Power Supply Vendor Reference

[Price, Ed]

Group:


I had a project engineer ask me if I could suggest any vendors for a modular
power supply for his project. I say project, because it's a ground-portable
box that does something or other which he didn't think I needed to know
about.

All I know is that he expects to put about 1kW of 208V, 50/60 Hz, Delta
power into the power supply, and get 270 VDC, 48 VDC, 28 VDC, +/- 15 VDC and
8 VDC out of it.

Anyone care to recommend their favorite PS vendor (or themselves)?


Thanks,

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 Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tr ipping Dring Fault Tests)

[drcuthbert]

I recently designed a piece of in-house gear that uses the PCB as part of
the protective earth GND return. At first I thought I would be forced to use
a wire(s) only (which was awkward given the mechanics of the unit) but then
was convinced that EN61010 did not require it. To get around the via issue
we kept the path on one PCB layer. We designed for well over 20 amps
continuous. The bare metal rear panel is connected to the power connector
GND with the standard YELLOW/GREEN wire. The cabinet and front panel are
connected through the PCB with either metal spacers or a metal bracket. When
testing this do I return the current through the rear panel only, or do two
more tests using the cabinet and the front panel? The cabinet and the front
panel do not have dedicated GND connections or any unpainted metal.

   Dave Cuthbert
   Micron Technology



From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 11:25 AM
To: Lou Aiken; Peter L. Tarver; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)



PC traces are easier to assemble and the assembly can be done in a tighter
space.  I think (just an opinion)  that proper design could make this type
of system more reliable as well with less chances of wires coming loose...

> -Original Message-
> From: Lou Aiken [SMTP:ai...@gulftel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 11:36 AM
> To:   Peter L. Tarver; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  Re: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit
Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)
> 
> 
> Why not provide a fuse to prevent deterioration of the PE trace on a PCB?
> 
> Joking of course, but now that I have your attention, I would like to see
> this thread move away from the physics and discuss what practical reasons
> there are for using PC traces to provide earth fault circuits.
> 
> 
> Lou Aiken, LaMer LLC
> 27109 Palmetto Drive
> Orange Beach, AL
> 36561 USA
> 
> tel ++ 1 251 981 6786
> fax ++ 1 251 981 3054
> Cell ++ 1 251 979 4648
> - Original Message -
> From: Peter L. Tarver 
> To: 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:53 AM
> Subject: RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
> Tripping Dring Fault Tests)
> 
> 
> 
> Not quite.  I^2·t will tell you the let through current of
> the copper trace, but will not necessarily tell you if the
> construction will be compliant.  The compliance criteria for
> this test include:
> 
> * no damage to the trace (no lifting, probably no
> discoloration)
> * no damage to the PWB (no delamination, burning; I don't
> know if this includes burning off of solder mask)
> * before and after earthing impedance must comply with the
> 0.1 Ohm maximum impedance
> * no change in earthing impedance greater than 10% of the
> before and after earthing impedance results
> 
> There is also the much more variable solder in the earthing
> path.  While manufacturing techniques have come a long way
> in terms of consistency, the amount of solder in a joint and
> the quality of the joint itself can play a significant role.
> It should be expected that a lower melting point solder will
> perform less well than a higher melting point solder.
> Appropriate process controls will have a positive effect.
> 
> These are some of the reasons some form of safety agency
> factory auditing of this type of construction is normal.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Peter L. Tarver, PE
> Product Safety Manager
> Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
> San Jose, CA
> peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Maxwell
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:32 AM
> >
> >
> > Exactly!
> >
> > Chris Maxwell
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: drcuthbert [SMTP:drcuthb...@micron.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:50 PM
> > >
> > > What is needed is the I squared t rating of the
> > breaker. Then the (I^2)(t)
> > > rating of the PCB. Then you know if the PCB can
> > take it.
> > >
> > >Dave Cuthbert
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> 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:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Pr

PEC and PC traces in AC line power supplies

[Ted Rook]

Talking modest power levels <1kW AC input here:

PC mounted IEC inlets have been available for some time with excellent
strength and isolation performance. We like the PC mount arrangement because
it avoids the prep and assembly work required for discrete wire termination of
the L and N connections.

The inlet we use (Schurter, no connection) has a short spur on the E terminal
to which we DO attach a discrete wire which then terminates on the approved
protective ground mechanical terminal. At the same time E is also distributed
along with L and N to the power supply input circuit. We are required to
ensure that the earth wire is secured to the E terminal using a mechanically
secure attachment prior to solder.  We could also use 'Fastons' 'spade lugs
but some European labs, VDE I think, require crimp construction that grips
both the conductor and the insulation. In our case a mechanically secure
solder joint has been preferred.

Primary protection is provided by PCB mounted 20 x 5 mm fuse.
PCB traces are 1oz copper plated to 2oz. 
So far we have run into no testing problems with UL6500 for safety. Ground
fault current issues have not been raised.

This is pretty elementary stuff, but you did ask ;-)



Best Regards

Ted Rook, Console Engineering, ext 4659

Please note our new location and phone numbers:

Crest Audio Inc, 16-00 Pollitt Drive
Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 USA

201 475 4600 telephone receptionist, 8.30 - 5 pm EST.
201 475 4659 direct line w/voice mail, 24 hrs.
201 475 4677 fax, 24 hrs.




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Sweden WEEE Requirements

[Joe P Martin]

Group,

Sweden's Ordinance on Producer Responsibility for waste from electronic
equipment has been in effect since July 1, 2001.  The requirements are not
the same as the upcoming European Union WEEE Directive. I have several
questions for the group.

Why do you think the Swedish requirements have never been discussed on this
forum?
How is your company addressing the Swedish requirements?
Will the Swedish requirements need to be updated to meet the WEEE Directive
requirements?
The Swedish requirements specifically list "Laboratory Equipment" as having
to comply with their requirements.  The WEEE Directive does not list
laboratory equipment in it's scope.  Will this discrepancy need to be
clarified?
Can individual member states have different requirements than the EU
requirements?
Do other member states have individual WEEE requirements at this time?

All responses are appreciated.

Regards

Joe Martin
Applied Biosystems
marti...@appliedbiosystems.com






This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: UL508 and UL60950

[Gregg Kervill]

There are a number of potential issues - Watch out for the IP rating though
– 950 does not consider Pollution Degree IV and if your 950 part is not
protected to Pollution Degree II or III them the Creepage Clearance distance
WILL be inadequate.
 
Best regards
 
Gregg
 

From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of peter merguerian
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 12:21 PM
To: Pierre SELVA; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: UL508 and UL60950
 
Pierre, 
I have seen many INDUSTRAIL TYPE computers Listed under UL's category for
Information Technology Equipment (NWGQ) - ITE. Therefore, I am assuming that
such UL1950 or UL60950 equipment can be used in UL508 products. 
Peter 
 Pierre SELVA  wrote: 

Hello from France,

One of my customer is providing Human Machine Interfaces (Industrial
programmable controllers, Displays, ...).
Most of these products are included in UL508 certified complete products, and
are themselves UL508 certified.

But, can we use UL60950 certified products in a complete UL508 product.
In other words, do we have to demonstrate compliance of the included product
to UL 508 if it's UL60950 certified ?
For example, can we use UL60950 industrial computers in a UL 508 complete
product ?

Any input is welcome
Many thanks in advance.
Pierre Selva





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com
Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
 
  _  

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo!   Mail
Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
 

Re: 50Hz remark

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Ted Rook  wrote (in
) about '50Hz remark' on Tue, 4 Feb 2003:
>I'm referring to the basic frequency difference only, 

OK, I thought maybe there was more.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: CE marking and additional information requirements

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that John Roche  wrote
(in <200302041134_mc3-1-2829-4...@compuserve.com>) about 'CE marking and
additional information requirements' on Tue, 4 Feb 2003:

>The raison d'etre for the CE Marking scheme is to inform the end-user that
>the product meets the Essential Requirements of the applicable EU
>Directives. The CE mark is supposed to direct the user to other sources of 
>information (usually found in the pakaging or user manual), that will
>enable them to discover for themselves the delights that comprise the
>details of the product including its compliance status.

The CE mark is aimed at customs officers and regulatory authorities, and
not to the end-user.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tr ipping Dring Fault Tests)

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that drcuthbert  wrote (in
)
about 'EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tr
ipping Dring Fault Tests)' on Tue, 4 Feb 2003:

>The results would then
>be published in Compliance, Conformity, or Printed Circuit design magazine.

Please also send them to your experts on your TC108 national committee.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: Agilent 6842A

[jestuckey]

Then you haven't dealt with agilent (no caps on purpose) lately.  Ask them if
they can spell the other company's name.  
 
I have been through similar hoops as of late, and they couldn't spell RS.
 
Regards,
 

JOHN E. STUCKEY 

From: emcp...@aol.com [mailto:emcp...@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 11:00
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Agilent 6842A



I think all of the people that own the Agilent 6842A Harmonic and Flicker Test
System should get together and request Agilent to update their software for
the new standards.  As a loyal HP/Agilent customer, I would expect them to
take care of this issue.  This is why we buy certain brands of test equipment,
and not others.  I feel that we "got ripped" on this deal since the 6842A is
not a cheap piece of test equipment.

Tim Pierce 

RE: Agilent 6842A

[richwo...@tycoint.com]

Tim, which amendments or revisions of the test equipment standards or product
test standards do you believe are not supported?
 
Richard Woods 
Sensormatic Electronics 
Tyco International 


From: emcp...@aol.com [mailto:emcp...@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 1:00 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Agilent 6842A


I think all of the people that own the Agilent 6842A Harmonic and Flicker Test
System should get together and request Agilent to update their software for
the new standards.  As a loyal HP/Agilent customer, I would expect them to
take care of this issue.  This is why we buy certain brands of test equipment,
and not others.  I feel that we "got ripped" on this deal since the 6842A is
not a cheap piece of test equipment.

Tim Pierce 

RE: UL508 and UL60950

[richwo...@tycoint.com]

We once had a UL508 panel where the Listed construction allowed us to
install a specified UL 60950 Listed ITE device into the panel at the
customer site. So, it can be done. In our particular case, UL was the
Listing agency.

Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International





From: Pierre SELVA [mailto:e.l...@wanadoo.fr]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 7:48 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: UL508 and UL60950



Hello from France,

One of my customer is providing Human Machine Interfaces (Industrial
programmable controllers, Displays, ...).
Most of these products are included in UL508 certified complete products,
and are themselves UL508 certified.

But, can we use UL60950 certified products in a complete UL508 product.
In other words, do we have to demonstrate compliance of the included product
to UL 508 if it's UL60950 certified ?
For example, can we use UL60950 industrial computers in a UL 508 complete
product ?

Any input is welcome
Many thanks in advance.
Pierre Selva





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: request sources for UL and/or IEC accessibility probe (test finger)

[Pete Perkins]

Sources for test probes & equipment:

You ought to look at www.ergonomicsusa.com & check out their
offerings...

  br, Pete

  Peter E Perkins, PE
  Principal Product Safety Consultant
  Tigard, ORe 97281-3427
  503/452-1201 fone/fax
  p.perk...@ieee.org 





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)

[Gary McInturff]

Lou,
I'm not proposing anything mind you, but you could save some space if 
you had
a PWB mounted appliance inlet and you would still have to get the PEC to the
chassis. 
Gary


From: Lou Aiken [mailto:ai...@gulftel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 8:36 AM
To: Peter L. Tarver; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)



Why not provide a fuse to prevent deterioration of the PE trace on a PCB?

Joking of course, but now that I have your attention, I would like to see
this thread move away from the physics and discuss what practical reasons
there are for using PC traces to provide earth fault circuits.


Lou Aiken, LaMer LLC
27109 Palmetto Drive
Orange Beach, AL
36561 USA

tel ++ 1 251 981 6786
fax ++ 1 251 981 3054
Cell ++ 1 251 979 4648

From: Peter L. Tarver 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)



Not quite.  I^2·t will tell you the let through current of
the copper trace, but will not necessarily tell you if the
construction will be compliant.  The compliance criteria for
this test include:

* no damage to the trace (no lifting, probably no
discoloration)
* no damage to the PWB (no delamination, burning; I don't
know if this includes burning off of solder mask)
* before and after earthing impedance must comply with the
0.1 Ohm maximum impedance
* no change in earthing impedance greater than 10% of the
before and after earthing impedance results

There is also the much more variable solder in the earthing
path.  While manufacturing techniques have come a long way
in terms of consistency, the amount of solder in a joint and
the quality of the joint itself can play a significant role.
It should be expected that a lower melting point solder will
perform less well than a higher melting point solder.
Appropriate process controls will have a positive effect.

These are some of the reasons some form of safety agency
factory auditing of this type of construction is normal.


Regards,

Peter L. Tarver, PE
Product Safety Manager
Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
San Jose, CA
peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com


> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Maxwell
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:32 AM
>
>
> Exactly!
>
> Chris Maxwell
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: drcuthbert [SMTP:drcuthb...@micron.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:50 PM
> >
> > What is needed is the I squared t rating of the
> breaker. Then the (I^2)(t)
> > rating of the PCB. Then you know if the PCB can
> take it.
> >
> >Dave Cuthbert



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)

[Chris Maxwell]

PC traces are easier to assemble and the assembly can be done in a tighter
space.  I think (just an opinion)  that proper design could make this type of
system more reliable as well with less chances of wires coming loose...

> -Original Message-
> From: Lou Aiken [SMTP:ai...@gulftel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 11:36 AM
> To:   Peter L. Tarver; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  Re: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)
> 
> 
> Why not provide a fuse to prevent deterioration of the PE trace on a PCB?
> 
> Joking of course, but now that I have your attention, I would like to see
> this thread move away from the physics and discuss what practical reasons
> there are for using PC traces to provide earth fault circuits.
> 
> 
> Lou Aiken, LaMer LLC
> 27109 Palmetto Drive
> Orange Beach, AL
> 36561 USA
> 
> tel ++ 1 251 981 6786
> fax ++ 1 251 981 3054
> Cell ++ 1 251 979 4648
> - Original Message -
> From: Peter L. Tarver 
> To: 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:53 AM
> Subject: RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
> Tripping Dring Fault Tests)
> 
> 
> 
> Not quite.  I^2·t will tell you the let through current of
> the copper trace, but will not necessarily tell you if the
> construction will be compliant.  The compliance criteria for
> this test include:
> 
> * no damage to the trace (no lifting, probably no
> discoloration)
> * no damage to the PWB (no delamination, burning; I don't
> know if this includes burning off of solder mask)
> * before and after earthing impedance must comply with the
> 0.1 Ohm maximum impedance
> * no change in earthing impedance greater than 10% of the
> before and after earthing impedance results
> 
> There is also the much more variable solder in the earthing
> path.  While manufacturing techniques have come a long way
> in terms of consistency, the amount of solder in a joint and
> the quality of the joint itself can play a significant role.
> It should be expected that a lower melting point solder will
> perform less well than a higher melting point solder.
> Appropriate process controls will have a positive effect.
> 
> These are some of the reasons some form of safety agency
> factory auditing of this type of construction is normal.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Peter L. Tarver, PE
> Product Safety Manager
> Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
> San Jose, CA
> peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Maxwell
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:32 AM
> >
> >
> > Exactly!
> >
> > Chris Maxwell
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: drcuthbert [SMTP:drcuthb...@micron.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:50 PM
> > >
> > > What is needed is the I squared t rating of the
> > breaker. Then the (I^2)(t)
> > > rating of the PCB. Then you know if the PCB can
> > take it.
> > >
> > >Dave Cuthbert
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> 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:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.> 
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> 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:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hyper

Agilent 6842A

[emcp...@aol.com]

I think all of the people that own the Agilent 6842A Harmonic and Flicker Test
System should get together and request Agilent to update their software for
the new standards.  As a loyal HP/Agilent customer, I would expect them to
take care of this issue.  This is why we buy certain brands of test equipment,
and not others.  I feel that we "got ripped" on this deal since the 6842A is
not a cheap piece of test equipment.

Tim Pierce

RE: Multi - Lingual Markings For Industrial Equipment in the U.S.

[Price, Ed]

>-Original Message-
>From: Duncan Hobbs [mailto:duncan_ho...@xyratex.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 7:51 AM
>To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>Subject: Multi - Lingual Markings For Industrial Equipment in the U.S.
>
>
>
>Group,
>
>   Does anyone know if there are any state or federal regulations
>that may require bilingual markings for certain regions in the 
>USA? I am
>thinking of certain states where Spanish is a widely used language. 
>
>The equipment is industrial test equipment, of the sort that would be
>installed in a factory (i.e. not consumer equipment)
>
>Many thanks in advance,
>   Duncan.
>
>
>Duncan Hobbs, Senior Compliance Engineer
>Xyratex Product Compliance Lab.
>Havant, Hants, U.K.
>02392 496444
>duncan_ho...@xyratex.com
>



Duncan:

I don't know of any product marking requirements. I expect California to be
on the forefront of any such requirements. I was able to find some
references to forms, examinations and assistance being required to be
provided in Spanish to Hispanic California workers by the California OSHA
(Cal-OSHA) at:

http://www.dir.ca.gov/samples/search/query.htm

But I didn't find anything about products, either consumer or industrial,
needing bilingual labeling.

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 Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: UL508 and UL60950

[peter merguerian]

Pierre, 


I have seen many INDUSTRAIL TYPE computers Listed under UL's category for
Information Technology Equipment (NWGQ) - ITE. Therefore, I am assuming that
such UL1950 or UL60950 equipment can be used in UL508 products. 


Peter 


 Pierre SELVA  wrote: 



Hello from France,

One of my customer is providing Human Machine Interfaces (Industrial
programmable controllers, Displays, ...).
Most of these products are included in UL508 certified complete products, and
are themselves UL508 certified.

But, can we use UL60950 certified products in a complete UL508 product.
In other words, do we have to demonstrate compliance of the included product
to UL 508 if it’s UL60950 certified ?
For example, can we use UL60950 industrial computers in a UL 508 complete
product ?

Any input is welcome
Many thanks in advance.
Pierre Selva





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committeee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com
Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc




  _  

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus 
 - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now http://mailplus.yahoo.com> 

Re: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)

[John Barnes]

Chris,
Douglas Brooks wrote an article about Preese's and Onderdonk's equations
for fusing currents of wires, which was published in Printed Circuit
Magazine.  It can be downloaded from UltraCAD's web site at
http://www.ultracad.com/fusing.pdf

Appendix F of the book that I am writing for Kluwer, Robust Electronic
Design Reference, will cover the ampacity (current-carrying capacity) of
wires, printed circuit board traces, busbars, etc.  The manuscript is
due August 1st, so I had better get back to my writing...

John Barnes KS4GL, PE, NCE, ESDC Eng, SM IEEE
dBi Corporation
http://www.dbicorporation.com/


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: UL508 and UL60950

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Pierre SELVA  wrote (in
<3e26daa600ad0...@mel-rta10.wanadoo.fr>) about 'UL508 and UL60950' on
Tue, 4 Feb 2003:
>One of my customer is providing Human Machine Interfaces (Industrial 
>programmable controllers, Displays, ...).
>Most of these products are included in UL508 certified complete products, and 
>are themselves UL508 certified.
>
>But, can we use UL60950 certified products in a complete UL508 product.
>In other words, do we have to demonstrate compliance of the included product
to 
>UL 508 if it’s UL60950 certified ?
>For example, can we use UL60950 industrial computers in a UL 508 complete 
>product ?

You would do well to actually ask UL. They *like* to be asked, it makes
them feel wanted. (;-)

And they will certainly tell you, with complete authority, whereas we
can only advise.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fa

[Cortland Richmond]

Lou Aiken wrote 

>> ... what practical reasons there are for using PC traces to provide
earth fault circuits. <<

One practical reason is, to cut costs and simplify construction. Some years
ago a former employer designed and made a computer power supply with the
safety ground on the board, and UL allowed it. It was necessary to make the
board rugged enough at the grounding point to accept a standard, threaded
stud, nut and washer combination; they would not budge on THAT. It survived
fault current tests just fine. 

What we got from this was the ability to put everything, including an IEC
power connector, on one board, and eliminate flying wires.

I've also seen current requirements which could not be reasonably met using
a PWB trace, and in that case, a heavy bus strap was soldered onto the
board. This is a viable replacement where space or fabrication constraints
don't allow for the heavy, wide traces high current incurs. This
construction may be a reasonable answer to  some of the issues here.

Cortland


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: CE marking and additional information requirements

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Neil Helsby 
wrote (in <20030204.8161...@mis.configured.host>) about 'CE marking and
additional information requirements' on Tue, 4 Feb 2003:

>"The CE marking must be affixed to the apparatus or data plate. Where 
>this is not possible or not warranted on account of the nature of that 
>apparatus, it must be affixed to the packaging, if any, and to the 
>accompanying documents."

Which Directive is that from? The wording is different in every
Directive I've compared, and is different again in some of the draft
revised Directives. There ought to be a standard. (;-)
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Maxwell  wrote
(in <83d652574e7af740873674f9fc12dbaaf7e...@utexh1w2.gnnettest.com>)
about 'EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)' on Tue, 4 Feb 2003:

>This would make heat dissipation different; and I would assume that it would 
>make the fusing characteristics (I^2)(t) slightly different as well.

Or even a lot different. The reason why I personally would not use a
printed board trace as a PEC is that boards can develop cracks and thin
copper patches, so I couldn't guarantee that every board would stand the
test that the test sample passed. In this case, I don't think
potentially destructive sample testing is adequate, either. The PEC
needs to be 'four nines' reliable.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

via current

[drcuthbert]

Via current calculator http://www.pcbstandards.com/SiteIndex2.php
This calculator is based on the heat rise of PCB traces. The via will
actually run cooler due to heat sinking to the traces/plane on either end of
the via. Anyway, it is a start and measuring the temp of a via during
steady-state or transient conditions is doable.

  Dave Cuthbert


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)

[Lou Aiken]

Why not provide a fuse to prevent deterioration of the PE trace on a PCB?

Joking of course, but now that I have your attention, I would like to see
this thread move away from the physics and discuss what practical reasons
there are for using PC traces to provide earth fault circuits.


Lou Aiken, LaMer LLC
27109 Palmetto Drive
Orange Beach, AL
36561 USA

tel ++ 1 251 981 6786
fax ++ 1 251 981 3054
Cell ++ 1 251 979 4648

From: Peter L. Tarver 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)



Not quite.  I^2·t will tell you the let through current of
the copper trace, but will not necessarily tell you if the
construction will be compliant.  The compliance criteria for
this test include:

* no damage to the trace (no lifting, probably no
discoloration)
* no damage to the PWB (no delamination, burning; I don't
know if this includes burning off of solder mask)
* before and after earthing impedance must comply with the
0.1 Ohm maximum impedance
* no change in earthing impedance greater than 10% of the
before and after earthing impedance results

There is also the much more variable solder in the earthing
path.  While manufacturing techniques have come a long way
in terms of consistency, the amount of solder in a joint and
the quality of the joint itself can play a significant role.
It should be expected that a lower melting point solder will
perform less well than a higher melting point solder.
Appropriate process controls will have a positive effect.

These are some of the reasons some form of safety agency
factory auditing of this type of construction is normal.


Regards,

Peter L. Tarver, PE
Product Safety Manager
Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
San Jose, CA
peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com


> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Maxwell
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:32 AM
>
>
> Exactly!
>
> Chris Maxwell
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: drcuthbert [SMTP:drcuthb...@micron.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:50 PM
> >
> > What is needed is the I squared t rating of the
> breaker. Then the (I^2)(t)
> > rating of the PCB. Then you know if the PCB can
> take it.
> >
> >Dave Cuthbert



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

CE marking and additional information requirements

[John Roche]

Richard

In practice we see the CE Mark itself displayed in a variety of different
ways; on its own, as part of a label, not on the label at all, not on the
product at all (but on the packaging or in the User Manual). All seem quite
acceptable and legal. 

The raison d'etre for the CE Marking scheme is to inform the end-user that
the product meets the Essential Requirements of the applicable EU
Directives. The CE mark is supposed to direct the user to other sources of 
information (usually found in the pakaging or user manual), that will
enable them to discover for themselves the delights that comprise the
details of the product including its compliance status.

Therefore you could just append those magic letters to the product
somewhere and let the user read elsewhere, and at his/her leisure, all the
garbage which we have for years struggled to cram onto that small label
that always requires a magnifying glass (of the sort that Sherlock Holmes
would have be proud to own), in order to decipher what is contained
there-on.

I hope that this helps.

Best regards,

John Roche

Patton & Associates (UK) Ltd.
Orchard House
FINDON, West Sussex.
BN14 0UH.  UK GB.

INTERNET: ro...@patton-assoc.com
Web Page: http//www.patton-assoc.com

Telecommunications Consulting, Design and Type Approval/Certification 
for Europe, North America and the Pacific Rim

<< <<
> Variants of the CE marking question have been raised before, so here's
> another one or two.
> 
> Does the CE mark have to be located near other information such has
company
> name/trade mark, product name/model number or electrical ratings? Or can
it
> stand alone without such information?
> 
> Reading the LVD, EMC and the CE Directives, they mention affixing the CE
> Mark, but does not state any additional information that needs to be
located
> near the CE mark. Also, I checked past postings on the CE Mark and did
not
> have any luck finding if these questions were answered.
> 
> Thanks in-advance.
> 
> Richard Georgerian
> Compliance Engineer 
> Carrier Access Corporation
> 5395 Pearl Parkway
> Boulder, CO 80301
> USA
> 
> Tele: 303-218-5748Fax: 303-218-5503
> mailto:rgeorger...@carrieraccess.com
<<


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: UL508 and UL60950

[john.radom...@modicon.com]

Pierre,

Industrial computer systems are not covered by UL60950, they are covered by
UL508. So, I believe that your system (PLC, computer, etc.) needs to be
evaluated to the requirements of UL508.

John Radomski
Schneider Electric




  
 
  "Pierre SELVA"  
 
 To:  
 
  Sent by:  cc:   
 
  owner-emc-pstc@majordoSubject:  UL508 and
UL60950 
  mo.ieee.org 
 
  
 
  
 
  02/04/2003 07:48 AM 
 
  Please respond to   
 
  "Pierre SELVA"  
 
  
 
  
 





Hello from France,

One of my customer is providing Human Machine Interfaces (Industrial
programmable controllers, Displays, ...).
Most of these products are included in UL508 certified complete products,
and are themselves UL508 certified.

But, can we use UL60950 certified products in a complete UL508 product.
In other words, do we have to demonstrate compliance of the included
product to UL 508 if it's UL60950 certified ?
For example, can we use UL60950 industrial computers in a UL 508 complete
product ?

Any input is welcome
Many thanks in advance.
Pierre Selva







This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Multi - Lingual Markings For Industrial Equipment in the U.S.

[Duncan Hobbs]

Group,

Does anyone know if there are any state or federal regulations
that may require bilingual markings for certain regions in the USA? I am
thinking of certain states where Spanish is a widely used language. 

The equipment is industrial test equipment, of the sort that would be
installed in a factory (i.e. not consumer equipment)

Many thanks in advance,
Duncan.


Duncan Hobbs, Senior Compliance Engineer
Xyratex Product Compliance Lab.
Havant, Hants, U.K.
02392 496444
duncan_ho...@xyratex.com
 
 



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)

[Peter L. Tarver]

Not quite.  I^2·t will tell you the let through current of
the copper trace, but will not necessarily tell you if the
construction will be compliant.  The compliance criteria for
this test include:

* no damage to the trace (no lifting, probably no
discoloration)
* no damage to the PWB (no delamination, burning; I don't
know if this includes burning off of solder mask)
* before and after earthing impedance must comply with the
0.1 Ohm maximum impedance
* no change in earthing impedance greater than 10% of the
before and after earthing impedance results

There is also the much more variable solder in the earthing
path.  While manufacturing techniques have come a long way
in terms of consistency, the amount of solder in a joint and
the quality of the joint itself can play a significant role.
It should be expected that a lower melting point solder will
perform less well than a higher melting point solder.
Appropriate process controls will have a positive effect.

These are some of the reasons some form of safety agency
factory auditing of this type of construction is normal.


Regards,

Peter L. Tarver, PE
Product Safety Manager
Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
San Jose, CA
peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com


> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Maxwell
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:32 AM
>
>
> Exactly!
>
> Chris Maxwell
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   drcuthbert [SMTP:drcuthb...@micron.com]
> > Sent:   Monday, February 03, 2003 7:50 PM
> >
> > What is needed is the I squared t rating of the
> breaker. Then the (I^2)(t)
> > rating of the PCB. Then you know if the PCB can
> take it.
> >
> >Dave Cuthbert



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

50Hz remark

[Ted Rook]

John,
I'm referring to the basic frequency difference only, and the remark was
targeted to others in industries like ours, based in the land of 60Hz and
exporting into 50Hz territory.
Because stuff works on 60Hz, and linear transformers can take care of the
nominal voltage difference between 120 and 230V it is tempting for sales
departments to ignore the down rating required to avoid premature saturation
of cores at 50Hz.

I was attempting to give the engineers a 'heads up' because this fact of life
is not going away and will continue to plague US manufacturers who are less
than thorough in their market evaluations.



Best Regards

Ted Rook, Console Engineering, ext 4659

Please note our new location and phone numbers:

Crest Audio Inc, 16-00 Pollitt Drive
Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 USA

201 475 4600 telephone receptionist, 8.30 - 5 pm EST.
201 475 4659 direct line w/voice mail, 24 hrs.
201 475 4677 fax, 24 hrs.




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tr ipping Dring Fault Tests)

[drcuthbert]

Chris,
I have estimated this type of thing in the past assuming adiabatic
conditions. That is, the energy put into the material heats it and no energy
is lost during the heating. This gives the worse-case temperature rise. So,
what is needed is the electrical resistance of the material and the specific
heat of the material. Let's look at the case of a trace sized to handle 25
amps continuously with a 40 degree C rise.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/9643/TraceWidth.htm

We will pulse it with 200 amps for 20 ms and see what the heat rise is
assuming adiabatic conditions:

The trace is 500 mils (1.27 cm) wide, 1 inch (2.54 cm) long, and is 1 oz
copper (1.4 mils or 3.55 x10^-3 cm). The resistance is 1 milliohm. The
energy absorbed is (I^2)(R)(t) = 0.8 joules. The density of copper is 8.96
gr/cm^3. The mass of this trace is 0.103 gr. The specific heat of copper is
0.386 J/gr*C. The specific heat of this trace is therefore 0.0398J/C which
gives a heat rise of 20 degrees C for a 200 amp, 20ms pulse.  I have
neglected the change in resistance and specific heat with temp.

I have actually viewed the voltage drop across a metal line as it was heated
by a pulse. From this one can plot the temperature versus time. The real
issue, I think are the vias and vias with heat reliefs. How many do we use?
We can calculate the vias the same way and come up with a recommendation. Of
course, it would be great to check this with experiments. I would be
interested in doing this if someone here wants to partner on the project. I
can have a test board designed and built and do the pulsing. What I need are
standards, suggestions, circuit breaker data, and any other help (such as
researching to see if we are reinventing the wheel. The results would then
be published in Compliance, Conformity, or Printed Circuit design magazine.


 Dave Cuthbert
 Micron Technology


From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 6:32 AM
To: drcuthbert; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)


Exactly!  There is lots of data and tables available on the web for steady
state current; but I haven't found any sources that would give the (I^2)(t)
values for wires or PCB traces.   Such tables would take a great deal of
mystery out of this subject.  Right now, the best guess is to go by steady
state current rating; but there must be faults in this.  A PCB trace that
can handle 10 Amps of steady state current has a totally different geometry
than a wire that can handle 10 Amps of steady state current.  This would
make heat dissipation different; and I would assume that it would make the
fusing characteristics (I^2)(t) slightly different as well.

Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024

NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | 




> -Original Message-
> From: drcuthbert [SMTP:drcuthb...@micron.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:50 PM
> To:   'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit
Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)
> 
> 
> What is needed is the I squared t rating of the breaker. Then the (I^2)(t)
> rating of the PCB. Then you know if the PCB can take it. 
> 
>Dave Cuthbert
> 
> 


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests)

[Chris Maxwell]

Exactly!  There is lots of data and tables available on the web for steady
state current; but I haven't found any sources that would give the (I^2)(t)
values for wires or PCB traces.   Such tables would take a great deal of
mystery out of this subject.  Right now, the best guess is to go by steady
state current rating; but there must be faults in this.  A PCB trace that can
handle 10 Amps of steady state current has a totally different geometry than a
wire that can handle 10 Amps of steady state current.  This would make heat
dissipation different; and I would assume that it would make the fusing
characteristics (I^2)(t) slightly different as well.

Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024

NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | 




> -Original Message-
> From: drcuthbert [SMTP:drcuthb...@micron.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:50 PM
> To:   'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: EN60950 protective conductor test (was Re: Circuit Breaker
Tripping Dring Fault Tests)
> 
> 
> What is needed is the I squared t rating of the breaker. Then the (I^2)(t)
> rating of the PCB. Then you know if the PCB can take it. 
> 
>Dave Cuthbert
> 
> 


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

UL508 and UL60950

[Pierre SELVA]

Hello from France,

One of my customer is providing Human Machine Interfaces (Industrial
programmable controllers, Displays, ...).
Most of these products are included in UL508 certified complete products, and
are themselves UL508 certified.

But, can we use UL60950 certified products in a complete UL508 product.
In other words, do we have to demonstrate compliance of the included product
to UL 508 if it’s UL60950 certified ?
For example, can we use UL60950 industrial computers in a UL 508 complete
product ?

Any input is welcome
Many thanks in advance.
Pierre Selva





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: Harmonic & flicker questions

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that emcp...@aol.com wrote (in <144.9826c5b.2b70a07e
@aol.com>) about 'Harmonic & flicker questions' on Mon, 3 Feb 2003:

>I have some questions about the harmonic/flicker standards.  I would 
>appreciate any input you have.
>
>1.  What are the differences between EN 61000-3-2:1995 plus A1:1998, 
>A2:1998, & A14:2000 and the new standard EN 61000-3-2:2000?

It's simply not possible to answer questions like this on a mailing
list, especially for A14, which is a LARGE amendment. You really have to
buy the latest standard.
>
>2.  What are the differences between EN 61000-3-3:1995 and the new
standard 
>EN 61000-3-3: 1995 plus A1:2001?

It's the same here. A1 is a large amendment and, short of reproducing
the whole text here, it's not possible to tell you the differences. 
>
>3.  What is the difference between EN 61000-3-3:1995 and EN 
>61000-3-11:2000?  I read in the standard that if equipment is not
meeting 
>the EN 61000-3-3 standard, then this standard applies.  Does this mean I 
>don't need to perform EN 61000-3-11 if I'm passing EN 61000-3-3?

Yes. Section 11 is mainly for equipment rated above 16 A/phase, but CAN
be used for equipment rated below 16 A that doesn't meet section 3.
>
>4.  Also, I currently use an HP/Agilent 6842A Harmonic & Flicker Test
System 
>to perform the tests to the old standards.  I called Agilent, and they
said 
>they have discontinued this unit and will not support any software
upgrades 
>after the A14 amendment.  Does anyone know if there is someone that can 
>write some software that will work with the 6842A system?

You also need to take into account that IEC 61000-4-15, the flickermeter
standard, has also been revised.
>
>5.  If I have to get a new Harmonic & Flicker Test System, which one do
you 
>recommend?  I would want a system that will perform all of the
standards: EN 
>61000-3-2, EN 61000-3-3, & EN 61000-3-11.  I hope there is a system I
can 
>buy that will be supported 3-4 years from now.
>
You won't get one instrument that does it all. For 61000-3-11 testing,
you might need a 75 A 3-phase supply. Think of separate boxes,
flickermeter and harmonic test set. Note that the latter should conform
to the recently revised IEC 61000-4-7.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: FCC Importation Issue

[John Allen]

Hi Folks

I am surprised that people are still "having trouble" with Form 740 and
related documents - these have been around for years in one form or another!
We were routinely doing these forms 15 years ago (and they had been around a
long time before that) when I worked for HP at Bristol in the UK and we sent
equipment to our US companies !

What it might mean is: 
- US Customs (and/or the FCC) are being more stringent on checking for the
forms and their content;
or 
- Something else has changed in the way imports are being handled
or 
Importers have simply forgotten that these requirements exist.

Regards

John Allen
Technical Consultant
Electromagnetics, Safety and Reliability Group
ERA Technology Ltd
Cleeve Rd
Leatherhead
Surrey KT22 7SA
Tel:+44 (0) 1372-367025 (Direct)
+44 (0) 1372-367000 (Switchboard)
Fax:+44 (0) 1372-367102 (Fax)



From: craig.har...@jci.com [mailto:craig.har...@jci.com]
Sent: 03 February 2003 20:15
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: FCC Importation Issue







The form that is mentioned below is FCC Form 740. If you go to
http://www.fcc.gov/ and type "FCC Form 740" in the search box. the first
item that comes up its the form. the second Item is a public notice
pertaining to the form

  We just ran into this issue with one of our products that was held in
customs. In the past it has not seemed to be an issue.

Thanks,

Craig


 

  jwise...@printronix.co

  m  To:
dclay...@nccn.net, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

  Sent by:   cc:

  owner-emc-pstc@majordo Subject: RE: FCC
Importation Issue  
  mo.ieee.org

 

 

  02/03/03 11:35 AM

  Please respond to

  JWiseman

 

 






Don,

Every now and then I get something stuck in US customs.  Typically the
agent will supply a form for FCC or CDRH compliance depending what is hung
and the reason.  If you fill out the paperwork the shipment proceeds.  If I
find a copy of the form here I will scan it in and send it to you directly.

The only time the above did not work for me was a power supply sample
coming in from Singapore.

Good Luck,
Josh


Has anyone out there had any problems with U.S. Customs
holding a product for lack of FCC report or a declartion
>from a manufacturer that product is indeed compliant?

Thanks in advance,

Don Clayton
ESR Engineering Inc.


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc





This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

_
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed
Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit
http://www.worldcom.com


*
Copyright ERA Technology Ltd. 2002. (www.era.co.uk). All rights reserved. 
The information supplied in this Commercial Communication should be treated
in confidence.
No liability whatsoever is accepted for any loss or damage 
suffered as a result of accessing this message or any attachments.

_
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed
Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit
http://www.worldcom.com


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discus

Re: Marking of packaging material

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Dave Wilson  wrote (in
<20030203224912.58722.qm...@web20004.mail.yahoo.com>) about 'Marking of
packaging material' on Mon, 3 Feb 2003:

>Can anyone point me to the tables in the annex of Decision 97/129, 
>the ID system for packaging covered by 94/62/EC? I can find the 
>text, but not the tables which presumably detail the numbering 
>system.

You tried to get them from the European Commission's web site? If so,
it's a known problem that the downloads don't included tables and
graphics, but nothing is being done to change it. (8-O(

However, there are some mirror sites that DO have the complete documents
downloadable. Unfortunately, I can't give you a URL.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: CE marking and additional information requirements

[Neil Helsby]

To quote:
"The CE marking must be affixed to the apparatus or data plate. Where 
this is not possible or not warranted on account of the nature of that 
apparatus, it must be affixed to the packaging, if any, and to the 
accompanying documents."
Regards,
Neil Helsby


**
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

immunity to radiated impulses

[Doug Smith]

Hi All,

I have posted this month's Technical Tidbit, Crossing Ground Plane 
Breaks - Part 3, Immunity to Radiated EMI. It is at http://emcesd.com 
with the link being the picture at the bottom of the index page.

In the article, the last in a three part series on the effects of 
paths crossing ground plane breaks, the effects of immunity to 
impulsive EMI fields are investigated. As one might expect, the data 
presented shows a significant loss of immunity to EMI for signal paths 
that cross a ground plane break as compared to paths that stay over a 
solid ground plane. You may find the data useful in convincing your 
non-EMC friends of this layout issue.



For thos of you who have been watching the list of articles and papers 
grow over the past few years to about 70 on my site, you may be 
interested in a new site in the EMC field that is starting with 
several posted papers with more articles to come. The new site is by 
one of the most experienced people in EMC! There are several papers 
posted that form the basis of our understanding how ESD affects 
electronic systems. Although published years ago, these papers are 
still current and useful reading for engineers involved in system 
level ESD. New articles will be added on a continuing basis. The site 
is at:

http://www.systemsemc.com/



Doug
-- 

 ___  _   Doug Smith
  \  / )  P.O. Box 1457
   =  Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457
_ / \ / \ _   TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799
  /  /\  \ ] /  /\  \ Mobile:  408-858-4528
|  q-( )  |  o  |Email:   d...@dsmith.org
  \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Harmonic & flicker questions

[emcp...@aol.com]

Hello Group,

I have some questions about the harmonic/flicker standards.  I would
appreciate any input you have.

1.  What are the differences between EN 61000-3-2:1995 plus A1:1998, A2:1998,
& A14:2000 and the new standard EN 61000-3-2:2000?

2.  What are the differences between EN 61000-3-3:1995 and the new standard EN
61000-3-3: 1995 plus A1:2001?

3.  What is the difference between EN 61000-3-3:1995 and EN 61000-3-11:2000? 
I read in the standard that if equipment is not meeting the EN 61000-3-3
standard, then this standard applies.  Does this mean I don't need to perform
EN 61000-3-11 if I'm passing EN 61000-3-3?

4.  Also, I currently use an HP/Agilent 6842A Harmonic & Flicker Test System
to perform the tests to the old standards.  I called Agilent, and they said
they have discontinued this unit and will not support any software upgrades
after the A14 amendment.  Does anyone know if there is someone that can write
some software that will work with the 6842A system?

5.  If I have to get a new Harmonic & Flicker Test System, which one do you
recommend?  I would want a system that will perform all of the standards: EN
61000-3-2, EN 61000-3-3, & EN 61000-3-11.  I hope there is a system I can buy
that will be supported 3-4 years from now.

Thanks for your help in advance!

Tim Pierce
EMC Engineer

Re: Labelling requirements components

[David Heald]

Andre,
   I think that in section 1.7.12 (the section you referenced in the 
60950 family) there is also a provision that for service personnel, the 
language on safety related info can be English. (except in Germany, 
where it must also be in German).  I would take this to mean that 
component safety information can be in a different language (English or 
German) than would normally be present on the outside of the product. 
This seems to follow common sense as well (not that that gets you very 
far when evaluating to safety standards :).

Also look in 1.7.14 to see if this applies in your case.  (Replacement 
of the differently labeled/sourced/revision component can't cause the 
removal or alteration of product level safety labeling.)

I'd check this to make sure that what I remember is up to date but I 
don't think you need to worry about the labeling language on the 
component (so long as it is approved for its end use and you meet 1.7.14).

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

Andre Boons wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> If a manufacturer is required to put information on the label of his 
> product, it must be in a language that is acceptable for the user in the 
> country where the product is put on the market.
> 
> If the above product consists of a certain part that can be replaced 
> during service operations locally and there are special precautions to 
> be taken care of when replacements takes place, should the label on that 
> part also be in the language of the country where the final product is 
> marketed.
> An example could be a CRT of a VDU that needs replacement by exactly the 
> same type.
> 
> Regards,
> Andre
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> 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:
> Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
> Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
> Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc