Hello,
We just purchased the York HFG01, http:
/www.yorkemc.co.uk/instrumentation/hfg01/, for Site
reproducibility/RoundRobin testing and use the HPET (the for A2LA verification
checks) . The HPET consists of:·
Eagle Electric cleat receptacle, medium, keyless, plastic, 660W, 250V,
screw
terminals (part number S752W-SP), quantity 5
· Eagle Electric cone glocoil, 660W, 120V, (part number 415A), quantity
5.
These screw into the above receptacles.
· Light Dimmer, S300, Bright Image
· Solid State Relay, Dayton 5Z948
Bypass switch
Note:59510A switch box is replaced by a solid state relay the load
resistors
are glowcoils.
If interested, I would send the HPET schamatic when I return 5 May.
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
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
