|
| DSH 437
3 O0 r3 b9 V7 _
! \ V* U' o5 m; G/ p4 p5 d | Verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity ID m
7 Q9 W( T5 R. B- l, Y1 b+ {' r | 9.12.13& D5 L5 U2 t( r2 s i! \; J
| 61009-1(ed.2)
& O7 W- t1 u- `/ k |
! ]: R* O* V- @ Q+ ~, @" F: l% V6 H: [Standard:
- R& d) c8 v" X" E. Q! i6 H3 G# ] qIEC 61009-1 (1996-12)3 N' U' ]8 n& [% C+ ]
Sub clause:2 r3 |8 n: {6 N* L6 d3 ?
9.12.13/ C4 H) p) g7 B4 s
Sheet No. 437
7 F. Q+ J5 E: c: aSubject
6 c; A) h/ _9 ^' W; c- GVerification of the rated residual
( \( ]5 ~# U# [1 g- M# emaking and breaking capacity IDm
7 d0 f8 T5 b) L: J- l/ LKey words: Confirmed at CTL2 v0 b* J/ e7 e7 o
39th Meeting+ v7 u0 o$ C: k3 J/ j1 }
Question:
. v7 [. X) j Z, {8 I9.12.13.1 refers to the test conditions prescribed in 9.12.1 and states that the impedance Z1 shall5 K H* p4 Q5 ?0 [, d, X/ |
not be used.
, e. ?# J8 k9 d9.12.1 refers to the conditions in 9.12.1 to 9.12.12.3 r5 b9 T; \3 ]
9.12.2 and 9.12.7.4 require the test circuits according to figures 5 to 9 together with impedance
) l( v+ t/ T. x% C8 @. [# {4 WZ2 to be used.
- u- w' Q) [' b4 K* kAccording to these figures the following inconsistency appears:* c2 ~ t1 ^9 }6 r6 J$ V
For a single pole switch (with two current paths) normally rated for 230 V, the rated residual/ i9 E2 @5 S/ i6 m) U+ V
making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.
. l! _- W9 w' q' b8 r7 L0 ZFor a two pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking& K% ?. U6 T& V$ j6 x ~; b
capacity has to be tested at 400 V.
2 D0 C2 m, M w9 e. A; B. |2 N" XFor a three pole switch normally rated for 400 V, the rated residual making and breaking
. y2 u1 n$ l- |$ ~capacity has to be tested at 400 V.
* i0 O2 b" s* \1 dFor a three pole switch with four current paths and for a four pole switch normally rated for Z% T O; G* s+ o) L3 j! `! W
400 V, the rated residual making and breaking capacity has to be tested at 230 V.9 P* i) o; c+ j
Due to the fact that the purpose of this test is not to cover the special fault conditions in IT-systems,
+ ]$ _; _, D# _7 W P) ~- Zthe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be
8 n' O7 p: x$ W$ u230 V, independent of the number of poles, and the relevant figures should be corrected.
! Q$ X9 g1 S- y4 j4 j, ^Decision taken at the SC23E WG2 meeting in Nice, October 2001:; s9 `! W- o1 c# v4 k- a
Extract from the minutes IEC SC23E_WG2_006:
) n+ D+ p9 N" n. G+ y* _- }4 r+ ySC23E_WG2_010 request from Austria to update 61008 clause 9.11.2.3% W+ R3 E0 `2 ~, Q, a R- ?8 M
The proposal made by Mr Bachl was considered justified and accepted. During the meeting
3 x5 L* H/ ^' e. E( AWG2 decided that laboratories and certification bodies should be informed about this
* A8 U% G# ]& \$ h' _important decision.: H" h3 t, N5 N
Therefore the following statement was drafted: Y+ M& r r8 g( O3 b
22 @3 `3 V. z" Y! J# u
Decision to be forwarded to CTL:7 Z/ u, G/ `3 z+ _5 {/ z
IEC SC23E WG2 decided to correct the inconsistent test requirement in IEC 61008-1 (1996-12), subclause4 K9 y+ c% }$ q! Q6 v
9.11.2.3 and in IEC 61009-1 (1996-12), subclause 9.12.13 - Verification of the rated residual
" R% ?& ]0 G9 F# S1 ]+ O( {* ?making and breaking capacity IDm.
+ d; p, }/ _4 f3 i: wThe test voltage for this verification of the rated residual making and breaking capacity should be the6 t/ S4 [# G8 p; V; t0 s" c( Y& ^7 ~
line to neutral voltage, independent of the number of poles of the RCCB or RCBO. This correction will% \3 ] _- X/ L, ?2 F/ ~. P
be included in the next amendment or revision of IEC 61008-1 and IEC 61009-1.' o# ]3 K. R& T0 a
The revised test circuit (fig. 7) proposed for the standard is attached.
6 @+ ?. }) Z6 k1 v7 w
; `2 k6 U2 ]' V% M: h
- S* \4 G8 R) t# e' ?' 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
|