I don't know if it's correct or not. I haven't seen a definitive answer to the question.
Correct. It shows that, with a little goodwill, one can overcome the language barrier.
Telescoping safety earth?
- Thread starter abbey road d enfer
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
sahib
Well-known member
It is still difficult to comment in the absence of how you intend to execute the design of the final instrument using these four individual devices.
However, I am assuming that you are housing all of them in a single case, and using the power amp IEC as the mains input to the entire system. I am also assuming that you have (no doubt) also solved all of the mains, low voltage and signal wiring issues within the design.
If so, then there would be no need to provide individual, hard wired safety earth to preamp, sound module and keyboard cases as long as good electrical bonding between the main case and the individual device cases is maintained through their mounting screws. However, as a precaution I would provide hard wired safety earth from the power amp IEC (or chassis stud point) to the main case. Now the other three are integral part of the system and take their safety earth from the main case chassis.
Edit: Reading your previous posts, above also assumes that 0V is connected to the chassis/earth only at the power amp end, and the preamp, sound module and keyboard cases are floating (or the circuitries inside the cases are floating).
Last edited:
The what is a dangerous voltage is kind of the wrong question... its the current that kills us and GFCI protection devices trip at roughly 6mA...
JR
PS: I joke that an AA battery could kill you if thrust deep into your heart.
Last edited:
To make things clearer, the four elements are assembled in a common carpentry cabinet, with looms circulating between the different parts. It's a fixed set-up, however, for maintenance duties, they should be easily extractible and functional. Continuity between chassis is via wires.
sahib
Well-known member
In which case, and depending on the diagram in you post #2, cascaded connection from one equipment chassis to another makes more sense. I would imagine you will be using in-line connectors between the two equipment wiring, in which case, include the safety earth connection within the same connector.
That's what I intended to do first, but I had doubts about how a safety agency would take it...
Newmarket
Well-known member
I think your doubts are justified. PEC on a shared connector ? Reliability issues ? and , depending on connector type, removable manually without a tool (while appreciating that the other power connections would likely also be disconnected at the same time).
Every IEC mains input connector has protective earth on a connector manually removable without a tool. Seems the most common way to do it.
Newmarket
Well-known member
You mean a crimp / blade "Faston" type connection ?
zamproject
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 1,513
Yes, most main connectors (with or without EMI/RFI filter ) have 6.35 faston connection, wile usualy at the other side of the wire (chassis mount) the rules seem you need a nut/bolt (M4 min) with approved washer and eyelet crimp connector.
You can buy double or quad faston receptacle in rivet form, obvioulsy for chassis/earth wiring, but can't say in which condition it's allowed.
unfortunately IEC documentations are so expensive...
You can buy double or quad faston receptacle in rivet form, obvioulsy for chassis/earth wiring, but can't say in which condition it's allowed.
unfortunately IEC documentations are so expensive...
sahib
Well-known member
That is not correct.
In-line connector is internal to the equipment. IEC is the mains input.
One has to be dumb enough to service an equipment without disconnecting it from the mains. Even then there is a mechanism to eliminate that risk.
Every power supply whether in kit or built form we supply has a warning label on the top cover. "DISCONNECT FROM MAINS BEFORE OPENING THIS COVER".
Newmarket
Well-known member
True that's a typical connection method. Personally like to see those connections inside a "rubber" insulating boot. But I've had to design without previously where it wasn't practicable due to other components wired in there. Used the insulated type cable crimps - not that it should matter for the PEC connection but preferred for assembly.
I do recall the 'connector' aspect of it being questioned wrt LVD but it seemed to be accepted that that only happened to in line / "user friendly" type connections.
Newmarket
Well-known member
Points taken. But I still think that an internal PEC connection via an in line connector might be challenged.
zamproject
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 1,513
Now I wonder how all tech around do
several years ago when I was designing an outlet tester to presumably prevent dangerous mis-wiring I did a deep dive into who was getting electrocuted. A significant number of deaths were professionals, engineers and technicians who were a little too confident when working around dangerous voltages.Now I wonder how all tech around do
JR
No, I mean the power cord connecting mains power to the equipment. If the protective earth is on a connector, but disconnecting that connector disconnects all power entry to that module, then what is the problem with having earth on a connector? Every piece of gear with a removable power cable has protective earth on a connector.
My reply was a direct response to post #27 which stated "I think your doubts [about safety agency approval] are justified. PEC on a shared connector ?"
I was just pointing out that PEC is almost always on a shared connector, shared with mains power line and neutral, so just pointing out the fact that PEC is on a shared connector is not useful without additional detail. Useful information would be to point out the hazard to be avoided, the fault path in which that hazard becomes active, and why the questioned approach does or does not avoid that hazard.
sahib
Well-known member
Possibly. But only if the execution has flaws. Otherwise there are numerous examples of this application out in the industry. There are even run of the mill in-line connectors that are vastly more reliable than the "compliant" spade connectors.
Including me. I can not tell you how many times I zapped myself over the years.Now I wonder how all tech around do
But joke aside, repair and maintenance are two different things. Indeed there are times that a repair has to be done with equipment under power, but this is done in what you would call a controlled environment.
Newmarket
Well-known member
Yeah. Okay but that is an external connection. "Inline" connectors for mains connection , as opposed to pcb connection systems, are surprisingly difficult.
Many connectors that seem suitable are not recommended / qualified for mains application. Even though they would probably be fine and have often been used for such in the past. I'm coming from a UK / EU regulatory angle here. It maybe different in different territories.
And I'm not saying that's its not possible - I've spec'd in some excellent Neutrik connectors in the past although in the assembled product the Earth connections were bonded independently of the Earth connection made by that connection - or that it's a danger technically.
But from experience it might be challenged depending on who is evaluating it.
As previously - it might be challenged. If it has been properly thought through and implemented then - yes - you could make a case in favour.
But would you really want to put your time and effort into that rather than 'play safe' and avoid the possibility of your case being rejected ?
Of course, as always, the benefits might be worth it but the risk is usually best avoided ime.
Newmarket
Well-known member
Well it might be challenged even if there's not a problem. But you are then faced with making your case.
If it makes sense to go that route with a particular product / system then fine but I'd avoid it if practicable.
Agree that there are better / more reliable connectors than the spade etc type.
ime audio kit design is often ahead of other product areas in connectorisation. It's something that I've often tried to bring into my non-audio work (sometimes accepted / sometimes resisted) where crimps / spades / blades etc seem to be predominant.
sahib
Well-known member
Newmarket, buddy, you are hanging onto this for no reason. Yes, if one wants to be awkward one can challenge anything. There is nothing stops one from doing it. But the data talks awkward one walks.
Of course, if you use 0.1" molex header for mains connection and ask me to test it for safety, I'll fail it. But what would be the objection to, say, gold plated fully sealed in-line connector with a couple of thousand insertion life?
There are gazillions of applications out there with 3 way in-line mains connections. I have serviced broadcast equipment where the connection between IEC and the (switching) power supply is made through locking header, or industrial equipment with in-line mains connection. From lighting, to automation the industry uses 3 prong in line connections for mains left-right-centre. There are water proof (if not chemical) 3 prong in-line mains connectors that are designed for outdoor use. Who can object using it inside an equipment. There is in-line male/female IEC. Who can object using it inside an equipment?
On being awkward, part of my business used to be in modelmaking/prototyping. For indemnity insurance the risk assessor had insisted that the safety guard on the circular saw had to remain fitted at all times. I had demonstrated an operation to him that the safety guard was the very thing that would guarantee that you would end up with your fingers chopped off. And I have seen somebody chopping his fingers off that way.
Of course, if you use 0.1" molex header for mains connection and ask me to test it for safety, I'll fail it. But what would be the objection to, say, gold plated fully sealed in-line connector with a couple of thousand insertion life?
There are gazillions of applications out there with 3 way in-line mains connections. I have serviced broadcast equipment where the connection between IEC and the (switching) power supply is made through locking header, or industrial equipment with in-line mains connection. From lighting, to automation the industry uses 3 prong in line connections for mains left-right-centre. There are water proof (if not chemical) 3 prong in-line mains connectors that are designed for outdoor use. Who can object using it inside an equipment. There is in-line male/female IEC. Who can object using it inside an equipment?
On being awkward, part of my business used to be in modelmaking/prototyping. For indemnity insurance the risk assessor had insisted that the safety guard on the circular saw had to remain fitted at all times. I had demonstrated an operation to him that the safety guard was the very thing that would guarantee that you would end up with your fingers chopped off. And I have seen somebody chopping his fingers off that way.
Similar threads
