RE: circular connectors for power meeting EU regs
Again I am slightly bemused with the Test House comment about the connector de-rating at full load. Clearly fault conditions are excluded! Have you looked at something from Amphenol, DL5015 Pre-Mating Earth range? Farnell 391-1070. Maybe ok for your 115VAC 3 phase. (200V or so interphase)? Enci At 12:23 27/08/2003 +0100, Gibling, Vic wrote: Were you going to use the contacts at maximum current rating? No. At the lowest voltage the current would be 20A, the maximum rating for the connector is 35A (derated 50°C). Incidentally, I have spent some time today searching for a suitable connector. What I have noticed is that there are many to UL1977. Do I understand these are unacceptable for use with primary circuits or can they be used providing I carry out additional tests, like the mating/unmating endurance? Thank you for your interest. Vic -Original Message- From: Enci [mailto:emc-p...@cinepower.com] Sent: 26 August 2003 15:35 To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' Subject: RE: circular connectors for power meeting EU regs At 14:19 26/08/2003 +0100, Gibling, Vic wrote: Did you get a satisfactory answer from the forum? I ask as I just been told by a test house that the ITT-Canon CGL Industrial power connector we had wanted to use as a primary coupler is not suitable - apparently should only be used with secondary circuits. ( I believe this is the connector my colleague (boss) proposed to you via the forum ) We had assessed it against the 309 connectors for leading earth, creepage, clearance and isolation voltage. Alas the test house statedYou will find that the contacts will quickly deteriorate if you were to carry out a mating/unmating endurance test at maximum current rating. Were you going to use the contacts at maximum current rating? This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: circular connectors for power meeting EU regs
At 14:19 26/08/2003 +0100, Gibling, Vic wrote: Did you get a satisfactory answer from the forum? I ask as I just been told by a test house that the ITT-Canon CGL Industrial power connector we had wanted to use as a primary coupler is not suitable - apparently should only be used with secondary circuits. ( I believe this is the connector my colleague (boss) proposed to you via the forum ) We had assessed it against the 309 connectors for leading earth, creepage, clearance and isolation voltage. Alas the test house statedYou will find that the contacts will quickly deteriorate if you were to carry out a mating/unmating endurance test at maximum current rating. Were you going to use the contacts at maximum current rating? This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Conducted emissions--green wire?
hehehe oh man, and it isnt even April 1st. At 12:48 14/07/2003 -0600, brent.dew...@us.datex-ohmeda.com wrote: I don't think I'd go back to that test house! What the technician did was both wrong and potentially dangerous. The closest test method to this that I know of was under the old VDE 0871 regulation in which a 50 ohm-50 microhenry network was inserted into the protective earth to lift the lead at conducted emissions frequencies. Regards, Brent DeWitt Boris Yost yost@rainbowdisplays.c To: Emc-Pstc@Majordomo. Ieee. Org emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org om cc: Sent by: Subject: Conducted emissions--green wire? owner-emc-pstc@majordom o.ieee.org 14-07-03 11:02 AM Please respond to Boris Yost Dear Listers: I recently watched a conducted emissions test. Said test technician connected Line to a LISN, Neutral to a LISN, and ground got stuck in a piece of foam to keep it from touching anything. This bothered me and I questioned this. However, according to said test technician, that is what they are supposed to do. The LISN's and the EUT were put on a metal table surface. The LISN's were well strapped down, but my thing was just sitting there. Doesn't this mean that the impedance of the EUT is some random number depending on the materials and surface finishes of the table, EUT, and where they put the LISN's? The stand I used for the EUT isn't really part of the EUT, just something I had to hold it up. What happens when somebody else mounts a display on a furniture lift and puts it in a piece of wooden furniture? Boris --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: The Universal Plug Adapter!???
Hi John, Regarding all singing and dancing mains plug interface products Several months ago a colleague returning from USA proudly presented a universal travel plug adaptor. Not the same one in your link, but a different one. This design was based on sliding out the plug connection you wanted. The only problem was you could slide out all three male power connectors. A quick check with a continuity tester showed continuity between the relevant pins. L+L+L and N+N+N. The only level of safety to prevent electric shock is a single warning label warning not to extend all the plugs at the same time. but it has a large CE mark I get in response. Maybe I am missing something, but does having CE Marking somehow extend an invisible shield around the product, akin to one or more levels of protection?!? It makes me wonder what kind of dangerous products were being released onto the market before the advent of CE. .. the sad part is that it wasnt April 1st. Maybe the Compliance Magazine should have a, But it has a CE Mark, as a regular feature next to the banana skins section. Enci. At 17:42 02/06/2003 +0100, John Allen wrote: Hi Folks ... However, for the equivalent in mains plugs see http://www.nebulus.com/props/plug.html Personally I think it looks (insert your own - probably unprintable - comment)! God help anyone who trie to build or use one of these - all the unplugged-in pins are likely to be Live/Hot (with a vengence)! - or have a missed some subtle point in the design? This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Non-Compliant Products
Hi Rich, EN 60598-1:2000, Section 10.3, Leakage current for fixed and portable class 1 luminaires. At 08:11 01/04/2003 -0800, Rich Nute wrote: Hi Enci: Only this morning have I just tested a competitive product from a manufacturer in Germany, which failed miserably (+40dB) on conducted emissions testing and earth leakage, to be fair only 2mA, but the standard clearly states 1mA!. What standard specifies 1 mA? The irony is that leakage current is largely due to Y capacitors in the EMC filter. Higher leakage current suggests higher value Y capacitors. Higher value Y capacitors implies lower conducted emissions. Best regards, Rich ps: IEC 60950 is the applicable standard for IT equipment. The leakage current limit values in IEC 60950 are: 0.25 mA for parts and circuits that are not connected to protective earth, and 3.5 mA (0.75 mA for handheld equipment) for parts and circuits that are connected to protective earth. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Non-Compliant Products
Only this morning have I just tested a competitive product from a manufacturer in Germany, which failed miserably (+40dB) on conducted emissions testing and earth leakage, to be fair only 2mA, but the standard clearly states 1mA!. As a designer/manufacturer myself this makes me really annoyed. I have spent countless hours iterating the design process to ensure compliance from the first engineering samples down to every unit rolling off the production line. My experience with UK trading standards ( I am in the UK!) was interesting. I mentioned in passing about non compliant products during his un-announced visit on me to drop in and see how we are doing with compliance. He wasnt interested and the last time I checked the products were still on the market. So as with this product I have tested this morning, I'll just leave it until I next see them at a trade show and asked them if they have fixed it yet. As a manufacturer I am more concerned to supply products to specification (the usual stipulation in contract is conformity to relevant directives etc), because if we dont we get the equipment returned or we spend any profit on getting them right. So in a sense is compliance down to self regulation? How about as a consumer, buying a PC, then 6 months later (with no modifications) finds it is non-compliant (highly likeyl!!).. Can the consumer return it/demand correction/!?!? Enci I can live with a couple of dB failure that is in the minutia. What I am talking about is a signature that can be broad band in nature and having a class B product fail class A miserably. This is just a blatant disregard for the standards. Mark J. Kirincic mkirin...@houston.rr.com - Original Message - From: Stone, Richard A mailto:rsto...@lucent.com (Richard) To: 'drcuthbert' mailto:drcuthb...@micron.com ; 'Mark Kirincic' mailto:mkirin...@houston.rr.com ; Stone, Richard A (Richard) mailto:rsto...@lucent.com ; lfresea...@aol.com ; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:03 AM Subject: RE: OK, what's going on? There has been an enormous amount of feedback from Dereks email this week. Including mine. I am beginning to get the notion this is all brand new to most of the people here.. it isn't..going on for years... were not going to change evolution, we can gripe and complain best thing to do is our own diligence on our product,..not censor someone elses... what do you do to the company that passes site A oats,then fails site B...go to site C?...best 2 out of 3? think bill gates would care if he sold PC's? and not just software...People who rely on word/excel and other programs would care less about failing by a few db. the FCC is in place they run itwe try our best Richard, -Original Message- From: drcuthbert [ mailto:drcuthb...@micron.com] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:54 AM To: 'Mark Kirincic'; Stone, Richard A (Richard); lfresea...@aol.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: OK, what's going on? What would NARTE say about certified EMC engineers and technicians signing off on equipment that does not make the grade? It would be great if everyone and every company handled the issue of EMC ethically. But since the world does not always work this way...I favor the idea of a fine for every unit that is shipped from a lot that statistically fails. I.E. mandatory sampling (of boxed and shipped units) and only a certain percentage are allowed to fail, etc. Companies would then weigh the cost of compliance against the cost of non-compliance. Devils advocate speaking now: But from the viewpoint of economics this would of course add cost to every unit shipped. Is the additional manufacturing cost to the public offset by any savings due to lower emissions and lower susceptibility? Would society truly benefit from better EMC enforcement or does this serve only the EMC community? Dave Cuthbert Micron Technology
Lead Free
Has anyone actually tried it? What are your experiences? What do non-EU countries think about it? This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
CE. What it may mean?
CE = Chocolate Eggs :) Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Manufacturer's I.D. for Europe
Hi John, If I recall correctly, in the EEC claims are not restricted to the final re-seller or the person/organisation to place the product on the market. Claims can also be pursued against any individual in the supply chain. Enci At 07:19 12/02/02 -0800, John wrote: Also in the US (with UL anyway) there's 'Multiple Listing' where the re-seller's identity is displayed but the manufacturer's is shielded from the public, however it's traceable thru UL. In my personal opinion, the method in Europe where the final reseller is the responsible party is a double-edged sword. a. After the initial manufacture, there could be value-added modifications by a reseller that in theory could compromise the end-product's compliance therefore the manufacturer should not be responsible. b. Turns out the product's design had some safety-compromising flaws that became apparent after some time of use. Why should the final reseller be responsible? (But he can always take the manufacturer thru litigation). Tough call. This can be debated endlessly, with numerous valid points on bothe sides. My opinion only . . . John Juhasz Fiber Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: geor...@lexmark.com [mailto:geor...@lexmark.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 3:52 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Manufacturer's I.D. for Europe What are your thoughts on this issue? The prevailing ITE safety standards (e.g. IEC 60950) require markings that include the manufacturer's name, trademark, or identification mark (section 1.7.1). It is not uncommon for a manufacturer to allow another company to market their products under the 2nd company's logo. Often the 2nd company will retain the certified machine model/type number, but prefers no reference to the original manufacturer, including on the power rating label. In the U.S., manufacturer identification marks can be listed by UL in their Yellow Books. For example, in the case above, the original manufacturer's identity can be preserved by the use of a listed graphic, which is not obvious to someone buying the product through the 2nd company. In addition, the use of agency file numbers with their marks maintains traceability to the original manufacturer. However, in Europe, I am not aware of any means by which manufacturer's identification marks can be registered or listed. In addition, European safety agency marks are not required to be accompanied by file numbers etc. Therefore, replacement of the original manufacturer's name and/or logo with that of a 2nd party obscures any traceability to the original manufacturer. This may be acceptable, for as I understand it, the EU holds the responsible party as being the one placing the product on the market, i,e, not the original manufacturer. George Alspaugh --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived
RE: Immunity Standards
EN50082-1:1997 is going to be replaced by EN 61000-6-1:2001. Enci Hi group, I have question concerning the differences of EN50082-1:92 and EN50082-1:97 Immunity Stadards? Regards Cecil --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Conducted noise emission diagnosis device
Hi, A very descriptive device is presented in the following book: Power Line Filter Design for Switched Mode Power Supplies. By Mark Nave. It is out of print, and if you see a copy for sale, it's worth buying. He also took out a patent for his device under the following no: US Patent No: 4,849,685 Dated Jul 18, 1989. If you want a more detailed description I recommend you buy a copy from the US Patent office. 3 US Dollars for an internet download. Not free, but cheap enough to make it worth buying the PDF version. His device basically cancels out the DM noise, then you design a filter for the CM noise. Fit the CM filter, and remove the device, then measure again and the difference will mostly be the DM noise making it easier to design the filter. Simple really and from the looks of the design cheap!( the parts you probably have laying around in your workshop!) I keep meaning to make one but have yet to get around it. Oh yes, symmetry is important and you will need a LISN with two outputs. Enci At 00:37 05/02/02 -0300, you wrote: Hello Group, I am looking for a device that will differentiate the dominant component (either common-mode or differential-mode current) in the total conducted noise emission current of a product measuring through its' power cord using a LISN. This device can be called common/differential mode current separator. In conducted noise emission measurement, both common-mode and differential mode noise current are measured by LISN and the LISN can't tell which mode is the dominant current. I came across a paper by Clayton Paul and Keith Hardin which explain the usefulness of a separator like this that would identified the dominant current from the total current. Hence, the correct capacitor value(either X-caps or Y-caps) can be changed accordingly so to reduce the overall conducted noise. The book by Clayton Paul Introduction to Eletromagnetic Compatibility has also mention about this device. I have contacted a few persons trying to look for the person who have actually built this separator himself and I am also looking for any vendor who have this product for sale. So far, my effort has yield no results. Can anybody point me to the right person so that i can try to built this separator myself. Any other suggestion and comments are greatly appreciated. Best Regards, ** Muriel Bittencourt de Liz Ph.D. Student Federal University at Santa Catarina Florianópolis, SC Brazil --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: ITE Class A vs B Emissions
I have often wondered exactly why there are two classes in EN55022. The limits are pretty similar, does a 13dB difference in conducted emission QP limits really make a difference above 5MHz? I know the 23dB difference 5MHz (conducted emissions) helps with products that have a SMPS, for example. In the radiated emissions the difference is 10dB. In the real world is there really a need for two limits? Enci - Original Message - From: richwo...@tycoint.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 1:40 PM Subject: ITE Class A vs B Emissions We currently design our products to comply with the Class B emissions limits of EN 55022, but I am getting a lot of pressure from engineering to allow the limits to be raised to Class A. The equipment is intended for business use only. I understand that Class A is legal in the EU for business equipment, and our customers don't seem to understand or care if the equipment is Class A or B. So, the question is this - Are you successful in marketing your business ITE as Class A? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: Stand Alone SMPS
Hi, Two good places to start: LVD: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/electr_equipment/lv/stand.htm Click on LVD standards. It's a big page and takes a while to load. EMC: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/stand.htm Click on the List of harmonised standards. Again, a big page and takes a little time to load. Enci At 09:54 05/02/02 +0800, you wrote: Group,immunity) to apply to test a Stand Alone SMPS unit for CE marking. This SMPS is a power source for the Audio Amplifier. EN55020 standards, since it is an associated equipment of broadcast receivers? What about If I want to export to Japan? Thanks in Advance Kuga ** P. Kuganesan EMC Engineer LabOne Singapore Pte Ltd Tel: 8969 861 Fax: 7769 102 / 8969 189 ** --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: SV: Generic emissions - EN 61000-6-3
Compliance with Directives http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/document/ chap04.pdf It's only 4 pages. Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: CE Marking - Protoypes
Well, I found the guide I was looking for, and the key issue is the placing on the market or taking into service. The guide clearly states demonstrating at an exhibition is not considered to be placing on the market. It also says a notice is required, as descibed below. Therefore the application of CE Marking or lack thereof is meaningless. Enci Prototype, equipments for demostration aren't covered by the EMC or RTTE directive. This is article 8.2 of RTTE a similar article exist in the EMC directive 2. At trade fairs, exhibitions, demonstrations, etc., Member States shall not create any obstacles to the display of apparatus which does not comply with this Directive, provided that a visible sign clearly indicates that such apparatus may not be marketed or put into service until it has been made to comply. Ciao Paolo --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
CE Marking - Protoypes
I am trying to find official guidelines on the CE Marking of prototypes/samples, not available for sale, but used for demonstration at trade shows or other venues. Any help is appreciated. Thank you, Enci. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: EMC-related safety issues
I understand in this particular case the RF camera may have been marketed for baby surveillance. The majority of camera systems, wired and wireless, that I have seen are not marketed in this manner. Most are advertised as security/surveillance cameras. Are you implying that all manufacturers of these camera systems must consider the possible use of the products for the protection of persons? What if the manufacturer clearly states in the user instructions that the product is not suitable for the protection of persons? I have always understood that a manufacturer can meet obligations by addressing intended use only. For example if I was to manufacture a kettle, I would state for boiling water only in the relevant documentation. Some of the recent messages in this thread would seem to imply that I would have to consider the possible use of the kettle being used to boil something other than water, gasoline for example. Am I then liable from the damages resulting from the possible ignition of the volatile fumes from some undefined energy source, i.e. lack of emc immunity? Enci At 08:26 03/01/02 -0500, Richard Woods wrote: Ken, let me address the specific case you mentioned - the RF camera used for baby surveillance. In that particular application, surveillance for the protection of persons, more severe immunity requirements apply. Those requirements are either specified in EN 50130-4 or the particular ETSI product EMC standard. A manucturer should understand that the product may be used for protection of persons and apply the appropriate immunity requirements. Failure to do so, could create a liability issue. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International -Original Message- From: Ken Javor[mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 02,2002 2:22 PM To: cherryclo...@aol.com;emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EMC-related safetyissues To say that Industrystandards don't go far enough, that it is the responsibility of the Producerto be able to determine all possible environments and failure modes that mightever occur is placing an impossible burden and any rationale entity, uponreading this document will immediately cease production of anything that couldconceivably ever malfunction in anyway whatsoever. But this safety guide saysyes, and places the manufacturer at risk. -- From:cherryclo...@aol.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re:EMC-related safety issues Date: Wed, Jan 2, 2002, 9:49 AM Once again, John, you seem to be trying to give a negative impression about the IEE's guide on EMC and Functional Safety (which you now admit you haven't read) instead of simply saying what it is that you think is wrong with it. Of course I am passionate about the IEE guide - my colleagues and I spent a long time working on it! When I discovered you were criticising it to the emc-pstc of course I had to respond - but I was not (and am not) trying to defend the guide, merely trying to find out just exactly what it is that you (and your silent 'equally senior experts') don't like about it so I can get it improved. I am sorry if my wordy emails give the wrong impression - the simple fact is that I always write too much (as any editor who has had an article from me will confirm!). Once again I ask you - and everyone else in the entire EMC or Safety community world-wide - to read the IEE's guide and let me have constructive comments about how to improve it. You can easily download it for free from www.iee.org.uk/Policy/Areas/Electro (- you only need to download the 'core' document for this exercise and can leave the nine 'industry annexes' for later criticism). I'll make it easy for anyone to comment even if they haven't read the Core of the IEE's guide ...the guide is based on the following engineering approach, explicitly stated at the start of its Section 4 and duplicated below. * To control EMC correctly for functional safety reasons, hazard and risk assessments must take EM environment, emissions, and immunity into account. The following should be addressed: 1) The EM disturbances, however infrequent, to which the apparatus might be exposed 2) The foreseeable effects of such disturbances on the apparatus 3) How EM disturbances emitted by the apparatus might affect other apparatus (existing or planned)? 4) The foreseeable safety implications of the above mentioned disturbances (what is the severity of the hazard, the scale of the risk, and the appropriate safety integrity level?) 5) The level of confidence required to verify that the above have been fully considered and all necessary actions taken to achieve the desired level of safety * Please - anybody and everybody out
Re: Merry christmas
Thanks Xing, and best wishes to all for the new year. Cheers, Enci p.s. Try not to study the compliance marking of any Xmas gifts. :) At 08:24 25/12/01 +0800, Xing weibing wrote: Hi Group colleagues Merry Christmas and have a new year! Best Regards Xing weibing 2001-12-25 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: surges on 24VAC
Hi Jennifer, I would argue that the test should not be applied that port, simply because that port is fed from a 24V supply upstream. It is perfectly reasonable to specify in the product documentation that the supply upstream must meet the requirements. Why make the compliance process more onerous? Furthermore, Annex A, and Annex B of EN61000-4-5, recognises a product such as yours by allowing you to specify the installation classification, e.g. Class 0, look at Table A.1 and all the tests are not applicable. Regards, Enci At 13:43 17/12/01 -0600, you wrote: Hello everyone, I am currently trying to test a product of ours that falls under 50082-1 generic standard for light industrial equipment. Our problem is that we have a 24VAC power input port. The generic standard calls out for EN 61000-4-5 on AC power input ports. After looking at EN 61000-4-5 it seems that it is intended for AC mains voltages, but I couldn't find anything that says a 24VAC input is exempt from this test. I am looking for outside opinions on whether this test is truly applicable. Thanks, Jennifer Banh BTW, we already tried just testing to the spec, and failed. Any suggestions on how to protect against this test would also be appreciated. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
An old chestnut.
Hi Group, Can someone please remind me again why I have to pay over 1 British Pound a sheet for standards? (over 2 British pounds a page non-BSI member price) Where does the money go? Does this same situation exist outside the European Union? How much do you pay? Is membership on a committee producing a standard a paid position? For a new line of products in low volume, the costs involved in acquiring the relevant standards are steep. With the relative ease in which I can acquire datasheets online, I have often wondered why standards are not freely downloadable - would that not increase the safety of equipment produced by SME's and hobbyists alike? Also as an informed consumer I would be able to see specific details of the standards applicable to any products I buy. Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
EMC. 10db over limit = unsafe?
Hi Group, If I have a product, a finished apparatus, that passes all LVD or safety tests, i.e. earth leakage, insulation, etc., is that product unsafe if it is 10db over the conducted emissions limits for EMC? Article 4 and Annex III of the EMC directive do not refer to safety, only to the concept that equipment will not hinder the use of other equipment and immunity. Where does this 80/80 rule now fit in that was discussed recently - specifically if authorities acknowledge the fact that there may be equipment out there that exceeds the EMC emissions limits for their product type? Also in Annex III, it states: The information required to enable use in accordance with the intended purpose of the apparatus must be contained in the instructions accompanying the apparatus. Does this then imply that the manual must state that suitable measures must be taken to ensure compliance? e.g. additional filter? Thank you in advance, Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: IATA
;) I was thinking about active circuitry.. I'll take my foot out of my mouth now.. At 14:42 04/12/01 +, you wrote: Eh, static magnetic field. The type to cause a permanent deflection on a navigation compass. You IATA test goods in there shipping packaging. Enci wrote: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org At 09:11 04/12/01 +, Andrew Carson wrote: You want Packing Instruction 902, within the section on Dangerous Goods. To summaries the limits are, 2mG at measurement distance of 2.1m - Non Magnetic Material 2mG at a measurement distance of 2.1m - Hazardous Magnetic Material, must be marked accordingly 5.25mG at a measurement distance of 4.6m - Can not be transported by aircraft. Not much when you think the Earths magnetic field is 450 to 550mG What about frequency? Enci -Original Thread- From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 8:19 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: IATA I understand that there is an IATA standard that sets the magnetic field limit for a device being shipped in an aircraft. Can someone point me to a website that has this standard/limit? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. -- Andrew Carson - Product Safety Engineer, Xyratex, UK Phone: +44 (0)23 9249 6855 Fax: +44 (0)23 9249 6014 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: IATA
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org At 09:11 04/12/01 +, Andrew Carson wrote: You want Packing Instruction 902, within the section on Dangerous Goods. To summaries the limits are, 2mG at measurement distance of 2.1m - Non Magnetic Material 2mG at a measurement distance of 2.1m - Hazardous Magnetic Material, must be marked accordingly 5.25mG at a measurement distance of 4.6m - Can not be transported by aircraft. Not much when you think the Earths magnetic field is 450 to 550mG What about frequency? Enci -Original Thread- From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 8:19 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: IATA I understand that there is an IATA standard that sets the magnetic field limit for a device being shipped in an aircraft. Can someone point me to a website that has this standard/limit? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Notified Body Question
Hi, I have a Notified Body test report that states the following: This report is in conformity with EN45001. Question 1) Is this an official report produced by the Notified Body as a Notified Body? In other words, can I use it in my TCF as a Notified Body test report, as it has a higher status that a ordinary test report by another laboratory? The date of the report is June 2000. EN 45001 was withdrawn on the 15 May 2000 and replaced with EN 17025. Question 2) Assuming the answer to question 1 is YES, is the report still valid ? Thank you for your help. Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
EL (Electro Luminescent) considerations.
Hi Group, Could anyone tell me a little more about the safety implications/standards for the use of EL wire/sheet. Specifically when powered from a battery source,i.e. battery-inverter-EL, and the EL wire/sheet outer insulation is exposed. Thank you in advance, Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Looking for a book.
Hi All, I am looking for the following book: Power Line Filter Design for Switched-Mode Power Supplies by Mark J. Nave ISBN 0-442-00453-2 It is out of print and I have been unable to find a copy on the web or locally. Ideally if anyone has a copy they are willing to sell, please email me. I know that will be pretty unlikely, as this book is about as rare as hen's teeth, therefore my best bet is to get a duplicate of the book. Again if anyone is willing to do that for a reasonable price, or send it to me so that I can copy it and return it, please email me. Thank you, Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: My departure
John, Your departure will be loss to this forum, and I hope measures have been taken to offer you the possibility of reconsidering. Thank you for you help in the past, both on and off this forum. Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: Components connected to PE
Hi Chris, In answer to your question, I would think not. Whatever you use you must consider the single fault condition of the component bridging the input and ground, e.g. short. Also consider other aspects like the material flammability rating. One nice thing about approved caps is that most if not all, the safety issues are already addressed. If it is a low volume product you might well consider just using these approved components, but for high volume, where the great big dragon called Cost* is breathing fire, you may want to look at the alternatives. Is component size an issue? Enci * Also known as: The Boss, Accountant, Bank Manager, Customer. :) At 14:49 15/11/01 -, Chris wrote: Hi Group, I have one of those scenarios where EMC meets product safety. For the purpose of RFI, I have a requirement to connect RF bypass capacitors from the input lines of a Low voltage DC (30V max, SELV) piece of equipment to PE. As I recall when I worked in ac voltage converters, we used to connect Y-rated capacitors between phase and PE. Is it still a requirement that I need a Y-rated capacitor for this LV product or can I get away with a much smaller capacitor with a varistor in parallel? All comments welcome. I trust the wording is clear but please let me know if a sketch in word is required. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Fire safety. Was RE: HiPot testing of DC mains powered products
Hi Chris, I understand it may be an agency requirement to hipot, but I am not sure that a hipot test would necessarily reveal potential insulation failures/faults that would lead to the type of hazard you indicated. Surely these hazards have already been addressed in the design/type-testing phase? Enci At 15:22 06/11/01 -0500, Chris Maxwell chris.maxw...@nettest.com wrote: Your answer would be a possibility for self-certification cases. However, if we want to use an NRTL mark such as UL, TUV, CSA ...; then the agency will dictate whether or not to hipot. My understanding is that such agencies will require hipot on products even if they are rated 48VDC (which may be considered SELV) as long as the products use more than a minimum power level. My understanding is that the power level is around 15Watts. I believe that the reasoning behind this has more to do with fire safety than shock safety. Any product that draws more than a certain power level (again I think that about 15 Watts is the cutoff) from a DC mains (i.e. station battery ...) is considered a definite power/energy/fire hazard...thus the hipot requirements. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: EMI filter hazards
At 09:31 29/10/01 -, John Crabb wrote: IEC60950 requires that capacitor exceeding 0.1uF should have a means of discharge resulting in a time constant not exceeding 1 second for pluggable equipment Type A. .. a means of discharge As I understand it there is no need to blindly install a resistor. Depending on the product, it may discharge the filter caps. This is how I test when the need arises: Hook up a relay normally closed, providing power to your appliance. Connect one input of your scope (battery powered scope is best) as the trigger on the relay coil. Connect the other input in voltage capture mode across the appliance terminals. When you open the relay, the second input is triggered by the first input and captures the residual voltage across the appliance filter. (in reality you see a few mains cycles as well due to the operating time of the relay) You will also need a small dc supply for the relay. Repeat the test about 50 times and if you have a good portable scope you should be able to print off the discharge waveform and stick it in the design file. Cheap. :) Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: EFT Failures..Help!
At 11:22 22/10/01 +0100, Alex McNeil wrote: I am at an EMC test centre today and tomorrow. Unfortunately, my product failed EFT testing on the AC power port at 1KV. This is for various ^^^ My product is Class II, no Earth. It is supplied by an external power supply. ^^^ Hi Alex, Where is the AC power port on your product? Why are you testing a power supply that has been tested already? What do mean by failed EFT testing ? Did it reset, blow up. ? What is your product? :) Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: Applying the appropriate ENs
It is the primary end use of the product that dictates the standard(s) required. If a product is sold as X, but then used by the user as Y, the manufacturer/etc only has to apply X relevant standards. But if the product is sold/marketed as Y, then Y standards must be applied. As a manufacturer/etc you choose the end use, and therefore the required standards. In reality it is easier to apply all intended standards during the design stage then let the marketing dept sell it without further work required on the DoC etc. Enci Assume a product is primarily intended for a particular use (example: CCTV for surveillance use) and the appropriate ENs are applied for that intended use and a Declaration of Conformity is issued listing the applied standard. Now assume that the product is marketed and sold for a secondary intended use (example: professional audio/video) where the same essential requirements apply but other ENs exist for that application. Is it legally required to also apply the other ENs and list them on the Declaration? --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Thin Insulation (Electrical) Material
Hi, I am looking for source/names/information on thin electrical insulation material - preferrably in the UK please. I have a small metal housing, which needs additional insulation. My first prototype used polyester tape, as used for transformer windings. Tape is not an ideal solution due to the size of the area to be covered. So far I have come up with: Nomex Aramid Paper (RS cat. no:) 349-9712 Phenolic Fabric (RS cat no:) 374-395 Ideally I would like to use a clear plastic film, but have yet to find any. Any suggestions appreciated. Thank you. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: US Mains Plug/Earthing
Thank you for all your comments. Do EU manufacturers have to fit a suitable mains plug to appliances when exporting to USA?... or can it be supplied without a plug, putting the requirement on the user to follow the instructions - in my case, stating that a grounding plug must be used ? Thank you. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
US Mains Plug/Earthing
I am in the UK, a customer in USA wants us to fit 2 pin mains plugs to the Class 1 appliances he is going to be buying from us. He is very firm that there are no regulations in US that requires this to be so. Is that true? Thank you. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Trading Standards UK
In the UK, what scope does a Trading Standards Officer have with regard to inspecting compliance with European Directives? (LVD EMC) As I understand it, they can inspect the evidence to support a DoC and samples of equipment have to be made available for them if they wish. Can they inspect any equipment and related documentation manufactured and made available for sale, professional and non-professional equipment, bearing CE marking? Are they entitled to inspect the manufacturing process? I am curious and would appreciate any experiences or comments either on the mailing list or off list. Thank you, Enci. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
USA EMC requirements
Where can I find, or what are the USA EMC requirements for conducted and radiated emissions for an independant lighting ballast for discharge lamps? Thanks in advance. Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: Harmonics - A14 revision
At 21:33 28/02/01 +, John Woodgate wrote: 31891b757c09184bbfec5275f85d55950b0...@cceexc18.americas.cpqcorp.net, Lesmeister, Glenn glenn.lesmeis...@compaq.com wrote: Why should all equipment need harmonic control when only some equipment cause problems? That's what the Amendment A14 to EN61000-3-2 (also voted positive by a majority of IEC P-members) attempts to address. The next revision will go even further. Hi John, When is the next revision due and can you tell us anything more about it? Regards, Enci --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
EN60598 or EN60922 (UL1029 or UL1573)
Anyone with experience in applying any of the standards in the subject, I would appreciate your comments. Product in question: DC supplied Independant Electronic Ballast for Metal Halide lamp. 30V DC in, Max Power 250W. Max output 300V (Pulse voltage) Ignitor fitted in remote lamphead. Conformity to EN standards required for European sales. Also UL conformity for future third party testing for USA sales. Which standard do I apply? EN60598-1 or EN60922, and which UL standard should I be looking at? I have copies of 60598 and 60922 and my comments are below: 60922:1997 --- Section 1.1 Scope and object: The standard covers inductive ballasts for use on a.c. supplies up to 1000V... Parts of this standard can be applied, most ignored, and some leave me in the dark. 60922 concentrates on mechanical and thermal properties of the ballast. The ballast I am looking for a standard for is just a DC driven switch mode power supply. There are no big windings as in inductive ballasts 60598-1:2000 (supersedes 60598-1:1997 +A1:1998 + A12:1998 + A13:1999) -- Section 0.5.1 Components, other than integral components, shall comply with the requirements of the relevant IEC standard, if any. Section 0.5.3 Components for which no appropriate IEC standard exists shall satisfy the relevant requirements of this luminaire standard as part of the luminaire. Note - Examples of components are lampholders, switches, ballasts, flexible cables and cords and plugs. This is a whopper of a read, and also the standard applied by a consultancy company when evaluating an A.C. version of this ballast. I also came across IEC 60923:1996, Ballasts for discharge lamps (excluding tubular fluorescent lamps) I feel EN60598-1 is the correct standard. Does anyone agree? Thanks in advance. Enci. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
