I once worked with an EMC engineer who measured the performance of himself and his time by the cost of the components that were used in the equipment solely for the purpose of EMC control.
His objective was to reduce the cost of compliance by advising designers of careful layout so as to minimize the need for EMC components. Safety is a bit different because many safety components are also functional components. Nevertheless, a ground wire can be eliminated if double-insulation is employed. In this example, a cost trade-off between the power cord and the extra insulation. But, these days, most primary circuit designs are indeed double-insulated as transformers simply don't use internal shields. Enclosures... only needed for primary circuits and secondary circuits exceeding 30 V. (Yes, you still want an enclosure, but not for safety!) Etc. So, compliance should not cost too much. I look forward to your comments on compliance costing too much. Rich - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]>
