Gents:

 

Why don’t you just measure the entire cycle of the DUT?  Use the long cyclic
measurement and you do not have to show repeatability!!!

 

Regards,

Rodger

 

  _____  

From: Kurt Fischer [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 10:43 AM
To: 'Hall, Ken'; 'Pat Lawler'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 repeatability test

 

Hello,

 

I do not have a copy of the standard so I am relying on memory:

 

1. The 5% repeatability requirement stated in the standard refers to
Instrumentation repeatability and validation (as Ken referred to in his email).

 

2. The problem stated in Pat's email is that the EUT has different measurement
results when measured at different times.

 

It seems that the solution path is to determine why the EUT generates
different LF emissions profiles and determine if these profiles meet the
limits in a reasonable number of cases or trials per the standard. To the best
of my memory, there is no requirement that the repeatability measurements of
the EUT itself be +/- 5%.

 

Regards,

 

Kurt Fischer 


From: Hall, Ken [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 5:53 AM
To: Kurt Fischer; Pat Lawler; [email protected]
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 repeatability test

Hello,

 

We just purchased the York HFG01for Site reproducibility/RoundRobin testing
and use the HPET ( the for cyclic checks. The HP59510A switch box is replaced
by a solid state relay the load resistors are glowcoils.

 

Regards,

 

Ken Hall

 

 

 


  _____  


From: [email protected] on behalf of Kurt Fischer
Sent: Mon 4/19/2004 7:42 PM
To: 'Pat Lawler'; [email protected]
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 repeatability test

 

You should use the same EUT (which must be stable and repeatable). If you
are obtaining drastically different results then you do not know if it is
the EUT or the test setup/instrumentation that is effecting the results.

I would suggest using something like an incandescent light bulb to run the
test and check the repeatability of the instrumentation and test setup.

Just my 2 cents.

Good Luck,

Kurt


From: [email protected]
[ mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Pat Lawler
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 5:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: EN61000-3-2 repeatability test



When the 'Repeatability' clause in EN61000-3-2:2000 (clause 6.3.2.1) is
applied, is the comparison value (reference value) the result from another
test run, or is it the test limit?

For example, the harmonic test limit is 300mA, and the values from two test
runs are 7.4mA and 13mA.

1) If the comparision value is from the other test run:
13mA-7.49mA
-----------*100=42.4%  (failing the test)
  13mA

2) If the comparison value is the test limit:
13mA-7.49mA
-----------*100=1.8%  (passing the test)
   300mA

Method 1 seems overly stringent, but I can't find anything in the standard
covering the method. Is this detail covered in another standard (like
61000-4-7?)
---
Pat Lawler
pat dot lawler at verizon dot net



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



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