CHANGE REQUEST |
Request identity number: |
C00091 |
Applies to: |
S00389, S00390, S00409, S00410, S00412, S00417, S00418, S00419, S00424, S00425, S00428, S00450, S00451, S00458, S00459, S00460, S00461, S00462, S00463, S00464, S00465, S00466, S00467, S00468, S00469, S00470, S00471, S00472, S00473, S00474, S00475, S00476, S00477, S00478, S00479, S00480, S00481, S00482, S00483, S00484, S00485, S00486, S00487, S00488, S00489, S00490 |
Type of request: |
Editorial |
Request status level: |
Resolved |
Proposal: |
Withdraw the following symbols: S00417, S00418, S00424, S00425, S00468, S00474, S00490
Make the following minor changes:
S00389 and S00390: Add a new application note: An indication of any specific kind of substation may be added inside the symbol, for example: "AC/DC"
S00409: Reduce the diameter of the circle to the half (=M).
S00410: Change the name to read: Line; Duct
S00412: Change the name to read: Manhole for underground chamber.
S00419: Delete "Overground" from the name.
S00428: Delete the right hand side feeder. Delete application note A0100.
S00450, S00451, S00458, S00459: Delete the horizontal line.
S00460, S00461, S00462, S00463, S00464, S00465: Delete the horisontal line.
S00461: Change the name to: "... with sliding shutter" to be in line with IEV.
S00466 to S00490: Reduce the sice of the symbols (the center circle to the half (=M))
|
Reason: |
This is part of the TaskII proposal for Part 11. For reference purposes, see the attached file below.
|
Requested by: |
TC3 Secretary
per-ake.svensson@se.abb.com
TC3 |
General comments: |
|
Comments at evaluation: |
Submitted for evaluation 2002-02-27. Closing for evaluation 2002-04-26. Extension until 2002-04-30.
AT(WGAS): There are a lot of questions in this CR: There is no proposal for the symbols S00481 to S00489. (Comment by the Secretary: Misprint - S00466 to S00480 shold be S00466 to S00490, as sted in the proposal from Task II) S00411 is a symbol without manhole. (Comment: Should be S00412 - it is now corrected.) The symbol with a shutter is S00461, not S00460 (Comment: Yes - it is now corrected). S00468 and S00474 should become reduced in their size and also withdrawn.? (Comment: Yes - since they will still exist in the database and therefore should be in line with the other symbols.) Comments: S00468 and S00474 should not be withdrawn. The circle of all switch symboles should not be reduced in their size. The circles in the symbols S00478, S00479, and S00480 cannot be smaler as they are. (The intent with the proposal from Task II was obviously that symbols to be used on installation diagrams should be as small as possible to fit better to the scale of the background architectural drawing, also in those cases where they are not circular.)
DE(RESC): I agree with a part of the comments from Austria, but nevertheless I also agree to use the normal data base procedure and to comment at the validation stage.
CN(GUTI):I disagree to reduce the size of S00409,S00466 to S00480.
FI(TAVI): I agree partly with comments from Germany and Austria. In principal we e.g. agree with the reduction of proposed symbols for Installation diagrams. IEC 61082 allows the enlargement.
The big problem is that some proposals/modifications are not so clear. I propose that future proposals should be made starting with symbol ID-numbers so that all modifications for one symbol should presented at same document or collected into same place. This principle has been used for IEC 60417 symbol evaluation. See:
http://www.map.tu.chiba-u.ac.jp/IEC/60417/
and e.g.
http://www.map.tu.chiba-u.ac.jp/IEC/60417/wet-shaver.html
(Comment: OK, there is a bit too much in this CR.)
DK(KATH): Too many different things in the same change request is bad, but here are our comments:
S00417 and S00418 we agree to the proposal, but concerning S00424, S00425, S00468, S00474 and S00490 we are not sure. Use the extended procedure.
S00389, S00390, S00409, S00410, S00419, S00428, S00450, S00451 and S00458...S00465 we say yes to the proposals. Use the normal database procedure.
If S00411 is to read as S00412 and S00460 is to read as S00461 we also say yes to use the normal database procedure.
Concerning S00466...S00480 we say use the extended procedure. (As pointed out by FI the diagram rules in IEC 61082 states that installation symbols should be adapted to the scale of the drawing as far as possible, so a change in size in the collection of symbols really does not change the size that should actually be applied. In reality this means that the symbols used would in most cases be smaller than the sizes shown in the database, and it would give better guidance if they were shown in that size. Since the size may be varied for installation symbols, a change in size in the database can not be considered to be a major change and the normal database procedure would be sufficient.)
Conclusion by the Secretary: With the following exceptions the proposal (as corrected) will be submitted for validation.
S00468 and S00474 are not proposed to be withdrawn, since there are a number of objections to this.
Regarding S00490 note that if it is not withdrawn, then it should be changed. The old symbol for inductance in the middle should be replaced by symbol S00583. |
Comments at validation: |
Submitted for validation 2002-05-28.
AT(WGAS): Yes to reduce the size of some Installation symbols, because it is allowed to fit the size to the scale of the architectural drawing.
FI(TAVI): I see no need for S00583 inside of rectangle. S00583 can be used alone as external Auxiliary appara-tus for discharge lamp
FI(TAVI Question: Is it possible to make in the future modifications by mirror page of symbol ID where all the modifications/additions will be presented by strike out and colours??
DE(RESC): I agree to withdraw the proposed symbols except symbol S00468. Here I propose to delete the additional "t" and rename the symbol as " single pole switch".
I do not understand why the name of symbol S00410 should be changed. In my opinion this is still a line in a duct or in a pipe, isn't it?
Regarding the symbols S00466...490 I would like to remember, that IEC 61082 allows to change the size of the used symbols, so why should we change the size in the database? |
Voting at validation: |
AT(WGAS): Yes regarding to the conclusion by the Secretary.
FI(TAVI): Yes with comments by the Secretary and withdrawal of S00490.
DE(RESC): General YES, with regard to my comments.
JP(HIKE): Yes.
DK(KATH): Yes, with our earlier comments in mind.
Conclusion by the Secretary: The proposal is approved and will be implemented, except the reduction of size. Principally, most of the symbols in the group are unnecessarily big, compare e.g. how the symbols are applied in IEC 61082-4, but a problem is that they are not the only ones that are too big among those that are intended for installation diagrams. After discussion with the Chairman we suggest that we should make a general review of the installation symbols and come up with a more comprehensive proposal, and for the time being leave them as they are.
Furthermore, the change of name of S00410, will due to the comment from DE not be carried out. (This is also part of the more general issue of the unclear border between the actual symbol and context shown for understanding. This ought also be the subject for a general revision of the standard.) |
Requested on: |
2002-02-26 |
Evaluated on: |
2002-05-28 |
Resolved on: |
2002-09-09 |
Withdrawn on: |
|
Evaluation closing on: |
2002-04-30 |
Validation closing on: |
2002-07-31 |