Yes I agree
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
e-mail and destroy all copies and the original message.
It is in IEC62052-31; which I believe refers to IEC61010-1
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 11:28 AM
To: Balmukund Vyas; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
Which standard has that
Which standard has that very sensible text?
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
-Original Message-
From: Balmukund Vyas [mailto:balmukund.v...@ymllabs.com]
Sent: Thursday,
Thank you.
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
-Original Message-
From: Balmukund Vyas [mailto:balmukund.v...@ymllabs.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 8:41 AM
To:
Well, sort of twice. In the manufacturer's own in-house testing, 101 V is
applied. At the test house, some days/weeks/months later, 99 V is applied.
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England
Sylvae in aeternum
Hello All
Have I misunderstood the words in IEC62052-31?
In a hypothetical measurement of an applied voltage where the uncertainty of
the exact value is 1% and a test voltage of 100 is required, the manufacturer
would need to insist on a 101V test voltage and the test facility would have to
6 matches
Mail list logo
