Re: [PSES] definition of terminology

[Ralph McDiarmid]

That seems a handy resource all right.  I didn't know it existed.  At random, I 
looked up these three examples:

non-linear, adj
-qualifies a circuit element or a circuit for which not all relations between 
the integral quantities are linear
*not really helpful, because it only states that non-linear is not linear*

and then this one:

instantaneous power 
-for a two-terminal element or a two-terminal circuit with terminals A and B, 
product of the voltage uAB 
p=uAB⋅i 
where uAB is the line integral of the electric field strength from A to B, and 
where the electric current in the element or circuit is taken positive if its 
direction is from A to B and negative if its direction is from B to A
*huh?*

and finally this one:

reactive power  
-for a linear two-terminal element or two-terminal circuit, under sinusoidal 
conditions, quantity equal to the product of the apparent power S and the sine 
of the displacement angle φ
Q=Ssinφ
*what displacement angle?*  I know the angle to which it refers, but it's not 
stated; maybe somewhere else*


I have to say that all three definitions leave me wanting.


Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 2:48 PM
To: Ralph McDiarmid 
Cc: EMC-PSTC 
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

There is a resource, but few actually use it to my knowledge.  

http://www.electropedia.org/

Doug



On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Ralph McDiarmid 
 wrote:
Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated voltage” 
should really be on the technical committees, not academia.  I know that is 
some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are loosely defined.  I 
wonder if there should be one IEC document, which could serve as a reference to 
all others for terminology.  I think there is one, but it is likely not 
comprehensive.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[John Woodgate]

IEC standards writers are required to. There are quite a few of them. But I 
suppose you mean normal people. (;-)
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 10:48 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
 
There is a resource, but few actually use it to my knowledge.  
 
http://www.electropedia.org/
 
Doug
 
 
 
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Ralph McDiarmid 
 > wrote:
Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated voltage” 
should really be on the technical committees, not academia.  I know that is 
some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are loosely defined.  I 
wonder if there should be one IEC document, which could serve as a reference to 
all others for terminology.  I think there is one, but it is likely not 
comprehensive.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric



From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org 
 ]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

All,

   Yes, the consultant or safety engineers dream/nightmare.  We 
have to realize that the glass is half empty for most of the world and we have 
an ongoing opportunity to strike them across the knuckles with a ruler (as the 
nuns did in primary school) and begin the teaching mode. 

   As PT Barnum (the American circus entrepreneur) once said (and 
quoted often) ‘There is a fool born every minute’. 

   If the technical schools provided all of this detailed training 
we wouldn’t have anything to do. 

   So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these important stories 
and smile, but not laugh out loud, when you run into the same situation again 
(and again, and again). 

   Every project and every design team is an opportunity to 
straighten out the world. 

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201  

mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org  

From: john Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk 
 ]
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also faced at HP Bristol in the 
1980s when we built peripherals that had to operate across the World – and that 
meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up to 240V 50Hz for the UK and a few 
other places, AND +/- to cope with the relevant required local tolerances (and 
so effectively meant +/- 10% across the board). This meant careful selection 
and testing of PSUs and of the ratings to be marked on the end-use products, 
but fortunately most of our products did not have directly mains-powered motors.

In practice, if you have a product that does have such motors then it may well 
mean that you need to produce separate models with different motors for the 
geographical areas that operate at the extremes of the voltage/frequency ranges 
– especially  those at the lower end thereof – or else change the designs to 
use DC motors supplied from full voltage/frequency range-capable PSUs (or, 
possibly, use AC motors rated for the lowest “worst case” voltage/ frequency / 
tolerance combination, but with solid state control systems which ensure that 
those motors are operated within that regime regardless of the actual supplied 
mains voltages/ frequencies/ tolerances?).

OTOH, the latter approaches are probably impracticable in most cases for cost 
/space /weight / technology reasons , and so that  means you need a “horses for 
courses” approach.

John E Allen
W. London, UK
-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
 >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[Doug Powell]

There is a resource, but few actually use it to my knowledge.

http://www.electropedia.org/

Doug



On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Ralph McDiarmid <
ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com> wrote:

> Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated voltage”
> should really be on the technical committees, not academia.  I know that is
> some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are loosely defined.  I
> wonder if there should be one IEC document, which could serve as a
> reference to all others for terminology.  I think there is one, but it is
> likely not comprehensive.
>
> Ralph McDiarmid
> Product Compliance
> Engineering
> Solar Business
> Schneider Electric
>
>
>
> From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
>
> All,
>
>Yes, the consultant or safety engineers dream/nightmare.
> We have to realize that the glass is half empty for most of the world and
> we have an ongoing opportunity to strike them across the knuckles with a
> ruler (as the nuns did in primary school) and begin the teaching mode.
>
>As PT Barnum (the American circus entrepreneur) once said
> (and quoted often) ‘There is a fool born every minute’.
>
>If the technical schools provided all of this detailed
> training we wouldn’t have anything to do.
>
>So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these important
> stories and smile, but not laugh out loud, when you run into the same
> situation again (and again, and again).
>
>Every project and every design team is an opportunity to
> straighten out the world.
>
> :>) br,  Pete
>
> Peter E Perkins, PE
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
> PO Box 23427
> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
>
> 503/452-1201
>
> mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org
>
> From: john Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM
> To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
>
> As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also faced at HP Bristol
> in the 1980s when we built peripherals that had to operate across the World
> – and that meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up to 240V 50Hz for the
> UK and a few other places, AND +/- to cope with the relevant required local
> tolerances (and so effectively meant +/- 10% across the board). This meant
> careful selection and testing of PSUs and of the ratings to be marked on
> the end-use products, but fortunately most of our products did not have
> directly mains-powered motors.
>
> In practice, if you have a product that does have such motors then it may
> well mean that you need to produce separate models with different motors
> for the geographical areas that operate at the extremes of the
> voltage/frequency ranges – especially  those at the lower end thereof – or
> else change the designs to use DC motors supplied from full
> voltage/frequency range-capable PSUs (or, possibly, use AC motors rated for
> the lowest “worst case” voltage/ frequency / tolerance combination, but
> with solid state control systems which ensure that those motors are
> operated within that regime regardless of the actual supplied mains
> voltages/ frequencies/ tolerances?).
>
> OTOH, the latter approaches are probably impracticable in most cases for
> cost /space /weight / technology reasons , and so that  means you need a
> “horses for courses” approach.
>
> John E Allen
> W. London, UK
>
> -
> 
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <
> emc-p...@ieee.org>
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
> Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
> Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
> unsubscribe)
> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Scott Douglas 
> Mike Cantwell 
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Jim Bacher:  
> David Heald: 
>



-- 

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[Doug Powell]

This idea of using using an AC/DC PSU to run a motor is approximately what
we have done.  However, to keep it a 3-phase AC drive we use a VFD and
being a fluid pumping situation we can vary the pump speed if we wish.  The
only problem with VFDs is they are horrible for EMC and some companies even
offer a line reactor accessory.  Apparently there is a new generation of
these devices coming out that are much quieter.

-Doug


Douglas E Powell
Laporte, Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:56 AM, john Allen 
wrote:

> As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also faced at HP Bristol
> in the 1980s when we built peripherals that had to operate across the World
> – and that meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up to 240V 50Hz for the
> UK and a few other places, AND +/- to cope with the relevant required local
> tolerances (and so effectively meant +/- 10% *across the board*). This
> meant careful selection and testing of PSUs *and of the ratings to be
> marked on the end-use products*, but fortunately most of our products did
> not have directly mains-powered motors.
>
>
>
> In practice, if you have a product that does have such motors then it may
> well mean that you need to produce separate models with different motors
> for the geographical areas that operate at the extremes of the
> voltage/frequency ranges – especially  those at the lower end thereof – *or
> else change the designs to use DC motors supplied from full
> voltage/frequency range-capable PSUs (or, *possibly, use AC motors rated
> for the lowest “worst case” voltage/ frequency / tolerance combination, *but
> with solid state control systems which ensure that those motors are
> operated within that regime regardless of the actual supplied mains
> voltages/ frequencies/ tolerances*?).
>
>
>
> OTOH, the latter approaches are probably impracticable in most cases for
> cost /space /weight / technology reasons , and so that  means you need a
> “horses for courses” approach.
>
>
>
> John E Allen
>
> W. London, UK
>
>
>
> *From:* Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com]
> *Sent:* 06 April 2017 00:43
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
>
>
>
> Ha!  Age old problem.  Just have to explain it as you did.  And also for
> the end product consumer nameplate I don’t put the +-10% rating on the
> plate.  Had a major motor manufacturer recently trying to tell me that the
> motor they have rated for 230V was OK to run at 208V because it’s good for
> 230 +-10%. Had to explain to them that I need it to run at 208V – 10%.
> Crickets on that one.
>
> A previous motor from that manufacturer was rated for something like 208V
> @60Hz but 190V @50Hz and sure enough when tested at 208V + 10% @ 50Hz the
> windings saturated and drew crazy current.
>
>
>
> Likewise have to explain to design engineers that they cannot use a 230V
> motor in the product rated at 208V and rate the end product at 208V – 0%.
>
>
>
> -Dave
>
>
>
> *From:* Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com ]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 05, 2017 6:52 PM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* [PSES] Votlage Rating vs Voltage Specificaion
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Has anyone found a good way to explain to non-compliance types the
> difference between voltage rating and voltage specification?  After all
> these years I still run into this discussion and have not found a good way
> to clear the air.
>
>
>
> A classic example is an open frame AC/DC power supply used to produce the
> housekeeping voltages within a larger product.  In a recent example, the
> PSU datasheet stated the voltage input range as 85 to 264 VAC.  This is
> great and I really like that specification. However, I also had a design
> engineer who took those numbers from the datasheet and transcribed them
> directly to the rating label of his product.  As a result the agency
> engineer wanted to apply the ±10% rule to the rating label voltage and
> the rating tests were then 76.5 to 290.4 VAC (this was not an ITE
> product).  Note: a little quick math shows that the 264 VAC upper limit of
> the PSU is actually a result of 240 V plus 10%.
>
>
>
> All this seems obvious to me but apparently not to everyone ... and maybe
> it's me who is just a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
>
>
>
> I would be grateful to hear any experiences where explanations were
> successful and lasting.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Douglas E Powell
>
> doug...@gmail.com
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>
> -
> 
>
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <
> emc-p...@ieee.org>
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
> Attachments are not permitted 

Re: [PSES] ESD Table Top Testing Bench with IEC 61000-4-2

[Grasso, Charles]

Hello Kevin - Interesting question.

Keep the old wooden benches -  after all your company has shipped several 
products using those benches.

The issue for me is that you should not claim compliance to 61000-4-2 if the 
test fixtures do not
comply with the requirements of said specification.

Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Compliance Engineer
Dish Technologies
(w) 303-706-5467
(c) 303-204-2974
(t) 3032042...@vtext.com
(e ) charles.gra...@dish.com
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com


From: Ghery S. Pettit [mailto:n6...@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 5:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] ESD Table Top Testing Bench with IEC 61000-4-2

I remember dealing with a manager years ago who made layout decisions based on 
esthetics.  I wouldn't want to deal with that situation again.  I would tell 
your local Feng Shue expert to butt out and leave the lab equipment (and the 
ESD tables are lab equipment) design to the EMC experts.  IEC 61000-4-2 is 
rather explicit about the design of the tables, and what your Feng Shue person 
wants is not what the standard demands.  I know if I were assessing your lab 
that would be an easy discrepancy to write.

Ghery S. Pettit, NCE


From: Harris, Kevin J (DSC) [mailto:kevinharr...@tycoint.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 1:22 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] ESD Table Top Testing Bench with IEC 61000-4-2

Dear Colleagues,

We made a decision to renovate our laboratory with new lab benches. This has 
led to a bit of a conundrum with our ESD benches. Our local Feng Shui expert 
has proclaimed that it would not do to have all new lab benches except for our 
old ESD wooden benches.  The issue we keep circling around is the new benches 
would have steel legs with rubber feet under a non conducting table top. IEC 
61000-4-2 seemingly asks for a non conducting table in its entirety. Does 
anyone know if such a setup deviation would make an iota of difference to the 
test?

Thanks

Kevin




This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended for the 
use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of 
this e-mail, you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or 
take any action in respect of any information contained in it. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail 
and immediately destroy this e-mail and its attachments.
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas >
Mike Cantwell >

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher >
David Heald >
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas >
Mike Cantwell >

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher >
David Heald >
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[John Woodgate]

These runes differ in meaning:

I have seen products rated 85-264V and others rated 100/120/208/230/240.

85-264 means any voltage within that range. You could put in 165 V and expect 
no problem.

100/120/208/230/240 means only those voltages, with whatever the relevant 
standard says about tolerances. 165 V would not work for this product.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.


-Original Message-
From: Ralph McDiarmid [mailto:ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 8:29 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

I don't know, but I suppose it could be addressed by an "abnormal test" to see 
if UUT fails in a way which then renders it potentially unsafe by way of 
non-compliance with a criterion in the standard.  

I have seen products rated 85-264V and others rated 100/120/208/230/240.   I 
would expect the first one to pass thermal test criteria at 85V, at rated 
power, at highest rated ambient .  One corner of the "performance envelope" if 
you will.  And then, do I test the latter at 100V -10%   ?

And, I don't think that compliance with a standard proves a product safe; only 
that it complies with a specific set of criteria.  Product safety is hard to 
define, much harder to accurately assess, even with use of the AFMEA and FTA 
tools, which are subjective so it seems to me.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric



-Original Message-
From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 10:51 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

Supposedly, since the ratings are specified in the standard, they must involve 
safety if not done according to the standard.  So, what is the safety issue if 
the ratings are not in accordance with the standard?  What is the injury?

What is the safety issue if the applied voltage is less than or more than the 
marked ratings but still within the nominal from the electric power utility?  
Again, what is the injury?

Rich


> -Original Message-
> From: John Woodgate
> [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 9:11 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
> 
> There are in fact two IEC resources, Electropedia, which has all the 
> formal definitions produced by TC1 and Glossary, which has a selection 
> of terms, culled from many standards, that have not been adopted by 
> TC1.
> 
> http://www.electropedia.org/?ref=extfooter
> 
> http://std.iec.ch/glossary?ref=extfooter
> 
> Neither can be comprehensive at one instant, because new terms are 
> being added all the time.
> 
> With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only 
> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England
> 
> Sylvae in aeternum manent.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph McDiarmid
> [mailto:Ralph.McDiarmid@SCHNEIDER-
> ELECTRIC.COM]
> Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 4:42 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
> 
> Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated 
> voltage” should really be on the technical committees, not academia.  
> I know that is some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are 
> loosely defined.  I wonder if there should be one IEC document, which 
> could serve as a reference to all others for terminology.  I think 
> there is one, but it is likely not comprehensive.
> 
> Ralph McDiarmid
> Product Compliance
> Engineering
> Solar Business
> Schneider Electric
> 
> 
> 
> From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc- requ...@ieee.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
> 
> All,
> 
>Yes, the consultant or safety engineers 
> dream/nightmare.  We have to realize that the glass is half empty for 
> most of the world and we have an ongoing opportunity to strike them 
> across the knuckles with a ruler (as the nuns did in primary school) 
> and begin the teaching mode.
> 
>As PT Barnum (the American circus
> entrepreneur) once said (and quoted often) ‘There is a fool born every 
> minute’.
> 
>If the technical schools provided all of this detailed 
> training we wouldn’t have anything to do.
> 
>So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these important 
> stories and smile, but not laugh out loud, when you run into the same 
> situation again (and again, and again).
> 
>Every project and every design team is an opportunity 
> to straighten out the world.
> 
> :>) br,  Pete
> 
> Peter E Perkins, PE
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant PO Box 23427 
> Tigard, ORe 

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[John Woodgate]

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Most safety standards do not specify voltage 
ratings for products, only the voltage range for which the standard is valid.

If the applied voltage is more than the maximum rated value, damage could/will 
occur. In some cases, a too-low supply voltage can also cause damage, as 
voltage control circuits strive to achieve the impossible.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

-Original Message-
From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 6:51 PM
To: 'John Woodgate' ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification



Supposedly, since the ratings are specified in the standard, they must involve 
safety if not done according to the standard.  So, what is the safety issue if 
the ratings are not in accordance with the standard?  What is the injury?

What is the safety issue if the applied voltage is less than or more than the 
marked ratings but still within the nominal from the electric power utility?  
Again, what is the injury?

Rich


> -Original Message-
> From: John Woodgate
> [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 9:11 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> There are in fact two IEC resources, Electropedia,
> which has all the formal definitions produced by TC1
> and Glossary, which has a selection of terms, culled
> from many standards, that have not been adopted by
> TC1.
> 
> http://www.electropedia.org/?ref=extfooter
> 
> http://std.iec.ch/glossary?ref=extfooter
> 
> Neither can be comprehensive at one instant, because
> new terms are being added all the time.
> 
> With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions
> Only
> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates
> Rayleigh England
> 
> Sylvae in aeternum manent.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph McDiarmid
> [mailto:Ralph.McDiarmid@SCHNEIDER-
> ELECTRIC.COM]
> Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 4:42 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like
> “rated voltage” should really be on the technical
> committees, not academia.  I know that is some
> standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are loosely
> defined.  I wonder if there should be one IEC
> document, which could serve as a reference to all others
> for terminology.  I think there is one, but it is likely not
> comprehensive.
> 
> Ralph McDiarmid
> Product Compliance
> Engineering
> Solar Business
> Schneider Electric
> 
> 
> 
> From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-
> requ...@ieee.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> All,
> 
>Yes, the consultant or safety engineers
> dream/nightmare.  We have to realize that the glass is
> half empty for most of the world and we have an
> ongoing opportunity to strike them across the knuckles
> with a ruler (as the nuns did in primary school) and
> begin the teaching mode.
> 
>As PT Barnum (the American circus
> entrepreneur) once said (and quoted often) ‘There is a
> fool born every minute’.
> 
>If the technical schools provided all of this
> detailed training we wouldn’t have anything to do.
> 
>So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these
> important stories and smile, but not laugh out loud,
> when you run into the same situation again (and again,
> and again).
> 
>Every project and every design team is an
> opportunity to straighten out the world.
> 
> :>) br,  Pete
> 
> Peter E Perkins, PE
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs
> Consultant
> PO Box 23427
> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
> 
> 503/452-1201
> 
> mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org
> 
> From: john Allen
> [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM
> To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also
> faced at HP Bristol in the 1980s when we built
> peripherals that had to operate across the World – and
> that meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up to
> 240V 50Hz for the UK and a few other places, AND +/-
> to cope with the relevant required local tolerances (and
> so effectively meant +/- 10% across the board). This
> meant careful selection and testing of PSUs and of the
> ratings to be marked on the end-use products, but
> fortunately most of our products did not have directly
> mains-powered motors.
> 
> In practice, if you have a product that does have such
> motors then it may well mean that you need to produce
> separate models with different motors for the
> 

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[Ralph McDiarmid]

I don't know, but I suppose it could be addressed by an "abnormal test" to see 
if UUT fails in a way which then renders it potentially unsafe by way of 
non-compliance with a criterion in the standard.  

I have seen products rated 85-264V and others rated 100/120/208/230/240.   I 
would expect the first one to pass thermal test criteria at 85V, at rated 
power, at highest rated ambient .  One corner of the "performance envelope" if 
you will.  And then, do I test the latter at 100V -10%   ?

And, I don't think that compliance with a standard proves a product safe; only 
that it complies with a specific set of criteria.  Product safety is hard to 
define, much harder to accurately assess, even with use of the AFMEA and FTA 
tools, which are subjective so it seems to me.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric



-Original Message-
From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 10:51 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

Supposedly, since the ratings are specified in the standard, they must involve 
safety if not done according to the standard.  So, what is the safety issue if 
the ratings are not in accordance with the standard?  What is the injury?

What is the safety issue if the applied voltage is less than or more than the 
marked ratings but still within the nominal from the electric power utility?  
Again, what is the injury?

Rich


> -Original Message-
> From: John Woodgate
> [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 9:11 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
> 
> There are in fact two IEC resources, Electropedia, which has all the 
> formal definitions produced by TC1 and Glossary, which has a selection 
> of terms, culled from many standards, that have not been adopted by 
> TC1.
> 
> http://www.electropedia.org/?ref=extfooter
> 
> http://std.iec.ch/glossary?ref=extfooter
> 
> Neither can be comprehensive at one instant, because new terms are 
> being added all the time.
> 
> With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only 
> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England
> 
> Sylvae in aeternum manent.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph McDiarmid
> [mailto:Ralph.McDiarmid@SCHNEIDER-
> ELECTRIC.COM]
> Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 4:42 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
> 
> Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated 
> voltage” should really be on the technical committees, not academia.  
> I know that is some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are 
> loosely defined.  I wonder if there should be one IEC document, which 
> could serve as a reference to all others for terminology.  I think 
> there is one, but it is likely not comprehensive.
> 
> Ralph McDiarmid
> Product Compliance
> Engineering
> Solar Business
> Schneider Electric
> 
> 
> 
> From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc- requ...@ieee.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
> 
> All,
> 
>Yes, the consultant or safety engineers 
> dream/nightmare.  We have to realize that the glass is half empty for 
> most of the world and we have an ongoing opportunity to strike them 
> across the knuckles with a ruler (as the nuns did in primary school) 
> and begin the teaching mode.
> 
>As PT Barnum (the American circus
> entrepreneur) once said (and quoted often) ‘There is a fool born every 
> minute’.
> 
>If the technical schools provided all of this detailed 
> training we wouldn’t have anything to do.
> 
>So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these important 
> stories and smile, but not laugh out loud, when you run into the same 
> situation again (and again, and again).
> 
>Every project and every design team is an opportunity 
> to straighten out the world.
> 
> :>) br,  Pete
> 
> Peter E Perkins, PE
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant PO Box 23427 
> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
> 
> 503/452-1201
> 
> mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org
> 
> From: john Allen
> [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM
> To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification
> 
> As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also faced at HP 
> Bristol in the 1980s when we built peripherals that had to operate 
> across the World – and that meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up 
> to 240V 50Hz for the UK and a few other places, AND +/- to cope with 
> the relevant required local tolerances (and so effectively meant +/- 
> 10% across the board). This meant careful selection and testing of 
> PSUs and of the ratings 

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[Richard Nute]

Supposedly, since the ratings are specified in the standard, they must involve 
safety if not done according to the standard.  So, what is the safety issue if 
the ratings are not in accordance with the standard?  What is the injury?

What is the safety issue if the applied voltage is less than or more than the 
marked ratings but still within the nominal from the electric power utility?  
Again, what is the injury?

Rich


> -Original Message-
> From: John Woodgate
> [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 9:11 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> There are in fact two IEC resources, Electropedia,
> which has all the formal definitions produced by TC1
> and Glossary, which has a selection of terms, culled
> from many standards, that have not been adopted by
> TC1.
> 
> http://www.electropedia.org/?ref=extfooter
> 
> http://std.iec.ch/glossary?ref=extfooter
> 
> Neither can be comprehensive at one instant, because
> new terms are being added all the time.
> 
> With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions
> Only
> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates
> Rayleigh England
> 
> Sylvae in aeternum manent.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph McDiarmid
> [mailto:Ralph.McDiarmid@SCHNEIDER-
> ELECTRIC.COM]
> Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 4:42 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like
> “rated voltage” should really be on the technical
> committees, not academia.  I know that is some
> standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are loosely
> defined.  I wonder if there should be one IEC
> document, which could serve as a reference to all others
> for terminology.  I think there is one, but it is likely not
> comprehensive.
> 
> Ralph McDiarmid
> Product Compliance
> Engineering
> Solar Business
> Schneider Electric
> 
> 
> 
> From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-
> requ...@ieee.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> All,
> 
>Yes, the consultant or safety engineers
> dream/nightmare.  We have to realize that the glass is
> half empty for most of the world and we have an
> ongoing opportunity to strike them across the knuckles
> with a ruler (as the nuns did in primary school) and
> begin the teaching mode.
> 
>As PT Barnum (the American circus
> entrepreneur) once said (and quoted often) ‘There is a
> fool born every minute’.
> 
>If the technical schools provided all of this
> detailed training we wouldn’t have anything to do.
> 
>So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these
> important stories and smile, but not laugh out loud,
> when you run into the same situation again (and again,
> and again).
> 
>Every project and every design team is an
> opportunity to straighten out the world.
> 
> :>) br,  Pete
> 
> Peter E Perkins, PE
> Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs
> Consultant
> PO Box 23427
> Tigard, ORe  97281-3427
> 
> 503/452-1201
> 
> mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org
> 
> From: john Allen
> [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM
> To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage
> Specification
> 
> As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also
> faced at HP Bristol in the 1980s when we built
> peripherals that had to operate across the World – and
> that meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up to
> 240V 50Hz for the UK and a few other places, AND +/-
> to cope with the relevant required local tolerances (and
> so effectively meant +/- 10% across the board). This
> meant careful selection and testing of PSUs and of the
> ratings to be marked on the end-use products, but
> fortunately most of our products did not have directly
> mains-powered motors.
> 
> In practice, if you have a product that does have such
> motors then it may well mean that you need to produce
> separate models with different motors for the
> geographical areas that operate at the extremes of the
> voltage/frequency ranges – especially  those at the
> lower end thereof – or else change the designs to use
> DC motors supplied from full voltage/frequency range-
> capable PSUs (or, possibly, use AC motors rated for the
> lowest “worst case” voltage/ frequency / tolerance
> combination, but with solid state control systems which
> ensure that those motors are operated within that regime
> regardless of the actual supplied mains voltages/
> frequencies/ tolerances?).
> 
> OTOH, the latter approaches are probably impracticable
> in most cases for cost /space /weight / technology
> reasons , and so that  means you need a “horses for
> courses” approach.
> 
> John E Allen
> W. London, UK
> 
> -
> 

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[John Woodgate]

There are in fact two IEC resources, Electropedia, which has all the formal 
definitions produced by TC1 and Glossary, which has a selection of terms, 
culled from many standards, that have not been adopted by TC1.

http://www.electropedia.org/?ref=extfooter

http://std.iec.ch/glossary?ref=extfooter

Neither can be comprehensive at one instant, because new terms are being added 
all the time.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

-Original Message-
From: Ralph McDiarmid [mailto:ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 4:42 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated voltage” 
should really be on the technical committees, not academia.  I know that is 
some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are loosely defined.  I 
wonder if there should be one IEC document, which could serve as a reference to 
all others for terminology.  I think there is one, but it is likely not 
comprehensive.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric
 


From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

All,

   Yes, the consultant or safety engineers dream/nightmare.  We 
have to realize that the glass is half empty for most of the world and we have 
an ongoing opportunity to strike them across the knuckles with a ruler (as the 
nuns did in primary school) and begin the teaching mode.  

   As PT Barnum (the American circus entrepreneur) once said (and 
quoted often) ‘There is a fool born every minute’.  

   If the technical schools provided all of this detailed training 
we wouldn’t have anything to do.  

   So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these important stories 
and smile, but not laugh out loud, when you run into the same situation again 
(and again, and again).  

   Every project and every design team is an opportunity to 
straighten out the world.  

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org

From: john Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk] 
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also faced at HP Bristol in the 
1980s when we built peripherals that had to operate across the World – and that 
meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up to 240V 50Hz for the UK and a few 
other places, AND +/- to cope with the relevant required local tolerances (and 
so effectively meant +/- 10% across the board). This meant careful selection 
and testing of PSUs and of the ratings to be marked on the end-use products, 
but fortunately most of our products did not have directly mains-powered 
motors. 

In practice, if you have a product that does have such motors then it may well 
mean that you need to produce separate models with different motors for the 
geographical areas that operate at the extremes of the voltage/frequency ranges 
– especially  those at the lower end thereof – or else change the designs to 
use DC motors supplied from full voltage/frequency range-capable PSUs (or, 
possibly, use AC motors rated for the lowest “worst case” voltage/ frequency / 
tolerance combination, but with solid state control systems which ensure that 
those motors are operated within that regime regardless of the actual supplied 
mains voltages/ frequencies/ tolerances?). 

OTOH, the latter approaches are probably impracticable in most cases for cost 
/space /weight / technology reasons , and so that  means you need a “horses for 
courses” approach.

John E Allen
W. London, UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David 

Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

[Ralph McDiarmid]

Pete, I wonder if the onus to define the terminology like “rated voltage” 
should really be on the technical committees, not academia.  I know that is 
some standards, terms like "disconnect" and "trip" are loosely defined.  I 
wonder if there should be one IEC document, which could serve as a reference to 
all others for terminology.  I think there is one, but it is likely not 
comprehensive.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric
 


From: Pete Perkins [mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 10:20 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

All,

   Yes, the consultant or safety engineers dream/nightmare.  We 
have to realize that the glass is half empty for most of the world and we have 
an ongoing opportunity to strike them across the knuckles with a ruler (as the 
nuns did in primary school) and begin the teaching mode.  

   As PT Barnum (the American circus entrepreneur) once said (and 
quoted often) ‘There is a fool born every minute’.  

   If the technical schools provided all of this detailed training 
we wouldn’t have anything to do.  

   So fill your peddler’s sack with all of these important stories 
and smile, but not laugh out loud, when you run into the same situation again 
(and again, and again).  

   Every project and every design team is an opportunity to 
straighten out the world.  

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe  97281-3427

503/452-1201

mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org

From: john Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk] 
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:57 AM
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Voltage Rating vs Voltage Specification

As Dave said, this is “age old problem” that we also faced at HP Bristol in the 
1980s when we built peripherals that had to operate across the World – and that 
meant from 100V 50 & 60Hz in Japan and up to 240V 50Hz for the UK and a few 
other places, AND +/- to cope with the relevant required local tolerances (and 
so effectively meant +/- 10% across the board). This meant careful selection 
and testing of PSUs and of the ratings to be marked on the end-use products, 
but fortunately most of our products did not have directly mains-powered 
motors. 

In practice, if you have a product that does have such motors then it may well 
mean that you need to produce separate models with different motors for the 
geographical areas that operate at the extremes of the voltage/frequency ranges 
– especially  those at the lower end thereof – or else change the designs to 
use DC motors supplied from full voltage/frequency range-capable PSUs (or, 
possibly, use AC motors rated for the lowest “worst case” voltage/ frequency / 
tolerance combination, but with solid state control systems which ensure that 
those motors are operated within that regime regardless of the actual supplied 
mains voltages/ frequencies/ tolerances?). 

OTOH, the latter approaches are probably impracticable in most cases for cost 
/space /weight / technology reasons , and so that  means you need a “horses for 
courses” approach.

John E Allen
W. London, UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] LVD Notified Body technical experts

[Nick Williams]

Yes, I am aware there is no such thing as an LVD NoBo these days, but I need a 
sanity check on an argument I am having with a client and could do with running 
some thoughts past one or two people who have in depth experience of LVD and UK 
Electricity at Work Regulations compliance work. Please contact me directly if 
you can spare 10 minutes of your time to review some information and express an 
opinion. 

Thanks

Nick. 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: