Re: [PSES] MOV failure detection
Fred, While MOVs tend to be messy and TSBs can short both of these devices can fail in an open state as well. Or, the device shorts and a protection fuse may open. At which time the transient device is open, protection it afforded is gone and the equipment continues to operate. This is the undetected fault I am referring to. Any experiences in this situation? Doug Douglas E Powell Independent Compliance Consultant http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 -Original Message- From: FRED TOWNSEND ftowns...@sbcglobal.net Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 18:11:40 To: doug...@gmail.com; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: MOV failure detection Doug I think your assumptions are correct. It's pretty much physical inspection. Specifically MOVs may split open and smoke may escape. Gas protectors usually fall open. Zeners (most semiconductors and carbon protectors) fail short and their no guarantee they won't burn a trace so UL sometimes requires fuses on such devices. Regards, Fred Townsend From: doug...@gmail.com doug...@gmail.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Sent: Sun, September 23, 2012 8:31:19 AM Subject: MOV failure detection Aside from all the regulatory issues of leakage current and nasty failure modes of MOVs. What methods have been used to detect a failed transient suppression device in equipment? Or, is there some expectation the devices will survive a warranty period and that alone is good enough? Seems like any detection schemes would also have a series of regulatory issues and be a significant cost adder to the product. Doug Douglas E Powell Independent Compliance Consultant http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] A curiosity question
All, I have noticed many IEC publications (in PDF) have a series of symbol embedded in varying locations on every page. They consist of string of punctuation marks. This sample string is somewhat randomized but it is representative. -``--`-`,,`,,,`,`,,`,`,,`--,,`-`,`,`,`,,`--- Is this some sort of encoding tied to the order number to validate the purchase of the document? Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Capacitor rating for mains useage
Ken, Even though they may have a DC rating that exceeds the AC Peak of the line. There are more factors. Line rated caps also have surge ratings, typically in the kV range. Derek mentioned the X an Y series and surge is one of the main attributes of this type. I once had an RF engineer conceive the idea of putting the generator's RF returns on the rectified DC bus. He used 1000 V mica caps of about 2200 pF. They did not survive the required IEC surge tests. If the caps you propose are for connection between mains and earth, they must carry an appropriate certification. There are some rugged component tests that certified caps must pass and many standard types are not adequate. There is a reason why line rated caps tend to be physically larger. Finally, from a purely engineering standpoint, a few caps are not AC rated because they have a high dissipation factor and may actually overheat. Doug Douglas E Powell Independent Compliance Consultant http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 -Original Message- From: Derek Walton lfresea...@aol.com Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 22:06:23 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Derek Walton lfresea...@aol.com Subject: Re: [PSES] Capacitor rating for mains useage HI Ken, you don't say how small and it's relative you know :-) Any cap I suggest for across the line use I strongly recommend it has an X rating, a Y rating if it goes between power and earth. Is this what you were meaning? Cheers, Derek. -Original Message- From: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com To: emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Fri, Aug 31, 2012 5:58 pm Subject: Capacitor rating for mains useage Forum members, Am trying to spec out some small value capacitors to be placed across unrectified mains potentials. These caps are rated at dc potentials way beyond the peak of the ac bus potential, but they carry no ac rating. What are the issues here? The cap should not breakdown at ac mains potential, so what information does an ac rating provide? Is it related to surge potentials that can appear on ac mains? Thank you and happy Labor Day to those members are the west side of the Pond. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] another cell phone battery
Blazing Saddles 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Light Bulb provokquium
Personal opinion only... Make the alternative bulbs economically competitive and dump the legislation. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On 8/24/12, Pearson, John john.pear...@polycom.com wrote: Hi Any opinions on this? http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/skirting-eu-law-the-rebranding-of-incandescent-bulbs-as-heat-balls Do the members feel that the legislation is working or is it counterproductive in respect of ecological aims not just from energy saving from cradle to grave (including manufacture and hazardous material). And what about the claim that the lost heat in colder climes needs to be replaced with other sources. John - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Light Bulb provokquium
CFLs do have a dirty little secret with regard to the environment. They increase the amount of mercury in the landfill. Most countries have an exemption for this in their waste products legislation. -doug On 8/24/12, Pearson, John john.pear...@polycom.com wrote: Hi John Thanks My thinking is it isn't just price $'wise but also price to the environment in both material and energy? JohnP -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate Sent: 24 August 2012 16:25 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Light Bulb provokquium In message CAByvTVPDdQ343GbF8=AxXZSgajd7cvH1Q=P2zp98Q+QHAD-=c...@mail.gmail.com, dated Fri, 24 Aug 2012, Doug Powell doug...@gmail.com writes: Make the alternative bulbs economically competitive and dump the legislation. Chicken and egg; the industry wouldn't have spend a lot of RD $$$ on CFLs and LED lamps if the ban hadn't been introduced. Prices are coming down, but not equal yet. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Instead of saying that the government is doing too little, too late or too much, too early, say they've got is exactly right, thus throwing them into total confusion. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Light Bulb provokquium
Very true, all new inventions do cost more at first. That's why investors were invented. Now a few companies have learned how to get various legal entities to mandate their products find a market. -doug On 8/24/12, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote: The EMC Compliance screen room has less than optimal HVAC, and in the winter all the light fixtures are fitted with 100 Watt incandescents for their heating value. These are now illegal in the USA, but EMCC has a ³stash² that should last longer than its proprietor. In the summer months, all but one or two incandescents are replaced with CFLs to limit heat generation in the room. The CFLs are turned off during RE scans in frequency ranges where they compromise the ambient. Both the EU and the USA made command economy decisions in banning incandescents. I totally disagree that such market interventions were necessary. I myself have installed CFLS in areas of our home where I deem them to make sense on the basis of saving electricity (NOT saving the planet). Mainly my concern was limiting heat dissipation, because in our climate, shedding heat is more important for more of the year than generating it. All new inventions start out expensive and then as the initial investment is paid off and volume picks up, costs decrease and prices with it, and eventually, totally without any command economy market interventions, alternative light bulbs will become cost-competitive with incandescents, when product life and energy usage is taken into account. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Pearson, John john.pear...@polycom.com Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 15:27:04 +0100 To: emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org Conversation: Light Bulb provokquium Subject: Light Bulb provokquium Hi Any opinions on this? http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/skirting-eu-law-the-rebranding -of-incandescent-bulbs-as-heat-balls Do the members feel that the legislation is working or is it counterproductive in respect of ecological aims not just from energy saving from cradle to grave (including manufacture and hazardous material). And what about the claim that the lost heat in colder climes needs to be replaced with other sources. John - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim
Re: [PSES] EC vs EU suffix
And the CE mark, what happens to it? CE = Communauté Européenne -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On 8/16/12, peter_kelle...@dell.com peter_kelle...@dell.com wrote: EU = European Union EC = European Community The Treaty of Lisbon which came into force in in December 2009 provided for the absorption of the entity known as the European Community by the European Union. Regards Peter. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Scott Xe Sent: 16 August 2012 15:37 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: EC vs EU suffix The EU regulations/decisions/directives published after 2010 have a suffix of EU rather than EC. Is there any particular reason for this change? Scott - 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-p...@ieee.orgmailto:emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.commailto:dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] EC vs EU suffix
That plus all these have been used at one time or another: Communauté Européenne Comunidad Europea Comunidade Europeia Comunità Europea Conformité Européenne On 8/16/12, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com wrote: Conformité Européenne -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Doug Powell Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 2:30 PM To: peter_kelle...@dell.com Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EC vs EU suffix And the CE mark, what happens to it? CE = Communauté Européenne -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On 8/16/12, peter_kelle...@dell.com peter_kelle...@dell.com wrote: EU = European Union EC = European Community The Treaty of Lisbon which came into force in in December 2009 provided for the absorption of the entity known as the European Community by the European Union. Regards Peter. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Scott Xe Sent: 16 August 2012 15:37 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: EC vs EU suffix The EU regulations/decisions/directives published after 2010 have a suffix of EU rather than EC. Is there any particular reason for this change? Scott - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] EC vs EU suffix
Thanks, That explains a lot of things... On 8/16/12, Crane, Lauren lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com wrote: The CE marking remains the same. The meaning is 'Caveat Emptor' ;-) Regards, Lauren Crane KLA-Tencor -Original Message- From: Brian Oconnell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 2:44 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EC vs EU suffix Conformité Européenne -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Doug Powell Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 2:30 PM To: peter_kelle...@dell.com Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EC vs EU suffix And the CE mark, what happens to it? CE = Communauté Européenne -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On 8/16/12, peter_kelle...@dell.com peter_kelle...@dell.com wrote: EU = European Union EC = European Community The Treaty of Lisbon which came into force in in December 2009 provided for the absorption of the entity known as the European Community by the European Union. Regards Peter. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Scott Xe Sent: 16 August 2012 15:37 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: EC vs EU suffix The EU regulations/decisions/directives published after 2010 have a suffix of EU rather than EC. Is there any particular reason for this change? Scott - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] Ignition sources and exposure time
Maybe I should have saved this for a Friday question, but here goes. This is a general question regarding ignition sources and exposure time. In reviewing the flammability (UL 94) tests and the hot wire ignition (UL 746) tests, it seems 30 seconds is the magic number for igniting the sample being evaluated. I want to turn this premise around the other way to look at the source itself. Can it be said that if ignition is exposed to an arbitrary material for less than 30 seconds, it is no longer a source of ignition? In general I think not, as many materials are capable of ignition with less than 30 seconds exposure. So how about an ignition source of say 1 second? Still possible, if there is enough energy available to transfer to the ignitable material. How about 100 microseconds? Like an electric spark or possibly a sudden explosion? I realize ATEX understands the concept of flameproof enclosures for explosive atmospheres, but what if I have an explosion occur in a non-explosive atmosphere? Is the enclosure material required to be flame proof or is it only evaluated for mechanical strength? It also seems this line of questioning could lead down a path of time vs. energy. For example the UL 94 test is a 30 second exposure to a 50W flame. Would a 15 second 100W flame be equivalent? This might even be converted into watt-seconds and Joules. Any advice or even opinions are welcomed. -Doug -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Ignition sources and exposure time
John, Your point is well taken. As a child, I recall running my fingers through a candle flame. If you move fast enough, you do not absorb feel the heat of the flame. So it seems to me that the true definition of ignition would be something like a cirmstance where a source of ignition is sustained long enough against a material to be absorbed and raise its temperature to the point where it begins to combust. The UL 94 test has standardized the available energy and time taken to ignite a sample, and samples can then be evaluated in comparison to other materials. Conversely, it seems possible to use a standardized ignitable material to evaluate ignition sources. And this has been done to some extent in IEC 610101-1 section 9.2 Eliminating or reducing the sources of ignition within the equipment and 9.4 Limited-energy circuits. But the aspect of time is not considered in either case, only magnitude. So far what I see in the standards is the approach to identify long-term (greater than 30 seconds) sources of ignition or already burning materials when evaluating the spread of fire. In the end, I suppose my question could be phrased, Aside from the rapid and devastating mechanical effects of an explosion, is it possible or even likely to start a fire with something like UL 94 HB material, simply with an explosion? And if so, Is the use of UL 94 HB enclosure material enough, even if it does not have direct contact with non-energy limited circuits? (double negative, I know...) More comments? -doug On 8/15/12, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote: In message cabyvtvny1rjvr5g8moofwhm43wpbooszi0yrefkimxx6dvg...@mail.gmail.com, dated Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Doug Powell doug...@gmail.com writes: For example the UL 94 test is a 30 second exposure to a 50W flame. Would a 15 second 100W flame be equivalent? Sometimes, sometimes not. It depends on what the heat does to the material. I know of three effects, but there may be more: 1. The material itself oxidizes rapidly with energy release, so may be said to 'burst into flames'. Thin natural textiles may do this (but wool is type 3). 2. The material rapidly decomposes with release of oxygen, so 'instantaneously combusts'. Cellulose nitrate (Celluloid) is an example. 3. The material has to heat up a lot before it begins to decompose and release combustible gases. ABS plastic is an example, so is wood. Clearly, time of exposure matters. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Instead of saying that the government is doing too little, too late or too much, too early, say they've got is exactly right, thus throwing them into total confusion. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS in IEC 61010:2010
All, It has been nearly four weeks since I posted this question and I am a bit surprised. Usually this forum has any number of people willing to discuss a wide variety of topics, if only to render an opinion. So far there are no takers. I'd appreciate it if anyone can help. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Jul 3, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Doug Powell doug...@gmail.comwrote: Greetings all, I would like someone to verify my thoughts in IEC 61010-1:2010 section 16.2 d) Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS. This clause is a bit obscure (possibly incomplete) and to be honest makes no sense in the ways I have seen it used so far. This new section 16 is all about ergonomics and here we are suddenly we are referencing “terminals” again. In the Standard and in the TRF rev. H, the word TERMINALS is printed in the font small caps Arial, which indicates it has an official definition in the balloted portion of the standard. IEC 61010-1 section 3.2.1 defines TERMINAL as a “component provided for the connection of a device to external conductors”. My feeling is this subject is very well covered in sections 5, 6, 10 and Annex F and a reference is ergonomics seems out of place. Ergonomics has to do with hazards related to long term exposure of repetitive motions and activities. Therefore, this cannot be about a one-time or very infrequent task of installing of a wiring terminal which is hardly enough for repetitive stress injury. Note: There is no such thing as an ergonomics emergency. For the sake of clarification, the note in section 16 refers to these standards: EN 894-2, -3, ISO 9241, and SEMI S8. After re-reading each of these standards, I found “terminals” are always referring to Visual Display Terminals (VDTs); either CRT or flat panel types and with or without active touch surfaces. So I must conclude, in the section 16 of IEC 61010-1 “terminal” is about visual displays. Therefore, the test report form responses to “arrangement of terminals” should be along the lines of viewing angles, heights, or N/A. Is this the consensus? -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS in IEC 61010:2010
Brian and Doug, Thanks for the reply. My assertion is that 61010-1 section 16 is titled Hazards resulting from application and section 16.2 is Ergonomics aspects, which I read as possibly repetitive stress syndrome. Therefore the section 3 definition for terminal, defined as the connection to external conductors, is not applicable. The only way a wiring terminal is likely to induce an ergonomic hazard is if the operator is required to operate the wiring terminals of the product multiple times every day. In my view, this can only occur in the orignal manufacturer factory where the product was originally assembled. While safety of OEM operators is indeed a workplace concern, it is not within the scope of this product safety standard. Therefore, I felt the word terminal should have been something like video display terminal, which does have ergonomic implications based on visual and reach considerations if it is a touch screen. Thoughts?? -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On 7/30/12, Doug Nix d...@mac.com wrote: Brian Understood, but that is not the context given in IEC 61010-1, based on the definition provided. I'm basing it on the definition you provided in your original query. Doug On 30-July-2012, at 12:54, Brian Oconnell wrote: Doug, Your analysis is logical and could be used in the Technical File. But the HMI meaning of a 'terminal' as a data display is previously listed in item 'b', so the TC's intent is not clear and could also be interpreted to indicate the affected electrical connector. There are ergonomic considerations for electrical connections routinely performed by the end-user that should be considered as part of risk mitigation for electrical hazards. Try to find existing CB reports to see how CABs are interpreting this mess that is called 61010-1. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Doug Powell Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 7:59 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org; EMC-PSTC@listserv.ieee.org Subject: Re: Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS in IEC 61010:2010 All, It has been nearly four weeks since I posted this question and I am a bit surprised. Usually this forum has any number of people willing to discuss a wide variety of topics, if only to render an opinion. So far there are no takers. I'd appreciate it if anyone can help. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Jul 3, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Doug Powell doug...@gmail.comwrote: Greetings all, I would like someone to verify my thoughts in IEC 61010-1:2010 section 16.2 d) Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS. This clause is a bit obscure (possibly incomplete) and to be honest makes no sense in the ways I have seen it used so far. This new section 16 is all about ergonomics and here we are suddenly we are referencing “terminals” again. In the Standard and in the TRF rev. H, the word TERMINALS is printed in the font small caps Arial, which indicates it has an official definition in the balloted portion of the standard. IEC 61010-1 section 3.2.1 defines TERMINAL as a “component provided for the connection of a device to external conductors”. My feeling is this subject is very well covered in sections 5, 6, 10 and Annex F and a reference is ergonomics seems out of place. Ergonomics has to do with hazards related to long term exposure of repetitive motions and activities. Therefore, this cannot be about a one-time or very infrequent task of installing of a wiring terminal which is hardly enough for repetitive stress injury. Note: There is no such thing as an ergonomics emergency. For the sake of clarification, the note in section 16 refers to these standards: EN 894-2, -3, ISO 9241, and SEMI S8. After re-reading each of these standards, I found “terminals” are always referring to Visual Display Terminals (VDTs); either CRT or flat panel types and with or without active touch surfaces. So I must conclude, in the section 16 of IEC 61010-1 “terminal” is about visual displays. Therefore, the test report form responses to “arrangement of terminals” should be along the lines of viewing angles, heights, or N/A. Is this the consensus? -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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
Re: [PSES] Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS in IEC 61010:2010
Richard, As it turns out, I have some direct experience with the handful of standards referenced in this section. In addition, I feel the topic of wiring terminals is more than adequately covered in several other sections of the standard. It is these two factors that first got my attention and why I am so surprised that there is such a strong interpretive bias toward electrical wiring terminals in a section on ergonomics (sorry for the use of the term bias, I do not have any other way to express what I am trying to convey). Today, many modern devices within the scope of 61010-1 have digital user interface displays: VFDs, LCDs, LED, and so on. Although the word terminal may seem ambiguous to me in this context, I nevertheless feel this is a valid topic which had been overlooked in 61010-1 until now. Possibly this is a first attempt by the committee to correct this. I may very well attempt to contact the US subcommittee directly and then go on from there. Doug Douglas E Powell Independent Compliance Consultant http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Douglas E Powell Compliance Engineering and Consulting http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 -Original Message- From: Payne, Richard richard.pa...@tektronix.com Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:27:38 To: Doug Powelldoug...@gmail.com; Doug Nixd...@mac.com Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGEMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS in IEC 61010:2010 Hi Doug: Only time for a short response, sorry about that. I believe that Terminals refers to the connectors as defined in the standard. After spending much time reviewing the 3rd edition, I believe that the ergonomics section is referring to what happens that could cause a hazard based on the ergonomic design of the connectors (Terminals) and controls. Note that misuse is more prominently addressed in this version. What happens if a binding post terminal with a loose strand is so close to another terminal that the user contacts the loose strand while trying to connect to the adjacent terminal ? What happens if two controls are so close together that a user could easily, inadvertently, press one instead of the other ? Could these actions result in a hazard ? Admittedly many common designs would not allow such things to present a hazard to the user. But, remember that the standard is written to cover a variety of types of products and differing designs. If there is no possibility of a hazard, just note that in the risk assessment. Note - ergonomics does not just refer to repetitive motion injuries. One definition I found from a website states: The study of designing equipment and devices that fit the human body, its movements and its cognitive abilities. Richard Payne Tektronix, Inc. Product Safety Engineering V: (503) 627-1820 F: (503) 627-3838 E: richard.pa...@tektronix.com -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Doug Powell Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:36 AM To: Doug Nix Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS in IEC 61010:2010 Brian and Doug, Thanks for the reply. My assertion is that 61010-1 section 16 is titled Hazards resulting from application and section 16.2 is Ergonomics aspects, which I read as possibly repetitive stress syndrome. Therefore the section 3 definition for terminal, defined as the connection to external conductors, is not applicable. The only way a wiring terminal is likely to induce an ergonomic hazard is if the operator is required to operate the wiring terminals of the product multiple times every day. In my view, this can only occur in the orignal manufacturer factory where the product was originally assembled. While safety of OEM operators is indeed a workplace concern, it is not within the scope of this product safety standard. Therefore, I felt the word terminal should have been something like video display terminal, which does have ergonomic implications based on visual and reach considerations if it is a touch screen. Thoughts?? -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On 7/30/12, Doug Nix d...@mac.com wrote: Brian Understood, but that is not the context given in IEC 61010-1, based on the definition provided. I'm basing it on the definition you provided in your original query. Doug On 30-July-2012, at 12:54, Brian Oconnell wrote: Doug, Your analysis is logical and could be used in the Technical File. But the HMI meaning of a 'terminal' as a data display is previously listed in item 'b', so the TC's intent is not clear and could also be interpreted to indicate the affected electrical connector. There are ergonomic considerations for electrical connections routinely performed by the end-user that should be considered as part of risk mitigation for electrical hazards. Try to find existing CB
[PSES] IEC 61010-1:2010 section 5.4.4
I'm curious, Why is this paragraph added near the end of the section? *If equipment conforming to IEC 60950 is used with equipment conforming to this standard, and if there is a HAZARD due to moisture or liquids, the instructions for use shall specify any additional precautions necessary.* Seems like there must be a story behind this that needs to be told. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Original Signed Reports Versus Digital Scanned Reports for EMC Technical Files
Monrad, I am not aware of any need to save hard copy reports, especially after enough time has elapsed. Document retention in the EU for liability directive is still 10 years (you might double check that). Otherwise, I have been doing electronic submittals (of safety reports) to my certifiers for more than 10 years. I see no need to subsequently print these simply for archival purposes. Doug Douglas E Powell Compliance Engineering and Consulting http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 -Original Message- From: Monrad Monsen monrad.mon...@oracle.com Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 17:31:55 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Monrad Monsen monrad.mon...@oracle.com Subject: [PSES] Original Signed Reports Versus Digital Scanned Reports for EMC Technical Files We have EMC lab currently files and saves the original signature documents for every test report. However, we retain the electronic scan copy version of the reports which are backed up and have disaster recovery procedures in place for off-site storage. We would like to stop saving the paper copies and just rely on the electronic scanned copy reports. If we have a scanned electronic copy of the test reports, is there any need to have the original signed paper version? Are there any countries or agencies that require us to have the original signed paper versions on hand? Thanks. Monrad Monsen +1.303.272.9612 Office - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] ELF
Being as he said no interest in E-Fields, I imagine it's about human exposure limits. And as always, it depends on where which jurisdiction is making requirements. Doug Douglas E Powell Compliance Engineering and Consulting http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 -Original Message- From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 17:35:22 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: [PSES] ELF In message 20120707091554.589bc...@resin04.mta.everyone.net, dated Sat, 7 Jul 2012, Macy m...@basicisp.net writes: Need table that shows recommended limits up to 1MHz. EMC or human exposure limits? In any case, the EMC limits are not the same for all products. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Instead of saying that the government is doing too little, too late or too much, too early, say they've got is exactly right, thus throwing them into total confusion. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS in IEC 61010:2010
Greetings all, I would like someone to verify my thoughts in IEC 61010-1:2010 section 16.2 d) Ergonomics Aspects - arrangement of TERMINALS. This clause is a bit obscure (possibly incomplete) and to be honest makes no sense in the ways I have seen it used so far. This new section 16 is all about ergonomics and here we are suddenly we are referencing “terminals” again. In the Standard and in the TRF rev. H, the word TERMINALS is printed in the font small caps Arial, which indicates it has an official definition in the balloted portion of the standard. IEC 61010-1 section 3.2.1 defines TERMINAL as a “component provided for the connection of a device to external conductors”. My feeling is this subject is very well covered in sections 5, 6, 10 and Annex F and a reference is ergonomics seems out of place. Ergonomics has to do with hazards related to long term exposure of repetitive motions and activities. Therefore, this cannot be about a one-time or very infrequent task of installing of a wiring terminal which is hardly enough for repetitive stress injury. Note: There is no such thing as an ergonomics emergency. For the sake of clarification, the note in section 16 refers to these standards: EN 894-2, -3, ISO 9241, and SEMI S8. After re-reading each of these standards, I found “terminals” are always referring to Visual Display Terminals (VDTs); either CRT or flat panel types and with or without active touch surfaces. So I must conclude, in the section 16 of IEC 61010-1 “terminal” is about visual displays. Therefore, the test report form responses to “arrangement of terminals” should be along the lines of viewing angles, heights, or N/A. Is this the consensus? -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] OSHA - NRTL audit question
Brian, NRTLs are under to oversight of OSHA, although I was not aware they would do field surveys like this. See: http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/ -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.comwrote: Was at an NRTL/CAB site yesterday. Noted a small group lurking - assessment engineer said they were part of an OSHA audit team. I recognized one member of the audit team from another NRTL down the road. Does the U.S. OSHA use NRTLs to audit each 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] IEC 61010-1 6.7.1.4
This is my Friday Question: What exactly is the point of IEC 61010-1:2010 section 6.7.1.4? It mentions requirements depend on factors in 6.7.1.1 a) to d), which by the way is true for all insulation, then provides a four paragraph tutorial on types of construction, electric strength, gaps, voids, and cumulative damage. No requirements for construction, examination, or testing are actually given in this section of the standard. However, the TRF Rev H does have one requirement for thickness of insulation based on section 6.7.1.1 a) to d) which in turn describes voltage and overvoltage stresses, and there is a parenthetical reference to Table K.9. Table K.9 has very nice table for minimum thickness of molded and potted parts. Except that Annex K is really about equipment in extended environments (2000 meters, O.V. Cat III and IV, etc.). The Standard and TRF apparently fall back on the old methods taken from IEC 60950 of 0.4 mm minimum thickness for ≤ 300V insulation and expands the table a bit with two more rows for 300V to 600V and 600V to 1000V. Additionally, this requirement is apparently for mains only and falls far short for dealing with high voltage secondaries. In addition, there are no other guidance or requirements given for the other concerns mentioned in the tutorial portion of this clause. I could go to the wealth of information provided to the committee in IEC 60664-1 and IEC 60664-3, but in the interest of time and space I won't do that now. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] EN 60950-1 INaccessible parts
Gert, It would seem a motherboard is SELV circuitry and not subject to functional spacings or a dielectric test. Or am I misunderstanding your application? Doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 11:26:45 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 60950-1 INaccessible parts Hi Kevin, Thanks, This means that for a PC (secondary GND is Earthed) all SECONDARY circuits not GND must meet 1. functional clearance and creepage to GND as per table 2M and or 2N, or 2. withstand the 500 Vac (or higher) dielectrical test, or 3. be short circuit safe as in 5.3.4c 1 and 2 will probably fail on a motherboard, on many places... How compliance will be achieved there ? Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen, BSc g.grem...@cetest.nl mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl www.cetest.nl Kiotoweg 363 3047 BG Rotterdam T 31(0)104152426 F 31(0)104154953 Van: Kevin Richardson [mailto:kevin.richard...@ieee.org] Verzonden: Thursday, May 31, 2012 11:11 AM Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Onderwerp: RE: [PSES] EN 60950-1 INaccessible parts Hi Gert, Remember that clause 5.3.4 deals with 'functional insulation' only. It talks about the insulation between a SECONDARY CIRCUIT and an 'inaccessible' conductive part that is earthed for functional reasons. There needs to be some insulation where the inaccessible conductive part is earthed. If this were an earthed 'accessible' conductive part it certainly cannot be just 'functional' insulation between it and a SECONDARY CIRCUIT. In terms of 5.3.4 c), as I understand it, clause 5.3.4 gives you a choice of how to meet the functional insulation requirement, i.e. either a) or b) or c). Option c) can be chosen if it is likely that if by short-circuiting the SECONDARY CIRCUIT to an inaccessible conductive part either overheating or thermal damage may occur as per the two dot points in 5.3.4 c), then you can choose option c). If you so choose option c) then clause 5.3.9 details the criteria to determine compliance with 5.3.4 c). Best regards, Kevin Richardson Stanimore Pty Limited Compliance Advice Solutions for Technology (Legislation/Regulations/Standards/Australian Agent Services) Ph: 02-4329-4070 (Int'l: +61-2-4329-4070) Fax: 02-4328-5639 (Int'l: +61-2-4328-5639) Mobile: 04-1224-1620 (Int'l: +61-4-1224-1620) Email:kevin.richard...@stanimore.comor kevin.richard...@ieee.org URL: www.stanimore.com Confidentiality This material (this email including all attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information intended to be read or used by the addressees only. If you are not one of the intended recipients or you have received this material in error, any copying, disclosure, distribution, use of or reliance upon this material is prohibited. Please immediately notify Stanimore Pty Limited and delete/destroy all copies (electronic and hardcopy) of this email and all attachments. While the sender tries to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this material, Stanimore take no responsibility for any actions taken as a result of receiving this material or for any consequence of its use. From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen [mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl] Sent: Thursday, 31 May 2012 5:43 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] EN 60950-1 INaccessible parts Anyone aware of what seems as a typo to me in EN 60950-1:2006 in par 5.3.4 it say that clearance and creepage distances for functional isolation must be respected for INaccessible parts ... Whats the sense of guarding the isolation to not accessible parts At the same time, anyone understands what means 5.3.4c they are short-circuited when a short circuit could cause.. well, that seems evident, sounds like green grass to me: a pleonasm thus. Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen, BSc g.grem...@cetest.nl mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl www.cetest.nl - 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-p...@ieee.org 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
[PSES] Off the shelf or brick smps
My question for today. What is the typical test setup for radiated EMC measurements of general purpose off the shelf switching power supply; is the resistor test load tightly coupled to the output terminals of the PSU or is it on a long wire and taken down the 80 cm of the table and out of the test field? Is there any standard requirement for this and are manufacturers willing to publish this information? Thanks, -doug -- Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Hipot with in-circuit voltage limiting devices IEC 61010-1 3rd Ed.
Mick, Sorry I didn't review this email before I just sent my last. Clearly you see the same problem as I. I have to wonder if the committee in reviewing this clause only used data sheets and did not validate in the lab. Or is it possibly the committee members just missed this? I would like to suggest the Vclamp we should use this the 8 mS / 10 mS rating. That's mS, not uS. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Mick Maytum m.j.may...@ieee.org wrote: Doug, My previous message gave the IEC rulings - terms clamping voltage and nominal varistor voltage - for two specific points on the MOV clamping (clipping) characteristic. For completeness IEC 61010-1, ed. 3.0 (2010-06) defines the following: *working voltage * highest r.m.s. value of the a.c. or d.c. voltage across any particular insulation which can occur when the equipment is supplied at rated voltage NOTE 1 Transients and voltage fluctuations are not considered to be part of the working voltage. NOTE 2 Both open-circuit conditions and normal operating conditions are taken into account. I'm now giving an opinion. Your (nominal) AC supply is 230V rms. The phase not less than twice the working voltage. means the hipot test is done with an AC value of at least 460 V rms or 650 V pk. The hipot test voltage of 0.9 times the clamping voltage of the MOV is clearly crazy, as from your figures of 710 V clamping voltage and 473 V nominal varistor voltage, testing at 0.9x710 = 630 V would cause substantial current in the MOV. One could skate round this and say that the 1 mA nominal varistor voltage is the clamping* threshold* voltage - a new term - and use an MOV or combination of MOVs to have a nominal voltage of 650/0.9 = 720 V. Sounds like a letter to the Chair and Secretary of TC 66 is needed to resolve this matter. Regards Mick On 10/05/2012 00:27, Doug Powell wrote: A change was made in 3rd Ed. for routine mains hipot tests while clamping devices are still in the circuit; specifically clause F.3.2 (Ed. 3). The standard states the test can be carried out at 0.9 times the clamping voltage of the device and not less than twice the working voltage. Edition 2 said not less than that of the working voltage. My application is 230Vac and I initially selected 275Vrms MOVs. Plugging in the F.3.2 equations, I get a hipot failure. These devices have a very soft voltage knee and as a result of the dynamic resistance, the knee very time dependent. The MOV supplier states the maximum clamping voltage using the 8/20 mS surge is 710V and the DC clamping voltage with a 1 mA current source is 473V. I would assume the 473V is very similar to the peak of the 275 Vrms 50/60 Hz waveform, plus some headroom for component tolerance (~18%). If you try running the numbers to re-select a different MOV value, it is very possible to get all tied up in knots. So, which clamping voltage are we to use? My thought is to use 2 x 230 = 460V and select the next higher MOV from the catalog. Opinions, rulings, decrees from on high? -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send
Re: [PSES] Hipot with in-circuit voltage limiting devices IEC 61010-1 3rd Ed.
Yes, but in this case, disconnection is not an option. Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.comwrote: F.3.2 says, “…test of F.3.1 *can* be carried out…..”. Because it says “can” and not “shall” does this make this test optional? Doesn’t the previous version of this standard allow you to disconnect surge suppressors during the HiPot test? The Other Brian *From:* emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] *On Behalf Of *Mick Maytum *Sent:* Thursday, May 10, 2012 12:00 PM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Cc:* Doug Powell *Subject:* Re: [PSES] Hipot with in-circuit voltage limiting devices IEC 61010-1 3rd Ed. Doug, I wouldn't credit the TC 66 has having MOV component knowledge, just perceptions. Since my last message I have sent messages to the Chair and Secretary of TC 66 wearing my IEC SC 37B chair hat. I was restrained for a change, merely stating they were breaking the laws of physics for MOVs rather than crazy! I suggested that if the 0.9 factor was to work it should be applied to the nominal voltage not the clamping voltage. I'll keep you informed of developments if any. Regards Mick On 10/05/2012 15:15, Doug Powell wrote: Mick, Sorry I didn't review this email before I just sent my last. Clearly you see the same problem as I. I have to wonder if the committee in reviewing this clause only used data sheets and did not validate in the lab. Or is it possibly the committee members just missed this? I would like to suggest the Vclamp we should use this the 8 mS / 10 mS rating. That's mS, not uS. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Mick Maytum m.j.may...@ieee.org wrote: Doug, My previous message gave the IEC rulings - terms clamping voltage and nominal varistor voltage - for two specific points on the MOV clamping (clipping) characteristic. For completeness IEC 61010-1, ed. 3.0 (2010-06) defines the following: *working voltage * highest r.m.s. value of the a.c. or d.c. voltage across any particular insulation which can occur when the equipment is supplied at rated voltage NOTE 1 Transients and voltage fluctuations are not considered to be part of the working voltage. NOTE 2 Both open-circuit conditions and normal operating conditions are taken into account. I'm now giving an opinion. Your (nominal) AC supply is 230V rms. The phase not less than twice the working voltage. means the hipot test is done with an AC value of at least 460 V rms or 650 V pk. The hipot test voltage of 0.9 times the clamping voltage of the MOV is clearly crazy, as from your figures of 710 V clamping voltage and 473 V nominal varistor voltage, testing at 0.9x710 = 630 V would cause substantial current in the MOV. One could skate round this and say that the 1 mA nominal varistor voltage is the clamping* threshold* voltage - a new term - and use an MOV or combination of MOVs to have a nominal voltage of 650/0.9 = 720 V. Sounds like a letter to the Chair and Secretary of TC 66 is needed to resolve this matter. Regards Mick - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com -- *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 LT; emc-p...@ieee.orgGT; 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
Re: [PSES] Hipot with in-circuit voltage limiting devices IEC 61010-1 3rd Ed.
The routine voltage test on mains is mandatory, but the method has options. This is how I read the standard. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:04 PM, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote: In message **64D32EE8B9CBDD44963ACB076A5F6A**BB0261DE06@Mailbox-Tech.**lecotech.local, dated Thu, 10 May 2012, Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.com writes: F.3.2 says, ...test of F.3.1 can be carried out.. Because it says can and not shall does this make this test optional? It seems, from the limited context you give, that the *method* is optional, but *a* test is mandatory. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Instead of saying that the government is doing too little, too late or too much, too early, say they've got is exactly right, thus throwing them into total confusion. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex 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-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-**pstc.htmlhttp://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/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.htmlhttp://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/**listrules.htmlhttp://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] Hipot with in-circuit voltage limiting devices IEC 61010-1 3rd Ed.
A change was made in 3rd Ed. for routine mains hipot tests while clamping devices are still in the circuit; specifically clause F.3.2 (Ed. 3). The standard states the test can be carried out at 0.9 times the clamping voltage of the device and not less than twice the working voltage. Edition 2 said not less than that of the working voltage. My application is 230Vac and I initially selected 275Vrms MOVs. Plugging in the F.3.2 equations, I get a hipot failure. These devices have a very soft voltage knee and as a result of the dynamic resistance, the knee very time dependent. The MOV supplier states the maximum clamping voltage using the 8/20 mS surge is 710V and the DC clamping voltage with a 1 mA current source is 473V. I would assume the 473V is very similar to the peak of the 275 Vrms 50/60 Hz waveform, plus some headroom for component tolerance (~18%). If you try running the numbers to re-select a different MOV value, it is very possible to get all tied up in knots. So, which clamping voltage are we to use? My thought is to use 2 x 230 = 460V and select the next higher MOV from the catalog. Opinions, rulings, decrees from on high? -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] e-standard.org The cheapest standards in the world
I set up a gmail account and went through the steps to buy a couple standards. The site seems to have a functioning shopping cart software and the privacy report says they are using https://payment_fashionpay_com/sslpayment as their shopping cart software. A quick InterNIC check of fashionpay.com shows the site was created on May 8 of 2010 Domain Name: FASHIONPAY.COM Registrar: XIN NET TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION Whois Server: whois.paycenter.com.cn Referral URL: http://www.xinnet.com Name Server: F1G1NS1.DNSPOD.NET Name Server: F1G1NS2.DNSPOD.NET Status: ok Updated Date: 02-may-2012 Creation Date: 08-may-2010 Expiration Date: 08-may-2013 The Verisign and the Trustwave validation indicates “identify is verified” and this payment site is:SHENZHEN SUHUITONG NETWORK TECHNOLOGY CO.,LTD; Shenzhen, Guangdong, CN My Privacy Policy software cannot identify this site and at the point of submitting a VISA number, there is no padlock on the status bar even though this is an https site. The InterNIC report for e-standard.org points to New York with registrant, admin and tech contact all the same and they used Godaddy. ID:CR95380743 Name:e-standard support Street1:25 W 43rd Street, 6th Floor Street2:cheapest industry standards and codes Street3: City:New York State/Province:New York Postal Code:10036 Country:US Phone:+1.2126424979 Phone Ext.: FAX: FAX Ext.: Email:serv...@e-standard.org At this street address are the ANSI people. Their address is: Street1: 25 West 43rd Street, 4th floor Street2: New York, NY 10036 Tel: 1.212.642.4900 Fax: 1.212.398.0023 ANSI’s legitimate store is at http://webstore.ansi.org/ and it is called eStandards Store. It appears to use it's own shopping cart, installed on their own servers. I suggest this is either a software development group within ANSI has a web address to their development sandbox which somehow got released – OR – someone is attempting to duplicate ANSI and is not creative enough to come up with a unique street address that looks legitimate. One more point, the InterNIC listed phone number of e-standards appears to be an internal number under the main ANSI number; 212-642-4979 vs. 212-642-4900. Maybe someone at ANSI.ORG can weigh in on this discussion. My advice: *Approach with caution* Anyone care to call these phone numbers and see what happens?? -Doug Douglas E Powell http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Ron Pickard rpick...@equinoxpayments.comwrote: Hi Lauren, I have no experience with that site. ** ** Exceptionally good buys there to be sure, but I would also the legality of it. Also intriguing at the bottom of the webpage is the claim that it is “Powered by American National Standards Institute” with a hyperlink to http://ansi.org. Still, approach with caution. ** ** Best regards, ** ** Ron ** ** *From:* Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com] *Sent:* Monday, May 07, 2012 2:29 PM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] e-standard.org The cheapest standards in the world ** ** Does anyone have experience with the subject standards vendor. ** ** Their prices are so low (NFPA 70-2011 for $25!?) it has activated all my “if it’s too good to be true” warning systems. ** ** Regards, Lauren Crane KLA-Tencor ** ** - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - 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 LT; emc-p...@ieee.orgGT; 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:
[PSES] PV test lab for efficiency
All, I am seeking information on availability of a test lab, qualified to do CEC efficiency testing (Sandia protocol) for Solar PV with power capability of up to 500 kW. Preference is an accredited lab able to write a letter of attestation. Location is only of secondary concern. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] IEC/EN 61010-1
The in the acoustics section 12.5 of 61010-1 are the concepts of operator and bystander positions. The standard clearly states dimensions for the test room, yet it does not clearly state what distances are for personnel. Let's assume a control panel is mounted in a rack system, at eye-level, and with buttons that must be pressed. What would be the typical distances for the operator and the bystander? For the bystander, 1 meter seems about right. In the past, I have seen as little as 12 inches for the operator, but this seems a bit close. My original thought was this may represent a person leaning with one shoulder against a rack mounted panel. While the distance from the panel surface to the ear of this person can be quite short, it is not likely to be an operator's position. A difference of only a few inches can make all the difference in your results. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] IEC/EN 61010-1
Thanks Brian, Very similar to what we are doing now. Plan to simply make a note of the test conditions in the test report. :Doug On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.comwrote: As the manufacturer you have to decide what a typical operator position is, then document it in the report. We give a distance from the front of the device (varies from 200cm – 500cm) and a distance off the floor (or off the table for table mounted equipment). For the bystander position, we take measurements on all four sides at a 1 meter distance and 1.6 meters off the floor. The Other Brian *From:* emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] *On Behalf Of *Doug Powell *Sent:* Wednesday, April 25, 2012 12:47 PM *To:* emc-pstc *Subject:* IEC/EN 61010-1 The in the acoustics section 12.5 of 61010-1 are the concepts of operator and bystander positions. The standard clearly states dimensions for the test room, yet it does not clearly state what distances are for personnel. Let's assume a control panel is mounted in a rack system, at eye-level, and with buttons that must be pressed. What would be the typical distances for the operator and the bystander? For the bystander, 1 meter seems about right. In the past, I have seen as little as 12 inches for the operator, but this seems a bit close. My original thought was this may represent a person leaning with one shoulder against a rack mounted panel. While the distance from the panel surface to the ear of this person can be quite short, it is not likely to be an operator's position. A difference of only a few inches can make all the difference in your results. -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com -- *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 LT; emc-p...@ieee.orgGT; 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 LT;emcp...@radiusnorth.netGT; Mike Cantwell LT;mcantw...@ieee.orgGT; For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher LT;j.bac...@ieee.orgGT; David Heald LT;dhe...@gmail.comGT; -- Thanks, -doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] ad code injection?
I'm afraid these old solutions will not work for long. The new trend is all about the next level in tracking your browsing habits and targeted advertising. ALL web browsers are susceptible, that is if you want to keep modicum of functionality on the web these days. The list of susceptible browsers includes but is not limited to: Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera, Internet explorer and yes iOS Mobile. Certainly you can turn off your JavaScript and cookies but many sites won't even load. It's going to get even worse as HTML5 becomes more available and browsers take advantage of the new technologies. I also tried editing my hosts file to redirect all badly behaved ad-ware to 127.0.0.1. This requires you read' the source code on the web pages you visit and identify those embedded web addresses which have no business tracking you. Have you ever noticed how web page sidebar and header advertising seems to align to your browsing preferences? For an eye opener, read or listen to this article. http://www.npr.org/2012/02/24/147356632/weaving-around-web-privacy-controls For the last several weeks I have effectively stopped all this tracking by using one of the programs mentioned in the article. I have found there are far more that 500 companies trying to track your browsing habits, possibly 900 by now. The only ill-effect I have noticed by loading this software is a lag of a second or two when doing page loads. This is because the software scans the entire web page content before allowing your browser to have access. It also reports a list of sites it has blocked, i.e. prevented from updating their profile on you. Some sites are very impressive with the number of companies tracking you and it isn't just Google. In fact, from the notices I see, Google appears to be one of the minor offenders. Besides, it's a bit like swatting flies. I get a sense of satisfaction knowing which companies I have thwarted. -doug On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.comwrote: Various services have been doing ad-injection for at least five years so not new - first noticed it around 2006. In fact, there are wordpress utilities that do ad injection for bloggers. The bad stuff will probably not come until you click on the 'extra' banner. Some easy notebook mitigation to do while traveling: 1. Run only chrome or mozilla FF 2. turn off JS and cookies 3. carry your own router (firewall settings for MAC filter, without default SSID, etc). 4. run Linux on trips (easy dual-boot setup, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Win32-loader_%28Debian%29 Also note that a router will probably eat most of a data-line surge before your notebook's ethernet port sees it. Routers are cheap compared to the computer. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Doug Smith Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 10:01 AM To: Si-List; emc-pstc Subject: ad code injection? Hi All, I just found a disturbing trend used by some Internet providers, especially ones in places like hotels. That being injecting code in to any web page visited. As you know, I do not accept advertising for others on my website http://emcesd.com but you may see ads I have not put there. Below is a clip from an article on blogs.nytimes.com and a link to the full article. If you ever see an ad on my website from someone else, can you please capture a screen shot and send it to me? I do not use annoying techniques, like blinking banners, on my web page, in fact it is just flat html with out even javascript. I try to make my site as informative to engineers as possible without flashy banners and such. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/06/courtyard-marriott-wifi/ On its Web site, a company called RG Nets, which makes Revenue eXtraction Gateway, explains that its system rewrites every Web page on the fly so that it can include a banner ad. “As you can see, the pervasive nature of the advertising banner on all Web pages guarantees banner advertising impression,” a narrator says in the video. I am late this month on my Technical Tidbit because of my move from Silicon Valley to Boulder City, NV, where I am at the moment. Doug - 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-p...@ieee.org 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
Re: [PSES] Color of Mains Wiring
I think there is some variance in standards for green/yellow colors. I believe IEC 60204-1 has some guidance on the actual color mix, also standards for HAR wire should have this. The rule I have seen is for more than just a trace of color. Nominally the green/yellow mix should be 50%/50%. Tolerances are that neither color covers less than 30% or more than 70%, measured around the circumference. The stripe may be either longitudinal or spiral. Also, if the stripe is painted and not extruded, it must be permanent and durable. This is difficult to do on teflon wire. From what I have experienced, most North American wire manufacturers order to put their green core wire through a paint striping machine, and usually only one paint wheel is used of the three possible. In Europe most green/yellow wire I know about is extruded in these colors. Doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: IBM Ken ibm...@gmail.com Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 15:42:15 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: IBM Ken ibm...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PSES] Color of Mains Wiring For the ground/bond, can't you also use plain green wiring (yellow tracer optional) or bare copper? Perhaps this is just in 60950... On 4/7/12, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote: In message 4f7f83c9.5040...@radiusnorth.net, dated Fri, 6 Apr 2012, Scott Douglas sdoug...@radiusnorth.net writes: Here's to hoping someone can tell me I have not been dreaming all this time. You have been dreaming. However, it's a good dream. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK If 'QWERTY' is an English keyboard, what language is 'WYSIWYG' for? - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Color of Mains Wiring
The man who taught me compliance said internal wires could be any color. This was back in the days of VDE 0160. And my certs went through LGA Nurnberg The exception was of course the ground circuit. There was strong direction to avoid confusion with DC circuits, especially the Red for positive voltages. In the end we chose all three phase wiring would be black. If phase rotation mattered we used labels. On the topic of colors, when I was in the US Navy, I took a color blindness test and learned statistically about 20% of white caucasian males have a red/grn color deficiency. My German compliance tutor indicated this was one reason for the grn/yel striped wire for grounding. Doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Peter Merguerian pmerguerian2...@yahoo.com Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 18:10:35 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Peter Merguerian pmerguerian2...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [PSES] Color of Mains Wiring Scott, No requirements for internal wires other than green yellow which must be used for grounding All the Best Peter Sent from my iPhone Peter S. Merguerian pe...@goglobalcompliance.com Go Global Compliance Inc. www.goglobalcompliance.com (408) 931-3303 On Apr 6, 2012, at 5:01 PM, Scott Douglas sdoug...@radiusnorth.net wrote: For ITE (60950-1) and A/V (60065) products a question of color came up today. I told an ODM they had to use Brown (Line), Blue (Neutral), and Green/Yellow (PE) colors for AC Mains wiring inside the product. They replied that the current standard does not require Brown and Blue. I looked in my several years old copies of the standards (UL, CSA, IEC) and the only color I can find is Green/Yellow for Protective Earth. For years I have been requiring and getting AC Mains within a product to be Brown, Blue, Green/Yellow. For whatever reason, this just that way it was and everybody knew it and used those colors. Since I cannot find that requirement in either of the standards, can anyone tell my why I have been insisting on them all these years? Where does the requirement come from? BFIF, I also recall that UL accepts Brown, Blue, and Green/Yellow within domestic products. So where does that that allowance/acceptance come from? This is not for external power cords, but hook-up wire inside the product. I am looking for page, paragraph, and rule - something in writing just so I know that I have not been on the happy wagon all these years. Here's to hoping someone can tell me I have not been dreaming all this time. Regards, Scott - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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),
[PSES] Fwd: So, what is up with the CENELEC website?
I received many replies, public and private, and many people have assisted me, thank you! In particular, Gert Gremmen in The Netherlands was able to create a trouble ticket on the CENELEC web site and here is the response. I for one, will be flagging my shortcut to CENELEC with their expected hours of operation. I suppose all this could be avoided is the webmaster had placed a message on the website indicating it was down for routine maintenance instead of allowing the server error codes to show up as if the site were broken somehow. Thank you all, -doug Dear Mr Gremmen, The CENELEC website has been up and running as usual, with exception of Thursday 29 March, from 12:00 to 18:00 CET, because of a general maintenance on the CENELEC database. There has been another issue on Tuesday afternoon indeed, we were forced to reboot the server and consequently the dynamic pages of the CENELEC website were inaccessible for a certain period. For your American colleagues, it’s important to note that we run our backups on a daily basis between 20:00 and 21:00 CET. This usually takes more or less 30 minutes, and indeed falls during business hours in the US. If you again experience any difficulties during European business hours, feel free to let me know by sending me a print screen of the error message on the page. We apologize for any possible inconvenience caused. Best regards, *Els SOMERS* Officer - Competence Centre - EDP - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] So, what is up with the CENELEC website?
For many years I have consistently seen broken web pages and defective search screens at CENELEC. Just today I tried again and several of their pages say: Service Temporarily Unavailable The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later. -- Oracle-Application-Server-10g/10.1.2.0.0 Oracle-HTTP-Server Server at cmc09app.cenorm.be Port 8080 Is anyone else having this problem? I would really like to know the current status of EN 61010-1:2010 on CENELEC and tried clicking on the Search button, National Committees, Technical Committees, and List of Technical Bodies. All links have this problem. http://www.cenelec.eu/aboutcenelec/contactus/contact_entry.htm -Doug - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] receiving/approval processes under fire
Excellent advice Rich. I am a proponent of “design for compliance” and have been for years. Getting involved early solves more than you can possibly know; if possible do it at the napkin design stage. Here is a list of ideas that immediately come to mind, there's probably much more. 1) Early involvement identifies markets, requirements, standards, and design risks. 2) “Involvement” means getting down in the trenches with design engineers, manufacturing engineers, procurement, operations, incoming inspection, everyone. Understand the designs, materials, suppliers. Be able to fully comprehend schematics and mechanical diagrams, know company processes, know the customer needs, and make suggestions. 3) Be an advocate for the company when facing the agency and work through the issues to mutual agreement. I’ve seen plenty of compliance engineers forget this and simply “go by the book”. 4) Compliance is not a roadblock to productivity; it is an essential function in of the company and it opens market doors. Sales people know how to buy into this idea. 5) Don't simply say no and shut them down. If something is not right, offer a minimum of three alternative ideas. I once ran into a compliance engineer whose first idea was to go to the engineer's manager to try and force the issue. This is clearly the wrong answer; working through the tough problems together actually wins a compliance advocate on the engineering side of the house. I've had some great arguments and won some dear friends doing this. 6) If it is non-negotiable (and I mean really non-negotiable), be courteous and respectful while explaining the case. It means all the difference. 7) Complaint: Design people say Compliance stifles creativity! Answer: Designers already work within a set of rules called the laws of physics, materials properties, etc. What we really need is more creative designers and engineers that know how to apply ALL the rules. 8) Compliance costs too much. Compared to what, not selling your products at all? This does not fly with me after I participated in the redesign of a line of low cost high power energy conversion products. By replacing all the general purpose and cheap components with those too expensive circuit breakers, fuses, optocouplers, transformers, etc. we achieved a 6% in the cost of goods sold (COGS). In addition, this product line was the history of the company that subsequently demonstrated six-sigma quality. 9) Compliance people have a big advantage in that they see all the departments of a company. A great design idea in one business unit is a great design idea in another business unit. Same goes for processes. Spreading these ideas around the whole business makes you look good too. My goal is to always, always develop great rapport, collaboration, and to be just as agile as the rest of the company. After all, the competition is not inside the company and if you miss the market, you missed it all. Enough for now, I'm on lunch and have to get back to work. -Doug On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Richard Nute ri...@ieee.org wrote: Mr. Woodgate suggests: What you do is make the design team leader *responsible*for the compliance of the design. He/she doesn't do the tests but has to understand the standards that apply enough to assess the test reports and sign them off. Absolutely! I have successfully used this process for years! My designers have been very complementary. However, to do this, the compliance engineer must partner with the designer so as to offer various alternatives that complement his design, not just a one-size-fits-all. And, you must take some risk with the certification house so that your promises to the design engineer are fulfilled. To do this means you must also partner with the cert house at the same time to be certain that the design is certifiable. This means you join the design team in the very early stages of the design and jointly agree with the design team as to a safety design strategy -- BEFORE the design is developed to a physical model. This has another advantage: the very first prototypes comply with the requirements, and can be used for certification. This means that the certification timetable is not in the critical path to project completion. Good luck! 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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
Re: [PSES] Mains voltage in Europe
These voltages, and more, all exist today. It depends on the system to which you are connected. The 110 is from a 220 split phase feed. Often this is from of a secondary of a delta connected transformer. Normally 120v is derived from a 208v three phase wye system. It is from one of the phases referenced to earth (neutral); 120 x sqrt(3) = 208. Using vector diagrams you can discover many of these relationships. Some of these diagrams are referenced in 60664 based standards. Over the years there have been many arguments over which voltage and frequency, is the correct one. There's even some proponents for using DC power exclusively. Aviation and some naval systems operate on 400 hz. I suspect this is a discussion that will never end. Doug Douglas E Powell http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: itl-emc user group itl...@itl.co.il Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 03:20:11 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: itl-emc user group itl...@itl.co.il Subject: Re: [PSES] Mains voltage in Europe After all this discussion, Does anyone know the Mains Voltage in the US. It was once 110 VAC and then 115 VAC. I heard that now it may be 120 VAC Any info would be helpful -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 10:48 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Mains voltage in Europe In message f2c4784e656a4aacaf96ae46d3ac2...@tamuracorp.com, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: I see minimal politics in EMC or safety standards - so they are a technical standard. You should be there! In EMC, PLT is pure politics, but there are more subtle examples. In fact, 'politics versus engineering' is the wrong way to look at the subject. It's better looked at as 'economics versus technology', and standards committees are increasingly being 'encouraged' (coerced) into addressing economic questions that they are not trained, and not empowered, to answer, thus bearing the blame when everything goes pear-shaped. PLT is an obvious case; if it can be made to work, it could generate gigabucks, some for private enterprise and 20% at least as tax for governments. But at the technology level, it can only be made to work by inconveniencing amateur radio operators, who don't have enough votes to matter. I see significant 3d and 4th party agenda influence on the environmental standards - so they can be considered political standards. So I would like to know what are/were the exogenous influences on the EU distribution systems that made it a political voltage? OK, you did ask! The European Commission decided that, like water, natural gas and fuel, electricity is a 'commodity' and thus needs 'quality at the point of delivery' regulations just as the others have. However, while, in principle, a simple 'non-return valve' prevents users from contaminating the other three, users are adept at contaminating the electricity supply with harmonic currents and load current changes that propagate voltage changes through the network, and no 'no-return valve' analogue exists. Also, straying trucks and trees, and wind, rain and snow, affect electricity supplies much more than the others. So the electricity suppliers negotiated EN 50160, a 'quality standard' for electricity. It's not really a standard in the usual sense, because it has so many 'ifs', 'unlesses' and 'excepts' etc. that conformity to it is not very meaningful, but it is a 'political standard'. Even so, nothing much better can be done. Included in it is '230 V +/-10 %'. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK If 'QWERTY' is an English keyboard, what language is 'WYSIWYG' for? - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to
Re: [PSES] EU wiring code low voltage / medium voltage transition
I realize this is not an authoritive page with regard to codes and standards but it has a good synopsis of the grid and power distribution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_distribution Check the graphic on General layout of electricity networks -doug Douglas E Powell http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 On 2/22/12, doug...@gmail.com doug...@gmail.com wrote: I am not certain low voltage is determined solely by voltage reading. This is terminology that comes from utilities and power distribution. Medium voltage being less than 50 kV and Low voltage less the 1000 V. If you are in a low voltage application, you are below a substation at the secondary customer level. Doug Douglas E Powell http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Peter Tarver ptar...@ieee.org Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 09:28:47 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: ptar...@ieee.org Subject: [PSES] EU wiring code low voltage / medium voltage transition Good morning. In the US, low voltage is considered 600 Vac or less. Medium voltage begins above 600 Vac. In Canada, low voltage is considered 750 Vac or less. Medium voltage begins above 750 Vac. Is there a similar (harmonized or not) voltage level transition in Europe? Is the LVD's 1000 Vac limit that demarc? - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] EN/IEC 61010-1 Ed. 3 - Color Coding
All, It seems there is a change in 61010-1 regarding the exclusive use to green / yellow color coded parts. In the past these colors were reserved solely for the use of the protective conductor, and protective bonding devices. This is generally true of safety standards based in or harminozed to 60664-1. Now I find in the third edition of 61010-1 has a provision for use of green / yellow on potential equalization and functional earthing in section 6.9.3 c) d). In addition Table 1, symbol #8 Equipotentiality (IEC 60417 - 5021) is removed from use. I always understood protective bonding is a mandatory safety connection and functional or equipotential ground are not and should not be used for electrical safety hazard protection. Can someone please explain the committee's rationale behind this? I really feel this waters down the importance of protective grounding and protective bonding; especially when working with high powered or high voltage equipment. thanks -doug - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Rating Label Nomenclature for Auto Voltage Select Devices
To my knowledge there is no internationally accepted symbol specifically for this. However, the ! symbol in a triangle directs the user to refer to documentation before installing/using. In the user documents is where you would detail this info in the language of the region. Doug Douglas E Powell http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.com Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 16:54:22 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.com Subject: [PSES] Rating Label Nomenclature for Auto Voltage Select Devices On rating labels for devices, is there a common nomenclature to distinguish if a multi voltage range device, such as a 115V/230V ac device, is auto-sensing requiring no user action or if it requires a manual operation such as changing voltage select switches or internal wiring? I've seen on some products where it was rated something like, 115/230 V~ (autosensing), or something like that. But I don't think the English working would be internationally recognized. Is there a symbol to term that is? Any suggestions? Thanks, The Other Brian 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] IEC 6010-1 vs MIL STD
Hi all, Is there a particular U.S. Military standard which could be considered an approximate equivalent to IEC 61010-1? Sometimes military and commercial standards do parallel in some ways. Thanks! Doug Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Is this common knowledge - Electrical Ratings
This discussion has become interesting. Possibly ratings are common knowledge and possibly not. I'm sure everyone has an awareness of ratings, but do they have an understanding? And if they don't, do ratings serve any purpose for the end user? I suggest most people understand they must match the voltage of devices to the place they plug it in. Even children understand batteries have polarity and must go in a certain way. But I've met people who do not know what a volt is and are somewhat intimidated or even frightened by it. On a recent trip to Israel we heard of an individual who plugged their electronic device into a power outlet of a different rating and completely ruined it. They said, It was only plugged in for a second. Have you noticed, energy efficiency has been all the rage, mainly because of the press and tax incentives, but what does it really mean to the average consumer? High efficiency is better, right? Recently my wife was shopping for a new kitchen mixer and one of her criteria was it must have a high number of amps. She had managed to connect amps with horsepower. When I asked if she knew what it all meant, she admitted the answer was no. But it was a way for her to do comparison shopping. In the end, it's most likely about mitigating liability. Both for the manufacturer and the certifying agency. The almost exponential increase in product warnings over the last few decades is another indication of this. The saying used to be caveat emptor, let the buyer beware. Now, I believe it is caveat venditor, let the seller beware. Doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: John Shinn jmsh...@pacbell.net Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:17:37 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: John Shinn jmsh...@pacbell.net Subject: Re: [PSES] Is this common knowledge - Electrical Ratings The issue is that you said most, not all. John Shinn -Original Message- From: Richard Nute Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 1:23 PM To: 'John Woodgate' ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] Is this common knowledge - Electrical Ratings The ratings could just as well be in the accompanying documents. ... which are thrown away, no, sorry, *recycled*, with the packaging. Of course. But, as I said before, why do I need to know the ratings? Especially after the equipment is installed? Most manufacturers now provide e-copies on the web. So, I can get most any accompanying documents at any time. - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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:
[PSES] Discovery warns of catastrophic failure of lithium-ion batteries : Johns Hopkins University – The Gazette
This discovery has a lot of potential. A self-monitoring battery could easily signal for help or open an interlock. If caught early enough, a thermal runaway might be averted. This could be especially important on large devices like electric vehicles or charge controllers. http://gazette.jhu.edu/2012/01/09/discovery-warns-of-catastrophic-failure-of-lithium-ion-batteries/ Doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] EMC-PSTC Email List Subscriber Status as of January 4, 2012
The numbers are down somewhat. I seem to recall the late 1990s we were about 800 strong. Doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:53:18 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Subject: [PSES] EMC-PSTC Email List Subscriber Status as of January 4, 2012 To All, Here is a brief summary of EMC-PSTC Email List subscribers by country. This list was collected January 4, 2012. * Country Subscribers * --- --- * Argentina 1 * Australia 5 * Belgium1 * Canada14 * China 2 * Denmark6 * France 1 * Germany 10 * India 1 * Ireland1 * Israel 5 * Italy 3 * Japan 3 * Luxembourg 1 * Netherlands2 * Norway 2 * Poland 1 * Singapore 2 * Spain 3 * Taiwan 3 * United Kingdom25 * United States576 * * Total number of concealed subscribers: 19 * Total number of users subscribed to the list:668 (non-concealed only) * Total number of countries represented:22 (non-concealed only) Best regards, Scott Douglas EMC-PSTC List Admin - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] EMC-PSTC Email List Subscriber Status as of January 4, 2012
Thanks Ed, So my recollection was not too far off. Of course we'll probably never know if these numbers were full time professionals or otherwise. In a way this is surprising it is still as high as it is since I've only seen word of mouth advertising. In my early days of participating in the forum, I found it invaluable for my own education. Today my time is such that I cannot participate as much as in the past, but on occasion I try to return the favor I was given by so many when I was new to the business. Doug Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Ed Price edpr...@cox.net Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:45:05 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: edpr...@cox.net Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC-PSTC Email List Subscriber Status as of January 4, 2012 Doug: For some odd reason, I kept a list of subscribers, valid as of 30 March 2006. Here's the stats for that date: * Total number of concealed subscribers: 7 * Total number of users subscribed to the list:860 (non-concealed only) * Total number of local host users on the list: 0 (non-concealed only) * (No country data) In about the past 6 years, our membership has declined from 860 to 668, a 22% decline. I don't have the data to prove this, but my guess is that our numbers continued relatively constant from March of 2006 until the financial crisis in 2008 also began squeezing the regulatory compliance professionals. The latest 668 figure may even include some recovery of jobs over the past year or so. I'm not trying to create make-work somebody, but it might be interesting (if our admins have the data) to plot the membership figures of our list since inception. I wonder how closely our population tracks the state of the economy? Ed Price El Cajon, CA USA -Original Message- From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 6:58 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC-PSTC Email List Subscriber Status as of January 4, 2012 The numbers are down somewhat. I seem to recall the late 1990s we were about 800 strong. Doug Douglas E Powell mailto:doug...@gmail.com doug...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 20:53:18 To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net Subject: [PSES] EMC-PSTC Email List Subscriber Status as of January 4, 2012 To All, Here is a brief summary of EMC-PSTC Email List subscribers by country. This list was collected January 4, 2012. * Country Subscribers * --- --- * Argentina 1 * Australia 5 * Belgium1 * Canada14 * China 2 * Denmark6 * France 1 * Germany 10 * India 1 * Ireland1 * Israel 5 * Italy 3 * Japan 3 * Luxembourg 1 * Netherlands2 * Norway 2 * Poland 1 * Singapore 2 * Spain 3 * Taiwan 3 * United Kingdom25 * United States576 * * Total number of concealed subscribers: 19 * Total number of users subscribed to the list:668 (non-concealed only) * Total number of countries represented:22 (non-concealed only) Best regards, Scott Douglas EMC-PSTC List Admin - 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 mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html 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/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http
Re: [PSES] A compliance archival query
Sharepoint is a good solution, so long as the servers on the back-end have a robust backup system. In the last couple of years I went through some difficulty in proving this was true for my ISO 17025 lab certification efforts. The problem I found was the I.T. department policies, or rather non-adherence to them. In the end, I suppose this a possible issue for any file server. Once file retention and security are established, I really like the document revision system provided on Sharepoint. It is very configurable at the library level with checkin/checkout capability and even keeps full copies of each revision with an opportunity for notes on what the revision was about. The disadvantage is you must work the documents while online. Possibly a hybrid approach where you work offline up to a certain point and then move files online is a good solution. You can also control permissions by assigning different people or groups to different levels of access; none, read-only, edit, full control. Another advantage is if you go to the next level, you can put into place workflows with approvals by reviewers. Very nice. I had requirements from the agency, as part of the client witness program, for retaining raw data (taken from instrumentation or scans of handwritten data), derived data (processed in spreadsheets), and finally the reports and report attachments. All are very possible on Sharepoint and can be linked together. After learning the rudiments of Sharepoint design, you can turn this into a full dashboard system and not simply another layer of file management using your windows explorer. Project progress, KPIs, work requests, all are possible. Doug Douglas E Powell doug...@gmail.com 970-646-3732 http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01 Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Ron Pickard rpick...@equinoxpayments.com Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 16:08:37 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Ron Pickard rpick...@equinoxpayments.com Subject: [PSES] A compliance archival query Happy New Year to all of you and I hope that this new year finds itself to be rewarding an prosperous for us all. And embarking into the new year, I will be looking into ways to improve my compliance folder and record archival and retrieval system. At this point in time I do not as yet know if this will involve modifying or upgrading the system (SharePoint) or replacing it with something else. To that end I would appreciate (and other group members may also find this info beneficial) if anyone is willing to share what overall systems they're using (canned, custom or home grown) and possibly recommend any along with experiences they've had with them (pro or con). If agreeable, I will tabulate the feedback and provide it back to the group. I look forward to your reply. Best regards, Ron - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] Experts and Wisdom
All, With some folks retiring and others I know are changing careers (recently termed “retooling”), I had some pensive thoughts about losing many folks who are experts in the field or those with great wisdom. So it occurs to me, I would like to hear your favorite quotes on Wisdom and Experts. I’ll prime the pump with a few I know. a.. Wisdom is the “stuff” you get immediately after you need it most. b.. An expert is one who has already made all of the necessary mistakes. c.. ex·pert/ˈekspərt/ Noun: compound word “ex + spurt”. EX meaning “has been”, SPURT meaning a “drip under pressure”, therefore a “Has been drip under pressure!” thanks, –doug Douglas E Powell Independent Compliance Engineering doug...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver
Grace, It is possible to overload the input of your analyzer/receiver without damage, normally this just causes signals to clip. However strong signals outside your normal range of measurement can be a concern. If you are concerned about spikes caused by click sources, it is possible to purchase a small coaxial surge suppressor that will not affect your measurements. It uses a small replaceable spark gap with much less than 10 pF, not a filter network. Mounting this directly on your shield room penetration panel works very well. This is a good precautionary measure to have in your system in any case. Preselection filters are a possibility, as long as you have the calibration factors. I always prefer to keep a small value RF attenuation pad (wide bandwidth) on the input of the receiver. The pad should be located between the surge suppressor and the RF input. Putting this directly on the front of the receiver minimizes normal wear and tear on the RF input connector. I prefer a power rated attenuator of a couple watts. The value can be almost anything from 3 to 10, so long as you don't cause signals of interest to drop out of sight in the noise floor. And don't forget to correct your readings for this. It may seem counter intuitive, but using a small value pad and then turning on the preamp has worked well for me. All the best in the New Year, Doug Powell Sent with Xobni Mobile - http://xobni.com/mobile Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Grace Lin graceli...@gmail.com Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 11:00:48 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Grace Lin graceli...@gmail.com Subject: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver Dear Members, Happy New Year!!! I need your advice to prevent RS ESU receiver from damage. A service report (as a result of annual calibration) indicates frequency response out of specification below 10MHz. Adjusted frequency response. Adjusted the reference oscillator to optimize frequency accuracy when operating from an internal standard. Plots from the calibration report shows the problem frequncy range was right below 150 kHz (100 kHz -150 kHz). I wonder the problem was caused by click noise from dimmers. Under receiver mode, I was unable to see the click noise (below 1 MHz in most cases) displyed in the ESU screen when the start freq was 150kHz and stop freq was 30MHz. I was able to see the high click noise when the receiver was set at the certain frequency (for example 150 kHz). At the same time, the screen also showed IF Overload message. What should I do to prevent it from happening again? 1. Is there any way to play with the ESU's preselection? ESU has 13 preselection filters ( http://www.rohde-schwarz.us/en/products/test_and_measurement/emc_field_strength/ESU-%7C-Overview-%7C-100-%7C-6430.html). The first one covers 20 Hz to 150 kHz and the second one covers 150 kHz to 2 MHz. I thought when I take data starting 150kHz, the emission below 150kHz shouldn't be selected (not cause the problem). 2. Should I find a filter to bypass the emissions below 150kHz? If yes, could you please refer me one? 3. Should I find an attenuator to attenuate the emission below 150kHz? If yes, could you please refer me one? Thank you very much for your time and look forward to your advice. Best regards, Grace Lin - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp
Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver
Here is one example: RS®ESH3-Z2 Pulse Limiter High RF input levels and high-energy interfering pulses generated on artificial mains networks when the DUT is switched on and off can damage the RF input circuits of test receivers. The RS®ESH3-Z2 pulse limiter limits and reduces the interference level. 0 Hz - 30 MHz Doug Powell Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: doug...@gmail.com Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 16:47:18 To: Grace Lingraceli...@gmail.com; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: doug...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver Grace, It is possible to overload the input of your analyzer/receiver without damage, normally this just causes signals to clip. However strong signals outside your normal range of measurement can be a concern. If you are concerned about spikes caused by click sources, it is possible to purchase a small coaxial surge suppressor that will not affect your measurements. It uses a small replaceable spark gap with much less than 10 pF, not a filter network. Mounting this directly on your shield room penetration panel works very well. This is a good precautionary measure to have in your system in any case. Preselection filters are a possibility, as long as you have the calibration factors. I always prefer to keep a small value RF attenuation pad (wide bandwidth) on the input of the receiver. The pad should be located between the surge suppressor and the RF input. Putting this directly on the front of the receiver minimizes normal wear and tear on the RF input connector. I prefer a power rated attenuator of a couple watts. The value can be almost anything from 3 to 10, so long as you don't cause signals of interest to drop out of sight in the noise floor. And don't forget to correct your readings for this. It may seem counter intuitive, but using a small value pad and then turning on the preamp has worked well for me. All the best in the New Year, Doug Powell Sent with Xobni Mobile - http://xobni.com/mobile Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Grace Lin graceli...@gmail.com Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 11:00:48 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Grace Lin graceli...@gmail.com Subject: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver Dear Members, Happy New Year!!! I need your advice to prevent RS ESU receiver from damage. A service report (as a result of annual calibration) indicates frequency response out of specification below 10MHz. Adjusted frequency response. Adjusted the reference oscillator to optimize frequency accuracy when operating from an internal standard. Plots from the calibration report shows the problem frequncy range was right below 150 kHz (100 kHz -150 kHz). I wonder the problem was caused by click noise from dimmers. Under receiver mode, I was unable to see the click noise (below 1 MHz in most cases) displyed in the ESU screen when the start freq was 150kHz and stop freq was 30MHz. I was able to see the high click noise when the receiver was set at the certain frequency (for example 150 kHz). At the same time, the screen also showed IF Overload message. What should I do to prevent it from happening again? 1. Is there any way to play with the ESU's preselection? ESU has 13 preselection filters ( http://www.rohde-schwarz.us/en/products/test_and_measurement/emc_field_strength/ESU-%7C-Overview-%7C-100-%7C-6430.html). The first one covers 20 Hz to 150 kHz and the second one covers 150 kHz to 2 MHz. I thought when I take data starting 150kHz, the emission below 150kHz shouldn't be selected (not cause the problem). 2. Should I find a filter to bypass the emissions below 150kHz? If yes, could you please refer me one? 3. Should I find an attenuator to attenuate the emission below 150kHz? If yes, could you please refer me one? Thank you very much for your time and look forward to your advice. Best regards, Grace Lin - 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-p...@ieee.org 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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver
Ken, Having worked power electronics for years, I have on occasion seen conducted emissions far exceed 107 dBuV. Of course I have routinely measured emissions on mains of up to 100 amps and more recently up to 700 amps. Caution is warranted. Also some of these products use AC large contractors and operating these devices while under load can cause huge inductive spikes on the LISN. - Doug Powell Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 12:03:23 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Subject: Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver Gert provided an excellent post, but I am puzzled by the need for all this protection. Granted I work in a screen room with either dedicated power or filtered power, but here is the question, nonetheless. The conducted emission limit above 150 kHz is at or above 60 dBuV these days, correct? So 30 - 40 dB of either internal or external broadband attenuation is available for use, while still providing a suitable noise floor for a typical ESU receiver, and that¹s without using the pre-amplifier. Further, in the case of the original post, preselection exists filtering out the noise below 150 kHz. Why is there even a problem? Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:26:50 +0100 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Conversation: Protect An EMI Receiver Subject: RE: Protect An EMI Receiver Happy new year to all, and hope you had a great Christmas ! Every receiver or spectrum analyzer used for conducted measurements on a LISN or AMN to mains voltage ABSOLUTELY NEEDS a dedicated surge/spike suppressor. They are easy to purchase, but you can build one yourself using a fast bidirectional 10V transient suppressor with low capacitance when 0 Vdc over it (use your cap meter of read datasheet) If the suppressor was mounted in a 50 ohm circuit you would have problems with high frequencies, but if you connect this suppressor parallel to the ground resistor in a 20 dB T-type (NOT PI) attenuator the performance is much better. The attenuator adds 20 dB to the impulses and the transient suppressor cuts off everything above 10 V The ground resistor in this configuration is slightly above 10 ohm (instead of 50 Ohm) if I remember well, so the high frequency cut-off is way above 30 MHz. Use old fashioned coal resistors or smd film resistors (3 in series per value) and mount in a small coaxial enclosure with 2 BNC's. Make sure the input resistor allows for 500V each, unless you live in the USA then 200 V is enough. Voila your home brew transient suppressor with same specs as commercial products. Of course it needs calibration, and possibly adjustments to meet your accreditation requirements. My software (EMI-SCAN) allows for the transfer characteristics (+/- 1dB) to be corrected in real time. Gert Gremmen ce-test qualified testing bv Owner LinkedIn EMC experts group Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Grace Lin Verzonden: dinsdag 27 december 2011 17:01 Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org Onderwerp: Protect An EMI Receiver Dear Members, Happy New Year!!! I need your advice to prevent RS ESU receiver from damage. A service report (as a result of annual calibration) indicates frequency response out of specification below 10MHz. Adjusted frequency response. Adjusted the reference oscillator to optimize frequency accuracy when operating from an internal standard. Plots from the calibration report shows the problem frequncy range was right below 150 kHz (100 kHz -150 kHz). I wonder the problem was caused by click noise from dimmers. Under receiver mode, I was unable to see the click noise (below 1 MHz in most cases) displyed in the ESU screen when the start freq was 150kHz and stop freq was 30MHz. I was able to see the high click noise when the receiver was set at the certain frequency (for example 150 kHz). At the same time, the screen also showed IF Overload message. What should I do to prevent it from happening again? 1. Is there any way to play with the ESU's preselection? ESU has 13 preselection filters (http://www.rohde-schwarz.us/en/products/test_and_measurement/emc_field_stre ngth/ESU-%7C-Overview-%7C-100-%7C-6430.html). The first one covers 20 Hz to 150 kHz and the second one covers 150 kHz to 2 MHz. I thought when I take data starting 150kHz, the emission below 150kHz shouldn't be selected (not cause the problem). 2. Should I find a filter to bypass the emissions below 150kHz? If yes, could you please refer me one? 3. Should I find an attenuator to attenuate the emission below 150kHz? If yes, could you please refer me one? Thank you very much for your time and look forward to your advice. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from
Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver
The CISPR 16, 5 uH LISN. Doug Powell Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 13:40:13 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Reply-To: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Subject: Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver Clearly, under the conditions of hundreds of Amperes (what LISN was employed?) and large contactors, special attention is required. But the original post seemed to address more mundane, everyday situations, and that was the focus of my question. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: doug...@gmail.com Reply-To: doug...@gmail.com Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:27:43 + To: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver Ken,Having worked power electronics for years, I have on occasion seen conducted emissions far exceed 107 dBuV. Of course I have routinely measured emissions on mains of up to 100 amps and more recently up to 700 amps. Caution is warranted. Also some of these products use AC large contractors and operating these devices while under load can cause huge inductive spikes on the LISN.- Doug Powell Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry From: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 12:03:23 -0600 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG ReplyTo: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Subject: Re: [PSES] Protect An EMI Receiver Gert provided an excellent post, but I am puzzled by the need for all this protection. Granted I work in a screen room with either dedicated power or filtered power, but here is the question, nonetheless. The conducted emission limit above 150 kHz is at or above 60 dBuV these days, correct? So 30 - 40 dB of either internal or external broadband attenuation is available for use, while still providing a suitable noise floor for a typical ESU receiver, and that¹s without using the pre-amplifier. Further, in the case of the original post, preselection exists filtering out the noise below 150 kHz. Why is there even a problem? Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:26:50 +0100 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Conversation: Protect An EMI Receiver Subject: RE: Protect An EMI Receiver Happy new year to all, and hope you had a great Christmas ! Every receiver or spectrum analyzer used for conducted measurements on a LISN or AMN to mains voltage ABSOLUTELY NEEDS a dedicated surge/spike suppressor. They are easy to purchase, but you can build one yourself using a fast bidirectional 10V transient suppressor with low capacitance when 0 Vdc over it (use your cap meter of read datasheet) If the suppressor was mounted in a 50 ohm circuit you would have problems with high frequencies, but if you connect this suppressor parallel to the ground resistor in a 20 dB T-type (NOT PI) attenuator the performance is much better. The attenuator adds 20 dB to the impulses and the transient suppressor cuts off everything above 10 V The ground resistor in this configuration is slightly above 10 ohm (instead of 50 Ohm) if I remember well, so the high frequency cut-off is way above 30 MHz. Use old fashioned coal resistors or smd film resistors (3 in series per value) and mount in a small coaxial enclosure with 2 BNC's. Make sure the input resistor allows for 500V each, unless you live in the USA then 200 V is enough. Voila your home brew transient suppressor with same specs as commercial products. Of course it needs calibration, and possibly adjustments to meet your accreditation requirements. My software (EMI-SCAN) allows for the transfer characteristics (+/- 1dB) to be corrected in real time. Gert Gremmen ce-test qualified testing bv Owner LinkedIn EMC experts group Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Grace Lin Verzonden: dinsdag 27 december 2011 17:01 Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org Onderwerp: Protect An EMI Receiver Dear Members, Happy New Year!!! I need your advice to prevent RS ESU receiver from damage. A service report (as a result of annual calibration) indicates frequency response out of specification below 10MHz. Adjusted frequency response. Adjusted the reference oscillator to optimize frequency accuracy when operating from an internal standard. Plots from the calibration report shows the problem frequncy range was right below 150 kHz (100 kHz -150 kHz). I wonder the problem was caused by click noise from dimmers. Under receiver mode, I was unable to see the click noise (below 1 MHz in most cases) displyed in the ESU screen when the start freq was 150kHz and stop freq was 30MHz. I was able to see the high click noise when the receiver was set at the certain frequency (for example 150 kHz). At the same time, the screen also showed IF Overload message. What should I do to prevent it from happening again? 1. Is there any way to play with the ESU's preselection
Re: Thermocouple alternative?
John, In my company, I often run into this problem and a non-contact or infrared thermometer is not always pratical. Like you, I also had to resort to momentary turn off to get accurate readings. In one instance, I had magentic fields strong enough to cause damage to the instrument. There are several things you can do and not all of these are always necessary. 1) I exclusively use T type thermocouple wire because it has no ferrous content and the effective temperature range more closely brackets the temperatures I am interested in. The reason for non-ferrous wire is strong magnetic fields not only induce erroneous readings, but they also cause heating of the thermocouple itself. In the past I typically saw this problem with the K J types. Simply doing a momentary turn-off does not correct this problem as the wire takes some descrete time to cool off and after a point you don't know if you device under test is cooling as well. The problem is that I've never found a handheld meter that accepts T type wire. 2) The next thing I do is insure the thermocouple conductors are not separated, keeping loop area small. Twisting is ideal if you can do this without damaging to the welded tip. Ideally you should be able to weld your own. 3) If possible, try to orient thermocouple wires to avoid 'cutting' flux lines. 4) Try using ferrite beads to knock down any common-mode RF induced on the wire and being conducted into the instrument. The readings you are interested in are essentially DC. 5) If you are still having troubles, construct a Faraday shield by wrapping with copper foil. Grounding the shield may be helpful. The shield needs to fully enclose the thermocouple bead and surround the wires for some distance, far enough to exit the area where the fields are. Be sure the copper foil is insulated inside and out. Note, readings may take a little longer. 6) Finally, if all else fails, you can resort to the resistance method described in IEC 61558-1 (fomerly IEC 60742) clause 14.2. This takes a milli-Ohm meter. -doug --- Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. [quote]Hi John, A possible solution would be to use an infrared non-contact thermometer. They measure temperature essentially by pointing them at the object of interest. They have a few drawbacks that I know of: 1. You need to have visual access to the part or surface of interest. 2. You need to account for spot size since its detector essentially integrates all of the infrared in its field of view. The spot size changes with distance from the thermometer to the surface of interest. 3. If you are trying to graph temperature over time: you can't just glue it in place and hook it to a data logger. I don't know if it would be worth rigging up some kind of tripod to keep the infrared detector aimed at the point of interest. We had one in the lab for a couple of days. It was a handheld, battery powered unit about the size of a Palm Pilot. Sadly, I only got to play with it a little bit before it was taken away. I wanted to see how accurate it was at measureing component temperatures on a circuitboard. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Crabb, John [SMTP:jo...@exchange.scotland.ncr.com] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 9:02 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC-related safety issues Seeing that we have got round to the subject of thermocouples, etc, I often use a Solartron SI3535D datalogger with thermocouples for measuring component temperatures, and find quite often that it does not give correct readings when thermocouples are placed on transformers in switching power supplies, high voltage transformers in monitors, etc. I can get a correct reading by switching off the EUT momentarily, obviously removing the source of the problem. Note that the problem can occur even if the thermocouple is not making an electrical connection to the component winding involved. Any suggestions how to overcome this ? My previous antique datalogger didn't have this problem, but it eventually had to be scrapped due to lack of spare parts - and the expectation that a more modern unit would be better !. Regards, John Crabb, Development Excellence (Product Safety) , NCR Financial Solutions Group Ltd., Kingsway West, Dundee, Scotland. DD2 3XX E-Mail :john.cr...@scotland.ncr.com Tel: +44 (0)1382-592289 (direct ). Fax +44 (0)1382-622243. VoicePlus 6-341-2289. [/quote] Replies to this message may be posted in a public forum. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web
