Clause 3 – How to understand the definition of “protective extra-low voltage circuit”

protective extra-low voltage circuitportable appliance => portable appliance: earthed circuit operating at safety extra-low voltage which is separated from other circuits by basic insulation and protective screening, double insulation or reinforced insulation
NOTE 1 Protective screening is the separation of circuits from live parts by means of an earthed screen.
NOTE 2 A protective extra-low voltage circuit is also known as a PELV circuit.

The definition of this term mentions earthed circuit operating at extra-low voltage. There is controversy over the understanding of this definition. The first view is that if the secondary circuit of the transformer is directly connected to the protective earthing, the secondary circuit can be determined to be PELV. The second view is that the secondary circuit of the transformer needs to pass through a protective impedance or additional insulation before it can be connected to the protective earthing circuit, which is considered PELV. I personally support the first view.
Let me first introduce how I came to my point of view. In the case of not knowing the intention of the standard, we can indirectly deduce the intention of the standard based on the definition and requirements of a certain concept (PELV) in several versions of the standard. There is no definition of PELV in the third edition of the IEC 60335-1 standard. PELV was added in the fourth edition of the standard. There are two requirements for PELV. The first is the fourth paragraph of 27.1 of the standard, which requires “Safety extra-low voltage circuits shall not be earthed unless they are protective extra-low voltage circuits.” The standard believes that PELV can be grounded (it does not say whether it is directly or indirectly grounded). In the default principle of the entire IEC 60335-1, the external protective earthing circuit is a circuit that is allowable to be touched by the user and is not a circuit that is dangerous for electric shock. Therefore, 27.1 actually has no purpose. The requirement of clause 27.1 is to reduce the earthing requirements of SELV, so the definition of PELV is given. Second, there is a exception for exemption from earthing resistance testing for PELV circuits in 27.5. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that the definition of PELV does not have a practical safety protection function. At the same time, the requirements of clause 22.59 of the sixth edition of the standard are also mainly for transformers with two separate secondary circuits, and some isolation is required between these two secondary circuits.
Here we need to explain that the sixth edition of the standard changed SELV to ELV in the definition of the wording, which is not a relaxation of the requirements. It is correct to change SELV to ELV because the definition of PELV has emphasized that ELV is isolated by double insulation (basic insulation and protective screening, double insulation or reinforced insulation), so there is no need to repeat the requirement of SELV.

Next, let me explain the views of different points of view.
First, the fourth paragraph of 27.1 does not specify how the PELV circuit is grounded. It can be directly grounded or grounded after protective impedance or supplementary insulation. Then, the IEC 60335-1:2020 ED6.0 version added the requirements of clause 22.59, as follows: Protective extra-low voltage circuits shall be separated by at least supplementary insulation from circuits operating at safety extra-low voltage. There are two ways to understand 22.59. One is that SELV has supplementary insulation before grounding to prevent the current on the protective earthing from flowing back into the circuit, causing the risk of electric shock. After all, there is an electric charge on the earth. In some special cases, if the potential of SELV is lower than the potential of the earth, this will form a conductive loop and cause the risk of electric shock. The second situation is that the isolation transformer has two secondary windings, one of which is a SELV circuit, but because it does not comply with clause 8.1.4, it is not allowed to be touched, and the other secondary winding corresponds to PELV, which can be touched. In this way, the purpose of clause 22.59 is to ensure that the two independent secondary windings of the transformer (the two independent windings are PELV and SELV) do not affect each other. According to the first understanding of clause 22.59, combined with the understanding of 27.1 that it cannot be directly grounded, we can conclude that SELV can only be determined as PELV after being grounded through an additional insulation.


What I personally question is whether it is necessary to consider the situation where the current is generated between the external protective earthing circuit and the internal circuit of the appliance due to the influence of the internal circuit of the appliance. In conventional products without SELV or PELV circuits, there is basic insulation between the live parts and the protective earthing circuit. Does the standard believe that this basic insulation can prevent the dangerous current between the protective earthing circuit and the internal live parts? If the answer is yes, then clause 22.59 should require basic insulation instead of additional insulation. Of course, the standard may also increase the requirements for PELV circuits, regardless of the basic anti-electric shock protection rules of class I appliances. According to common sense, the PELV circuit is already a circuit generated by isolation transformer isolation, so why is there an isolation requirement for additional insulation? What kind of electric shock risk is isolated by the additional insulation here?

IECEE has made many decisions on PELV and functional earthing, such as DSH-492, CTL PDSH 2244, CTL-OP 106.
In addition, IECEE decision – DSH-492 has the following two pictures.

To be honest, I don’t understand the meaning and basic principles of these two pictures. I personally think that even if we understand the basic principles of this picture, we cannot make a judgment based on this principle, because this decision is only for the third edition of IEC 60335-1.
In addition, IECEE decision – OSM/HA 75 also mentions the requirements of PELV, and interested readers can read it.
According to the definition of SELV and PELV in IEC 61140 standard:

There is no requirement for earthing failure of PELV, so accordingly, the grounding measures of PELV are considered reliable by the standard.
Note 1: The protective shield is to isolate the circuit from the live parts by means of a grounded shield.
Note 2: The protective extra-low voltage circuit can also be represented by the PELV circuit.

SOURCE: IEC 60050-826 regarding to SELV and PELV as below:

Similar Posts

  • Clause 3 – How to understand the definition of “fixed appliance”

    fixed appliance: appliance that is intended to be used while fastened to a support or while secured in a specific location. The definition emphasizes fastening to a bracket or fixing in a specific position. Generally, we think that this kind of fixation requires some installation actions and some fixing devices, these devices can be fixed…

  • Clause 3 – How to understand the definition of “heating appliance”

    heating appliance: appliance incorporating heating elements but without any motor. Before introducing this definition, we need to briefly introduce the electric heating elements commonly used in household electrical appliances. PTC heating element: PTC (Positive Temperature Coefficient) heating elements are widely used for various heating applications because of their self-regulating properties and safety features. Here are…

  • Clause 3 – How to understand the definition of “non-detachable part”

    non-detachable-part: part that can only be removed or opened with the aid of a tool or a part that fulfils the test of 22.11. The definition of this concept is mainly for the judgment of clause 8 and clause 20, and the judgment of other clauses may also be used. On the appliance, whether any…

  • Clause 3 – How to understand the definition of “self-resetting thermal cut-out”

    self-resetting thermal cut-out: thermal cut-out that automatically restores the current after the relevant part of the appliance has cooled down sufficiently In the definition there is a clear mention, when the temperature is cooled to a certain degree, in fact, its intention is to control the temperature is not too high, when the temperature is…

  • Clause 3 – How to understand the definition of “detachable part”

    detachable part: part that can be removed or opened without the aid of a tool, a part that is removed or opened in accordance with the instructions for use, even if a tool is needed for removal, or a part that does not fulfil the test of 22.11.NOTE 1 If for installation purposes a part…

  • 第 3 項 – 「タイプ X アタッチメント」の定義の理解方法

    タイプXアタッチメント:電源コードの交換が容易な取付方法エントリへの注記 1: 電源コードは特別に用意され、製造元またはそのサービス代理店からのみ入手できる場合があります。特別に用意されたコードには器具の一部が含まれる場合があります。 まず、この定義は電源コード用です。次に、注記によると、コードは製造元またはそのサービス代理店からのみ入手できます。第三に、電源コードの交換が容易な構造であることが挙げられる。注記から、このコードが一般の家電付属品市場で購入できる場合、炊飯器の供給コードであることがわかります 上の図の例に示されているものは、実際にはここで言及されている電源コードに属しません。最後に、電源コードもアプライアンスの一部である場合があります。 Type X のアタッチメントは簡単に交換できる必要があります。以下の図に示すように、 電源コードは極性端子に接続されています。この接続方法は通常のマイナスドライバーで完了します。取り付けが容易なタイプですので、タイプXアタッチメントとして定義できます。同様の理由で、ここでの電源コードの接続が便利でクイックなコネクタを使用して接続されている場合は、タイプ X アタッチメントとして定義することもできますが、この構造はほとんど見られません。セクション 26.2 の最初の文を参照してください。「特別な準備ソフトウェアを備えた機器を除き、タイプ X の取り付け接続を備えた機器および固定配線に接続された機器には、ネジ、ナット、または同様の装置による接続用の端子が提供されなければなりません。接続はハンダ付けで行います。」これは、タイプ X の取り付け接続を完了するために、ネジ、ナット、または同様の接続デバイスを使用できることを意味します。逆に、ネジ、ナット、または同様の接続デバイスを使用して接続を完了する構造は、タイプ X アタッチメントとして定義できます。ここではろう付けについても言及されているので、ろう付けもタイプ X アタッチメントで使用される接続方法であると考える理由がありますが、個人的にはろう付けは簡単な接続方法ではないため、タイプ X アタッチメントとはみなせないと考えています。ろう付けを伴う場合は、ろう付けよりも簡単なはんだ付けを検討しますが、はんだ付けも容易ではないと思いますので、Type Xアタッチメント接続と判断することはお勧めできません。タイプXの付属品は現在では非常に珍しいと言わざるを得ません。技術の向上と材料の最適化により、電源コードの損傷はほとんど発生しなくなり、たとえ電源コードが損傷したとしても、一般のユーザーが自分で修理や交換することは困難です。ほとんどの電気製品はタイプ Y の取り付け構造を採用しています。標準でタイプ X の取り付けを定義したとき、後進技術により多くの電源コードが損傷したため、この安全規則が規定されました。 It has to be said that type X attachment is very rare now. Due to the improvement of technology and the optimization of materials, the damage of…