Hi Mark,

I'll reference TIA-968-B since it is the latest version of the standard.  Under 
section 4.1 Environmental Simulation it states:

Unpackaged approved terminal equipment and approved protective circuitry shall 
comply
with all the criteria specified in this Standard, both prior to and after 
application of the
mechanical and electrical stresses specified in this section.

I think that pretty much says it all.  So after all the mechanical shock and 
surges you cannot fail any of the other criteria.  Hopefully if you are a piece 
of POTS equipment you fail on-hook which would simplify things somewhat.  
Failing off-hook could be tough to pass.  If your equipment suffers 
catastrophic damage it needs to go down benignly with respect to the 
harms-based philosophy of the standard.

Being non-operational cuts out a lot of testing.  You can't fail signal power 
level limitations if you are not outputting any signal for example.

I have not thumbed through Part 68 lately but there may be more detail in 
there.  A member of this list was one of the contributors to TIA-968-B and may 
chime in on this topic.

Dan

From: Mark Gandler [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 2:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PSES] TIA-968-A failure modes, notwithstanding...

Dan,
"Your equipment may fail or be completely destroyed but it cannot take the 
network with it"
this was my understanding as well (regardless of how poorly and senseless the 
standard written), but clearly it is not the sam understanding across the labs.

Are where any guidance, f.a.q's or interpretations documents, articles 
published anywhere regarding this subject?

"After the failure mode the applicable tests are repeated to make sure you 
product does not harm the network even if your product no longer operates."
if the product is completely destroyed, would it be there nothing left to 
repeat the tests with?
Mark

________________________________
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:24:16 -0500
Subject: RE: [PSES] TIA-968-A failure modes, notwithstanding...
Mark,

Your equipment may fail or be completely destroyed but it cannot take the 
network with it.  After the failure mode the applicable tests are repeated to 
make sure you product does not harm the network even if your product no longer 
operates.

Dan

From: Mark Gandler [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [PSES] TIA-968-A failure modes, notwithstanding...

Group,
trying to get to the bottom of the statement some of you saw many times over. 
Test is a power line surge, section 4.2.4 of TIA-968-A. This is a quote:

"Failure Modes resulting from application of power line surge. Approved terminal
equipment and approved protective circuitry shall comply with all the criteria 
in this
standard, both prior to and after the application of the power line surge 
specified in
4.2.4, notwithstanding that this surge may result in partial or total 
destruction of the
equipment under test"

The use of the word "notwithstanding" is quite common throughout this standard. 
Been somewhat late English language acquirer, I looked it up in Merriam-Webster 
and easiest one for me was "in spite of".

There are many different types of surge test pass/failure criteria's throughout 
61000-4, GR1089 and others, from no traffic errors during the surge to it is ok 
if it falls apart, as long as it does not catch on fire and does not kill 
anyone.

But these requirements are clearly defined in each standard.

My question for TIA-968-A is: how can something be compliant with all the 
criteria in this standard "in spite of" been totally destructed? Does it mean 
it is ok if power adapter or power supply is dead or entire product, including 
voice port can be out?

Test Lab did the 2.5kV test, power adapter stopped producing DC, but no arcing, 
burning or enclosure breach. Lab concluded the failure.

I am probably missing something very obvious, so please be gentle.


Thank you,
Mark

-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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]<mailto:[email protected]>>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
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]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
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]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

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]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

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]>

Reply via email to