|
| DSH 597
* y4 u1 j; b" g- D, X1 A3 S) V1 o) j" u* _; S4 j: Y2 W
| Verificaton of main contact position, position of the actuator1 ?& v; F e! ]" w k- y k
| 8.3.3.9
$ ] e# J. D* g+ t" b1 g | 60947-1(ed.1);am1 & 60947-1(ed.2) & 60947-1(ed.2);am1;am2 & 60947-1(ed.3) & 60947-1(ed.3);am1;am2 & 60947-1(ed.3);am2 & 60947-1(ed.4) & 60947-1(ed.5) & 60947-1(ed.5);am1 & 60947-2(ed.1);am1 & 60947-2(ed.2) & 60947-2(ed.2);am1;am2 & 60947-2(ed.3) & 60947-2(ed.4) & 60947-2(ed.4);am1/ I5 a/ A' P; l2 L7 l1 @% J
|
1 i1 B. c/ Y: ~! {; UStandard(s): IEC60947-1, IEC60947-
: }0 P* K% B2 e" P2) l1 t" v- c2 d7 S. D$ \- K }' x
Sub clause(s):
; J: Y1 ]* Q. d# P8.2.5.3 of IEC60947-1 and# |2 h( k+ o; c8 E- }/ i# a
8.3.3.9 of IEC60947-2# {/ t% y, Q2 q' v
DSH
0 _ i. U# M8 y; G597& n! \% E ?* S0 Y0 D) B, g* M: t
Subject:
+ Z$ g$ @; R- E% ?9 ^/ l2 TVerification of main contact
0 h7 s4 c) n1 B' ^/ m5 qposition, position of the actuator9 O2 B; i0 b, x8 L; k1 m; n9 p
Key words:" x/ |6 Q. g$ `( p7 P. I
- suitable for isolation
* l+ s& P9 r0 @6 P/ l7 f' j) [0 m1 f: s- indication of contact. A& w4 m# Q7 p0 h h5 D8 K% f
position
; m: Q; B2 T e6 \Decision approved by* `' q+ R& S1 i6 J
the 44th CTL Plenary+ V. T# Q3 o' Q6 a1 ^
meeting 2007
5 u, M& M0 M0 t* g) nQuestion:
; U' N4 F# l" CVerification of the main contact position is conducted only on products suitable for isolation. This is an, o9 E8 M7 ~- B2 N9 e
additional requirement to be verified.8 A# s/ T$ q( |3 C Q3 O" h
Q1: After the 3F test, the actuator comes to rest in a position between the trip and open position (which is; G9 n4 P& _9 O- D/ ]; o* [7 a
neither consistent with the tripped nor with the open position markings as indicated on the product). Is this a8 G, _8 v; k: T3 M4 j- I2 `
pass when tested according 8.2.5.3 of IEC60947-1?
; O2 |3 ^" `) u0 w! {$ b4 sQ2: If the answer of Q1 is yes, is this in conflict with the general constructional requirements of 7.1.5? How! U8 Z" h0 x2 T3 J$ z5 Y% }
should section 7.1.6.1 (additional (constructional) requirements) be interpreted?; W& K* k9 S( K Z
Proposal:
5 y0 J# \6 u/ L5 a9 G8 {* x+ nThere are two possibilities, depending on the features of the breaker:$ P7 Q Z7 e8 V" b' c
1) The indicator is the actuator, and it is the only position indicator, or
& X) \$ E; b) _2) There is an actuator that may show the operating position, but in addition there is a' z- f: [1 Z: j" ^1 ]
separate position indicator." Y+ I0 ?7 x/ n! X2 g; T/ @8 X ^* Z
For construction per item 1, this result is not acceptable% A2 N$ X4 M/ A$ L3 y% U
For construction per item 2, the result described is acceptable if the separate position! c- S( A$ h/ J
indicator unambiguously shows the closed position, irrespective of the rest position of the
! A; d2 k# N+ }( V$ Tactuator.
2 |1 ^- {+ k* P: Z7 ERefer to IEC 60947-1, Clause 7.1.6.1
2 I: o5 D) h, u0 e8 x
% M2 f# e" z/ [6 V7 z6 P2 o% ~4 @$ f7 o8 [1 G) p
% s0 L5 @' G# 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
|