|
| DSH 436
0 A) W5 e3 N/ r
( ?1 @( o' W1 p" ^3 B5 o | Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity IDm
& m! E5 ?$ Q' D P2 @4 G. p4 k | 9.11.2.3
+ h& x4 x5 {# K | 61008-1(ed.2)
6 q$ B8 `; i- Z P. T/ e+ H |
% i( W$ ?4 h: n6 i% d! T5 LStandard:+ I+ n+ c3 G* x9 ^" _
IEC 61008-1 (1996-12)
: [# _. \" }* M9 Z" R( Q0 DSub clause:
* H3 w, z& \/ {8 @+ r- S9 `9.11.2.3. V" z) W a! G# ?
Sheet No. 436) D {+ D' J( N# g7 q" k5 V1 K
Subject:( }3 M9 ?+ F' }, e2 q1 ^, M
Verification of the rated residual7 N) \) S2 C& e- k3 b
making and breaking capacity IDm. w& [: v4 H7 ?/ _; d
Key words: Confirmed at 39th5 j* S7 x. o& S, i
CTL Meeting6 J/ U/ S0 k% l' J( e
Question:
9 X3 l, E' d4 Y/ Q9.11.2.3 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.11.2.1 and states that the resistor R3 shall w7 M. g9 K/ f& A8 S8 T
not be used.
7 |6 A9 w: P& Y2 D. j9.11.2.1 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with resistor R2 to be used., g% X, N6 G* Q6 J0 @% W$ j2 Z% a6 j
According to these figures, the following inconsistency appears:
$ f G, E) [ J' U/ xFor a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual- s1 t: ~ ^5 b E
making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
* V) ~% O+ p' n5 E+ KFor a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
' h6 D/ \. [% x O" ocapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
% B* }/ B Z2 P$ w8 VFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking7 |7 B& d x/ ?1 u4 e7 O0 X: p& M) ]
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.6 B. ]1 Q! I' K& F
For a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for: h( f) g" S! Z) j
400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.8 R7 O |0 P: H+ D
Due to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,
# l% x: Z a9 a2 L7 @the test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
3 p5 _' y: D4 ?* n6 Z( L* s6 e230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.
! W7 h) Y# |, f6 {& ADecision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:8 T* R: P" x( {9 e" q) G% H3 i
Extract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:8 @6 {# i+ m" N- J! Z Q8 b
SC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.3# `: g% \6 b$ F" C g" n# M
The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting5 x% m' K1 U* z5 h" A
WG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this
5 z: \' D, ?6 c+ H/ H- k* {important decision.
6 F' {( n7 B. lTherefore the following statement was drafted:
+ W. b* X1 G* \: G2
6 l3 l9 t9 Q4 G/ UDecision to be forwarded to CTL:
' t# a5 h5 k& q& @9 kIEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause
1 t7 d a+ {# W( } U2 Z+ z% G9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual
. W7 P3 o5 V4 D; H/ g2 Umaking and breaking capacity IDm.
+ ?9 `8 Y6 R0 b" n0 XThe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the4 B* ~6 M- G7 M; P* F- X1 w+ V
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will% o7 v0 Z2 [0 }8 a( S' v
be included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.- l% K( i* i% C
The revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.
7 ^) U, n6 R. }
( H2 x7 q& H. s& P% W
2 I- U! P% x! d7 [4 @- ]4 E2 t |
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
|