Dave, I like you motor example. It's one more bit I can add to make my case. I guess I'm resigned to always having to explain this. best, doug
Ha! Age old problem. Just have to explain it as you did. And also for the end product consumer nameplate I don’t put the +-10% rating on the plate. Had a major motor manufacturer recently trying to tell me that the motor they have rated for 230V was OK to run at 208V because it’s good for 230 +-10%. Had to explain to them that I need it to run at 208V – 10%. Crickets on that one. A previous motor from that manufacturer was rated for something like 208V @60Hz but 190V @50Hz and sure enough when tested at 208V + 10% @ 50Hz the windings saturated and drew crazy current.
Likewise have to explain to design engineers that they cannot use a 230V motor in the product rated at 208V and rate the end product at 208V – 0%.
-Dave
From: Doug Powell [mailto:[email protected]]
Hi all,
Has anyone found a good way to explain to non-compliance types the difference between voltage rating and voltage specification? After all these years I still run into this discussion and have not found a good way to clear the air.
A classic example is an open frame AC/DC power supply used to produce the housekeeping voltages within a larger product. In a recent example, the PSU datasheet stated the voltage input range as 85 to 264 VAC. This is great and I really like that specification. However, I also had a design engineer who took those numbers from the datasheet and transcribed them directly to the rating label of his product. As a result the agency engineer wanted to apply the ±10% rule to the rating label voltage and the rating tests were then 76.5 to 290.4 VAC (this was not an ITE product). Note: a little quick math shows that the 264 VAC upper limit of the PSU is actually a result of 240 V plus 10%.
All this seems obvious to me but apparently not to everyone ... and maybe it's me who is just a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
I would be grateful to hear any experiences where explanations were successful and lasting.
--
Douglas E Powell - 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/ For help, send mail to the list administrators: For policy questions, send mail to: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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/ For help, send mail to the list administrators: For policy questions, send mail to: | ||
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification Nyffenegger, Dave
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification Doug Powell
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification john Allen
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specificat... Pete Perkins
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specif... Ralph McDiarmid
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Sp... John Woodgate
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Volta... Richard Nute
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs V... Ralph McDiarmid
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating ... John Woodgate
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating ... Kunde, Brian
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating ... John Woodgate
- Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating ... Brian O'Connell

