Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread Patrick 
Once again, I agree completely!

For large platforms (e.g. Aircraft Carrier, intercontinental bomber, etc.)
the exact distribution may not be known for a particular equipment bay.

For many smaller platforms (e.g. helicopters, UAVs, controlled munitions,
etc. ) the power distribution is exactly known.

So both cases exist.  It is risky to assume one or the other, and
worthwhile to research this detail within the specification. If any
uncertainty remains, it's always good to discuss with your customer.


On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:24 PM Ken Javor 
wrote:

> For the record the reason that MIL-STD-461 forbids using shielded power
> wires for EMI testing is because even if a particular load gets shielded
> power from the point–of-distribution (circuit breaker or fuse box), that
> doesn’t means the electrical power bus between the point-of-generation and
> distribution is shielded. In the vast majority of cases, it is not.  So it
> is cheating to shield power between test sample and LISN and pretend that
> emissions can’t leak out, or that strong fields can’t couple directly to
> power lines.
>
> Only on those platforms where power is shielded from point-of-generation
> to point-of-distribution and from there to the load is it possible to
> tailor the standard and allow shielded power for EMI testing. Another
> possibility is unshielded power from point-of-generation to
> point-of-distribution, or even elsewhere, then brick wall filtering and
> shielding from that point on. But that isn’t a typical installation, either.
>
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
>
> --
> *From: *Patrick 
> *Date: *Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:52:00 -0700
> *To: *Ken Javor 
> *Cc: *
> *Subject: *Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> yes, agree completely:  customers and suppliers can agree to tailor where
> it makes sense... and that tailoring can be contained within the contract.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:13 PM Ken Javor 
> wrote:
>
> Disagree totally. Unless the Customer pre-emptively states otherwise
> contractually, MIL-STD-461F/G are very clear that power is not to be
> shielded during EMI testing, regardless of the platform installation wiring
> diagrams.
>
> This was always meant to be the case, but it was abused precisely as below
> and that is why the blanket prohibition against shielding was inserted in
> “F” and retained in “G.”
>
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
>
>
> --
> *From: *Patrick 
> *Reply-To: *Patrick 
> *Date: *Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:19:32 -0700
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> ( not really addressing your question, but possibly of interest...). Note
> that 4.3.8.6 explicitly states cable assemblies shall simulate actual
> installation and usage.  If your installation requirements include shields
> on all cables, including primary power, then a discussion with the
> procuring authority is needed, with possible tailoring, to make sure test
> configurations meet expectations.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:27 AM James Pawson (U3C) <
> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Ken,
> That makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
> James
>
>
>
> *From:* Ken Javor 
> *Sent:* 15 January 2019 15:34
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> The issue is with primary power: that supplied by the platform to
> electrical and electronic loads. It does not apply to secondary power
> developed in a load and supplied to another load. It has nothing to do with
> dc vs. ac. If a load were supplied with 28 Vdc power from an aircraft
> platform and subsequently converted that to say 24 Vac at 400 cycles to run
> some other circuitry, the dc power would be subjected to the wording you
> cited, but the ac power would not.
>
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
>
> --
> *From: *"James Pawson (U3C)" 
> *Reply-To: *"James Pawson (U3C)" 
> *Date: *Tue, 15 Jan 2019 08:21:24 -
> *To: *
> *Subject: *[PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> Hello all,
>
> MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly
> carrying “primary power” i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be
> separated out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test
> setup (clause 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall
> not be shielded.
>
> I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of
> the standard are most helpful.
>
> My interpretation is that:
>
>
>1. this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in
>MIL-STD-1399
>
>
>) and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
>Associated Equipment
>2. power supplied in this fashion can be supplied

Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread Ken Javor 
For the record the reason that MIL-STD-461 forbids using shielded power
wires for EMI testing is because even if a particular load gets shielded
power from the point­of-distribution (circuit breaker or fuse box), that
doesn¹t means the electrical power bus between the point-of-generation and
distribution is shielded. In the vast majority of cases, it is not.  So it
is cheating to shield power between test sample and LISN and pretend that
emissions can¹t leak out, or that strong fields can¹t couple directly to
power lines.

Only on those platforms where power is shielded from point-of-generation to
point-of-distribution and from there to the load is it possible to tailor
the standard and allow shielded power for EMI testing. Another possibility
is unshielded power from point-of-generation to point-of-distribution, or
even elsewhere, then brick wall filtering and shielding from that point on.
But that isn¹t a typical installation, either.

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261



From: Patrick 
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:52:00 -0700
To: Ken Javor 
Cc: 
Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

yes, agree completely:  customers and suppliers can agree to tailor where it
makes sense... and that tailoring can be contained within the contract. 



On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:13 PM Ken Javor 
wrote:
> Disagree totally. Unless the Customer pre-emptively states otherwise
> contractually, MIL-STD-461F/G are very clear that power is not to be shielded
> during EMI testing, regardless of the platform installation wiring diagrams.
> 
> This was always meant to be the case, but it was abused precisely as below and
> that is why the blanket prohibition against shielding was inserted in ³F² and
> retained in ³G.²
> 
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Patrick 
> Reply-To: Patrick 
> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:19:32 -0700
> To: 
> Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
> 
> ( not really addressing your question, but possibly of interest...). Note that
> 4.3.8.6 explicitly states cable assemblies shall simulate actual installation
> and usage.  If your installation requirements include shields on all cables,
> including primary power, then a discussion with the procuring authority is
> needed, with possible tailoring, to make sure test configurations meet
> expectations.  
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:27 AM James Pawson (U3C)
>  wrote:
>> Hi Ken,
>> That makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
>> James
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> From: Ken Javor 
>> Sent: 15 January 2019 15:34
>> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>>  
>> The issue is with primary power: that supplied by the platform to electrical
>> and electronic loads. It does not apply to secondary power developed in a
>> load and supplied to another load. It has nothing to do with dc vs. ac. If a
>> load were supplied with 28 Vdc power from an aircraft platform and
>> subsequently converted that to say 24 Vac at 400 cycles to run some other
>> circuitry, the dc power would be subjected to the wording you cited, but the
>> ac power would not.
>> 
>> Ken Javor
>> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
>> Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
>> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 08:21:24 -
>> To: 
>> Subject: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>> 
>> Hello all,
>>  
>> MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly carrying
>> ³primary power² i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be separated
>> out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test setup (clause
>> 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall not be shielded.
>>  
>> I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of the
>> standard are most helpful.
>>  
>> My interpretation is that:
>>  
>> 1. this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in MIL-STD-1399
>>  )
>> and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
>> Associated Equipment
>> 2. power supplied in this fashion can be supplied within a shielded cable if
>> that is what is specified in the final installation
>> 
>> Having not done any MIL-STD work before I just wanted to make sure my
>> interpretation was correct?
>>  
>> Many thanks as always,
>> James
>>  
>>  
>> James Pawson
>> Unit 3 Compliance
>>  
>>  
>> -
>> 
>> 
>> 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),

Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread Patrick 
yes, agree completely:  customers and suppliers can agree to tailor where
it makes sense... and that tailoring can be contained within the contract.



On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:13 PM Ken Javor 
wrote:

> Disagree totally. Unless the Customer pre-emptively states otherwise
> contractually, MIL-STD-461F/G are very clear that power is not to be
> shielded during EMI testing, regardless of the platform installation wiring
> diagrams.
>
> This was always meant to be the case, but it was abused precisely as below
> and that is why the blanket prohibition against shielding was inserted in
> “F” and retained in “G.”
>
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
>
>
> --
> *From: *Patrick 
> *Reply-To: *Patrick 
> *Date: *Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:19:32 -0700
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> ( not really addressing your question, but possibly of interest...). Note
> that 4.3.8.6 explicitly states cable assemblies shall simulate actual
> installation and usage.  If your installation requirements include shields
> on all cables, including primary power, then a discussion with the
> procuring authority is needed, with possible tailoring, to make sure test
> configurations meet expectations.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:27 AM James Pawson (U3C) <
> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Ken,
> That makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
> James
>
>
>
> *From:* Ken Javor 
> *Sent:* 15 January 2019 15:34
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> The issue is with primary power: that supplied by the platform to
> electrical and electronic loads. It does not apply to secondary power
> developed in a load and supplied to another load. It has nothing to do with
> dc vs. ac. If a load were supplied with 28 Vdc power from an aircraft
> platform and subsequently converted that to say 24 Vac at 400 cycles to run
> some other circuitry, the dc power would be subjected to the wording you
> cited, but the ac power would not.
>
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
> --
>
> *From: *"James Pawson (U3C)" 
> *Reply-To: *"James Pawson (U3C)" 
> *Date: *Tue, 15 Jan 2019 08:21:24 -
> *To: *
> *Subject: *[PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> Hello all,
>
> MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly
> carrying “primary power” i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be
> separated out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test
> setup (clause 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall
> not be shielded.
>
> I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of
> the standard are most helpful.
>
> My interpretation is that:
>
>
>1. this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in
>MIL-STD-1399
>
>
>) and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
>Associated Equipment
>2. power supplied in this fashion can be supplied within a shielded
>cable if that is what is specified in the final installation
>
>
> Having not done any MIL-STD work before I just wanted to make sure my
> interpretation was correct?
>
> Many thanks as always,
> James
>
>
> James Pawson
> Unit 3 Compliance
>
>
> -
> 
>
> 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 
> -
> 
> 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:

Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread Ken Javor 
Disagree totally. Unless the Customer pre-emptively states otherwise
contractually, MIL-STD-461F/G are very clear that power is not to be
shielded during EMI testing, regardless of the platform installation wiring
diagrams.

This was always meant to be the case, but it was abused precisely as below
and that is why the blanket prohibition against shielding was inserted in
³F² and retained in ³G.²

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261




From: Patrick 
Reply-To: Patrick 
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:19:32 -0700
To: 
Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

( not really addressing your question, but possibly of interest...). Note
that 4.3.8.6 explicitly states cable assemblies shall simulate actual
installation and usage.  If your installation requirements include shields
on all cables, including primary power, then a discussion with the procuring
authority is needed, with possible tailoring, to make sure test
configurations meet expectations.  



On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:27 AM James Pawson (U3C)
 wrote:
> Hi Ken,
> That makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
> James
>  
>  
> 
> From: Ken Javor 
> Sent: 15 January 2019 15:34
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>  
> The issue is with primary power: that supplied by the platform to electrical
> and electronic loads. It does not apply to secondary power developed in a load
> and supplied to another load. It has nothing to do with dc vs. ac. If a load
> were supplied with 28 Vdc power from an aircraft platform and subsequently
> converted that to say 24 Vac at 400 cycles to run some other circuitry, the dc
> power would be subjected to the wording you cited, but the ac power would not.
> 
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
> 
> 
> 
> From: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
> Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 08:21:24 -
> To: 
> Subject: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
> 
> Hello all,
>  
> MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly carrying
> ³primary power² i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be separated
> out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test setup (clause
> 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall not be shielded.
>  
> I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of the
> standard are most helpful.
>  
> My interpretation is that:
>  
> 1. this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in MIL-STD-1399
>  )
> and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
> Associated Equipment
> 2. power supplied in this fashion can be supplied within a shielded cable if
> that is what is specified in the final installation
> 
> Having not done any MIL-STD work before I just wanted to make sure my
> interpretation was correct?
>  
> Many thanks as always,
> James
>  
>  
> James Pawson
> Unit 3 Compliance
>  
>  
> -
> 
> 
> 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

Re: [PSES] World Weather

2019-01-15 Thread James Pawson (U3C) 
Slightly OT but I find http://windy.com absolutely fascinating viewing!

All the best

James

 

From: Charlie Blackham  
Sent: 15 January 2019 19:38
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] World Weather

 

Doug

 

ETSI publish a number of standards with environmental conditions and 
requirements for a wide variety of locations which can be downloaded from 
https://goo.gl/RrHaPz

 

EN 300 019-1-4 provides details of environments likely to be seen by outdoor 
equipment and EN 300 019-2-4 contains the test applied to products

 

Regards

Charlie

 

Charlie Blackham

Sulis Consultants Ltd

Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317

Web:  

 www.sulisconsultants.com

Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247

 

From: Doug Powell mailto:doug...@gmail.com> > 
Sent: 15 January 2019 18:21
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] World Weather

 

All,

 

I realize the specification for climatic conditions of outdoor products is 
ultimately a matter of the agreement between the product supplier and end user. 
 Nevertheless, I find it useful to briefly survey expected weather conditions, 
such as temperature, pressure, %RH, precip, wind, sunshine (UV).  There are any 
number of resources (too many) for this type of information on the web and I 
wondered what resources members of this forum prefer for worldwide locations.

 

Thanks!  Doug

 

-- 

 

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 
mailto: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 mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 

-


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 
mailto: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 mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 


-

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] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread Patrick 
( not really addressing your question, but possibly of interest...). Note
that 4.3.8.6 explicitly states cable assemblies shall simulate actual
installation and usage.  If your installation requirements include shields
on all cables, including primary power, then a discussion with the
procuring authority is needed, with possible tailoring, to make sure test
configurations meet expectations.



On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:27 AM James Pawson (U3C) <
ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi Ken,
>
> That makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
>
> James
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Ken Javor 
> *Sent:* 15 January 2019 15:34
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
>
>
> The issue is with primary power: that supplied by the platform to
> electrical and electronic loads. It does not apply to secondary power
> developed in a load and supplied to another load. It has nothing to do with
> dc vs. ac. If a load were supplied with 28 Vdc power from an aircraft
> platform and subsequently converted that to say 24 Vac at 400 cycles to run
> some other circuitry, the dc power would be subjected to the wording you
> cited, but the ac power would not.
>
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"James Pawson (U3C)" 
> *Reply-To: *"James Pawson (U3C)" 
> *Date: *Tue, 15 Jan 2019 08:21:24 -
> *To: *
> *Subject: *[PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check
>
> Hello all,
>
> MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly
> carrying “primary power” i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be
> separated out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test
> setup (clause 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall
> not be shielded.
>
> I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of
> the standard are most helpful.
>
> My interpretation is that:
>
>
>1. this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in
>MIL-STD-1399
>
>
>) and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
>Associated Equipment
>2. power supplied in this fashion can be supplied within a shielded
>cable if that is what is specified in the final installation
>
>
> Having not done any MIL-STD work before I just wanted to make sure my
> interpretation was correct?
>
> Many thanks as always,
> James
>
>
> James Pawson
> Unit 3 Compliance
>
>
> -
> 
>
> 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 
>
> -
> 
>
> 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 
> -
> 
>
> 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
>

Re: [PSES] World Weather

2019-01-15 Thread Charlie Blackham 
Doug

ETSI publish a number of standards with environmental conditions and 
requirements for a wide variety of locations which can be downloaded from 
https://goo.gl/RrHaPz

EN 300 019-1-4 provides details of environments likely to be seen by outdoor 
equipment and EN 300 019-2-4 contains the test applied to products

Regards
Charlie

Charlie Blackham
Sulis Consultants Ltd
Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317
Web: 
www.sulisconsultants.com
Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247

From: Doug Powell 
Sent: 15 January 2019 18:21
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] World Weather

All,

I realize the specification for climatic conditions of outdoor products is 
ultimately a matter of the agreement between the product supplier and end user. 
 Nevertheless, I find it useful to briefly survey expected weather conditions, 
such as temperature, pressure, %RH, precip, wind, sunshine (UV).  There are any 
number of resources (too many) for this type of information on the web and I 
wondered what resources members of this forum prefer for worldwide locations.

Thanks!  Doug

--

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 
mailto: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 mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

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] World Weather

2019-01-15 Thread Doug Powell 
All,

I realize the specification for climatic conditions of outdoor products is
ultimately a matter of the agreement between the product supplier and end
user.  Nevertheless, I find it useful to briefly survey expected weather
conditions, such as temperature, pressure, %RH, precip, wind, sunshine
(UV).  There are any number of resources (too many) for this type of
information on the web and I wondered what resources members of this forum
prefer for worldwide locations.

Thanks!  Doug

-- 

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:
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] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread James Pawson (U3C) 
Hi Ken,

That makes sense, thanks for the clarification.

James

 

 

From: Ken Javor  
Sent: 15 January 2019 15:34
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

 

The issue is with primary power: that supplied by the platform to electrical
and electronic loads. It does not apply to secondary power developed in a
load and supplied to another load. It has nothing to do with dc vs. ac. If a
load were supplied with 28 Vdc power from an aircraft platform and
subsequently converted that to say 24 Vac at 400 cycles to run some other
circuitry, the dc power would be subjected to the wording you cited, but the
ac power would not. 

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261




  _  

From: "James Pawson (U3C)" mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> >
Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> >
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 08:21:24 -
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> >
Subject: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

Hello all,
 
MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly
carrying "primary power" i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be
separated out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test
setup (clause 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall
not be shielded.
 
I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of the
standard are most helpful.
 
My interpretation is that:
 

1.  this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in
MIL-STD-1399

 )
and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
Associated Equipment 
2.  power supplied in this fashion can be supplied within a shielded
cable if that is what is specified in the final installation


Having not done any MIL-STD work before I just wanted to make sure my
interpretation was correct?
 
Many thanks as always,
James
 
 
James Pawson
Unit 3 Compliance
 
 
-


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
mailto: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 mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher  mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 

-


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
mailto: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 mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 


-

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] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread Ken Javor 
The issue is with primary power: that supplied by the platform to electrical
and electronic loads. It does not apply to secondary power developed in a
load and supplied to another load. It has nothing to do with dc vs. ac. If a
load were supplied with 28 Vdc power from an aircraft platform and
subsequently converted that to say 24 Vac at 400 cycles to run some other
circuitry, the dc power would be subjected to the wording you cited, but the
ac power would not.

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261




From: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 08:21:24 -
To: 
Subject: [PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

Hello all,
 
MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly
carrying ³primary power² i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be
separated out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test
setup (clause 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall
not be shielded.
 
I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of the
standard are most helpful.
 
My interpretation is that:
 
1. this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in
MIL-STD-1399 
 )
and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
Associated Equipment
2. power supplied in this fashion can be supplied within a shielded cable if
that is what is specified in the final installation
 
Having not done any MIL-STD work before I just wanted to make sure my
interpretation was correct?
 
Many thanks as always,
James
 
 
James Pawson
Unit 3 Compliance
 
 
-


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:

[PSES] MIL-STD-461 and power cables sanity check

2019-01-15 Thread James Pawson (U3C) 
Hello all,

 

MIL-STD-461 has a requirement for any conductors in a cable assembly
carrying "primary power" i.e. AC power from a vessel distribution bus to be
separated out from the main cable bunch and routed separately in a test
setup (clause 4.3.8.6). It also states that the primary power cables shall
not be shielded.

 

I understand the rationale for this, the explanatory notes at the end of the
standard are most helpful.

 

My interpretation is that:

 

a.  this only applies to AC power buses (like those referenced in
MIL-STD-1399
 )
and not to DC power supplied from another part of the EUT or from some
Associated Equipment
b.  power supplied in this fashion can be supplied within a shielded
cable if that is what is specified in the final installation

 

Having not done any MIL-STD work before I just wanted to make sure my
interpretation was correct?

 

Many thanks as always,

James

 

 

James Pawson

Unit 3 Compliance

 

 


-

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: