---------------------- Forwarded by Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US on
01/18/2001 08:07 AM ---------------------------
Robert E. Heller
01/18/2001 08:08 AM
3M Product Safety, St. Paul, MN 55107
76-1-01
EMC Laboratory Fax: 651-778-6252
To: "Doug Best" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. (Document link: Robert E. Heller)
My read on this is if the equipment can be operated (in real life) with the
battery charger attached then it must be tested with the battery charger in
place (this would be worst case configuration).
If it cannot be operated then test the battery charger with the unit not
operating (charge mode only).
I do not believe that you can declare "non-compliance".
For others reading................would it be O.K. to declare in the
operator's manual that the unit must not be operated while charging?
=====================================================================
"Doug Best" <[email protected]> on 01/16/2001 04:17:32 PM
Please respond to "Doug Best" <[email protected]>
To: "Jim Eichner" <[email protected]>
cc: [email protected] (bcc: Robert E.
Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US)
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments.
Agreed Jim,
I just got done testing a portable piece of test equipment that has a AC
power draw of 110W nominally, this equipment has a lead acid battery that
provides battery operation, when the battery is fully charged the equipment
passes class A marginally (10% under the limit worst case), but when the
battery charger is running the AC power draw increases 20 Watts and the
13th
harmonic goes out of spec (8-10% above limit).
My question is, can we specify compliance to the specification when the
battery is suitably charged, and note non-compliance if the first condition
is not meant?
-Doug Best
Compliance Technician
IFR Americas Inc.
Design Engineering
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Eichner [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 13:44
To: 'EMC-PSTC - forum'
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments.
Jim: You wrote "essentially anything will pass now". Oh how I wish that
were true!
The absolute requirements do make it easier for low power equipment to
pass,
but for anything above several hundred watts all bets are off and running
the test can lead to ugly surprises. For example, I recently tested 2
battery chargers to A14: one with approx. 400W draw and the other approx.
800W. The 400W one just barely passes and the 800W one fails miserably.
Smaller bulk filter caps would help, but there's that pesky functionality
thing!
Regards,
Jim Eichner
Sr. Regulatory Compliance Engineer
Mobile Markets
Xantrex Technology Inc.
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.xantrex.com
Any opinions expressed are those of my invisible friend, who really exists.
Honest.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Conrad [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 12:10 PM
To: 'Allan, James'; [email protected]; 'emc-pstc (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments.
Al,
It relaxed the limits for almost all products except ITE, TV's, etc. I do
not remember all the details since I have not had to apply it yet.
Essentially the harmonic current limits are no longer relative based on the
power consumption of the device but based are on absolute values as if the
product was drawing 15A(not sure of this exact #). But essentially
anything will pass now. You can purchase A14 on the IEC web site at
www.iec.ch There is also a 75 watt exemption. Products less that 75
watts automatically comply.
Best regards,
Jim'
Jim Conrad
P.O. Box 25
Hamilton, MA 01936-0025
USA
[email protected]
Phone #: 978-468-3909
FAX #: 978-468-3909
-----Original Message-----
From: Allan, James [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 2:53 PM
To: [email protected]; 'emc-pstc (E-mail)';
'[email protected]'
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments.
In a nutshell how did A14 change 61000-3-2. I don't have a copy of
A14 yet.
Jim Allan
Manager, Engineering Services
Milgo Solutions LLC
1619 N Harrison Parkway
Sunrise, FL, 33323
E-mail [email protected]
Phone (954) 846-3720
Fax (954) 846-5693
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Conrad [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:09 AM
> To: [email protected]; 'emc-pstc (E-mail)'
> Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments.
>
>
> Yes, you can use the A14 for the January 1, 2001 compliance. Just be
sure
> to add 61000-3-2 A14 to your DOC.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jim
>
> Jim Conrad
> P.O. Box 25
> Hamilton, MA 01936-0025
> USA
>
> [email protected]
> Phone #: 978-468-3909
> FAX #: 978-468-3909
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf
> Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 7:43 AM
> To: emc-pstc (E-mail)
> Subject: EN61000-3-2 Amendments.
>
>
> Does anybody know if the amendments made it into EN61000-3-2 for its
> January
> 2001 compliance date?
>
> As a manufacturer of products that only use switch mode power supplies,
> the
> amendments are of great importance to me.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
>
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
> [email protected]
> with the single line:
> unsubscribe emc-pstc
>
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Jim Bacher: [email protected]
> Michael Garretson: [email protected]
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Richard Nute: [email protected]
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
>
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
> [email protected]
> with the single line:
> unsubscribe emc-pstc
>
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Jim Bacher: [email protected]
> Michael Garretson: [email protected]
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Richard Nute: [email protected]
>
-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
[email protected]
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Jim Bacher: [email protected]
Michael Garretson: [email protected]
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: [email protected]
-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
[email protected]
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Jim Bacher: [email protected]
Michael Garretson: [email protected]
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: [email protected]
-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
[email protected]
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Jim Bacher: [email protected]
Michael Garretson: [email protected]
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: [email protected]
-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
[email protected]
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Jim Bacher: [email protected]
Michael Garretson: [email protected]
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: [email protected]
