|
| DSH 436
- I9 Y4 ^1 ]6 |, A
2 Y$ _- A7 W% M7 e' `* F | Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity IDm
4 K J' e" U2 n4 i& D& { | 9.11.2.3
; q- q) l- s- u) e7 P | 61008-1(ed.2)+ y, s0 q. K* g3 b+ E
|
5 w) K# v3 C8 J& P3 OStandard:
8 u+ ?0 e" t2 C5 w2 U8 y% UIEC 61008-1 (1996-12)- Z' W8 ?& Q/ n* W% N7 ^: m
Sub clause:
1 A4 O! i5 T1 k9 f' O9.11.2.3
2 R( p, }( V* H. }: F' F/ f' d/ \Sheet No. 436: m: ]) f4 _8 k9 d
Subject:& c1 x- q* c4 A6 J
Verification of the rated residual" j% P; Q4 C, ]( y/ ?
making and breaking capacity IDm
1 G) j2 e! v. Y; M) ~/ GKey words: Confirmed at 39th' s4 O& l+ p; @6 ^/ k
CTL Meeting |5 q" {) [/ n. Z7 o
Question:
: T3 f. Z0 \2 R @4 o4 ^9.11.2.3 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.11.2.1 and states that the resistor R3 shall
/ d/ |/ d1 D: S# vnot be used. v- ]* s: z* z7 u- w
9.11.2.1 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with resistor R2 to be used.
9 a& a A/ L6 a- k1 oAccording to these figures, the following inconsistency appears:# ~( @. b% Y* V4 T. B
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual. z0 ]; f) L6 ?
making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.- t, c7 s! J" t5 p
For a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
1 p9 b# e# \5 @" t q: a3 N% ]capacity has to be tested at 400 V.
9 l/ v* e4 e9 AFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
7 L" H9 U( v% q5 I4 M1 k$ T2 gcapacity has to be tested at 400 V.
+ R8 ?% u! M1 ]% G; M8 i4 xFor a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for" g& o- ]( m% w9 J/ A9 I, g. S
400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.7 _$ j2 W( e4 ~9 j; p; J" U6 }
Due to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,1 V4 Q5 ~% Q$ I, E
the test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
9 L0 l+ {# C& O! O4 m! _) y230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected., c4 i4 K% H y: a% R
Decision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:
3 J! [+ P# w9 f/ aExtract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:
% t7 x/ P; J' fSC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.3: r- [" Y3 g h3 k* Q
The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting
, j1 X* X5 S1 I% i7 B W& }% fWG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this5 t( J! c' M3 M+ ?1 T& U& [; L
important decision.. x& @, D5 L3 h4 V
Therefore the following statement was drafted:5 f9 {0 J: o% K
23 t3 w$ K4 ]* Q' o- I7 X0 Y# H$ T
Decision to be forwarded to CTL:+ T1 w4 y+ d- b5 C* Z M
IEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause
/ j0 O7 K* L. D3 C' w+ ^; x% C7 Q9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual
* U# c7 N7 V9 Z5 [* Bmaking and breaking capacity IDm." R s9 f5 ^0 q3 k, K4 p% {
The test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the
3 G5 ^# k3 T( l& n; oline to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will
- ]! ^* L. {3 \& n) mbe included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.
" S9 i; I0 u) J7 l$ o. DThe revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.
& N; [( P. M4 y7 D% \9 |+ E+ D1 s# B( c: ?
! |9 o5 t6 l7 x; B% [, _ |
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
|