|
| DSH 437: ?* ]1 K. Z/ L+ D! R
7 {! s) x: K6 B1 F' W
| Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity ID m5 S4 V- q+ f. J- k& {1 r3 [$ k. M( S
| 9.12.13
; N7 K1 a: X) G. c3 W. B% w | 61009-1(ed.2)4 T3 P7 X/ [2 m
|
0 m' [2 H' I7 v8 {9 k) H# QStandard:) U1 C6 D! ?8 J
IEC 61009-1 (1996-12)9 z/ s4 r! C* }# y- D: B, f. Z& }
Sub clause:
+ d0 e+ N: C& u2 h- e9.12.139 A R! @, u' _% o
Sheet No. 437% `) L, }, |( i4 i* C- l
Subject
( L$ z4 b5 U% |& DVerification of the rated residual
8 C3 R0 Z. c2 i+ P" \) U; g+ zmaking and breaking capacity IDm
7 E, k- E/ C% A- _ A3 j% iKey words: Confirmed at CTL
8 s2 M) m; B/ W! e5 I39th Meeting# P; w4 A' X7 d% ]8 |0 O5 N6 I
Question:
. n: B# E3 g7 Q3 P$ _# L! e( b/ d9.12.13.1 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.12.1 and states that the impedance Z1 shall9 I& G1 P" u- t) h% ]
not be used.
% q% @( e: S+ J4 z' R- v9.12.1 refers to the conditions in 9.12.1 to 9.12.12.
/ p( Z; b x+ S* ]/ k" F9.12.2 and 9.12.7.4 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with impedance; ]: j! ?/ l& u
Z2 to be used.
0 n" M- r) K) ^According to these figures the following inconsistency appears:6 m! b$ ^, O4 X
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual5 N8 H9 ?: U5 }0 \$ W
making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.; x0 q: a# t7 U l
For a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking7 X+ i. h1 X2 s
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.1 t0 }3 X( p' t) N& A, a. h
For a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
9 O) A8 w& L- G: kcapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
/ `. i/ [- y- }; g: sFor a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for
$ g+ }1 J7 l- [400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V. L# c2 }. }- O. q1 W7 y
Due to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,
+ n [) Z/ i* h; A) F* m" R! Kthe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
; k7 X, U9 y+ Y230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.- ?9 w% r- G4 z
Decision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:" y% z& \0 y/ _& [; n6 }+ [7 A
Extract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:
* r) k v. U" \9 Q9 b; [1 x; C, gSC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.3
$ H \3 d1 A7 k2 pThe proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting
3 Z1 W" y t" c: F* O: ~. v) e) SWG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this% p5 c" w: l1 ]4 i7 b
important decision.$ G T f+ d1 l* i4 Y1 N0 d3 \4 z
Therefore the following statement was drafted:7 b) m( K6 P F
2
$ q5 U5 I# i2 cDecision to be forwarded to CTL:
2 ~4 X( ?6 V$ y+ h# S+ u! dIEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause5 F% x* B8 M7 a. E) w1 v8 E% n
9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual
6 F" u& t; W6 z7 Q6 ymaking and breaking capacity IDm.2 w- ^( f+ \9 W1 H
The test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the: f3 T: B9 _& n- A9 C2 z9 T: k1 D; K
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will1 u+ |/ B: F/ E, P. s
be included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.
, H) h' ]$ K1 Z. _2 H( AThe revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.) V- M, }- T5 Q; f+ \
" c6 O/ T. N! |3 {
W. x6 E0 d, [& N( T' [( B# 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
|