Re: [PSES] DOW for ETSI EN 300 386 v1.6.1

Your understanding is correct. There may be a reason why the Commission has not adopted v2.1.1, such as a problem with undated references, or it may be yet anther case of delayed updating. I expect someone here knows for sure. With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only

[PSES] Job Opening for an International RF Regulatory Engineer.

Forwarding for Mark Luksich at gogo... gogo Commercial Aviation has a job opening for an International RF Regulatory Engineer. *Key Responsibilities:* * Working with regulatory and/or legal staff, analyze rules and regulations to determine technical compliance requirements for

[PSES] DOW for ETSI EN 300 386 v1.6.1

Hi, ETSI published EN 300 386 v2.1.1 in July 2016. In the standard's Foreword, they provide national transposition date of 30 September 2017 as the date-of-withdrawal (DOW) of any conflicting national standard (EN 300 386 v1.6.1). The last listing of harmonized standards for European Union's

Re: [PSES] Separation of Circuits

John, This may or may not be helpful to you, but you did say “UL”60065, so this is what the National Electrical Code says about running cables in the same raceway as power (communication cable is the example here). The same basic rules apply to other types of signal wire (Class 2,3, optical,

Re: [PSES] Separation of Circuits

John Don’t forget that clearance only applies when air is the insulator (definitions) Distances through solid insulation do not have to consider clearance, just thickness of insulation is section 8.8 (in version I’m looking at) Regards Charlie Charlie Blackham Sulis Consultants Ltd Tel: +44

Re: [PSES] LISN Calibration Measurement Uncertainty

All,  As always - thanks for the feedback and discussion. Learn a lot from this forum  Best regards,  Mac From: Ken Javor To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 8:57 AM Subject: Re: [PSES] LISN Calibration Measurement Uncertainty

Re: [PSES] Separation of Circuits

Thanks Charles, I knew I was having a disconnect. Best Regards, John John Allen Product Safety Consulting, Inc www.productsafetyinc.com On Sep 13, 2017, at 10:38 AM, Charlie Blackham > wrote:

Re: [PSES] Separation of Circuits

Hello John, I agree with Ted but would like to add that insulation of wire shall not be subjected to abrasion. Best regards, Bostjan From: Ted Eckert [mailto:07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 3:45 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES]

Re: [PSES] Separation of Circuits

Thanks Ted, the 0.4mm thickness is in par 8.9 (construction requirements with regard to protection against shock) of 60065 but the creepage and clearances section (13), doesn't seem to have any exceptions except Annex J, but they're still looking for physical separation. I'm trying to prove a

Re: [PSES] Separation of Circuits

Hell John, The construction is not specifically prohibited. The wiring for hazardous voltage primary and secondary circuits can touch user accessible circuits as long as the requirements for double or reinforced insulation are met. If you have a line-voltage wire, and you can guarantee that

Re: [PSES] LISN Calibration Measurement Uncertainty

I assumed that since uncertainty was in question, that this was some sort of CISPR 22 or similar quest, so 150 kHz and up, and not CISPR 25. If it were CISPR 25, then it is a low impedance at 150 kHz as Tom points out, but using the technique I suggested, excellent accuracy may still be had. Ken

Re: [PSES] LISN Calibration Measurement Uncertainty

On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 10:13:26 -0500, Ken Javor wrote: > There shouldn't be a lower impedance issue, because from 150 kHz up the LISN > is very close to 50 ohms. And once the LISN coil impedance is well above 50 > ohms, the measured LISN impedance should be 50 ohms

[PSES] Separation of Circuits

Hi, I'm struggling with a separation of circuits issue. The Standard I'm using is UL60065. Many other Standards allow wires of different voltages to be in contact with each other as long as they're both rated for the higher voltage. UL60065 doesn't have a separation of circuits section and

[PSES] Why higher value for DC in SELV - Electrical Shock Safety Criteria"

A paper and thoughtful discussions by G. Biegelmeier are in the "Electrical Shock Safety Criteria: Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Electrical Shock Safety Criteria" publication. Regards Mick Maytum - This