|
| DSH 436+ E% G5 P9 P2 ~2 r
- a$ `! \0 L& H q* L+ D | Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity IDm
5 y' d' J$ I! Z | 9.11.2.3- }: _ ?0 Q5 c" `) n, U
| 61008-1(ed.2)+ j0 [" w9 M' }( T6 ?* |
|
" }) o- o0 g; `4 ?Standard:
, { V% V3 y1 d# W( d- Z1 dIEC 61008-1 (1996-12)
" [# h% R, _6 v1 P( A& i- SSub clause:7 w/ \2 I9 |: C* P, u
9.11.2.3
1 Y& q# E q- ]0 A# |- e8 U! iSheet No. 436: x+ {( p) x& x; L
Subject:$ X: M1 s6 {9 `
Verification of the rated residual
) `; I; `9 k1 o3 O8 ymaking and breaking capacity IDm6 y: G2 C' ~+ K. o, j- Q
Key words: Confirmed at 39th4 ]' {3 \7 t% E2 W2 q
CTL Meeting0 O9 ^+ v9 G, v+ @8 c
Question:& J# U: U& L+ ]' v+ a
9.11.2.3 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.11.2.1 and states that the resistor R3 shall
8 |* D0 ~3 A9 Pnot be used.
, G. w# a. t2 }5 J+ j/ ^2 F( d3 ]5 x9.11.2.1 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with resistor R2 to be used.( B' U& M! k- O8 K0 S3 C
According to these figures, the following inconsistency appears: z- h6 i% ?% o
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual) G- J+ g; Y" {( m) E
making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.' r; S& i# a$ ]- {/ P! m# q8 e
For a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
1 y2 C: J t3 X; Q8 Jcapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
. a( h0 Y* t3 O) m9 J+ UFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking7 F$ P7 O( F0 Z- V
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.# |7 c9 g) {" K: \
For a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for9 V; g$ D. f, I- Z0 a: M2 w
400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
. Z0 [" L% S6 U; A4 t0 mDue to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,
3 T) f' x6 F2 N1 i u1 ?, Kthe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
' I( H! N& C5 b230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.
8 F4 e2 A, E2 g) A; i7 _7 a# KDecision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:
: A b9 l; Q" R! UExtract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:
) Q. L' {4 U$ |5 g zSC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.3
& b) l' w# o0 r; `The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting$ x# i2 C* t, I$ g
WG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this
5 Q1 O8 C N B) zimportant decision.
6 O* A! H) L/ `/ Z5 aTherefore the following statement was drafted:2 _2 l2 u# y2 M* ]
2
- k& r, L7 ~& o8 cDecision to be forwarded to CTL: Y+ U9 h; O: m5 r3 i( Y8 w
IEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause
" a$ x6 P+ V! o, g1 s9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual/ Z9 w6 F; S& M) E
making and breaking capacity IDm.
0 y3 L: ` y) n. H: z4 }3 xThe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the5 |5 m' ~* ?' V% C: b) d0 {4 u
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will9 N- ]5 Z* Y, j# B1 o4 k) t
be included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.0 B9 C' }. r8 e! q
The revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached., m3 r3 W, e9 l, ? N, k* u0 `2 K
4 ^+ Y# N: }. E! S2 r8 P4 Z C1 J' \) E. X ~
|
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
|