[email protected] writes: >Dear All, > >Question 1: Can we rely on the two screws securing the appliance inlet >as a means for bonding? Over the years, I have been told by various >safety agencies that such construction is unacceptable.
Over the years I, too, have been told that the metal part provided as part of the appliance inlet was not acceptable and that I would have to make a specific ground to a specific attachment point, i.e. "the stud". The only explanation I recall is that the screws holding the appliance inlet may loosen (or be loosened) thus inadvertently losing the ground connection, whereas if the earth terminal is taken to a specific point where it is the first or only connection, then you must take a specific and intentional action to disconnect earth from the equipment. And, that first point of earth ground is protected with lockwashers and its own nut. Other grounds may be stacked on top of that, but it must have "its own means of securement". > >Question 2: Am I correct in assuming that the appliance earthing >terminal for the above Listed/Certified products was considered as the >main protective earthing terminal? Yes. > >Question 3: Why do most other ITE manufacturers use the "stud on the >chassis method" for protective earthing terminal? > See my answer to #1. It was easier to give "them" a "stud" and not argue about it. It carries onward to this day. In retrospect, I don't mind it actually. It makes it clear that there is a specific point of earth ground in a system. > > > >PETER S. MERGUERIAN Regards, Scott [email protected] --------- This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected] with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected] (the list administrators).
