ed
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all
copies of the original message.
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John
Woodgate
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 5:15 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: FW: 60950-1:2006 clause 2.5 - Limited power
In message
, dated
Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Jim Eichner writes:
>To be clear, the LPS application would not be a "circuit breaker" as
>the term is commonly used. The language from '950 that I objected to
>was regarding automatically resetting overcurrent protective devices,
>so rather than a cir
To be clear, the LPS application would not be a "circuit breaker" as the
term is commonly used. The language from '950 that I objected to was
regarding automatically resetting overcurrent protective devices, so
rather than a circuit breaker it would be something like a thermal
auto-reset device th
3 matches
Mail list logo