Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-17 Thread Peter Tarver
Zhang Guoqing  -

I'm not sure where to begin to respond to the below, so I'll limit my
responses to the following.

1) §1.4.11 is in §1.4, General conditions for test, and presents an
assumption about the nature of telecommunications networks in general.
For the purposes of this standard, is not intended to provide a
reference requirement to other standards or to place a specific
requirement on the output of a TNV circuit.

2) ETSI and other standards are welcome to reference 60950-1, but this
does not always equate to a perfect mapping of 60950-1 into those other
standards.

3) The maximum current a circuit is capable of delivering is not
necessarily (and typically is not) into a load identical to the Norton
equivalent output impedance of the source circuit.

4)  TNV circuits output characteristics are evaluated in §2.3.

5) I was a member of the Canada/US BiNational Working Group (BNWG) when
the requirement in §6.3 was developed and had input into TC 74 through
the TC 74 Chair, who was also a member of the BNWG.  The same is true for
§1.4.11.

6) If you're interested in further reading, consider UL 1863, which was
one of the references used to develop the 1.3 A limit.


Regards,

Peter Tarver


 -Original Message-
 From: Zhangguoqing (A) [mailto:zhangguoq...@huawei.com]
 Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 19:05
 To: Peter Tarver; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 Subject: 答复: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11
 of IEC60950-1

 Dear Peter,

 Thanks for your reply.

 For this topic, my opinion is:
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 - if it is declared and installed for power
 transmission, the power transmit / receive equipment
 will be installed by skilled person, and be installed
 in pairs.
  clause 6.3 should be the requirement for power
 transmit equipment, but 15VA should not be the
 requirement for power transmit equipment.  so, the
 power distributed to and available from the
 TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK will be larger than 15 VA.

 - if it is not declared and installed for power
 transmission, the power available from a
 TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK is considered to be limited
 to 15 VA, and so the equipment connected to the
 TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK
   ? does not need to comply with §4.6.4.3
   ? does not need a fire enclosure for the
 connectors, per §4.7.2.2,
 7th dashed paragraph
   ? does not need a fire enclosure for materials
 rated HB75 or HB40
 less flammable (under specified conditions), per
 §4.7.2.2, 9th dashed
 paragraph, 2nd dotted subparagraph
   ? use the connector material exemption in
 §4.7.3.3, 3rd paragraph,
 5th dashed subparagraph
   ? etc.
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 But, in some ETSI standards, 15VA is a limit for power
 transmission equipment. The reason for this limit is
 interpreted as  according to EN 60950-1  in those
 standards!
 For example, this sentence is extracted from clause 4.3
 of ETSI TR 102 614 V1.1.1 (2010-06):
 15 W is the limit according to EN 60950-1 [i.9] for the
 power on a telecommunication network and the A4
 interface is
 be designed in order to limit the output current to a
 value that does not cause damage to the
 telecommunication wiring
 system due to overheating, under any load condition as
 required by the same EN 60950-1 [i.9]. The S/Pfilter
 should be
 dimensioned for the maximum current of 250 mA at 60 V.

 so, I am confused with this sentence.


This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an intended 
recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute this message. 
If you received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply email 
and destroy all copies of the original message. 


-

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.


Re: [PSES] 答复: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-16 Thread Peter Tarver
 From: Boštjan Glavič [mailto:bostjan.gla...@siq.si]
 Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 21:21

 To summarize, limit of 1.3A is applicable for CO
 equipment, and limit 15VA for subscriber units
 (analogue or ISDN phones, modems etc).

This is simply not correct.  Please see my post earlier in this thread.


Regards,

Peter Tarver


This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an intended 
recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute this message. 
If you received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply email 
and destroy all copies of the original message. 


-

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

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

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

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

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

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


Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-16 Thread Peter Tarver
 From: Zhangguoqing (A)
 Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 17:57

 If a transmit equipment can deliver 1.3A current into
 telecommunication network, then in the corresponding
 receive equipment (terminals), 1.3A current is
 available, do you think so?

The 1.3 A limitation is under worst-case loading conditions, and is not
the normal operating current.  For any loading condition up to and
including short-circuit, the output current available from the source
cannot exceed 1.3 A.

This concept is not unlike the LPS current limits in §2.5 in that the
intent is to not create a risk of fire in certain common premises wiring
and connection devices.

 My question is why the standard states the transmit
 equipment can deliver 1.3A (max.), but at the same time
 it states the power available from a TELECOMMUNICATION
 NETWORK is limited to 15 VA?

The 15 VA assumption in §1.4.11 is assumed by definition.  It is the
assumed power available from an unknown/generic telecommunications
network, which may come from a PBX, a central office, a key system or
other equipment, which the equipment under evaluation has no specific
knowledge of.

Because this is assumed by definition it is not a requirement that applies
to equipment outputs in IEC 60950-1.  These requirements are contained
elsewhere in the standard.

If you connect a terminal device to a telecommunications network, the
anticipated power available from the telecommunications network is 15 VA.
By defining this power limitation, for the purposes of this standard,
doubt about what the connection is like is ameliorated.

For example, if I were to connect a POTS telephone or other network
(nonPoE) device to a telecommunications network, the POTS device:
• does not need to comply with §4.6.4.3
• does not need a fire enclosure for the connectors, per §4.7.2.2,
7th dashed paragraph
• does not need a fire enclosure for materials rated HB75 or HB40
less flammable (under specified conditions), per §4.7.2.2, 9th dashed
paragraph, 2nd dotted subparagraph
• use the connector material exemption in §4.7.3.3, 3rd paragraph,
5th dashed subparagraph
• etc.

The same exceptions/exemptions can apply to those portions of a fax
machine, computer, answering machine and the like, where there are no
extenuating circumstances caused by other circuits/components in the
vicinity of the TNV circuit.


Regards,

Peter Tarver


This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an intended 
recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute this message. 
If you received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply email 
and destroy all copies of the original message. 


-

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

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

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

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

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

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


[PSES] 答复: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-16 Thread Zhangguoqing (A)
Dear Peter,

Thanks for your reply.  

For this topic, my opinion is:
-
- if it is declared and installed for power transmission, the power transmit / 
receive equipment will be installed by skilled person, and be installed in 
pairs. 
 clause 6.3 should be the requirement for power transmit equipment, but 15VA 
should not be the requirement for power transmit equipment.  so, the power 
distributed to and available from the TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK will be larger 
than 15 VA. 

- if it is not declared and installed for power transmission, the power 
available from a TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK is considered to be limited to 15 
VA, and so the equipment connected to the TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK
? does not need to comply with §4.6.4.3
? does not need a fire enclosure for the connectors, per §4.7.2.2,
7th dashed paragraph
? does not need a fire enclosure for materials rated HB75 or HB40
less flammable (under specified conditions), per §4.7.2.2, 9th dashed
paragraph, 2nd dotted subparagraph
? use the connector material exemption in §4.7.3.3, 3rd paragraph,
5th dashed subparagraph
? etc.
-
But, in some ETSI standards, 15VA is a limit for power transmission equipment. 
The reason for this limit is interpreted as  according to EN 60950-1  in 
those standards!
For example, this sentence is extracted from clause 4.3 of ETSI TR 102 614 
V1.1.1 (2010-06):
15 W is the limit according to EN 60950-1 [i.9] for the power on a 
telecommunication network and the A4 interface is
be designed in order to limit the output current to a value that does not cause 
damage to the telecommunication wiring
system due to overheating, under any load condition as required by the same EN 
60950-1 [i.9]. The S/Pfilter should be
dimensioned for the maximum current of 250 mA at 60 V.

so, I am confused with this sentence.



Zhang Guoqing
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Bantian, Longgang District,Shenzhen 518129, P.R.China
Tel: +86-13686493636
Email: zhangguoq...@huawei.com
http://www.huawei.com

  


-邮件原件-
发件人: Peter Tarver [mailto:ptar...@enphaseenergy.com] 
发送时间: 2013年9月17日 4:58
收件人: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
主题: Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

 From: Zhangguoqing (A)
 Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 17:57

 If a transmit equipment can deliver 1.3A current into
 telecommunication network, then in the corresponding
 receive equipment (terminals), 1.3A current is
 available, do you think so?

The 1.3 A limitation is under worst-case loading conditions, and is not
the normal operating current.  For any loading condition up to and
including short-circuit, the output current available from the source
cannot exceed 1.3 A.

This concept is not unlike the LPS current limits in §2.5 in that the
intent is to not create a risk of fire in certain common premises wiring
and connection devices.

 My question is why the standard states the transmit
 equipment can deliver 1.3A (max.), but at the same time
 it states the power available from a TELECOMMUNICATION
 NETWORK is limited to 15 VA?

The 15 VA assumption in §1.4.11 is assumed by definition.  It is the
assumed power available from an unknown/generic telecommunications
network, which may come from a PBX, a central office, a key system or
other equipment, which the equipment under evaluation has no specific
knowledge of.

Because this is assumed by definition it is not a requirement that applies
to equipment outputs in IEC 60950-1.  These requirements are contained
elsewhere in the standard.

If you connect a terminal device to a telecommunications network, the
anticipated power available from the telecommunications network is 15 VA.
By defining this power limitation, for the purposes of this standard,
doubt about what the connection is like is ameliorated.

For example, if I were to connect a POTS telephone or other network
(nonPoE) device to a telecommunications network, the POTS device:
? does not need to comply with §4.6.4.3
? does not need a fire enclosure for the connectors, per §4.7.2.2,
7th dashed paragraph
? does not need a fire enclosure for materials rated HB75 or HB40
less flammable (under specified conditions), per §4.7.2.2, 9th dashed
paragraph, 2nd dotted 

Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-13 Thread Peter Tarver
 -Original Message-
 From: Zhangguoqing (A) [mailto:zhangguoq...@huawei.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 05:39

 My question is , if a equipment intends to provide
 power over the telecommunication wiring system, the
 current and the power should be controlled at the same
 time?  or, only the current should be controlled?


Zhang Guoqing -

§1.4.11 is the assumed power available *from* a telecommunications network
to connected equipment (terminals).  A POTS device, for example, with no
other power sources can be considered to be supplied by a 15 VA power
limited source.  This plays nicely with the 15 VA limits you'll find in
the fire enclosure and internal wiring requirements.

§6.3 relates to current generated by equipment and *delivered into* a
telecommunications network under worst-case loading conditions.  The
intent is to protect wiring and wiring devices typical in
telecommunications networks, in particular modular plugs/jacks, line cords
and the like.


Regards,

Peter Tarver


This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an intended 
recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute this message. 
If you received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply email 
and destroy all copies of the original message. 


-

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

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

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

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

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

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


[PSES] 答复: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-13 Thread Zhangguoqing (A)
Dear Peter, 

Thank you for your reply.

If a transmit equipment can deliver 1.3A current into telecommunication 
network, then in the corresponding receive equipment (terminals), 1.3A current 
is available, do you think so?

My question is why the standard states the transmit equipment can deliver 1.3A 
(max.), but at the same time it states the power available from a 
TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK is limited to 15 VA? 

Zhang guoqing
 
-邮件原件-
发件人: Peter Tarver [mailto:ptar...@enphaseenergy.com] 
发送时间: 2013年9月14日 7:27
收件人: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
主题: Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

 -Original Message-
 From: Zhangguoqing (A) [mailto:zhangguoq...@huawei.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 05:39

 My question is , if a equipment intends to provide
 power over the telecommunication wiring system, the
 current and the power should be controlled at the same
 time?  or, only the current should be controlled?


Zhang Guoqing -

§1.4.11 is the assumed power available *from* a telecommunications network
to connected equipment (terminals).  A POTS device, for example, with no
other power sources can be considered to be supplied by a 15 VA power
limited source.  This plays nicely with the 15 VA limits you'll find in
the fire enclosure and internal wiring requirements.

§6.3 relates to current generated by equipment and *delivered into* a
telecommunications network under worst-case loading conditions.  The
intent is to protect wiring and wiring devices typical in
telecommunications networks, in particular modular plugs/jacks, line cords
and the like.


Regards,

Peter Tarver


This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an intended 
recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute this message. 
If you received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply email 
and destroy all copies of the original message. 


-

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

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

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

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

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

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

-

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

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

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

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

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

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


Re: [PSES] 答复: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-13 Thread Boštjan Glavič
Dear Zhang,

As fair as I know, there are many old twisted pair wirings around the world 
without standardized cross-sectional are. Therefore they checked it and set 
maximum limit from central office to 1.3A. However on the subscriber side you 
will never get more than few 10mA (usually 20-40mA). This is enough for 
analogue telephone to operate. Therefore you will never exceed 15W on 
subscriber side.

To summarize, limit of 1.3A is applicable for CO equipment, and limit 15VA for 
subscriber units (analogue or ISDN phones, modems etc).

Please consider this is not applicable for Power over Ethernet. This is local 
network and not for public telecommunication network.

Best regards,
Bostjan



On 14. sep. 2013, at 02:57, Zhangguoqing (A) zhangguoq...@huawei.com wrote:

 Dear Peter, 
 
 Thank you for your reply.
 
 If a transmit equipment can deliver 1.3A current into telecommunication 
 network, then in the corresponding receive equipment (terminals), 1.3A 
 current is available, do you think so?
 
 My question is why the standard states the transmit equipment can deliver 
 1.3A (max.), but at the same time it states the power available from a 
 TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK is limited to 15 VA? 
 
 Zhang guoqing
 
 -邮件原件-
 发件人: Peter Tarver [mailto:ptar...@enphaseenergy.com] 
 发送时间: 2013年9月14日 7:27
 收件人: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 主题: Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Zhangguoqing (A) [mailto:zhangguoq...@huawei.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 05:39
 
 My question is , if a equipment intends to provide
 power over the telecommunication wiring system, the
 current and the power should be controlled at the same
 time?  or, only the current should be controlled?
 
 
 Zhang Guoqing -
 
 §1.4.11 is the assumed power available *from* a telecommunications network
 to connected equipment (terminals).  A POTS device, for example, with no
 other power sources can be considered to be supplied by a 15 VA power
 limited source.  This plays nicely with the 15 VA limits you'll find in
 the fire enclosure and internal wiring requirements.
 
 §6.3 relates to current generated by equipment and *delivered into* a
 telecommunications network under worst-case loading conditions.  The
 intent is to protect wiring and wiring devices typical in
 telecommunications networks, in particular modular plugs/jacks, line cords
 and the like.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Peter Tarver
 
 
 This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
 contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an 
 intended recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute 
 this message. If you received this message in error, please contact the 
 sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. 
 
 
 -
 
 This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
 discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
 emc-p...@ieee.org
 
 All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
 http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
 
 Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
 http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
 formats), large files, etc.
 
 Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
 Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
 unsubscribe)
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
 For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
 Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org
 
 For policy questions, send mail to:
 Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
 
 -
 
 This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
 discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
 emc-p...@ieee.org
 
 All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
 http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
 
 Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
 http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
 formats), large files, etc.
 
 Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
 Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
 unsubscribe)
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
 For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
 Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org
 
 For policy questions, send mail to:
 Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

-

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 

[PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-11 Thread Zhangguoqing (A)
Hi,  

I have a question on clause 6.3 and clause 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1.

6.3 Protection of the telecommunication wiring system from overheating
Equipment intended to provide power over the telecommunication wiring system to 
remote equipment shall limit the output current to a value that does not cause 
damage to the telecommunication wiring system, due to overheating, under any 
external load condition. The maximum continuous current from equipment shall 
not exceed a current limit that is suitable for the minimum wire gauge 
specified in the equipment installation instructions. The current limit is 1,3 
A if such wiring is not specified.
NOTE 2 The minimum wire diameter normally used in telecommunication wiring is 
0,4 mm, for which the maximum continuous current for a multipair cable is 1,3 A.

1.4.11 Power from a telecommunication network
For the purpose of this standard, the power available from a TELECOMMUNICATION 
NETWORK is considered to be limited to 15 VA.

My question is , if a equipment intends to provide power over the 
telecommunication wiring system, the current and the power should be controlled 
at the same time?  or, only the current should be controlled?

Best regards,

Zhang Guoqing

-

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

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

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

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

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

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


Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-11 Thread John Woodgate
In message 
7d25799235e00f4c9b04eca410c1c5bf8f0ba...@szxema502-mbx.china.huawei.com
, dated Wed, 11 Sep 2013, Zhangguoqing (A) zhangguoq...@huawei.com 
writes:


6.3 Protection of the telecommunication wiring system from overheating 
Equipment intended to provide power over the telecommunication wiring 
system to remote equipment shall limit the output current to a value 
that does not cause damage to the telecommunication wiring system, due 
to overheating, under any external load condition. The maximum 
continuous current from equipment shall not exceed a current limit that 
is suitable for the minimum wire gauge specified in the equipment 
installation instructions. The current limit is 1,3 A if such wiring is 
not specified. NOTE 2 The minimum wire diameter normally used in 
telecommunication wiring is 0,4 mm, for which the maximum continuous 
current for a multipair cable is 1,3 A.


1.4.11 Power from a telecommunication network
For the purpose of this standard, the power available from a 
TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK is considered to be limited to 15 VA.


My question is , if a equipment intends to provide power over the 
telecommunication wiring system, the current and the power should be 
controlled at the same time?  or, only the current should be controlled?


1.4.11 is not a requirement, it is an assumption. Why it is stated, and 
why it is included under General conditions for tests are questions that 
the authors of the text should address.


Unless a 'creative' interpretation of 1.4.11 indicates otherwise, I 
suggest that 1.4.11 has no effect on 6.3 and you need to limit only the 
current.

--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
If dictionaries were correct, we would only need one, because they would all
give the same information.
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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

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

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

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

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

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


Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

2013-09-11 Thread Zhangguoqing (A)
Thanks for John's reply 

The contents of clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1 are moved to IEC60368-1 1st 
edition

6.2.2.4 PS1
PS1 is a circuit where the power source, (see Figure 40) measured according to 
6.2.2, does not exceed:
�C 500 W measured during the first 3 s; and
�C 15 W measured after 3 s.
For the purpose of this standard, the power available from external circuits 
described in Table 16, ID numbers 11, 12, 13 and 14, are considered to be PS1.

6.5.4 Requirements for interconnection to building wiring.
External paired conductor cable circuits, such as those described in Table 16, 
ID numbers 11, 12, 13 and 14 having a minimum wire diameter of 0,4 mm, shall 
have the current limited to 1,3 A.

Please tell me if you know the current requirement and power requirement when a 
equipment intends to provide power over the telecommunication wiring system.

Zhang guoqing


-邮件原件-
发件人: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
发送时间: 2013年9月11日 22:50
收件人: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
主题: Re: [PSES] question on clause 6.3 and 1.4.11 of IEC60950-1

In message 
7d25799235e00f4c9b04eca410c1c5bf8f0ba...@szxema502-mbx.china.huawei.com
, dated Wed, 11 Sep 2013, Zhangguoqing (A) zhangguoq...@huawei.com 
writes:

6.3 Protection of the telecommunication wiring system from overheating 
Equipment intended to provide power over the telecommunication wiring 
system to remote equipment shall limit the output current to a value 
that does not cause damage to the telecommunication wiring system, due 
to overheating, under any external load condition. The maximum 
continuous current from equipment shall not exceed a current limit that 
is suitable for the minimum wire gauge specified in the equipment 
installation instructions. The current limit is 1,3 A if such wiring is 
not specified. NOTE 2 The minimum wire diameter normally used in 
telecommunication wiring is 0,4 mm, for which the maximum continuous 
current for a multipair cable is 1,3 A.

1.4.11 Power from a telecommunication network
For the purpose of this standard, the power available from a 
TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORK is considered to be limited to 15 VA.

My question is , if a equipment intends to provide power over the 
telecommunication wiring system, the current and the power should be 
controlled at the same time?  or, only the current should be controlled?

1.4.11 is not a requirement, it is an assumption. Why it is stated, and 
why it is included under General conditions for tests are questions that 
the authors of the text should address.

Unless a 'creative' interpretation of 1.4.11 indicates otherwise, I 
suggest that 1.4.11 has no effect on 6.3 and you need to limit only the 
current.
-- 
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
If dictionaries were correct, we would only need one, because they would all
give the same information.
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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

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

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

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

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

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

-

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

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

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

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

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

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