|
| DSH 437
! h, Z: `9 Q; E. k3 o2 J2 M1 d' V# J3 J: I, \: K$ q3 }$ o; z
| Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity ID m
7 |, z2 ?- \* C' Z) \2 ?4 L8 R6 f5 R | 9.12.13! F, p9 `( r, \5 P! V
| 61009-1(ed.2)
2 ~6 t+ w. D( b/ k5 e |
n ?1 Q" u, E2 {* n& tStandard:
$ a/ \9 s6 r4 F& j, r; mIEC 61009-1 (1996-12)
9 C5 r v1 E$ F+ e; CSub clause:
3 ?* t( \$ @6 D/ j+ P/ ^/ c8 P9.12.13! W: h, B! Q A, v
Sheet No. 437
: b5 r6 L! Y/ {% q, OSubject
W# A \" W% [) WVerification of the rated residual
& a2 S; h+ e [! r) ~+ s# D, ?making and breaking capacity IDm
9 @ J0 [" x$ s: MKey words: Confirmed at CTL
8 L5 h- E2 B$ e! T1 U8 `39th Meeting' |( B5 F" ~ h% Q a9 R1 t
Question:
" N$ c8 B* L$ b4 V9.12.13.1 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.12.1 and states that the impedance Z1 shall
9 L9 E* c$ ]% i- ]# C, H$ snot be used.2 G/ F; o( S8 L) G& S
9.12.1 refers to the conditions in 9.12.1 to 9.12.12.- |& `, `3 B: C: n
9.12.2 and 9.12.7.4 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with impedance7 \! {# s9 Q' O- j4 [/ [9 K
Z2 to be used.
( \8 D! b1 h+ P$ Y9 oAccording to these figures the following inconsistency appears:& Q9 J6 ]7 n! Y
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual& W) e% l5 f6 W- \1 q @) V
making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
! b& V3 L7 Z+ }7 s- W0 |8 R RFor a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
) ]6 y$ |' T" m( k+ k. K& }) ocapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
7 B2 e& e$ k; K9 D0 mFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
. g2 N. X! ^1 h/ C* Q! N# C1 ucapacity has to be tested at 400 V., r' E! |% C1 l v) W! I8 W
For a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for# |0 p( H: W( m
400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
" t% i, ~# U, j1 O3 `5 TDue to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,* T$ n! C, i% J
the test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be; R( V% @* K+ z( w9 x: E% Y
230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.
( M+ c3 A# e, C3 _3 W: O. |0 JDecision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:
J8 V, [. ^8 H5 H" S) W. C% ~Extract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:
+ ]) X( s5 M9 [# I+ j) B! T' CSC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.3
- p7 I* X6 p) k& O2 |+ OThe proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting
4 ]) M# e! b. y+ S) g) G3 fWG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this
( F1 v) M* ?. S4 c/ |- A% iimportant decision.9 V; w9 i7 l) _: b9 |& _6 C
Therefore the following statement was drafted:
' h6 n, p$ i* z* c' O2
' ^$ ^* ~ E7 d. Q$ [Decision to be forwarded to CTL:
8 n2 g: z5 }4 t1 G% o% fIEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause
5 ]$ p l+ x9 k6 B; X# y9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual
' ]0 A: G' x; c' Mmaking and breaking capacity IDm.* B# f3 H, b& v/ f. w, v
The test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the y) I( u8 K% f: n4 G7 Z& m
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will
6 x! Z2 k5 o9 E/ [, dbe included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.
; d* s4 D$ ]: u, X" UThe revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.
8 \$ J" M; f1 K6 C3 Q2 E/ i/ z' i8 f T
) @5 N% @7 @9 j* h7 E! z |
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
|