Re: [PSES] Touch/Leakage Current Test Equipment
Hi Brian, We used hioki in the past. The problem is how to calibrate internal circuit up to 1MHz. You can calibrate voltage up to 1MHz, however instrument shows current and this is not an easy task. Many labs have the same issue. Calibration up to 1MHz is required by IEC 60990 standard and by CB scheme. See OD-5013. Instrument shall allow rms and peak measurements. One customer was using in production Chroma. They were not very happy with it since they could not integrate it into their system. We prefer now to use normal network circuit. Our metrology department built different networks for different applications and made ISO 17025 calibration up to 1MHz. You need to use osc with the network. This is good since you can see the signal on osc. It is not so good for medical measurement since you need to do a lot of measurements manually. Therefore we built a second switch box, which makes measurement easier. Of course, such method is not useful if you are doing routine tests in production. Best regards, Boštjan Boštjan Glavič Vodja laboratorija za elektroniko / Head of Laboratory Varnost in elektromagnetika / Safety and Electromagnetics SIQ Ljubljana, Mašera-Spasićeva ulica 10, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija T: +386 1 4778 265 M: +386 41 391 283 bostjan.gla...@siq.si<mailto:bostjan.gla...@siq.si>; www.siq.si<https://www.siq.si/> [SIQ]<https://www.siq.si/> To elektronsko sporočilo je namenjeno izključno naslovniku. Pravno obvestilo.<https://www.siq.si/pravno-obvestilo-za-prejemnike-elektronske-poste/> The information transmitted by this email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. Disclaimer.<https://www.siq.si/en/legal-notice-for-e-mail-recipients/> [SIQ Facebook]<https://www.facebook.com/SIQLjubljana/> [SIQ LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/siq> [SIQ YouTube] <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCURzJFvP5CDVtL_vdvWjbQA/featured> From: Brian Kunde Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2024 2:51 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Touch/Leakage Current Test Equipment CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. Greetings to all. I would like to hear your recommendations for test equipment for performing Touch/Leakage Current. If it is ok to say, we currently have an ED LT-952 with the 30A option and it has been great. However, we would like to get a second tester that has a LAN interface so we can automate the testing and data collection. We like the Meter Reference feature so the measurement is not only referenced to ground, but also to Line 1 or Line 2. We also like the 30 amp ability since we do test products that are rated between 20A and 30A. Even higher current rating would be nice. I would love to hear your recommendations for a good Leakage Current Tester. If it is not ok to post here, please send it directly to me. Validation and Calibration: On another related topic, how do you all Validate your Leakage Current Tester? Does anyone self calibrate their own Tester? How hard can this be? The company we use for calibration says they cannot calibrate it so they send it to another company, resulting in my tester being gone for a long period of time. So I am trying to find an acceptable solution. I also have the Human Body Model circuit as a separate box that I connect to a calibrated DMM to make measurements. This box is easy to validate just with a meter. Our NRTL Inspector says we can just measure the resistance and capacitance of the Box ourselves and do not have to send it out for calibration (that is what they do). So can I use this Box to compare the results I get with my ED Leakage Current Tester and call it good? Thank you very much. The Other Brian 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/<https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC lis
[PSES] Touch/Leakage Current Test Equipment
Greetings to all. I would like to hear your recommendations for test equipment for performing Touch/Leakage Current. If it is ok to say, we currently have an ED LT-952 with the 30A option and it has been great. However, we would like to get a second tester that has a LAN interface so we can automate the testing and data collection. We like the Meter Reference feature so the measurement is not only referenced to ground, but also to Line 1 or Line 2. We also like the 30 amp ability since we do test products that are rated between 20A and 30A. Even higher current rating would be nice. I would love to hear your recommendations for a good Leakage Current Tester. If it is not ok to post here, please send it directly to me. Validation and Calibration: On another related topic, how do you all Validate your Leakage Current Tester? Does anyone self calibrate their own Tester? How hard can this be? The company we use for calibration says they cannot calibrate it so they send it to another company, resulting in my tester being gone for a long period of time. So I am trying to find an acceptable solution. I also have the Human Body Model circuit as a separate box that I connect to a calibrated DMM to make measurements. This box is easy to validate just with a meter. Our NRTL Inspector says we can just measure the resistance and capacitance of the Box ourselves and do not have to send it out for calibration (that is what they do). So can I use this Box to compare the results I get with my ED Leakage Current Tester and call it good? Thank you very much. The Other Brian - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Fw: Shake and Bake! MIL-STD 810/DO-160 for Military and Aerospace Devices and Systems
8YdDmo45d0v9rILO7EwiA==> Washington Laboratories, Ltd. | 4840 Winchester Blvd Suites # 5 & 6 | Frederick, MD 21703 US Unsubscribe<https://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=un=001CAFc7EPX6wJRvCuY0mjQ2g%3D=65bc31f0-b9bd-11e8-bc79-d4ae52806b34=2bba7716-fe5f-4a79-bd02-b3ed38b41cf9> | Update Profile<https://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=oo=001CAFc7EPX6wJRvCuY0mjQ2g%3D=65bc31f0-b9bd-11e8-bc79-d4ae52806b34=2bba7716-fe5f-4a79-bd02-b3ed38b41cf9> | Constant Contact Data Notice<http://www.constantcontact.com/legal/about-constant-contact> [Constant Contact]<http://www.constantcontact.com/landing1/vr/home?cc=nge_campaign=nge=VF21_CPE_medium=VF21_CPE_source=viral=ROVING=2bba7716-fe5f-4a79-bd02-b3ed38b41cf9> IMPORTANT! This message is from outside of the company - take extra precaution when clicking on any links or attachments in this message. If you suspect this e-mail is suspicious report it to IT immediately. - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries?
My professional experience with Amazon product safety people, maybe 5 years ago and before I retired, was frustrating. One angle you might try: treat them like another product safety professional with whom you are networking. In this case, you might provide a link to the CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 website and point out that the standard only applies to secondary cells. You might also provide a link to a site explaining what secondary cells are. We all have helped educate one another over the years; we can continue that courtesy with our Amazon colleagues. Mike Sherman Sherman PSC LLC > On 07/22/2024 1:58 PM CDT Ralph McDiarmid wrote: > > > > Unless Amazon has a regulatory department that has access to national > standards, this may be a simple checkbox for in-coming inspection. In that > case, you might be stuck with the requirement regardless of CR2032 cell type. > > > > CAN/CSA C22.2 are part 2 national standards for Canada, not applicable in > other countries unless adopted. > > > > Ralph > > > > From: Ted Eckert <07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 11:21 AM > To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > Subject: Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries? > > > > Hello John, > > > > I believe that IEC 60086-4 is the applicable standard for primary > (non-rechargeable) lithium batteries, including coin cells. As others have > noted, IEC 62133-2 is for secondary (rechargeable) batteries. > > > > Ted Eckert > > The opinions expressed in this message are my own and do not necessarily > reflect those of my employer. > > > - > > From: John Riutta mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 10:31 AM > To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries? > > > > > > You don't often get email from jriu...@celestron.com > mailto:jriu...@celestron.com. Learn why this is important > https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification > > > > Hello all, > > > > We’ve been seeing Amazon requiring CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for all > products that use or contain at time of sale a CR 2032 coin cell battery. I > was of the understanding that this standard did not apply to this battery. > Unfortunately, I do not possess a copy of the standard so I cannot verify > this myself. MayI ask if anyone here can offer verification or rebuttal > please? > > > > Best regards, > > John > > > > John E. Riutta, MA, MBA, FLS I Product Development and Product Compliance > Manager I jriu...@celestron.com mailto:jriu...@celestron.com I 323.446.1076 > > CELESTRON, LLC. I 2835 Columbia Street I Torrance, CA 90503 > > > > [Logo Description automatically generated] http://www.celestron.com/ [Icon > Description automatically generated] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_celestronuniverse=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mp6OgNq_McWjXY2YQYjZ9Dk6_XzP1VPvIEe8C8zj56A= > [A close-up of a fire Description automatically generated with low > confidence] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=VPySibohtehHWHpC8d5rHDIovgyX-KLLxjtWSiblJGI= > [A picture containing text, clipart Description automatically generated] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mFMWx391BWGOZRSQd2VOWpQ8frezSjy2nYeDDPQcxtg= > [Icon Description automatically generated] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_CelestronDotCom=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=ziJj_dfd_78luGSUUH4AfwmPyhD40fdDd46c8oL7bcc= > [Icon Description automatically generated] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_celestron-2Dllc-2D=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ
Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries?
Unless Amazon has a regulatory department that has access to national standards, this may be a simple checkbox for in-coming inspection. In that case, you might be stuck with the requirement regardless of CR2032 cell type. CAN/CSA C22.2 are part 2 national standards for Canada, not applicable in other countries unless adopted. Ralph From: Ted Eckert <07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 11:21 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries? Hello John, I believe that IEC 60086-4 is the applicable standard for primary (non-rechargeable) lithium batteries, including coin cells. As others have noted, IEC 62133-2 is for secondary (rechargeable) batteries. Ted Eckert The opinions expressed in this message are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. _ From: John Riutta mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 10:31 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries? You don't often get email from jriu...@celestron.com <mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> . Learn why this is important <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> Hello all, We've been seeing Amazon requiring CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for all products that use or contain at time of sale a CR 2032 coin cell battery. I was of the understanding that this standard did not apply to this battery. Unfortunately, I do not possess a copy of the standard so I cannot verify this myself. MayI ask if anyone here can offer verification or rebuttal please? Best regards, John John E. Riutta, MA, MBA, FLS I Product Development and Product Compliance Manager I <mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> jriu...@celestron.com I 323.446.1076 CELESTRON, LLC. I 2835 Columbia Street I Torrance, CA 90503 <http://www.celestron.com/> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_cele stronuniverse=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV 4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBI u-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mp6OgNq_McWjXY2YQYjZ9Dk6_XzP1VPvIEe8C8zj56A& e=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Celestron; d=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FV pxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW 5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=VPySibohtehHWHpC8d5rHDIovgyX-KLLxjtWSiblJGI=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_celes tron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4Jrq Hl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5 RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mFMWx391BWGOZRSQd2VOWpQ8frezSjy2nYeDDPQcxtg=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_C elestronDotCom=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40q V4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSB Iu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=ziJj_dfd_78luGSUUH4AfwmPyhD40fdDd46c8oL7bcc => <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_compa ny_celestron-2Dllc-2D=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM =x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHB GiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ7A71XexAkwNhfOYqmzp9H ADpQfIk=> From: Ralph McDiarmid mailto:rmm.priv...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 10:40 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: Re: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? I stopped reading at the word "performances". Ralph From: Douglas Powell mailto:doug...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 9:27 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ieeexplore.ieee.org_do cument_10574416=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40 qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6T mg345FDzau0JquoopInoKrPLEhikCaN=_UxHI-pyQoHSCbqUQCVFvIEGK_7RUdJisvq72DPJL8 w=> ) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no ment
Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries?
Hello John, I believe that IEC 60086-4 is the applicable standard for primary (non-rechargeable) lithium batteries, including coin cells. As others have noted, IEC 62133-2 is for secondary (rechargeable) batteries. Ted Eckert The opinions expressed in this message are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. From: John Riutta Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 10:31 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries? You don't often get email from jriu...@celestron.com. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> Hello all, We’ve been seeing Amazon requiring CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for all products that use or contain at time of sale a CR 2032 coin cell battery. I was of the understanding that this standard did not apply to this battery. Unfortunately, I do not possess a copy of the standard so I cannot verify this myself. MayI ask if anyone here can offer verification or rebuttal please? Best regards, John John E. Riutta, MA, MBA, FLS I Product Development and Product Compliance Manager I jriu...@celestron.com<mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> I 323.446.1076 CELESTRON, LLC. I 2835 Columbia Street I Torrance, CA 90503 [Logo Description automatically generated]<http://www.celestron.com/> [Icon Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_celestronuniverse=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mp6OgNq_McWjXY2YQYjZ9Dk6_XzP1VPvIEe8C8zj56A=> [A close-up of a fire Description automatically generated with low confidence] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=VPySibohtehHWHpC8d5rHDIovgyX-KLLxjtWSiblJGI=> [A picture containing text, clipart Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mFMWx391BWGOZRSQd2VOWpQ8frezSjy2nYeDDPQcxtg=> [Icon Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_CelestronDotCom=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=ziJj_dfd_78luGSUUH4AfwmPyhD40fdDd46c8oL7bcc=> [Icon Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_celestron-2Dllc-2D=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ7A71XexAkwNhfOYqmzp9HADpQfIk=> From: Ralph McDiarmid Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 10:40 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? I stopped reading at the word “performances”. Ralph From: Douglas Powell mailto:doug...@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 9:27 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ieeexplore.ieee.org_document_10574416=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6Tmg345FDzau0JquoopInoKrPLEhikCaN=_UxHI-pyQoHSCbqUQCVFvIEGK_7RUdJisvq72DPJL8w=>) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no mention of any aspects of operational intelligence used in the design of this power module. Is there something I missed, or is the term "Intelligence" being used as marketing hype? I'm seriously experiencing some fatigue over all this talk of Intelligence, Machine Intelligence, and Artificial Intelligence. Thanks for letting me air out a little, ~Doug This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a mes
Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries?
OOPS! I missed that about 'rechargeable'. CR2032 cells are not normally rechargeable, so the standard doesn't apply. On 2024-07-22 18:57, John Woodgate wrote: I don't know the meaning of the final '20' in the reference to the standard; it may be that it should be a date, like 2021. There appears to be nothing in the underlying IEC 62133-2: 2017 + AMD1:2021 that would exclude any coin cell. On 2024-07-22 18:31, John Riutta wrote: Hello all, We’ve been seeing Amazon requiring CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for all products that use or contain at time of sale a CR 2032 coin cell battery. I was of the understanding that this standard did not apply to this battery. Unfortunately, I do not possess a copy of the standard so I cannot verify this myself. MayI ask if anyone here can offer verification or rebuttal please? Best regards, John John E. Riutta, MA, MBA, FLSI Product Development and Product Compliance Manager I jriu...@celestron.com <mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> I 323.446.1076 CELESTRON, LLC.I 2835 Columbia Street ITorrance, CA 90503 Logo Description automatically generated <http://www.celestron.com/>Icon Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_celestronuniverse=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mp6OgNq_McWjXY2YQYjZ9Dk6_XzP1VPvIEe8C8zj56A=>A close-up of a fire Description automatically generated with low confidence <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=VPySibohtehHWHpC8d5rHDIovgyX-KLLxjtWSiblJGI=>A picture containing text, clipart Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mFMWx391BWGOZRSQd2VOWpQ8frezSjy2nYeDDPQcxtg=>Icon Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_CelestronDotCom=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=ziJj_dfd_78luGSUUH4AfwmPyhD40fdDd46c8oL7bcc=>Icon Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_celestron-2Dllc-2D=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ7A71XexAkwNhfOYqmzp9HADpQfIk=> *From:*Ralph McDiarmid *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2024 10:40 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* Re: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? I stopped reading at the word “performances”. Ralph *From:*Douglas Powell *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2024 9:27 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ieeexplore.ieee.org_document_10574416=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6Tmg345FDzau0JquoopInoKrPLEhikCaN=_UxHI-pyQoHSCbqUQCVFvIEGK_7RUdJisvq72DPJL8w=>) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no mention of any aspects of operational intelligence used in the design of this power module. Is there something I missed, or is the term "Intelligence" being used as marketing hype? I'm seriously experiencing some fatigue over all this talk of Intelligence, Machine Intelligence, and Artificial Intelligence. Thanks for letting me air out a little, ~Doug 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.mail-2Darchive.com_emc-2Dpstc
Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries?
I don't know the meaning of the final '20' in the reference to the standard; it may be that it should be a date, like 2021. There appears to be nothing in the underlying IEC 62133-2: 2017 + AMD1:2021 that would exclude any coin cell. On 2024-07-22 18:31, John Riutta wrote: Hello all, We’ve been seeing Amazon requiring CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for all products that use or contain at time of sale a CR 2032 coin cell battery. I was of the understanding that this standard did not apply to this battery. Unfortunately, I do not possess a copy of the standard so I cannot verify this myself. MayI ask if anyone here can offer verification or rebuttal please? Best regards, John John E. Riutta, MA, MBA, FLSI Product Development and Product Compliance Manager I jriu...@celestron.com <mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> I 323.446.1076 CELESTRON, LLC.I 2835 Columbia Street ITorrance, CA 90503 Logo Description automatically generated <http://www.celestron.com/>Icon Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_celestronuniverse=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mp6OgNq_McWjXY2YQYjZ9Dk6_XzP1VPvIEe8C8zj56A=>A close-up of a fire Description automatically generated with low confidence <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=VPySibohtehHWHpC8d5rHDIovgyX-KLLxjtWSiblJGI=>A picture containing text, clipart Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mFMWx391BWGOZRSQd2VOWpQ8frezSjy2nYeDDPQcxtg=>Icon Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_CelestronDotCom=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=ziJj_dfd_78luGSUUH4AfwmPyhD40fdDd46c8oL7bcc=>Icon Description automatically generated <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_celestron-2Dllc-2D=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ7A71XexAkwNhfOYqmzp9HADpQfIk=> *From:*Ralph McDiarmid *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2024 10:40 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* Re: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? I stopped reading at the word “performances”. Ralph *From:*Douglas Powell *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2024 9:27 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ieeexplore.ieee.org_document_10574416=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6Tmg345FDzau0JquoopInoKrPLEhikCaN=_UxHI-pyQoHSCbqUQCVFvIEGK_7RUdJisvq72DPJL8w=>) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no mention of any aspects of operational intelligence used in the design of this power module. Is there something I missed, or is the term "Intelligence" being used as marketing hype? I'm seriously experiencing some fatigue over all this talk of Intelligence, Machine Intelligence, and Artificial Intelligence. Thanks for letting me air out a little, ~Doug 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.mail-2Darchive.com_emc-2Dpstc-40listserv.ieee.org_-2520=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6Tmg345FDz
Re: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries?
Hi John, IEC 62133-2 covers Secondary cells (rechargeable). Unless your coin cell is rechargeable then it will not be covered by this standard. All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk | <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. From: John Riutta Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 6:32 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries? Hello all, We’ve been seeing Amazon requiring CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for all products that use or contain at time of sale a CR 2032 coin cell battery. I was of the understanding that this standard did not apply to this battery. Unfortunately, I do not possess a copy of the standard so I cannot verify this myself. MayI ask if anyone here can offer verification or rebuttal please? Best regards, John John E. Riutta, MA, MBA, FLS I Product Development and Product Compliance Manager I <mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> jriu...@celestron.com I 323.446.1076 CELESTRON, LLC. I 2835 Columbia Street I Torrance, CA 90503 <http://www.celestron.com/> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_celestronuniverse=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mp6OgNq_McWjXY2YQYjZ9Dk6_XzP1VPvIEe8C8zj56A=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=VPySibohtehHWHpC8d5rHDIovgyX-KLLxjtWSiblJGI=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mFMWx391BWGOZRSQd2VOWpQ8frezSjy2nYeDDPQcxtg=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_CelestronDotCom=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=ziJj_dfd_78luGSUUH4AfwmPyhD40fdDd46c8oL7bcc=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_celestron-2Dllc-2D=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ7A71XexAkwNhfOYqmzp9HADpQfIk=> From: Ralph McDiarmid mailto:rmm.priv...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 10:40 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: Re: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? I stopped reading at the word “performances”. Ralph From: Douglas Powell mailto:doug...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 9:27 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ieeexplore.ieee.org_document_10574416=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6Tmg345FDzau0JquoopInoKrPLEhikCaN=_UxHI-pyQoHSCbqUQCVFvIEGK_7RUdJisvq72DPJL8w=> ) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no mention of any aspects of operational intelligence used in the design of this power module. Is there something I missed, or is the term "Inte
[PSES] CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for CR 2032 Batteries?
Hello all, We’ve been seeing Amazon requiring CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20 for all products that use or contain at time of sale a CR 2032 coin cell battery. I was of the understanding that this standard did not apply to this battery. Unfortunately, I do not possess a copy of the standard so I cannot verify this myself. MayI ask if anyone here can offer verification or rebuttal please? Best regards, John John E. Riutta, MA, MBA, FLS I Product Development and Product Compliance Manager I jriu...@celestron.com<mailto:jriu...@celestron.com> I 323.446.1076 CELESTRON, LLC. I 2835 Columbia Street I Torrance, CA 90503 [Logo Description automatically generated]<http://www.celestron.com/> [Icon Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_celestronuniverse=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mp6OgNq_McWjXY2YQYjZ9Dk6_XzP1VPvIEe8C8zj56A=> [A close-up of a fire Description automatically generated with low confidence] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_Celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=VPySibohtehHWHpC8d5rHDIovgyX-KLLxjtWSiblJGI=> [A picture containing text, clipart Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_celestron=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=mFMWx391BWGOZRSQd2VOWpQ8frezSjy2nYeDDPQcxtg=> [Icon Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_CelestronDotCom=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=ziJj_dfd_78luGSUUH4AfwmPyhD40fdDd46c8oL7bcc=> [Icon Description automatically generated] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_celestron-2Dllc-2D=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ7A71XexAkwNhfOYqmzp9HADpQfIk=> From: Ralph McDiarmid Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 10:40 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? I stopped reading at the word “performances”. Ralph From: Douglas Powell mailto:doug...@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 9:27 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ieeexplore.ieee.org_document_10574416=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6Tmg345FDzau0JquoopInoKrPLEhikCaN=_UxHI-pyQoHSCbqUQCVFvIEGK_7RUdJisvq72DPJL8w=>) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no mention of any aspects of operational intelligence used in the design of this power module. Is there something I missed, or is the term "Intelligence" being used as marketing hype? I'm seriously experiencing some fatigue over all this talk of Intelligence, Machine Intelligence, and Artificial Intelligence. Thanks for letting me air out a little, ~Doug 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.mail-2Darchive.com_emc-2Dpstc-40listserv.ieee.org_-2520=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8=a2CCo_J4V1NasdwIBe0EeqpUJTYCY_V6Tmg345FDzau0JquoopInoKrPLEhikCaN=bbXt_oShGs28qy6R5E-mHRAXGK3F7lRCfHt_MNjUKIE=> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ewh.ieee.org_soc_pses_=DwMFaQ=euGZstcaT
Re: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules?
I stopped reading at the word “performances”. Ralph From: Douglas Powell Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 9:27 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules? So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no mention of any aspects of operational intelligence used in the design of this power module. Is there something I missed, or is the term "Intelligence" being used as marketing hype? I'm seriously experiencing some fatigue over all this talk of Intelligence, Machine Intelligence, and Artificial Intelligence. Thanks for letting me air out a little, ~Doug _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] "Intelligent" Power Modules?
So I just finished reading "1.2 kV/400 A SiC Source Turn-Off MOSFET Intelligent Power Module" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10574416) The word "intelligent" in the title of the article piqued my interest. So, what's with the overuse of the term "intelligent" nowadays? When I read the article, I noticed that the word appeared only three times: once in the title, once in the abstract, and once in the opening paragraph. The acronym "IPM" appeared 31 times throughout. I saw no mention of any aspects of operational intelligence used in the design of this power module. Is there something I missed, or is the term "Intelligence" being used as marketing hype? I'm seriously experiencing some fatigue over all this talk of Intelligence, Machine Intelligence, and Artificial Intelligence. Thanks for letting me air out a little, ~Doug - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Energy Star 1.2
Hello fellow certiiers of equipment, We're researching adding a product to our EV charger file which has UL approval and Energy Star.There's a new Energy Star 1.2 out for EVSE products; does anyone have a feel or read a summary of what's changed and what are the "grand" improvements? I've got to justify cost and schedule delay to get the new product upgraded to E.S. 1.2 and I haven't had the time to really dig throughhttps://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/ENERGY%20STAR%20Version%201.2%20EVSE%20Final%20Specification_0.pdf to see what changed and if it's worth it. Colorado Brian - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Kudos
Once in a while I get feedback on my work that makes it all worthwhile, as have many of us have. In this case, the feedback was from a senior engineer of many years: "I was lucky to reserve my seat early and attend last week. This was one of the best, most useful training weeks in my career. I walked away with a new tool box for the toughest EMC problems. Thank you Doug!" Doug Smith Sent from my iPhone IPhone: 408-858-4528 Office: 702-570-6108 Email: d...@dsmith.org Website: http://dsmith.org - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Hi Christopher. It may not specifically apply to a ferrite core, but here is another thing to watch out for with Red Phosphorous: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1598224 Best regards, Brad From: Richard Nute Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 6:07 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor ~ Hi Christopher: To put your mind at ease regarding the flammability of the Red Phosphorus, I suggest you test it. Suspend the core by a wire. Apply a small flame (1 inch max) from a barbecue starter to the bottom of the core, and see whatZjQcmQRYFpfptPreheaderEnd ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart External Sender This message came from outside our organization. Please use caution before acting on the message. ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd Hi Christopher: To put your mind at ease regarding the flammability of the Red Phosphorus, I suggest you test it. Suspend the core by a wire. Apply a small flame (1 inch max) from a barbecue starter to the bottom of the core, and see what happens. The core should provide a heat sink for the red phosphorus such that it cannot reach ignition temperature, or exceed the burn time of 94V-0. I agree with Ted and Ralph. Good luck, and best regards, Rich From: Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:40 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.mail-2Darchive.com_emc-2Dpstc-40listserv.ieee.org_=DwMFaQ=Qwsh1H-X9ypOoLLEcAIltRyC0Dw0FG3Mmyd56ahml5w=5ZHWVDzrGbU3ySN96a0gomOtFxh8qabNblooc4DXss4=onV-uuy__PhBoIvHpmThzdRv0Bo2KNmMBxfQ9jrmKq4zDsmUAG9XQp8XB95xYek4=APbSsp4g0zEPp-K6CDPnIHfUUsoghSOZkvqH4yiDzLM=> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ewh.ieee.org_soc_pses_=DwMFaQ=Qwsh1H-X9ypOoLLEcAIltRyC0Dw0FG3Mmyd56ahml5w=5ZHWVDzrGbU3ySN96a0gomOtFxh8qabNblooc4DXss4=onV-uuy__PhBoIvHpmThzdRv0Bo2KNmMBxfQ9jrmKq4zDsmUAG9XQp8XB95xYek4=rURdpY__ftv728vlyP8Shz9AwymXwyAThYI-4GxwIv8=> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ewh.ieee.org_soc_pses_list.html=DwMFaQ=Qwsh1H-X9ypOoLLEcAIltRyC0Dw0FG3Mmyd56ahml5w=5ZHWVDzrGbU3ySN96a0gomOtFxh8qabNblooc4DXss4=onV-uuy__PhBoIvHpmThzdRv0Bo2KNmMBxfQ9jrmKq4zDsmUAG9XQp8XB95xYek4=O5eZjJLELN8t6_jYYTYwfoaJMKn8lpu9ofbQr5NWnBQ=> List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ewh.ieee.org_soc_pses_listrules.html=DwMFaQ=Qwsh1H-X9ypOoLLEcAIltRyC0Dw0FG3Mmyd56ahml5w=5ZHWVDzrGbU3ySN96a0gomOtFxh8qabNblooc4DXss4=onV-uuy__PhBoIvHpmThzdRv0Bo2KNmMBxfQ9jrmKq4zDsmUAG9XQp8XB95xYek4=X4BBpv5T0AU-endATEGu7bWRSHaYML7Baxet-WDOA5A=> For help, send mail to the list administrators: Mike Sherman at: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__listserv.ieee.org_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FSUBED1-3DEMC-2DPSTC-26A-3D1=DwQFaQ=Qwsh1H-X9ypOoLLEcAIltRyC0Dw0FG3Mmyd56ahml5w=5ZHWVDzrGbU3ySN96a0gomOtFxh8qabNblooc4DXss4=onV-uuy__PhBoIvHpmThzdRv0Bo2KNmMBxfQ9jrmKq4zDsmUAG9XQp8XB95xYek4=-2CGfPVG0zfUhEJhuHJm_KwrDb3BZcogBAnXoz_L9b8=> - CONFIDENTIAL- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential, and may also be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, use, copy, or distribute this message. If you receive this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email and then delete this email. - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc pos
Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
This seems all a bit weird. Unless the Phosphorus is used in a coating, it can have no relation to the ferrite. As many here know, ferrite "beads" are formed by a sintering process where the powdered metalic oxide components are subjected to very high pressure and temperatures that fuse the glassy structure, creating what is essentially a ceramic. Phosphorus would be vaporized in the mold preheat, much less the actual sintering process. If it is a coating, that's another discussion. - Brent On 7/10/2024 6:49 PM, John Woodgate wrote: That would cause the emission of white phosphorus vapour, which burns in air spontaneously even at room temperature, and is highly toxic. That is, if there is any red phosphorus there, which I very much doubt. On 2024-07-10 23:07, Richard Nute wrote: Hi Christopher: To put your mind at ease regarding the flammability of the Red Phosphorus, I suggest you test it. Suspend the core by a wire. Apply a small flame (1 inch max) from a barbecue starter to the bottom of the core, and see what happens. The core should provide a heat sink for the red phosphorus such that it cannot reach ignition temperature, or exceed the burn time of 94V-0. I agree with Ted and Ralph. Good luck, and best regards, Rich *From:* Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:40 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> Virus-free.www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 E
Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
I have sent an email to Vaccumschmeltze asking whether there is any red phosphorus in their products. Their website offers an ROHs and REACH declaration at: https://www.vacuumschmelze.com/03_Documents/Certificates/Certificate%20of%20Compliance%20REACH_RoHS.pdf that does not mention phosphorus. On 2024-07-10 23:49, John Woodgate wrote: That would cause the emission of white phosphorus vapour, which burns in air spontaneously even at room temperature, and is highly toxic. That is, if there is any red phosphorus there, which I very much doubt. On 2024-07-10 23:07, Richard Nute wrote: Hi Christopher: To put your mind at ease regarding the flammability of the Red Phosphorus, I suggest you test it. Suspend the core by a wire. Apply a small flame (1 inch max) from a barbecue starter to the bottom of the core, and see what happens. The core should provide a heat sink for the red phosphorus such that it cannot reach ignition temperature, or exceed the burn time of 94V-0. I agree with Ted and Ralph. Good luck, and best regards, Rich *From:* Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:40 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> Virus-free.www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
That would cause the emission of white phosphorus vapour, which burns in air spontaneously even at room temperature, and is highly toxic. That is, if there is any red phosphorus there, which I very much doubt. On 2024-07-10 23:07, Richard Nute wrote: Hi Christopher: To put your mind at ease regarding the flammability of the Red Phosphorus, I suggest you test it. Suspend the core by a wire. Apply a small flame (1 inch max) from a barbecue starter to the bottom of the core, and see what happens. The core should provide a heat sink for the red phosphorus such that it cannot reach ignition temperature, or exceed the burn time of 94V-0. I agree with Ted and Ralph. Good luck, and best regards, Rich *From:* Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:40 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Hi Christopher: To put your mind at ease regarding the flammability of the Red Phosphorus, I suggest you test it. Suspend the core by a wire. Apply a small flame (1 inch max) from a barbecue starter to the bottom of the core, and see what happens. The core should provide a heat sink for the red phosphorus such that it cannot reach ignition temperature, or exceed the burn time of 94V-0. I agree with Ted and Ralph. Good luck, and best regards, Rich From: Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:40 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Fwd: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Maybe I'm missing something. Is the Red Phosphorus used in a coating for the ferrite? On 7/10/2024 3:48 PM, John Woodgate wrote: Forwarded Message Subject: Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:46:17 +0100 From: John Woodgate To: Ted Eckert But surely not in a ferrite core? On 2024-07-10 19:36, Ted Eckert wrote: Hi Christopher, Phosphorus is commonly used for flame retardants. Many V-1 and V-0 rated plastics use such flame retardants, and phosphorus is used for flame retardants for fabrics. As such, I don't think you should have an issue. Ted Eckert /The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer./ *From:* Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:39 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor You don't often get email from 0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org. Learn why this is important <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> Virus-free.www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
I doubt ferrite cores are flammable, but if they are, I’m sure they are superior to the rating UL94V-0. From: Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:40 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Fwd: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Forwarded Message Subject:Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:21:16 +0100 From: John Woodgate To: Chris Your best action is to ask the manufacturer Vacuumschmelze. Where did you find the information about red phosphorus? It seems a strange ingredient for a magnetic core. On 2024-07-10 18:39, Chris wrote: Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Fwd: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Forwarded Message Subject:Re: [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:21:16 +0100 From: John Woodgate To: Chris Your best action is to ask the manufacturer Vacuumschmelze. Where did you find the information about red phosphorus? It seems a strange ingredient for a magnetic core. On 2024-07-10 18:39, Chris wrote: Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Fwd: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Forwarded Message Subject: Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:46:17 +0100 From: John Woodgate To: Ted Eckert But surely not in a ferrite core? On 2024-07-10 19:36, Ted Eckert wrote: Hi Christopher, Phosphorus is commonly used for flame retardants. Many V-1 and V-0 rated plastics use such flame retardants, and phosphorus is used for flame retardants for fabrics. As such, I don't think you should have an issue. Ted Eckert /The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer./ *From:* Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:39 AM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor You don't often get email from 0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org. Learn why this is important <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Thanks Ted. Christopher On Wednesday, July 10, 2024 at 11:37:06 AM PDT, Ted Eckert wrote: Hi Christopher, Phosphorus is commonly used for flame retardants. Many V-1 and V-0 rated plastics use such flame retardants, and phosphorus is used for flame retardants for fabrics. As such, I don't think you should have an issue. Ted EckertThe opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.From: Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:39 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor | | You don't often get email from 0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org.Learn why this is important | | Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated ChristopherNextracker LLC. - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Hi Christopher, Phosphorus is commonly used for flame retardants. Many V-1 and V-0 rated plastics use such flame retardants, and phosphorus is used for flame retardants for fabrics. As such, I don't think you should have an issue. Ted Eckert The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. From: Chris <0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 10:39 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor You don't often get email from 0133def26cf0-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated Christopher Nextracker LLC. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued
RF radiated emission measurements are not precious and it’s not unusual to find a +/- 5dB variation between two certified open-area test sites. (a combination of equipment calibration variance and test site tolerances) It is possible then to find a pass when testing at one site and receive a failure when testing at another. I think this has been the experience for some and likely something that has existed for decades in the industry and is accepted as the “norm”. Ralph From: Elliott Martinson <33e8876b9475-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:56 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued On one hand, it’s odd they can even claim “compliance”, when their SMPS module will interact with customer design so much. On the other hand, I have experience with a supply like this, where I had to prove it still failed class B emissions with literally nothing on its output but a purely resistive load (small loop area, conductive surface area – other than pseudo-“cables”) From: Matthew Wilson | GBE mailto:matthew.wil...@gbelectronics.com> > Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 11:28 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: Re: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued You don't often get email from matthew.wil...@gbelectronics.com <mailto:matthew.wil...@gbelectronics.com> . Learn why this is important <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> That is an interesting consideration regards the beat frequency, thanks for the post. Something we have noticed several times with third-party ‘bought in’ mains-DC SMPSU (most people do that rather than design a bespoke one because the third-party has gained the necessary re safety compliance) is that people may specify the SMPSU for the maximum load out of their power budget for the apparatus to be driven by the SMPSU. This usually is a sum/concatenation of all the highest current draw circuits/parts e.g. all LEDs on, activating sounder transducer, maybe driving a printer (usually thermal), radio module (Wi-Fi say) active, etc, etc. In fact the equipment does not do this ‘maximum draw’ too often and so the majority of the time the SMPSU is usually operating at lower capacity (a few LEDs on, idle printer, not actively TX/RX data packets). And it is then that EMC emissions created by the SMPSU (radiated and conducted) are actually at their worse. In some (probably more extreme) cases this can upset performance of the apparatus, or even co-located equipment, but also it can annoy when at the EMC test chamber with breaches of the emissions limit line. The downside of third-party power supplies is although they will have a nice declaration of conformity (for us in the EU (OK I know UK isn’t any more but we’ve decided to carry on with it behind the scenes!) and claims for EMC compliance, never is any precise detail of how and the environment in which these tests were performed provided. A resistive load on the shortest possible DC output leads, with short mains input leads too I’m sure is the setup – happy to be proved wrong! Nearest I’ve found to such is this from Meanwell but it has some assumptions – large metal plates for one (but which one did they use for a particular model?!): https://www.meanwell.co.uk/knowledge-base/how-do-mean-well-test-for-electro-magnetic-interference-emi Anyway, as is probably known in this audience, but is a constant reminder to clients and so forth, you can’t expect not to test a third party SMPSU even when it is ‘compliant’. Thanks for giving me an excuse to ramble on :-) Kind regards, Matthew Wilson, GB Electronics (UK) Ltd. Disclaimer: 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 delete it from your system, do not use or disclose the information in any way and notify the sender immediately. The contents of this message may contain personal views which are not the views of the company, unless specifically stated. GB Electronics (UK) Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales under number 06210991. Registered office: Ascot House Mulberry Close, Woods Way, Goring By Sea, West Sussex, BN12 4QY. From: doug emcesd.com mailto:d...@emcesd.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 10:55 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued Hi All, When thinking about power supplies, one would think that they either work or not. But this is not the case. Switching power supply frequencies are usually much lower that today’s system frequencies. This leads to a situation where it can take an hour or much more
[PSES] Using Red Phosphorous ferrite core on a 48VDC motor
Folks, I need some help to answer this product safety question. We are using ferrite core T60006-L2025-W380 to supress radiated emissions on the 48VDC motor cable. I am concerned about the flamilibility of the Red Phosphorus which is contained in the Ferrite core. Any help is appreceiated ChristopherNextracker LLC. - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] [External] [PSES] EMC Job Opening in Ottawa
For those interested the job opportunity with Honeywell in Ottawa, Canada has been updated in the hope of catching more applicants: careers.honeywell.com Search for: REQ453055 Goodluck Rich From: Jones, Richard <158e9dcd0d5e-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 2:05 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [External] [PSES] EMC Job Opening in Ottawa You don't often get email from 158e9dcd0d5e-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org<mailto:158e9dcd0d5e-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> WARNING: This message has originated from an External Source. This may be a phishing email that can result in unauthorized access to Honeywell systems. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, scanning QR codes, or responding. We have a job opening for an EMC Test Engineer in our Ottawa location, they would be running the lab, maintaining equipment and performing test with the support of our team in Mississauga. Looking for someone preferably with previous test experience, but will consider each applicant on merit. If interested or know of someone looking for an opportunity in Ottawa it can be found at: Careers.honeywell.com Search for "HRD228742" Goodluck Rich This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 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)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued
Further to John’s comment, here is an extract from EMC standard CISPR 22: “The operational conditions of the EUT shall be determined by the manufacturer according to the typical use of the EUT with respect to the expected highest level of emission. The determined operational mode and the rationale for the conditions shall be stated in the test report.” The operating condition producing the highest level of emission may not be the rated output power of the EUT. The manufacturer is expected to investigate. Ralph From: John Woodgate Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 9:42 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued The DoC states the standards applied, and those standards (CISPR-originated) give very precise details of the test set-up. On 2024-07-08 17:27, Matthew Wilson | GBE wrote: The downside of third-party power supplies is although they will have a nice declaration of conformity (for us in the EU (OK I know UK isn’t any more but we’ve decided to carry on with it behind the scenes!) and claims for EMC compliance, never is any precise detail of how and the environment in which these tests were performed provided. A resistive load on the shortest possible DC output leads, with short mains input leads too I’m sure is the setup – happy to be proved wrong! -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> Virus-free. <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued
The DoC states the standards applied, and those standards (CISPR-originated) give very precise details of the test set-up. On 2024-07-08 17:27, Matthew Wilson | GBE wrote: The downside of third-party power supplies is although they will have a nice declaration of conformity (for us in the EU (OK I know UK isn’t any more but we’ve decided to carry on with it behind the scenes!) and claims for EMC compliance, never is any precise detail of how and the environment in which these tests were performed provided. A resistive load on the shortest possible DC output leads, with short mains input leads too I’m sure is the setup – happy to be proved wrong! -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best Wishes John Woodgate Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued
That is an interesting consideration regards the beat frequency, thanks for the post. Something we have noticed several times with third-party 'bought in' mains-DC SMPSU (most people do that rather than design a bespoke one because the third-party has gained the necessary re safety compliance) is that people may specify the SMPSU for the maximum load out of their power budget for the apparatus to be driven by the SMPSU. This usually is a sum/concatenation of all the highest current draw circuits/parts e.g. all LEDs on, activating sounder transducer, maybe driving a printer (usually thermal), radio module (Wi-Fi say) active, etc, etc. In fact the equipment does not do this 'maximum draw' too often and so the majority of the time the SMPSU is usually operating at lower capacity (a few LEDs on, idle printer, not actively TX/RX data packets). And it is then that EMC emissions created by the SMPSU (radiated and conducted) are actually at their worse. In some (probably more extreme) cases this can upset performance of the apparatus, or even co-located equipment, but also it can annoy when at the EMC test chamber with breaches of the emissions limit line. The downside of third-party power supplies is although they will have a nice declaration of conformity (for us in the EU (OK I know UK isn't any more but we've decided to carry on with it behind the scenes!) and claims for EMC compliance, never is any precise detail of how and the environment in which these tests were performed provided. A resistive load on the shortest possible DC output leads, with short mains input leads too I'm sure is the setup - happy to be proved wrong! Nearest I've found to such is this from Meanwell but it has some assumptions - large metal plates for one (but which one did they use for a particular model?!): https://www.meanwell.co.uk/knowledge-base/how-do-mean-well-test-for-electro-magnetic-interference-emi Anyway, as is probably known in this audience, but is a constant reminder to clients and so forth, you can't expect not to test a third party SMPSU even when it is 'compliant'. Thanks for giving me an excuse to ramble on :-) Kind regards, Matthew Wilson, GB Electronics (UK) Ltd. Matthew WilsonMIET Technical Director GB Electronics (UK) Ltd matthew.wil...@gbelectronics.com www.gbelectronics.com +44 (0) 1903 244 500 Ascot House|Mulberry Close|Woods Way Goring-by-Sea|West Sussex|BN12 4QY|UK Certificate Number 10455 ISO 9001, ISO 14001 Disclaimer: 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 delete it from your system, do not use or disclose the information in any way and notify the sender immediately. The contents of this message may contain personal views which are not the views of the company, unless specifically stated. GB Electronics (UK) Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales under number 06210991. Registered office: Ascot House Mulberry Close, Woods Way, Goring By Sea, West Sussex, BN12 4QY. From: doug emcesd.com Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 10:55 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Switching power supplies continued Hi All, When thinking about power supplies, one would think that they either work or not. But this is not the case. Switching power supply frequencies are usually much lower that today's system frequencies. This leads to a situation where it can take an hour or much more for an edge to hit a circuit in the system at a critical time and cause a problem. The problem looks like an intermittent one, but it is not intermittent! It is sort of like a beat frequency between a system signal and the power supply switching. This class of problems is very interesting. I have been tracking them down for about 40 years now and have developed some techniques for doing this. Tracking down what seem like intermittent problems can take a lot of time, but power supply interaction with a system is not an intermittent problem but sometimes takes a bit to track down a fix. I have seen these kinds of problems where a switching supply, not even connected to that part of the system, cause this kind of problem in a circuit a meter or more away from the supply. This is the kind of problem I love! Like a cat and mouse game, often requiring unconventional troubleshooting methods. Doug [https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_HuR3Ky2TF_XhFHyxnYRmiq7nHQldnMsPNYFaLG6kb5T4y8MeCe-BDC_BscJtSFgszSSjssihHS-pjM3-jwNP8S0CwE-gN8fsRsPkojiAlmpBwb20vIVizS-siCUywW_jqrefbVr] 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/em
[PSES] Switching power supplies continued
Hi All, When thinking about power supplies, one would think that they either work or not. But this is not the case. Switching power supply frequencies are usually much lower that today's system frequencies. This leads to a situation where it can take an hour or much more for an edge to hit a circuit in the system at a critical time and cause a problem. The problem looks like an intermittent one, but it is not intermittent! It is sort of like a beat frequency between a system signal and the power supply switching. This class of problems is very interesting. I have been tracking them down for about 40 years now and have developed some techniques for doing this. Tracking down what seem like intermittent problems can take a lot of time, but power supply interaction with a system is not an intermittent problem but sometimes takes a bit to track down a fix. I have seen these kinds of problems where a switching supply, not even connected to that part of the system, cause this kind of problem in a circuit a meter or more away from the supply. This is the kind of problem I love! Like a cat and mouse game, often requiring unconventional troubleshooting methods. Doug [https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_HuR3Ky2TF_XhFHyxnYRmiq7nHQldnMsPNYFaLG6kb5T4y8MeCe-BDC_BscJtSFgszSSjssihHS-pjM3-jwNP8S0CwE-gN8fsRsPkojiAlmpBwb20vIVizS-siCUywW_jqrefbVr] - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] EMC Job Opening in Ottawa
We have a job opening for an EMC Test Engineer in our Ottawa location, they would be running the lab, maintaining equipment and performing test with the support of our team in Mississauga. Looking for someone preferably with previous test experience, but will consider each applicant on merit. If interested or know of someone looking for an opportunity in Ottawa it can be found at: Careers.honeywell.com Search for "HRD228742" Goodluck Rich - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] power supplies - standardized performance tests
IEC 61204-6 does look promising, but it does have a limit on output voltage of 200 volts d.c. I’ll assume like its power limit of 2,500 watts, its voltage limit can be extended by applying good engineering principles. And it seems reasonably priced. Thanks for finding this John. Ralph From: John Woodgate Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2024 2:17 PM To: rmm.priv...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PSES] power lsupply musings #1 IEC doesn't look too promising. These are not exactly on stone tablets, but they are old: IEC61204:1993 + AMD1:2001, IEC 61204-6: 2000. You can preview them. go to www.iec.ch <http://www.iec.ch> , then go to Web store and search. On 2024-07-02 20:01, Ralph McDiarmid wrote: Oh boy, have I seen this, in the distant past. Today, there is likely an IEC standard which defines how this measurement should be performed. When I was a development engineer at a small d.c. power supply company in the 1990s we grappled with this same issue. We eventually designed a custom voltage probe which measured differential ripple & noise into 50 ohms with a 20 MHz bandwidth. It provided a repeatable measurement of output noise into a stabilized impedance while rejecting common-mode contribution. Its implementation settled most arguments on how this measurement was done since some customers at the time were challenging our results when we were merely using an unbalanced 10X scope probe with any convenient oscilloscope on hand. Any, well considered, implementation for a noise probe is probably just as good so long as it is used consistently, and the method disclosed to those who need to know. Ralph From: doug emcesd.com <mailto:d...@emcesd.com> Sent: Monday, July 1, 2024 4:18 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] power lsupply musings #1 Hi Everyone, I thought I would post a bit about power supplies. Something as simple as trying to measure ripple on the output can be very inaccurate, overstating ripple amplitude by a lot, 100% over stated is not all that unusual. One problem arises from common mode noise on the output that gets into the structure of the probe used for the measurement. Most probes have modes resulting in display of voltages that are not actually present. If you doubt this, just connect both terminals of a scope probe to the low end, say ground, of a power supply output and you will often see a significant signal that is not actually there. Whatever one measures with a shorted probe on the ground side of the supply output is the error in the measurement and can easily exceed the actual ripple voltage present on the output. Have you seen this? I cover this in detail in my presentations. Doug <https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_HuR3Ky2TF_XhFHyxnYRmiq7nHQldnMsPNYFaLG6kb5T4y8MeCe-BDC_BscJtSFgszSSjssihHS-pjM3-jwNP8S0CwE-gN8fsRsPkojiAlmpBwb20vIVizS-siCUywW_jqrefbVr> _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msher
[PSES] Fwd: [PSES] power lsupply musings #1
Forgot to 'Reply All. Forwarded Message Subject:Re: [PSES] power lsupply musings #1 Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 22:16:42 +0100 From: John Woodgate To: rmm.priv...@gmail.com IEC doesn't look too promising. These are not exactly on stone tablets, but they are old: IEC61204:1993 + AMD1:2001, IEC 61204-6: 2000. You can preview them. go to www.iec.ch, then go to Webstore and search. On 2024-07-02 20:01, Ralph McDiarmid wrote: Oh boy, have I seen this, in the distant past. Today, there is likely an IEC standard which defines how this measurement should be performed. When I was a development engineer at a small d.c. power supply company in the 1990s we grappled with this same issue. We eventually designed a custom voltage probe which measured differential ripple & noise into 50 ohms with a 20 MHz bandwidth. It provided a repeatable measurement of output noise into a stabilized impedance while rejecting common-mode contribution. Its implementation settled most arguments on how this measurement was done since some customers at the time were challenging our results when we were merely using an unbalanced 10X scope probe with any convenient oscilloscope on hand. Any, well considered, implementation for a noise probe is probably just as good so long as it is used consistently, and the method disclosed to those who need to know. Ralph *From:*doug emcesd.com *Sent:* Monday, July 1, 2024 4:18 PM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] power lsupply musings #1 Hi Everyone, I thought I would post a bit about power supplies. Something as simple as trying to measure ripple on the output can be very inaccurate, overstating ripple amplitude by a lot, 100% over stated is not all that unusual. One problem arises from common mode noise on the output that gets into the structure of the probe used for the measurement. Most probes have modes resulting in display of voltages that are not actually present. If you doubt this, just connect both terminals of a scope probe to the low end, say ground, of a power supply output and you will often see a significant signal that is not actually there. Whatever one measures with a shorted probe on the ground side of the supply output is the error in the measurement and can easily exceed the actual ripple voltage present on the output. Have you seen this? I cover this in detail in my presentations. Doug 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: 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 <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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEE
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question -- update
Indeed, but the crunch question is where did that data come from. We can tell by the number 60664 that it originated probably in the 1970s. On 2024-07-02 20:21, Ralph McDiarmid wrote: I’m aware of IEC 60664-1 (insulation coordination) and I’ve referenced it many times over the years. You’ll find its normative reference in several IEC and CSA standards and UL840 seems to rely on its database. IEC 60664 has been around a long time and has several parts. Ralph *From:*Richard Nute *Sent:* Friday, June 28, 2024 3:31 PM *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG *Subject:* [PSES] dielectric strength question -- update Since my 23 June message, I may have found the answer to my quest as to where the air insulation (clearances) distances came from: IEC 664, Edition 1, 1980, Appendix Table AI, withstand voltages, and Table AII, breakdown voltages. According to IEC 664, Table AII is “experimental data” by Prof. Dr. Ing. W. Pfeiffer, convenor of IEC TC109/MT3, elektrotechnische zeitschriftAusg.B, 1976. Dr. Hermstein, elektrotechnische zeitschrift Ausg. A, 1969. These are Germanelectrotechnical journals issue A, 1969, and issue B, 1976. I could not find copies of these. Perhaps our German subscribers can find these. I surmise from the tables that these two people tested air breakdown voltage as a function of distance. I did find that Dr. Hermstein did some experimental work on electrical performance of gasses that has been discredited. Table AI (IEC 664) is withstand voltages based on the breakdown voltages in Table AII (IEC 664). This is the source of IEC 60664-1 clearance distance tables which have been used by a number of IEC standards committees. I’ve attached a plot of both the breakdown voltage per distance and the withstand voltage per distance through air. These are linear axes while the IEC 664 and IEC 60664-1 plots are logarithmic axes.I’ve included trend lines (dotted) and their equations.(The voltage-distance tables are not in IEC 60664-1.) I suspect the non-linearity of the breakdown (red) line is due to measurement problems. I would expect the line to be straight except for the small dimensions that approach the Paschen voltage limit for air, 327 volts peak. (Paschen studied gas breakdowns at very small gaps and found that various gasses do not break down at very small gap dimensions.) Best regards, Rich This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: 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 <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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question -- update
I'm aware of IEC 60664-1 (insulation coordination) and I've referenced it many times over the years. You'll find its normative reference in several IEC and CSA standards and UL840 seems to rely on its database. IEC 60664 has been around a long time and has several parts. Ralph From: Richard Nute Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 3:31 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] dielectric strength question -- update Since my 23 June message, I may have found the answer to my quest as to where the air insulation (clearances) distances came from: IEC 664, Edition 1, 1980, Appendix Table AI, withstand voltages, and Table AII, breakdown voltages. According to IEC 664, Table AII is "experimental data" by Prof. Dr. Ing. W. Pfeiffer, convenor of IEC TC109/MT3, elektrotechnische zeitschrift Ausg. B, 1976. Dr. Hermstein, elektrotechnische zeitschrift Ausg. A, 1969. These are German electrotechnical journals issue A, 1969, and issue B, 1976. I could not find copies of these. Perhaps our German subscribers can find these. I surmise from the tables that these two people tested air breakdown voltage as a function of distance. I did find that Dr. Hermstein did some experimental work on electrical performance of gasses that has been discredited. Table AI (IEC 664) is withstand voltages based on the breakdown voltages in Table AII (IEC 664). This is the source of IEC 60664-1 clearance distance tables which have been used by a number of IEC standards committees. I've attached a plot of both the breakdown voltage per distance and the withstand voltage per distance through air. These are linear axes while the IEC 664 and IEC 60664-1 plots are logarithmic axes. I've included trend lines (dotted) and their equations. (The voltage-distance tables are not in IEC 60664-1.) I suspect the non-linearity of the breakdown (red) line is due to measurement problems. I would expect the line to be straight except for the small dimensions that approach the Paschen voltage limit for air, 327 volts peak. (Paschen studied gas breakdowns at very small gaps and found that various gasses do not break down at very small gap dimensions.) Best regards, Rich _ This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] power lsupply musings #1
Oh boy, have I seen this, in the distant past. Today, there is likely an IEC standard which defines how this measurement should be performed. When I was a development engineer at a small d.c. power supply company in the 1990s we grappled with this same issue. We eventually designed a custom voltage probe which measured differential ripple & noise into 50 ohms with a 20 MHz bandwidth. It provided a repeatable measurement of output noise into a stabilized impedance while rejecting common-mode contribution. Its implementation settled most arguments on how this measurement was done since some customers at the time were challenging our results when we were merely using an unbalanced 10X scope probe with any convenient oscilloscope on hand. Any, well considered, implementation for a noise probe is probably just as good so long as it is used consistently, and the method disclosed to those who need to know. Ralph From: doug emcesd.com Sent: Monday, July 1, 2024 4:18 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] power lsupply musings #1 Hi Everyone, I thought I would post a bit about power supplies. Something as simple as trying to measure ripple on the output can be very inaccurate, overstating ripple amplitude by a lot, 100% over stated is not all that unusual. One problem arises from common mode noise on the output that gets into the structure of the probe used for the measurement. Most probes have modes resulting in display of voltages that are not actually present. If you doubt this, just connect both terminals of a scope probe to the low end, say ground, of a power supply output and you will often see a significant signal that is not actually there. Whatever one measures with a shorted probe on the ground side of the supply output is the error in the measurement and can easily exceed the actual ripple voltage present on the output. Have you seen this? I cover this in detail in my presentations. Doug <https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_HuR3Ky2TF_XhFHyxnYRmiq7nHQldnMsPNYFaLG6k b5T4y8MeCe-BDC_BscJtSFgszSSjssihHS-pjM3-jwNP8S0CwE-gN8fsRsPkojiAlmpBwb20vIVi zS-siCUywW_jqrefbVr> _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] power lsupply musings #1
Hi Everyone, I thought I would post a bit about power supplies. Something as simple as trying to measure ripple on the output can be very inaccurate, overstating ripple amplitude by a lot, 100% over stated is not all that unusual. One problem arises from common mode noise on the output that gets into the structure of the probe used for the measurement. Most probes have modes resulting in display of voltages that are not actually present. If you doubt this, just connect both terminals of a scope probe to the low end, say ground, of a power supply output and you will often see a significant signal that is not actually there. Whatever one measures with a shorted probe on the ground side of the supply output is the error in the measurement and can easily exceed the actual ripple voltage present on the output. Have you seen this? I cover this in detail in my presentations. Doug [https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_HuR3Ky2TF_XhFHyxnYRmiq7nHQldnMsPNYFaLG6kb5T4y8MeCe-BDC_BscJtSFgszSSjssihHS-pjM3-jwNP8S0CwE-gN8fsRsPkojiAlmpBwb20vIVizS-siCUywW_jqrefbVr] - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] "Significant Thickness"
Thanks, Gert, but I don't think that's enough to satisfy the legal people. The rationale does not say what 'significant' means, and the meaning can't be determined from the rationale text. the best solution, I think, is to delete 'significant' from 6.4.8.2.3, as it adds nothing to meaning but a lot to confusion. It's then consistent with the rationale. On 2024-07-01 11:35, Gert Gremmen F4LDP wrote: TR 62368-2:2019: Part 2: Explanatory information related to IEC 62368-1:2018 6.4.8.2.3 Compliance criteria Rationale: In each case there is a performance test, and construction (pre-selection) criteria given. For material flammability, compliance of the material is checked at the minimum thickness used as a fire enclosure or fire barrier. Gert Gremmen On 1-7-2024 11:02, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello again, IEC 62368-1 /6.4.8 Fire Enclosures/ /6.4.8.2.3 Compliance criteria/ /Compliance is checked by inspection of applicable data sheets or test. The material flammability class is checked for the *thinnest significant thickness* used./ There’s not a definition of “significant thickness” in the standard. Given that openings in a fire enclosure have controlled maximum dimensions I’m going to read “significant thickness” as “thickness of an area of material that is larger than the maximum permitted opening in that face of the fire enclosure” Thoughts welcomed! All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver *Unit 3 Compliance Ltd* *EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy* www.unit3compliance.co.uk <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 /Office hours:/ /Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri./ /For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks./ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Independent Expert on CE marking EMC Consultant Electrical Safety Consultant 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] "Significant Thickness"
TR 62368-2:2019: Part 2: Explanatory information related to IEC 62368-1:2018 6.4.8.2.3 Compliance criteria Rationale: In each case there is a performance test, and construction (pre-selection) criteria given. For material flammability, compliance of the material is checked at the minimum thickness used as a fire enclosure or fire barrier. Gert Gremmen On 1-7-2024 11:02, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello again, IEC 62368-1 /6.4.8 Fire Enclosures/ /6.4.8.2.3 Compliance criteria/ /Compliance is checked by inspection of applicable data sheets or test. The material flammability class is checked for the *thinnest significant thickness* used./ There’s not a definition of “significant thickness” in the standard. Given that openings in a fire enclosure have controlled maximum dimensions I’m going to read “significant thickness” as “thickness of an area of material that is larger than the maximum permitted opening in that face of the fire enclosure” Thoughts welcomed! All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver *Unit 3 Compliance Ltd* *EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy* www.unit3compliance.co.uk <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 /Office hours:/ /Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri./ /For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks./ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Independent Expert on CE marking EMC Consultant Electrical Safety Consultant - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 BEGIN:VCARD FN:Gert Gremmen N:Gremmen;Gert;;; ADR:;;1261 Route de Pirot;Chauffailles;;71170;France EMAIL;PREF=1:g.grem...@cetest.nl TEL;TYPE=cell:+33 7 84507010 NOTE:Independent Expert on CE marking \n Harmonised Standards (HAS-) Consu ltant @ European Commission for RED\, LVD and EMC\n EMC Consultant\n Elect rical Safety Consultant\n X-MOZILLA-HTML:TRUE END:VCARD
Re: [PSES] "Significant Thickness"
James My understanding off this phrase is "The material flammability class is checked at the thinnest part of the material that is relied upon as a Fire Enclosure" 62368-1 allows different methods of compliance with clause 6.4 within the same product - for example, parts of the product that are PS1 or PS2 don't need a Fire Enclosure but might share an outer enclosure with parts that are PS3 and require a Fire Enclosure for that portion of the product. Best regards Charlie Charlie Blackham Sulis Consultants Ltd Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 From: James Pawson (U3C) Sent: Monday, July 1, 2024 10:02 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] "Significant Thickness" Hello again, IEC 62368-1 6.4.8 Fire Enclosures 6.4.8.2.3 Compliance criteria Compliance is checked by inspection of applicable data sheets or test. The material flammability class is checked for the thinnest significant thickness used. There's not a definition of "significant thickness" in the standard. Given that openings in a fire enclosure have controlled maximum dimensions I'm going to read "significant thickness" as "thickness of an area of material that is larger than the maximum permitted opening in that face of the fire enclosure" Thoughts welcomed! All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy www.unit3compliance.co.uk<http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk<mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers' projects. I'm available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk<mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/<https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] "Significant Thickness"
Hello again, IEC 62368-1 6.4.8 Fire Enclosures 6.4.8.2.3 Compliance criteria Compliance is checked by inspection of applicable data sheets or test. The material flammability class is checked for the thinnest significant thickness used. There's not a definition of "significant thickness" in the standard. Given that openings in a fire enclosure have controlled maximum dimensions I'm going to read "significant thickness" as "thickness of an area of material that is larger than the maximum permitted opening in that face of the fire enclosure" Thoughts welcomed! All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk | <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers' projects. I'm available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> he...@unit3compliance.co.uk or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Polyimide film/tape for fire enclosure (UL 94 V-0 rating)
Generally, adhesive tape cannot be relied on for a safety feature, like forming part of a fire enclosure. Standards typically require mechanical securement. Ralph From: James Pawson (U3C) Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2024 9:51 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Polyimide film/tape for fire enclosure (UL 94 V-0 rating) Hello safety experts, In relation to my post a month or so ago about battery fire enclosures w.r.t. EN 62368-1 I wondered about using polyimide tape to provide a fire enclosure for a battery. The idea being to wrap the tape around the battery, at least once, probably twice. Suitable materials could include: * DuPont Kapton <https://www.dupont.com/content/dam/dupont/amer/us/en/ei-transformation/public/documents/en/EI-10142_Kapton-Summary-of-Properties.pdf> (UL file E39505) states V-0 for 25um thick * Muller Alhorn Norton TH <https://www.mueller-ahlhorn.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Norton-TH-FI-16011-ENG.pdf> (UL file E231847 <https://iq.ulprospector.com/en/profile?e=599035> ) states V-0 for 25um thick Tapes vs film Plastic material is tested to UL 94 but tapes are tested to UL 510. Therefore, as soon as you put a self adhesive backing on a UL 94 V-0 rated film, even if the material doesn’t change, the material now needs testing to UL 510. As far as I can tell, the test methodology between the two standards are not comparable. I feel like there is no reason that adding a small amount of adhesive on the back would significantly change the flammability characteristics. The alternative “by the book” method would be to wrap the battery in the polyimide film and secure with some regular polyimide tape on the outside Vertical Burning vs Thin Material Vertical Burning The tests appear to be fundamentally similar in terms of sample size and flame power, just the wrapping of the thin material sample around a supporting mandrel. It looks like V-0 and VTM-0 ratings are comparable in this respect. As always, I would appreciate your thoughts on the matter, particularly in pointing out any problems in logic or understanding on my part. References UL 94 UL 510 This link also discusses some of the same <https://www.cmc.de/en/ul-listung> (If only we had a vertical burning test rig and we could try out some of these ideas…) All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk | <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m contactable between 1300h to 1730h from Monday to Friday. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> he...@unit3compliance.co.uk or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 (includ
[PSES] Polyimide film/tape for fire enclosure (UL 94 V-0 rating)
Hello safety experts, In relation to my post a month or so ago about battery fire enclosures w.r.t. EN 62368-1 I wondered about using polyimide tape to provide a fire enclosure for a battery. The idea being to wrap the tape around the battery, at least once, probably twice. Suitable materials could include: * DuPont Kapton <https://www.dupont.com/content/dam/dupont/amer/us/en/ei-transformation/public/documents/en/EI-10142_Kapton-Summary-of-Properties.pdf> (UL file E39505) states V-0 for 25um thick * Muller Alhorn Norton TH <https://www.mueller-ahlhorn.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Norton-TH-FI-16011-ENG.pdf> (UL file E231847 <https://iq.ulprospector.com/en/profile?e=599035> ) states V-0 for 25um thick Tapes vs film Plastic material is tested to UL 94 but tapes are tested to UL 510. Therefore, as soon as you put a self adhesive backing on a UL 94 V-0 rated film, even if the material doesn’t change, the material now needs testing to UL 510. As far as I can tell, the test methodology between the two standards are not comparable. I feel like there is no reason that adding a small amount of adhesive on the back would significantly change the flammability characteristics. The alternative “by the book” method would be to wrap the battery in the polyimide film and secure with some regular polyimide tape on the outside Vertical Burning vs Thin Material Vertical Burning The tests appear to be fundamentally similar in terms of sample size and flame power, just the wrapping of the thin material sample around a supporting mandrel. It looks like V-0 and VTM-0 ratings are comparable in this respect. As always, I would appreciate your thoughts on the matter, particularly in pointing out any problems in logic or understanding on my part. References UL 94 UL 510 This link also discusses some of the same <https://www.cmc.de/en/ul-listung> (If only we had a vertical burning test rig and we could try out some of these ideas…) All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk | <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m contactable between 1300h to 1730h from Monday to Friday. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> he...@unit3compliance.co.uk or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
Hi Ralph: "My understanding that “clearance” is distance through air (the insulating medium for clearance), not through solid or liquid insulation." True. "Clearance distance is a function of peak voltage and air pressure." True. "The testing of solid insulation is generally done using an impulse withstand voltage test." Depends on the standard. Its the first option in IEC 60664-1. "Clearance is tested using steady-state d.c. or the rms equivalent of an a.c. test voltage." In IEC 60664-1, the first option is an impulse withstand test, followed by peak sinusoid and DC. IEC 60664-1, 6.1.2.1, Note 1 says "The electric testing of clearances will also stress the associated solid insulation." Solid, air (clearance), and surface (creepage) distance are always in parallel. They cannot be tested separately. See attached illustration. Best regards, Rich - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question -- update
Hi, Rich. I thought you were writing about solid dielectrics. I did a Google search for the German journal and it seems that its issues may be available up to 1995. The organization VDE should be able to help you: https://www.vde.com/en. Also, the search turned up a book that seems to have relevant information, at https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Electrical_Properties_of_Solid_Insulatin/c9qgPOK7eNwC?hl=en=1=elektrotechnische+zeitschrift=PA220=frontcover On 2024-06-28 23:31, Richard Nute wrote: Since my 23 June message, I may have found the answer to my quest as to where the air insulation (clearances) distances came from: IEC 664, Edition 1, 1980, Appendix Table AI, withstand voltages, and Table AII, breakdown voltages. According to IEC 664, Table AII is “experimental data” by Prof. Dr. Ing. W. Pfeiffer, convenor of IEC TC109/MT3, elektrotechnische zeitschriftAusg.B, 1976. Dr. Hermstein, elektrotechnische zeitschrift Ausg. A, 1969. These are Germanelectrotechnical journalsissue A, 1969, and issue B, 1976. I could not find copies of these. Perhaps our German subscribers can find these. I surmise from the tables that these two people tested air breakdown voltage as a function of distance. I did find that Dr. Hermstein did some experimental work on electrical performance of gasses that has been discredited. Table AI (IEC 664) is withstand voltages based on the breakdown voltages in Table AII (IEC 664). This is the source of IEC 60664-1 clearance distance tables which have been used by a number of IEC standards committees. I’ve attached a plot of both the breakdown voltage per distance and the withstand voltage per distance through air. These are linear axes while the IEC 664 and IEC 60664-1 plots are logarithmic axes.I’ve included trend lines (dotted)and their equations.(The voltage-distance tables are not in IEC 60664-1.) I suspect the non-linearity of the breakdown (red) line is due to measurement problems. I would expect the line to be straight except for the small dimensions that approach the Paschen voltage limit for air, 327 volts peak. (Paschen studied gas breakdowns at very small gaps and found that various gasses do not break down at very small gap dimensions.) Best regards, Rich This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] dielectric strength question -- update
Since my 23 June message, I may have found the answer to my quest as to where the air insulation (clearances) distances came from: IEC 664, Edition 1, 1980, Appendix Table AI, withstand voltages, and Table AII, breakdown voltages. According to IEC 664, Table AII is "experimental data" by Prof. Dr. Ing. W. Pfeiffer, convenor of IEC TC109/MT3, elektrotechnische zeitschrift Ausg. B, 1976. Dr. Hermstein, elektrotechnische zeitschrift Ausg. A, 1969. These are German electrotechnical journals issue A, 1969, and issue B, 1976. I could not find copies of these. Perhaps our German subscribers can find these. I surmise from the tables that these two people tested air breakdown voltage as a function of distance. I did find that Dr. Hermstein did some experimental work on electrical performance of gasses that has been discredited. Table AI (IEC 664) is withstand voltages based on the breakdown voltages in Table AII (IEC 664). This is the source of IEC 60664-1 clearance distance tables which have been used by a number of IEC standards committees. I've attached a plot of both the breakdown voltage per distance and the withstand voltage per distance through air. These are linear axes while the IEC 664 and IEC 60664-1 plots are logarithmic axes. I've included trend lines (dotted) and their equations. (The voltage-distance tables are not in IEC 60664-1.) I suspect the non-linearity of the breakdown (red) line is due to measurement problems. I would expect the line to be straight except for the small dimensions that approach the Paschen voltage limit for air, 327 volts peak. (Paschen studied gas breakdowns at very small gaps and found that various gasses do not break down at very small gap dimensions.) Best regards, Rich - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
My understanding that “clearance” is distance through air (the insulating medium for clearance), not through solid or liquid insulation. Clearance distance is a function of peak voltage and air pressure. The testing of solid insulation is generally done using an impulse withstand voltage test. Clearance is tested using steady-state d.c. or the rms equivalent of an a.c. test voltage. The tables for clearance and creepage along with the requirements for solid insulation appear to have served the industry well over the past few decades and there seems no compelling reason to scrutinize their origin, unless it can be shown that those requirements are generally inadequate or draconian. I suspect there is a decent safety margin built-in to those numbers, maybe a 2:1 factor. Ralph From: Richard Nute Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 4:34 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question Hi John: My concern is an engineering-based prediction of clearances (air insulation) as a function of voltage. What is the basis for the clearance tables in the standards? I have never seen anything that allows me to independently verify the clearance dimensions as a function of voltage. My assumption was that the volts per unit distance through the insulating medium was an insulator constant. Not true. The volts per unit distance is a variable and depends on the distance. So, how do I generate a table of distance for each voltage? As near as I know, the tables are empirical. Your hypothesis is that the V/d curves are due to non-uniformity of the insulator is sort-of verified by the papers listed by Adam Dixon. However, the incident you describe seems to me to be due to partial discharge. Any V/d non-uniformity area of the insulating medium is a candidate for partial discharge. Air, because its V/d is very much less than a solid insulator V/d, is likely to have sufficient voltage across the void and can lead to a partial breakdown of the solid insulator. In the 1950s, I doubt that we knew much of the theory of partial discharge. Best regards, Rich From: John Woodgate mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk> > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:26 PM To: ri...@ieee.org <mailto:ri...@ieee.org> ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question I feel that those curves support the hypothesis that the variation is due to non-uniformity in the material. I first suggested voids (because I recall a spectacular failure of a line output transformer design in the late 1950s whose HV winding was encapsulated in polythene. Air in the voids ionized and the ions gobbled up the polythene. Attempt to eliminate the voids in viscous molten polythene under vacuum were partly successful, but did not survive the moulding process. Voids are only one possibility; simple variations in density may be sufficient to concentrate the electric field just where it will do the most damage. Can some tests be done on a solid material that has been certified to be highly uniform? What happens with liquids, which should be orders of magnitude more uniform than the average solid? On 2024-06-25 20:35, Richard Nute wrote: Thanks to Adam for all the references. They address very thin solid insulations. But they confirm that dielectric strength is not a constant for very small distances, and they do not have an answer as to why. My concern is verifying clearances in safety standards. I’ve attached curves of three standards clearance requirements (logarithmic scale for volts per millimeter). The solid curves represent the clearances in standards and are close to power curves (dotted lines). The equations are for a best-fit power curve. The solid green curve is from an old standard and depicts actual withstand measurements. I suspect the electric strength curves are related to the reason for Paschen’s finding that gases do not break down at low voltages. My objective is to predict clearance dimensions without tables. Best regards, Rich _ This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@co
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
Hi John: My concern is an engineering-based prediction of clearances (air insulation) as a function of voltage. What is the basis for the clearance tables in the standards? I have never seen anything that allows me to independently verify the clearance dimensions as a function of voltage. My assumption was that the volts per unit distance through the insulating medium was an insulator constant. Not true. The volts per unit distance is a variable and depends on the distance. So, how do I generate a table of distance for each voltage? As near as I know, the tables are empirical. Your hypothesis is that the V/d curves are due to non-uniformity of the insulator is sort-of verified by the papers listed by Adam Dixon. However, the incident you describe seems to me to be due to partial discharge. Any V/d non-uniformity area of the insulating medium is a candidate for partial discharge. Air, because its V/d is very much less than a solid insulator V/d, is likely to have sufficient voltage across the void and can lead to a partial breakdown of the solid insulator. In the 1950s, I doubt that we knew much of the theory of partial discharge. Best regards, Rich From: John Woodgate Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:26 PM To: ri...@ieee.org; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question I feel that those curves support the hypothesis that the variation is due to non-uniformity in the material. I first suggested voids (because I recall a spectacular failure of a line output transformer design in the late 1950s whose HV winding was encapsulated in polythene. Air in the voids ionized and the ions gobbled up the polythene. Attempt to eliminate the voids in viscous molten polythene under vacuum were partly successful, but did not survive the moulding process. Voids are only one possibility; simple variations in density may be sufficient to concentrate the electric field just where it will do the most damage. Can some tests be done on a solid material that has been certified to be highly uniform? What happens with liquids, which should be orders of magnitude more uniform than the average solid? On 2024-06-25 20:35, Richard Nute wrote: Thanks to Adam for all the references. They address very thin solid insulations. But they confirm that dielectric strength is not a constant for very small distances, and they do not have an answer as to why. My concern is verifying clearances in safety standards. I’ve attached curves of three standards clearance requirements (logarithmic scale for volts per millimeter). The solid curves represent the clearances in standards and are close to power curves (dotted lines). The equations are for a best-fit power curve. The solid green curve is from an old standard and depicts actual withstand measurements. I suspect the electric strength curves are related to the reason for Paschen’s finding that gases do not break down at low voltages. My objective is to predict clearance dimensions without tables. Best regards, Rich _ This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =1 -- OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> Virus-free. <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient> www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.m
Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
L-G failure sounds like the Y-caps conducting. I made a special input connector for my unit that connected to traces that went around the Y-caps and/or the GDTs on the input (single phase 120V) that was used during FAT.IIRC, we also had to pull pins b/c we had faults from a UL-rated Phoenix connector. It wasn't the connector, it was the solder bumps under the board that were arc'ing. So, we had a customer connector made that only used 3 of the 5 sockets. Amongst the tricks I've had to employ Colorado Brian -- Original Message -- From: Doug Nix To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:31:19 -0400 Hi Brian, This is my bailiwick. If you are talking about semiconductor manufacturing equipment, the correct standard is IEC 60204-33. If its standard manufacturing machinery, then its IEC 60204-1. Clause 18 calls out 1 kV or 2x nominal mains voltage, whichever is more for the voltage test (read hipot) for machinery designed for connection to a TN supply. The standard permits you to disconnect any equipment that is either pre-certified (as most industrial PSUs are) or that might be damaged by the test. Any industrial PSU built today will have surge suppressors on the primary side. Also, mains filters used in these machines will have Y-caps that will conduct significant current between the mains conductors and PE during a hipot test. So, the answer is to disconnect these devices and test the mains voltage wiring upstream and downstream of them separately. If the PSU is downstream of a control transformer, you need only test up to the primary of the control transformer. All industrial equipment is supposed to be hipot tested at the factory; however, just because its supposed to be done doesn't make it so.Best regards, Doug nixd...@ieee.org+1 (519) 729-5704 On Jun 24, 2024, at 08:19, Brian Kunde wrote:I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the factory. Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the same model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is supposed to perform this way. My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the final product when the power supply is installed. I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So how am I to use this PSU in my final product? Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. Best regards to all. The Other BrianThis 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
I feel that those curves support the hypothesis that the variation is due to non-uniformity in the material. I first suggested voids (because I recall a spectacular failure of a line output transformer design in the late 1950s whose HV winding was encapsulated in polythene. Air in the voids ionized and the ions gobbled up the polythene. Attempt to eliminate the voids in viscous molten polythene under vacuum were partly successful, but did not survive the moulding process. Voids are only one possibility; simple variations in density may be sufficient to concentrate the electric field just where it will do the most damage. Can some tests be done on a solid material that has been certified to be highly uniform? What happens with liquids, which should be orders of magnitude more uniform than the average solid? On 2024-06-25 20:35, Richard Nute wrote: Thanks to Adam for all the references. They address very thin solid insulations. But they confirm that dielectric strength is not a constant for very small distances, and they do not have an answer as to why. My concern is verifying clearances in safety standards. I’ve attached curves of three standards clearance requirements (logarithmic scale for volts per millimeter). The solid curves represent the clearances in standards and are close to power curves (dotted lines). The equations are for a best-fit power curve. The solid green curve is from an old standard and depicts actual withstand measurements. I suspect the electric strength curves are related to the reason for Paschen’s finding that gases do not break down at low voltages. My objective is to predict clearance dimensions without tables. Best regards, Rich This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
Thanks to Adam for all the references. They address very thin solid insulations. But they confirm that dielectric strength is not a constant for very small distances, and they do not have an answer as to why. My concern is verifying clearances in safety standards. I’ve attached curves of three standards clearance requirements (logarithmic scale for volts per millimeter). The solid curves represent the clearances in standards and are close to power curves (dotted lines). The equations are for a best-fit power curve. The solid green curve is from an old standard and depicts actual withstand measurements. I suspect the electric strength curves are related to the reason for Paschen’s finding that gases do not break down at low voltages. My objective is to predict clearance dimensions without tables. Best regards, Rich - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
Hi Brian, This is my bailiwick. If you are talking about semiconductor manufacturing equipment, the correct standard is IEC 60204-33. If it’s standard manufacturing machinery, then it’s IEC 60204-1. Clause 18 calls out 1 kV or 2x nominal mains voltage, whichever is more for the “voltage test” (read hipot) for machinery designed for connection to a TN supply. The standard permits you to disconnect any equipment that is either pre-certified (as most industrial PSUs are) or that might be damaged by the test. Any industrial PSU built today will have surge suppressors on the primary side. Also, mains filters used in these machines will have Y-caps that will conduct significant current between the mains conductors and PE during a hipot test. So, the answer is to disconnect these devices and test the mains voltage wiring upstream and downstream of them separately. If the PSU is downstream of a control transformer, you need only test up to the primary of the control transformer. All industrial equipment is supposed to be hipot tested at the factory; however, just because it’s supposed to be done doesn't make it so. Best regards, Doug Nix d...@ieee.org +1 (519) 729-5704 > On Jun 24, 2024, at 08:19, Brian Kunde wrote: > > I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the factory. > Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? > > Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to > 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it > failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC > voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all > phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the same > model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is supposed > to perform this way. > > My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the final > product when the power supply is installed. > > I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So how > am I to use this PSU in my final product? > > Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. > > Best regards to all. > > The Other Brian > 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > > 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/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> > Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> > Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> > For policy questions, send mail to: > Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
Totally of the original topic, but I have used “swag” uncapitalized in several papers on the topic of electromagnetic coupling to and from cables over a ground plane. In that context, “swag” means single-wire-above-ground. -- Ken Javor Ph: (256) 650-5261 From: Ken Javor Reply-To: Ken Javor Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 8:15 AM To: Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question Silly wild ass guess is what I mean when I use that acronym. -- Ken Javor Ph: (256) 650-5261 From: "James Pawson (U3C)" Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 7:29 AM To: Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question Could someone define the acronym SWAG in this context please? Something With Air Gap? All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy www.unit3compliance.co.uk | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. From: Adam Dixon Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:24 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question SWAG #2: non-uniformities in materials + multiple breakdown mechanisms make it difficult to model. Mica shows up in 1940's vintage literature. Here are some interesting papers that I perused after Rich posed the question: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9079498 Space change behavior in cross-linked polymers https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app.49379 Touches on different breakdown mechanisms (see Figure 3; also the Figure 2 reference may be worthwhile but I haven't tried accessing it) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7764431/ electron injection and avalanche breakdown process https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1=pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636 Electromechanical breakdown mechanism but also states "The exact cause for the observed behavior remains to be investigated" https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA635433.pdf Paschen Curve anomalies (for consideration of gas dielectrics) https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1656858 Describes influence of polymer chain ends (Figure 1 is a good illustration) Cheers, Adam in Atlanta adam.di...@ieee.org On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM Patrick wrote: just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then begins to increase with thickness. interesting question. On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute wrote: Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web.) How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through air (or any insulation)? Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth Edition), 1994: If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders the material useless as an insulator. The potential gradient necessary to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is termed the ‘dielectric strength’. The dielectric strength of a given material decreases with increases in the thickness. Table 2.2 gives approximate values for some of the more common dielectric materials. Table 2.2. Dielectric strength of some common insulators MaterialThickness (mm) Dielectric strength (kV/mm) Air 0.2 5.75 0.6 4.92 1.0 4.36 10.02.98 Mica0.01200 0.10115 1.00
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
My understanding is Scientific Wild Ass Guess Best Regards, Mike From: Patrick Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 6:51 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question Silly WildAss Guess. A precursor to a hypothesis. Plus easier to say and spell. On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 6:15 AM Ken Javor mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com>> wrote: Silly wild ass guess is what I mean when I use that acronym. -- Ken Javor Ph: (256) 650-5261 From: "James Pawson (U3C)" mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk>> Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk>> Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 7:29 AM To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>> Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question Could someone define the acronym SWAG in this context please? Something With Air Gap? All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy www.unit3compliance.co.uk<http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk<mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk<mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. From: Adam Dixon mailto:lanterna.viri...@gmail.com>> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:24 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question SWAG #2: non-uniformities in materials + multiple breakdown mechanisms make it difficult to model. Mica shows up in 1940's vintage literature. Here are some interesting papers that I perused after Rich posed the question: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9079498 Space change behavior in cross-linked polymers https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app.49379 Touches on different breakdown mechanisms (see Figure 3; also the Figure 2 reference may be worthwhile but I haven't tried accessing it) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7764431/ electron injection and avalanche breakdown process https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1=pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636 Electromechanical breakdown mechanism but also states "The exact cause for the observed behavior remains to be investigated" https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA635433.pdf Paschen Curve anomalies (for consideration of gas dielectrics) https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1656858 Describes influence of polymer chain ends (Figure 1 is a good illustration) Cheers, Adam in Atlanta adam.di...@ieee.org<mailto:adam.di...@ieee.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM Patrick mailto:conwa...@gmail.com>> wrote: just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then begins to increase with thickness. interesting question. On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute mailto:ri...@ieee.org>> wrote: Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web.) How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through air (or any insulation)? Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth Edition)<https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780750611954/mechanical-engineers-reference-book>, 1994: If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders the material useless as an insulator. The potential gradient<https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/potential-gradient> necessary to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is t
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
Silly WildAss Guess. A precursor to a hypothesis. Plus easier to say and spell. On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 6:15 AM Ken Javor wrote: > Silly wild ass guess is what I mean when I use that acronym. > > > > -- > > > > Ken Javor > > Ph: (256) 650-5261 > > > > > > *From: *"James Pawson (U3C)" > *Reply-To: *"James Pawson (U3C)" > *Date: *Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 7:29 AM > *To: * > *Subject: *Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question > > > > Could someone define the acronym SWAG in this context please? > > > > Something With Air Gap? > > > > All the best > > James > > > > James Pawson > > Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver > > > > *Unit 3 Compliance Ltd* > > *EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : > Consultancy* > > > > www.unit3compliance.co.uk | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk > > +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 > > 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL > > Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 > > > > *Office hours:* > > *Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and > troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m > available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri.* > > *For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on > he...@unit3compliance.co.uk or call 01274 > 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks.* > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Adam Dixon > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:24 PM > *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > *Subject:* Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question > > > > SWAG #2: non-uniformities in materials + multiple breakdown mechanisms > make it difficult to model. Mica shows up in 1940's vintage literature. > Here are some interesting papers that I perused after Rich posed the > question: > > > > https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9079498 > Space change behavior in cross-linked polymers > > https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app.49379 > Touches on different breakdown mechanisms (see Figure 3; also the Figure 2 > reference may be worthwhile but I haven't tried accessing it) > > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7764431/ > electron injection and avalanche breakdown process > > > https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1=pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636 > Electromechanical breakdown mechanism but also states "The exact cause for > the observed behavior remains to be investigated" > > https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA635433.pdf > Paschen Curve anomalies (for consideration of gas dielectrics) > > https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1656858 > > Describes influence of polymer chain ends (Figure 1 is a good illustration) > > > > > > Cheers, > > Adam in Atlanta > > adam.di...@ieee.org > > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM Patrick wrote: > > just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and > the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be > thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an > increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases > available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. > > A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness > and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then > begins to increase with thickness. > > interesting question. > > > > On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute wrote: > > > > Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric > strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric > substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric > strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the > physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables > in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web.) > How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through > air (or any insulation)? > > Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth > Edition) > <https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780750611954/mechanical-engineers-reference-book>, > 1994: > > If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material > is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The > failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders > the material useless as an insulator. The potential gradient > <https://www.sciencedire
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
Silly wild ass guess is what I mean when I use that acronym. -- Ken Javor Ph: (256) 650-5261 From: "James Pawson (U3C)" Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 7:29 AM To: Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question Could someone define the acronym SWAG in this context please? Something With Air Gap? All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy www.unit3compliance.co.uk | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. From: Adam Dixon Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:24 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question SWAG #2: non-uniformities in materials + multiple breakdown mechanisms make it difficult to model. Mica shows up in 1940's vintage literature. Here are some interesting papers that I perused after Rich posed the question: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9079498 Space change behavior in cross-linked polymers https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app.49379 Touches on different breakdown mechanisms (see Figure 3; also the Figure 2 reference may be worthwhile but I haven't tried accessing it) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7764431/ electron injection and avalanche breakdown process https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1=pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636 Electromechanical breakdown mechanism but also states "The exact cause for the observed behavior remains to be investigated" https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA635433.pdf Paschen Curve anomalies (for consideration of gas dielectrics) https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1656858 Describes influence of polymer chain ends (Figure 1 is a good illustration) Cheers, Adam in Atlanta adam.di...@ieee.org On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM Patrick wrote: just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then begins to increase with thickness. interesting question. On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute wrote: Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web.) How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through air (or any insulation)? Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth Edition), 1994: If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders the material useless as an insulator. The potential gradient necessary to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is termed the ‘dielectric strength’. The dielectric strength of a given material decreases with increases in the thickness. Table 2.2 gives approximate values for some of the more common dielectric materials. Table 2.2. Dielectric strength of some common insulators MaterialThickness (mm) Dielectric strength (kV/mm) Air 0.2 5.75 0.6 4.92 1.0 4.36 10.02.98 Mica0.01200 0.10115 1.0061 Thanks, and best regards, Rich This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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.
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
In my case, SWAG = best guess (how I heard it used growing up in small town USA, along the lines of Wikipedia's entry). Cheers, Adam in Atlanta adam.di...@ieee.org On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:29 AM James Pawson (U3C) < ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> wrote: > Could someone define the acronym SWAG in this context please? > > > > Something With Air Gap? > > > > All the best > > James > > > > James Pawson > > Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver > > > > *Unit 3 Compliance Ltd* > > *EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : > Consultancy* > > > > www.unit3compliance.co.uk | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk > > +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 > > 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL > > Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 > > > > *Office hours:* > > *Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and > troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m > available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri.* > > *For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on > he...@unit3compliance.co.uk or call 01274 > 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks.* > > > > > > > > > > *From:* Adam Dixon > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:24 PM > *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > *Subject:* Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question > > > > SWAG #2: non-uniformities in materials + multiple breakdown mechanisms > make it difficult to model. Mica shows up in 1940's vintage literature. > Here are some interesting papers that I perused after Rich posed the > question: > > > > https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9079498 > Space change behavior in cross-linked polymers > > https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app.49379 > Touches on different breakdown mechanisms (see Figure 3; also the Figure 2 > reference may be worthwhile but I haven't tried accessing it) > > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7764431/ > electron injection and avalanche breakdown process > > > https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1=pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636 > Electromechanical breakdown mechanism but also states "The exact cause for > the observed behavior remains to be investigated" > > https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA635433.pdf > Paschen Curve anomalies (for consideration of gas dielectrics) > > https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1656858 > > Describes influence of polymer chain ends (Figure 1 is a good illustration) > > > > > > Cheers, > > Adam in Atlanta > > adam.di...@ieee.org > > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM Patrick wrote: > > just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and > the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be > thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an > increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases > available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. > > A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness > and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then > begins to increase with thickness. > > interesting question. > > > > On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute wrote: > > > > Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric > strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric > substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric > strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the > physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables > in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web.) > How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through > air (or any insulation)? > > Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth > Edition) > <https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780750611954/mechanical-engineers-reference-book>, > 1994: > > If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material > is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The > failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders > the material useless as an insulator. The potential gradient > <https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/potential-gradient> > necessary > to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is > termed the ‘dielectric strength’. The dielectric strength of a given > material decreases with increases in the thicknes
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
Could someone define the acronym SWAG in this context please? Something With Air Gap? All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk | <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. From: Adam Dixon Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 1:24 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question SWAG #2: non-uniformities in materials + multiple breakdown mechanisms make it difficult to model. Mica shows up in 1940's vintage literature. Here are some interesting papers that I perused after Rich posed the question: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9079498 Space change behavior in cross-linked polymers https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app.49379 Touches on different breakdown mechanisms (see Figure 3; also the Figure 2 reference may be worthwhile but I haven't tried accessing it) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7764431/ electron injection and avalanche breakdown process https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1 <https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1=pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636> =pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636 Electromechanical breakdown mechanism but also states "The exact cause for the observed behavior remains to be investigated" https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA635433.pdf Paschen Curve anomalies (for consideration of gas dielectrics) https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1656858 Describes influence of polymer chain ends (Figure 1 is a good illustration) Cheers, Adam in Atlanta adam.di...@ieee.org <mailto:adam.di...@ieee.org> On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM Patrick mailto:conwa...@gmail.com> > wrote: just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then begins to increase with thickness. interesting question. On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute mailto:ri...@ieee.org> > wrote: Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web.) How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through air (or any insulation)? Charles J. Fraser, in <https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780750611954/mechanical-engineers-reference-book> Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth Edition), 1994: If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders the material useless as an insulator. The <https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/potential-gradient> potential gradient necessary to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is termed the ‘dielectric strength’. The dielectric strength of a given material decreases with increases in the thickness. Table 2.2 gives approximate values for some of the more common dielectric materials. Table 2.2. Dielectric strength of some common insulators MaterialThickness (mm) Dielectric strength (kV/mm) Air 0.2 5.75 0.6 4.92 1.0 4.36 10.02.98 Mica0.01200 0.10115 1.0061 Thanks, and best regards, Rich _ This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send y
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
SWAG #2: non-uniformities in materials + multiple breakdown mechanisms make it difficult to model. Mica shows up in 1940's vintage literature. Here are some interesting papers that I perused after Rich posed the question: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=9079498 Space change behavior in cross-linked polymers https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app.49379 Touches on different breakdown mechanisms (see Figure 3; also the Figure 2 reference may be worthwhile but I haven't tried accessing it) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7764431/ electron injection and avalanche breakdown process https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1=pdf=65f577afe99e3253e7e3f38054ce9ea49b16a636 Electromechanical breakdown mechanism but also states "The exact cause for the observed behavior remains to be investigated" https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA635433.pdf Paschen Curve anomalies (for consideration of gas dielectrics) https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1656858 Describes influence of polymer chain ends (Figure 1 is a good illustration) Cheers, Adam in Atlanta adam.di...@ieee.org On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:00 PM Patrick wrote: > just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and > the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be > thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an > increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases > available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. > > A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness > and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then > begins to increase with thickness. > > interesting question. > > On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute wrote: > >> >> Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric >> strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric >> substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric >> strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the >> physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables >> in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the >> web.) How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance >> through air (or any insulation)? >> >> Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth >> Edition) >> <https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780750611954/mechanical-engineers-reference-book>, >> 1994: >> >> If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric >> material is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. >> The failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which >> renders the material useless as an insulator. The *potential gradient* >> <https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/potential-gradient> >> necessary >> to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is >> termed the ‘dielectric strength’. The dielectric strength of a given >> material decreases with increases in the thickness. Table 2.2 gives >> approximate values for some of the more common dielectric materials. >> >> Table 2.2. Dielectric strength of some common insulators >> >> *Material* * Thickness (mm)* * Dielectric strength (kV/mm)* >> Air 0.2 5.75 >> 0.6 4.92 >> 1.0 4.36 >> 10.02.98 >> Mica0.01200 >> 0.10115 >> 1.0061 >> >> Thanks, and best regards, >> >> Rich >> >> >> -- >> >> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc >> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to >> EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG >> 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) <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: 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 >> > -- > > This
Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
There must be a metal clip to disconnect GDT during hipot. Normally it is closed to input connector. Other option is that manufacturer performs hipot on PCB with full value and on complete unit (in enclosure) with reduced value. Anyhow, I agree with Ralph. As PSU is tested separately, you can remove or disconnect it for routine testing on complete unit. Best regards Bostjan Poslano iz Outlook za Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> Od: Ralph McDiarmid Poslano: torek, junij 25, 2024 4:24:40 AM Za: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Zadeva: Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. Some PSUs may have a screw or a jumper to remove for hipot testing. Or you can hipot test your machine without the PSU connected, assuming the PSU has a 3rd party certification for electrical safety. Ralph From: Brian Kunde Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 5:20 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the factory. Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the same model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is supposed to perform this way. My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the final product when the power supply is installed. I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So how am I to use this PSU in my final product? Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. Best regards to all. The Other Brian 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/<https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 un
Re: [PSES] dielectric strength question
just a SWAG... perhaps dielectric strength is dependent on volume, and the increased 'thickness' is assumed to be thickness-for-a-constant-surface-area. If that's the case then an increasing thickness is also an increased volume which also increases available charge carriers, reducing breakdown voltage. A test of my SWAG would be to incrementally increase dielectric thickness and determine if breakdown voltage eventually finds a minimum and then begins to increase with thickness. interesting question. On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 13:32 Richard Nute wrote: > > Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric > strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric > substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric > strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the > physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables > in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web. > ) How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through > air (or any insulation)? > > Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth > Edition) > <https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780750611954/mechanical-engineers-reference-book>, > 1994: > > If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material > is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The > failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders > the material useless as an insulator. The *potential gradient* > <https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/potential-gradient> > necessary > to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is > termed the ‘dielectric strength’. The dielectric strength of a given > material decreases with increases in the thickness. Table 2.2 gives > approximate values for some of the more common dielectric materials. > > Table 2.2. Dielectric strength of some common insulators > > *Material* * Thickness (mm)* * Dielectric strength (kV/mm)* > Air 0.2 5.75 > 0.6 4.92 > 1.0 4.36 > 10.02.98 > Mica0.01200 > 0.10115 > 1.0061 > > Thanks, and best regards, > > Rich > > > -- > > This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc > discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to > EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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) <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: 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 > - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
Some PSUs may have a screw or a jumper to remove for hipot testing. Or you can hipot test your machine without the PSU connected, assuming the PSU has a 3rd party certification for electrical safety. Ralph From: Brian Kunde Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 5:20 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the factory. Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the same model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is supposed to perform this way. My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the final product when the power supply is installed. I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So how am I to use this PSU in my final product? Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. Best regards to all. The Other Brian _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
Thanks to all who have replied so far. Here are a few quick replies to questions I am being asked. The hipot tester is showing a "Breakdown". It is not exceeding the tester's current capability (though that was a good question). I looked through all the information provided by the PSU manufacturer and no mention of any special conditions involving the hipot testing. The PSU does list a Phase to PE dielectric specification of 3500Vac. The PSU does not appear to have any jumper or means to disconnect surge suppression from outside the enclosure (it comes in a metal box). The only adjustment is a POT for adjusting the output voltage. We have contacted the manufacturer's Tech Support here in the USA but they have no idea what HiPot even is. They gave us an email address in Germany to send our enquiry to. It might take a few days, especially with the soccer football going on over there right now. Exciting ending during the Swiss game last night. We have a call in to our NRTL inspector to get his take on this topic. Thanks again for all replies. The Other Brian On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 10:57 AM Dan Roman wrote: > Hi Brian, > > > > Is your hi-pot tester capable of delivering the current required to do the > hi-pot test without tripping? Are you experiencing a breakdown or maybe > the current setting on the tester just doesn’t go high enough, in which > case you’ll need a higher capacity hi-pot testing in production. I am > thinking this might be the most likely issue. > > > > Are there any conditions in the safety report for the power supply related > to hi-pot that may be applicable? > > > > Are there jumpers or provisions to disconnect EMC components (caps or > surge suppressors) for the purpose of doing a hi-pot test? You may need to > remove a jumper in the power supply to do the production hi-pot test and > then reinstall the jumper afterwards. > > > > Just some random thoughts. > > > > Dan > > > > > > *From:* Brian Kunde [mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, June 24, 2024 8:20 AM > *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > *Subject:* [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question > > > > I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the > factory. Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? > > > > Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to > 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it > failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC > voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all > phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the > same model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is > supposed to perform this way. > > > > My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the > final product when the power supply is installed. > > > > I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So > how am I to use this PSU in my final product? > > > > Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. > > > > Best regards to all. > > > > The Other Brian > -- > > 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ > <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> > > Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ > Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) <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: 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 > - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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/listr
Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
Hi Brian, Is your hi-pot tester capable of delivering the current required to do the hi-pot test without tripping? Are you experiencing a breakdown or maybe the current setting on the tester just doesn’t go high enough, in which case you’ll need a higher capacity hi-pot testing in production. I am thinking this might be the most likely issue. Are there any conditions in the safety report for the power supply related to hi-pot that may be applicable? Are there jumpers or provisions to disconnect EMC components (caps or surge suppressors) for the purpose of doing a hi-pot test? You may need to remove a jumper in the power supply to do the production hi-pot test and then reinstall the jumper afterwards. Just some random thoughts. Dan From: Brian Kunde [mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 8:20 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the factory. Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the same model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is supposed to perform this way. My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the final product when the power supply is installed. I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So how am I to use this PSU in my final product? Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. Best regards to all. The Other Brian _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
Hello Brian, I Cannot comment on each and every factory, but in my previous employment(s) this was definitely the case. Regards Steve Clarke Test Engineer Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Electrical Safety : Environmental & Vibration : CE & UKCA : Consultancy <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk | <mailto:step...@unit3compliance.co.uk> step...@unit3compliance.co.uk | +44(0)1274 911747 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 From: Brian Kunde Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:20 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the factory. Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the same model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is supposed to perform this way. My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the final product when the power supply is installed. I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So how am I to use this PSU in my final product? Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. Best regards to all. The Other Brian _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] HiPot Testing of 3-Phase PSU Question
I understand that commercial products are %100 HiPot tested at the factory. Does this rule hold true for 3-phase industrial machinery? Here is why I am asking. I just pre-tested a German build 400-480Vac to 24Vdc power supply (DIN Rail Mount). It passed all the tests, except it failed the Phase-to-PE HiPot test at around 1000V. I tried both AC and DC voltage and tried connecting it from a single phase to PE and tried all phases connected together to PE. I tested a second power supply of the same model and it did the same exact thing. So I am thinking that it is supposed to perform this way. My concern is that in our factory, they will not be able to HiPot the final product when the power supply is installed. I assume the power supply has some kind of built in surge suppression. So how am I to use this PSU in my final product? Thoughts and comments would be appreciated. Best regards to all. The Other Brian - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Safety question
Hi All, Last week a friend asked me a safety question, not being a safety expert I thought I would try the question on this group. The question has to do with EN 60204‑1:2018 relating to a piece of semiconductor processing equipment. The equipment has an EMO (emergency off button) that in an orderly fashion shuts the equipment down. The EMO control has duplicated signals with feedback to control the main contactor to shut down power. The contactor itself is not duplicated, however power can be shut down by the manual switch. If power is shut down this way there is no safety issue at all, but product in the machine (a wafer) may be damaged and restart may be complicated. Does this arrangement comply with EN 60204‑1:2018? Seems to me that it does but would appreciate input from others Doug Smith Sent from my iPhone IPhone: 408-858-4528 Office: 702-570-6108 Email: d...@dsmith.org Website: http://dsmith.org - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] dielectric strength question
Why does air (or any insulating material) have decreasing dielectric strength, kV/mm, with increasing distance through the dielectric substance? Assume homogenous field. (I have assumed the dielectric strength was constant for the material.) In other words, what is the physical basis for the non-constant dielectric strength clearance tables in various safety standards? (I have yet to find the answer from the web.) How can I predict the dielectric constant for a given distance through air (or any insulation)? Charles J. Fraser, in Mechanical Engineer's Reference Book (Twelfth Edition) <https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780750611954/mechanical-engineers-refer ence-book> , 1994: If the potential difference across opposite faces of a dielectric material is increased above a particular value, the material breaks down. The failure of the material takes the form of a small puncture, which renders the material useless as an insulator. The potential gradient <https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/potential-gradient> necessary to cause break down is normally expressed in kilovolts/millimetre and is termed the 'dielectric strength'. The dielectric strength of a given material decreases with increases in the thickness. Table 2.2 gives approximate values for some of the more common dielectric materials. Table 2.2. Dielectric strength of some common insulators MaterialThickness (mm) Dielectric strength (kV/mm) Air 0.2 5.75 0.6 4.92 1.0 4.36 10.02.98 Mica0.01200 0.10115 1.0061 Thanks, and best regards, Rich - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] MIL-HDBK-237B drastic changes
I think we share sentiments here for the most part Mr. Javor. I barely know any E3 engineers or Spectrum Managers who have even opened MIL-HDBK-237D, so there is no chance a PM is going to have read it. What surprised me is that it almost seemed like during the B to C transition the E3 part was totally dropped and the Spectrum part took over. And it seems like we really haven’t had much guidance on how to establish an E3 program since 237B. Handbooks actually seem like the appropriate place to walk people through a process in great detail. But… the process in question is program management and it seems like the more precise and detailed the guidance gets, the less accurate it is. For example, the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is a beautiful 1,250 page masterpiece that is absolutely useless in practice because no one program seems to follow it. So in many ways I agree with you, but I think having, and updating, that guidance is still useful to early career engineers and anyone looking for a baseline interpretation on these deliverables. Even if no one followed it, I think it would be nice to have a better breakdown of these DIDs for teaching purposes, if nothing else. Thanks for your thoughts Ken! Always appreciated!Michael ViauOn Jun 22, 2024, at 1:39 PM, Ken Javor wrote:I saw Mr. Viau’s post and purposely didn’t answer it for two reasons. First and foremost, I don’t have a definitive answer to his question. But second, my reaction to all these revisions was somewhat opposite of his. That is, I recall the original 1973 release, which was current when I got started, and (if memory serves – unfortunately I don’t have a copy) it was 37 pages long. That may be in error, but what is absolutely true is that the original was much shorter than any of the revisions. My assessment of the original was that it was perfect for some new program manager who may have previously been peripherally aware of the concept of EMC, but now needed a little more in-depth understanding of the EMC aspects of the product acquisition process. When revision A came out, I was quite disappointed, because it had suffered “mission creep” and was never, ever, not ever, going to be read by anyone in a managerial position. It may well have been useful for someone who needed to learn the Navy EMC process in detail, but the “customer” for that handbook had completely changed. A guess as to the changes between the follow-on revisions, based purely on analogous experience, is that when personnel change, viewpoints change and even though the underlying technical or managerial issues have not changed, each contributor wants to put his stamp on things, so that handbook changes often arise from varying personalities, as opposed to purely factual matters. Sorry, that’s all I’ve got, which is why I didn’t originally respond. Long shot, if anyone has a copy of the original 1973 release of MIL-HDBK-237, I would appreciate a copy, to complete my collection. Thank you, -- Ken JavorPh: (256) 650-5261 From: Ken Wyatt Reply-To: Ken Wyatt Date: Saturday, June 22, 2024 at 11:19 AMTo: Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-HDBK-237B drastic changes You might check with Ken Javor (ken.ja...@emccompliance.com). He’s pretty savvy on MIL-STDs.___I'm here to help you succeed! Feel free to call or email with any questions related to EMC or EMI troubleshooting - at no obligation. I'm always happy to help!Kenneth WyattWyatt Technical Services LLC8201 Lighthouse Lane CtWindsor, CO 80528Contact Me! New Books! Web Site | BlogThe EMC Blog (EDN)Subscribe to NewsletterConnect with me on LinkedIn On Jun 19, 2024, at 5:55 PM, Michael Viau <michael.t.v...@gmail.com> wrote: Does anyone have any documentation (or even a story) on why the changes between MIL-HDBK-237B (1997) and 237C (2001) were so drastic?237B filled a sorely missed gap in terms of how the DIDs were explained and described. It seems to be the most recent document to actually talk through the expectations for an E3IAR. And the last one to talk about EMC Control Plans in any detail. ADS-37A-PRF has a full appendix describing an E3IAR, but it was a year before 237B was released. Why did C drop all of this helpful context?237C genuinely seems like it could be an entirely separate document, and it seems odd that they went through the effort of deleting so much of rev B. Any suggestions for clues I could follow to paint the picture?Thanks everyone!Michael Viau-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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGAll 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.htmlFo
Re: [PSES] MIL-HDBK-237B drastic changes
I saw Mr. Viau’s post and purposely didn’t answer it for two reasons. First and foremost, I don’t have a definitive answer to his question. But second, my reaction to all these revisions was somewhat opposite of his. That is, I recall the original 1973 release, which was current when I got started, and (if memory serves – unfortunately I don’t have a copy) it was 37 pages long. That may be in error, but what is absolutely true is that the original was much shorter than any of the revisions. My assessment of the original was that it was perfect for some new program manager who may have previously been peripherally aware of the concept of EMC, but now needed a little more in-depth understanding of the EMC aspects of the product acquisition process. When revision A came out, I was quite disappointed, because it had suffered “mission creep” and was never, ever, not ever, going to be read by anyone in a managerial position. It may well have been useful for someone who needed to learn the Navy EMC process in detail, but the “customer” for that handbook had completely changed. A guess as to the changes between the follow-on revisions, based purely on analogous experience, is that when personnel change, viewpoints change and even though the underlying technical or managerial issues have not changed, each contributor wants to put his stamp on things, so that handbook changes often arise from varying personalities, as opposed to purely factual matters. Sorry, that’s all I’ve got, which is why I didn’t originally respond. Long shot, if anyone has a copy of the original 1973 release of MIL-HDBK-237, I would appreciate a copy, to complete my collection. Thank you, -- Ken Javor Ph: (256) 650-5261 From: Ken Wyatt Reply-To: Ken Wyatt Date: Saturday, June 22, 2024 at 11:19 AM To: Subject: Re: [PSES] MIL-HDBK-237B drastic changes You might check with Ken Javor (ken.ja...@emccompliance.com). He’s pretty savvy on MIL-STDs. ___ I'm here to help you succeed! Feel free to call or email with any questions related to EMC or EMI troubleshooting - at no obligation. I'm always happy to help! Kenneth Wyatt Wyatt Technical Services LLC 8201 Lighthouse Lane Ct Windsor, CO 80528 Contact Me!New Books! Web Site | Blog The EMC Blog (EDN) Subscribe to Newsletter Connect with me on LinkedIn On Jun 19, 2024, at 5:55 PM, Michael Viau wrote: Does anyone have any documentation (or even a story) on why the changes between MIL-HDBK-237B (1997) and 237C (2001) were so drastic? 237B filled a sorely missed gap in terms of how the DIDs were explained and described. It seems to be the most recent document to actually talk through the expectations for an E3IAR. And the last one to talk about EMC Control Plans in any detail. ADS-37A-PRF has a full appendix describing an E3IAR, but it was a year before 237B was released. Why did C drop all of this helpful context? 237C genuinely seems like it could be an entirely separate document, and it seems odd that they went through the effort of deleting so much of rev B. Any suggestions for clues I could follow to paint the picture? Thanks everyone! Michael Viau - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] MIL-HDBK-237B drastic changes
Does anyone have any documentation (or even a story) on why the changes between MIL-HDBK-237B (1997) and 237C (2001) were so drastic? 237B filled a sorely missed gap in terms of how the DIDs were explained and described. It seems to be the most recent document to actually talk through the expectations for an E3IAR. And the last one to talk about EMC Control Plans in any detail. ADS-37A-PRF has a full appendix describing an E3IAR, but it was a year before 237B was released. Why did C drop all of this helpful context? 237C genuinely seems like it could be an entirely separate document, and it seems odd that they went through the effort of deleting so much of rev B. Any suggestions for clues I could follow to paint the picture? Thanks everyone! Michael Viau - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Fwd: Re: [PSES] Lasers
Adding an ‘amen’ to Regan’s response. In most cases incorporating a laser product results in a new laser product that usually must be reported initially and annually. In situations of “bundling” such as including a barcode scanner product with a computer, might not result in a new laser product. But incorporating a laser sensor into industrial machinery usually does result in a new laser product. Also keep in mind that any replacement parts put in commerce might need to be “registered”. The US Federal laser regulations were recently amended to incorporate some of the concepts in a few Laser Notices (perhaps LN 54). I certainly recommend reading the reg’s directly to understand obligations. Best Regards, -Lauren Confidential – Limited Access and Use From: Regan Arndt Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2024 5:14 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Fwd: Re: [PSES] Lasers You don't often get email from reganar...@gmail.com<mailto:reganar...@gmail.com>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> External Email: Do NOT reply, click on links, or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If you believe this email may be unsafe, please click on the “Report Phishing” button on the top right of Outlook. Hello all, The manufacturer of the end-use product must ALSO submit an application to the CDRH (as a LASER PRODUCT) when they are incorporating an existing OEM laser or laser system that has a CDRH accession # associated with it. This manufacturer will then get a different accession # on this new submittal & must also do an annual report submission. You can obtain a guidance document directly from the CDRH at: https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/home-business-and-entertainment-products/laser-products-and-instruments One of the definitions that are basic to the regulations are: A LASER PRODUCT is any device that constitutes, incorporates, or is intended to incorporate a laser or laser system [CFR 1040.10 (b) (21)] The accession # that is given to the manufacturer of the LASER PRODUCT system is merely just a tracking # (not a CDRH approval) for the end product model it is being sold into the USA. Hope that helps. Regan Arndt On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 2:47 PM Jim Bacher, WB8VSU mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>> wrote: Steve, both. The client has to file a yearly report as well. The client just refers to the OEMs FDA Accession number along with detailing labeling, manuals, etc. Jim Bacher, WB8VSU j.bac...@ieee.org<mailto:j.bacher%40ieee.org> or ja.bac...@outlook.com<mailto:ja.bac...@outlook.com> JBRC Consulting LLC Product EMC & Regulatory Consultant https://trc.guru/ email:j...@trc.guru<mailto:jim%40trc.guru> IEEE Life Senior Member On June 18, 2024 5:39:08 PM sgbrody mailto:sgbr...@comcast.net>> wrote: I have a client with a product that has a 3rd party Class 3B laser embedded. Who needs an FDA Accession number - laser manufacturer or my client as an end product containing an embedded laser? Thanks, 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 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)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 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)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@iee
Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Lasers
Hi Steve, I apologize for the late response. I can only add one comment, and that is that you may want to review Laser Notice 54<https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/exemption-reporting-and-recordkeeping-requirements-low-power-laser-products-laser-notice-54> to see if it applies to your client's device. Best regards, Ted Eckert The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. From: sgbrody Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2024 5:16 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] Lasers You don't often get email from sgbr...@comcast.net<mailto:sgbr...@comcast.net>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> Thanks to those who responded to my question. 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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 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)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Lasers
Thanks to those who responded to my question.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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Fwd: Re: [PSES] Lasers
Hello all, The manufacturer of the end-use product must ALSO submit an application to the CDRH (as a LASER PRODUCT) when they are incorporating an existing OEM laser or laser system that has a CDRH accession # associated with it. This manufacturer will then get a different accession # on this new submittal & must also do an annual report submission. You can obtain a guidance document directly from the CDRH at: https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/home-business-and-entertainment-products/laser-products-and-instruments One of the definitions that are basic to the regulations are: A LASER PRODUCT is any device that constitutes, incorporates, or is intended to incorporate a laser or laser system [CFR 1040.10 (b) (21)] The accession # that is given to the manufacturer of the LASER PRODUCT system is merely just a tracking # (not a CDRH approval) for the end product model it is being sold into the USA. Hope that helps. Regan Arndt On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 2:47 PM Jim Bacher, WB8VSU wrote: > Steve, both. The client has to file a yearly report as well. The client > just refers to the OEMs FDA Accession number along with detailing labeling, > manuals, etc. > > > Jim Bacher, WB8VSU > j.bac...@ieee.org or ja.bac...@outlook.com > JBRC Consulting LLC > Product EMC & Regulatory Consultant > https://trc.guru/ email:j...@trc.guru > IEEE Life Senior Member > > > On June 18, 2024 5:39:08 PM sgbrody wrote: > >> I have a client with a product that has a 3rd party Class 3B laser >> embedded. >> >> Who needs an FDA Accession number - laser manufacturer or my client as an >> end product containing an embedded laser? >> >> Thanks, >> >> > -- > > 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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) <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: 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 > - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Fwd: Re: [PSES] Lasers
Steve, both. The client has to file a yearly report as well. The client just refers to the OEMs FDA Accession number along with detailing labeling, manuals, etc. Jim Bacher, WB8VSU j.bac...@ieee.org or ja.bac...@outlook.com JBRC Consulting LLC Product EMC & Regulatory Consultant https://trc.guru/ email:j...@trc.guru IEEE Life Senior Member On June 18, 2024 5:39:08 PM sgbrody wrote: I have a client with a product that has a 3rd party Class 3B laser embedded. Who needs an FDA Accession number - laser manufacturer or my client as an end product containing an embedded laser? Thanks, - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Lasers
Have you asked the laser maker? Surely they know fur certain. On 2024-06-18 22:38, sgbrody wrote: I have a client with a product that has a 3rd party Class 3B laser embedded. Who needs an FDA Accession number - laser manufacturer or my client as an end product containing an embedded laser? Thanks, 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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Lasers
I have a client with a product that has a 3rd party Class 3B laser embedded.Who needs an FDA Accession number - laser manufacturer or my client as an end product containing an embedded laser?Thanks,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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Australian Standards / Electric Code
We've gotten an order for energy monitoring equipment to Australia.Generally, this is low-energy, web-active electronics approved to UL 61010-1, and CTs that are recognized to UL 2808 (thereby approved for placement in residential panels).. Anyone know of a way to cross-check UL/US and NEC approval with what's required for the land down under? Colorado Brian - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] EU DoC
Amund Generally yes - specific requirements contained in an Annex of the relevant Directive(s), for example RED Annex VI 7. Where applicable, the notified body ... (name, number) ... performed ... (description of intervention) ... and issued the EU-type examination certificate: ...(certificate number) Best regards Charlie Charlie Blackham Sulis Consultants Ltd Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 From: Amund Westin Sent: Monday, June 10, 2024 5:53 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] EU DoC If you have to consult an EU Notified Body for CE marking a product, must the EU DoC include information that Notified Body? Best regards Amund 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/<https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] EU DoC
If you have to consult an EU Notified Body for CE marking a product, must the EU DoC include information that Notified Body? Best regards Amund - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] requirements for SST
Dear experts, I would need your help. Our client is designing modular SST (Solid State Transformer). This device will generate 800VDC out of middle voltage mains (13800V L-L). The unit will be placed outside the building and outout of the unit will supply equipment in data centers (through internal DC/DC converters). 8000Vac L-N will be shared between 9 modules, so each module will be supplied by less than 1000Vac. Questions 1. Is safety/EMC regulated for such product in your country? 2. If yes, what standards apply and what agency can give approval? 3. Can separate module be certified? What standard? At the moment we found IEC 62477-2 as most applicable standard for such device. Any other recommendation? Thank you for your support. Best regards, Boštjan SIQ - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] UK The Product Safety and Metrology etc. (Amendment) Regulations 2024
Dear Charlie, The regulation has been published as SI 2024 No 696. The Product Safety and Metrology etc. (Amendment) Regulations 2024 (legislation.gov.uk) <https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024/696/introduction/made> Regards, Scott On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 at 16:09, Charlie Blackham wrote: > UK has published draft legislation to allow continued acceptance of CE > Marking past the end of 2024 in the "The Product Safety and Metrology etc. > (Amendment) Regulations 2024" along with an explanatory memorandum. > The law is due to come into force on 1st October ahead of the current 31 > December deadline. > > > > The Product Safety and Metrology etc. (Amendment) Regulations 2024 > (legislation.gov.uk) > <https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2024/9780348260311/resources> > > > > Best regards > > Charlie > > > > *Charlie Blackham* > > *Sulis Consultants Ltd* > > *Mead House* > > *Longwater Road* > > *Eversley* > > *RG27 0NW* > > *UK* > > *Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317* > > *Email: **char...@sulisconsultants.com * > > *Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ <https://sulisconsultants.com/> * > > Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 > > > -- > > 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > 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) <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: 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 > - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] seeking a consultant
My client needs a consultant for automotive functional safety. For those interested, I can setup call to discuss the details of the requirement. Thank you, Ralph - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] How to take down your 10+ Gig and more
Hi All, I have a treasure trove of data on most currently available ESD simulators for waveform purity and E-field emissions. The data took most of a week of my time to generate and $100,000+ of equipment, mostly donated for the purpose. One clear message that comes out of the data is that by far the worst case ESD hit on a fast data rate system is not what you think it is. A 2kV air discharge applied a certain, common, way is worse than any other ESD event. Also in the data, we are testing for ESD stress that cannot happen in the environment, thereby wasting resources. Also in the data, you can pass or fail an ESD test, depending on what you want, by just selecting the right simulator! I am going to do a complimentary presentation of this data in July, normally a few thousand dollars, coupled with my three day, PCB/system debug class in July, sort of a two for one summer doldrums event. The class is actually lower cost than the data presentation normally would be. If interested, call, text, or email me for details. Doug Smith Sent from my iPhone IPhone: 408-858-4528 Office: 702-570-6108 Email: d...@dsmith.org Website: http://dsmith.org - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] EU Energy Labeling Conformity
Yes, it's similar to Energy Star. On 2024-06-04 00:11, Brian Gregory wrote: This looks like an EU version of Energy Star; am I reading this right? I started to try to figure out the Energy Efficiency classes, but that appears to be even beyond Bing's AI ability Brian Gregory 720-450-4933 -- Original Message -- From: Scott Xe To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 09:32:53 +0800 Hello Experts, According to the Ecodesign Directive (EU) 2009/125, manufacturers must draw up a declaration of conformity for covered products. However, the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 does not explicitly mention this requirement. Is a declaration of conformity also mandatory for products covered under the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 as part of the compliance process? Cheers, Scott 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] EU Energy Labeling Conformity
This looks like an EU version of Energy Star; am I reading this right? I started to try to figure out the Energy Efficiency classes, but that appears to be even beyond Bing's AI ability Brian Gregory 720-450-4933 -- Original Message -- From: Scott Xe To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 09:32:53 +0800 Hello Experts, According to the Ecodesign Directive (EU) 2009/125, manufacturers must draw up a declaration of conformity for covered products. However, the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 does not explicitly mention this requirement. Is a declaration of conformity also mandatory for products covered under the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 as part of the compliance process? Cheers, ScottThis 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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 - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] SV: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity
Guys IoT products, they seem to not be a included in this directive. And that’s because of its low power consumptions nature ? BR Amund Fra: Charlie Blackham Sendt: 1. juni 2024 21:11 Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Emne: Re: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity Scott The Ecodesign Directive applies to products within scope of a Commission Regulation implementing Directive 2009/125/EC These products must then be labelled in accordance with the relevant Commission Delegated Regulation on how to energy label that product. You don’t declare compliance with a labelling method, you just label in accordance with it. Lists of relevant Regulations at https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-label-and-ecodesign/list-energy-efficient-products-regulations-product-group_en Best regards Charlie Charlie Blackham Sulis Consultants Ltd Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 From: Scott Xe mailto:scott...@gmail.com> > Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2024 2:33 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity Hello Experts, According to the Ecodesign Directive (EU) 2009/125, manufacturers must draw up a declaration of conformity for covered products. However, the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 does not explicitly mention this requirement. Is a declaration of conformity also mandatory for products covered under the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 as part of the compliance process? Cheers, Scott _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <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: msherma...@comcast.net <mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org <mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org <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 <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1> =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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity
Dear Charlie, Thanks for your reply. As some of ecodesign regulations do not require energy labelling, appreciate your useful link which gives clear indications which ecodesign regulations do not require energy labelling. Best regards, Scott On Sun, 2 Jun 2024 at 03:10, Charlie Blackham wrote: > Scott > > > > The Ecodesign Directive applies to products within scope of a Commission > Regulation implementing Directive 2009/125/EC > > > > These products must then be labelled in accordance with the relevant > Commission Delegated Regulation on how to energy label that product. > > > > You don’t declare compliance with a labelling method, you just label in > accordance with it. > > > > Lists of relevant Regulations at > > > https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-label-and-ecodesign/list-energy-efficient-products-regulations-product-group_en > > > > Best regards > > Charlie > > > > *Charlie Blackham* > > *Sulis Consultants Ltd* > > *Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317* > > *Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ <https://sulisconsultants.com/> * > > Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 > > > > *From:* Scott Xe > *Sent:* Saturday, June 1, 2024 2:33 AM > *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > *Subject:* [PSES] Declaration of Conformity > > > > Hello Experts, > > > > According to the Ecodesign Directive (EU) 2009/125, manufacturers must > draw up a declaration of conformity for covered products. However, the > Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 does not explicitly mention this > requirement. > > > > Is a declaration of conformity also mandatory for products covered under > the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 as part of the compliance > process? > > > > Cheers, > > > > Scott > -- > > 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ > <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> > > Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ > Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) <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: 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 > - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity
Scott The Ecodesign Directive applies to products within scope of a Commission Regulation implementing Directive 2009/125/EC These products must then be labelled in accordance with the relevant Commission Delegated Regulation on how to energy label that product. You don’t declare compliance with a labelling method, you just label in accordance with it. Lists of relevant Regulations at https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-label-and-ecodesign/list-energy-efficient-products-regulations-product-group_en Best regards Charlie Charlie Blackham Sulis Consultants Ltd Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 From: Scott Xe Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2024 2:33 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Declaration of Conformity Hello Experts, According to the Ecodesign Directive (EU) 2009/125, manufacturers must draw up a declaration of conformity for covered products. However, the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 does not explicitly mention this requirement. Is a declaration of conformity also mandatory for products covered under the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 as part of the compliance process? Cheers, Scott 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/<https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)<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: msherma...@comcast.net<mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org<mailto:linf...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org<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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
[PSES] Declaration of Conformity
Hello Experts, According to the Ecodesign Directive (EU) 2009/125, manufacturers must draw up a declaration of conformity for covered products. However, the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 does not explicitly mention this requirement. Is a declaration of conformity also mandatory for products covered under the Energy Labelling Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 as part of the compliance process? Cheers, Scott - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Li-Ion Fire Enclosure (IEC 62368-1:2018 / EN 62368-1:2020) Concept
Hi James: The UL94 flammability ratings are based on standardized samples of the plastic material. The ratings may or may not be representative of the results in the end-product. My suggestion is to do the UL94 test on the whole end-product. The heat-sinking of the internal components may allow the enclosure to meet the V-1 requirement. (Many years ago, I did this (passed) on a populated PC board, where the unpopulated board was rated HB.) A second suggestion: Consider that the battery is the source of the flame. Use a fire starter pill/tablet inside the device to ignite the enclosure (you have to quickly put the enclosure back together). The device probably doesn't have enough oxygen inside to sustain flaming sufficient to ignite the enclosure. If you burn a hole in the enclosure (which allows the flaming to attack the outside surface), you will likely fail the test. Good luck! Rich From: James Pawson (U3C) Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 8:43 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Li-Ion Fire Enclosure (IEC 62368-1:2018 / EN 62368-1:2020) Concept Hi folks, We are working with a client on a small wearable device with a PS2 Li-Ion cell. Annex M.4.3 requires a fire enclosure for the PS2 capable battery. The plastic the client wants to use is not datasheet rated to UL 94 V-1 in the thickness they are using (testing could be performed to establish this) We are investigating the attached construction (also <https://unit3compliancecouk-my.sharepoint.com/:i:/g/personal/james_unit3com pliance_co_uk/EYDdhd6tpK1InDtDFOTVb4UB_KRHzF9nFOhPlI-RX7TLgA?e=QfhWw0> here) and I was looking for a sanity check to see if I was missing anything. * Plastic case rated between HB40 and V-2 (6.3.1 for materials outside a fire enclosure). Mechanically robust for drop test. * PS2 battery with metal foil wrap (e.g. thick aluminium self adhesive tape with no gaps other than cable egress) meeting fire enclosure requirements in 6.4.8.2.2 (no material thickness specified) * PS2 PCB circuit relies on reduce likelihood of ignition proved by single fault testing * VW-1 rated cable I feel like I'm missing something important. Thoughts and comments appreciated. All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk | <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Li-Ion Fire Enclosure (IEC 62368-1:2018 / EN 62368-1:2020) Concept
Re metal foil wrap, aluminium might burn at LI-ion fire temperature, but copper or brass would not. On 2024-05-31 16:42, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hi folks, We are working with a client on a small wearable device with a PS2 Li-Ion cell. Annex M.4.3 requires a fire enclosure for the PS2 capable battery. The plastic the client wants to use is not datasheet rated to UL 94 V-1 in the thickness they are using (testing could be performed to establish this) We are investigating the attached construction (also png icon here <https://unit3compliancecouk-my.sharepoint.com/:i:/g/personal/james_unit3compliance_co_uk/EYDdhd6tpK1InDtDFOTVb4UB_KRHzF9nFOhPlI-RX7TLgA?e=QfhWw0>) and I was looking for a sanity check to see if I was missing anything. * Plastic case rated between HB40 and V-2 (6.3.1 for materials outside a fire enclosure). Mechanically robust for drop test. * PS2 battery with metal foil wrap (e.g. thick aluminium self adhesive tape with no gaps other than cable egress) meeting fire enclosure requirements in 6.4.8.2.2 (no material thickness specified) * PS2 PCB circuit relies on reduce likelihood of ignition proved by single fault testing * VW-1 rated cable I feel like I’m missing something important… Thoughts and comments appreciated. All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver *Unit 3 Compliance Ltd* *EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy* www.unit3compliance.co.uk <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> | ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 /Office hours:/ /Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri./ /For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on he...@unit3compliance.co.uk <mailto:he...@unit3compliance.co.uk> or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks./ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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) <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: 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 -- Signature OOO - Own Opinions Only Best wishes John Woodgate, Rayleigh, Essex UK Keep trying -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] Product reliability in the field relating to standards testing
Doug, Have you reached out to C63? This information could be included in the next edition of IEEE C63.16 --> “American National Standard Guide for Electrostatic Discharge Test Methodologies and Acceptance Criteria for Electronic Equipment” Thanks, [cid:image075342.jpg@52D522C7.F6E00B9E] David Schaefer Technical Manager Element Materials Technology 9349 W Broadway Ave Brooklyn Park , MN 55445 , United States O +1 612 638 5136 ext. 10461 david.schae...@element.com<mailto:david.schae...@element.com> www.element.com<https://us.content.exclaimer.net/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.element.com%2F=ixvYNdAGEeqbBQANOhMLNA=aabe0990b90beb1196f5000d3a130b34=bvr0O264AGzU1lp7QuELkdlEOzfI2OKH9ixGcRY-RKU=Link=cZ5egsqVcuTJwdSIK2EbV6p7Tgro9jT7_Tkg-Fb3YiB23cBOgCoUmOEqeUjNn3Wb1utJh_tCAps2nMvNa74FEJYf-WrOczTU6zFlHw54Kkx7YpXyoM-CTV1wYsG6Kp67xdorBRMa5LiebYSyV1KLNeSLvlAMyCdpGXdRt4PdyKih9tRDbM50s0p_22b_gp9LGtkISjiEDnV76ZvXKmVbUxVVd0tqHec9MBwk_T418oc5ZZWOclsIYRqkwfQqf0Wqj5isA4xlnhmt49FZz-5XoxKuiGArsymw_Y4qtO9TEOwjITToveVj6b1_ZkHWiMlIWuUr1cjhpNrAxmzAv6LY8g=1=77759683-d602-4b1e-b23b-cfb2fbd1dfef> [cid:image235527.png@41B30C45.F84BF390]<https://us.content.exclaimer.net/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FElementTesting%2F=ixvYNdAGEeqbBQANOhMLNA=aabe0990b90beb1196f5000d3a130b34=SocialMediaIcon=ACovrZvJeYWsDyyKT0zvYAsZsidrWJylGQABf2bJhKNtCg10KfO2BYNiEUfocR4zw1YzoxFMvQi8ibysZnq3cNZQ2enJrElHRFhuRkcKd45P1AH6s8ee-4IsaM0qk_DybvwO5i12-_P_XaBFh2_9xOmCWZdsBiX-t_6d3mt1nvVR8gKtz-8s3FLwTT0uFlbk4MqGLEBOJRREfG_ZRdBPMRb4PKgkhNDQ4QWsEBPZxwChBoMJQyoQTTD6h1cgGbuyr7tQO6Qs9Y36o1lT7tgQY1FpJ7t8IzelvDE7pnzJ7HW6Izwq6FoBil54k2vQh9lhHva6dgfz_zh9TdhlHUeFOw=1=77759683-d602-4b1e-b23b-cfb2fbd1dfef> [cid:image768969.png@3A177FC0.38D1E813]<https://us.content.exclaimer.net/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.instagram.com%2Felementtesting%2F=ixvYNdAGEeqbBQANOhMLNA=aabe0990b90beb1196f5000d3a130b34=SocialMediaIcon=JFA_C5bAd9pBZiZaSwZX__vhNs-S3M7YTVfi09pIXK1gAXP45i_59EBt5lobzjQ9vJpXmcA6Culn3ScJ4KoeJDH_KArSoBjG1D9DgSV9uBjiqtoY_R0pRy2C2xdzJJzE23qcW1VbyOPH5oED5R5Lw4293PVxGh8b8iVg5ucDVDD7Wv1qQ397usbAsSnLgtNiNRdYaUcd117IEi8S1tvs_yBmd5EfMYwWk3mRXndcszbDP4fNvqHXqAjwMjzPWfEiCBLm5q16NTaxc6zYjxG7fKDkoKqsDx9IceOzpt4VP1AaVUISQ4pP01qjUK926Mb3n4aIBXlPNdNFtQdU02BIgw=1=77759683-d602-4b1e-b23b-cfb2fbd1dfef> [cid:image898692.png@6AF7F372.16DA520C]<https://us.content.exclaimer.net/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fc%2FElementTesting=ixvYNdAGEeqbBQANOhMLNA=aabe0990b90beb1196f5000d3a130b34=SocialMediaIcon=qgxe1vvCl-XANIN26LoMZ_puPisQ0Ly4xaIIvKvXNru81qXWfAY10HToiRKguS1vq7Oe9AiAIdiBZcovvx21mZntAAB0D8YKytpGwpv6HOVPlgZoIbzqF7yEdQ6V0cAOwsOVs3J5x0c5gfmvTx4E8aLO9TvJhoWWIQh82YXZ6vCKjz-It2yKE-XH6SqslPD6z-iSnTs-HuXk_gJtocOYc_yM6WKneytw_rVHBDUb67WqJjL2odhj0ek81gYcpkFqVwDLe0rdd3Z0JoXAPTTL_vaXpvTY-05zuaJLLYk1ua078uotTVIGVehAlOk7W2Ar87HCPppCLb7CTEOTV03w4w=1=77759683-d602-4b1e-b23b-cfb2fbd1dfef> [cid:image698610.jpg@CEAF9888.336775E5]<https://us.content.exclaimer.net/?url=https%3A%2F%2Felementmaterials.eu.qualtrics.com%2Fjfe%2Fform%2FSV_3xQqm84s6IydI5D=ixvYNdAGEeqbBQANOhMLNA=aabe0990b90beb1196f5000d3a130b34=gmElYo7_s0JlFVGqteg4_kVfS3mYohjNqcGed925oc0=Image=U30r4FjO4qAnGLGxEYgrVj4Bg00SfIoY7ZRWmxKo0ae23QULQXwlyH7LsE723cGyQFQJrHJoE9nntmtc2Usy7WtguFAaA-2gYihpbfWltpcVhYVU_ZmJiDoHoCdgRsYnGGeL6j3V1uy8yBRfoFSB7QuOQqyuO6ERPvQyVD9zxvdGysyomtbORGLA_-ZAFr7IH04hCWr7XW5pwGx5nyXCKnGBA0kRcXNs6cWRfNDuxBDBUR2lTIDk8bZjewd-rTD9-cdSCAc1nWwUE3VgJyDDavNRrHlfu6w7lAFI_ralJkrvlDa8pGw8MFsb9Jro551bcafyklUNZ2S7DJltelheAQ=1=77759683-d602-4b1e-b23b-cfb2fbd1dfef> From: doug emcesd.com [mailto:d...@emcesd.com] Sent: Monday, May 27, 2024 9:10 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Product reliability in the field relating to standards testing CAUTION:This email originated from outside of Element Materials Technology. DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact the TOC if you are in any doubt about this email. IEC61000-4-2 has been around for a long time. About 30 years ago myself and others presented to tc-77b improvements that were (and still are) needed. Those concerns still need to be addressed. Our current standard has us addressing ESD stresses that cannot happen and on the other hand ignoring stresses that do happen. I touch on these in detail in my classes to help my clients. Layer on this trying to arrive at a good model for real world conditions, an issue in all EMC related standards. I would like to address the human body model for a small piece of metal in the hand. My personal discharge, as measured by the instrumentation at Barth Electronics (right here in Boulder City, Nevada) is completely different than the model in 61000-4-2. The Barth instrumentation is the best in the world and I feel fortunate to be near them, about a 15 minute run away. My small metal discharge is very different in two ways. First, the body wave after the first peak has much less energy in it than in the standard. This mos
[PSES] Product reliability in the field relating to standards testing
IEC61000-4-2 has been around for a long time. About 30 years ago myself and others presented to tc-77b improvements that were (and still are) needed. Those concerns still need to be addressed. Our current standard has us addressing ESD stresses that cannot happen and on the other hand ignoring stresses that do happen. I touch on these in detail in my classes to help my clients. Layer on this trying to arrive at a good model for real world conditions, an issue in all EMC related standards. I would like to address the human body model for a small piece of metal in the hand. My personal discharge, as measured by the instrumentation at Barth Electronics (right here in Boulder City, Nevada) is completely different than the model in 61000-4-2. The Barth instrumentation is the best in the world and I feel fortunate to be near them, about a 15 minute run away. My small metal discharge is very different in two ways. First, the body wave after the first peak has much less energy in it than in the standard. This most likely is easily explained because I have an athletic body from 45,000 miles of running and most likely does not affect test results all that much. However, my initial peak current is more than twice that in the standard using a 5 GHz bandwidth. Since the speed of light is one foot per nanosecond, nothing further away than my elbow can affect this part of the discharge waveform. And, this will affect test results. I think we need new data taken at a 5 GHz bandwidth. Separate from the above, we would like to minimize field issues from environmental stresses. So, I developed an interesting apparatus using an instrument from the chemical/materials industry coupled with an easy to make "antenna" that generates radiated EMI that is very severe. It takes out HDMI and other signals in the room when it is in use. But if it does not affect a design one can be reasonably sure one's device is not going to have problems in the field or at least you will know what the product response is, and if it is dangerous. I just finished building a better antenna from parts in our local Ace Hardware store. Starting now I will be demonstrating it for my attendees as part of my seminars, including one coming up. It will be interesting to see how it affects different products. Doug Smith Sent from my iPhone IPhone: 408-858-4528 Office: 702-570-6108 Email: d...@dsmith.org Website: http://dsmith.org - 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 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
Re: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question
We have an answer from UL508A for industrial panels but the question was, “ SCCR ratings on industrial machinery” Perhaps it is the question that is the difficulty here. Ralph From: Bill Lawrence Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2024 2:50 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question Assume UL 508A Marking is: -Original Message- From: MIKE SHERMAN mailto:msherma...@comcast.net> > Sent: May 15, 2024 10:38 PM To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> > Subject: Re: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question Brian — I am equally mystified by qualifying an SCCR with a voltage. Perhaps you could network into a friendly UL 408a panel shop and see what they say. Mike Sherman Sherman PSC LLC On 05/15/2024 9:05 AM -05 Brian Kunde mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com> > wrote: I appreciate the replies, but I am not getting the information I am seeking. Some machines have just the SCCR Rating, such as SCCR: 10kA but a few machines we have looked at include a reference to the "Max Voltage", such as SCCR: 10kA RMS Symmetrical, 480V Maximum What is the source, code, standard, directive, etc. that calls out the Max Voltage as a requirement in the SCCR rating that is printed on the Nameplate label? We cannot find such a source. In our case, we have a machine that can operate at 230V, 380V, or 480V depending on how the motor is wired. So on a machine rated 230V it has a SCCR rating that includes the Max Voltage of 480V. We are getting push-back from the field saying that having the voltage on the SCCR rating is confusing. To resolve this, we want to remove the reference to the Max Voltage, but before we do that, we want to find out if it is mandated in the code or some standard. I can see where the max voltage might be required on some components. Maybe it is an old requirement that is no longer required. I am just guessing. Thanks again for your help. The Other Brian On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 3:54 PM Scott Aldous <0220f70c299a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org <mailto:0220f70c299a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> > wrote: Starting on page 7, the white paper that Rich linked to also references UL 508A, supplement SB, which is a method of determining SCCR for industrial control panels without test. The method at a high level involves carrying over the SCCR rating of the "weakest link in the chain" from a protective component standpoint to the overall panel. I wonder if that method may have been used for the machinery in question, with a component level voltage rating (improperly, in my opinion) shifted over to the end device. Note that UL 508A includes "at a nominal voltage" in its definition of SCCR. On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:33 PM Richard Nute mailto:ri...@ieee.org> > wrote: Hi Brian: See the very last line of: https://www.mouser.com/pdfDocs/littelfuse_industrial_whitepaper_increase_sccr.pdf Best regards, Rich From: Ralph McDiarmid mailto:rmm.priv...@gmail.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 11:41 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: Re: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question Could this number to used to select a suitable circuit breaker and so the interrupting voltage is an important parameter? The nameplate rating on the machine should be the information an electrician needs during installation and selection of wire size and type. Ralph From: Brian Kunde mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 11:29 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question Greetings to all. I am new to SCCR ratings on industrial machinery. The ratings I have seen sometimes has a "Maximum Voltage" included, such as; SCCR: 22kA, 600V Maximum Where does the voltage value come from? In one case, the machine had a line voltage rating of "120/208 Vac", but the SCCR rating had a voltage rating of "Max 600V". Can this be confusing? Might something think the machine can operate at 600Vac? Thanks for any replies. The Other Brian _ 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/%20> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html> List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html
Re: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question
Assume UL 508A Marking is: -Original Message- From: MIKE SHERMAN Sent: May 15, 2024 10:38 PM To: Subject: Re: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question Brian I am equally mystified by qualifying an SCCR with a voltage. Perhaps you could network into a friendly UL 408a panel shop and see what they say. Mike Sherman Sherman PSC LLC On 05/15/2024 9:05 AM -05 Brian Kunde wrote: I appreciate the replies, but I am not getting the information I am seeking. Some machines have just the SCCR Rating, such as SCCR: 10kA but a few machines we have looked at include a reference to the "Max Voltage", such as SCCR: 10kA RMS Symmetrical, 480V Maximum What is the source, code, standard, directive, etc. that calls out the Max Voltage as a requirement in the SCCR rating that is printed on the Nameplate label? We cannot find such a source. In our case, we have a machine that can operate at 230V, 380V, or 480V depending on how the motor is wired. So on a machine rated 230V it has a SCCR rating that includes the Max Voltage of 480V. We are getting push-back from the field saying that having the voltage on the SCCR rating is confusing. To resolve this, we want to remove the reference to the Max Voltage, but before we do that, we want to find out if it is mandated in the code or some standard. I can see where the max voltage might be required on some components. Maybe it is an old requirement that is no longer required. I am just guessing. Thanks again for your help. The Other Brian On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 3:54 PM Scott Aldous <0220f70c299a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org (mailto:0220f70c299a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org)> wrote: Starting on page 7, the white paper that Rich linked to also references UL 508A, supplement SB, which is a method of determining SCCR for industrial control panels without test. The method at a high level involves carrying over the SCCR rating of the "weakest link in the chain" from a protective component standpoint to the overall panel. I wonder if that method may have been used for the machinery in question, with a component level voltage rating (improperly, in my opinion) shifted over to the end device. Note that UL 508A includes "at a nominal voltage" in its definition of SCCR. On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:33 PM Richard Nute mailto:ri...@ieee.org)> wrote: Hi Brian: See the very last line of: https://www.mouser.com/pdfDocs/littelfuse_industrial_whitepaper_increase_sccr.pdf Best regards, Rich From: Ralph McDiarmid mailto:rmm.priv...@gmail.com)> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 11:41 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG (mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG) Subject: Re: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question Could this number to used to select a suitable circuit breaker and so the interrupting voltage is an important parameter? The nameplate rating on the machine should be the information an electrician needs during installation and selection of wire size and type. Ralph From: Brian Kunde mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com)> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 11:29 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG (mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG) Subject: [PSES] SCCR Rating Question Greetings to all. I am new to SCCR ratings on industrial machinery. The ratings I have seen sometimes has a "Maximum Voltage" included, such as; SCCR: 22kA, 600V Maximum Where does the voltage value come from? In one case, the machine had a line voltage rating of "120/208 Vac", but the SCCR rating had a voltage rating of "Max 600V". Can this be confusing? Might something think the machine can operate at 600Vac? Thanks for any replies. The Other Brian 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-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG (mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG) 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 (mailto:msherma...@comcast.net) Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org (mailto:linf...@ieee.org) For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher at: j.bac...@ieee.org (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-PSTCA=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 EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG (mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG) All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pst
