John,
Way back when, I worked on something similar.  One power cord of sufficient
size could run the whole thing but the cleanup crew had a tendency unplug it
to run the vacuum cleaner.  So redundant cords were put into place, which if
plugged into the same branch circuit, all stopped when the floor buffer over
powered that branch.  Now the cords had to plugged into different branches...
and so on...
 
Fault tolerant and redundant? I took that to mean that any one of the power
cords could be pulled and the system would still run. If so, then a little
musical chairs with the power cords should get them rearranged so the system
never shuts down.
 
If a number of these power cords are meant as parallel connections to reduce
the current per cord then I would say that they are indeed just one cord and
plug all of one parallel set into one LISN.  Quickly you'll see that presents
a challenge in that now there needs to be plug strip to accept these cords. 
The solution is left to the creative lab tech.
Is the 80cm length for the power cord under test only, leaving the other cords
as long as necessary, or it the 80cm for all the power cords. I thought it was
just the one cord (or set of cords) under test.
 
All this just to keep the building wiring from broadcasting the conducted
noise from a system. 


Ken Javor <[email protected]> wrote:

        First a direct response to the question posed, then a challenge to the
premise upon which it is based. The second comment, if legitimate, is more
important than the first.
        
        You could use one dual LISN, or one LISN per current-carrying power
conductor, if you had eighteen different make-before-break switches that would
allow each power cord to draw current either from the LISN power output port,
or the LISN input power side.  If you want to go with eighteen LISNs, I think
it is technically acceptable to stack them, but you want the ground strap to
maintain a lower than 5:1 length-to-width ratio, so that likely means stacking
no more than three high.
        
        But here’s an interesting and likely unwelcome thought, which I invite
other forum members to comment upon. The point of meeting a conducted
emissions requirement is to protect radios operating below 30 MHz that might
be powered from the same branch circuit, or in the case of class A which
likely applies here, operated within some distance of the equipment, but
plugged into a different branch.  If the equipment in your two racks operates
simultaneously, it isn’t obvious to me that you are even allowed different
LISNs – presumably all your rack equipment plugs into the same branch
circuit, which should be represented by a single pair of LISNs.  Immediate
problem solved, but potentially more noise to filter, especially if power
supplies operating off each cord operate at same switching frequencies.
         
        Ken Javor
        
        Phone: (256) 650-5261
        
        
        
________________________________

        From: "Flavin, John" <[email protected]>
        Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 16:40:10 -0400
        To: <[email protected]>
        Conversation: Placement of LISNs for Conducted Emissions Testing to
CISPR22/FCC part 15
        Subject: Placement of LISNs for Conducted Emissions Testing to 
CISPR22/FCC
part 15
        
        
        
        Our company sells ITE systems that are housed in commerial 19" racks. 
The
system is designed to be fault tolerant and redundant, so each rack has two AC
mains cords. 
        
        We do our own EMI certification testing (we're an accreditted lab), and 
our
typical EUT consists of two of these rack, so there are 4 AC Mains cords to
test, which we connect to 4 LISNs.
        
        A modified version of this system is now in the works, where the dual AC
mains cords are replaced by multiple cords (with lower current per cord). The
design now would have 10 AC mains cords out of one rack, and 8 from the other.
This means the two rack EUT would have 18 AC Mains cords to test. 
        
        In a perfect world, where cost were no object, we would have 18 LISNs, 
since
this is the most efficient for testing -- set it up once, and test everything.
        
        Our question is how to place a relatively large number of LISNs and 
satisfy
the standards' requirement of the 80cm spacing of the EUT and LISN.
Specifically:
        
        1) Are we allowed to place LISNs around all sides of the EUT, 
maintaining the
80cm spacing (i.e. have LISNs at the front face of the EUT, and run the mains
cord from the back to the LISN)?
        
        2) Are we allowed to stack LISNs on top of each other, as long as the 
LISN is
bonded to the ground plane? 
        
        Since we have to test each cord in turn, we could reduce the number of 
LISNs
by combining a number of the cords not currently being tested through a second
(or third) LISN. The downside of this is having to re-plug the cords after
each cord is tested, which requires shutting the system down and restarting,
which is a non-trivial task (and takes longer than it does to test one cord).
        
        
        John D. Flavin 
        Teradata TCP Engineering 
        17095 Via del Campo 
        San Diego, CA 92127 
        [email protected] 
        V: (858) 485-3874 
        F: (213) 337-5432 
        - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 




- Bill
You can say what you want about the South, but you never hear of anyone
retiring and moving North!!!

- ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 

Reply via email to