Actually this looks redundant to me. The 100-115-120/208-220-230-240 can be expressed as 100-120/208-240. This is because the dash character indicates a range and the slash character indicates a selectable value. In quasi boolean fashion, this could be explained as (from 100 to 120) OR (from 208 to 240).
One more point for the sake of clarity, the ±10% tolerance for a range is based on the end limits or a range. In your example above, -10% of 100V thru +10% of 120V and -10% of 208V thru +10% of 240V which translates into 90 thru 132 an 187.2 thru 264. This would not be included on a rating label however. In my experience ±10% is standard operating conditions (SOC) when not otherwise specified. This has been expanded on occasion in product design proposals where the customer has specified +10% / -15% as a preliminary step toward mitigating voltage dips and sags. All the best, doug On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Kunde, Brian <[email protected]> wrote: > Is something like this allowed? > > 100-115-120/208-220-230-240 > > Will a ±10% tolerance always be assumed? If your tolerance was something > different, such as -15%/+10%, does this information have to be on the > device or is the manual good enough? > > The Other Brian > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Woodgate [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 5:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification > > These runes differ in meaning: > > I have seen products rated 85-264V and others rated 100/120/208/230/240. > > 85-264 means any voltage within that range. You could put in 165 V and > expect no problem. > > 100/120/208/230/240 means only those voltages, with whatever the relevant > standard says about tolerances. 165 V would not work for this product. > > With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only > www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England > > Sylvae in aeternum manent. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ralph McDiarmid [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 8:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification > > I don't know, but I suppose it could be addressed by an "abnormal test" to > see if UUT fails in a way which then renders it potentially unsafe by way > of non-compliance with a criterion in the standard. > > I have seen products rated 85-264V and others rated 100/120/208/230/240. > I would expect the first one to pass thermal test criteria at 85V, at > rated power, at highest rated ambient . One corner of the "performance > envelope" if you will. And then, do I test the latter at 100V -10% ? > > And, I don't think that compliance with a standard proves a product safe; > only that it complies with a specific set of criteria. Product safety is > hard to define, much harder to accurately assess, even with use of the > AFMEA and FTA tools, which are subjective so it seems to me. > > Ralph McDiarmid > Product Compliance > Engineering > Solar Business > Schneider Electric > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Nute [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 10:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification > > Supposedly, since the ratings are specified in the standard, they must > involve safety if not done according to the standard. So, what is the > safety issue if the ratings are not in accordance with the standard? What > is the injury? > > What is the safety issue if the applied voltage is less than or more than > the marked ratings but still within the nominal from the electric power > utility? Again, what is the injury? > > Rich > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Woodgate > > [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 9:11 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification > > > > There are in fact two IEC resources, Electropedia, which has all the > > formal definitions produced by TC1 and Glossary, which has a selection > > of terms, culled from many standards, that have not been adopted by > > TC1. > > > > http://www.electropedia.org/?ref=extfooter > > > > http://std.iec.ch/glossary?ref=extfooter > > > > Neither can be comprehensive at one instant, because new terms are > > being added all the time. > > > > With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only > > www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England > > > > Sylvae in aeternum manent. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ralph McDiarmid > > [mailto:Ralph.McDiarmid@SCHNEIDER- > > ELECTRIC.COM] > > Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 4:42 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification > > > > Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated > > voltage” should really be on the technical committees, not academia. > > I know that is some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are > > loosely defined. I wonder if there should be one IEC document, which > > could serve as a reference to all others for terminology. I think > > there is one, but it is likely not comprehensive. > > > > Ralph McDiarmid > > Product Compliance > > Engineering > > Solar Business > > Schneider Electric > > > > > > > > From: Pete Perkins [mailto:00000061f3f32d0c-dmarc- [email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification > > > > All, > > > > Yes, the consultant or safety engineers > > dream/nightmare. We have to realize that the glass is half empty for > > most of the world and we have an ongoing opportunity to strike them > > across the knuckles with a ruler (as the nuns did in primary school) > > and begin the teaching mode. > > > > As PT Barnum (the American circus > > entrepreneur) once said (and quoted often) ‘There is a fool born every > > minute’. > > > > If the technical schools provided all of this detailed > > training we wouldn’t have anything to do. > > > > So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these important > > stories and smile, but not laugh out loud, when you run into the same > > situation again (and again, and again). > > > > Every project and every design team is an opportunity > > to straighten out the world. > > > > :>) br, Pete > > > > Peter E Perkins, PE > > Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant PO Box 23427 > > Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 > > > > 503/452-1201 > > > > mailto:[email protected] > > > > From: john Allen > > [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM > > To: mailto:[email protected] > > Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification > > > > As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also faced at HP > > Bristol in the 1980s when we built peripherals that had to operate > > across the World – and that meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up > > to 240V 50Hz for the UK and a few other places, AND +/- to cope with > > the relevant required local tolerances (and so effectively meant +/- > > 10% across the board). This meant careful selection and testing of > > PSUs and of the ratings to be marked on the end-use products, but > > fortunately most of our products did not have directly mains-powered > > motors. > > > > In practice, if you have a product that does have such motors then it > > may well mean that you need to produce separate models with different > > motors for the geographical areas that operate at the extremes of the > > voltage/frequency ranges – especially those at the lower end thereof > > – or else change the designs to use DC motors supplied from full > > voltage/frequency range- capable PSUs (or, possibly, use AC motors > > rated for the lowest “worst case” voltage/ frequency / tolerance > > combination, but with solid state control systems which ensure that > > those motors are operated within that regime regardless of the actual > > supplied mains voltages/ frequencies/ tolerances?). > > > > OTOH, the latter approaches are probably impracticable in most cases > > for cost /space /weight / technology reasons , and so that means you > > need a “horses for courses” approach. > > > > John E Allen > > W. London, 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 <emc- [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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html > > (including how to unsubscribe) > > 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]> > > > > - > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 <emc- [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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html > > (including how to unsubscribe) > > 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]> > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) 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]> > > ______________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. > ______________________________________________________________________ > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) 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]> > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) 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]> > ________________________________ > > LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential > information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this > by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) > 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]> > -- Douglas E Powell [email protected] http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 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]>
