Compliance Global list information
Dear Group, Where can I get a global agency certification list that showed all coutries accept CB-Scheme or CE marking? Thanks in Advance! Richard Terawave Communications 30680 Huntwood, CA 94544 --- 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
RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14
I just checked the CENELEC website, looked under Standardization Activities, searched for EN 61000-3-2, and found the following information regarding amendment prA14:2000 (the Class A - Class D amendment): Project Number: 13725 DOA: July 1, 20001 DOP: January 1, 2002 !!! It was reported earlier on this email group that the DOA for A14 was in December 2000 and DOP was expected to be January 1, 2001. What gives? Is the CENELEC web site just not up to date, or are the earlier dates erroneous? Many thanks to anyone who can authoritatively assist here. Paul O'Shaughnessy -Original Message- From: O'Shaughnessy, Paul [mailto:paul_oshaughne...@affymetrix.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 2:56 PM To: 'wo...@sensormatic.com'; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14 Absolutely correct - I was making the assumption that the dop corresponds to the date of publication in the OJ of the EC. Paul O'S. -Original Message- From: wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 11:24 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14 Don't forget that an EMC standard cannot be used to self-declare compliance until and unless it is published in the OJ. Richard Woods --- 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
RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides?
There seems to be some confusion regarding terminology and the location of the overcurrent protective devices being discussed. In the US and Canada, if a circuit breaker is located in the panelboard, John is generally correct that the neutral will not be controlled by the circuit breaker. On the other hand, if the circuit breaker is located in utilization equipment, there are no particular rules, regulations or standards that I am aware of preventing one pole of a circuit breaker from also controlling the neutral, except that, when the neutral is so controlled, all phases must be disconnected by common a control mechanism. The common vernacular applied to supplementary overcurrent devices that resemble branch circuit breakers is to also call them circuit breakers. Even the manufacturers and distributors of such devices call them circuit breakers. While incorrect in installation code terms, this is very likely what most respondents are referring to. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE ptar...@nortelnetworks.com -Original Message- From: Wagner, John P (John) [mailto:johnwag...@avaya.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 3:28 PM To: 'brian_kunde'; emc-pstc; 'Russell, Ray' Subject: RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? I take some exception to the response below. Single phase connections between phases either on a delta or wye system do not have a neutral connection. There are two grounded delta systems -- corner ground where one phase is grounded, or center tapped ground on one of the phases (commonly called high leg). There are also variations of the grounding scheme to allow for impedance grounded systems where appropriate. A standard two pole breaker os not designed, nor can it be used to interrupt neutral. For that, a special shunt trip braker is needed. John P. Wagner AVAYA Communication 11900 N. Pecos St, Room 2F58 Denver CO 80234 email: johnwag...@avaya.com phone: 303 538-4241 fax: 303 538-5211 -- From: Russell, Ray[SMTP:ray_russ...@gastmfg.com] Reply To: Russell, Ray Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 5:15 AM To: 'brian_kunde'; emc-pstc Subject: RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? Hi Brian, I see most of the return postings have focused on the UK, which has a terminated neutral system. There are several installations especially in the US, where the power could be derived from a delta, or unterminated neutral system. I believe in this case, overcurrent protection is required on both lines. In addition, the 2 pole circuit breaker method provides a suitable 2 pole disconnect. Good Luck, Ray Russell ray_russ...@gastmfg.com -Original Message- From: brian_kunde [mailto:brian_ku...@leco.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 12:32 PM To: emc-pstc Subject: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? The issue of designing in Overcurrent Protection on one side or both sides of the AC mains keeps coming up. We deal in Laboratory Equipment so the EN 61010-1 is the standard we use. I'm not sure what EN60950 would say on the subject. The only area I have found that deals with this question is a NOTE in section 9.6 of EN61010-1 which says, Overcurrent protection devices (e.g. fuses) should preferably be fitted in all supply conductors. This seems GRAY to me and I get beat up on it all the time. I feel that overcurrent protection should be on all current carrying conductors. With a 230V~ product you never know where in the world the product will be shipped, if the AC Main has a grounded neutral, or if the receptacle is polarized. So, I feel you never know for sure which line or if both lines will be HOT in reference to Earth ground. If my thinking is correct, shouldn't ALL 230V~ products have overcurrent protection on both sides of the line? I would think so, but I see products everyday that only have ONE side of the line fused. My superiors feel that if others can get away with it, why can't we. Why add the extra cost of double pole breakers or double fuse holders if it is not necessary? Am I being too cautious or do I have a point? Thank you for your support and advice. Brian Kunde LECO Corp. --- 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
RE: Sales Position; Selling EMC and Safety Services
Sales Representative Flextronics EMC Labs has an opening for a Technical Sales representative to Sell a Full Range of EMC and Safety Testing Services. The candidate should have at least 2 years of Technical Sales, Preferably in a laboratory environment (but not necessary). Experience with regulatory and certification processes and procedures is a plus. The position is salary plus commission. Flextronics has a complete benefits package, including an employee stock purchase plan and a great Paid Time Off Package (PTO). Our Web Site is www.flextronics.com Click on Flextronics Design then click on Agency Tsting and Approvals Interested candidiates please send your resume to: bill.ronzio@flextronics. com or 919-556-2043 Fax attn: Bill Ronzio --- 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
RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14
Absolutely correct - I was making the assumption that the dop corresponds to the date of publication in the OJ of the EC. Paul O'S. -Original Message- From: wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 11:24 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14 Don't forget that an EMC standard cannot be used to self-declare compliance until and unless it is published in the OJ. Richard Woods --- 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
RE: mil-std-461/462 for download
Paul, There is MIL-STD-461E and other MIL standards at this site. http://www.rbitem.com/emcstandards/northamerica/default.asp Gaston Cloutier telweb Inc. 350 rue Franquet, porte 45 Sainte-Foy, Quebec Canada G1P 4P3 Tel: 418-650-5516, poste: 217 Fax: 418-650-0860 Email: gclout...@telweb.com Web: www.telweb.com -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Paul Slavens Sent: 9 octobre, 2000 12:21 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: mil-std-461/462 for download Dear Group, Where can I download MIL-STD-461/462 from the internet? Thanks in Advance Paul _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --- 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
RE: mil-std-461/462 for download
Paul, Try this page. http://astimage.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/ Rocky -)-(- -Original Message- From: Paul Slavens [mailto:paul_slav...@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 11:21 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: mil-std-461/462 for download Dear Group, Where can I download MIL-STD-461/462 from the internet? Thanks in Advance Paul _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --- 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
Safety, EMC, Power Systems engineer opening
Regulatory/Power Systems Engineer Main Responsibilities Become part of a multi-functional system's engineering team in the process of developing a state of the art photo-finishing system incorporating technologies from Eastman Kodak Co. and Hewlett Packard Co. Responsible for product regulatory compliance and certification as well as analysis and specification of product power requirements. Regulatory engineer: Ensure products meet regulatory requirements for emissions, radiation, safety, and environmental issues. Assist in the design of other mechanical and electrical components, as well as over-all configuration and structure. Lead in developing and implementing the testing and verification of worldwide regulatory requirements. Work with external design organizations as necessary to develop and maintain testing simulators to facilitate testing, and to provide contract services to conduct compliance verification tests. Power systems engineer: Specify and/or design, as needed, systems and circuitry to provide power conditioning and distribution for the various components of a light-industrial, image capture, process, and print device. Support power supply vendor selection, development and qualification. Participate in program team meetings reporting on the status of ongoing tests and providing recommendations for path forward to accomplish product goals. Desired Experience Detailed regulatory design/troubleshooting capability with relevant EMC and safety experience. Designed and implemented digital motor controllers and printer/scanner power conditioning and distribution systems. Experience with regulatory requirements and certification processes for North America, Europe and Asia. Previously achieved regulatory compliance on a light-industrial device; works well with multiple small teams; familiar with standard office productivity software applications (e.g. MS Office, Visio, MS Outlook, etc) About Phogenix Imaging LLC (http://www.phogenix.com) Phogenix Imaging is a joint venture of Hewlett-Packard Company and Eastman Kodak Company committed to creating powerful, state-of-the-art digital inkjet solutions for the photofinishing marketplace of today and tomorrow. Backed with the knowledge, skills and vision of Hewlett-Packard Company and Eastman Kodak Company, Phogenix Imaging will transform the marketplace by bringing digital inkjet technology to retail with superior digital-based photographic delivery systems. Forward resumes to: Craig Stearman Phogenix Imaging LLC 16399 West Bernardo Drive San Diego, CA 92127 Phone: (858) 798-7950 Fax:(858) 798-7821 Email: resu...@phogenix.com --- 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
mil-std-461/462 for download
Dear Group, Where can I download MIL-STD-461/462 from the internet? Thanks in Advance Paul _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --- 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
RE: Have I baffled the Product Safety Technical Committee?????
The following from a collegue of mine may help: If it helps improve the confusion over UL and their flame ratings, a Class 2 Flammability rating comes from UL900 Air Filter Units. Taking straight form the standard, Class 1 Units - Those that, when clean, do not contribute fuel when attacked by flame and emit only negligible amounts of smoke. Class 2 Units - Those that, when clean, burn moderately when attached by flame or emit moderate amounts of smoke, or both. We had a similar problem on a product being tested to UL3111-1 where a Class 1 filter material was employed. We tested the material ourselves and found it to correspond to an HF-1 rating. With this and the Class 1 definition, UL accepted it's use under the conditions of Annex F of UL3111-1 - Reducing the Fuel available to a fire. -- Regards Dave Instone. Compliance Engineer Test Systems, MP24/22 Xyratex, Langstone Rd., Havant, Hampshire, P09 1SA, UK. Tel: +44 (0)23-92-496862 (direct line) Fax: +44 (0)23-92-496014 http://www.xyratex.com Tel: +44 (0)23-92-496000 --- 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
RE: Have I baffled the Product Safety Technical Committee?????
There is no correlation between air filter flammability class and the UL94 classifications. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE ptar...@nortelnetworks.com -Original Message- From: Jim Eichner [mailto:jim.eich...@xantrex.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 10:17 PM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: Have I baffled the Product Safety Technical Committee? Jeffrey: I don't know the Class 2 designation as regards flammability, but here are some old e-mails on the flame classifications, in case they help. Regards, Jim -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 1:20 PM To: Collins, Jeffrey; 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: Have I baffled the Product Safety Technical Committee? I know there's NEBS conferences on both coasts this week so many of you may be out of the office.(I'm attending the one in Baltimore) Does anyone have a good handle on all the different flame spec's and if there's some correlation between them. See my first message below... -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 3:52 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: UL Class 2 Flammability Ratings Correlation Group, Is anyone knowledgeable on how a UL Class 2 Flammability rating correlates with a UL 94-V? or HB rating? I have seen the Class 2 flammability ratings on air filters. I have a Telecom product that is being designed not only for UL-1950 certification but will meet the Bellcore GR-63 flammability spec's. I am doing an analysis on fuel load and am curious what relationship, if any, there is between these ratings. While on this topic, has anyone had experience with correlating UL flammability ratings with NFPA flammability ratings? All comments are welcome.. Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- 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
RE: Antenna Distance
Marvin, There is work on-going in CISPR SC G to create limits at 3 meters for Class B devices of a certain size or less. Given the speed with which changes occur, and then are adopted, I wouldn't count on this happening any time soon. The 10 meter limits will not go away for larger systems, or for Class A devices. CISPR 22 does allow testing at shorter distances when measurements cannot be made at 10 meters due to ambient signals or other reasons. Some companies have taken this to be a blanket approval to test at 3 meters. Some countries, notably Taiwan, insist on 10 meter measurements if at all possible. While you can make measurements at distances less than 10 meters, you are taking a risk as the 1/R distance factor doesn't really work and the field generally falls off more slowly. As a result, a product may appear to pass at 3 meters and fail at 10 meters. The rate of falloff is not constant, but varies with frequency and the size of the EUT. Caveat tester! Hope this helps. Ghery S. Pettit, NCE Intel Corporation Member, USNC IEC / CISPR SC G TAG -Original Message- From: Wolak, Marvin [mailto:marvin.wo...@marconi.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 1:56 PM To: EMC-PSTC Newsgroup (E-mail) Subject: Antenna Distance Is 10m emissions testing going away or unnecessary? What does the future hold? (Please indicate degree of uncertainty when projecting future changes.) We are a global company and must meet all international requirements as well as Bellcore. The reason I ask this is that I keep hearing via third parties that some test lab or other is claiming that they do all certification testing in a 3m / 5m chamber. Regards, Marvin Wolak Marconi Communications marvin.wo...@marconi.com --- 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
RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14
Don't forget that an EMC standard cannot be used to self-declare compliance until and unless it is published in the OJ. Richard Woods -- From: O'Shaughnessy, Paul [SMTP:paul_oshaughne...@affymetrix.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 10:28 AM To: 'Nick Rouse'; Friedemann Adt Cc: EMC Subject: RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14 Right - the dop is the first date upon which you MAY employ a new standard for compliance. The dow is the day by which any conflicting (ie the old standard) must be withdrawn and is therefore ineffective. This makes the period between dop and dow a transition period. Typically, the new standard is tougher than the original, so the transition period is used by everyone to ECO their products, retire the dinosaurs, etc. In this case (assuming all the dates are correct and it goes according to the plan), the situation is a bit upside down - A14 makes compliance to EN61000-3-2 easier. The dow for EN61000-3-2 will coincide with the dop of A14, which means on January 1st, you'll need to comply with EN61000-3-2, BUT you'll have the option to use A14 in doing so. For many manufacturers, A14 is the simpler and easier path, so I expect that many will take it once it is available. Paul O'Shaughnessy -Original Message- From: Nick Rouse [mailto:100626.3...@compuserve.com] Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 3:08 PM To: Friedemann Adt Cc: EMC Subject: Re: EN 61000-3-2/A14 Fred, The dow is the date at which conflicting standards must be withdrawn. For an ammendment it means the part of the old standard that conflicts with the ammendment. From the doa until the dow you may use either the old unamended standard or the new ammended version. After the cross over period you may use only the new amended version. Nick Rouse - Original Message - From: Friedemann Adt a...@viewsonic.com To: h...@jyske-emc.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 6:56 PM Subject: Re: EN 61000-3-2/A14 I tried to refresh my memory about quoted abbreviations but even using the Official Journal's search engine I got not beyond 'DOW Jones Industrial'. Thus I like to appeal to any merciful soul out there to straighten me out.. dow: is the date at which the standard is enforced and therefore the date at which product being brought onto the market has to comply ? Thank you Fred Adt compliance reliability manager a...@viewsonic.com phone (909) 444-8958 Helge Knudsen h...@jyske-emc.com 10/06/00 02:50AM Hello group EN 61000-3-2/A14 was ratificated 2000-10-03 with the following dates: dor: 2000-10-03 doa: 2000-12-01 dop: 2001-01-01 dow: 2004-01-01 It is expected that the amendment will be announced in Official Journal before 2001-01-01. Best regards Helge Knudsen Jyske EMC Denmark --- 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:
RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides?
Hi John, I agree there are many different mains wiring configurations, I was merely pointing out the case where I believe a 2 pole circuit breaker is required. How do you handle 230V equipment marketed worldwide, that may encounter any number of these configurations? Ray Russell ray_russ...@gastmfg.com -Original Message- From: Wagner, John P (John) [mailto:johnwag...@avaya.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 10:28 AM To: 'brian_kunde'; emc-pstc; 'Russell, Ray' Subject: RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? I take some exception to the response below. Single phase connections between phases either on a delta or wye system do not have a neutral connection. There are two grounded delta systems -- corner ground where one phase is grounded, or center tapped ground on one of the phases (commonly called high leg). There are also variations of the grounding scheme to allow for impedance grounded systems where appropriate. A standard two pole breaker os not designed, nor can it be used to interrupt neutral. For that, a special shunt trip braker is needed. John P. Wagner AVAYA Communication 11900 N. Pecos St, Room 2F58 Denver CO 80234 email: johnwag...@avaya.com phone: 303 538-4241 fax: 303 538-5211 -- From: Russell, Ray[SMTP:ray_russ...@gastmfg.com] Reply To: Russell, Ray Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 5:15 AM To: 'brian_kunde'; emc-pstc Subject: RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? Hi Brian, I see most of the return postings have focused on the UK, which has a terminated neutral system. There are several installations especially in the US, where the power could be derived from a delta, or unterminated neutral system. I believe in this case, overcurrent protection is required on both lines. In addition, the 2 pole circuit breaker method provides a suitable 2 pole disconnect. Good Luck, Ray Russell ray_russ...@gastmfg.com -Original Message- From: brian_kunde [mailto:brian_ku...@leco.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 12:32 PM To: emc-pstc Subject: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? The issue of designing in Overcurrent Protection on one side or both sides of the AC mains keeps coming up. We deal in Laboratory Equipment so the EN 61010-1 is the standard we use. I'm not sure what EN60950 would say on the subject. The only area I have found that deals with this question is a NOTE in section 9.6 of EN61010-1 which says, Overcurrent protection devices (e.g. fuses) should preferably be fitted in all supply conductors. This seems GRAY to me and I get beat up on it all the time. I feel that overcurrent protection should be on all current carrying conductors. With a 230V~ product you never know where in the world the product will be shipped, if the AC Main has a grounded neutral, or if the receptacle is polarized. So, I feel you never know for sure which line or if both lines will be HOT in reference to Earth ground. If my thinking is correct, shouldn't ALL 230V~ products have overcurrent protection on both sides of the line? I would think so, but I see products everyday that only have ONE side of the line fused. My superiors feel that if others can get away with it, why can't we. Why add the extra cost of double pole breakers or double fuse holders if it is not necessary? Am I being too cautious or do I have a point? Thank you for your support and advice. Brian Kunde LECO Corp. --- 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:
RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides?
I take some exception to the response below. Single phase connections between phases either on a delta or wye system do not have a neutral connection. There are two grounded delta systems -- corner ground where one phase is grounded, or center tapped ground on one of the phases (commonly called high leg). There are also variations of the grounding scheme to allow for impedance grounded systems where appropriate. A standard two pole breaker os not designed, nor can it be used to interrupt neutral. For that, a special shunt trip braker is needed. John P. Wagner AVAYA Communication 11900 N. Pecos St, Room 2F58 Denver CO 80234 email: johnwag...@avaya.com phone: 303 538-4241 fax: 303 538-5211 -- From: Russell, Ray[SMTP:ray_russ...@gastmfg.com] Reply To: Russell, Ray Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 5:15 AM To: 'brian_kunde'; emc-pstc Subject: RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? Hi Brian, I see most of the return postings have focused on the UK, which has a terminated neutral system. There are several installations especially in the US, where the power could be derived from a delta, or unterminated neutral system. I believe in this case, overcurrent protection is required on both lines. In addition, the 2 pole circuit breaker method provides a suitable 2 pole disconnect. Good Luck, Ray Russell ray_russ...@gastmfg.com -Original Message- From: brian_kunde [mailto:brian_ku...@leco.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 12:32 PM To: emc-pstc Subject: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? The issue of designing in Overcurrent Protection on one side or both sides of the AC mains keeps coming up. We deal in Laboratory Equipment so the EN 61010-1 is the standard we use. I'm not sure what EN60950 would say on the subject. The only area I have found that deals with this question is a NOTE in section 9.6 of EN61010-1 which says, Overcurrent protection devices (e.g. fuses) should preferably be fitted in all supply conductors. This seems GRAY to me and I get beat up on it all the time. I feel that overcurrent protection should be on all current carrying conductors. With a 230V~ product you never know where in the world the product will be shipped, if the AC Main has a grounded neutral, or if the receptacle is polarized. So, I feel you never know for sure which line or if both lines will be HOT in reference to Earth ground. If my thinking is correct, shouldn't ALL 230V~ products have overcurrent protection on both sides of the line? I would think so, but I see products everyday that only have ONE side of the line fused. My superiors feel that if others can get away with it, why can't we. Why add the extra cost of double pole breakers or double fuse holders if it is not necessary? Am I being too cautious or do I have a point? Thank you for your support and advice. Brian Kunde LECO Corp. --- 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
RE: EN 61000-3-2/A14
Right - the dop is the first date upon which you MAY employ a new standard for compliance. The dow is the day by which any conflicting (ie the old standard) must be withdrawn and is therefore ineffective. This makes the period between dop and dow a transition period. Typically, the new standard is tougher than the original, so the transition period is used by everyone to ECO their products, retire the dinosaurs, etc. In this case (assuming all the dates are correct and it goes according to the plan), the situation is a bit upside down - A14 makes compliance to EN61000-3-2 easier. The dow for EN61000-3-2 will coincide with the dop of A14, which means on January 1st, you'll need to comply with EN61000-3-2, BUT you'll have the option to use A14 in doing so. For many manufacturers, A14 is the simpler and easier path, so I expect that many will take it once it is available. Paul O'Shaughnessy -Original Message- From: Nick Rouse [mailto:100626.3...@compuserve.com] Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 3:08 PM To: Friedemann Adt Cc: EMC Subject: Re: EN 61000-3-2/A14 Fred, The dow is the date at which conflicting standards must be withdrawn. For an ammendment it means the part of the old standard that conflicts with the ammendment. From the doa until the dow you may use either the old unamended standard or the new ammended version. After the cross over period you may use only the new amended version. Nick Rouse - Original Message - From: Friedemann Adt a...@viewsonic.com To: h...@jyske-emc.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 6:56 PM Subject: Re: EN 61000-3-2/A14 I tried to refresh my memory about quoted abbreviations but even using the Official Journal's search engine I got not beyond 'DOW Jones Industrial'. Thus I like to appeal to any merciful soul out there to straighten me out.. dow: is the date at which the standard is enforced and therefore the date at which product being brought onto the market has to comply ? Thank you Fred Adt compliance reliability manager a...@viewsonic.com phone (909) 444-8958 Helge Knudsen h...@jyske-emc.com 10/06/00 02:50AM Hello group EN 61000-3-2/A14 was ratificated 2000-10-03 with the following dates: dor: 2000-10-03 doa: 2000-12-01 dop: 2001-01-01 dow: 2004-01-01 It is expected that the amendment will be announced in Official Journal before 2001-01-01. Best regards Helge Knudsen Jyske EMC Denmark --- 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
RE: earth bonding stud
Chris: The US mil practice for this stack would not use a crinkle washer at the bottom of the stack. The top crinkle washer (mil would prefer a split ring lockwasher) should be enough to provide the axial compression loading on the stack. The baseplate-to-solder terminal interface should be smooth, clean and conductive, hence no crinkle washer needed to cut into the surfaces. Also, the crinkle points are relative small points of contact, so a heavy fault current might melt the tiny points. Regards, Ed :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-) Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-) -Original Message- From: James, Chris [mailto:c...@dolby.co.uk] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 5:15 AM To: 'Colgan, Chris'; 'Emc-Pstc' (E-mail) Subject: RE: earth bonding stud Chris, Sounds good. We use solder terminals with integral star. Make sure the wire to the solder terminal is hooked thru and wrapped round the lug before soldering i.e. so that it is mechanically secured as well as soldered. Chris -Original Message- From: Colgan, Chris [mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com] Sent: 09 October, 2000 10:42 AM To: 'Emc-Pstc' (E-mail) Subject: earth bonding stud Hello group Having only ever dealt with Class II double insulated products, we are going to produce a Class I earthed product. We have an M4 stud in the baseplate and I have to spec the method of connecting the stud to the IEC mains inlet to provide chassis bonding to earth. I was going to suggest the following stack of parts: M4 crinkle washer, M4 solder terminal, M4 crinkle washer, M4 Nyloc nut. Does anyone think that this might prove unsuitable? Regards Chris Colgan EMC Safety TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU United Kingdom * Phone: +44 (0)1480 415627 * Fax: +44 (0)1480 415689 * Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com * http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error, please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either by E-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail. TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, 11 Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600) Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159) ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** --- 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
RE: Antenna Distance
Where I have seen this practiced it was done so using a 5 meter distance in a listed SAC using the 10 meter CISPR 22 limit. The limit level was NOT increased on a linear interpolation, as there was no proof that the EUT's emissions exhibited a linear roll-off. All of this allowed the EUT to be tested in the same chamber with no movement or reassembly time incurred, and provide data which demonstrated good margin and provided a solid point from which to answer any questions that might be asked. JOHN E. STUCKEY EMC Engineer Micron Technology, Inc. Integrated Products Group Micron Architectures Lab 8455 West Emerald St. Boise, Idaho 83704 PH: (208) 363-5313 FX: (208) 363-5596 jestuc...@micron.com -Original Message- From: Wolak, Marvin [mailto:marvin.wo...@marconi.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 14:56 To: EMC-PSTC Newsgroup (E-mail) Subject: Antenna Distance Is 10m emissions testing going away or unnecessary? What does the future hold? (Please indicate degree of uncertainty when projecting future changes.) We are a global company and must meet all international requirements as well as Bellcore. The reason I ask this is that I keep hearing via third parties that some test lab or other is claiming that they do all certification testing in a 3m / 5m chamber. Regards, Marvin Wolak Marconi Communications marvin.wo...@marconi.com --- 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
Re: earth bonding stud
Chris, I would prefer a simpler solution (only two parts): solder lock ring terminal (with a built-in star washer) + nut. John Radomski Colgan, Chris Chris.Colgan@TAGMcLarenTo: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Audio.com cc: Sent by:Subject: earth bonding stud owner-emc-p...@ieee.org 10/09/00 05:41 AM Please respond to Colgan, Chris Hello group Having only ever dealt with Class II double insulated products, we are going to produce a Class I earthed product. We have an M4 stud in the baseplate and I have to spec the method of connecting the stud to the IEC mains inlet to provide chassis bonding to earth. I was going to suggest the following stack of parts: M4 crinkle washer, M4 solder terminal, M4 crinkle washer, M4 Nyloc nut. Does anyone think that this might prove unsuitable? Regards Chris Colgan EMC Safety TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU United Kingdom * Phone: +44 (0)1480 415627 * Fax: +44 (0)1480 415689 * Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com * http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error, please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either by E-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail. TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, 11 Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600) Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159) ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** --- 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
Re: earth bonding stud
I'm going back at least a dozen years to when I last had to deal with this. At the time the requirement was that the earth wire could not be removed without the use of a tool. I found that the tag gave me enough torque with my thumb to loosen the nut sufficiently to enable the (nyloc) nut to be undone with my fingers. We cured the problem by placing the stud close to a side frame member so that it prevented rotating the tag. -- Regards Dave Instone. Compliance Engineer Test Systems, MP24/22 Xyratex, Langstone Rd., Havant, Hampshire, P09 1SA, UK. Tel: +44 (0)23-92-496862 (direct line) Fax: +44 (0)23-92-496014 http://www.xyratex.com Tel: +44 (0)23-92-496000 Colgan, Chris wrote: Hello group Having only ever dealt with Class II double insulated products, we are going to produce a Class I earthed product. We have an M4 stud in the baseplate and I have to spec the method of connecting the stud to the IEC mains inlet to provide chassis bonding to earth. I was going to suggest the following stack of parts: M4 crinkle washer, M4 solder terminal, M4 crinkle washer, M4 Nyloc nut. Does anyone think that this might prove unsuitable? Regards Chris Colgan EMC Safety TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU United Kingdom * Phone: +44 (0)1480 415627 * Fax: +44 (0)1480 415689 * Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com * http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com --- 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
Oct. 6, 2000 Conformity-Update Now Available
Conformity-Update for the week ending Oct. 6, 2000 is now available at: http://www.conformity-update.com --- 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
RE: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides?
Hi Brian, I see most of the return postings have focused on the UK, which has a terminated neutral system. There are several installations especially in the US, where the power could be derived from a delta, or unterminated neutral system. I believe in this case, overcurrent protection is required on both lines. In addition, the 2 pole circuit breaker method provides a suitable 2 pole disconnect. Good Luck, Ray Russell ray_russ...@gastmfg.com -Original Message- From: brian_kunde [mailto:brian_ku...@leco.com] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 12:32 PM To: emc-pstc Subject: Overcurrent Protection: One or Both Sides? The issue of designing in Overcurrent Protection on one side or both sides of the AC mains keeps coming up. We deal in Laboratory Equipment so the EN 61010-1 is the standard we use. I'm not sure what EN60950 would say on the subject. The only area I have found that deals with this question is a NOTE in section 9.6 of EN61010-1 which says, Overcurrent protection devices (e.g. fuses) should preferably be fitted in all supply conductors. This seems GRAY to me and I get beat up on it all the time. I feel that overcurrent protection should be on all current carrying conductors. With a 230V~ product you never know where in the world the product will be shipped, if the AC Main has a grounded neutral, or if the receptacle is polarized. So, I feel you never know for sure which line or if both lines will be HOT in reference to Earth ground. If my thinking is correct, shouldn't ALL 230V~ products have overcurrent protection on both sides of the line? I would think so, but I see products everyday that only have ONE side of the line fused. My superiors feel that if others can get away with it, why can't we. Why add the extra cost of double pole breakers or double fuse holders if it is not necessary? Am I being too cautious or do I have a point? Thank you for your support and advice. Brian Kunde LECO Corp. --- 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
RE: earth bonding stud
Chris, Sounds good. We use solder terminals with integral star. Make sure the wire to the solder terminal is hooked thru and wrapped round the lug before soldering i.e. so that it is mechanically secured as well as soldered. Chris -Original Message- From: Colgan, Chris [mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com] Sent: 09 October, 2000 10:42 AM To: 'Emc-Pstc' (E-mail) Subject: earth bonding stud Hello group Having only ever dealt with Class II double insulated products, we are going to produce a Class I earthed product. We have an M4 stud in the baseplate and I have to spec the method of connecting the stud to the IEC mains inlet to provide chassis bonding to earth. I was going to suggest the following stack of parts: M4 crinkle washer, M4 solder terminal, M4 crinkle washer, M4 Nyloc nut. Does anyone think that this might prove unsuitable? Regards Chris Colgan EMC Safety TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU United Kingdom * Phone: +44 (0)1480 415627 * Fax: +44 (0)1480 415689 * Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com * http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error, please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either by E-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail. TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, 11 Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600) Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159) ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** --- 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
earth bonding stud
Hello group Having only ever dealt with Class II double insulated products, we are going to produce a Class I earthed product. We have an M4 stud in the baseplate and I have to spec the method of connecting the stud to the IEC mains inlet to provide chassis bonding to earth. I was going to suggest the following stack of parts: M4 crinkle washer, M4 solder terminal, M4 crinkle washer, M4 Nyloc nut. Does anyone think that this might prove unsuitable? Regards Chris Colgan EMC Safety TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU United Kingdom * Phone: +44 (0)1480 415627 * Fax: +44 (0)1480 415689 * Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com * http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error, please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either by E-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail. TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, 11 Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600) Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159) ** Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com ** --- 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
Re: Label Rub test per IEC60950
As I recall, the chemical that was described is what is sold in the US as kerosene. It appeared way back in the early UL standards that way. Since this is a petroleum distillate characterized mainly by its molecular weight and what temperature it comes off the refining process, describing it is kind of like coming up with a chemical formula for milk. Too messy to try. The term kerosene was not sufficient to properly describe it worldwide, so this description was what was recommended by those in the business. Many have also used cigarette lighter fluid for the test. Functionally it is pretty equivalent, just a lighter distillate. The container's much more convenient. Bob E Eszlari wrote: Hi Doug, I think you will find that the common mineral spirit found in your local hardware store is used by most companies to perform the test in order to get a good idea if the label and print will pass. I have found that UL will accept the results. By the way, the gallon of mineral spirits I have at home is also labeled petroleum spirit. If you are doubtful of this test result, you may want to have an agency such as UL do the test for you or use an approved label system. In my experience I have found mineral spirit to be a more harsh chemical than Isopropyl Alcohol. The alcohol test is performed on labels that are used in medical environments per IEC 60601. Ed From: Massey, Doug C. masse...@lxe.com Reply-To: Massey, Doug C. masse...@lxe.com To: 'IEEE Forum' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Label Rub test per IEC60950 Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:22:27 -0400 Does anyone know what the trade name for the chemical used for the rub test in 60950 clause 1.7.15 is ? The standard calls it petroleum spirit, then describes an aliphatic solvent hexane, with several properties, none of which are a chemical formula. Is it common mineral spirits available at most hardware stores? Also, is Isopropyl Alcohol a more harsh solvent than the petroleum spirits? Thanks Doug Massey Safety Approvals Engineer LXE, Inc. Norcross, GA., USA Ph. (770) 447-4224 x3607 FAX (770) 447-6928 e-mail: masse...@lxe.com Cruise our website at: http:\\www.lxe.com --- 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 _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. --- 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
