What IEC 62619 means in the test plan
IEC 62619 is the safety standard for industrial lithium batteries: stationary storage, traction packs outside passenger-car UN 38.3 transport, and many machine and commercial-vehicle programmes.
Unlike UN 38.3 this is not dangerous-goods transport. It is safe behaviour in use and abuse: overcharge, short circuit, thermal abuse, propagation. OEM specs often cite “per IEC 62619” without a clause or acceptance. That is where traceability breaks.
What the plan has to lock
- Clause, not only the standard number. §7.2 is a different set from §8.2. Without a section number the requirement is not auditable.
- DUT level. Cell, module or system. Propagation evidence rarely sits on the same level as the cell overcharge test.
- Protective devices. BMS, fuse, enclosure: what may stay active in the test, what must be bypassed.
- Boundary vs UN 38.3 and OEM. The same physical quantity (temperature, shock) has three profiles in three documents.
UN 38.3 vs IEC 62619 vs OEM — what does not transfer
The same physical quantity is not transferable evidence. Propagation sits only in IEC 62619 and is often the gap.
| Quantity | UN 38.3 | IEC 62619 | Typical OEM | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thermal | T.2 cycles | §7.2.4 Thermal abuse | Own temperature profile | Duplicate campaign |
| Shock | T.4 | Mechanical | Crash / special profile | Different pulses |
| Short circuit | T.5 | §7.2.2 External short | BMS on or off | Protective devices unclear |
| Overcharge | T.7 | §7.2.1 Overcharge | Different SOC | Not transferable |
| Propagation | — | §8.2 | Often pack level | Usually the gap |
Cevelar maps spec sentences to clauses and test cases. Gaps stay orange, not in a footnote. See battery validation before the lab.
Boundary vs the UN 38.3 transport series T.1–T.8. Clause numbers from IEC 62619; exact profiles live in the spec. Cite: cevelar.com/en/standards/iec-62619#un-vs-iec