.
: o( u3 S9 m: @8 O7 {- z8 N
0 \8 G9 q' A9 y( T9 x9 K1 Y( U% e5 ~" ~
|
本帖子中包含更多资源
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有账号?注册安规
x
|