|
| DSH 436
, I3 f0 \* `+ U) u1 t7 |( f$ f$ w8 p% M0 R) n7 }0 u! Y8 h
| Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity IDm
: ^8 A( I r+ ^; l* Y+ U | 9.11.2.3
. V) J; G _9 j; o% e- ~( u5 F | 61008-1(ed.2). v- O+ j, }2 C2 X5 h' w- S, b( @
|
% d- {" h5 x% i& |' `Standard:
" P! `& P* {& I% d( r5 SIEC 61008-1 (1996-12)7 }' a: n- g) ~7 J* t( f
Sub clause:8 H0 l: z$ W9 r7 v
9.11.2.3
2 W E7 I0 _ I% k# Q: T9 S, YSheet No. 436; C0 i) `; { E( x; y$ Q
Subject:
G$ B- d8 {8 Z; ~3 M* oVerification of the rated residual( d; I0 }0 A }: z# S
making and breaking capacity IDm4 ?/ n6 u s7 X
Key words: Confirmed at 39th+ P4 @ n K4 z6 X9 D% d
CTL Meeting
; O( B. u) h: A: a. Y- I4 [Question:5 u" l: c: I& @5 S$ N# r5 X
9.11.2.3 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.11.2.1 and states that the resistor R3 shall9 k2 @/ l( K+ g t6 W# z; y
not be used.: p0 N; `6 r) y) w3 L
9.11.2.1 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with resistor R2 to be used.
; I' e. }" L& c" X, D2 KAccording to these figures, the following inconsistency appears:$ W% `/ F% S# N' F/ W
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual
" T1 S1 A/ U9 [' nmaking and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
X; L! x0 U! Y6 l1 Q/ b+ ?For a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
~) [% S6 C9 O9 }# Rcapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
+ ]/ c. A8 B# k) L# h0 |" a, WFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
8 V* _9 |) X4 Y3 Z- h; xcapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
- r1 \0 F* G, h) |For a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for% j- X2 |0 K6 k" d U
400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.* G6 O. m* X$ Z+ \7 }8 A
Due to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems," v9 [; _- E- J# u% n
the test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
+ V; q/ G; V, ]2 ~3 }- f230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.& Z/ T$ z$ i1 i4 _. g i) M! T7 a
Decision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:
; l& X* d; d/ p& `1 w* B' nExtract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:
; D, l, D8 e" |* mSC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.37 n& k' h% {) K9 P( f3 b6 D& X
The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting/ c' ?. x9 j3 h2 W
WG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this( H" o8 B1 `8 F( L
important decision.
$ I7 {! K0 ]7 P' OTherefore the following statement was drafted:( n* d8 r* L3 G
2
5 a* r8 s s$ d& o' yDecision to be forwarded to CTL:
: }; i8 g: b H" hIEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause
3 ]4 @% B: J6 i- {( Q6 z9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual
$ e: I" R& o: Y, G$ `making and breaking capacity IDm.
6 }- {7 [; H' }) o9 dThe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the
0 P; s) a+ k! s3 ?line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will
% I. z, V7 Q/ d' Gbe included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.7 k: g6 ~) O: n# e* v
The revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.
4 e0 ~6 r3 _, E$ q
* e5 c( n) {" b- C$ X
# D; s% n$ Y6 T; |0 E% B0 r |
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
|