Isn't this a variation of using the traces as a fusing element 
instead of using a real fuse?  It's been done, there's nothing 
wrong with it until you start *claiming* the traces as a fusible 
device.  I'm not sure about this, but if you are, don't the traces 
themselves have to be tested as if they're a fuse? 

I've talked with some test engineers at some test houses about 
this and it can get involved claiming traces as fusible links. 
To get around this, I had the equip modified to include fuses. 

Doug 

At 11:36 PM 1/4/99 +0200, Peter Merguerian wrote:
>
>Happy New Year to All,
>
>I would like to ask the opinion of all members regarding compliance 
>criteria for the Overvoltage Tests in on TNV lines connected to 
>exposed plant. UL1950 states that after the OV Tests, unit must 
>comply with the Dielectric Voltage Withstand Tests or Leakage 
>Current Tests.
>
>Assuming that after the OV Tests, some internal traces of the 
>board opened and caused slight charring on the PCB and the unit 
>passed all applicable Dielectric Voltage Withstand Tests, would 
>this be considered an acceptable result?
>
>Looking forward to hearing from all members on this sensitive issue.



---------
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected]
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], or
[email protected] (the list administrators).

Reply via email to