Talk:DIN rail
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Standard for module size[edit]
Does anybody have a link to the standard DIN rail box sizes / outer envelope / maximum sizes ?
The module size for e.g. circuit breaker modules is described in the DIN 43880 Standard. A brief description of the outer envelope with minimum/maximum dimensions can be found on page 2 of this datasheet (Italtronic modulbox XTS): http://docs-europe.electrocomponents.com/webdocs/139f/0900766b8139f862.pdf
————————— Why is it used ? What is it used for?
I added a section about the module widths, but couldn't find a reliable source for them. The standard module width is 17.5 mm, so a device with a width of 4 modules would be 70 mm wide (4 * 17.5 mm). An enclosure may have space for 20 modules, and if the devices follow the module widths (they usually do, but not always), there's no "wasted space" in the enclosure. The height and depth of a module are definitely also standardized, since most devices have that distinctive "staircase" shape when viewed from the side. All of these measurements are probably in the DIN standard, but I don't want to pay for the standard just to find out... Humpparitari (talk) 11:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
The "types" don't seem standard[edit]
The type names shown in this article are not verifiable outside of particular vendors catalogs. I believe the standard designations are actually DIN 1, DIN 2, DIN 3, etc. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 00:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Omega[edit]
Omega is a manufacturer and that's a more likely source for the name than any reference to a letter. Of course, if there is a source for the name, it should be added.
https://www.omega.com/pptst/DRTB-RAIL.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.92.94.122 (talk) 08:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Cultural and technical significance[edit]
It is notable that such a simple term "DIN rail" is used in many languages as a common term these days, because of the huge influence it had on the electrical box installations. In the old days, you needed a board, drill holes precisely, then make threads in those holes, then ATTEMPT to mount your equipment, such as relays, circuit breakers and such. The holes didn't always fit, the metal waste from the drilling and thread cutting was a mess and the falling and disappearing flathead screws and bolts were a disaster.
Ever since the Din rail became commonplace, nobody bothers with the old installation methods anymore. You just mount the rail (if not already mounted) and plug in everything you need and just do the cabling.
The "DIN rail" had conquered the world by how practical it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.149.115.252 (talk) 18:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)