I agree with Alice on the arrangement of Hi-Pot for new products, but I
think the question was returned products for repair, correct. I read John W's
note with interest, but I also remember a note from Rich Nute about a test he
ran that pretty much pointed out that a simple continuity test served about
the
same purpose. Rich, I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth -- I apologize
in advance if I have. If I remember Rich's much earlier note, he ran the
tests with very few of the original PEC wire strands in place.
Finally all of this brings up an interesting question about the aging of
protective systems. Most of you know that I'm not in favor or writing or even
changing standards just because one can do it, there must be some new problem
that the old standard doesn't address before it should be changed. Having said
all of that, how does the standard address aging of the insulation system,
other than mentioning that the system should be in a well warmed condition
before hi-pot?
Gary
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:
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com
Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
