Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[Ralph McDiarmid]

I thought it was 15% duty cycle.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk] 
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 7:31 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

Hi John,

Sorry I was away on Friday, I've passed the question on to the customer.
What's the significance of 153 degrees?

Thanks
James


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 16 October 2017 14:56
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

Hello, James. Could you please answer the question below?
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-12 20:47, John Woodgate wrote:
I am bound to be asked another question. Why have a 3 kW heater if it's always 
used with triac control at a firing angle of 153 degrees or higher? Is it to 
get very rapid warm-up at full power, then maintaining temperature will much 
reduced power?
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
Hello John,
 
It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.
Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.
Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial 
environment or powered from a generator.
 
My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and 
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.
 
Thanks for your help
James
 
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion
 
I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take that 
up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what is 
critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control, or 
'burst firing' or something else?
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
Hi folks,
 
I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the 
moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a question 
about HDMI so that I can feel useful!
 
Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 61000-3-2:2014.
 
. The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for welding 
plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
. Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is "professional 
equipment" which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic "limits are not 
specified in this standard"
. Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control methods still 
applies even to equipment with no limits
. Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low order 
harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to power 
heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less than 
200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
. Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional equipment is 
OK provided one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which it is, see 
previous bullet)
 
So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that 
Class D equipment limits apply.
However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from 
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2
 
I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might help?
 
Much appreciated,
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: 

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[James Pawson (U3C)]

Hi John,

 

Sorry I was away on Friday, I've passed the question on to the customer.
What's the significance of 153 degrees?

 

Thanks

James

 

 

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 16 October 2017 14:56
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

 

Hello, James. Could you please answer the question below?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> 
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-12 20:47, John Woodgate wrote:

I am bound to be asked another question. Why have a 3 kW heater if it's
always used with triac control at a firing angle of 153 degrees or higher?
Is it to get very rapid warm-up at full power, then maintaining temperature
will much reduced power?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> 
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hello John,

 

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.

Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial
environment or powered from a generator.

 

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.

 

Thanks for your help

James

 

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

 

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take
that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what
is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control,
or 'burst firing' or something else?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> 
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

 

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the
moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a
question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

 

Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

 

*   The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for
welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
*   Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
"professional equipment" which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic
"limits are not specified in this standard"
*   Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
*   Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low
order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to
power heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less
than 200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
*   Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which
it is, see previous bullet)

 

So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that
Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2

 

I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might
help?

 

Much appreciated,

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 (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 mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

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

 

-


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

All

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

Hello, James. Could you please answer the question below?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-12 20:47, John Woodgate wrote:


I am bound to be asked another question. Why have a 3 kW heater if 
it's always used with triac control at a firing angle of 153 degrees 
or higher? Is it to get very rapid warm-up at full power, then 
maintaining temperature will much reduced power?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:


Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics 
generated.


Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an 
industrial environment or powered from a generator.


My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment 
and exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.


Thanks for your help

James

*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
*Sent:* 11 October 2017 16:49
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will 
take that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular 
case, what is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it 
phase-angle control, or 'burst firing' or something else?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed
control methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for
professional equipment is OK provided one of the “above
conditions” is fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
61000-3-2

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
that might help?

Much appreciated,

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

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

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

-


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

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

I am bound to be asked another question. Why have a 3 kW heater if it's 
always used with triac control at a firing angle of 153 degrees or 
higher? Is it to get very rapid warm-up at full power, then maintaining 
temperature will much reduced power?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:


Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics 
generated.


Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an 
industrial environment or powered from a generator.


My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment 
and exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.


Thanks for your help

James

*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
*Sent:* 11 October 2017 16:49
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will 
take that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular 
case, what is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it 
phase-angle control, or 'burst firing' or something else?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is
fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
61000-3-2

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
that might help?

Much appreciated,

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

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

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

-


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


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


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


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.or

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

See below.

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-12 09:16, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:


Hi John,

OK this is getting interesting, I see your point on the distinction 
for “conditions”. Would it specifically say “clauses” if it meant any 
of the text in that section?


JMW: No, I think it would have to be completely re-written. It is rather 
ambiguous: does 'above conditions' refer to a,b,c or to 'less than or 
equal to 200 W or that the limits of Table 3 are not exceeded'.  And in 
b), it is not totally clear which limits are 'relevant', taking into 
account what it says in Clause 5; 'Equipment not specified in one of the 
three other classes shall be considered as Class A equipment.' Then in  
Clause 7 '..limits are not specified in this standard. professional 
equipment with a total rated power above 1 kW', yet the flow-chart makes 
that apply only if techniques not allowed in 6.1 are not used.


The 2014 edition of 61000-3-2 has been revised and the draft final 
voting stage is expected to be approved for circulation at an upcoming 
meeting of the committee.  The chairman has invited me to submit a 
document to that meeting (I cannot attend) explaining the confusion and 
proposing a solution. The new draft is rather different from the 2014 
edition, but at present  anomalies still exist.


Taking this into account, for the equipment described:

So, the use of symmetrical control methods for professional equipment 
is permitted if


 1. The a|b|c conditions in 6.1 do not apply to the EUT (they don’t)
 2. The limits are not exceeded and it is being used for precise
temperature control and there is no other technique available (not
being used for precise temp control)

This all hinges on whether it is using a control technique that is not 
permitted under Clause 6.1.


I think that's clear; phase angle control is symmetrical and it does 
produce low-order harmonics.


Or does the provision apply for symmetrical control methods which 
produce large low order harmonics that are used to power heating 
elements, in which case the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply?


Yes, if the product meets the Class D (Table 3) limits, it complies. 
Does it? It might, because of the low duty cycle. Note that the 'mA/W' 
figures relate to the 3 kW, not the actual RMS input current.


I suppose that even if we get all the way through the flowchart to the 
end and it doesn’t meet the limits there is still a catch for


If (professional equipment) then apply Clause 4. This might be the way 
forward.


It seems not sensible to apply Clause 4 to such a low power product. I 
think many suppliers would laugh if asked for permission to connect. But 
telling purchasers that they have to ask for permission would be a sales 
off-put.


Round, like a circle, like a spiral…

JMW: If the product is installed on a springy dustfield on the Moon, no 
limits apply, unless it's supplied by a mental wind turbine, since there 
is no physical wind on the Moon.


I'll try to keep you informed on progress.


James

*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
*Sent:* 11 October 2017 22:21
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

That isn't a 'condition'. The conditions are the items in the a-b-c 
list in 6.1.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 21:42, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

It was the symmetrical control for the powering of heating
elements part that was the previous condition that was fulfilled.

Hope this helps
James

 John Woodgate wrote 

OK, I've sent a digest to the committee chair. Meanwhile, I
noticed something that I don't quite understand:

You say that "Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for
professional equipment is OK provided one of the “above
conditions” is fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)"

Which is the 'above condition' that the welder meets?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>

Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the
harmonics generated.

Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in
an industrial environment or powered from a generator.

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional
equipment and exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search
for feelings.

Thanks for your help

James

*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
   

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[James Pawson (U3C)]

Hi John,

 

OK this is getting interesting, I see your point on the distinction for 
“conditions”. Would it specifically say “clauses” if it meant any of the text 
in that section?

 

Taking this into account, for the equipment described:

 

So, the use of symmetrical control methods for professional equipment is 
permitted if

a.  The a|b|c conditions in 6.1 do not apply to the EUT (they don’t)
b.  The limits are not exceeded and it is being used for precise 
temperature control and there is no other technique available (not being used 
for precise temp control)

 

This all hinges on whether it is using a control technique that is not 
permitted under Clause 6.1.

 

Or does the provision apply for symmetrical control methods which produce large 
low order harmonics that are used to power heating elements, in which case the 
harmonic limits of Table 3 apply?

 

I suppose that even if we get all the way through the flowchart to the end and 
it doesn’t meet the limits there is still a catch for 

If (professional equipment) then apply Clause 4. This might be the way forward.

 

Round, like a circle, like a spiral…

James

 

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 22:21
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

 

That isn't a 'condition'. The conditions are the items in the a-b-c list in 6.1.

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> 
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 21:42, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

It was the symmetrical control for the powering of heating elements part that 
was the previous condition that was fulfilled. 

Hope this helps
James

 John Woodgate wrote 

OK, I've sent a digest to the committee chair. Meanwhile, I noticed something 
that I don't quite understand:

You say that "Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional 
equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is fulfilled (which it 
is, see previous bullet)"

Which is the 'above condition' that the welder meets? 

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> 
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hello John,

 

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.

Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial 
environment or powered from a generator.

 

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and 
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.

 

Thanks for your help

James

 

 

From: John Woodgate [ <mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk> mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To:  <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

 

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take that 
up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what is 
critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control, or 
'burst firing' or something else?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> 
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

 

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the 
moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a question 
about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

 

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 61000-3-2:2014.

 

*The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for welding 
plastic parts together using resistance heater coils

*Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is “professional 
equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic “limits are not 
specified in this standard”

*Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control methods 
still applies even to equipment with no limits

*Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low order 
harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to power 
heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less than 
200W (it isn’t) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply

*Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional equipment 
is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is fulfilled (which it is, see 
previous bullet)

 

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that 
Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from 
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2

 

I feel like I

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

That isn't a 'condition'. The conditions are the items in the a-b-c list 
in 6.1.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 21:42, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
It was the symmetrical control for the powering of heating elements 
part that was the previous condition that was fulfilled.


Hope this helps
James

 John Woodgate wrote 

OK, I've sent a digest to the committee chair. Meanwhile, I noticed 
something that I don't quite understand:


You say that "Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for 
professional equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is 
fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)"


Which is the 'above condition' that the welder meets?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:


Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics 
generated.


Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an 
industrial environment or powered from a generator.


My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment 
and exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.


Thanks for your help

James

*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
*Sent:* 11 October 2017 16:49
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will 
take that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular 
case, what is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it 
phase-angle control, or 'burst firing' or something else?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed
control methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for
professional equipment is OK provided one of the “above
conditions” is fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
61000-3-2

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
that might help?

Much appreciated,

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

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

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

-


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

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[James Pawson (U3C)]

It was the symmetrical control for the powering of heating elements part that 
was the previous condition that was fulfilled. 

Hope this helps
James

 John Woodgate wrote 

>OK, I've sent a digest to the committee chair. Meanwhile, I noticed 
>something that I don't quite understand:
>
>You say that "Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for 
>professional equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is 
>fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)"
>
>Which is the 'above condition' that the welder meets?
>
>John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
>J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
>Rayleigh, Essex UK
>
>On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
>>
>> Hello John,
>>
>> It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics 
>> generated.
>>
>> Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.
>>
>> Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an 
>> industrial environment or powered from a generator.
>>
>> My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment 
>> and exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.
>>
>> Thanks for your help
>>
>> James
>>
>> *From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
>> *Sent:* 11 October 2017 16:49
>> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion
>>
>> I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will 
>> take that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular 
>> case, what is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it 
>> phase-angle control, or 'burst firing' or something else?
>>
>> John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
>> J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
>> Rayleigh, Essex UK
>>
>> On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
>> forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
>> quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!
>>
>> Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
>> 61000-3-2:2014.
>>
>>   * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
>> for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
>>   * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
>> “professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
>> that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
>>   * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
>> methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
>>   * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
>> large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
>> control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
>> provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
>> or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
>>   * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
>> equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is
>> fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)
>>
>> So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
>> saying that Class D equipment limits apply.
>>
>> However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
>> exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
>> 61000-3-2
>>
>> I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
>> that might help?
>>
>> Much appreciated,
>>
>> 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 (including how to
>> unsubscribe)
>&

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

OK, I've sent a digest to the committee chair. Meanwhile, I noticed 
something that I don't quite understand:


You say that "Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for 
professional equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is 
fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)"


Which is the 'above condition' that the welder meets?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:


Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics 
generated.


Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an 
industrial environment or powered from a generator.


My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment 
and exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.


Thanks for your help

James

*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
*Sent:* 11 October 2017 16:49
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will 
take that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular 
case, what is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it 
phase-angle control, or 'burst firing' or something else?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is
fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
61000-3-2

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
that might help?

Much appreciated,

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

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

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

-


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


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


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


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

List rules: ht

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

I don't know for sure. I was told that the low-frequency emission 
standards apply whether they are cited in a Generic or not.  61000-6-3 
isn't restricted to 'residential, it includes 'commercial and light 
industrial, which is why 61000-3-11 and -12 are cited. Maybe 61000-6-3 
assumes a dedicated MV/LV transformer.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 19:28, Ralph McDiarmid wrote:

That is an interesting technical point.  Notice that EN61000-6-3 (generic 
residential) calls out 61000-3-2, -3, -11  and -12, but EN61000-6-4 
(industrial) does not.

Presumably,  EN61000-6-4 makes full provision for the apparatus ?

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 10:10 AM
To: Ralph McDiarmid ; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

61000-3-2, -3, -11  and -12 do not have to be cited in the Generics; they apply 
independently. 61000-3-4 assumes a dedicated MV/LV transformer, but the product 
is only 3 kW, so one can't assume that.
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 17:26, Ralph McDiarmid wrote:
I wonder if your customer's triac equipment falls under the EN61000-6-4 (EMC) 
Emission standard for
industrial environments?   I didn't see 61000-3-2 called out in that generic 
standard.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 9:08 AM
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.
Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.
Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial 
environment or powered from a generator.

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and 
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.

Thanks for your help
James


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take that 
up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what is 
critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control, or 
'burst firing' or something else?
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
Hi folks,
  
I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!
  
Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 61000-3-2:2014.
  
. The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils

. Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is "professional equipment" 
which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic "limits are not specified in this 
standard"
. Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control methods still 
applies even to equipment with no limits
. Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low order 
harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to power 
heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less than 
200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
. Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional equipment is OK provided 
one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)
  
So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from 
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2
  
I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might help?
  
Much appreciated,

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/

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[Ralph McDiarmid]

That is an interesting technical point.  Notice that EN61000-6-3 (generic 
residential) calls out 61000-3-2, -3, -11  and -12, but EN61000-6-4 
(industrial) does not.

Presumably,  EN61000-6-4 makes full provision for the apparatus ?

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 10:10 AM
To: Ralph McDiarmid ; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

61000-3-2, -3, -11  and -12 do not have to be cited in the Generics; they apply 
independently. 61000-3-4 assumes a dedicated MV/LV transformer, but the product 
is only 3 kW, so one can't assume that.
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 17:26, Ralph McDiarmid wrote:
I wonder if your customer's triac equipment falls under the EN61000-6-4 (EMC) 
Emission standard for
industrial environments?   I didn't see 61000-3-2 called out in that generic 
standard.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 9:08 AM
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.
Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.
Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial 
environment or powered from a generator.

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and 
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.

Thanks for your help
James


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take that 
up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what is 
critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control, or 
'burst firing' or something else?
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
Hi folks,
 
I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the 
moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a question 
about HDMI so that I can feel useful!
 
Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 61000-3-2:2014.
 
. The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for welding 
plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
. Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is "professional 
equipment" which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic "limits are not 
specified in this standard"
. Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control methods still 
applies even to equipment with no limits
. Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low order 
harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to power 
heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less than 
200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
. Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional equipment is 
OK provided one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which it is, see 
previous bullet)
 
So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that 
Class D equipment limits apply.
However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from 
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2
 
I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might help?
 
Much appreciated,
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 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discuss

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

61000-3-2, -3, -11  and -12 do not have to be cited in the Generics; 
they apply independently. 61000-3-4 assumes a dedicated MV/LV 
transformer, but the product is only 3 kW, so one can't assume that.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 17:26, Ralph McDiarmid wrote:

I wonder if your customer's triac equipment falls under the EN61000-6-4 (EMC) 
Emission standard for
industrial environments?   I didn't see 61000-3-2 called out in that generic 
standard.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 9:08 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.
Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.
Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial 
environment or powered from a generator.

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and 
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.

Thanks for your help
James


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take that 
up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what is 
critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control, or 
'burst firing' or something else?
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
Hi folks,
  
I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!
  
Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 61000-3-2:2014.
  
. The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils

. Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is "professional equipment" 
which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic "limits are not specified in this 
standard"
. Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control methods still 
applies even to equipment with no limits
. Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low order 
harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to power 
heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less than 
200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
. Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional equipment is OK provided 
one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)
  
So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from 
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2
  
I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might help?
  
Much appreciated,

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>

-

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
L

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[Ralph McDiarmid]

I wonder if your customer's triac equipment falls under the EN61000-6-4 (EMC) 
Emission standard for
industrial environments?   I didn't see 61000-3-2 called out in that generic 
standard.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


From: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 9:08 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.
Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.
Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial 
environment or powered from a generator.

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and 
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.

Thanks for your help
James


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take that 
up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what is 
critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control, or 
'burst firing' or something else?
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates http://www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:
Hi folks,
 
I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the 
moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a question 
about HDMI so that I can feel useful!
 
Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 61000-3-2:2014.
 
. The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for welding 
plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
. Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is "professional 
equipment" which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic "limits are not 
specified in this standard"
. Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control methods still 
applies even to equipment with no limits
. Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low order 
harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to power 
heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less than 
200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
. Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional equipment is 
OK provided one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which it is, see 
previous bullet)
 
So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that 
Class D equipment limits apply.
However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from 
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2
 
I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might help?
 
Much appreciated,
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> 

-

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> 

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

If there is only a very remote chance of the product being connected to 
*public* LV mains supplies (as opposed to industrial supplies from a 
dedicated MV/LV transformer), 61000-3-2 doesn't apply. Does it meet the 
Class A limits?  I agree that it's 'professional equipment', but, as you 
see, the standard is not totally clear in this context. I will follow up 
with the IEC committee. It may take a few days to get an answer.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 17:08, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:


Hello John,

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics 
generated.


Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an 
industrial environment or powered from a generator.


My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment 
and exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.


Thanks for your help

James

*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
*Sent:* 11 October 2017 16:49
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will 
take that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular 
case, what is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it 
phase-angle control, or 'burst firing' or something else?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is
fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
61000-3-2

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
that might help?

Much appreciated,

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

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

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

-


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

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[James Pawson (U3C)]

Hello John,

 

It uses phase angle control hence the concern about the harmonics generated.

Manufacturer specs are single phase, 230V nominal, 3kW.

Typically used at less than a 15% duty cycle, often less, in an industrial
environment or powered from a generator.

 

My *feeling* is that should be classified as professional equipment and
exempted under Clause 7 but the IEV has 0 search for feelings.

 

Thanks for your help

James

 

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:49
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

 

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will take
that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular case, what
is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it phase-angle control,
or 'burst firing' or something else?

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> 
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:

Hi folks,

 

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the
moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a
question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

 

Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

 

*   The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for
welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
*   Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
"professional equipment" which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic
"limits are not specified in this standard"
*   Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
*   Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low
order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to
power heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less
than 200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
*   Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which
it is, see previous bullet)

 

So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that
Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2

 

I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might
help?

 

Much appreciated,

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 (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 mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

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

 

-


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

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


-

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


All emc-pstc postings are archived and sea

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

I should also have asked what the rated power actually is, and whether 
it's 1-phase or 3-phase?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 16:54, John Woodgate wrote:


True, but it's a cumbersome procedure and is not clearly enough 
indicated. I will try to get an improvement.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2017-10-11 15:59, Scott Aldous wrote:

Hi James,

The flowchart in Clause 7 in the version of the standard that I have 
access to sends you to Clause 4 for professional equipment that uses 
techniques not allowed by 6.1. The second paragraph of Clause 4 
addresses professional equipment that does not comply with the 
requirements of the standard, mentioning that the instruction manual 
must indicate to ask the supply utility  for permission to connect 
and that additional recommendations can be found in IEC/TR 61000-3-4 
or IEC 61000-3-12.


On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:01 AM, James Pawson (U3C) 
mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk>> wrote:


Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed
control methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for
professional equipment is OK provided one of the “above
conditions” is fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
61000-3-2

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
that might help?

Much appreciated,

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 >




--
Scott Aldous | Regulatory Compliance Program 
Manager |scottald...@google.com 
 | 650-253-1994


-


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


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


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


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

True, but it's a cumbersome procedure and is not clearly enough 
indicated. I will try to get an improvement.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:59, Scott Aldous wrote:

Hi James,

The flowchart in Clause 7 in the version of the standard that I have 
access to sends you to Clause 4 for professional equipment that uses 
techniques not allowed by 6.1. The second paragraph of Clause 4 
addresses professional equipment that does not comply with the 
requirements of the standard, mentioning that the instruction manual 
must indicate to ask the supply utility  for permission to connect and 
that additional recommendations can be found in IEC/TR 61000-3-4 or 
IEC 61000-3-12.


On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:01 AM, James Pawson (U3C) 
mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk>> wrote:


Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this
forum at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very
quickly. Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU
for welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means
that harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce
large low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac
control) that are used to power heating elements (applicable)
provided that either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t)
or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is
fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6
saying that Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being
exempt from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to
61000-3-2

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight
that might help?

Much appreciated,

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 >




--
Scott Aldous | Regulatory Compliance Program 
Manager |scottald...@google.com 
 | 650-253-1994


-


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


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


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


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

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

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

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




-

This mes

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[John Woodgate]

I agree that there appears to be a need for clarification, and I will 
take that up with the committee responsible. But for your particular 
case, what is critical is the nature of the 'triac control'. Is it 
phase-angle control, or 'burst firing' or something else?


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2017-10-11 15:01, James Pawson (U3C) wrote:


Hi folks,

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum 
at the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. 
Someone ask a question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!


Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 
61000-3-2:2014.


  * The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for
welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
  * Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means that
harmonic “limits are not specified in this standard”
  * Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
  * Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large
low order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that
are used to power heating elements (applicable) provided that
either input power is less than 200W (it isn’t) or the harmonic
limits of Table 3 apply
  * Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is
fulfilled (which it is, see previous bullet)

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying 
that Class D equipment limits apply.


However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt 
from Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2


I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that 
might help?


Much appreciated,

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 (including how to 
unsubscribe)

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

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

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




-

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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[James Pawson (U3C)]

Hi Scott, thanks for your input.

 

I agree with you, but as far as I can tell the equipment does comply with the 
techniques allowed in 6.1.

 

Then it gets passed down the chart to the “Belongs to exceptions of Clause 7…” 
box where it is exempted and deemed to conform without ever having tested to 
the limits applicable from Clause 6.1.

 

Very confusing. Which has priority, the flowchart or clause 6.1?

 

All thoughts appreciated

James

 

 

 

From: Scott Aldous [mailto:0220f70c299a-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: 11 October 2017 16:00
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

 

Hi James,

 

The flowchart in Clause 7 in the version of the standard that I have access to 
sends you to Clause 4 for professional equipment that uses techniques not 
allowed by 6.1. The second paragraph of Clause 4 addresses professional 
equipment that does not comply with the requirements of the standard, 
mentioning that the instruction manual must indicate to ask the supply utility  
for permission to connect and that additional recommendations can be found in 
IEC/TR 61000-3-4 or IEC 61000-3-12.

 

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:01 AM, James Pawson (U3C) 
mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> > wrote:

Hi folks,

 

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the 
moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a question 
about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

 

Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC 61000-3-2:2014.

 

*   The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for 
welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
*   Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is 
“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic 
“limits are not specified in this standard”
*   Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control methods 
still applies even to equipment with no limits
*   Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low 
order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to power 
heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less than 
200W (it isn’t) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
*   Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional 
equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is fulfilled (which it 
is, see previous bullet)

 

So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that 
Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from 
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2

 

I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might help?

 

Much appreciated,

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> > 





 

-- 

Scott Aldous | Regulatory Compliance Program Manager | scottald...@google.com 
<mailto:scottald...@google.com>  | 650-253-1994

 

-


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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[Scott Aldous]

Hi James,

The flowchart in Clause 7 in the version of the standard that I have access
to sends you to Clause 4 for professional equipment that uses techniques
not allowed by 6.1. The second paragraph of Clause 4 addresses professional
equipment that does not comply with the requirements of the standard,
mentioning that the instruction manual must indicate to ask the supply
utility  for permission to connect and that additional recommendations can
be found in IEC/TR 61000-3-4 or IEC 61000-3-12.

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:01 AM, James Pawson (U3C) <
ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
>
>
> I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at
> the moment; I’m trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a
> question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!
>
>
>
> Today’s question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
> 61000-3-2:2014.
>
>
>
>- The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for
>welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
>- Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
>“professional equipment” which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic
>“limits are not specified in this standard”
>- Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
>methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
>- Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low
>order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to
>power heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is
>less than 200W (it isn’t) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
>- Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
>equipment is OK provided one of the “above conditions” is fulfilled (which
>it is, see previous bullet)
>
>
>
> So we’ve gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that
> Class D equipment limits apply.
>
> However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from
> Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2
>
>
>
> I feel like I’m going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might
> help?
>
>
>
> Much appreciated,
>
> 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>
>
> 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 
>



-- 
Scott Aldous | Regulatory Compliance Program Manager |
scottald...@google.com | 650-253-1994

-

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] IEC 61000-3-2 Confusion

[James Pawson (U3C)]

Hi folks,

 

I apologise as I seem to be all take and not much give on this forum at the
moment; I'm trying to do a lot of learning very quickly. Someone ask a
question about HDMI so that I can feel useful!

 

Today's question is what appears to be a contradiction in IEC
61000-3-2:2014.

 

*   The customers equipment is a triac controlled high-power PSU for
welding plastic parts together using resistance heater coils
*   Power is over 1kW and the customer is suggesting that it is
"professional equipment" which, according to Clause 7, means that harmonic
"limits are not specified in this standard"
*   Flowchart in Clause 7 says that Clause 6.1 for allowed control
methods still applies even to equipment with no limits
*   Clause 6.1 says symmetrical control methods which produce large low
order harmonics (arguably this applies to triac control) that are used to
power heating elements (applicable) provided that either input power is less
than 200W (it isn't) or the harmonic limits of Table 3 apply
*   Clause 6.1 also says that symmetrical control for professional
equipment is OK provided one of the "above conditions" is fulfilled (which
it is, see previous bullet)

 

So we've gone from Clause 7 saying no limits apply to Clause 6 saying that
Class D equipment limits apply.

However the flowchart in Clause 7 suggests that just by being exempt from
Clause 7 limits means it automatically conforms to 61000-3-2

 

I feel like I'm going in circles. Does anyone have any insight that might
help?

 

Much appreciated,

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: