Peter,
Here's my two cents ...
Extraneous/non-electrical Conductive Part -
1 A conductive part that is not intended
to be part of ANY electrical circuit
(power or otherwise) of a device.
2. If removed from the device, does not
cause any degradation of electrical performance.
3. Has a high enough conductance so that if energized
with a single mode fault from the lines voltage
for device, would cause current to flow in excess
of 5 mA.
Remove item #3 above for "Extraneous Conductive Part".
On Wed, 17 Mar 1999, Peter E. Perkins wrote:
> I'm involved in a discussion concerning definitions... wot's you
> opinion...
>
> Exposed conductive part: conductive part of equipment, which can be
> touched and which is not normally live, but which can become live when
> basic insulation fails.
>
> Extraneous/non-electrical conductive part: conductive part not
> forming part of the electrical installation and liable to introduce an
> electric potential, generally the electric potential of a local earth.
>
> The issue is with the name of the last definition. Is it clearer
> to call it an 'Extraneous conductive part' or call it a 'Non-electrical
> conductive part'? Why do you prefer one name over the other?
>
> Keep those cards and letters coming, folks... we'll tally the
> votes and let you know how it comes out...
---------
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).
