DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=btinternet.com;
  h=DKIM-Signature:Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-Antivirus:X-Antivirus-Status;
  b=fiwNQFd3Q6Ba16SbQX06IrXkfE/Of+lHHT4eTDa2eellL8a2Mfvmcx+nvfjQQHByX+zhzDmuj2rV8bLukNLunZWB3oDKsFR+GcJkoSq4M3D2jeTNxeXvyBweuPM4jPbq87YtwtKy2dKyFHam1KXcpn+4o71f1MAHmpdaqa9gl9E=  ;
Message-ID: <004201cb58bb$529164e0$4001a8c0@lark>
From: "Alan Melia" <alan.melia@btinternet.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <AANLkTincvq2PNPFhDEcQac6Y0tcXawhPtnP3Muh1gJZt@mail.gmail.com> <4C971B00.30705@telus.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 12:41:24 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: Re: LF: RF and Combustion tests, and sparking, and TVI
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Of course on of the problem is likely to be that flame retardants will
probably be banned under RoHS :-))
Alan

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Tilley" <sthed475@telus.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: LF: RF and Combustion tests, and sparking, and TVI


>   Hi Andy
>
> In Canada, to obtain a field electrical safety approval for an 'unknown'
> polymeric or other non-metal enclosure the material must pass the
> following test:
>
> Using a paper match or butane cigarette lighter apply the flame directly
> to the material at its most vulnerable spot for 15 seconds then remove.
> If the material continues to burn after 5 seconds it is considered a
> fail, if it self extinguishes within the 5 seconds it is a pass.
>
> The above is good enough for insurance underwriters here and is codified
> in the CSA "SPE-1000 model code for the field evaluation of electrical
> equipment." I would suggest it be used in cases where fire is a concern
> for amateur purposes.
>
> Full product certification flame tests are far more rigorous but the
> above is considered acceptable for one of's and prototypes...
>
> 73 es GL
> Scott
>
>
> On 9/20/2010 8:08 AM, Andy Talbot wrote:
> >
> > I've carried out a few tests to see why the LF loading coil / ATU
> > housing caught alight and I'm now just about certain it was caused by
> > sparking from the aluminium foil used to seal the joins in the B+Q
> > Garden Store box and not RF being absorbed by teh plastic housing.
> > Combustion:
> > Placing pieces of the plastic housing in a gas flame, they caught
> > alight almost immediately and continued to self-sustain burn with a
> > yellow flame.   The fumes given off were almost completel odourless so
> > I'm pretty sure the material is polycarbonate - which on a reasonable
> > assumption based on its name, contains only C, H and O, and explains
> > why it burns moderately well.  I was rather surprised how quickly
> > the material caught alight, and then how slow but steady the resulting
> > flame was.
> > Incidently, I've tried burning clear polycarbonate roofing sheet in
> > the past, and it barely self-sustains - so I suspect the latter has a
> > fire retardant added.   They're not going to bother with that on a
> > cheap garden storage shed..
> > In a microwave cooker:
> > After several minutes of exposure, the material wasn't even warm.  I
> > tried pieces of the black base material  and the green plastic
> > housing, so it looks as if this material is not going to suffer any RF
> > absorbtion effects.
> > The 600 Watt beacon transmission  had been going for about 30 minutes
> > (at 33% WSPR duty cycle) before I noticed anything, so it may well
> > have started burning right at the start to end up with the result
> > shown in those pictures.
> > An incident in the past lends weight to the sparking idea.   Just
> > once, a few months ago, digital TV reception was suffering
> > intermittent interference and blocking and I realised the interference
> > was correlated with the transmission sessions of my 150 watt 503kHz
> > beacon signal.  Checking in the ATU showed (smelled) nothing out of
> > the ordinary, and I put the interference down to "EMC Related issues"
> > perhaps along the mains.  TV reception was OK the next day and ever
> > afterwards.   On reflection, 500kHz signals have no real way of
> > affecting UHF, so I am wondering if minute sparking was going on just
> > occasionally, with the resulting harmonics enough to cause QRN  at UHF
> > - with perhaps a session of dehanced propagation contributing.
> > Conclusions.
> > Cheap polycarbonate (probably) garden buildings from DIY centres are
> > suitable for RF housings PROVIDED there is no sparking / direct heat
> > exposure.
> > Don't even think of using metal tape without soldering or properly
> > bonding all joints - especially the sort not designed for electrical
use.
> > Don't set light to garden sheds
> > Andy
> > www.g4jnt.com <http://www.g4jnt.com>
>