Steve, et al,
So, Steve, why wouldn’t your client support buying the standard since failing
this certification test will cost them more in whatever Plan B is.
Isn’t it the same as at the Red Sox game; you can’t tell the
players without a program (and, oh yes, get the Crackerjacks too).
I’m trying to conjure up a picture of this dielectric test
without seeing either the test or the results.
Dielectric testing wire to wire was successful (at what voltage?) – is the test
voltage 250 Vac or does that just define the needed test voltage (maybe
1500Vac).
Did the not-foil-connected connector rise toward the test voltage during the
test? Did the foil itself rise toward the test voltage during testing?
Once connected, where was the dielectric failure? Was it to the
connector itself or to the foil bring the dielectric voltage to the connector?
There should not be a large enough current from the dielectric
voltage tester to cause the foil connection to fail unless it is not robust
(wot’s your take on robustness of the foil-to-connector interface)?
Could this failure have been expected (as the UL engineer seemed to expect).
Maybe you won’t (or can’t) discuss all of this in this open
forum but, perhaps, you can get more insight into the issue and get it
resolved.
Good luck in working thru this.
:>) br, Pete
Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 1067
Albany, ORe 97321-0413
503/452-1201
IEEE Life Fellow
<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]
From: Bill Owsley <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 1:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PSES] Cable question, or 'foiled' again
I agree. Have found the assembly violated creepage and clearance requirements,
and other construction, setup issues.
On Tuesday, January 21, 2020, 01:49:46 PM EST, Richard Nute <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:
Hi Steve:
I suspect that the test was set up incorrectly, especially since your client
has successfully passed the test in the past, and since UL predicted failure.
I would ask to replicate the test, and examine the test set-up.
Good luck, and best regards,
Rich
Ps: See you at ISPCE!
From: Steve Brody <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 7:47 AM
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [PSES] Cable question, or 'foiled' again
Experts,
I have always been one to tell others that to understand a requirement you need
to read the standard, directive, etc. However in this case I am trying not to
spend $505 for a PDF copy of UL 2238 which I may never use again.
I have a client whose customer is requiring a specific cable be UL approved.
The cable is used for control, not power, and is part of a larger system. The
requirement was for a UL 2238 approval, but no one has been able to tell me why
not use an a less severe standard.
The cable is similar to others that my client has submitted through their UL
approved harness house but this one is failing dielectric testing from the
conductors to the foil shield which is connected to the connector shell.
Conductor to conductor testing was OK. Previous submitted and approved cables
also have the foil shield connected to the connector shell, which would be
normal for EMC.
The cable itself is from a well known manufacturer and carries approvals and is
rated at >300V, and may even be 600V, but I don't have the cable spec at this
time. The connector(s) also carry UL.
Here is the quote from UL via my client:
The shield is foil. UL has failed the cable because we are connecting the
shield to the connector shell . The [UL] engineer actually said that he knew it
would fail the 250VAC test because of this fact, and he only ran the test to
get a data point. He said that this violates a requirement of UL 2238, and if
we cannot change the design then we will need to find a different standard to
apply for. We’re all confused because we’ve submitted other cables for this
project that passed UL 2238 with the shield connected to the connector shell.
Thoughts, comments, but no sticks or stones, please.
Thanks all,
Steve Brody
<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]
C - 603 617 9116
<mailto:[email protected]> [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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.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://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]>
