UL 508A refers us to UL 310 for bushings; UL 486A-486B Table 27 has values
for #30 up to 2000 kCM, but that is only based on cable size, not the weight of
equipment. My non-indexed search didn't come up with anything else through a
dozen or so IEC standards while searching for "retention" or
Just so's all of you know; Hawthorn isn't exactly the jewel of the west!
Colorado Brian
-- Original Message --
From: Ed Price
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] spacex EMC tst engr job
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:25:03 -0800
Yes, that 50 WPM typing requirement
If you read the article (and others) it can be read either way. The blog's
purpose is to give Compliance Officers tools, reference information and
background as to what is going on. That the SEC is getting involved in
Compliance investigations indicates to me increased scrutiny of companies
"other" Scott?) just made a similar
point... I will post anyway.
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Brian Gregory
wrote:
If you read the article (and others) it can be read either way. The blog's
purpose is to give Compliance Officers tools, reference information and
backgrou
Brian is right; all NEC rules apply to the installation. In this case, the
practical solution could be a sub-panel for the house loads that are served by
the inverter, but there are several ways it could be done. You are looking
inside the inverter (and the inverter safety standard) for the
Grace,Safety standards are: IEC 62109-1 and UL 62109-1 is now approved for
N.America. Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: Grace Lin
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Standards for Photo Voltaics Inverter
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 06:30:51 -0800
For field use I've found Dranetz and RPM
(http://www.powerqualityinc.com/rpm.html) to be the most durable. Colorado
Brian
-- Original Message --
From: "Brian O'Connell"
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] power quality monitors/analyzers
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016
To simplify; I often saw transformers declared class A pretty simply w/o any
record of an independent evaluation or certification. Higher classes are
another matter completely. To get a transformer approved for operation above
the limits for class A, one needs a separate evaluation. I'll ski
Let's also remember that there are categories of Listed products at companies
like UL, CSA and Intertek: including 'recognized' and 'approved.' The
difference is out of scope for this discussion. The proper phrase from a legal
standpoint IMO, should be approved and not "listed." As such, l
NESC and NETA {2013} are both ANSI standards and are both pretty much aimed at
the utility-distribution crowd: aka, 4 kV and above. Colorado Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: John Allen
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety
Just like CE Compliance, the scope statement is the key. OEM's should state
carefully where and how one does these things:the best use of language is not
to say "it's SAFE" (unless you're a paid umpire). I counsel my customers to
say that products have been tested to be in compliance with the
Intertek has a group out of Boston that specializes in "in situ" EMC testing,
even outdoors. That's the best bet I can think of. Colorado Brian
-- Original Message --
From: Ken Javor
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Need a LARGE Chamber
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 201
The third Brian opines: do what O'Connel says, then do a few tests,
too!Adjust load ratings for 50 Hz if necessary... Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: "Brian O'Connell"
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Using
I'm trying to find out if UL 6703 (connectors for PV systems) is being
upgraded to UL 9703 or the other way around. UL's site isn't helpful - it
could be drawings I got are just misprinted, but there was a UL 9703, "Outline
for Investigation" thanks, Colorado Brian720-450-4933
-- Or
Thanks Dave, that was very helpful! Where did you find this bulletin? I
can't get anything from their website... Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: "Nyffenegger, Dave"
To: Brian Gregory , "EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG"
Subject:
I worked for a NRTL for years, and no reviewer worth his salt ever accepted an
equation for thermal time constant or steady-state temperature. Just the data,
Ma'am Brian Gregory720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: Doug Powell
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re
(Brian
Gregory)
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: Paul Scott
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Implementing decision 2019/1326
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 14:46:32 +
Hello,
With regards to the standards listed in Annex I of this implementing decision
(for
hout regard to race,
color, religion, gender, age, disability, military status, national origin or
any other characteristic protected under federal, state, or applicable local
law Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-
This message is from th
Conductive epoxy bonding the probe to the surface?Calibrate with a current
shunt. "Colorado" Brian
720-450-4933
-- Forwarded Message --
From: Marko Radojicic <052300254e41-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] How to Measure Surf
As in EV chargers. Just started a new gig, and I'm back in compliance.Looking
for info on testing & compliance to the applicable standards: 2202, 2231, and
an exciting new concept that might require 9741 or 916. Please advise if this
is off scope for what's titled an EMC ListServe, but my exper
Yes,these are all UL. We've got a short list of SAE "J" standards as well,
and we do have plans to go to the UK, but not right now, that I know of.
Thanks. Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: John Woodgate
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Sub
I'd posted a week or two back about residential EV chargers.Here's the current
theory: My company sells a that's residential energy monitoring system (V2)
certified to 61010, an and EV charger certified to UL 2564. Customers assert
that extra market can be obtained by combined deployment of th
Good afternoon compliance colleagues, Have a curiously open-ended question
from a major OEM who's very process-oriented.So, I'm gathering ideas on how to
track standard updates and changes in multiple markets (US, EU, etc.). I'm
familiar with IAEI for collaborating with NA inspectors on NEC upd
Word is that IEEE/SA bought up Techstreet a while back.My Chrome browser
automatically routes me to IEEE/SA. The Edge browser gets me to the old
Techstreet page, and tells me that I'm already registered :-) So, they must be
one... at some point! Brian Gregory
720-450
information
> public. Sounds more like a generic reply a help-desk person will give to end
> the call. However, I do not believe UL is legally bound to keep detailed
> records public, only Company Name & file num
Advice from one with mostly US experience, but with an NRTL/NB: Until
otherwise prohibited by MD, best practices are: - use of company issued
documentation to properly describe the products covered by a DoC. Types,
application and ratings need to be crystal clear in the documentation. Use
p
afety hat" on the NRTL
report. ** The time that this current needs to be sustained would be in
either UL 5085-3 or C22.2 #66.1 under temperature or abnormal testing (sorry,
don't have them handy) in real world terms, this is 10~15 min. but in some
cases is stretched out until the XF get
exposure to potential
hazards have been addressed. Sometimes, when risk was more elevated (higher
voltage, easy access to device internals via battery compartments), I would
require my customers, if they wanted their approval label, to "beef up" their
labeling. Regards,Brian Gregory
72
-- Original Message --
From: "Kunde, Brian"
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 18:54:17 +
Brian, thanks for your input. Can the potential hazard be addresses without
English Text which may be misunderstood by those unfamiliar with the language?
Wouldn’t Symbols Only be better?
[Co
dered useful by actual
customers. That being said, I've got the feeling that an informed answer would
require a fairly detailed account of "getting dinged in Europe" Regards, Brian
Gregory[Colorado]
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: "Ku
The only ones that come to mind are ISO audits, and the contractual
requirements between you entity and the NRTL/NB you engage to provide your
certifications. These only require that you possess the standard in question
and employees can locate it when necessary, thereby establishing "familiar
Doug, The standard must assume the RF circuits are even more energy-limited
than secondary circuits is my best guess. If so, it doesn't say that anywhere
I could find. It takes voltage, but also energy to create an ionizing path.
Regards, Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-- Ori
-- Original Message --
From: "Kunde, Brian"
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 20:13:33 +
Hello Brian,
> test to IEC 61000-4-11
I think the problem is line surges external to your units, and you are on the
right track when you suspect that all the test equipment is very
current-l
Hi there, A question came up that I can't answer w/o a copy of Part 47.Does
the FCC report require Quasi-Peak (QP) data, or just Avg and Peak. When do
peak readings trigger the need to report QP? I'm pretty sure Part 15 has AVG
and QP limits listed. Next was what sort of margin is expected i
Hello colleagues, We are building EV Chargers for residential markets (not
just US) and one of the safety applicable standards is UL 2231-2. It calls out
IEC 61000-4-3 for immunity testing parameters, which states a requirement for
a field strength of 20V/m. Our EMC expert says typically te
ey define the peak of the modulation as 20 V/m. I don't know where
these are defined. Thanks for all the detailed replies! Colorado Brian
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: John Woodgate
To: Brian Gregory
Subject: Re: [PSES] Immunity test field strength, residential
Hello EMC experts, A question came up today about filing new results to FCC
for our legacy product. 1. If the filing is only for FCC, then the lab
providing the report does not need A2LA accreditation,2. If the filing is for
a safety report, then the lab does need A2LA accreditation. Have I
o the required component standard, there is no degradation.
Reducing he capacitance would be a degradation for EMC but not for safety.
Who determines the class is the person who has all the necessary data. The test
house of surveillance authority check the decision.
On 2023-08-09 23:20, Brian Gregory
rwarded message attached
From: David Schaefer
To: Brian Gregory , "EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG"
Subject: RE: [PSES] Necessary Lab accreditations, class 2 permissible change
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 15:42:24 +
-
This
EV Chargers getting more and more complicated For our controls
investigations, hardware failures need to be assessed. One of the safety
standards calls out MIL-STD-217, which has got to be nearly as old as my Dad.
Looking for more up to date, modern and computer-based processes and
pro
Hello, I'd like to have all options fleshed out prior to committing to a
fairly expensive quote for full FCC & ISED re-test and re-register our level 2
EV Charging unit for residential applications, which already has FCC and ISED
registration numbers. If we choose the option of not refreshing
Chat GPT is essentially a BS generator. A very smart friend, a very
successful entrepreneur, finds it quite useful for writing add copy, which I
think proved my point. The one time I tried challenging GPT with a question on
power factor with generator convention (where positive power generatio
I finally got the feedback I was seeking from a swarm of quotes for EMC
testing for FCC and ISED, concerning qualifying a product with an
FCC-registered WiFi module deployed onto our PCB. I've tried processing the
FCC orders on what upholds or doesn't when placing the module on your PCB and
Hi, 1. Our unit is passing by a whisker, under 1dB @ 30 Mhz in a 3m chamber
against SubpartB requirements. Can we expect margin to improve in a 10m
chamber? 2. It's lightly loaded in the chamber (10% of FL), we do expect the
peak to squash down a bit with full load; they do when going from z
Hello experts, once upon a time, there were several 10m chambers in Colorado,
3-4 north of Denver that I knew about.The only one I know should still exist is
at NTS in Longmont; the ones that were at Hp and StorageTek are long gone, I'm
afraid. NTS is now owned by Element, with whom I've enga
know, NTS is now the only 3rd party test lab in Colorado with 10m
chambers.
Kenneth WyattWoodland Park, COSent from my iPhone.
On Nov 8, 2023, at 14:25, Brian Gregory wrote:
Hello experts, once upon a time, there were several 10m chambers in Colorado,
3-4 north of Denver that I knew
Hello experts, Our existing product label has our FCC ID, just under the FCC
logo in the classic form:x-y, where x = the FCC ID of the
imbedded, compliant WiFi model ("Grantee Code" in FCC lingo), and y = our
product name, per the UL label. ("Product Code" ). We're tryi
;ve gotten around doing any more Subpart C.
> Unless you have separately certified your product as a radio transmitter,
> there’s no other FCC ID label for you to apply
No, they didn't go that far: the "Grantee Code" above is the FCC ID of the
WiFi module. Thanks for th
Hello fellow experts, we're looking to build a conducted emission
pre-compliance test station to FCC Part 15 Subpart B requirements (residential
applications).Is a non-metallic table a necessity for reasonable accuracy? We
have a number of lab benches with wood tops and metal legs that would fi
Hello fellow EMC Nerds, I had posted a time or two on our EMC issues with a
unit that has a class B certified WiFi/BT module. With improved results
compared to the originally approved unit, we've been able to attest to
compliance via the SELF DECLARATION of CONFORMITY (SDoC) process as define
et. A good place to start is with the
documents RSS-Gen, General Requirements for Compliance of Radio Apparatus, and
ICES-Gen, General Requirements for Compliance of Interference-Causing Equipment.
Doug NixKitchener, Ontario, canadad...@mac.com+1 (519) 729-5704
On Feb 22, 2024, at 13:54, Brian Greg
Hello,this is a little off topic for an EMC board, but y'all have a great ken
("ken" not _Ken_ Wyatt, even as great as he is). Can anyone recommend a lab or
company to help us run some MTBF calculations for a N. American residential
appliance? thank you, Colorado Brian
-
--
Hello and Happy Friday, I've got a sales guy telling me our 120/240V EUT needs
two pair of single-phase LISNs for our CE test bench.That's only slightly
cheaper than a 3-phase unit at > 50A, but very bulky. Can someone remind me why
I'd need 4, 50A single-phase LISNs for our unit? I could see
Just finished some testing at an accredited lab. For an accredited report,
they run QPs on all measurements whose peak are w/in 6 dB of the limit. I
don't know if that's their rule, or by the regulations. FYI Colorado Brian
-- Forwarded Message --
From: Bill Owsley <00f5a
We're going to DIY a portable table for CE. We won't have a dedicated space
for it, so the table and ground plane will need to me ... portable.1. How big
must the test table be for normal FCC class B (CISPR 16, I think) conducted
emissions, from 0.15 - 30 MHz?Same question for the ground pl
1. Clearances for US Safety: I'd cite the relevant standards, but they are
so alike (identical Clearance tables), and so alike to UL 508, I'll defer.
Here's the question: When citing clearance spacing from "uninsulated live
components" does one measure from the edge of a PCB to the enclosu
This looks like an EU version of Energy Star; am I reading this right? I
started to try to figure out the Energy Efficiency classes, but that appears to
be even beyond Bing's AI ability Brian Gregory
720-450-4933
-- Original Message --
From: Scott Xe
To: EMC
We've gotten an order for energy monitoring equipment to Australia.Generally,
this is low-energy, web-active electronics approved to UL 61010-1, and CTs that
are recognized to UL 2808 (thereby approved for placement in residential
panels).. Anyone know of a way to cross-check UL/US and NEC app
L-G failure sounds like the Y-caps conducting. I made a special input
connector for my unit that connected to traces that went around the Y-caps
and/or the GDTs on the input (single phase 120V) that was used during FAT.IIRC,
we also had to pull pins b/c we had faults from a UL-rated Phoenix con
Hello fellow certiiers of equipment, We're researching adding a product to our
EV charger file which has UL approval and Energy Star.There's a new Energy Star
1.2 out for EVSE products; does anyone have a feel or read a summary of what's
changed and what are the "grand" improvements? I've got
Hello fellow compliance colleagues, Holy smokes but UL 38.3 is poorly written.
Can someone confirm that the scope only applies to batteries sold and shipped
separately, and do not apply to those installed in an
appliance-product?Secondly, I can't find a size limit in the scope. For
instance,
61 matches
Mail list logo