May be some confusion here:: There is NO published version of 61000-4-2 that specifies 50 discharges. It may be in CISPR, but not in the IEC basic standard..
There are some amendments to IEC 61000-4-2, but these deal with use of the HCP, identification of "operator accessable points", and testing of double insulated products. Now, there IS an early draft version of a revision of IEC 61000-4-2, which at this stage is a working draft within SC77B WG9. (There was a CD issued, but there have been many, many significant changes to this document, and is far from a version that could be circulated to industry.) This draft does talk about 50 discharges per point; however, I emphisize: THIS IS A WORKING DRAFT --- it is NOT likely to be published as it now stands. Additionally, WG9 met Monday and yesterday (September 10/11) and made many changes to the document and I don't anticipate another CD for several months. Hope this helps. It's always a problem when early drafts of documents begin to circulate. Michael Hopkins Thermo KeyTek Member, SC77B WG9 Convenor, SC77B WG11 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Lawler" <[email protected]> To: "EMC-PSTC" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 8:15 PM Subject: Re: ESD Testing > > I don't have the IEC 61000-4-2 ammendment, but CISPR24:1997 > (Immunity for ITE) does have the phrases > "... a minimum of 50 discharges at each point", > and > "... test points shall receive at least 50 direct contact > discharges." > > Maybe this is what you were thinking about. > --- > Patrick Lawler > [email protected] > > > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:25:49 -0700, "Doug McKean" > <[email protected]> wrote: > >Both are 8kV air discharge, both require performance criteria B, > >but I'd say the current version of 61000-4-2 is more severe. > > > >Doesn't the current IEC 61000-4-2:1995 + A1:1998 version > >require a minimum of 50 hits per test point whereas the 1984 > >version didn't? I don't remember the specifics of the 84 version > >and I don't have any reference to it. > > ------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > [email protected] > with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Michael Garretson: [email protected] > Dave Heald [email protected] > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: [email protected] > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. > ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson: [email protected] Dave Heald [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
