[email protected] wrote:
>
> Item Subject: cc:Mail Text
>
> Thank you all who responded. I had failed to mention that this printed
> wiring spark-gap has a slot in between the sharp points (electric field
> enhancers to facilitate breakdown) and yes, the solder mask is removed so
> that only bare copper shows. The creepage is fully compliant to table 6 so
> carbon tracking is not an issue (except for excessive high voltage
> transients). I also know that the exact voltage of spark gap operation is
> not fixed as many variables will control that. Now, having clarified that,
> is there an exemption to the clearance rules of table 3 if the spark gap
> could be treated as a pwb component?
Exempted? I don't see how. Any component must follow the
clearance rules. Your spark gap is being used as a specific
component for overvoltage protection. Perhaps I don't fully
understand what you meant.
Couple of comments as I have been reading this thread:
1. I'd be very careful of any dust accumulating in the gap.
One of the reasons why sealed components are preferred.
2. If the ends of this spark gap are sheared with bare copper
exposed, I don't understand why there is a need to remove
copper masking.
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------------
The comments and opinions stated herein are mine alone,
and do not reflect those of my employer.
-------------------------------------------------------
************************************************************
