Here's an interesting question that came up during a standards committee
meeting. I'll base the question on EN60950-1 although this approach and
the question it raises are universal.
Fault testing is required in section 5.3 and compliance criteria
includes hipot testing according to 5.3.8
John,
The DAQ card in the PC is EN61010 compliant. The instrument (an 8 DUT FET
noise tester) has the FETs inside the unit. The instrument ground is attached
to an oven chassis which is grounded. But, the instrument could be operated
stand-alone without the oven. The instrument is powered by a
In message 3ef8180825045544b765c027d8e950ee0397e...@whl60.e2v.com,
dated Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Barker, Neil neil.bar...@e2v.com writes
It is not clear whether your external power supply is Class 1 (basic
insulation + protective earth) or Class 2 (double insulated). If the
former, then the
I agree with John's concern and suggest that a decision to retest should
be made only after determining how far the equipment was out of cal and
if that error could have changed the results.
==
Ralph McDiarmid, AScT
Compliance Engineering Group
Xantrex
The return for the SELV output is not necessarily considered safety
grounding. I do not know how PC Common is referenced. Construction
requirements for either current path is determined on if the devices are
Class 1, and what the max fault current the conductors would be required to
carry.
The
Dave,
It is not clear whether your external power supply is Class 1 (basic
insulation + protective earth) or Class 2 (double insulated). If the former,
then the connection between the power supply and your instrument should be
providing the safety grounding. If the latter, then providing the
Gents,
Situation: I am building an instrument that interfaces to a DAQ card in a PC.
The instrument is powered by an external AC-DC power supply supplying +/- 12
volts at 100 mA. The instrument metal case is connected to the PC Common via
the DAQ card cable.
Question: Is this safety grounding
Vic,
I have a pdf of The physical fundamentals of low-voltage co-ordination
by K. Stimper of VDE. Contact me off-line and I can forward you a copy.
Regards,
David.
David Gelfand, P.E.
Product Integrity Engineer
Mitec Telecom Inc
9000 Trans-Canada Highway
Pointe-Claire QC H9R 5Z8
Canada
514
Tektronix also has wideband current probes. And there is Pearson.
Dave Cuthbert
Micron Technology, Inc.
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of
ted.eck...@apcc.com
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 4:40 AM
To: ju...@hursley-emc.co.uk
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re:
There have been many responses to this question regarding MRAs. However, I
don't know if anyone is aware that the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) is
in the process to eventually have their category certification clients at
least ISO 17025 compliant. Also, as far as calibration interval, if
Hello,
I am trying to understand some of the reasoning/philosophy behind the values
derived from EN60950 with respect to
insulation/creepage/clearance/electrical strength.
I started by attempting to read IEC 60664 but feel there must be a more user
friendly introduction available.
I would
Dear Group Members:
A list of electronic information products per Article 3 of the China's RoHS,
Administrative Measure for the Control of Pollution Caused by Electronic
Information Products, is availabe (in Chinese) at
http://www.mii.gov.cn/art/2006/03/16/art_722_8442.html
EGG is a large company and you want their Albuquerque division.
http://www.egginc.com/albuquerque/sensors.htm
I can also recommend Fischer Custom Communications. They have current
probes that have a reasonably flat frequency response over as much as five
orders of magnitude.
I am looking for a wide range current probe and someone has suggested a firm
called EG G can't find any ref on Google ? anyone got a lead if they are
still trading ?
thanks
Julian Jones
- This
message is from the IEEE
Hello again,
I also posed this question to the test site I mentioned in my question.
Their reply was:
Timescales for this are still a number of years off. The move to
screened rooms will probably be driven by UKAS and Customers rather than
specifications.
Interesting!!?
Regards
Vic
-
Ian,
The points you make are very valid, providing they are applied intelligently
as John Woodgate has already suggested.
However, if your laboratory meets all the requirements of ISO17025, it would
be but a small step to gain accreditation, which would make your reports
acceptable to product
In message
e1ba0362b28ed211a1e80008c71ea30603387...@z-160-100-30-252.est.ibm.com,
dated Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Gordon,Ian ian.gor...@bocedwards.com writes
if, when it NEXT goes for calibration whether it was found to be
outside the manufacturers specification or not. If it is found to be
outside
Gary McInturff asked:
Fan motors are often “impedance wound” to protect them in the case of
locked rotor – or something blocking the blades. I’ve seen the term but
don’t exactly know how this is accomplished. Can anybody clarify for me?
Most Fan motors, shaded pole motors, and similar, have
Mike et al
Our EMC lab is audited annually by TUV to ISO 17025 and the company as a
whole is audited annually by BSI and accredited to ISO 9001:2002. As we
only do in-house testing the cost/benefit of full UKAS accreditation for the
EMC lab isn't worthwhile.
The concerns regarding calibration
Hi Mike,
the EN's dont usually mention much about calibration. I don't recall now any
EMC standards saying that, but e.g. EN 60950-1 says how to calibrate the touch
current measuring device.
With regards to accreditation, the lab can assign the calibration interval as
they wish but as it needs
20 matches
Mail list logo
