|
| DSH 436" C* A- I2 Y; [; E* D7 y
4 B/ Q0 Q8 Y: c$ I
| Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity IDm8 H+ R" t( j# ?, Z
| 9.11.2.3. U$ J0 \1 [: m
| 61008-1(ed.2): ?9 e* f, [& _+ _, G
| / h$ @3 _1 A `7 i
Standard:
! m" ~* Z% J; x2 A, s5 r- aIEC 61008-1 (1996-12)% o# s$ y# i. ]9 W* V5 O
Sub clause:
$ U% s: y3 j* X; x; \% P9.11.2.39 d% ^8 ^" I: |: L! O) f0 b$ p
Sheet No. 436
" X, l& T( b' `9 P- VSubject:5 _2 {- G! p- j; L; b: k
Verification of the rated residual- F5 d: N# j. z+ r
making and breaking capacity IDm! }6 O) K) I- t: y6 I
Key words: Confirmed at 39th- k- l8 M; H9 G" G( N1 C% j
CTL Meeting" l+ N7 T5 \2 N/ e3 R( G
Question:1 C/ B1 G5 a6 `/ q: A8 K
9.11.2.3 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.11.2.1 and states that the resistor R3 shall
. P( e* z" @/ q) i2 ?9 L# `% Q, U. t1 Mnot be used.
3 O8 w0 t' k0 N7 n) V s* u9.11.2.1 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with resistor R2 to be used.* X6 W S1 c; o0 i" Z
According to these figures, the following inconsistency appears:. C C4 ^7 ]% w* o) |4 V/ w
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual8 ?# c% j) _8 |3 T# }) f4 o
making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
6 c1 } X8 k' l! S1 d2 L* SFor a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking$ t% ?% c, B: n A8 R
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.3 b4 G8 B( T. r% \9 |( b, M- e `8 [
For a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking4 [# {& \1 D$ w. ?
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.
. V( n% k+ _9 m/ [. A" R# M6 f5 pFor a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for
2 z; i6 I! A/ E$ m400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
, p) z- v6 p$ z. _: V, xDue to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,4 ]2 `) A# G; e/ V- n
the test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
& m& a" |/ F) \3 n$ m7 L. o2 z230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.
0 b8 p/ c5 H! fDecision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:4 N7 j L9 z K% [" u
Extract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:
" _$ l; Q4 O6 Z! T7 o9 o; p, @SC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.39 h: Y! @8 Q2 k; P9 ~" c- _
The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting( @* H( X5 c( ^4 N; K3 C5 z
WG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this+ c* y' ]( d8 D
important decision.5 @/ N# i1 P! T% w6 O$ `& n
Therefore the following statement was drafted:
" B. r* O) C$ q* B/ Y& l( F2* D* s) M& I" b/ Q; A# y# _5 ^ ]
Decision to be forwarded to CTL:
3 i% E% U q. ^, }( GIEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause- Y# J/ @5 @3 S* p" D
9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual
' Q, T, G$ p6 y: cmaking and breaking capacity IDm.# X7 [# n& ^, J4 |* c
The test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the4 _' _) n' ?* G# t" f/ r! M
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will% d) s1 U( p9 p( W+ B
be included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.
* P5 s) z8 L. R9 SThe revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.: f# i6 e# X1 {6 @& {
2 G7 ^' N R+ W
3 U7 j' i3 c$ e3 |7 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
|