Here's another 2 cents worth. It was my opinion and it still is that one discharges only to the connector shell and surrounding chassis metal. In the act of doing this per the approach suggested below, if there is arc over to the connector pins that causes damage, then this would be a failure as it implies a deficient design.
In no case would I approach the connector with the gun tip such that the distance from the tip to the connector pins is closer than the distance from the tip to the connector shell. This test procedure would suggest that direct discharge to the pins is the objective. However, if the gun tip is equidistant to a pin and the connector shell, I would think this is a fair test. Same goes for if the gun tip approaches the connector shell such that the distance to the shell is less than the distance to a connector pin. Regards, [email protected] ---------- From: mvaldman To: emc-pstc; JFix Subject: RE: IEC 801-3 question List-Post: [email protected] Date: Wednesday, December 04, 1996 11:34AM Hello JC, I started a debate on the emc-pstc about this issue about a year ago. I am not sure if there is a consensus about this issue. Some say: you shouldn't discharge to the pins, they would normally be covered by connector hoods anyway, and if not then the user should be instructed not to touch the pins. Also, it would be technically difficult to have pins of high speed signals ESD protected. Others say: in any case where pins would be exposed, you should test for ESD. My personal view: if some connectors would be normally not covered and there is a good chance they will be touched by the operator, use the commercially available low cost plastic "dust covers" during the test and in the product. This worked OK for us. In most cases it would be very difficult if not impossible to harden high speed pins to ESD. good luck moshe valdman EZRACH COMPUTERS [email protected] 972-3-5496369 972-52-941200
