Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
An example given in IEC 61283: 3/N/PE 400/230V 50Hz or . . . 3/N/PE 400/230V 50Hz Use of international symbols from IEC 417 is also mentioned. Ralph McDiarmid Product Compliance Engineering Solar Business Schneider Electric -Original Message- From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 10:14 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification There are other meanings for this type of notation; typically three-phase stuff. See IEC60038 where scope is not a component power supply. Brian -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 8:39 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification Yes, that means the product works on the lower voltages and to use it on the higher voltages you have to move a switch. There is an IEC standard: IEC 61293 Marking of electrical equipment with ratings related to electrical supply – Safety requirements 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: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 4:25 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification 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 - 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 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 Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald: __ 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 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 Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald:
Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
There are other meanings for this type of notation; typically three-phase stuff. See IEC60038 where scope is not a component power supply. Brian -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 8:39 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification Yes, that means the product works on the lower voltages and to use it on the higher voltages you have to move a switch. There is an IEC standard: IEC 61293 Marking of electrical equipment with ratings related to electrical supply – Safety requirements 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: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 4:25 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification 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 - 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 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 Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald:
Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
Hi Brian: > Is something like this allowed? > > 100-115-120/208-220-230-240 Unless the applicable standard says otherwise, yes. What is the safety issue (injury) that results from non-compliance with the standard's rules for marking configuration of the input rating? > Will a ±10% tolerance always be assumed? Usually, yes. > 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? Your "tolerance" will be used by the certification house if it is greater than the standard's "tolerance." However, you need not specify the tolerance. The "tolerance" need not be marked on the product; the standard does not require that you specify a tolerance. So, it is your choice to specify a tolerance or not, and where to place a tolerance. Best regards, 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 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 Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald:
Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
Yes, that means the product works on the lower voltages and to use it on the higher voltages you have to move a switch. There is an IEC standard: IEC 61293 Marking of electrical equipment with ratings related to electrical supply – Safety requirements 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: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 4:25 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification 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:jmw1...@btinternet.com] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 5:01 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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:ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com] Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 8:29 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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:ri...@ieee.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 10:51 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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:jmw1...@btinternet.com] > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 9:11 AM > To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc- requ...@ieee.org] > Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM > To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > Subject: Re: [
Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
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:jmw1...@btinternet.com] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 5:01 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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:ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com] Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 8:29 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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:ri...@ieee.org] Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 10:51 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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:jmw1...@btinternet.com] > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 9:11 AM > To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc- requ...@ieee.org] > Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM > To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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. > >
