---------------------- Forwarded by Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US on 01/18/2001 08:07 AM ---------------------------
Robert E. Heller 01/18/2001 08:08 AM 3M Product Safety, St. Paul, MN 55107 76-1-01 EMC Laboratory Fax: 651-778-6252 To: "Doug Best" <doug.b...@ifrsys.com> cc: Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. (Document link: Robert E. Heller) My read on this is if the equipment can be operated (in real life) with the battery charger attached then it must be tested with the battery charger in place (this would be worst case configuration). If it cannot be operated then test the battery charger with the unit not operating (charge mode only). I do not believe that you can declare "non-compliance". For others reading................would it be O.K. to declare in the operator's manual that the unit must not be operated while charging? ===================================================================== "Doug Best" <doug.b...@ifrsys.com> on 01/16/2001 04:17:32 PM Please respond to "Doug Best" <doug.b...@ifrsys.com> To: "Jim Eichner" <jim.eich...@xantrex.com> cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org (bcc: Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US) Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. Agreed Jim, I just got done testing a portable piece of test equipment that has a AC power draw of 110W nominally, this equipment has a lead acid battery that provides battery operation, when the battery is fully charged the equipment passes class A marginally (10% under the limit worst case), but when the battery charger is running the AC power draw increases 20 Watts and the 13th harmonic goes out of spec (8-10% above limit). My question is, can we specify compliance to the specification when the battery is suitably charged, and note non-compliance if the first condition is not meant? -Doug Best Compliance Technician IFR Americas Inc. Design Engineering doug.b...@ifrsys.com -----Original Message----- From: Jim Eichner [mailto:jim.eich...@xantrex.com] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 13:44 To: 'EMC-PSTC - forum' Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. Jim: You wrote "essentially anything will pass now". Oh how I wish that were true! The absolute requirements do make it easier for low power equipment to pass, but for anything above several hundred watts all bets are off and running the test can lead to ugly surprises. For example, I recently tested 2 battery chargers to A14: one with approx. 400W draw and the other approx. 800W. The 400W one just barely passes and the 800W one fails miserably. Smaller bulk filter caps would help, but there's that pesky functionality thing! Regards, Jim Eichner Sr. Regulatory Compliance Engineer Mobile Markets Xantrex Technology Inc. Email: jim.eich...@xantrex.com Website: www.xantrex.com Any opinions expressed are those of my invisible friend, who really exists. Honest. -----Original Message----- From: Jim Conrad [mailto:jc...@shore.net] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 12:10 PM To: 'Allan, James'; brett_sand...@snellwilcox.com; 'emc-pstc (E-mail)' Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. Al, It relaxed the limits for almost all products except ITE, TV's, etc. I do not remember all the details since I have not had to apply it yet. Essentially the harmonic current limits are no longer relative based on the power consumption of the device but based are on absolute values as if the product was drawing 15A(not sure of this exact #). But essentially anything will pass now. You can purchase A14 on the IEC web site at www.iec.ch There is also a 75 watt exemption. Products less that 75 watts automatically comply. Best regards, Jim' Jim Conrad P.O. Box 25 Hamilton, MA 01936-0025 USA jc...@shore.net Phone #: 978-468-3909 FAX #: 978-468-3909 -----Original Message----- From: Allan, James [mailto:james_al...@milgo.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 2:53 PM To: brett_sand...@snellwilcox.com; 'emc-pstc (E-mail)'; 'jc...@shore.net' Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. In a nutshell how did A14 change 61000-3-2. I don't have a copy of A14 yet. Jim Allan Manager, Engineering Services Milgo Solutions LLC 1619 N Harrison Parkway Sunrise, FL, 33323 E-mail james_al...@milgo.com Phone (954) 846-3720 Fax (954) 846-5693 > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Conrad [SMTP:jc...@shore.net] > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:09 AM > To: brett_sand...@snellwilcox.com; 'emc-pstc (E-mail)' > Subject: RE: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. > > > Yes, you can use the A14 for the January 1, 2001 compliance. Just be sure > to add 61000-3-2 A14 to your DOC. > > Best regards, > > Jim > > Jim Conrad > P.O. Box 25 > Hamilton, MA 01936-0025 > USA > > jc...@shore.net > Phone #: 978-468-3909 > FAX #: 978-468-3909 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf > Of > brett_sand...@snellwilcox.com > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 7:43 AM > To: emc-pstc (E-mail) > Subject: EN61000-3-2 Amendments. > > > Does anybody know if the amendments made it into EN61000-3-2 for its > January > 2001 compliance date? > > As a manufacturer of products that only use switch mode power supplies, > the > amendments are of great importance to me. > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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 > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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 > ------------------------------------------- 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 ------------------------------------------- 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 ------------------------------------------- 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 ------------------------------------------- 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