Richard, I am not familiar with prEN50116 either. However I am confident that with few exceptions UL and CSA procedure holders will find that hipot testing is required. UL controls the hipot tester by manufacturer and model in an Appendix located at the front of each Volume of the procedure. Why they put an Appendix at the front is another question I can't address.
Most EN standards do not have production line hipot requirements; however most holders of TUV licenses have no doubt been informed of production hipot and high current ground continuity testing requirements during their first inspection. NEMKO also has internal requirements requiring production hipot and high current ground tests on many types of products. Their requirements state they will become superceded upon adoption of harmonized CENELEC test requirements, which hopefully is what prEN50116 will be. As far as production line test requirements for holders of CE marking self declaration documents, who knows? As you, I await the group's reception of this note with bated breath. Jeff Lind Compliance West >Recently I have seen some questions in this group regarding hi-pot testing >and IEC1010 and prEN50116. > >I am not familiar with prEN50116 (perhaps someone can enlighten me about >that), but I am familiar with IEC1010 and hi-pot testing. > >In amendment 2 to IEC1010 Annex K changes from Informative to Normative >(becomes required). This Annex describes the routine manufacturing line >testing for products which includes hi-pot testing. I am sure that this >will be added to the harmonized equivalents as well, ANSI/ISA S82.01, CSA >1010.1, EN61010-1, and UL3111-1. > >Also, I believe that hi-pot testing is required by UL as well as CSA in the >majority of their electronic product categories. It may be in the Section >General or in an Appendix rather than in the Section which describes the >product, but I feel sure that UL believes that it is required. > >It would also surprise me if organizations like VDE and TUV don't also feel >that hi-pot testing is a requirement. I believe that we would be doing >hi-pot testing at this company whether it was required by the standard or >not, because we feel it is a good thing to do. > >If my understandings here are not accurate, I am confident that someone >will now let me know. > > >Richard Payne >Tektronix, Inc. >[email protected] > >
