Re: [PSES] Hazard warning labels on panel doors where COTS UPS installed?

[John Cochran]

UL requires us to apply a 'UPS Voltage Present When Off' label for UL 508A mobile carts we build with a UPS installed.  Inspector considers it a safety violation if the label is not on the access panel or door.

John



   


  
  
John Cochran
Compliance Manager
jcoch...@strongarm.com

Industrial workstations and mountings for the frontline workforce.
Strongarm Designs, Inc.
425 Caredean Drive | Horsham, PA 19044
(800) 778-7901 • strongarm.com

  
  


  


-Original Message-
From: Ralph McDiarmid  
Sent: Thursday, August 3, 2023 13:26
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Hazard warning labels on panel doors where COTS UPS installed?

CAUTION: This message originated from outside Strongarm. Do not open attachments or click on links if you do not recognize the sender.


Doug, a quick search through NFPA70 (USA national electrical code) says in article 645 Information Technology Equipment:

645.16 Marking. Each unit of an information technology system supplied by a branch circuit shall be provided with a  manufacturer's nameplate, which shall also include the input power requirements for voltage, frequency, and maximum rated load in amperes.

I endorse John Woodgate's answer;  if in doubt, label it.

I'm delighted to see a few familiar names after my long hiatus from this
forum.   I'm now semi-retired from the industry.

Ralph

From: Doug Nix 
Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2023 2:24 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Hazard warning labels on panel doors where COTS UPS installed?

Colleagues,

I have a client who has installed a COTS UPS in an industrial control panel.
The UPS is being used to keep the HMI alive in a power outage or if the disconnecting device is switched off.

I have scoured the resources that I have, and I can find nothing that requires a label on the outside of the panel to indicate that there is a UPS inside. EN 60204-1:2018 does not address this. I have a copy of EN IEC 62040-1, and it does not require a hazard warning label anywhere.

Any guidance you might offer is appreciated.

Doug Nix
mailto:d...@ieee.org
+1 (519) 729-5704


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/
Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/
Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html
List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Sherman at: mailto:msherma...@comcast.net Rick Linford at: mailto:linf...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher at: mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org

To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/

Website:  https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/
Instructions:  https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Sherman at: msherma...@comcast.net
Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
_
To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1




This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/

Website:  https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ 
Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Sherman at: msherma...@comcast.net
Rick Linford  at: linf...@ieee.org

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


 To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1 

Re: [PSES] Ferrules

[John Cochran]

Panduit PAN_TERM with vinyl insulation is UL 94V-0,


John Cochran
Compliance Manager
jcoch...@strongarm.com<mailto:jcoch...@strongarm.com>

[https://strongarm.com/strongarm-designs-logo.png]<https://strongarm.com>
Industrial workstations and mountings for the frontline workforce.

Strongarm Designs, Inc.
425 Caredean Drive | Horsham, PA 19044
(800) 778-7901 • strongarm.com<https://strongarm.com>



From: sgbrody 
Sent: Monday, April 3, 2023 15:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Ferrules

CAUTION: This message originated from outside Strongarm. Do not open 
attachments or click on links if you do not recognize the sender.

Hi all,

I have a 3rd party who is requiring 94V-0 on the ferrules of a connector.  Up 
to now the ferrules being used have been HB.

What say ye, esteemed experts?

Opinions, comments welcome.



Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>



To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: 
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 
_
To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: 
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1

Re: [PSES] Removable door panel grounding

[John Cochran]

>From my knowledge, the access panel will need a ground conductor or metal to 
>metal contact.  The second is more tricky as there can be no electrical 
>components on the panel and no possibility of a live conductor touch it.

I would find a way to keep the ground conductor connected but maybe consider 
ground studs at opposite corners so it has little slack when closed but allows 
the panel to be set aside without disconnecting the ground.

John Cochran
jcoch...@strongarm.com<mailto:jcoch...@strongarm.com>
215-443-3400 x219

From: Stultz, Mark <0f79f2e10e47-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 15:38
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Removable door panel grounding

CAUTION: This message originated from outside Strongarm. Do not open 
attachments or click on links if you do not recognize the sender.

Hi Frank,
Can you do a longer ground that allows moving the cover to the side?  In my 
experience it is risky to design a system where the ground is routinely 
disconnected.  If you need to design it that way, I recommend using a braided 
gasket that is partially compressed when the panel is installed.  You'll need 
the panel and gasket plated so that there is no corrosion that would increase 
the contact resistance since this arrangement can't be considered gas-tight.

Best regards,

Mark Stultz | CMSE(r) | Sealed Air | Automated Packaging Systems | Streetsboro, 
OH | 330-342-2402

From: Frank Tang 
<0d3fa4ae712a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org<mailto:0d3fa4ae712a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>>
Sent: Thursday, 16 June, 2022 3:23 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] Removable door panel grounding

You don't often get email from 
0d3fa4ae712a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org<mailto:0d3fa4ae712a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>.
 Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>

 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

Hi All,
In the past we have typically done a stud and nut grounding for removable 
lift-off access panels, but this is an inconvenience to disconnect the ground 
cable.
What are other methods for grounding large panel doors (3ft x 7ft) if any?

--
Thank you and best regards.
- Frank
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Femc-pstc.html=05%7C01%7Cmark.stultz%40sealedair.com%7C08c36d1e9b45484e6e8508da4fcd9b88%7C2691a2514c384643af0b0c0982f197bd%7C0%7C0%7C637910041749840006%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=kCYBUZ9eiCkvKJTfXcfWnx0fBXLmTN7hyfUqMmg3%2Bc4%3D=0>

Website: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2F=05%7C01%7Cmark.stultz%40sealedair.com%7C08c36d1e9b45484e6e8508da4fcd9b88%7C2691a2514c384643af0b0c0982f197bd%7C0%7C0%7C637910041749840006%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=ZHUArJed%2BRerA5uSlON%2BAe95UfnixpX4%2FSZGJunFJz0%3D=0>
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flist.html=05%7C01%7Cmark.stultz%40sealedair.com%7C08c36d1e9b45484e6e8508da4fcd9b88%7C2691a2514c384643af0b0c0982f197bd%7C0%7C0%7C637910041749840006%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=Qi9GTrZiw0sbVS9XRINZwj8iiJzUpYglR5hR9bcq7uo%3D=0>
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flistrules.html=05%7C01%7Cmark.stultz%40sealedair.com%7C08c36d1e9b45484e6e8508da4fcd9b88%7C2691a2514c384643af0b0c0982f197bd%7C0%7C0%7C637910041749840006%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=BL22A18SxgdIge83TVbLu6S32O4Bd36PL9gGGaedb%2BU%3D=0>

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>



To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: 
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1
-
-

Re: [PSES] Ground Bond Tests

[John Cochran]

I’m interested in these answers, but UL and Intertek do not require us to do 
more than Ground Continuity testing on 100% of the products.  The UL/cUL 
certified product is an Industrial LCD Monitor (NWGQ, NWGQ7) evaluated to the 
ITE standard IEC 60950-1 & CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 60950-1-07, with a detachable 
power cord.  The Intertek certified product is a mobile cart with a permanently 
attached 3/c cord with plug.  It is evaluated to UL 61010-1 & CSA 
C22.2#61010-1-12.  Both have an input range of 100-240VAC @ 15A.  We use a 
Hi-Pot tester with a Ground Continuity, Open/Short and Dielectric tests.  
Neither NRTL requires more than a buzzer/ohm-meter test of all exposed metal 
surfaces, which the Hi-Pot tester does.  The responses to this email challenge 
these requirements, but if not required, it is hard to convince management that 
we need to invest in more test equipment.  I feel more assured of the grounding 
on a system when we use our 25A Ground Bond Tester, but we only have one for 
engineering purposes.  We have never been required to do Ground Bond testing, 
only Ground Continuity.

John Cochran
jcoch...@strongarm.com<mailto:jcoch...@strongarm.com>
215-443-3400 x219

From: MIKE SHERMAN 
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 11:08 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Ground Bond Tests

Rich Nute has 3 Technically Speaking columns on this that can be found at the 
In Compliance magazine website. The first is here
https://incompliancemag.com/article/derivation-of-ground-impedance/
and I find it quite informative.
Mike Sherman
Graco Inc.

On 05/12/2021 8:01 AM Wiseman, Joshua 
mailto:joshua.wise...@orthoclinicaldiagnostics.com>>
 wrote:


I agree with Brian. I’ve been involved with product safety over 20 yrs and 
worked for an NRTL for about 6 of those.

The 40 A requirement came from the Canadian electrical code and all the NRTLs.

The only exemptions I’ve seen to the 100 % ground bond requirement has been for 
Class II and Class III devices or devices using an external power supply (brick 
or wall-wart styles.)

Josh

From: Brian Kunde mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 8:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Ground Bond Tests

EXTERNAL SENDER: Verify links, attachments and sender before taking action


61010-1 § 4.1 says,  "Tests in this standard are TYPE TESTS to be carried out 
on samples of equipment or parts. Their only purpose is to check that the 
design and construction ensure conformity with this standard. In addition, 
manufacturers shall perform the ROUTINE TESTS of Annex F on 100 % of equipment 
produced which has both HAZARDOUS LIVE parts and ACCESSIBLE conductive parts."

61010-1 Annex F, § F2 calls out the "Protective earth" test, also known as the 
Ground Bond Test, as a required test to be performed on 100% of production.  
Note the "NOTE" that says, "No value is specified for the test current.".   So 
some NRTL inspectors allow the ground bond test in production to be performed 
at any reasonable current value, but most will follow the requirements of 6.5.2.


I have been doing Product Safety for over 30 years and have worked with UL, 
CSA, TUV, NEMKO, EOLAS, etc., and all of them require 100% testing of 
production units to both the Highpot test and the Ground Bond test.

Regarding the 100mΩ verses 200mΩ question, all the NRTL inspectors I have 
worked with require the measured impedance of the Power Cord to be no more than 
100mΩ.  Note the UL/ANSI/CSA Deviation to 6.5.2.4 that instead of the 100mΩ 
requirement has a "shall not cause a potential drop of more than 4 V".  At a 
minimum 40 A ground bond test, a 100mΩ impedance would give you a 4V drop.  It 
doesn't say anything about an 8V drop for non-detachable power cords.  So NRTLs 
are going to stick with the 100mΩ across the board, I believe (this is opinion).

Hope this information is helpful.

The Other Brian


On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:27 PM Steve Brody 
mailto:sgbr...@comcast.net>> wrote:
So here is my question, or actually two of them:

First, one of my clients has been told by their 3rd party NRTL that a ground 
bond test is required as part of factory/production routine tests, even though 
it is not required by 61010-1.  I have never run into this requirement in my 
work history and I would be interested in hearing if any of you have.

Second, just to be sure my interpretation is correct, 61010-1, section 6.5.2.4, 
Impedance of protective bonding of plug-connected equipment, in the fist 
sentence, it has a limit of 100 mOhms impedance and my read is that this is for 
equipment with a power cord that has a plug on one end and a receptacle on the 
other.

Then, in the same section, still under the title of plug-connected equipment, 
it says for equipment that has a non-detachable power cord  the limit is 200 
mOhms.  My interpretation is that p

Re: [PSES] Tamper-proof Hardware

[John Cochran]

I interpret Supplimental Safeguards are additional to the Basic Safeguards.  
The basic safeguards are minimum requirements and supplemental safeguards are 
not required.

From: Robert Johnson [mailto:john...@itesafety.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2019 4:27 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Tamper-proof Hardware


I notice that IEC 62368 mentions tamper-proof screws in a couple places 
(articles 0.8, 0.11), although not explicitly requiring them. It describes 
tamper-proof screws as providing a supplemental safeguard against hazards. I 
would take that to mean for level 3 hazards, for example mains terminals, basic 
protection or other measures would ALSO be needed such as covers using regular 
screws. What are the implications for mains plugs assembled with slotted screws?

I have always assumed that requiring the use of a tool would provide protection 
against access to level 3 hazards. Access to mains terminal requirements seems 
to only require a tool per clause G.7.6.1. and V.1.1

The standard uses the term “tamper-proof screw” without definition. Is it 
slotted, Phillips, Torx, security Torx, Allen, hex, Robertson, or 
others ?

Are there examples where ordinary fasteners must be replaced with tamper-proof 
ones?



Bob Johnson
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Looking for a UL rated screw connector

[John Cochran]

Panduit PNLC-1/0-3 is really a UL Listed splice for 2 wires.

John Cochran
Strongarm Energy Division
STRONGARM Designs
Ph: 215-443-3400 x219


-Original Message-
From: Jon Keeble [mailto:j...@wattwatchers.com.au] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 4:06 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Looking for a UL rated screw connector

I am looking for a UL rated fitting used to join four 18AWG wires.

Such a product is the Thomas and Betts RC6 "Crimp-On Wire Joints, On-Piece 
Nylon Self Insulated".

But this is a crimp product, and I would like to use two screws.

Such a product is the Matelec FCN-16226 cable connector, but it is not UL rated.

Grateful for any help!



Jon Keeble

Wattwatchers
CTO
m: 0407 842 840
e:  j...@wattwatchers.com.au
s:  jkeeble
w: wattwatchers.com.au

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

[PSES] Wireless Regulatory Engineer position

[John Cochran]

I got an email from a recruiter and wanted to pass it on.  I don't know of 
anyone who would be interested and have no information on the position.  
Contact Debbie Schumacher if interested, and good luck.

Hi,

I'm looking for a Regulatory Engineer for our client in the wireless industry.  
As someone in the industry, I thought you might have worked with or know 
someone who might be interested in this.

Our client is a leading developer and manufacturer of electronics and 
communications equipment.  The Regulatory Engineer would need to know about 
standards for radios and systems, monitor the FCC website for regulatory 
changes and interface with the test lab and the aftermarket to insure 
compliance.

If there is someone you know, please feel free to have them contact me and I 
will send more info.  Thank you for taking the time to consider this.

Sincerely,

Debbie Schumacher
Talent Coordinator
Electronic Search, Inc.
847-506-2494
dschumac...@electronicsearch.com<mailto:dschumac...@electronicsearch.com>
www.electronicsearch.com<http://www.electronicsearch.com/>
5105 Tollview Drive Suite 245
Rolling Meadows, IL 60008


John Cochran
Strongarm Energy Division
STRONGARM Designs
423 Sargon Way, Horsham, PA 19044
Ph: 215-443-3400 x219   Fax: 215-443-3002
jcoch...@strongarm.com<mailto:jcoch...@strongarm.com>


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

[PSES] Internal connection labels in 220VAC systems

[John Cochran]

Recently a customer has corrected the markings of terminal blocks inside of an 
industrial control panel my company built.  An NRTL has evaluated the system 
and says the terminal markings for Line (L), Neutral (N), and Ground (G) are 
incorrect for a 220VAC input condition.  Their evaluation says that N is 
incorrect and should be labeled (L2) and the Line as (L1).  I agree that this 
is technically corrected for a North American wired 220VAC input as it consists 
of 2 live wires, each 110VAC.  For international use, 220VAC is only on one leg 
(L) and the return is (N).  This system is capable of handling 90-240VAC 
single-phase input, but the customer has been instructed by the NRTL that for 
110VAC input the terminals should be marked L/N/PE, and for 220VAC input the 
terminals should be marked L1/L2/PE.  This would require different construction 
for North America and International use.  Do I have an argument that the NRTL 
has made an incorrect assessment?

Thanks,
John Cochran
Strongarm Energy Division
STRONGARM Designs
423 Sargon Way, Horsham, PA 19044
Ph: 215-443-3400 x219   Fax: 215-443-3002
jcoch...@strongarm.com<mailto:jcoch...@strongarm.com>


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

[PSES] Low Power exemption for ATEX / IECEx

[John Cochran]

In IEC 60079-15 Clause 13, Low power device or components are exempt from 
evaluation of creepage and clearance, as defined in Clause 6.4 of the standard. 
 I designed a computer system which uses an i7 quad-core CPU module (COMe).  
The problem is the module draws 37W of power, and Note 1 in Clause 13 states 
Low power is typically considered 20W or less.  The word typically bothers me, 
but also the fact some competitors have gotten their systems certified with a 
45W i7 quad-core CPU.  The notified body we are using is insisting that our CPU 
cannot be approved.  Does anyone in the group have experience with certifying a 
higher wattage CPU module for international hazardous locations?

Thanks,
John Cochran
STRONGARM Designs


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Re: [PSES] EMC test lab, New York

[John Cochran]

Relif Testing Laboratories is the EMC lab I use.  They have a lab in 
Ronkonkoma, NY.  Retlif is fully accredited to ISO-STD-17025 and maintains such 
listing as, FCC recognized, VCCI listed, and EU CAB designated all to insure 
global acceptance of their test data.

John Cochran
STRONGARM Designs
Ph: 215-443-3400 x219

-Original Message-
From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 6:21 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EMC test lab, New York

I’m looking for recommendations for EMC testing services for a client in New 
York state. I need a well equipped lab which charges by the hour, properly 
understands the EMC Directive, has a good technical understanding of the EN 
standards and can recommend solutions in the case of minor compliance issues. I 
don’t want a lab who are only interested in maximising their income by 
performing unecessary tests.

Contact details gratefully received by direct message. 

Thanks

Nick. 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] Encapsulation for Creepage Clearance

[John Cochran]

In IEC 60079-15 Table 10 - Minimum creepage distances, clearances and 
separations, Encapsulated or solid insulation is allowed to reduce the minimum 
clearance requirements.  Note 4 of the table states completely encapsulated in 
compound to a minimum depth of 0.4 mm.  What tests are required to verify this 
encapsulation?  Does the encapsulation need to meet the requirements of IEC 
60079-18 Encapsulation, because the requirements for Conformal Coating much 
simpler?  I am trying to dispute MetLab requirement for testing to IEC 60079-18 
when the minimum creepage and clearance of a 100-240VAC power supply is 1.0 mm. 
 My understanding is creepage is not considered, if conformal coating or 
encapsulation is used.  Is this correct?

John Cochran
STRONGARM Designs
425 Cardean Drive, Horsham, PA 19044
Ph: 215-443-3400 x219   Fax: 215-443-3002
jcoch...@strongarm.commailto:jcoch...@strongarm.com

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

[PSES] Encapsulation for Creepage Clearance

[John Cochran]

In IEC 60079-15 Table 10 - Minimum creepage distances, clearances and 
separations, Encapsulated or solid insulation is allowed to reduce the minimum 
clearance requirements.  Note 4 of the table states completely encapsulated in 
compound to a minimum depth of 0.4 mm.  What tests are required to verify this 
encapsulation?  Does the encapsulation need to meet the requirements of IEC 
60079-18 Encapsulation, because the requirements for Conformal Coating much 
simpler?  I am trying to dispute MetLab requirement for testing to IEC 60079-18 
when the minimum creepage and clearance of a 100-240VAC power supply is 1.0 mm. 
 My understanding is creepage is not considered, if conformal coating or 
encapsulation is used.  Is this correct?

John Cochran
STRONGARM Designs
425 Cardean Drive, Horsham, PA 19044
Ph: 215-443-3400 x219   Fax: 215-443-3002
jcoch...@strongarm.commailto:jcoch...@strongarm.com


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] UL 1740 - Wet Locations vs Outdoor

[John Cochran]

I have a product being reviewed for compliance, a computer/display for use in 
outdoor environments, and UL/CSA/IEC 60950-22 was said to apply.

John Cochran
STRONGARM Designs
Ph: 215-443-3400 x219

From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:51 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] UL 1740 - Wet Locations vs Outdoor

All,

I am in review of construction and testing requirements for a product suing UL 
1740 - Robotics and Robotic Equipment.  I am using this standard in conjunction 
with ANSI RIA R15.06.  The device is not stationary; it is tethered and 
self-propelled.  It is powered by a universal input of 90-254 VAC, 50-60 Hz and 
it does produce secondary voltages as high as ± 600 V DC.  I hope someone here 
can clarify my concerns about the requirements for wet locations vs outdoor.  I 
anticipate that this product could be used in any type of weather although this 
has not been discussed with the client.

In UL 1740 the definition of a Wet Location is Portions of an indoor 
installation where occasional or continuous exposure to water or other liquids 
is anticipated.  UL 1740 has considerations such as reduced wet contact 
voltage limits and a brief mention of enclosure tests for spraying water, but 
no modification for safety spacings or any other concern.

Outdoor use is only mentioned a few times, twice as footnotes in sheet metal 
minimum thickness tables and once in the section for outdoor-use tests where it 
refers to solely to requirements of UL 50.  RIA R15.06 does mention 
specification of intended use  limits including outdoor in terms of risk 
assessment.

I suppose it bugs me a little that there is so little attention paid to the 
possibility of water in the environment (I am aware of submersible robotic 
vehicles being approved to this standard, although this is not the case in this 
instance).  Is it possible that the committee did not cover this matter in 
detail because they thought the Risk Assessment would take up the slack?   The 
client is especially concerned about safety and has actually suggested multiple 
levels of redundancy with regard to isolation and insulation.  My feeling is 
that I should at least apply some of the wet location provisions.

Any insights or experiences that can be offered are much appreciated.




Thank you, ~Doug



--

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.commailto:doug...@gmail.com



http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.orgmailto:emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.orgmailto:sdoug...@ieee.org
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.commailto:dhe...@gmail.com

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas sdoug...@ieee.org
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3

[John Cochran]

It appears that I can only meet this requirement for outdoor enclosures by 
either using a Class 2 power supply, or require the installer to use the 
external ground connection in addition to the internal PE ground.  The system 
is safe under normal conditions, but only has hazardous voltages on the 
enclosure when the PE ground is broken.  Are there any opposing opinions?

John Cochran
STRONGARM Designs
425 Caredean Drive 
Horsham, PA 19044
PHONE: 215-443-3400 X193
FAX: 215-443-3002

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2014 2:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3

In message f6d1e59f218e.540c8...@bendbroadband.com, dated Sun, 7 Sep 2014, 
Rich Nute ri...@bendbroadband.com writes:

I believe the authors of 60950-22 expected that user-accessible parts 
would comprise SELV circuits rather than grounded parts.  See 2.1.1 and
2.2 in 60950-1.

Grounded parts would be subject to 5.1 in 60950-1.

Thank you. So what can the OP do? Does this need to be taken into account in a 
revision or replacement of 60950-22?
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Quid 
faciamus nisi sit?
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3

[John Cochran]

Actually I need to meet the standard for outdoor enclosures, UL 60950-22, and 
clause 6.1 refers back to UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.2 and 2.2.3.  The difference is 
the voltage limits are reduced, due to contact resistance of the body being 
reduced when subjected to wet locations.  The clause states the voltage 
difference under a single fault must not exceed 30 V ac, without any mention of 
current.  Am I reading this correctly?

John Cochran
STRONGARM Designs
425 Caredean Drive
Horsham, PA 19044
PHONE: 215-443-3400 X193
FAX: 215-443-3002

From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 8:05 PM
To: John Cochran; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3



Hi John:


Nothing wrong.  When the ground is opened, you get
about half the mains on the (formerly) grounded
parts.  All equipment does this, including two-
wire equipment.  Even a three-wire power cord does
this!

The voltage is due to a capacitive voltage divider,
line-chassis-neutral.  The capacitances are in the
line filter and the strays due to the wiring.

The key is the current.  It is (or should be) less
than that specified in the standard.  This is
touch nee leakage current.  Measure the current
to ground and you will find any where from 0.5 mA
to 5 mA.

When you touch the chassis, the voltage drops to
about 20 volts or less, and you may feel a tingle.

The source impedance (to mains) is about 200 k
(capacitive reactance), maybe more, maybe less,
depending on the equipment.


Best regards,
Rich

On 9/5/2014 12:49 PM, John Cochran wrote:
From: John Cochran
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 3:47 PM
To: 'emc-p...@ieee.orgmailto:emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3

I am doing compliance testing on an outdoor computer/display and am having 
problems with complying with clause 2.2.3 of UL 60950-1 and clause 6.2  of UL 
60950-22.  When the earth ground is disconnected, there is an AC potential on 
the chassis ground that is ½ of the line voltage.  At 240VAC, there is 120VAC 
on the ground.  Since everything is grounded in the system and it is in an 
aluminum enclosure, I have this potential everywhere.  I cannot find an open 
frame AC power supply that does not do the same thing.  What is it that I am 
doing wrong.  The UL 60950-22 standard says the maximum AC voltage that is 
acceptable is 15VAC.

John Cochran
425 Caredean Drive
Horsham, PA 19044
PHONE: 215-443-3400 X219
FAX: 215-443-3002




-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

[PSES] UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3

[John Cochran]

From: John Cochran
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 3:47 PM
To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3

I am doing compliance testing on an outdoor computer/display and am having 
problems with complying with clause 2.2.3 of UL 60950-1 and clause 6.2  of UL 
60950-22.  When the earth ground is disconnected, there is an AC potential on 
the chassis ground that is ½ of the line voltage.  At 240VAC, there is 120VAC 
on the ground.  Since everything is grounded in the system and it is in an 
aluminum enclosure, I have this potential everywhere.  I cannot find an open 
frame AC power supply that does not do the same thing.  What is it that I am 
doing wrong.  The UL 60950-22 standard says the maximum AC voltage that is 
acceptable is 15VAC.

John Cochran
425 Caredean Drive
Horsham, PA 19044
PHONE: 215-443-3400 X219
FAX: 215-443-3002


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Are ATEX, IEC and UL Zone classifications equivalent?

[John Cochran]

My company has a UL Listing for hazardous classified Industrial Control
Panels.  In the file, UL equates the Class/Division/Group listings to
Class/Zone/Group equivalents.  Are these different from ATEX Zone listings or
IEC Zone listings?  What different standards are used for ATEX or IEC listings?

 

John Cochran

Compliance Engineer

Strongarm Designs

 

-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc