Author Topic: IEC 61000-4-5 compliance testing and potentially another issue with Mean Well  (Read 7537 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline prasimixTopic starter

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2037
  • Country: hr
    • EEZ
I continued to work on preparations for next visit to the test lab. The idea is to pass the surge immunity test I failed last time as the BB3 is expected to recover on its own after all sorts of surges.
For this I have now prepared an external supervisor (reset/watchdog) chip that will get a “heartbeat” from the MCU. When the “heartbeat” skips or is late the supervisor will generate a reset. The selected supervisor is STM6824SWY6F. The tests I did in-house look promising. We’ll see how the supervisor behaves in the lab.

Offline prasimixTopic starter

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2037
  • Country: hr
    • EEZ
Oh, I forgot to mention: TVS on AC inputs are removed, new MOV across N-L are introduced, and bidirectional TVS were added across +5 V and +12 V outputs..

Offline prasimixTopic starter

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2037
  • Country: hr
    • EEZ
The last modifications were fruitful. Today we passed IEC 61000-4-5 test.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kean, Andrew McNamara

Offline jbb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1231
  • Country: nz
Congratulations
 
The following users thanked this post: prasimix

Offline prasimixTopic starter

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2037
  • Country: hr
    • EEZ
Thanks, We are slowly approaching the end. We will have to repeat some tests because we changed the Mean Well LRS with the EPP model. However, I believe that new problems should not arise because of that. The remaining new tests are less demanding, although there is still the possibility that we will not pass some of them. I'll keep you informed here of by opening a new topic related to newly found issue.


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf