Hello John, et al, As the originator of this message string, I have nearly reached the end of my string :-)
My copy of the IEC Standard, IEC 61558-1, 2nd Ed., (2005-09) is titled, "Safety of power transformers, power supplies, reactors and similar products-" My copy of the IEC Standard, IEC 61558-2-17, 1st Ed., (1997-02), is titled, Safety of power transformers, power supply units and similar-" A U.S. Member of TC96 tells me that IEC 61558-2-17 will be withdrawn when IEC 61558-2-16 is published. I've not found verification of that statement, but do rely on his statement until shown otherwise. The TC96 member also told me that the principle difference (increased dielectric strength) between 60950-1 Annex U requirements and 61558-1 Annex K requirements, is that 60950-1 is for equipment rated less than 600 V a.c. and 61558-1 addresses equipment rated less than 1000V V a.c. It appears, that TC96 in their attempt to make 61558 a catch-all standard, by including equipment rated 1000 V a.c. or less, has created a situation in which manufacturers of household goods have difficulties in sourcing compliant parts (so far I've only identified one supplier of tri-insulated wire - who claims Annex K compliance). Seems to me the standard could/should have two voltage levels (less than 600 V a.c. like many other standards for goods used in a consumer segment, and Less than 1000 V a.c. to include those goods used in the industrial segment. I found this mention on the IEC Website: IEC 61558-2-16 Ed. 1.0 E ACDV Safety of power transformers, power supplies, reactors, and similar products - Part 2-16: Particular requirements for switch mode power supplies and transformers for switch mode power supplies I cannot seem to get to the listing of U.S. members of TC96 on the 'public' side of the IEC Site. Can you, as an insider, ferret out this info and send it to me? ThanX and regards, Art Michael A.E. Michael, Dir. of Engineering Product Safety Int'l 166 Congdon St. East Middletown CT 06457-2107 U.S.A. Phone : (860) 344-1651 Fax : (860) 346-9066 Email : [email protected] Website: http://www.safetylink.com ================================ On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, John Woodgate wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, dated Fri, 17 Feb 2006, > John Woodgate <[email protected]> writes > >In message <p06230922c01bf4685e3d@[192.168.1.83]>, dated Fri, 17 Feb > >2006, Nick Williams <[email protected]> writes > >>Noted your later posting, and I will admit to sticking my nose into > >>something I am not properly briefed on, but your comment: > >> > >>At 9:23 pm +0000 17/2/06, John Woodgate wrote: > >>> > >>>Episode 3 is that the section of Part 2 applicable to switch-mode > >>>power supply transformers is section 2-16, which has not yet been > >>>published. > >> > >>sparked my interest. > >> > >>I have, on my desk and in front of me now (yes, I am still at work!), > >>a copy of BS EN 61558-2-17:1998 "Safety of power transformers, power > >>supply units and similar. Particular requirements for transformers for > >>switch mode power supplies". > >> > >>This appears to be somewhat at odds with your Episode 3, and may be > >>useful for your further consideration. > > > >Well, now, someone had better ask TC96 what they are up to, because > >section 16 is: > > > >Safety of power transformers, power supplies, reactors, and similar > >products - Part 2-16: Particular requirements for switch mode power > >supplies and transformers for switch mode power supplies > > > >How confusing can you get? > > > The plot thickens still further. IEC 61558-2-17 does not have ANY > exclusions in its scope, so applies to ALL SMPS transformers. BUT it's > nine years old, and the IEC web site doesn't show any work in progress > to revise it, to bring it into line with the second edition of IEC > 61558-1. > > Another document, not in the public domain, dated July 2005, says this > about a joint project of TC96, TC108 and TC55: > > Action: We are now waiting for the results of the work in TC 55/WG DKE > AK 413.0.1 and 413.0.2. The aim is that we can replace Annex U of IEC > 60950 and Annex K of IEC 61558-1. > > Maybe there is someone involved in IEC TC96 who can throw more light on > the relationship of IEC 61558-2-16 and -2-17, whose scopes seem to > overlap. > -- > OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk > 2006 is YMMVI- Your mileage may vary immoderately. > > John Woodgate > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society > emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ > > To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] > > Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html > > List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > > Scott Douglas [email protected] > Mike Cantwell [email protected] > > For policy questions, send mail to: > > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > David Heald: [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 Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
