Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
Pete Perkins said: "Historically, the HV impulse tests applied are safety tests." Safety-wise, HV tests of safeguard insulations are to determine that the safeguard insulations will withstand the normally-occurring transient voltages that occur on the mains circuits. I wouldn't call the HV tests as "safety tests." Rather, they determine the adequacy of the safeguard insulations. Impulse tests are relatively new, and require sophisticated test generators. The actual voltage that is applied to the insulations is a function of the source impedance and the load impedance. So, when an impulse test is applied in response to a safety requirement, we don't know if the insulations will withstand a mains transient voltage. IEC 60664-series allows use of impulse test or steady-state test as equal alternatives. 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 toAll emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald:
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
Further to Scott’s post, the required illumination is at 20V/m at the EUT, rather than the more commonly used 10 V/m (I don’t know the 60335-1 requirement). As Scott mentions, the intent in this case is to make certain the inverter remains functional, less so that it remain in a safe condition during the test (really meaning that the test objective doesn’t call for the observation, but if an unsafe condition occurs that is readily apparent, the inverter would likely not be functional). Surge testing on the grid connected port is also required for the same purposes, generally to 6 kVpk (combo and ring). Peter Tarver From: Scott Aldous Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 08:33 Hi James, The UL safety standard for PV inverters, UL 1741, makes normative reference to IEEE 1547 and IEEE 1547.1 in Section 46. IEEE 1547.1, in clause 5.5 on interconnection integrity, makes normative reference to IEEE C37.90.2, which has test requirements for withstand capability to radiated electromagnetic interference. Utility protection trip parameters must be monitored during test to ensure they continue to function correctly. So it's a bit of a roundabout way to get there, and one could argue that this is more a utility interactive requirement than a safety requirement per se, but this is another example of an EMC test requirement in a safety standard. - 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 toAll emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald:
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
One common cause of nuisance tripping is EMI line filters whose input capacitance to ground biases GFCIs near the tripping point. I would never power up a computer on a GFCI circuit, asking for trouble. No high voltage pulses needed. Doug Smith Sent from my iPhone IPhone: 408-858-4528 Office: 702-570-6108 Email: d...@dsmith.org Website: http://dsmith.org On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 8:09, Pete Perkins <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> wrote: James, The interoperability of equipment continues to get more complicated as switching technology spreads more ubiquitously. It is well known that electronic protection devices (including RCDs & GFCIs) are suffering ‘nuisance’ tripping which seems to be inadequately characterized incoming signals. Additional EMC type tests will have to be added to harden the units against these signals, while ensuring that that the unit properly operates when it should. Expect more such testing. You can search for the recent paper I did with students where we were able to ‘trick’ the GFCI into tripping when it shouldn’t; ‘nuisance’ tripping in action. Historically, the HV impulse tests applied are safety tests. These tests were given to the EMC lab engineers as the safety engineers, in those days, didn’t provide much lab availability or experience – they mostly peeked and poked at components in the assembly assessing spacings and similar. Oh, how much this has changed today. :>) br, Pete Peter E Perkins, PE Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant PO Box 23427 Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 503/452-1201 IEEE Life Fellow p.perk...@ieee.org [p.perk...@ieee.org] From: James Pawson (U3C) <ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 4:41 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards Hello all, Thanks for all the interesting replies, much appreciated. All the best James From: Gert Gremmen; ce-test < g.grem...@cetest.nl [g.grem...@cetest.nl] > Sent: 21 March 2018 11:07 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG [EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards The EMC tests as called out in 60335 are safety tests, contrary to those called out under the EMCD that are functional tests only. For Europe , one can discuss about the necessity of those tests, as the EMCD requires testing in all operating modes including OFF or standby and as long as one can prove that an apparatus remains functional, it also could be considered safe. I have not seen many examples of a compliant functional apparatus that has become unsafe during an immunity test, but cannot exclude that this may happen either. Hence this test in 60335, that might also come into view during the required risk analysis as called out in the new LVD. For Europe only, of course. The difference between functional and safety related EMC is an evolving discussion, lately triggered by accidents with hybrid and autonomous driving cars. Gert Gremmen On 20-3-2018 10:27, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the “off position” and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required – one with the EUT “on” and one with it “off”. Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I’ve come across where this is the case but I’m not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to < emc-p...@ieee.org [emc-p...@ieee.org] > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html [http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html] Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ [http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/] can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ [http://www.ieee-pses.org/] Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) [http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html] List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html [http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html] For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas < sdoug...@ieee.org [sdoug...@ieee.org] > Mike Cantwell < mcantw...@ieee.org [mcantw...@ieee.org] >
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
Hi James, The UL safety standard for PV inverters, UL 1741, makes normative reference to IEEE 1547 and IEEE 1547.1 in Section 46. IEEE 1547.1, in clause 5.5 on interconnection integrity, makes normative reference to IEEE C37.90.2, which has test requirements for withstand capability to radiated electromagnetic interference. Utility protection trip parameters must be monitored during test to ensure they continue to function correctly. So it's a bit of a roundabout way to get there, and one could argue that this is more a utility interactive requirement than a safety requirement *per se*, but this is another example of an EMC test requirement in a safety standard. Let me throw one more thing out there... Whether or not the applicable safety standard requires this type of testing, the risk assessment required by the Low Voltage Directive should consider whether electromagnetic interference could give rise to a hazardous condition. Depending on the outcome of the risk assessment, additional testing may be required (or additional criteria added to EMC Directive testing). On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 8:09 AM, Pete Perkins < 0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> wrote: > James, > > > >The interoperability of equipment continues to get more > complicated as switching technology spreads more ubiquitously. It is well > known that electronic protection devices (including RCDs & GFCIs) are > suffering ‘nuisance’ tripping which seems to be inadequately characterized > incoming signals. Additional EMC type tests will have to be added to > harden the units against these signals, while ensuring that that the unit > properly operates when it should. Expect more such testing. You can > search for the recent paper I did with students where we were able to > ‘trick’ the GFCI into tripping when it shouldn’t; ‘nuisance’ tripping in > action. > > > >Historically, the HV impulse tests applied are safety > tests. These tests were given to the EMC lab engineers as the safety > engineers, in those days, didn’t provide much lab availability or > experience – they mostly peeked and poked at components in the assembly > assessing spacings and similar. Oh, how much this has changed today. > > > > :>) br, Pete > > > > Peter E Perkins, PE > > Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant > > PO Box 23427 > > Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 > > > > 503/452-1201 <(503)%20452-1201> > > > > IEEE Life Fellow > > p.perk...@ieee.org > > > > *From:* James Pawson (U3C) <ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 21, 2018 4:41 AM > > *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > *Subject:* Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards > > > > Hello all, > > > > Thanks for all the interesting replies, much appreciated. > > > > All the best > > James > > > > *From:* Gert Gremmen; ce-test <g.grem...@cetest.nl> > *Sent:* 21 March 2018 11:07 > *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > *Subject:* Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards > > > > The EMC tests as called out in 60335 are safety tests, contrary to those > called out under the EMCD that are functional tests only. For Europe , one > can discuss about the necessity of those tests, as the EMCD requires > testing in all operating modes including OFF or standby and as long as one > can prove that an apparatus remains functional, it also could be > considered safe. I have not seen many examples of a compliant functional > apparatus that has become unsafe during an immunity test, but cannot > exclude that this may happen either. Hence this test in 60335, that might > also come into view during the required risk analysis as called out in the > new LVD. For Europe only, of course. > > The difference between functional and safety related EMC is an evolving > discussion, lately triggered by accidents with hybrid and autonomous > driving cars. > > Gert Gremmen > > On 20-3-2018 10:27, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: > > Hello experts, > > > > I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically > calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the > EUT are set in the “off position” and a set of immunity tests are applied. > For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be > a concern. > > > > A couple of questions / thoughts: > > > >- It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing >required – one with the EUT “on” and one with it “off”. Would that be how >you read this? >- Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC >tests withi
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
James, The interoperability of equipment continues to get more complicated as switching technology spreads more ubiquitously. It is well known that electronic protection devices (including RCDs & GFCIs) are suffering 'nuisance' tripping which seems to be inadequately characterized incoming signals. Additional EMC type tests will have to be added to harden the units against these signals, while ensuring that that the unit properly operates when it should. Expect more such testing. You can search for the recent paper I did with students where we were able to 'trick' the GFCI into tripping when it shouldn't; 'nuisance' tripping in action. Historically, the HV impulse tests applied are safety tests. These tests were given to the EMC lab engineers as the safety engineers, in those days, didn't provide much lab availability or experience - they mostly peeked and poked at components in the assembly assessing spacings and similar. Oh, how much this has changed today. :>) br, Pete Peter E Perkins, PE Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant PO Box 23427 Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 503/452-1201 IEEE Life Fellow <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org From: James Pawson (U3C) <ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 4:41 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards Hello all, Thanks for all the interesting replies, much appreciated. All the best James From: Gert Gremmen; ce-test <g.grem...@cetest.nl <mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl> > Sent: 21 March 2018 11:07 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards The EMC tests as called out in 60335 are safety tests, contrary to those called out under the EMCD that are functional tests only. For Europe , one can discuss about the necessity of those tests, as the EMCD requires testing in all operating modes including OFF or standby and as long as one can prove that an apparatus remains functional, it also could be considered safe. I have not seen many examples of a compliant functional apparatus that has become unsafe during an immunity test, but cannot exclude that this may happen either. Hence this test in 60335, that might also come into view during the required risk analysis as called out in the new LVD. For Europe only, of course. The difference between functional and safety related EMC is an evolving discussion, lately triggered by accidents with hybrid and autonomous driving cars. Gert Gremmen On 20-3-2018 10:27, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the "off position" and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required - one with the EUT "on" and one with it "off". Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I've come across where this is the case but I'm not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> > Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> > David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> > All
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
Hello all, Thanks for all the interesting replies, much appreciated. All the best James From: Gert Gremmen; ce-test <g.grem...@cetest.nl> Sent: 21 March 2018 11:07 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards The EMC tests as called out in 60335 are safety tests, contrary to those called out under the EMCD that are functional tests only. For Europe , one can discuss about the necessity of those tests, as the EMCD requires testing in all operating modes including OFF or standby and as long as one can prove that an apparatus remains functional, it also could be considered safe. I have not seen many examples of a compliant functional apparatus that has become unsafe during an immunity test, but cannot exclude that this may happen either. Hence this test in 60335, that might also come into view during the required risk analysis as called out in the new LVD. For Europe only, of course. The difference between functional and safety related EMC is an evolving discussion, lately triggered by accidents with hybrid and autonomous driving cars. Gert Gremmen On 20-3-2018 10:27, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the "off position" and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required - one with the EUT "on" and one with it "off". Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I've come across where this is the case but I'm not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> > Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> > David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> > Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> > David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
If I remember correctly, the text in 60335 was prompted by an incident in Denmark where a toaster incorrectly switched on due to EMI. Since the work was done under pressure, it might not have been done in the most appropriate way, but the end-result is as intended. John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK On 2018-03-21 11:07, Gert Gremmen; ce-test wrote: The EMC tests as called out in 60335 are safety tests, contrary to those called out under the EMCD that are functional tests only. For Europe , one can discuss about the necessity of those tests, as the EMCD requires testing in all operating modes including OFF or standby and as long as one can prove that an apparatus remains functional, it also could be considered safe. I have not seen many examples of a compliant functional apparatus that has become unsafe during an immunity test, but cannot exclude that this may happen either. Hence this test in 60335, that might also come into view during the required risk analysis as called out in the new LVD. For Europe only, of course. The difference between functional and safety related EMC is an evolving discussion, lately triggered by accidents with hybrid and autonomous driving cars. Gert Gremmen On 20-3-2018 10:27, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the “off position” and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required – one with the EUT “on” and one with it “off”. Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I’ve come across where this is the case but I’m not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas > Mike Cantwell > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher > David Heald > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas > Mike Cantwell > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher > David Heald > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
The EMC tests as called out in 60335 are safety tests, contrary to those called out under the EMCD that are functional tests only. For Europe , one can discuss about the necessity of those tests, as the EMCD requires testing in all operating modes including OFF or standby and as long as one can prove that an apparatus remains functional, it also could be considered safe. I have not seen many examples of a compliant functional apparatus that has become unsafe during an immunity test, but cannot exclude that this may happen either. Hence this test in 60335, that might also come into view during the required risk analysis as called out in the new LVD. For Europe only, of course. The difference between functional and safety related EMC is an evolving discussion, lately triggered by accidents with hybrid and autonomous driving cars. Gert Gremmen On 20-3-2018 10:27, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the “off position” and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required – one with the EUT “on” and one with it “off”. Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I’ve come across where this is the case but I’m not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas > Mike Cantwell > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher > David Heald > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald:
[PSES] AW: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
Hello James, the immunity tests in EN 60335-1, 19.11.4 serve a different purpose than the EMC immunity tests required by the EMC directive during normal operation. These tests shall demonstrate that the EUT stays in a safe state, i.e. it is not turned on by EMC impact when electronically turned off or in standby by user interaction, and even more important, stays in a safe state when electronically turned off due to automatic fault detection (e.g. overtemperature). The requirements in 19.11.4 (and Annex R) are equivalent to those in EN 60730-1 for automatic electrical controls. Kind regards, Bernd Von: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk] Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. März 2018 10:28 An: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Betreff: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the "off position" and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required - one with the EUT "on" and one with it "off". Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I've come across where this is the case but I'm not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> WILO SE Nortkirchenstrasse 100, 44263 Dortmund Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 21356 www.wilo.com Vorstand/Executive Board: Oliver Hermes (Vorsitzender/Chairman), Carsten Krumm, Georg Weber, Mathias Weyers Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender/Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Prof. Dr. Norbert Wieselhuber Dieses Dokument ist vertraulich zu behandeln. Die Weitergabe sowie Vervielfaeltigung, Verwertung und Mitteilung seines Inhalts ist nur mit unserer ausdruecklichen Genehmigung gestattet. Alle Rechte vorbehalten, insbesondere fuer den Fall der Schutzrechtsanmeldung. This document has to be treated confidentially. Its contents are not to be passed on, duplicated, exploited or disclosed without our expressed permission. All rights reserved, especially the right to apply for protective rights. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
Re: [PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
One would normally expect immunity to be covered in a product-family performance standard applying to the whole family, which would be a TC59 publication in this case. But such a standard does not exist; however there is a product-family safety standard applying to the whole family, which is IEC 60335-1. So it is perhaps not unreasonable to put immunity requirements into that publication if they are not in CISPR 14-2. But if they are not in CISPR 14-2, why aren't they? John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk Rayleigh, Essex UK On 2018-03-20 09:27, James Pawson (U3C) wrote: Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the “off position” and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required – one with the EUT “on” and one with it “off”. Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I’ve come across where this is the case but I’m not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas > Mike Cantwell > For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher > David Heald > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald:
[PSES] EMC tests called up in Safety standards
Hello experts, I note that EN 60335-1 (household and similar appliances) specifically calls up EMC immunity tests in clause 19.11.4 where the controls for the EUT are set in the "off position" and a set of immunity tests are applied. For something that controls a heating element, I can see why this would be a concern. A couple of questions / thoughts: * It sounds like this at least doubles the amount of immunity testing required - one with the EUT "on" and one with it "off". Would that be how you read this? * Are there any other safety standards that explicitly call up EMC tests within them like this one does? This is the first one I've come across where this is the case but I'm not very familiar with safety standards in general. Thanks and all the best, James - 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 toAll emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas Mike Cantwell For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: David Heald: