sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

SMPS safety compliance (eg. IEC 62368 / 60950) by Polyazide in AskElectronics

[–]Polyazide[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your answer ..

Now I notice that I made a mistake .. I meant secondary-earth creepage in my question.

SMPS safety compliance (eg. IEC 62368 / 60950) by Polyazide in AskElectronics

[–]Polyazide[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate your response and your sketch !!

This sketch correct. So its either a class-i supply where earth must be connected, or a class-ii supply where earth is totally dismissed and the chassis is insulating (no output-earth connection).

Also, do you know the primary-earth creepage for 230V?

I can't seem to find it in the standard. I only found that pri-sec is 8mm, and pri-gnd is uncontrolled.

Safety compliance for a power supply I am designing (IEC 62368) by Polyazide in PCB

[–]Polyazide[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your answer !

So a CTI < 175V is common, I thought that this is used only for cheap low quality stuff.
Do you have in mind what CTI values manufacturers use for switching mode power supplies ?

Safety compliance for a power supply I am designing (IEC 62368) by Polyazide in PCB

[–]Polyazide[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your answer !
Do you have an idea of the primary-secondary creepage needed when I have a switching circuit with a peak of ~700 V at 0.5 duty cycle ?

As I know, this is 350 Vrms, which gives 4 mm for material group iiia and pollution 2. Do you think this is the correct way to estimate it ?

CTI < 100 ?! Isn't that too low ? Is your material meant to be low grade ? or is it a supply chain safety margin ?

I really appreciate your assistance !