Good afternoon.
The Subject tables discuss transients to be applied to conductors
considered external circuits.
Whereas in 60950-1, these tests generally applied to conductors
falling under Clauses 6 or 7, the scope of the applicability of the
Subject testing appears to have expanded to
Brian is correct regarding risk assessment under 61010-1 (and I had to make,
and prove, that “point” to my last contract employer – and without doing that,
some of their products could never be legitimately certified to the previous
edition of that standard) , but, frankly, the same is true (or
IEC/EN/UL 61010-1 standard in section 17 states that if there is a hazard
not addressed by the standard that you must perform a risk assessment. In
a note, it lists some Risk Assessment standards, but the most used and
current standard is the ISO 12100 which calls out many other standards
Hi James,
- Do any other safety standards share this reduction in OVC for PE
connected circuits?
I'm not completely sure what you mean by the reduction in OVC. This is
intended to refer only to the secondary circuit OVC, not the primary
circuit OVC. So in the example you gave, the
Hi James:
I cannot provide a detailed answer to your question, but it appears that
part of the analysis depends on what qualifies as "reliable earthing."
Most safety standards make a distinction between "reliable earthing"
(typically accompanied by a definition), and what might be called
Good morning all
We have a system that generates a chemical but without pumps and only electro
valves as moving part. The system has been checked for EN 61010-1
There is a risk that an hazardous gas release can happen and we have a gas
detector for that.
The question is that as it is not a
Hello safety experts,
A question regarding overvoltage categories and "reliable" earthing and some
differences between standards. I would be interested to hear your thoughts.
Background:
When determining the required withstand voltage for insulation, EN 62368-1
states that:
5.4.2.3.3
7 matches
Mail list logo
