|
| DSH 588- o8 Y3 ~1 n" L9 \+ u* l2 U
& p. x) o6 x7 }& J8 y9 |: |! J | Verification of main contact position, position of the handle
0 z) ~# E( ]: d3 }) x! |( ^& R* J | 8.2.5.3.2 of IEC60947-1 and 8.3.3.9 of IEC60947-2+ Z! z' D/ Y0 Q8 ]
| 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)
- P. V F$ S# p5 s' l* [; o |
, j; {' M0 K" |2 y& rStandard(s): IEC60947-1, IEC60947-0 P5 X: Y7 h4 i9 K8 R
2, IEC60947-3
( F* R' }8 X% F$ d( ^( uSub clause(s):
9 l2 S' S* Y$ C8.2.5.3.2 of IEC60947-1 and
' x# \" }& w+ r. i, T, ]; r8.3.3.9 of IEC60947-2
. |( u" O8 E u5 d5 G$ E0 XSheet No.
& y: R9 u, U% i4 q2 d0 dDSH 588+ e7 z3 ~6 E) i0 `) v
Subject:
# w% U6 Y. L; v% X! r; s9 XVerification of main contact, C0 _- D2 ~0 d: y/ d# M5 @5 ?
position, position of the handle
1 Q' p+ ^7 Q8 S2 h: mKey words:/ E: `4 O, Y2 a: n
- suitable for isolation9 k/ y! Q$ S. Y3 X
- indication of contact
/ Q0 @' Y; H# \4 y R4 l# k, ^position
7 o% l! |3 M% C' CDecision approved
2 t; o' f* ?# I0 g& O+ ]1 S9 hduring the CTL Plenary
- K/ x5 k9 z3 Y( cMeeting 20069 ?! y8 |6 E/ Q! s7 y! o
Question:& |/ @9 e; E2 s6 a. M' I9 D
Verification of the main contact position is conducted only on products suitable for isolation. This is an
# r: y& S: |: M" k" n( madditional requirement to be verified. With respect to this test, the following two questions gave rise to
6 R4 O7 [: b- @/ ^9 H' q, hdiscussions
: d# q: z/ d4 J% Q2 N+ GQ1: When after the 3F test, the indicator comes to rest in a position between the trip and open position (which
( P, W7 K/ S9 \9 p* wis not the tripped or open position as indicated on the product), is this a pass when tested according 8.2.5.3 of
1 y: N M9 N. [7 OIEC60947-1?
4 n* Y: C5 p8 L0 XQ2: If the answer of Q1 is yes, is this in conflict with the general constructional requirements of 7.1.5 or how0 c) S, [! c" }1 G( m$ L! @
should section 7.1.6.1 (additional constructional requirements) be interpreted?
" O# y$ I, Y; o$ P' CDecision:( _; Z& L; p! M4 G
There are two possibilities, depending on the features of the MCCB:2 A# [+ s# z0 B
1) The indicator is the actuator, and it is the only position indicator, or
& Z( e3 C5 _% Q8 @5 Q2) There is an actuator that may show the operating position, but in addition there is a; P8 N1 a, ?$ s
separate position indicator.6 {2 Y5 h( C, Z: }: g
For construction per item 1, this result is not acceptable
# E8 J! j4 s b% M" W" LFor construction per item 2, the result described is acceptable if the separate position: J& u7 i4 k6 j
indicator unambiguously shows the closed position, irrespective of the position of the2 k! v, E0 I G% y' ]' ?8 n
actuator.' X8 H2 r; a! T' F7 e: \7 C
Refer to IEC 60947-1, Clause 7.1.6.1( @2 e2 H2 R9 C
& H5 g. o+ D( Q2 t2 T
) p& j5 R) x% X, c
|
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
|