In message <[email protected]>, dated Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Doug Kramer <[email protected]> writes:
>The question, which EMC standard applies? > > > >55014 excludes from its scope ?regulating controls and equipment with >regulating controls incorporating semiconductor > >devices with a rated input current of more than 25 A per phase?. Would >this constitute a regulating control? The exclusion is ambiguous: is it the equipment that is rated at over 25 A/phase or the semiconductors? If equipment was meant, there should be commas after 'controls' and 'devices'. You say the heater is switched by a contactor, not a semiconductor device, so CISPR14-1/EN55014-1 and CISPR 14-2/EN 55014-2 would appear to apply. > > > >61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 are for devices under 16A, which the controller >most definitely is such a device, but the complete product is not. > > > >My best judgment is the following: > > > >EN61000-6-1, Immunity tests called out therein: > >61000-4-2, ESD > >61000-4-3, Radiated RF fields > >61000-4-4, electrical fast transients > >61000-4-5, surge > >61000-4-6, conducted RF signals > >61000-4-11, voltage dips and interrupts (which doesn?t apply for >devices over 16A, see above regarding 61000-3-2) > >EN61000-6-3, Emissions tests called out therein: > >61000-3-11, Limitation of voltage changes, voltage fluctuations and >flicker in public low-voltage supply systems - Equipment with rated >current 75 A and subject to conditional connection > >61000-3-12, Limits for harmonic currents produced by equipment >connected to public low-voltage systems with input current > 16 A and >75 A per phase Yes, you could go down that route. With a 42 A single-phase current, you are going to have to specify a REALLY low supply impedance in order to meet 61000-3-11 and -12. > > CISPR 16-2-3, radiated emissions (30MHz-1GHz) > > CISPR 16-2-1, conducted emissions (150kHz-30MHz) > No, these are Basic standards that only define methods of measurement; they do not include limits, so you may USE them in testing but you do not really 'apply' them. > > >That seems rationale to me, but I was still asked the question: > >Would it be appropriate to test the device with the heater disconnected >and treat it as a product only drawing 1A? No, I don't think you would get away with that. -- 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]>
