I concur with the suggestions James has made on this topic. Ralph
-----Original Message----- From: James Pawson (U3C) <[email protected]> Sent: September 9, 2024 12:21 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition - Fail Hi Amund, Throwing in another $0.02... For CB scheme reports, my experience is that the lab will take a very "black or white" approach to the standard. There is often no room for the manufacturer to risk assess or carry out additional testing for edge cases. In this case it sounds like the lab are taking the "we are not sure what is going on therefore fail" even though it might meet the requirements. To assess the risk, if you have access to a thermal chamber and a hipot tester, why not carry out your own measurements of dielectric strength at temperature? You could use this to help justify your position? Although the lab is just as likely to say no as you are not the manufacturer of the component! All the best James James Pawson Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy www.unit3compliance.co.uk | [email protected] +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 Office hours: Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m contactable between 1300h to 1730h from Monday to Friday. For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email on [email protected] or call 01274 911747. Our lead times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks. -----Original Message----- From: Ralph McDiarmid <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 5:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition - Fail Hi Amund, The standard I have access to, IEC 62368-1:2018 RLV © IEC 2018, has clause 4.1.2 Use of Components. Nowhere in that clause could I find a statement supporting what the lab thinks is needed. The noun "critical component" does not appear anywhere in the 2018 version, but I suggest it is a synonym for the term "safeguard" defined and used throughout IEC 62368-1. The lab really should be using language and terminology aligned with the standard being applied. In other standards that do include Abnormal Condition tests, component temperatures are not a pass/fail criterion in that operating condition. It appears to be so with IEC 62368, but it's not explicit and seems open to interpretation. However, in Normal Condition at +55C ambient it looks like you've got an issue with at least one component. You might need to change the upper end of your operating temperature range. (55C is very high for outdoor equipment.) Ralph -----Original Message----- From: Amund Westin <[email protected]> Sent: September 4, 2024 2:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition - Fail Ralph, “The standard also does not accept that critical components get a temperature above what is specified in the test report for that component»“ The lab refer to Clause 4.1.2. Right now, I don't have access to the standard, so I cant check the text. Best ragards Amund On 2024-09-04 09:15, Amund Westin wrote: > Thanks all for good comments! > > Ralph: > I'm still waiting for lab feedback on this one :“ The standard also > does not accept that critical components get a temperature above what > is specified in the test report for that component». “ I have a > feeling they will reply : Annex G.5.3.3.2, even though it is not a > transformer, but a DC/DC module. > I'll post the lab feedback when it comes in. > > > John W: > Improvement of ventilation is an option that is under discussion in > the R&D now. Trick to do, because of current design. > > > We got new information yesterday and I summarize the current situation: > 1) Abnormal condition: DCDCmodule spec +85C, measured under to be 91C > under abnormal condition > 2) Normal condition: DCDCmodule spec +85C, measured to be 83C under > normal condition (+25C ambient) > 3) Normal condition: DCDCmodule spec +85C, measured to be 88C under > normal condition (+55C ambient, spec final product is -40C to +55C)) > > > Facts: > DCDCmodule is CB certified (-40C to +85C) DCDCmodule is places inside > a fire enclosure DCDCmodule is not accessable / touchable Final > product with DCDCmodule have been running in the field +20 years > without failure. > > > I'll return with more information. > > > Best regards Amund > > > > > On 2024-09-03 16:52, Ralph McDiarmid wrote: >> Perhaps Amund could ask the lab which clause in IEC 62368 supports >> their statement, “ _The standard also does not accept that critical >> components get a temperature above what is specified in the test >> report for that component». “_ >> >> _ _ >> >> This is an Abnormal Condition and safeguard parameters, which include >> rated temperature, are not subject to the same constraints imposed >> during Normal Condition. >> >> _ _ >> >> I suggest there are two problems here. One is that the lab seems to >> misunderstand Abnormal Condition and the other is terminology like >> _Basic Safeguard Parameters_ and _Supplementary Safeguard Parameters_ >> used in Figure 45 do not seem to be defined anywhere. >> >> _ _ >> >> _Ralph_ >> >> From: Richard Nute <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, September 2, 2024 12:54 PM >> To: [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: RE: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - >> Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> Further to Ralph’s comments… and with thanks to Amund… >> >> Since the lab has its own interpretation of “abnormal” different than >> that of 62368-2, the lab needs to make its position on “abnormal” >> conditions known and apply to TC108 for consideration of a change to >> 62368-2. >> >> Or, Amund can forward the lab’s interpretation directly to TC108, >> although this will probably go to the interpretation panel. >> >> Rich >> >> ps: The lab’s response does make sense – sort of. It is filled with >> “what ifs” that I have some doubt that the assertions are from the >> lab’s experience. For example, for the exterior of the module to >> reach 85 C, the interior has to be hotter (maybe much >> hotter) and may exceed solid insulation rated temperature. We and the >> lab don’t know, but at 85 C, we (us) assume the interior solid >> insulation (and other safeguards) does not exceed its rating (which >> must be greater than 85 C). >> >> Another statement that creates doubt for me is that “_also lead to >> other dangers such as mains voltage being absorbed_.” The lab does >> not know what the “_other dangers_” are, and leaves us up in the air >> about what is “_mains voltage being absorbed_…” Absorbed by what? >> >> rn >> >> From: Ralph McDiarmid <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, September 2, 2024 9:52 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - >> Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> To add to what Charlie has mentioned, the integrity of a _safeguard_, >> like protective separation, can be verified at the end of the >> Abnormal with a dielectric test. A satisfactory result would >> indicate that the _safeguard_ remains effective. The standard states >> that _safeguard_ parameters, like rated temperature, can be exceeded >> during an abnormal test. >> >> If your lab doesn’t agree with any of this, I suggest you check to >> see if they are accredited to perform test and evaluation for IEC >> 62368. The lab may not be able to comprehend and interpret a complex >> standard like 62368. >> >> Ralph >> >> From: Charlie Blackham <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, September 2, 2024 1:28 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - >> Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> Amund >> >> A safety critical component rated at 85C is rated to run safely at >> that temperature for the life of the product. >> >> The temperature is only exceeded under an abnormal condition, which >> by definition is not a normal operating condition: >> >> 3.3.7.1 >> >> abnormal operating condition >> >> temporary operating condition that is not a normal operating >> condition and is not a single fault condition of the equipment itself >> >> a component providing ES3 to ES1 isolation has double or reinforced >> insulation, so remains safe even in a single fault condition, which >> we’re not assessing here. >> >> It looks like the lab doesn’t properly understand clauses B.3 and >> B.4 and I’ve never seen a competent lab use “bad luck” in a report >> before 😊 >> >> Best regards >> >> Charlie >> >> Charlie Blackham >> >> Sulis Consultants Ltd >> >> Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 >> >> Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ [1] >> >> Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 >> >> From: Amund Westin <[email protected]> >> Sent: 02 September 2024 09:02 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - >> Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> Hello Rich >> >> The component that gets hot, is a DC/DC module, bought from a >> well-known manufacturer and the module holds a CB certificate. >> >> Module Spec is +85C, when it reaches +89C, the final product itself >> shouts down as a consequence to too high temperature. >> >> The lab answer as follow: >> >> _«What fails here is that a very critical component gets too hot. >> What makes this component so critical is that this component is used >> as a separation between primary to secondary circuits (So ES3 -> ES1). >> As the module again has critical components in it (such as a >> transformer) which are in the separator, we have no control over how >> hot this component gets as it has only been tested up to 85oC. If the >> component gets too hot, this can cause the separation to be broken >> and you will then get primary voltage (ES3) into the secondary >> circuit (which is ES1)._ >> >> _This can also lead to other dangers such as mains voltage being >> absorbed in the event of bad luck or a fire. (This can also spread >> out of the product, if other products are connected via e.g. the >> RS232 connector). The standard also does not accept that critical >> components get a temperature above what is specified in the test >> report for that component»._ >> >> Does it make sense? >> >> Regards >> >> Amund >> >> Fra: Richard Nute >> Sendt: 30. august 2024 22:37 >> Til: [email protected] >> Emne: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal >> condition >> - Fail >> >> Hello Amund: >> >> Did you point out to the lab the relevant sub-clauses of 62368-2 per >> Charlie Blackham? If so, what was their reply (i.e., what safeguard >> failed)? >> >> Good luck, >> >> Rich >> >> From: Amund Westin <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 5:15 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition >> - Fail >> >> Under abnormal condition (holes in the chassis are blocked), the >> internal DC/DC module reach its maximum spec (+85C) and at +89C, the >> product make a shutdown due to its own safety. >> >> * No fire is generated. >> * Hot module/component, yes, but not accessible for humans (inside >> product) >> * The module is located inside the fire enclosure. >> * Nothing dangerous situation is generated, but product shuts down >> due to too hot module. Product could (maybe) also get permanent >> damaged, if the module broke down due to the heat. >> >> Anyway, the product seems to be safe regarding to both fire safety >> and electrical hazard. Isn’t that what it’s all about? Safe product, >> but maybe poor reliable if such Abnormal condition happens. >> >> The lab does not agree with me. >> >> BR Amund >> >> Fra: Amund Westin >> Sendt: 29. august 2024 20:05 >> Til: [email protected] >> Emne: [PSES] SV: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> Thanks James, >> >> No, the component that gets hot, but it is not accessible. It’s on a >> pcb inside the metal enclosure. The temperature was measures to 87C. >> The CB test report for the DC/DC component says it was tested and >> approved up to 85C. >> >> No ignition. The FAIL statement was due to higher temperature than >> approved in CB report for the component. >> >> Best regards Amund >> >> Fra: James Pawson (U3C) >> Sendt: 29. august 2024 18:35 >> Til: [email protected] >> Emne: Re: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> Amund, >> >> Is the temperature accessible? >> >> Is there any ignition caused? >> >> If no then the requirements have likely been met. >> >> All the best >> >> James >> >> James Pawson >> >> Managing Director & EMC Problem Solver >> >> Unit 3 Compliance Ltd >> >> EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : >> Consultancy >> >> www.unit3compliance.co.uk [2] | [email protected] >> >> +44(0)1274 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957 >> >> 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL >> >> Registered in England and Wales # 10574298 >> >> _Office hours:_ >> >> _Every morning my full attention is on consultancy, testing, and >> troubleshooting activities for our customers’ projects. I’m >> available/contactable between 1300h to 1730h Mon/Tue/Thurs/Fri._ >> >> _For inquiries, bookings, and testing updates please send us an email >> on [email protected]__ or call 01274 911747. Our lead >> times for testing and consultancy are typically 4-5 weeks._ >> >> From: Charlie Blackham <[email protected]> >> Sent: 29 August 2024 17:19 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> Amund >> >> Basic safeguard parameters may be exceeded during abnormal condition >> tested in Annex B.3. >> >> B.3.8 Compliance criteria during and after abnormal operating >> conditions >> >> _During an abnormal operating condition that does not lead to a >> single fault condition, all safeguards shall remain effective. After >> restoration of normal operating conditions, all safeguards shall >> comply with applicable requirements._ >> >> _ _ >> >> _If an abnormal operating condition leads to a consequential fault, >> the compliance criteria of B.4.8 apply_ >> >> _ _ >> >> The following is provided in PD IEC TR 62368‑2:2019, Part 2: >> Explanatory information related to IEC 62368-1:2018 (same in the 2014 >> version) >> >> Best regards >> >> Charlie >> >> Charlie Blackham >> >> Sulis Consultants Ltd >> >> Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 >> >> Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ [1] >> >> Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 >> >> From: Amund Westin <[email protected]> >> Sent: 29 August 2024 17:07 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [PSES] IEC62368-1 - Abnormal condition - Fail >> >> We measure a few degrees too high temperature on a power component >> inside the product, when the ventilation holes in the chassis are >> blocked (abnormal condition). >> >> Draft verdict from test lab is FAIL. >> >> Our claim is that such abnormal condition will not happen due to: >> >> * Product installed by skilled and trained technical persons. >> * Product installed in racks / environment that make it impossible >> for such blocking. >> >> The product is placed in closed premises with fences covering the >> premises. It’s part of international aircraft navigation system. >> >> Question: >> >> Is it reasonable to require such an abnormal condition test, when >> that a situation is not practical to happened in real life? >> >> Thanks! >> >> BR Amund Westin >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html [6] >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 [7] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html [6] >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 [7] >> >> [8] >> >> Virus-free.www.avg.com [8] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html [6] >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 [7] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html [6] >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 [7] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html [6] >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 [7] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html [6] >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 [7] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html [6] >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 [7] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ [3] >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 >> ------------------------- >> >> 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 [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are >> archived and searchable on the web at: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >> >> Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ [4] >> Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how >> to unsubscribe) [5] List rules: >> https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: >> [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> Jim Bacher at: [email protected] >> ------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: >> https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 >> >> Links: >> ------ >> [1] https://sulisconsultants.com/ >> [2] http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/ [3] >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/%20 >> [4] https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ >> [5] https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html >> [6] https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html >> [7] https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 >> [8] >> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=li >> nk&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient > > -- > Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Mvh Amund Westin (Siv.ing / > M.Sc) > ********************************** > Westin Emission > Oslo, Norway > EMC / Safety / Product Compliance consultant > Cell: (+47) 920 17 031 > Skype: EMC.amund > E-mail: [email protected] > Web: https://www.westin-emission.no/ > Linkedin: http://lnkd.in/2xHtrH > Member of Norsk Elektroteknisk Komite - sector EMC and IET > ********************************** > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 [email protected] > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ > Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how > to unsubscribe) List rules: > https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: > [email protected] > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> > _________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: > https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 -- Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Mvh Amund Westin (Siv.ing / M.Sc) ********************************** Westin Emission Oslo, Norway EMC / Safety / Product Compliance consultant Cell: (+47) 920 17 031 Skype: EMC.amund E-mail: [email protected] Web: https://www.westin-emission.no/ Linkedin: http://lnkd.in/2xHtrH Member of Norsk Elektroteknisk Komite - sector EMC and IET ********************************** - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> _________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> _________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. www.avg.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 [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> _________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1 - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/ Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Mike Sherman at: [email protected] Rick Linford at: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> _________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1
