Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-3:2017 evaluation of USB 2.0 ports

2021-10-20 Thread John Woodgate
Hi, Pete. Isn't Charlie's option to say, with test results, that if he plugs his product into a USBzilla source, it still remains safe under any single-fault condition? == Best wishes John Woodgate OOO-Own

[PSES] IEC 62368-3:2017 evaluation of USB 2.0 ports

2021-10-20 Thread Charlie Blackham
All I realise there are now applications where 100W or more can be transferred, but for devices with only USB2.0 ports, that are coming from the same chip, is there really any need for testing and CB certification to this standard as part of an assessment to IEC 62368-1? The particular

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-3:2017 evaluation of USB 2.0 ports

2021-10-20 Thread Bill Owsley
Old story, mid 80's, when PC's were being placed on every desk as office work stations. Two different separate events occurred. The high volume of switching power supplies feeding off the big inhouse transformers caused some heating issues due to harmonics, etc.  Thus the harmonic standard.

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-3:2017 evaluation of USB 2.0 ports

2021-10-20 Thread Pete Perkins
Charlie,Remember that 62368-3 was developed at the direction of ACOS to move the powered communication interfaces info from the 62368-1 base standard to a separate document that would be available for use outside of 62368-1. The goal is to move this from the Wild West into an

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-3:2017 evaluation of USB 2.0 ports

2021-10-20 Thread Pete Perkins
John (& Charlie), Yes, I believe I also said that, under Euro CE marking & now British UKCA, self-certification is allowed but he mentioned that he was concerned that a test house was pressing the issue. So, if he wants to get the test house marking he either has to talk them out of it or