Thanks for your comments. The definitions of SEL and PELV in IEC 62052-31 are
as below. Do you find it different?
Regards
B M Vyas
SELV system
An electrical system in which the voltage cannot exceed ELV:
· under normal conditions; and
· under single-fault conditions, including earth
Any reverb susceptibility experts able to provide guidance on antenna
selection? We've got a choice of shiny new ETS 3117s, or older antennas similar
to the 3105. I'd prefer to use the 3117s for radiated emissions in a FAR, not
tie them up here.
Does antenna choice really matter in reverb? As
I suspect that the SELV circuits of an electricity meter never leave the
enclosure, so SELV is OK, but PELV would still be equally safe or
better, even if a very low probability open-circuit earth occurred.
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Part of the reason why two levels of protection are required is because of what
happens if one level fails. If the protective earth bonding connection fails,
and the exposed metal is no longer earthed, the product will typically continue
to operate normally. There is no indication to the user
I agree: SELV as a low-voltage earth-free supply is not actually a safe
concept. It's OK for short connections in the same space, because the
probability of 'power cross' is extremely remote. But if SELV is
extended into several spaces, including, for example, a void, the chance
of
Dear Mr. Vyas:
I suggest you review the definitions for SELV and PELV in IEC 62052. These
definitions are not the same throughout IEC standards. (I don’t have IEC
62052.)
In some standards, SELV is isolated from protective earth, and PELV is
connected to protective earth. If these
HI Amund,
It's new under the RED.
Under the R any involvement of the Notified Body meant that the number
appeared on the label (and packaging, and user manual)
Now, with the RED, it's only for this specific case.
Thanks,
Michael.
-Original Message-
From: Amund Westin
Forwarding this to those in the group who may be interested. Please contact
Erin directly.
>From Erin:
I am recruiting for a Signal Integrity Electrical Engineer to join our team in
Greensboro, NC. We are looking for someone with a background in signal
integrity.
CommScope is a 5
Hi Vyas,
I'm not familiar with this standard, but the general principle is that 2
levels of protection are required to protect operators from hazards. In the
case of the "protective earthed accessible part", I imagine the standard
assumes that a single fault could compromise the protective
Thanks all!
Is this "only NB number under Annex IV Module H" regime new for RED, or
was it the same under RTTE?
Br.
Amund
On 2018-03-13 11:23, Michael Derby wrote:
Hello Amund,
Correct. If you apply to a Notified Body under Annex III (Module B)
and
get an EU-Type Examination
Dear All,
IEC 62052-31 is standard for product safety requirements for electricity
metering equipment. It has a table 20 (given below) which details out
insulation requirements between various types of circuits.
My question is, why Basic insulation is required between SELV circuit and
Amund
Correct - it is ONLY permitted if you follow Annex IV and must not be affixed
otherwise.
The NB number and EU-Type examination certificate number should of course be
referenced on the DoC
Regards
Charlie
Charlie Blackham
Sulis Consultants Ltd
Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317
Web:
Hello Amund,
Correct. If you apply to a Notified Body under Annex III (Module B) and
get an EU-Type Examination Certificate, you do not put their Notified Body
number on the product. (It would give the false impression that you had
used Annex IV (Module H).
If you apply to a Notified Body
As I can see from RED 2014/53/EU (article 20.3) and RED Guide (May 2017,
chapter 2.6.f), it's only allowed to affix the Notified Body number on
the radio product, if Annex IV (Module H) have been applied.
I assume that consulting a Notified Body under Annex III (Module B) and
get an EU-Type
14 matches
Mail list logo
