RE: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

2001-11-30 Thread CE-TEST
Did anyone take a look at 61010 standard for measuring etc. equipment.
This standard (if I read well) allows for 1.8 mm clearance and 0 creepage
on PCB material (regardless CTI) between hazardous 230 V and
ground if enclosed into a IPx5 or better enclosure (creating Pollution
degree 2).
This really surprises me, as no clause seems to be added for peak values
and transients.Is there anyone out there.. that can shine more light on this
???

Gert Gremmen
  -Original Message-
  From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Ed Eszlari
  Sent: donderdag 29 november 2001 18:35
  To: vit...@aol.com; ri...@sdd.hp.com; xin...@cesi.ac.cn
  Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
  Subject: Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]


  I also agree with the 4.4mm reinforced and 2.2mm basic/supp. calculation.
I will assume that there is a creepage requirement also and would use
pollution 1 in this application as long as the enclosure does not have
openings.

  Ed

  From: vit...@aol.com
  Reply-To: vit...@aol.com
  To: ,
  CC:
  Subject: Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]
  Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:51:04 EST
  
  
  Rich and Xing,
  
  No arguments from me about the clearance of 4.4 mm for reinforced. The
other 6.4 mm clearance requirement is probably a misapplication of the
clarance rules using the 840 v peak row of Table 3H.
  
  I think the original question may also need to consider creepage
requirements. Then again, maybe not. Can the inside of an ac adapter be
considered a pollution degree 1 environment? If so, the creepages are
determined using the clearance table. Has anyone taken this approach? I
presume no ventillation openings are allowed? How good a seal is needed for
the enclosure halves and connectors/output cables?
  
  vgl
  
  In a message dated Wed, 28 Nov 2001 7:50:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Rich Nute writes:
  
Hi Xing Weibing:
   
   
Here is my answer to the question.
   
 Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage
of
 IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
 VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V
PRIMARY
 AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I
HAVE
 READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE:
MINIMUM
 CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
 correct for this situation? regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28
   
Since the product is an adapter, I will assume that
the question addresses clearance between the mains
circuit and a SELV secondary circuit.
   
I will also assume that the applicable standard is
IEC 60950, either
   
2nd Ed (Tables 3 and 4) or
3rd Ed (Tables 2H and 2J).
   
The parameters are:
   
nominal mains voltage: 240 V rms
340 V peak
working voltage: 364 V rms
540 V peak
   
The problem is confused because there is
   
a set of requirements for working voltage,
in Table 3/H, and
   
a set of requirements for peak working voltage,
Table 4/2J.
   
(The 2nd Ed. refers to repetitive peak voltage;
the 3rd Ed refers to peak working voltage.)
   
According to the standard, if the peak value of the
working voltage exceeds the peak value of the mains
voltage, then the working voltage in Table 3/2H is
taken as the mains voltage. Then, the peak working
voltage (aka repetitive peak voltage) is used in
Table 4/2J.
   
In the example, the peak value of the working voltage
exceeds the peak value of the mains voltage.
   
The minimum clearance in Table 3/2H for 240 V mains
and 240 V working is:
   
4.0 mm reinforced
2.0 mm basic/supplementary
   
The additional clearance in Table 4/2J for 240 V mains
and 540 V peak is:
   
0.4 mm reinforced (567 V peak)
0.2 mm basic/supplemenatry (567 V peak)
   
So, the total clearance is:
   
4.4 mm reinforced
2.2 mm basic/supplementary.
   
Arguments? Another view or interpretation?
   
   
Best regards,
Rich
   
   
   
   
---
  
  
  ---
  This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
  Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
  
  Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
  
  To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
   majord...@ieee.org
  with the single line:
   unsubscribe emc-pstc
  
  For help, send mail to the list administrators:
   Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org
   Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net
  
  For policy questions, send mail to:
   Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
   Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
  
  All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
   No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server

Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

2001-11-29 Thread Ed Eszlari


I also agree with the 4.4mm reinforced and 2.2mm basic/supp. calculation. I will assume that there is a creepage requirement also and would use pollution 1 in this application as long as the enclosure does not have openings.
Ed

From: vit...@aol.com 
Reply-To: vit...@aol.com 
To: <ri...@sdd.hp.com>, <xin...@cesi.ac.cn>
CC: <emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage] 
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:51:04 EST 
 
 
Rich and Xing, 
 
No arguments from me about the clearance of 4.4 mm for reinforced. The other 6.4 mm clearance requirement is probably a misapplication of the clarance rules using the 840 v peak row of Table 3H. 
 
I think the original question may also need to consider creepage requirements. Then again, maybe not. Can the inside of an ac adapter be considered a pollution degree 1 environment? If so, the creepages are determined using the clearance table. Has anyone taken this approach? I presume no ventillation openings are allowed? How good a seal is needed for the enclosure halves and connectors/output cables? 
 
vgl 
 
In a message dated Wed, 28 Nov 2001 7:50:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich Nute <ri...@sdd.hp.com>writes: 
 
  Hi Xing Weibing: 
  
  
  Here is my answer to the question. 
  
   Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of 
   IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING 
   VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY 
   AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE 
   READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM 
   CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is 
   correct for this situation? regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28 
  
  Since the product is an adapter, I will assume that 
  the question addresses clearance between the mains 
  circuit and a SELV secondary circuit. 
  
  I will also assume that the applicable standard is 
  IEC 60950, either 
  
  2nd Ed (Tables 3 and 4) or 
  3rd Ed (Tables 2H and 2J). 
  
  The parameters are: 
  
  nominal mains voltage: 240 V rms 
  340 V peak 
  working voltage: 364 V rms 
  540 V peak 
  
  The problem is confused because there is 
  
  a set of requirements for working voltage, 
  in Table 3/H, and 
  
  a set of requirements for peak working voltage, 
  Table 4/2J. 
  
  (The 2nd Ed. refers to "repetitive peak voltage;" 
  the 3rd Ed refers to "peak working voltage.") 
  
  According to the standard, if the peak value of the 
  working voltage exceeds the peak value of the mains 
  voltage, then the working voltage in Table 3/2H is 
  taken as the mains voltage. Then, the peak working 
  voltage (aka repetitive peak voltage) is used in 
  Table 4/2J. 
  
  In the example, the peak value of the working voltage 
  exceeds the peak value of the mains voltage. 
  
  The minimum clearance in Table 3/2H for 240 V mains 
  and 240 V working is: 
  
  4.0 mm reinforced 
  2.0 mm basic/supplementary 
  
  The additional clearance in Table 4/2J for 240 V mains 
  and 540 V peak is: 
  
  0.4 mm reinforced (567 V peak) 
  0.2 mm basic/supplemenatry (567 V peak) 
  
  So, the total clearance is: 
  
  4.4 mm reinforced 
  2.2 mm basic/supplementary. 
  
  Arguments? Another view or interpretation? 
  
  
  Best regards, 
  Rich 
  
  
  
  
  --- 
 
 
--- 
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety 
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 
 
Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ 
 
To cancel your subscription, send mail to: 
 majord...@ieee.org 
with the single line: 
 unsubscribe emc-pstc 
 
For help, send mail to the list administrators: 
 Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org 
 Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net 
 
For policy questions, send mail to: 
 Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org 
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org 
 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
 No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. 
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online an

Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

2001-11-29 Thread VitoGL

Rich and Xing,

No arguments from me about the clearance of 4.4 mm for reinforced.  The other 
6.4 mm clearance requirement is probably a misapplication of the clarance rules 
using the 840 v peak row of Table 3H.

I think the original question may also need to consider creepage requirements.  
Then again, maybe not.  Can the inside of an ac adapter be considered a 
pollution degree 1 environment?  If so, the creepages are determined using the 
clearance table.  Has anyone taken this approach?  I presume no ventillation 
openings are allowed?  How good a seal is needed for the enclosure halves and 
connectors/output cables?

vgl

In a message dated Wed, 28 Nov 2001  7:50:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich 
Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com writes:

 Hi Xing Weibing:
 
 
 Here is my answer to the question.
 
 Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE
READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM
CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
correct for this situation?  regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28
 
 Since the product is an adapter, I will assume that
 the question addresses clearance between the mains
 circuit and a SELV secondary circuit.
 
 I will also assume that the applicable standard is
 IEC 60950, either 
 
 2nd Ed (Tables 3 and 4) or 
 3rd Ed (Tables 2H and 2J).
 
 The parameters are:
 
 nominal mains voltage: 240 V rms
340 V peak
 working voltage:   364 V rms
540 V peak
 
 The problem is confused because there is 
 
 a set of requirements for working voltage, 
 in Table 3/H, and 
 
 a set of requirements for peak working voltage, 
 Table 4/2J.  
 
 (The 2nd Ed. refers to repetitive peak voltage; 
 the 3rd Ed refers to peak working voltage.)
 
 According to the standard, if the peak value of the
 working voltage exceeds the peak value of the mains
 voltage, then the working voltage in Table 3/2H is 
 taken as the mains voltage.  Then, the peak working
 voltage (aka repetitive peak voltage) is used in
 Table 4/2J.
 
 In the example, the peak value of the working voltage
 exceeds the peak value of the mains voltage.
 
 The minimum clearance in Table 3/2H for 240 V mains
 and 240 V working is:
 
 4.0 mm reinforced
 2.0 mm basic/supplementary
 
 The additional clearance in Table 4/2J for 240 V mains
 and 540 V peak is:
 
 0.4 mm reinforced (567 V peak)
 0.2 mm basic/supplemenatry (567 V peak)
 
 So, the total clearance is:
 
 4.4 mm reinforced
 2.2 mm basic/supplementary.
 
 Arguments?  Another view or interpretation?
 
 
 Best regards,
 Rich
 
 
 
 
 ---


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.


Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

2001-11-29 Thread Rich Nute




Hi Xing Weibing:


Here is my answer to the question.

Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
   IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
   VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
   AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE
   READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM
   CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
   correct for this situation?  regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28

Since the product is an adapter, I will assume that
the question addresses clearance between the mains
circuit and a SELV secondary circuit.

I will also assume that the applicable standard is
IEC 60950, either 

2nd Ed (Tables 3 and 4) or 
3rd Ed (Tables 2H and 2J).

The parameters are:

nominal mains voltage: 240 V rms
   340 V peak
working voltage:   364 V rms
   540 V peak

The problem is confused because there is 

a set of requirements for working voltage, 
in Table 3/H, and 

a set of requirements for peak working voltage, 
Table 4/2J.  

(The 2nd Ed. refers to repetitive peak voltage; 
the 3rd Ed refers to peak working voltage.)

According to the standard, if the peak value of the
working voltage exceeds the peak value of the mains
voltage, then the working voltage in Table 3/2H is 
taken as the mains voltage.  Then, the peak working
voltage (aka repetitive peak voltage) is used in
Table 4/2J.

In the example, the peak value of the working voltage
exceeds the peak value of the mains voltage.

The minimum clearance in Table 3/2H for 240 V mains
and 240 V working is:

4.0 mm reinforced
2.0 mm basic/supplementary

The additional clearance in Table 4/2J for 240 V mains
and 540 V peak is:

0.4 mm reinforced (567 V peak)
0.2 mm basic/supplemenatry (567 V peak)

So, the total clearance is:

4.4 mm reinforced
2.2 mm basic/supplementary.

Arguments?  Another view or interpretation?


Best regards,
Rich




---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.


Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

2001-11-28 Thread John Woodgate

I read in !emc-pstc that David Heald davehe...@mediaone.net wrote (in
3c0512fd.7eb9...@mediaone.net) about '[Fwd: clearance and working
voltage]', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Forwarded to the list for xingwb xin...@cesi.ac.cn.
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin

Begin forwarded message
 Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE
READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM
CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
correct for this situation?  regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28

Clearance between what and what? Class 1 or Class 2?
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.


[Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

2001-11-28 Thread David Heald

Forwarded to the list for xingwb xin...@cesi.ac.cn.
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin

Begin forwarded message
 Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE
READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM
CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
correct for this situation?  regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.