> Example: I measure and determine that an electrolytic > capacitor temperature is compliant with the standard, but > what happens when that capacitor eventually fails due to > large ripple current and then overheats and catches fire. > That's a single fault condition (a component fault), but it's > a scenario the standards today do not address, at least not > the standards I've worked with. Shorting that capacitor > during type testing does not simulate that condition.
In IEC 62368-1, if the capacitor is in a circuit where the available power exceeds 15 watts, it would be deemed a "potential ignition source." This would require spacing the capacitor away from flammable materials such that the fire would not spread from the capacitor. If the capacitor is in a circuit that exceeds 100 watts, the capacitor would be in a fire enclosure that prevents spread of fire from the equipment. The philosophy is that components (unless they are safeguards) are susceptible to overheating and catching fire, so mitigation of the flaming component is a requirement. Rich - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
