In message <[email protected]>, dated Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Doug Kramer <[email protected]> writes:
>I will not argue that the products in question could and do experience >8kV or more discharges. The question goes back to this; why was it set >at 4kV in 199x? Maybe, depending on how small x is, because no other standards at that time specified 8 kV. >And why does it need to be changed 10+ years later? It appears that it's just for uniformity. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Things can always get better. But that's not the only option. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - 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]>
