Thanks for responding Chris
The question boils down to this:
In the second edition of UL61010A-1 (clone of EN61010-1 2nd edition?)
section 6.7.3.1 subsection b-1 (sorry if I have the wrong reference number,
this is by memory - not at work) or section D.5 of the old standard. There
are some provisions for reducing C&C based on filtering.  What I don't
understand is how to determine the reduced transient limit Ut.  Does one
determine Ut by empirical measurement and witness tests or ???
Also, as you have been eluminating, how one would use this clause in a
design relative to high pot etc.
I asked my UL contact and they have never had anyone ask - will get back to
me.
I figure that designers run into this and give up falling back to the
conservative approach.
Without better understanding, that is what I am doing  and will just bite
the bullet putting in double basic isolation.
I see we have generated a good thread - haven't read them yet.
Perhaps there is a gem in there.

Regards

Chris Wells



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris Maxwell" <[email protected]>
To: "Chris Wells" <[email protected]>; "emc-pstc" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 9:05 AM
Subject: RE: IEC61010-1 multiple Overvoltage catagories in one circuit???


> Chris,
>
> The installation overvoltage category is really only defined at the input
to your product.   In my humble opinion, thinking about the “overvoltage
category” of different parts of your circuitry will probably confuse you
more than help you.
>
> It seems to me that you first need to establish what input overvoltage
category your product will be classified as.  Once that is done, you need to
meet all of the safety requirements (hi-pot, creepage, clearance…) for that
overvoltage category.  So, my recommendation is that you consider the input
overvoltage levels that your input will be subjected to and work from there.
>
> What I’m understanding from your message is that you have some substantial
filtering at the input, which will knock down any surges at the input.
Based upon this filtering, it seems that you want to reduce either the
creepage, clearance or insulation requirements for circuits after the  input
filtering.  I think (opinion only) that you will be able to do this to some
extent; but you will really need to be careful in your design.
>
> I have done this in a couple of designs to a limited extent; and this is
what I can tell you:
>
> 1.  You need to consider single faults (of course).  If you are depending
upon a single surge suppressor to knock down the hi-pot voltage; you’re
cooked.  This surge suppressor will be open circuited as a single fault
condition at the lab.  Same thing with a CM choke, it can be short circuited
as a single fault condition.
>
> 2.  In EN 61010-1, you should look through the clauses on “Protective
Impedance”; since this is the closest definition of what you’re trying to
do.
>
> 3.  Remember that suppression devices from line or neutral to safety
ground have limited applicability.  Many labs will not accept MOVs placed
>from line or neutral to safety ground, due to leakage current and aging
problems with MOVs.  You can put a gas tube in series with the MOV.  I have
seen TVS, type devices that are approved for line and/or neutral to ground
applications.  I couldn’t use them.  They were too big for my application,
about the size of a small rodent ☺
>
> 4.  Before you commit to your design.  Identify the "compromised"
locations that have either: tight clearances, insufficient creepage and/or
insufficient insulation.  What would happen if these locations were short
circuited?  Would a hazardous condition arise?  If so, then you have cause
for concern.  One of the tests performed by the lab in order to evaluate
your unit may be to short circuit these locations and see what happens.
>
> 5.  You may need to consider application of an approved conformal coating
by an approved applicator to either a limited section of your board or the
entire board.
>
> 6.  I would recommend cooperating with your chosen lab up front on this
one; because you need to know how they would test your circuit.  This type
of design would require the lab to prove the safety of certain portions of
your design by testing, as opposed to inspection.  As such, this type of
testing brings out subtle differences in how each lab evaluates a test
sample.  An easy way to do this would be to have them review the PCB layout
before you commit to buying boards.
>
> Hope I've helped.
>
> Chris Maxwell
> Design Engineer
> Nettest, Utica, NY
>
>
>
>




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

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://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Reply via email to