And deviates from CISPR 24 which only requires the ½ cycle dip. Still doesn’t answer why ETSI made the change.
Ghery Pettit Intel Corporation From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of SYKES WILLIAM T-WRQ876 Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 1:37 PM To: Monrad Monsen; [email protected] Subject: RE: Clarification on ETSI EN 300 386 v1.4.1 All: I believe the change is to reflect alignment with the base dips/interruptions spec EN/IEC 61000-4-11:2004 Table 1 . "Preferred test level and durations for voltage dips", Class 2, which has both 1/2 and 1 cycle 0% dips. See EN 300 386 v1.4.1 Section 2.1 Normative References [14]. The previous EN 300386 v1.3.2 cited an undated reference for 61000-4-11, but the new one is a dated reference (2004). William T. Sykes Compliance Engineer Motorola Home & Networks Mobility 101 Tournament Drive Horsham, PA 19044 215-323-2619 [email protected] ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Monrad Monsen Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Clarification on ETSI EN 300 386 v1.4.1 I need help in understanding ETSI EN 300 386 v1.4.1 (2008-04). In section 7.2.2.4 (page 26) for "Other than telecommunication centres, AC power ports", the standard gives the requirement for a "voltage dips and short interruptions immunity test" (7.2.2.4.4) stating the following: Residual voltage % 0 Criteria B Cycle 0.5 Residual voltage % 0 Criteria B Cycle 1 Both have the same performance criteria requirement (Criteria B) and both are full voltage interruptions (0%), so the two entries are redundant. Obviously, this is a typographical error. We just need to know which is the actual requirement of the standard. Either the standard wants us to test for a half cycle (10 ms) or for a full cycle (20 ms). In the earlier revision (ETSI EN 300 386 v1.1.3), section 7.2.2.4 required the following voltage interruption test: Voltage reduction % >95 Criteria B Duration ms 10 Did ETSI EN 300 386 v1.4.1 intend to keep the same duration using 0.5 cycle (same as 10ms from the past) so the other entry is the actual error, or did the committee really want to increase the required voltage interruption immunity by testing a full 1.0 cycle (doubles the requirement to 20ms) so the first entry is really the error? Note: ETSI EN 300 386 v1.4.1 is titled "Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio Spectrum Matters (ERM); Telecommunication network equipment; ElectroMagnetic Compatibility (EMC) requirements." The date of withdrawal (dow) or date when this standard revision becomes mandatory in Europe is 31 July 2011. Thank you. -- Monrad L. Monsen Worldwide Compliance Officer Sun Microsystems [email protected] 303.272.9612 Office - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]> - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]> - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]>
