John - I respectfully disagree that the standards bodies need to do anything. It is the designers that must be aware of the advancements of technology (such as described by Gert) and update their practices accordingly. [Low ESR / High Q caps are a good thing.] While I have no doubt about the potential effects of reaction hazards (I've put two fingers across a circuit calibrated to deliver 3.5 mA at 120V line potential; the infamous Walter Skuggevig apparatus), the safety standards should not be prescriptive.
Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Product Safety Manager Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services San Jose, CA [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: John Allen Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 4:13 AM Gert Thanks for that investigation that I have not had the time for recently! Now, maybe, the standards writing committees will begin to take this issue on board and do something about it as the problem is generally technically trivial to solve - the major issue then being to ensure that the bleeder device is always across the capacitor, and is not isolated from it by a switch or contactor that the operator can put in the "open" position before disconnecting the supply. John Allen ------------------------------------------- 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: Ron Pickard: [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: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
