Peter,
Thanx for the clarification.
Yes, the Simpson 228 does set the eBurn measurement up on a 100
mArms scale (which fits well with a 70mArms at hi freq spec as used in some
standards - at 70mArms at HF the line freq value would be ooo 17.5mArms
which would be readable on the 100 mArms scale). Working at 1 mArms or so
is down in the mud for that circuit; the value provided on the output
circuit is also at the noise limit for the amplifier, as I have shown in the
PSES/ISPCE demo done in the past.
This eBurn circuit is also the IEC basic body model circuit which
has been used for leakage current measurements for more than 50 years in IEC
standards - when these were primarily sinusoidal waveforms at line
frequency. It worked well for these measurements. The UL circuit has a
similar topology but different R and C values; it would provide similar
results as has been shown many times in the past.
There will be a paper on this measurement and circuit in the next
PSE Newsletter (it's in the hopper now so look for it when the PSE News is
next published).
We're all awaiting your completion of the evaluation and you
providing feedback on the experience and results from your work.
:>) br, Pete
Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe 97281-3427
503/452-1201
p.perk...@ieee.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Tarver [mailto:ptar...@enphaseenergy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 9:29 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Kikusui TOS3200 Leakage Current Meter
Thank you, Pete.
I have received an initial response from Kikusui requesting additional
information about the EUT and the test setup.
I haven't looked at the waveforms yet, other than voltage. That's on the
docket.
Regarding the matter of scale, (as I'm sure you're aware) the Simpson 228
uses multiple measurement networks and was the first commercially available
leakage current meter to address UL 1459 requirements. The Burn Hazard
setting (corresponding to 61010-1, Figure A.3, and the Kikusui TOS3200,
Network A) is 100 mA full scale and I am trying to measure current below 1
mA.
For shock hazard (Let Go and Reaction), the scale is OK.
Peter Tarver
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pete Perkins
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 23:17
>
> Peter,
>
> Altho I have no experience with the Kikusui meter, I believe that you
> are on the right track chasing these differences.
>
> Since you have a Simpson 228 are you using a scope to look at the
> waveforms and get the readings for the scope display? In my work with
> that meter I always looked at the scope display because of the better
> numerical resolution from the scope display. If you have looked at
> the collexion of scope pix provided on safetylink you will see these
> details in each scope display - the waveforms as well as the digital
> readout of rms and pk-pk values.
>
> Not sure what your measured touch current is when you say the 228
> doesn't have the sensitivity you need. The 0.3mA scale should easily
> read down to <0.03mA (<30uA) or below. Or is it you can't read the
> differences between two measurements on the meter face? Use your
> scope reading to get the numerical values, as discussed above.
>
> Not sure whether or not you can get scope waveform pix from the
> Kikusui unit.
>
> Unfortunately, the use of complex equipment takes some training and/or
> experience to get the correct result each time. The mfgr makes it
> sound so easy but the proof is in the use pudding.
>
The information contained in this message may be privileged and
confidential. It is intended to be read only by the individual or entity to
whom it is addressed or by their designee. If the reader of this message is
not the intended recipient, you are on notice that any distribution of this
message, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete or destroy
any copy of this message!
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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>
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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>
