RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Far be it from me to nit-pick, but to say in a standard that the tests specified in this annex SHOULD be carried out by the manufacturer on each luminaire after production, doesn't sound like a normative requirement. They should have used SHALL. But maybe it is an informative annex ? 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. -Original Message- From: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk [mailto:raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk] Sent: 23 August 2001 15:13 To: kazimier_gawrzy...@dell.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing I just found out the notes about the hipot testing. The standard is IEC 60598-1 Page 343 Annex Q Conformity testing during manufacture. Under General para., The tests specified in this annex should be carried out by the manufacturer on each luminaire after production and are intended to reveal, as far as safety is concerned, unacceptable variation in material and manufacture. These tests are intended not to impair the properties and the reliability of the luminaire, and they vary from certain type tests in the standard by the lower voltages utilised. is stated. For hipot test, it suggests a minimum voltage of 1.5 kV a.c. for a minimum of 1 s and maximum breakdown current 5 mA for class 1 luminaires and class 2 luminaires metal encased. Thanks and regards, Raymond Li --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I just found out the notes about the hipot testing. The standard is IEC 60598-1 Page 343 Annex Q Conformity testing during manufacture. Under General para., The tests specified in this annex should be carried out by the manufacturer on each luminaire after production and are intended to reveal, as far as safety is concerned, unacceptable variation in material and manufacture. These tests are intended not to impair the properties and the reliability of the luminaire, and they vary from certain type tests in the standard by the lower voltages utilised. is stated. For hipot test, it suggests a minimum voltage of 1.5 kV a.c. for a minimum of 1 s and maximum breakdown current 5 mA for class 1 luminaires and class 2 luminaires metal encased. Thanks and regards, Raymond Li As far as I remember, the standard is BS EN 60598 Luminaires. I do not have this standard in hand now so I cannot quote the page and/or the clause. Does someone have this standard and take a look for me? Thanks!! Actually I have learnt this caution from different engineers a number of times especially from semi-conductor technical people but that was the first time I read it in standard. Regards, Raymond Li Omni Source Asia Ltd. - Phone: +852-2542 5303 Email: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk Fax: +852-2541 9067 Kazimier_Gawrzyja l...@dell.com To: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 23/08/01 01:52 a cc: Subject: RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Raymond, I'm curious...which standard were you reading? Regards, Kaz Gawrzyjal Dell Computer Corp. -Original Message- From: Stone, Richard A (Richard) [mailto:rsto...@lucent.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 12:34 PM To: 'raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Cc: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing I don't see where that proves anything ( 1/2 voltage testing) using voltage applicable to product is required. Testing for one second checks for shorts and miswiring or spacings that may have been decreased due to workmanship. Richard, -Original Message- From: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk [mailto:raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:26 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Cc: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Dear All, I have read one BSEN standard suggesting not to perform hipot testing at the test voltage, 3kV, 1.25kV or 3.75kV in mass production. The reason is that it might introduce potential failure in future operation by the customer not immediate failure. It also suggests if hipot testing is done on production line, lower testing voltage, i.e., 1/2 of test voltage should be applied. I would like to have comments on this concern while doing hipot test on production line or other modern way to replace the hipot test on production line. Thanks and regards, .. Raymond Li Omni Source Asia Ltd. - Phone: +852-2542 5303 Email: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk Fax: +852-2541 9067 John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing o.ieee.org 22/08/01 01:39 a Please respond to John Woodgate I read in !emc-pstc that Doug McKean dmck...@corp.auspex.com wrote (in 001001c12a54$2b315f80$3e3e3...@corp.auspex.com) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Tue, 21 Aug 2001: IMHO, if I were to address the initial question regarding manufactoring testing of a product bound for Europe - unless there were some severe national deviation differences from a similar type of US domestic approval of the product, I'd continue along with hi-pot testing just as if the product were bound for a domestic (US) market. Well, you have come to the right conclusion but for two wrong reasons. In Europe, there are no longer any 'national approvals' like the old SEMKO etc. There is ONLY the Low Voltage
RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Just a viewpoint from one of those commercial test houses. In Europe the requirements of the Low Voltage Directive are that a product must be safe, be constructed in accordance with good engineering practice and comply with the principal elements of the safety objectives detailed. It does not say that a product must conform to any standard, it does however say that a product complying with a harmonised standard will be deemed to comply with the safety provisions of the Directive. Therefore the law in Europe has no requirements for any production line hipot or other testing provided you can show evidence that you have done all that is necessary to show the product is safe. Under the legal requirements it is possible to deviate from any production line testing detailed in the standards whether it is in an informative or normative or any other type of Annex. In practise it is difficult to imagine any way of ensuring an electrical product is safe without some form of end of line testing. Many test houses operate certification schemes which give additional confidence to buyers that a product is safe (or whatever other thing the marks are perceived to show by the buyer). Most test marks are private marks belonging to a company, there is one exception and that is the German GS mark. This is a Government mark and forms part of the German Safety Law, it is not (and never has been) Mandatory, the mark is issued by the TUVs and their appropriate logo will appear alongside the GS mark. This mark is well established in Germany and other parts of Europe. Regarding other issues brought up on this subject, by choosing a test house carefully, it should be possible to obtain virtually all international certification necessary through one body, possibly by using the CB scheme (which is not a true certification scheme). This has cost and time benefits and should simplify the process. I expect I have just told you all what you already know, but I hope it helps. Best regards Glenn Moffat TUV International UK TUV Rheinland/Berlin-Brandenburg Group Ltd www.uk.tuv.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 and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I read in !emc-pstc that Colgan, Chris chris.col...@tagmclaren.com wrote (in AE0F4BD08FEAD211895900805FE67B1FD6CAC5@CAT) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Thu, 23 Aug 2001: ps there's no need to shout :) Since it was the third time that I'd made the point, I felt that some emphasis could be excused. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Raymond, I've been in such a position where we contested hi-pot testing each and every AC power cable which was sent with every product during production line testing. There were two basic reasons: one, for the reason you've suggested possibly introducing a failure. Second, the time constraint on the assembly floor became a burden. We appealed and it was decided by the NRTL at the time that it was okay not to do 100% testing of the cords. BUT, some percentage (I forget now) would have to be done and entered into a hi-pot log book, model number, serial number, and date noted. I have to footnote that we were using fully approved cords on their own merit. I'm only imagining that since we were using listed components, the concern was not as much as if we had been using something with less of an approval. If there is a concern, I would certainly suggest asking your NRTL test engineer. - Doug McKean --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I read in !emc-pstc that raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk wrote (in of5099731c.c8b3ec7a-on48256ab0.004e0...@omnisourceasia.com.hk) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Wed, 22 Aug 2001: I have read one BSEN standard suggesting not to perform hipot testing at the test voltage, 3kV, 1.25kV or 3.75kV in mass production. Which one? That is vital! The reason is that it might introduce potential failure in future operation by the customer not immediate failure. It also suggests if hipot testing is done on production line, lower testing voltage, i.e., 1/2 of test voltage should be applied. I would like to have comments on this concern while doing hipot test on production line or other modern way to replace the hipot test on production line. I think this is being over-cautious, maybe dangerously so. There is a good reason for using such high voltages, based on typical surge or spike voltages plus a margin - failures may not be detected at lower voltages. The concern over gradual degradation of insulation was brought up in the context of 'PAT' - Portable Appliance Testing, where products **in service** might be tested every three months or even at shorter intervals. In this case, it is now the practice not to do a hi-pot test at all, but an insulation resistance test. (There is a problem with this as well, but that's another subject.) -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I don't see where that proves anything ( 1/2 voltage testing) using voltage applicable to product is required. Testing for one second checks for shorts and miswiring or spacings that may have been decreased due to workmanship. Richard, -Original Message- From: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk [mailto:raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:26 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Cc: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Dear All, I have read one BSEN standard suggesting not to perform hipot testing at the test voltage, 3kV, 1.25kV or 3.75kV in mass production. The reason is that it might introduce potential failure in future operation by the customer not immediate failure. It also suggests if hipot testing is done on production line, lower testing voltage, i.e., 1/2 of test voltage should be applied. I would like to have comments on this concern while doing hipot test on production line or other modern way to replace the hipot test on production line. Thanks and regards, .. Raymond Li Omni Source Asia Ltd. - Phone: +852-2542 5303 Email: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk Fax: +852-2541 9067 John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing o.ieee.org 22/08/01 01:39 a Please respond to John Woodgate I read in !emc-pstc that Doug McKean dmck...@corp.auspex.com wrote (in 001001c12a54$2b315f80$3e3e3...@corp.auspex.com) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Tue, 21 Aug 2001: IMHO, if I were to address the initial question regarding manufactoring testing of a product bound for Europe - unless there were some severe national deviation differences from a similar type of US domestic approval of the product, I'd continue along with hi-pot testing just as if the product were bound for a domestic (US) market. Well, you have come to the right conclusion but for two wrong reasons. In Europe, there are no longer any 'national approvals' like the old SEMKO etc. There is ONLY the Low Voltage Directive, and the European Standards (ENs) that have been 'notified' in the Official Journal as providing evidence of compliance. However, most if not all of these ENs have *mandatory requirements* for 100% production-line testing (confusingly called 'routine testing'), including a 'hi-pot' test. It is entirely the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that the Declaration of Conformity for the product is true, and to do that he MAY, but does not have to, employ a test-house to produce a report and maybe an expensive certificate and grant permission, in return for more money, to apply a glamorous sticker to the product. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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. --- 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. --- 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
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Dear All, I have read one BSEN standard suggesting not to perform hipot testing at the test voltage, 3kV, 1.25kV or 3.75kV in mass production. The reason is that it might introduce potential failure in future operation by the customer not immediate failure. It also suggests if hipot testing is done on production line, lower testing voltage, i.e., 1/2 of test voltage should be applied. I would like to have comments on this concern while doing hipot test on production line or other modern way to replace the hipot test on production line. Thanks and regards, .. Raymond Li Omni Source Asia Ltd. - Phone: +852-2542 5303 Email: raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk Fax: +852-2541 9067 John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing o.ieee.org 22/08/01 01:39 a Please respond to John Woodgate I read in !emc-pstc that Doug McKean dmck...@corp.auspex.com wrote (in 001001c12a54$2b315f80$3e3e3...@corp.auspex.com) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Tue, 21 Aug 2001: IMHO, if I were to address the initial question regarding manufactoring testing of a product bound for Europe - unless there were some severe national deviation differences from a similar type of US domestic approval of the product, I'd continue along with hi-pot testing just as if the product were bound for a domestic (US) market. Well, you have come to the right conclusion but for two wrong reasons. In Europe, there are no longer any 'national approvals' like the old SEMKO etc. There is ONLY the Low Voltage Directive, and the European Standards (ENs) that have been 'notified' in the Official Journal as providing evidence of compliance. However, most if not all of these ENs have *mandatory requirements* for 100% production-line testing (confusingly called 'routine testing'), including a 'hi-pot' test. It is entirely the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that the Declaration of Conformity for the product is true, and to do that he MAY, but does not have to, employ a test-house to produce a report and maybe an expensive certificate and grant permission, in return for more money, to apply a glamorous sticker to the product. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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. --- 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
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I read in !emc-pstc that Colgan, Chris chris.col...@tagmclaren.com wrote (in AE0F4BD08FEAD211895900805FE67B1FD6CAC3@CAT) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Wed, 22 Aug 2001: Well, you have come to the right conclusion but for two wrong reasons. In Europe, there are no longer any 'national approvals' like the old SEMKO etc. There is ONLY the Low Voltage Directive, and the European Standards (ENs) that have been 'notified' in the Official Journal as providing evidence of compliance. Not so, the SEMKO S mark along with NEMKO, DEMKO and FIMKO and many others (TUV?) is alive and well. These marks not only demonstrate compliance with the LVD and EMCD (if applicable) but also that some form of manufacturing quality contol is exercised which is audited by the mark's owner. Critical components will be checked and hi pot testing must be performed. They are NOT NOW 'NATIONAL APPROVALS'. That is why I was careful to say ***old*** SEMKO. Those marks are now the property of **commercial test- houses**, and those test-houses have no higher status than any other, in spite of what you may be led to believe. The auditing is simply another 'added value' feature, like the fancy certificates and the permission to use the marks. TUV (either species) has never, AIUI, been anything other than a commercial test-house. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Well, you have come to the right conclusion but for two wrong reasons. In Europe, there are no longer any 'national approvals' like the old SEMKO etc. There is ONLY the Low Voltage Directive, and the European Standards (ENs) that have been 'notified' in the Official Journal as providing evidence of compliance. Not so, the SEMKO S mark along with NEMKO, DEMKO and FIMKO and many others (TUV?) is alive and well. These marks not only demonstrate compliance with the LVD and EMCD (if applicable) but also that some form of manufacturing quality contol is exercised which is audited by the mark's owner. Critical components will be checked and hi pot testing must be performed. Chris Colgan Compliance Engineer TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU *Tel: +44 (0)1480 415 627 *Fax: +44 (0)1480 52159 * Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclaren.com * http://www.tagmclaren.com ** Please visit us at www.tagmclaren.com ** The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error, please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either by E-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail. TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, 11 Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600) Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159) ** Please visit us at www.tagmclaren.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 and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I read in !emc-pstc that Doug McKean dmck...@corp.auspex.com wrote (in 001001c12a54$2b315f80$3e3e3...@corp.auspex.com) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Tue, 21 Aug 2001: IMHO, if I were to address the initial question regarding manufactoring testing of a product bound for Europe - unless there were some severe national deviation differences from a similar type of US domestic approval of the product, I'd continue along with hi-pot testing just as if the product were bound for a domestic (US) market. Well, you have come to the right conclusion but for two wrong reasons. In Europe, there are no longer any 'national approvals' like the old SEMKO etc. There is ONLY the Low Voltage Directive, and the European Standards (ENs) that have been 'notified' in the Official Journal as providing evidence of compliance. However, most if not all of these ENs have *mandatory requirements* for 100% production-line testing (confusingly called 'routine testing'), including a 'hi-pot' test. It is entirely the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that the Declaration of Conformity for the product is true, and to do that he MAY, but does not have to, employ a test-house to produce a report and maybe an expensive certificate and grant permission, in return for more money, to apply a glamorous sticker to the product. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
The following is strictly opinion ... I may be sticking my neck way out here, but it is my understanding that any required manufacturing hi-pot test, with regard to UL-1950, is contractual between the mfr of said device and the testing NRTL. To my knowledge, there is no *requirement* within the standard which warrants manufacturing hi-pot test. The standard merely gives a guide if it is so chosen to be done. After testing, the NRTL may submit the mfr to lots of requirements not within the standard. And if one were to read the standard to the letter, there's tons of contractual arrengements not stated in the standard. This is why I have a difficult time explaining to some people the real meaning of the NRTL label when it is applied to the product. It's subtle I know, but the real meaning of the label is not one of approval', it's really a sign of a continued contractual arrangement between you and the NRTL. Some people think of the NRTL label as a sort of medal as one would win in some sporting event. Years after, you may still have the medal but no longer compete. Not so with an NRTL label. If there were no contractual agreement behind it, then upon successful completion of the testing you could apply the label and be done with the NRTL forever. And as such, failure to maintain requirements after testing can result with the label being pulled. In the case of someplace such as Europe, where self-declarartion is used, things can get more severe by having a product pulled. IMHO, if I were to address the initial question regarding manufactoring testing of a product bound for Europe - unless there were some severe national deviation differences from a similar type of US domestic approval of the product, I'd continue along with hi-pot testing just as if the product were bound for a domestic (US) market. Sorry for getting wrapped around the axle about this topic, but that's my 3.1415 cents worth ... - Doug --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
CORRECTION: ... we do use EN 61010-1 almost ... eric.lif...@ni.com Sent by: To: emc-p...@ieee.org owner-emc-pstc@majordomcc: o.ieee.org Subject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing 08/20/2001 05:14 PM Please respond to eric.lifsey Interesting points. This provoked me to look again into a standard that I've examined but never used, BS EN 50178:1998, Electronic equipment for use in power installations. It covers safety, EMC, and environmental conditions. It is 99 pages long, it's informative Annex A starts on page 72, so more that 25% of the standard is informative. However, we do use EN 61616-1 almost exclusively and have routinely specified hipot testing, and it does't hurt that we also have the explicit encouragement of a 3rd party approval. Back to topic. Our manufacturing people view the hipot test as useful for detecting defects, possibly because the hipot tester and control software are linked into a database which makes operating and tracking the results of this test automatic. I wonder if it wasn't for the software/database linkage that the hipot test might not enjoy as much acceptance by manufacturing. If the hipot test is made easy to set and operate, then it might be considered useful rather than some arcane obligation. Eric Lifsey National Instruments --- 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: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Hi Kaz, Both IEC60950 3rd Ed UL60950 3rd Ed define the ROUTINE TEST as you describe, however, in note 1, the key phrase is specified elsewhere in this standard. In fact, the only references for ROUTINE TEST and Electric Strength put together (REST = Routine Electric Strength Test) in this standard can be found at the following locations: - Tables 2H(note 2) and 2K(note 2) require REST for Double/Reinforced Insulation. - Clause 2.10.5.3 requires REST for PWBs per Table 2M(note 3). - Clause 2.10.5.4 requires REST for wound components. - Tables G.2(note 2) requires REST for Double/Reinforced Insulation. - Tables R.1(note 4) and R.2(note 2) provide REST alternatives. So, it would appear that a ROUTINE TEST description for finished ITE products still is not present in this standard (series). However, as we all undoubtedly have at least one third-party mark on our products here in the US and maybe elsewhere, that third-party has the privilege to mandate what routine tests are required for their mark to be affixed to our products. Looking forward to some comments/rebuttals. Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com Kazimier_Gawrzyjal@Dell .com To: j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing o.ieee.org 08/20/01 01:44 PM Please respond to Kazimier_Gawrzyjal For Hi-pot, see CAN/CSA C22.2 No 60950-00 * UL 60950, ed. 3, Dec. 1, 2000, cl. 5.2.2 Note 1 and the invoked definition (by NOTE 1) for ROUTINE TEST per cl. 1.2.13.3. My opinion and not that of my employer. Regards, Kaz Gawrzyjal Dell Computer Corp. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:49 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing I read in !emc-pstc that Peter Merguerian pmerguer...@itl.co.il wrote (in 2D1037012914D4118DB8204C4F4F50202D5CD4@ITLLTD01) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Mon, 20 Aug 2001: Production - Line Tests (usually Dilectric Strength and Earth Continuity and in some cases like medical equipment, Leakage ) are not required by the standards but by the third party certification agencies. No, they are written into IEC standards now. I don't know about UL and CSA. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- 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
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Interesting points. This provoked me to look again into a standard that I've examined but never used, BS EN 50178:1998, Electronic equipment for use in power installations. It covers safety, EMC, and environmental conditions. It is 99 pages long, it's informative Annex A starts on page 72, so more that 25% of the standard is informative. However, we do use EN 61616-1 almost exclusively and have routinely specified hipot testing, and it does't hurt that we also have the explicit encouragement of a 3rd party approval. Back to topic. Our manufacturing people view the hipot test as useful for detecting defects, possibly because the hipot tester and control software are linked into a database which makes operating and tracking the results of this test automatic. I wonder if it wasn't for the software/database linkage that the hipot test might not enjoy as much acceptance by manufacturing. If the hipot test is made easy to set and operate, then it might be considered useful rather than some arcane obligation. Eric Lifsey National Instruments John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing o.ieee.org 08/20/2001 08:09 AM Please respond to John Woodgate I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Maxwell chris.maxw...@nettest.com wrote (in 83d652574e7af740873674f9fc12dbaa675...@utexh1w2.gnnettest.com) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Mon, 20 Aug 2001: I believe that it matters. For instance, in EN 61010-1 (Safety of Test Measurement Equipment) production line testing is in one of the informative annexes. It isn't in one of the normative annexes. This leads me to believe that, if strictly interpreted, production line hipot ... isn't required for EN 61010-1. You are correct, if indeed the Annex is Informative. But that is exceedingly surprising. I'm not sure if this is also true for other Euro safety standards. No, it is not, for any that I know about anyway. I wonder if other people have noticed this difference between informative and normative annexes. How is this interpreted? Normative Annexes contain provisions that are equally valid as those of the main text. Informative Annexes do not, or should not, contain provisions, simply recommendations, clarifications or data. In any case, they are *purely* informative. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
For Hi-pot, see CAN/CSA C22.2 No 60950-00 * UL 60950, ed. 3, Dec. 1, 2000, cl. 5.2.2 Note 1 and the invoked definition (by NOTE 1) for ROUTINE TEST per cl. 1.2.13.3. My opinion and not that of my employer. Regards, Kaz Gawrzyjal Dell Computer Corp. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:49 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing I read in !emc-pstc that Peter Merguerian pmerguer...@itl.co.il wrote (in 2D1037012914D4118DB8204C4F4F50202D5CD4@ITLLTD01) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Mon, 20 Aug 2001: Production - Line Tests (usually Dilectric Strength and Earth Continuity and in some cases like medical equipment, Leakage ) are not required by the standards but by the third party certification agencies. No, they are written into IEC standards now. I don't know about UL and CSA. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I read in !emc-pstc that Peter Merguerian pmerguer...@itl.co.il wrote (in 2D1037012914D4118DB8204C4F4F50202D5CD4@ITLLTD01) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Mon, 20 Aug 2001: Production - Line Tests (usually Dilectric Strength and Earth Continuity and in some cases like medical equipment, Leakage ) are not required by the standards but by the third party certification agencies. No, they are written into IEC standards now. I don't know about UL and CSA. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Chris, Production - Line Tests (usually Dilectric Strength and Earth Continuity and in some cases like medical equipment, Leakage ) are not required by the standards but by the third party certification agencies. This is to ensure that the unit meets protection against shock even after a production-line fault - such as a screw which may have slipped and caused a short or the earth lead was not connected). PETER S. MERGUERIAN Technical Director I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. 26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022 Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019 Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175 -Original Message- From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:47 PM To: don_macart...@selinc.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Hi Don, I'm curious Which safety standard to you use for CE marking your product? I believe that it matters. For instance, in EN 61010-1 (Safety of Test Measurement Equipment) production line testing is in one of the informative annexes. It isn't in one of the normative annexes. This leads me to believe that, if strictly interpreted, production line hipot ... isn't required for EN 61010-1. I'm not sure if this is also true for other Euro safety standards. I wonder if other people have noticed this difference between informative and normative annexes. How is this interpreted? Chris Maxwell Design Engineer - NetTest Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com phone +1 315 266 5128 fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 USA web www.nettest.com -Original Message- From: don_macart...@selinc.com [SMTP:don_macart...@selinc.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:13 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Dear Group: A Hipot standard which we must run for CE compliance requires that circuit-to-circuit and circuit-to-ground testing be performed on a routine basis. The test is applied for 10s. The products I deal with have many circuits (Inputs, outputs, etc.) so test time is excessive . To speed test time the standard allows for grouping of similar circuits and decreasing the test time to 1s (with increased voltage). There is a problem with the grouping method because faults between circuits in the group are masked. A better way of performing dielectric strength testing would be to automate a process where each individual circuit is hipot tested to ground for 1 second. The problem is that this method doesn't match what the CE standard requires. Some of you have probably been in similar circumstances. What did you do? What do you suggest? Do I meet the standard no matter the cost? What is the risk of having my CE Mark pulled and perhaps my company sued if I do not meet the entire standard? Regards, Don MacArthur --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- 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
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Don, IEC 60950, section 5.3, is specific regarding electric strength testing. It does not require testing between secondary circuits, as it is the primary to secondary, and primary to ground insulation that provides protection against electric shock. Type testing is performed for 1 minute, although production testing is permitted for 1 sec. It usually requires several seconds for the high-pot to ramp up, stabilize at the desired votage, and then ramp down, so it normally takes 3+ seconds to assure a full second at the max voltage. Of course, you may be working with a non-ITE product, with a different standard, requiring secondary intra-circuit testing. George Alspaugh don_macarthur%selinc@interlock.lexmark.com on 08/17/2001 02:12:51 PM Please respond to don_macarthur%selinc@interlock.lexmark.com To: emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com cc:(bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Dear Group: A Hipot standard which we must run for CE compliance requires that circuit-to-circuit and circuit-to-ground testing be performed on a routine basis. The test is applied for 10s. The products I deal with have many circuits (Inputs, outputs, etc.) so test time is excessive . To speed test time the standard allows for grouping of similar circuits and decreasing the test time to 1s (with increased voltage). There is a problem with the grouping method because faults between circuits in the group are masked. A better way of performing dielectric strength testing would be to automate a process where each individual circuit is hipot tested to ground for 1 second. The problem is that this method doesn't match what the CE standard requires. Some of you have probably been in similar circumstances. What did you do? What do you suggest? Do I meet the standard no matter the cost? What is the risk of having my CE Mark pulled and perhaps my company sued if I do not meet the entire standard? Regards, Don MacArthur --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Don, I do not believe that circuit-to-circuit testing is required between low-voltage circuits. The test is intended to prevent shock hazards caused by insulation leakage between high-voltage circuits and low-voltage circuits. I would group the circuits for production testing and only test them separately (for diagnostic purposes) if the test failed. Scott Lacey -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of don_macart...@selinc.com Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:13 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Dear Group: A Hipot standard which we must run for CE compliance requires that circuit-to-circuit and circuit-to-ground testing be performed on a routine basis. The test is applied for 10s. The products I deal with have many circuits (Inputs, outputs, etc.) so test time is excessive . To speed test time the standard allows for grouping of similar circuits and decreasing the test time to 1s (with increased voltage). There is a problem with the grouping method because faults between circuits in the group are masked. A better way of performing dielectric strength testing would be to automate a process where each individual circuit is hipot tested to ground for 1 second. The problem is that this method doesn't match what the CE standard requires. Some of you have probably been in similar circumstances. What did you do? What do you suggest? Do I meet the standard no matter the cost? What is the risk of having my CE Mark pulled and perhaps my company sued if I do not meet the entire standard? Regards, Don MacArthur --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I read in !emc-pstc that don_macart...@selinc.com wrote (in 88256AAB.00 640e1a...@edison.selinc.com) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Fri, 17 Aug 2001: A Hipot standard which we must run for CE compliance requires that circuit-to-circuit and circuit-to-ground testing be performed on a routine basis. You don't tell us which standard you are applying. You may have misinterpreted it, but we can't tell. The 'routine' production-line 100% test is NOT intended to be a time- consuming process. The people who wrote the test procedure (which did not include me) do have *just a little* experience of volume production. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
