Re: IE C60601-1 table 16

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Brian O'Connell  wrote
(in ) about
'IE C60601-1 table 16' on Thu, 14 Aug 2003:
>Thanks for your reply. What clause in 601-1 provides this 
>definition & determination of WV? I have already discerned what 
>insulation class is being referred to, and which insulation class 
>is required, as 601-1 clearly explains and diagrams (at least) 
>this...
>
>Am I blind or is there no clause that defines WV (referred to as 
>"reference" V in the standard) and if peak V shall be considered?

The basic standard dealing with this subject is not 60950 but IEC 60664.
It's a 3-part standard, and Part 2 is divided into two sections. You
probably need to look at Part 1 and Section 2.1, which is a Guide and
probably answers many of your questions. 

This is a new edition of IEC 60664, and 60601-1 hasn't been updated yet
to take the new edition into account.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

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

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: IE C60601-1 table 16

[Ned Devine]

Brian,

If I understand you question, you are correct.  IEC 60601-1 second edition
does not address any voltages other than rms and DC.  The draft third edition
does address "peaks".   

It is up to you and if applicable the test house, how to interpret what the
rms value is.  NOTE:  you can interpolate.  See recommendation 27.


If you should have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Ned Devine
Entela, Inc.
3033 Madison Ave. SE
Grand Rapids, MI  49548

Phone: 616 248 9671
Fax: 616 574 9752
e-mail: ndev...@entela.com
www.entela.com 
Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 



From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:boconn...@t-yuden.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 10:01 AM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: RE: IE C60601-1 table 16

Sir 
Thanks for your reply. What clause in 601-1 provides this definition &
determination of WV? I have already discerned what insulation class is being
referred to, and which insulation class is required, as 601-1 clearly explains
and diagrams (at least) this...
Am I blind or is there no clause that defines WV (referred to as "reference" V
in the standard) and if peak V shall be considered?
thanks very much for everyone's advice. 
Brian 

-Original Message- 
From: FastWave [mailto:bi...@fastwave.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 5:17 AM 
To: 'Brian O'Connell'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' 
Subject: RE: IE C60601-1 table 16 
Brian, 
  
Working voltage is determined in the same manner as 950, 1010, etc. A special
consideration is that you may have to consider the possibility of any patient
connection being earthed.
  
Table 16: 
The first row titled "equivalent to Basic insulation between parts of opposite
polarity" is what 950 refers to as Operational insulation in the mains circuit
= insulation that may protect from a Risk of Fire but not does not provide
Risk of Shock protection. 
  
The second row is for Basic & Supplementary insulation. And the third row is
for Double & Reinforced insulation. Each row is split to provide the creepage
& the clearance requirement for each working voltage column. 
  
The weird letters in the second column (A-f, A-a1, etc.) relate to Appendix E
in the back of the standard. Appendix E has diagrams showing what constitutes
operational, basic, supplementary, reinforced, & double insulation. So if you
are unsure if a particular creepage/clearance distance is considered
o/b/s/r/d, you can use Appendix E. Just remember that the "601" standards do
not use the term "operational" insulation. 
  
Regards, 
Bill Bisenius 
E.D.& D. 
bi...@productsafet.com 
www.productsafeT.com 
  
-Original Message- 
From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:boconn...@t-yuden.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 6:00 PM 
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' 
Subject: IE C60601-1 table 16 
  
Good People 
Would someone please provide relevant clause that explains how to use this
table. Are the peak/dc and rms WV used seperately to determine clearance &
creepage, as in 60950?
or is the greater of the dc or ac WV used to determine both crp & clr ? 
Is the same measurement technique for determining WV as in 60950, 1010-1, etc
? 
thanks much 
Brian 



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

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

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: IE C60601-1 table 16

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Brian O'Connell  wrote
(in ) about
'IE C60601-1 table 16' on Thu, 14 Aug 2003:
>What does the EMC directive have to do with a question on the 
>application of the Creepage/Clearance table? 

'EMC Directive' is a mistake. It should say 'Low Voltage Directive'. I
understand your frustration in that I did not answer your question, but
someone else did. Nevertheless, what I said is true: if you don't have
the standard, you haven't practised due diligence. 

You may not have a problem with an 'agency' on this issue: it's either
not their responsibility or the European Directives are not involved.
But if the *regulatory authorities* became involved, they would
certainly want to know if you held the standards and had ready access to
them.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

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

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: IE C60601-1 table 16

[Brian O'Connell]

Mr Woodgate 

I have, and maintain, over 90 standards, and have never had an agency auditor
issue a variation for lack of a scoped standard or for a failure to keep a
required standard updated. My employer has spent a small fortune supporting
standards publishers. (My standards library includes EN/IEC/UL 60601-1,
EN/IEC/UL 60950, and IEC/EN 60950-1.)

I am weak, and relatively inexperienced, in the specific requirements for
medical equipment. I am, and it seems most others practicing this field, seem
to be aware of the general requirements of Compliance Engineering, but many in
this field tend to become somewhat specialized.

And myself and others appreciate particular advice that cites the standard and
clause, and direct experience that an engineer has obtained applying and
interpreting these requirements. This is why many of your comments that
provide precise interpretation of a particular instance and application of a
clause are valued by members of this listserv.

What does the EMC directive have to do with a question on the application of
the Creepage/Clearance table? If there is an EMC issue (IEC 60601-1-2 ??) that
would affect interpretation of this table. please provide applicable clause.
In any case, I cannot cite any EMC standards on the D of C for a component
power supply, and no 601 standards cannot be cited...

Another question. I was reviewing some IEC 60601-1 based CB reports done
before my tenure. Spacings for a medical device seems to be based on rms WV.
And Peak WV, for the purpose of spacings, does not seem to be addressed by
601-1. Would I be correct in reporting only the rms WVs (or DC when
applicable). In any case, ignoring some significant (repetitive) peak WVs does
not seem like sound engineering judgment.

R/S, 
Brian 

-Original Message- 
From: John Woodgate [ mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 10:42 PM 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Subject: Re: IE C60601-1 table 16 

I read in !emc-pstc that Brian O'Connell  wrote 
(in ) about 
'IE C60601-1 table 16' on Wed, 13 Aug 2003: 
> 
>Would someone please provide relevant clause that explains how to 
>use this table. Are the peak/dc and rms WV used seperately to 
>determine clearance & creepage, as in 60950? 
> 
It's really unwise to try to make a product conform to a standard of 
which you don't have ready access to a copy. In fact, if you are trying 
to comply with the EMC Directive, the 'due diligence' requirements 
practically demand that you have copies of all the standards *you* have 
applied. Note *you* have applied, because the due diligence applies to 
the manufacturer, not to any test house that he might choose to use. 
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate 

RE: IE C60601-1 table 16

[Brian O'Connell]

Sir 

Thanks for your reply. What clause in 601-1 provides this definition &
determination of WV? I have already discerned what insulation class is being
referred to, and which insulation class is required, as 601-1 clearly explains
and diagrams (at least) this...

Am I blind or is there no clause that defines WV (referred to as "reference" V
in the standard) and if peak V shall be considered?

thanks very much for everyone's advice. 

Brian 


-Original Message- 
From: FastWave [ mailto:bi...@fastwave.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 5:17 AM 
To: 'Brian O'Connell'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' 
Subject: RE: IE C60601-1 table 16 

Brian, 
  
Working voltage is determined in the same manner as 950, 1010, etc. A special
consideration is that you may have to consider the possibility of any patient
connection being earthed.

  
Table 16: 
The first row titled "equivalent to Basic insulation between parts of opposite
polarity" is what 950 refers to as Operational insulation in the mains circuit
= insulation that may protect from a Risk of Fire but not does not provide
Risk of Shock protection. 

  
The second row is for Basic & Supplementary insulation. And the third row is
for Double & Reinforced insulation. Each row is split to provide the creepage
& the clearance requirement for each working voltage column. 

  
The weird letters in the second column (A-f, A-a1, etc.) relate to Appendix E
in the back of the standard. Appendix E has diagrams showing what constitutes
operational, basic, supplementary, reinforced, & double insulation. So if you
are unsure if a particular creepage/clearance distance is considered
o/b/s/r/d, you can use Appendix E. Just remember that the "601" standards do
not use the term "operational" insulation. 

  
Regards, 
Bill Bisenius 
E.D.& D. 
bi...@productsafet.com 
www.productsafeT.com 
  
-Original Message- 
From: Brian O'Connell [ mailto:boconn...@t-yuden.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 6:00 PM 
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' 
Subject: IE C60601-1 table 16 
  
Good People 
Would someone please provide relevant clause that explains how to use this
table. Are the peak/dc and rms WV used seperately to determine clearance &
creepage, as in 60950?

or is the greater of the dc or ac WV used to determine both crp & clr ? 
Is the same measurement technique for determining WV as in 60950, 1010-1, etc
? 
thanks much 
Brian 

RE: IE C60601-1 table 16

[FastWave]

Brian,
 
Working voltage is determined in the same manner as 950, 1010, etc. A special
consideration is that you may have to consider the possibility of any patient
connection being earthed.
 
Table 16:
The first row titled “equivalent to Basic insulation between parts of
opposite polarity” is what 950 refers to as Operational insulation in the
mains circuit = insulation that may protect from a Risk of Fire but not does
not provide Risk of Shock protection. 
 
The second row is for Basic & Supplementary insulation. And the third row is
for Double & Reinforced insulation. Each row is split to provide the creepage
& the clearance requirement for each working voltage column. 
 
The weird letters in the second column (A-f, A-a1, etc.) relate to Appendix E
in the back of the standard. Appendix E has diagrams showing what constitutes
operational, basic, supplementary, reinforced, & double insulation. So if you
are unsure if a particular creepage/clearance distance is considered
o/b/s/r/d, you can use Appendix E. Just remember that the “601” standards
do not use the term “operational” insulation. 
 
Regards,
Bill Bisenius
E.D.& D.
bi...@productsafet.com
www.productsafeT.com  
 

From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:boconn...@t-yuden.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 6:00 PM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: IE C60601-1 table 16
 
Good People 
Would someone please provide relevant clause that explains how to use this
table. Are the peak/dc and rms WV used seperately to determine clearance &
creepage, as in 60950?
or is the greater of the dc or ac WV used to determine both crp & clr ? 
Is the same measurement technique for determining WV as in 60950, 1010-1, etc
? 
thanks much 
Brian 

Re: IE C60601-1 table 16

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Brian O'Connell  wrote
(in ) about
'IE C60601-1 table 16' on Wed, 13 Aug 2003:
>
>Would someone please provide relevant clause that explains how to 
>use this table. Are the peak/dc and rms WV used seperately to 
>determine clearance & creepage, as in 60950?
>
It's really unwise to try to make a product conform to a standard of
which you don't have ready access to a copy. In fact, if you are trying
to comply with the EMC Directive, the 'due diligence' requirements
practically demand that you have copies of all the standards *you* have
applied. Note *you* have applied, because the due diligence applies to
the manufacturer, not to any test house that he might choose to use. 
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

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

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc