IEEE Standard For Qualification of Class 1E Static Battery Chargers and Inverters For Nuclear Power Generating Stations

IEEE Standard for Qualification of
Class 1E Static Battery Chargers

and Inverters for Nuclear Power
Generating Stations
IEEE Power Engineering Society

Sponsored by the
Nuclear Power Engineering Committee
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE
IEEE Std 650™-2006
3 Park Avenue
(Revision of
New York, NY 10016-5997, USA
IEEE Std 650-1990)
31 August 2006
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Provided by IHS under license with IEEE
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE Std 650TM-2006
(Revision of
IEEE Std 650-1990)

Generating Stations
Sponsor
Nuclear Power Engineering Committee
of the
IEEE Power Engineering Society
Approved 8 June 2006

IEEE-SA Standards Board
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Abstract: Methods for qualifying static battery chargers and inverters for Class 1E installations
outside containment in nuclear power generating stations are described. These methods may
also be used to qualify similar electronic equipment for use in applications outside containment,
where specific standards for such equipment are not available. The qualification methods set
forth employ a combination of type testing and analysis, the latter including a justification of
methods, theories, and assumptions used. These procedures meet the requirements of
IEEE Std 323TM-2003.
Keywords: battery charger, inverter, qualification
_________________________
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

3 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5997, USA
Copyright © 2006 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

All rights reserved. Published 31 August 2006. Printed in the United States of America.
IEEE is a registered trademark in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, owned by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Incorporated.
Print: ISBN 0-7381-4984-5 SH95546

PDF: ISBN 0-7381-4985-3 SS95546
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of the publisher.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE Standards documents are developed within the IEEE Societies and the Standards Coordinating Committees of
the IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA) Standards Board. The IEEE develops its standards through a consensus
development process, approved by the American National Standards Institute, which brings together volunteers
representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve the final product. Volunteers are not necessarily members of the
Institute and serve without compensation. While the IEEE administers the process and establishes rules to promote
fairness in the consensus development process, the IEEE does not independently evaluate, test, or verify the accuracy
of any of the information contained in its standards.
Use of an IEEE Standard is wholly voluntary. The IEEE disclaims liability for any personal injury, property or other
damage, of any nature whatsoever, whether special, indirect, consequential, or compensatory, directly or indirectly
resulting from the publication, use of, or reliance upon this, or any other IEEE Standard document.
The IEEE does not warrant or represent the accuracy or content of the material contained herein, and expressly
disclaims any express or implied warranty, including any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a specific
purpose, or that the use of the material contained herein is free from patent infringement. IEEE Standards documents
are supplied “AS IS.”
The existence of an IEEE Standard does not imply that there are no other ways to produce, test, measure, purchase,
market, or provide other goods and services related to the scope of the IEEE Standard. Furthermore, the viewpoint
expressed at the time a standard is approved and issued is subject to change brought about through developments in the
state of the art and comments received from users of the standard. Every IEEE Standard is subjected to review at least
every five years for revision or reaffirmation. When a document is more than five years old and has not been
reaffirmed, it is reasonable to conclude that its contents, although still of some value, do not wholly reflect the present
state of the art. Users are cautioned to check to determine that they have the latest edition of any IEEE Standard.
In publishing and making this document available, the IEEE is not suggesting or rendering professional or other
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
services for, or on behalf of, any person or entity. Nor is the IEEE undertaking to perform any duty owed by any other
person or entity to another. Any person utilizing this, and any other IEEE Standards document, should rely upon the
advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances.
Interpretations: Occasionally questions may arise regarding the meaning of portions of standards as they relate to
specific applications. When the need for interpretations is brought to the attention of IEEE, the Institute will initiate
action to prepare appropriate responses. Since IEEE Standards represent a consensus of concerned interests, it is
important to ensure that any interpretation has also received the concurrence of a balance of interests. For this reason,
IEEE and the members of its societies and Standards Coordinating Committees are not able to provide an instant
response to interpretation requests except in those cases where the matter has previously received formal consideration.
At lectures, symposia, seminars, or educational courses, an individual presenting information on IEEE standards shall
make it clear that his or her views should be considered the personal views of that individual rather than the formal
position, explanation, or interpretation of the IEEE.
Comments for revision of IEEE Standards are welcome from any interested party, regardless of membership affiliation
with IEEE. Suggestions for changes in documents should be in the form of a proposed change of text, together with
appropriate supporting comments. Comments on standards and requests for interpretations should be addressed to:
Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

445 Hoes Lane
Piscataway, NJ 08854
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
USA
Authorization to photocopy portions of any individual standard for internal or personal use is granted by the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., provided that the appropriate fee is paid to Copyright Clearance Center. To
arrange for payment of licensing fee, please contact Copyright Clearance Center, Customer Service, 222 Rosewood
Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA; +1 978 750 8400. Permission to photocopy portions of any individual standard for
educational classroom use can also be obtained through the Copyright Clearance Center.

Introduction
This introduction is not part of IEEE Std 1202-2006, IEEE Standard for Qualification of Class 1E Static
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Battery Chargers and Inverters for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
This standard provides the methods of qualifying Class 1E static battery chargers and inverters in
accordance with IEEE Std 323-2003. The static battery chargers and inverters discussed in this standard are
Class 1E. This document, however, addresses this equipment only as a subsystem in the safety-related
electrical system.
The techniques and information contained in this standard may be applied to other similar electronic
equipment.
The reliability analysis requirements of IEEE Std 577TM-2004 and the methods described in
IEEE Std 352TM-1987 have been used along with statistical data.
The efforts of the working group on this standard and its annexes will continue for the purpose of updating
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
and disseminating more information regarding qualification techniques. The subjects of aging and the use
of surveillance/maintenance techniques to address aging will continue to be investigated and will be among
the areas considered by the working group in future revisions of this standard..
Notice to users
Errata
Errata, if any, for this and all other standards can be accessed at the following URL: http://
standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/updates/errata/index.html. Users are encouraged to check this URL for
errata periodically.
Interpretations
Current interpretations can be accessed at the following URL: http://standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/interp/
index.html.
Patents
Attention is called to the possibility that implementation of this standard may require use of subject matter
covered by patent rights. By publication of this standard, no position is taken with respect to the existence
or validity of any patent rights in connection therewith. The IEEE shall not be responsible for identifying
patents or patent applications for which a license may be required to implement an IEEE standard or for
conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those patents that are brought to its attention.
iv
Copyright © 2006 IEEE. All rights reserved.
Participants
At the time this standard was approved, the Working Group on Battery Chargers and Inverters (SC2.13)
had the following membership:
Dennis E. Dellinger, Chair

Kenneth Caldwell, Vice Chair
Satish K. Aggarwal Robert Francis James Parello

Thomas N. Brewington James F. Gleason John M. Richards
Nissen M. Burstein E. Reilly Schum
At the time that it approved this standard, the Subcommittee on Qualification (SC2) had the following
membership:
Satish K. Aggarwal, Chair

Patrick Gove, Secretary
Bohumil Bartonicek Robert Francis Bill Newell

Paul D. Baughman James F. Gleason James Parello
Anup K. Behera William L. Hadovski Janez Pavsek
Steven D. Benson Hideo Harada Jan S. Pirrong
Brij M. Bharteey Peter Helander Daniel J. Pomerening
Thomas N. Brewington Thomas R. Hencey III Robert Queenan
Nissen M. Burstein Jerrell C. Henley Edward L. Quinn
Steve Casadevall Dirk C. Hopp John M. Richards
Suresh Channarasappa David A. Horvath Fredrick L. Roy
Garry V. Chapman Yao-Tung Hsu Steve Sandberg
Javier A. Chicote In-Koo Hwang Glen E Schinzel
Sun Yeong Choi Craig S. Irish Roderick Simms
Choon-Hoon Chung Serena A. Jagtiani Kjell Spang
James M. Dean Frank W. Kloer Richard G. Starck
Liviu Nicolae Delcea Sushant Kapur Hirotsugu Suzuki
Dennis E. Dellinger Mohsin Khan Marek Tengler
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Philip DiBenedetto Henry Leung Marco Van Uffelen

Michael Doughtery Bruce M. Lory Laszlo Varga
Quang H. Duong P. G. McQuillan Carl Weber
Frank Drumm Daniel R. Mikow John Wheless
Yasutaka Eguchi Todd Mitton John White
Walter Emerson Asif Mohiuddin Toni Wittamore
Artur J. Faya Edward Mohtashemi Richard T. Wood
Wells D. Fargo Carole Monchy-Leroy Toshio Yamamoto
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
v
At the time that it approved this standard, the Nuclear Power Engineering Committee (NPEC) had the
following membership:
John Disosway, Chair

John D. MacDonald, Secretary
Satish K. Aggarwal Robert J. Fletcher Michael H. Miller

Ijaz Ahmad Robert Fuld Gerald L. Nicely
George Attarian James F. Gleason Roger D. Parker
George Ballassi Dale T. Goodney James Parello
Farouk D. Baxter Britton P. Grim Glen E Schinzel
Brij M. Bharteey William L. Hadovski Neil P. Smith
Wesley W. Bowers David A. Horvath James E. Stoner
Daniel F. Brosnan Paul R. Johnson James E. Thomas
Nissen M. Burstein Harvey C. Leake John Waclo
Robert C. Carruth J. Scott Malcom John White
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
John P. Carter Alexander Marion Paul L. Yanosy
Stephen Fleger David J. Zaprazny
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
The following members of the balloting committee voted on this standard. Balloters may have voted for
approval, disapproval, or abstention.
Satish K. Aggarwal Jesus M. De Leon Diaz Jeffrey J. Lamarca

Butch Anton J. P. Disciullo William Lumpkins
Michael P. Baldwin John Disosway G. L. Luri
Farouk D. Baxter Surinder K. Dureja John D. Macdonald
Robert R. Beavers Gary R. Engmann Jose A. Marrero
Richard T. Bolgeo Robert J. Fletcher Omar S. Mazzoni
Wesley W. Bowers Rabiz N. Foda John E. Merando Jr.
Mark D. Bowman James F. Gleason Gary L. Michel
Thomas N. Brewington Dale T. Goodney Michael S. Newman
Daniel F. Brosnan Randall C. Groves Charles Kamithi Ngethe
Nissen M. Burstein Paul E. Hellen Fredrick L. Roy
John P. Carter David A. Horvath David Singleton
Suresh Channarasappa Dennis Horwitz David R. Smith
Mark S. Clark Wayne E. Johnson Joseph R. Stevens
Tommy P. Cooper Paul R. Johnson Jr. S. Thamilarasan
John K. Coyle James H. Jones James E. Thomas
Ronald L. Daubert Saumen K. Kundu James W. Wilson Jr.
Dennis E. Dellinger David J. Zaprazny
vi
When the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved this standard on 8 June 2006, it had the following
membership:
Steve M. Mills, Chair
Richard H. Hulett, Vice Chair
Don Wright, Past Chair
Judith Gorman, Secretary
Mark D. Bowman William B. Hopf T. W. Olsen

Dennis B. Brophy Lowell G. Johnson Glenn Parsons
Joseph Bruder Herman Koch Ronald C. Petersen
Richard Cox Joseph L. Koepfinger* Gary S. Robinson
Bob Davis David J. Law Frank Stone
Julian Forster* Daleep C. Mohla Malcolm V. Thaden
Joanna N. Guenin Paul Nikolich Richard L. Townsend
Mark S. Halpin Joe D. Watson
Raymond Hapeman Howard L. Wolfman
*Member Emeritus
Also included are the following nonvoting IEEE-SA Standards Board liaisons:
Satish K. Aggarwal, NRC Representative

Richard DeBlasio, DOE Representative
Alan H. Cookson, NIST Representative
Jennie Steinhagen
IEEE Standards Program Manager, Document Development
Matthew Ceglia
IEEE Standards Program Manager, Technical Program Development
Patricia A. Gerdon
IEEE Standards Program Administration Manager
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
vii
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Contents
1. Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Scope ................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................ 1
2. Normative references.................................................................................................................................. 2
3. Definitions .................................................................................................................................................. 2
4. Specifications ............................................................................................................................................. 3
4.1 General ................................................................................................................................................ 3
4.2 Class 1E performance characteristics and safety function................................................................... 3
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
4.3 Environment ........................................................................................................................................ 4
4.4 Other conditions .................................................................................................................................. 5
5. Qualification............................................................................................................................................... 5
5.1 Analytical requirements....................................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Component qualification ................................................................................................................... 10
5.3 Equipment qualification..................................................................................................................... 12
5.4 Qualification of a product line ........................................................................................................... 15
5.5 Extension of qualified life ................................................................................................................. 16
6. Documentation ......................................................................................................................................... 16
6.1 General .............................................................................................................................................. 16
6.2 Qualification plan .............................................................................................................................. 16
6.3 Qualification report............................................................................................................................ 17
6.4 Qualification of product line.............................................................................................................. 17
6.5 Additional documentation requirements............................................................................................ 17
Annex A (informative) Stress analysis ......................................................................................................... 18
Annex B (informative) Electronic components for which aging is not a failure mechanism ....................... 21
Annex C (informative) Nonelectronic components for which aging is not a failure mechanism................. 29
Annex D (informative) Discussion of failure mechanisms in electromechanical devices............................ 32
Annex E (informative) Cycling of connectors.............................................................................................. 33
Annex F (informative) Bibliography ............................................................................................................ 34
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`--- viii
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Generating Stations
1. Overview
1.1 Scope
This standard describes methods for qualifying static battery chargers and inverters for Class 1E
installations outside containment in nuclear power generating stations. The application of this equipment in
the plant’s electrical system is not within the scope of this standard as other industry standards, such as
IEEE Std 308TM-2001 [B3], 1 IEEE Std 603TM-1998 [B6] and IEEE Std 946TM-2004 [B8], exist for this
purpose. In addition, industry standards exist for equipment performance, such as ANSI/NEMA PE 5-2003
[B1] and IEEE Std 944TM-1986 [B7]. Performance requirements are not specified in this standard.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this standard is to provide specific procedures to meet the requirements of
IEEE Std 323TM-2003. 2 For the purpose of this standard, battery chargers, inverters, and the associated
ancillary equipment must perform their safety function under specified service and environmental
conditions.
The demonstration that an installed battery charger or inverter will meet its design specification requires
many steps in a program of design, fabrication, quality assurance, qualification, transportation, storage,
installation, maintenance, periodic testing, and surveillance. This standard treats only the qualification area
of this program. The result of the qualification program may provide a basis for determination of long-term
maintenance requirements.
Qualification may be accomplished in several ways: type testing, operating experience, or analysis. These
methods may be used individually or in combination. The qualification methods in this standard employ a
combination of type testing and analysis. Operating experience is of limited use as a sole means of
qualification. Operating experience is, however, of great use as a supplement to testing, as the experience
may provide an insight into the change in behavior of materials and components through time under actual
service and maintenance conditions. Qualification by analysis shall include a justification of the methods,
theories, and assumptions used. In general, battery chargers and inverters are too complex to be qualified
1
The numbers in brackets correspond to those of the bibliography in Annex F.
2
Information on references can be found in Clause 2.
1
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE 650-2006
IEEE Standard for Qualification of Class 1E Static Battery Chargers and Inverters
for Nuclear Power Generating Stations
by analysis alone, although analysis is effective in the extrapolation of test data and the determination of
the effects of minor design changes to equipment previously tested.
2. Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced
document (including any amendments or corrigenda) applies.
EIA 401-73 (Reaff 90), Paper, Paper/Film, Film Dielectric Capacitors for Power Semiconductor
Applications. 3
EIA 454-78 (Reaff 90), Fixed Paper and Film-Paper Dielectric Capacitors with Non-PCB Impregnants for
Alternating Current Applications.
IEEE Std 101TM-1987, IEEE Guide for the Statistical Analysis of Thermal Life Test Data. 4, 5
IEEE Std 259TM-1999, IEEE Standard Test Procedures for Evaluation of Systems of Insulation for Dry-
Type Specialty and General-Purpose Transformers.
IEEE Std 323TM-2003, IEEE Standard for Qualifying Class 1E Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating
Stations.
IEEE Std 344TM-2004, IEEE Recommended Practice for Seismic Qualification of Class 1E Equipment for
Nuclear Generating Stations.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IEEE Std 383TM-2003, IEEE Standard for Type Test of Class 1E Electric Cables, Field Splices, and
Connections for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
IEEE Std 577TM-2004, IEEE Standard Requirements for Reliability Analysis in the Design and Operation of
Safety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
3. Definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. The Authoritative Dictionary
of IEEE Standard Terms [B2] should be referenced for terms not defined in this clause.
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
3.1 battery charger: Equipment that converts ac power to dc power and is used to recharge and maintain a
station battery in a fully charged condition and to supply power to dc loads during normal operation.
3.2 components: Items from which the equipment is assembled (e.g., resistors, capacitors, wires,
connectors, semiconductors, tubes, switches, and electromechanical devices).
3.3 equipment: An assembly of components designed and manufactured to perform specific functions.
3
EIA publications are available from Global Engineering Documents, 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, Colorado 80112, USA
(http://global.ihs.com/).
4
IEEE publications are available from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08855-
1331, USA (http://standards/ieee.org/).
5
The IEEE standards or products referred to in this clause are trademarks of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
2
IEEE 650-2006
3.4 equipment qualification: The generation and maintenance of evidence to ensure that equipment will
operate on demand to meet system performance requirements during normal and abnormal service
conditions and postulated design basis events.
NOTE—Equipment qualification includes environmental and seismic qualification. 6
3.5 inverter: Equipment that converts dc power to ac power. It includes auxiliary devices such as transfer
switches, alternate source transformers and regulators, input rectifiers (other than battery chargers), and
isolation devices (e.g., blocking diodes).
3.6 margin: The difference between service conditions and the conditions used for equipment
qualification.
3.7 operating experience: Accumulation of verifiable service data for conditions equivalent to those for
which particular equipment is to be qualified.
3.8 qualified life: The period of time, prior to the start of a design basis event, for which the equipment
was demonstrated to meet the design requirements for the specified service conditions.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
3.9 stressor: An agent or stimulus that stems from fabrication or perservice and service conditions and can
produce immediate degradation or aging degradation of a system, structure, or component. (adapted from
IEEE Std 1205TM-2000 [B9])
NOTE—At the end of the qualified life, the equipment shall be capable of performing the safety function(s) required
for the postulated design-basis and post-design-basis events (IEEE Std 323–2003). Class 1E equipment may include
components that have significant aging mechanisms. The qualification process will include information on when these
aging mechanisms start and any replacement/maintenance interval required.
4. Specifications
4.1 General
This subclause describes the items to be addressed in the owner’s specifications for the equipment to be
qualified. These items include the equipment identification, the Class 1E performance characteristics, the
input power supply, the environmental conditions, and the effect of changes in input power supply and
environmental conditions upon the Class 1E performance characteristics. If the equipment specification
includes margins, as defined in Clause 3, their values shall be identified.
4.2 Class 1E performance characteristics and safety function
The nuclear plant owner or its representative shall specify the performance characteristics (including the
safety function) of the equipment, including, as a minimum, numerical values and durations for normal,
abnormal, design basis event (DBE), and post-design-basis event conditions, as indicated in 4.2.1 through
4.2.3. Stressors, as defined in 3.8 and 4.1 of IEEE Std 1205-2000 [B9], shall be addressed in defining the
performance characteristics and safety function.
6
Notes in text, tables, and figures are given for information only and do not contain requirements needed to implement the standard.
3
IEEE 650-2006
4.2.1 Class 1E performance characteristics
The following characteristics are suggested conditions, parameters, and performance requirements to be
considered in acceptance testing.
a) Input conditions, such as
1) Voltage
2) Frequency
3) Phase
4) Current (if limiting conditions exist for installed condition)
b) Output requirements, such as
1) Voltage and voltage regulation
2) Current (minimum and maximum)
3) Current limit
4) Frequency and frequency regulation (inverters only)
5) Load power factor (inverters only)
6) Ripple voltage (battery chargers only)
7) Harmonic distortion (inverters only)
c) Surge withstand capability
d) Reverse dc current flow prevention (chargers only)
e) Characteristics of auxiliary equipment (if used), including
1) Transfer switches (functional operation, e.g., transfer time, high- and low-voltage actuation,
and overcurrent actuation)
2) Inverter’s input rectifier (same input conditions as battery charger)
3) Isolating device (blocking and conducting function)
4) Alternate source transformer and regulator (input conditions and output requirements)
f) Other performance characteristics as required by owner/purchaser specifications
4.2.2 Description of the safety function of Class 1E charger or inverter
The safety function(s) of the equipment (including required operating time) shall be specified for applicable
service and DBE conditions expected during its qualified life.
4.2.3 Qualified life objective (where applicable)
The equipment qualified life objective shall be specified along with the set of service conditions under
which successful performance must be demonstrated before, during, and after a DBE as applicable.
4.3 Environment
All significant environmental parameters shall be specified in the owner’s specification. The range of
environmental conditions shall include, as a minimum, normal and abnormal conditions and durations, as
well as DBE and post-DBE conditions.
4
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
Where applicable, the equipment specification shall include numerical values for the magnitude and
duration of the following service conditions:
a) Minimum and maximum, temperature including profiles if available

b) Minimum and maximum storage temperature
c) Maximum relative humidity (operating and storage)
d) Altitude (static air pressure)
e) Operational vibration
f) Seismic requirements
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
g) Nuclear radiation type
h) Irradiation (dose rate and total dose)
i) Radio frequency interference (RFI) and/or electromagnetic interference (EMI) levels (i.e., the
effects of the charger or inverter on other equipment, or vice versa) as defined in
NRC Reg. Guide 1.180-2003 [B11]
4.4 Other conditions
Where applicable, the equipment specifications shall include
a) Any significant rate of change or combinations of specified performance and environmental

limits listed in 4.2 and 4.3
b) The expected total number of operating cycles or operating time period for the
electromechanical devices (including periodic testing cycles)
c) Unusual atmospheric contamination (dust, oil, fungus, chemical or water spray, etc.)
d) Electrical and mechanical interfaces (input and output connections, mounting, voltages,
currents, etc.) between the Class 1E equipment to be qualified and other equipment or devices
e) Dielectric test parameters
5. Qualification
The qualification of Class 1E static battery chargers and inverters shall be established by analysis and test
as outlined in this clause. Figure 1 provides a pictorial overview.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
5
IEEE 650-2006
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Figure 1 —Flowchart for qualification of Class 1E static battery chargers and inverters
6
IEEE 650-2006
5.1 Analytical requirements
An analysis shall be performed on all components within the charger or inverter to determine which
components are required for the performance of its safety function and which components are not.
5.1.1 Nonsafety component analysis
A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) shall be performed, in accordance with 4.2 of
IEEE Std 577-2004, 7 on all components presumed to be nonsafety components. The FMEA shall
demonstrate that the failure of these components, as used in the circuit throughout the qualified life of the
equipment, does not affect the ability of the charger or inverter to perform its safety function (see 4.2.2) or,
by way of interfaces, does not affect the safety functions) of other equipment. The nonsafety components
shall be assembled into the sample equipment without additional analysis or testing. Any component whose
failure is determined to affect the ability of the charger or inverter to perform its safety function by the
FMEA shall be considered a safety component and is addressed in 5.1.2.
5.1.2 Safety component analysis
Components designated as safety components are those whose failure affects the ability of the charger or
inverter to perform its safety function or, by way of interfaces, affects the safety function of other
equipment. They shall be analyzed in accordance with the requirements of this subclause.
5.1.2.1 Operational stress analysis
An essential part of the qualification of this equipment is to verify the integrity of its design. Thus, as part
of the qualification process, a stress analysis of the equipment shall be performed to assure that no
electrical component is stressed to a point where its aging is accelerated beyond that expected in operation.
Should any components be overstressed, a redesign shall be performed to correct this condition. Typical
stress levels for voltage and power of 0.5 or less are not considered a contributor to aging. Annex A
provides background information on this topic as well as an example of a stress analysis.
5.1.2.2 Component classification
All safety components within the charger or inverter shall be classified as either components for which
aging is not a significant failure mechanism or components for which aging is a significant failure
mechanism. An aging mechanism is significant if, in the normal and abnormal service environment, it
causes degradation during the installed life of the equipment that progressively and appreciably renders the
equipment vulnerable to failure to perform its safety function(s) under DBE conditions (see 6.2.1 of
IEEE Std 323-2003). Operating experience, testing, and analysis may be used in this classification process.
5.1.2.2.1 Components without significant aging mechanisms
If the components are designed and manufactured with the same techniques used to manufacture the
commercial grade equivalent of mil-spec components, and they are applied within their design rating (as
determined by the stress analysis in 5.1.2.1) and a radiation environment less than 1.0E + 03 rads, then the
aging effect on the components will not be significant during the qualified life of the equipment in which
they are installed.
Aging may not be a significant failure mechanism for the components identified with a Phi (Φ) symbol.
These components must be designed and manufactured with the same techniques and materials as
components that exhibited no difference in performance due to age-related degradation. Component data
used to make such a determination must be technically justifiable. Any differences between the specific
components used in a charger or inverter and those identified in the publication must be justified.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
7
For guidance in performing an FMEA, consult IEEE Std 352TM-1987 [B4].
7
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
NOTE—The symbol Φ as used in this subclause does not refer to activation energy.
The components listed below are reflective of but not limited to:
a) Electronic components*
1) Discrete semiconductors
2) Surge suppressors — metal-oxide varistors and silicon type
3) Resistors
4) Tantalum dry electrolytic capacitors
5) Ceramic capacitors
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
6) Dry paper and plastic film capacitors

7) Mica capacitors
8) Glass capacitors
9) Integrated microelectronic devices
10) Hybrid microcircuits
11) Φ Fuses
12) Φ Control and instrument transformers and inductors
b) Nonelectronic components.*
1) Structural, nonwire insulating elements, and connections made of the following materials:
i) Steel
ii) Aluminum
iii) Copper
iv) Epoxy/fiberglass laminates, NEMA Grade G-10 or G-11 equivalent
v) Brass
vi) Ceramic
vii) Glass-filled diallyl phthalate
2) Electromechanical components.* Aging is not a significant failure mechanism for certain
types of the following electromechanical components in typical Class 1E battery charger or
static inverter applications:
i) Φ Connectors
ii) Φ Sockets (IC, transistor, relay)
iii) Φ Terminal blocks made of the following materials:
⎯ DAP
⎯ Melamine
⎯ Nylon
⎯ Nylon 6.6
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
⎯ Glass-filled phenolic
⎯ General-purpose phenolic
8
IEEE 650-2006
iv) Φ Fuse blocks made of the following materials:

⎯ Melamine
⎯ X laminate
⎯ Glass-filled polyester
⎯ Phenolic
⎯ Polycarbonate
v) Φ Meters
vi) Φ Lamp sockets
vii) Φ Electronic time-delay relays
viii) Motors
ix) Circuit breakers (molded case)
x) Φ Relays (general purpose) — normally de-energized
xi) Φ Snap acting switches
*Radiation tolerance levels must be verified by the manufacture/qualifier to envelop the design radiation
requirement.
NOTE—Annex A and Annex C furnish guidance for classifying additional components as those for which aging is not
a significant failure mechanism.
Justification must be provided to classify components not meeting the above criteria as components without
significant aging mechanisms.
5.1.2.2.2 Components with significant aging mechanisms
Unless documentation showing that aging is not a significant failure mechanism can be provided, it shall be
assumed that the following components have significant aging mechanisms:
a) Electromechanical components such as relays, fans, contactors, and circuit breakers

b) Insulated wire
c) Power magnetic components
d) Wet electrolytic capacitors
e) Surge suppressors (selenium)
f) AC oil-filled capacitors
g) Organic materials other than the non-aging, electromechanical components listed in item b2) of
5.1.2.2.1
h) Other components or materials not specified above
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
9
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
5.2 Component qualification
Components with significant aging mechanism need not be aged prior to the type test if they can be
addressed by periodic inservice surveillance/maintenance. To qualify components with significant aging
mechanisms that cannot be addressed by periodic inservice surveillance/maintenance, the component shall
be aged to the equipment qualified life objective. If the qualified life of the component is expected to be
less than that of the equipment, then the component shall be aged to its qualified life (prior to the type test)
based on either operating experience or component-life test data.
The replacement interval for limited-life components that cannot meet the desired equipment qualified life
shall be equal to or less than their qualified life. The qualified life of a component may be extended after
installation by additional testing, analysis, or operating experience. The specified replacement interval of a
component shall be equal to or less than the interval established in the qualification process.
Components with significant aging mechanisms shall be aged in accordance with one or more of the
following techniques.
5.2.1 Natural aging
Components may be taken from a field installation that has been operating for the desired period designated
as the component qualified life. Documentation shall be provided to demonstrate that the installed service
conditions meet or exceed the specified service conditions.
5.2.2 Accelerated aging
Accelerated aging is the process of subjecting a component or equipment to stress conditions at a rate
greater than natural aging, in accordance with known measurable physical or chemical laws of degradation.
This action renders its physical and electrical properties similar to those it would have at an advanced age
operating under expected service conditions. The methodology may include radiation, thermal, and/or wear
aging as required. The following methods are recommended for accelerated aging of components where the
component has not been exempted (see 5.1.2.2.1 and 5.1.2.2.2).
5.2.2.1 Circuit breakers and electromechanical switches
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
The predominant age-related failure mode of circuit breakers and switches in typical Class 1E battery
charger and static inverter applications is of a mechanical fatigue nature, as induced by switching cycles
(Annex D). However, an analysis of the materials employed in this device, in accordance with 5.1.2.2, is
also required. Due to the continuous operating mode of this equipment, circuit breakers and control and
power switches (and their associated annunciating relays) are cycled only during testing, preventive and
corrective maintenance, and plant shutdown periods. A determination of anticipated maximum number of
cycles [see item b) of 4.4] during the qualified life shall be made based on the sum of the following:
a) Number of cycles required for all necessary testing prior to plant operation
b) Estimated number of equipment maintenance cycles
c) Number of customer-planned cycles for any purpose (equipment or plant maintenance, etc.)
The breakers and switches shall then be cycled, at their maximum load, for the number of cycles
determined above. Coil-insulation systems associated with the breakers and switches shall be aged as
described in 5.2.2.3. Lubricants shall also be evaluated to determine whether aging will inhibit operation of
the device.
10
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE 650-2006
5.2.2.2 Electromechanical relays
The predominant age-related failure modes of electromechanical relays in typical Class 1E battery charger
and static inverter applications are, as a result of fatigue, due to operating cycles and failure of the coil
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
insulation system. The operating mode of each relay shall be identified as follows:
a) Normally energized—high-duty cycle (many times per day)

b) Normally energized—low-duty cycle (relay used during maintenance and testing, etc.)
c) Normally de-energized—high-duty cycle
d) Normally de-energized—low-duty cycle
The maximum expected number of operating cycles of each relay shall be determined for the equipment
qualified life based on the relay’s use in the equipment and the same criteria in 5.2.2.1. All relays shall be
cycled under simulated service conditions for the number of cycles determined above. The coil-insulation
system shall be aged as described in 5.2.2.3. An analysis of the materials employed in these devices, as
described in 5.1.2.2, is also required.
5.2.2.3 Magnetic components
The life of magnetic components, as used in chargers and inverters, is determined by the insulation system
(see IEEE Std 259-1999). An insulation system, on which thermal evaluation has been performed and
correlated temperature versus age data has been established, shall be employed. Magnetic components shall
be subjected to accelerated aging to the desired qualified life in accordance with 3.2 of IEEE Std 259-1999.
5.2.2.4 Wire, cable, terminal blocks, and connections
Insulated wire and cable shall be qualified for temperature, humidity, and time required for normal service
of this equipment by the methods described in IEEE Std 383-2003. Connectors shall be qualified for
temperature, humidity, and time required for normal service of this equipment by the methods described in
IEEE Std 572TM-1985 [B5]. The basis for qualification shall include pre-aging data to simulate qualified life
(such as Arrhenius plots with 95% confidence limits). Wire and cable insulation used in equipment units to
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
be qualified by type testing shall be thermally aged in accordance with this data. Where practical, wire shall
be aged in harnesses with connectors and terminal blocks attached, in order to test the integrity of the
connection methods employed in the aged condition. When mechanical cycling of connectors can be shown
to occur very infrequently, cycling need not be considered as an aging factor for qualification. Each type of
connector and terminal block used in the equipment shall be included. Interconnections shall be tested
through the thermal and mechanical stresses induced by the burn-in test (see 5.3.1.4), the stress test (see
5.3.1.6), and the seismic test (see 5.3.1.7).
5.2.2.5 DC electrolytic capacitors
Accelerated aging of dc electrolytic capacitors shall be achieved by subjecting the capacitors to rated core
temperature and rated working voltage for the rated life or less. The rated life is the life published by the
capacitor manufacturer when the capacitor is operated within rated conditions. The acceleration factors are
obtained from the capacitor manufacturer’s curves that relate the ratio of rated working voltage and core
temperature to actual operating working voltage and core temperature.
5.2.2.6 AC oil-filled capacitors
Accelerated aging of ac oil-filled capacitors for sinusoidal voltage applications shall be achieved in
accordance with the life data curves in EIA 401-73 and EIA 454-78. Capacitors subject to nonsinusoidal
voltage, or other than 60 Hz (e.g., commutating capacitors), shall be aged as described above based on the
equivalent 60 Hz sinusoidal voltage.
11
IEEE 650-2006
5.2.2.7 Surge suppressors
The protection of the power and control semiconductors against transient surges across the input and the
output of the equipment may be accomplished through the use of surge suppressors, transzorbs, mov’s, etc.
The rate of aging of surge suppressors is determined primarily by the amount and duration of the applied
current. The device passes current only when transient surges are encountered. The surge suppressors shall
be aged by subjecting the device to the maximum number of surges anticipated during the qualified life.
Unless otherwise required in the equipment specification, the device shall be subjected to 100 surges to
simulate the qualified life. The surges shall be equal to or greater than those specified in item c) in 4.2.1.
5.2.2.8 Circuit board assemblies
Circuit boards may consist of devices with significant aging mechanisms and devices without significant
aging mechanisms. An analysis shall be performed of all components on the board to determine whether
any have significant aging mechanisms. If there are no components with significant aging mechanisms on
the circuit board, it does not have to be aged prior to the type test. If there are components with significant
aging mechanisms on the board that cannot be addressed by surveillance/maintenance, the component that
has the shortest qualified life determines the qualified life of the board. All components with significant
aging mechanisms shall be aged to the qualified life of the short-life component in accordance with the
aging techniques in this subclause. These components may be aged on or off the circuit board. If aged off
the board, care shall be taken to avoid damaging the components during assembly onto the board.
5.2.2.9 Fuses
Fuses in Class 1E battery chargers and inverters are used to protect semiconductors, instrumentation, and
power and control circuits. Fuses shall be properly applied in circuits with respect to ampacity, voltage, and
temperature. Specifically, an adequate temperature margin shall be provided to preclude an increase in
temperature rise at the fuse or fuse holder termination beyond the fuse rating. Documentation may be
provided to verify that the fuses are properly applied in the circuits with respect to ampacity, voltage, and
temperature, and that adequate temperature margin has been provided to preclude an increase in
temperature rise at the fuse or fuse holder termination beyond the fuse rating. If such documentation is
provided, there are no age-related common-mode failure mechanisms for the fuses used. If this
documentation is not available, this device may be aged by natural or accelerated methods.
5.2.2.10 Organic materials
Arrhenius plots (see IEEE Std 101-1987) may be used to develop accelerated thermal aging techniques for
the organic materials to be qualified. If Arrhenius plots and activation energy values do not exist for certain
materials, an activation energy of similar material shall be considered. If reference activation energy levels
cannot be justified, an activation energy of 0.8 eV should be used as a conservative and technically
justifiable value.
5.2.2.11 Motors, pumps, and/or other components

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Motors, pumps, and/or other components may consist of materials with significant aging mechanisms. An
analysis shall be performed on all materials to determine whether any have significant aging mechanisms.
If a component has no materials with significant aging mechanisms, it does not have to be aged prior to the
type test. If a component has materials with significant aging mechanisms that cannot be addressed by
surveillance/maintenance, the component shall be aged in accordance with the aging techniques in this
subclause. The material that has the shortest qualified life determines the qualified life of the component.
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
5.3 Equipment qualification
Subclause 6.3.1.7 of IEEE Std 323–2003 outlines a sequence in which type testing may be performed. For
equipment with components with significant aging mechanisms that cannot be addressed by
12
IEEE 650-2006
surveillance/maintenance techniques, this sequence is not followed in this standard, due to the variation in
aging rates of the components. Since the equipment is to be assembled of aged components, testing of the
sample equipment must come after the components have been aged and the assembly is complete. The type
test sequence in this subclause is conservative in that the components are subjected to additional stresses
after aging. With the inclusion of the seismic test, this conservatism is sufficient to account for reasonable
uncertainties in demonstrating satisfactory performance and normal variations in commercial production,
and thus assure that the equipment can perform under the most adverse condition specified.
5.3.1 Type test
The type test sequence shall be conducted as follows.
5.3.1.1 Component aging
Components shall be analyzed and, where required, aged to their respective qualified life or the equipment
qualified life, whichever is less, in accordance with 5.2.
5.3.1.2 Component and equipment aging
New (nonaged) and age-conditioned components shall be assembled into a complete piece of equipment in
accordance with applicable production procedures. Mechanical inspection, dielectric testing [see item e) of
4.4], and functional testing for normal conditions (see 4.2) shall be performed. When applicable the ability
of the equipment to operate within the levels of EMI/RFI specified in item i) of 4.3 shall be demonstrated
by analysis, testing, or both to the purchaser specified standard. The equipment that is to undergo the
EMI/RFI testing shall be a technically justifiable representative new or aged piece(s) of equipment.
5.3.1.3 Radiation analysis or testing
Since the battery charger or inverter is located in an environment where only low levels (typically less than
1.0E + 03 rads, total integrated dose) of radiation are encountered. Documentation (analysis or testing)
shall be provided to demonstrate that the ability of the equipment to perform its required function is
unaffected by the radiation dose specified in item g) and item h) of 4.3.
5.3.1.4 Equipment burn-in
The equipment shall be subjected to minimum burn-in of 100 h (50 h at full load, 50 h at minimum
specified load) at room ambient temperature. The purchaser may specify variations to the nominal input
voltages if deemed appropriate for installed conditions. The burn-in places the equipment into its normal
installed condition and is intended to eliminate infant mortality failures.
5.3.1.5 Pre-environmental stress performance test
To establish a reference for the measurement of operating parameters under normal and worst-case
conditions and a valid basis for the comparison of test results, the complete equipment shall be subjected to
the conditioning process as follows.
Place the equipment in an environmental test chamber that has the capability of being varied in both
temperature and humidity over the required service conditions. With the chamber set at an ambient
temperature of 25 °C ± 5 °C and prevailing relative humidity, operate the equipment at full load for a
period of 2 h and document functional performance data for normal conditions [see item a), item b1), item
b2), and item b4) of 4.2.1. This data shall be analyzed for conformance to the Class 1E performance
characteristics and used as reference data for the continued tests to follow. Calibration adjustments may be
made to the equipment at this time.
13
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
5.3.1.6 Environmental stress test
To demonstrate that the equipment will meet its specified Class 1E performance characteristics under the
specified service conditions (as required by IEEE Std 323–2003), refer to Figure 2 and perform the
following stress test on the fully loaded equipment, or load condition that generates the maximum heat, in
the test chamber:
a) Allow the chamber to increase to the maximum temperature and maximum relative humidity
specified in the service conditions (see 4.3). The equipment shall be operated at this level for a
period of 8 h, at the end of which functional performance data [see item a), item b1), item b2),
and item b4) of 4.2.1] at maximum, nominal, and minimum input voltages, and maximum and
minimum loads shall be documented.
b) Allow the chamber to decrease to the minimum temperature specified in the service conditions
(see 4.3) and maximum obtainable relative humidity (50% minimum). The equipment shall be
operated at this level for a period of 8 h, at the end of which functional performance data [see
item a), item b1), item b2), and item b4) of 4.2.1] at maximum, nominal, and minimum input
voltages, and maximum and minimum loads shall be documented.
c) A complete cycle, including the transition period, shall last a maximum of 36 h. At the end of
the test cycle, the equipment shall be allowed to stabilize at room ambient temperature and
humidity, and a final set of functional performance data [see item a), item b1), item b2), and
item b4) of 4.2.1] at maximum, nominal, and minimum input voltages, and maximum and
minimum loads shall be documented. The above stress test is described in Figure 2.
This test subjects the complete equipment to the worst-case and nominal conditions of temperature,
humidity, input voltages, and output loads (input frequency variations have no impact on stressing the
equipment).
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Figure 2 —Environmental stress test
14
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
5.3.1.7 Seismic test
The ability of the equipment to withstand the operational vibration requirements specified in item e) of 4.3
shall be demonstrated by analysis, testing, or both. The equipment shall therefore be seismically qualified
according to IEEE Std 344-2004. The seismic acceleration levels shall include, as a minimum, +10% for
margin for the SSE test (see 4.1). If tested, the equipment shall be operated during and after the seismic test
at rated output and specified input voltage.
5.3.1.8 Performance test
Upon successful completion of these tests, a functional test shall be performed to meet the Class 1E
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
performance requirements for normal conditions specified in 4.2, and the equipment shall be considered
qualified.
5.3.2 Acceptance criteria
Should any failure occur during test steps 5.3.1.2, 5.3.1.3, or 5.3.1.4, the defective component shall be
replaced with a component that has been subjected to the same aging as the component that it replaces. In
the evaluation of the type test results, any sample equipment is considered to have passed when the
equipment meets or exceeds the function required by the equipment specification (see Clause 4).
Any failure occurring during the testing and qualification process shall be analyzed to determine whether it
is of random or common cause origin. The failure shall be determined not to be of common cause origin if
one of the following criteria is met:
a) Physical examination of the failed component(s) and its interface(s) determines that a random
workmanship problem was the cause of failure.
b) Reexamination of the stress analysis determines that the part is properly applied and any
components similarly applied in the test sample have had no like failures and the failure is not
repeated during subsequent retesting with replacement components.
NOTE—For purposes of this standard, consequential component failures caused by the failure of a single component
are not considered to be of common cause origin.
If the above or other methods have not identified the cause of failure, further analysis must be conducted.
If a failure is determined not to be of common cause origin, the equipment shall be repaired with
replacement components that have been subjected to the same aging as those that it replaces (see 5.2). If the
type test is continued, then it shall commence at the beginning of the specific test during which it failed.
If a failure is determined to be the common cause (either age-related or stress-related), the equipment shall
be rejected. Qualification of the equipment may be attained by redesigning, modifying, and retesting as
above, or qualifying for less stringent conditions by retesting to lower parameters (e.g., shorter qualified
component or equipment life, or lower seismic values).
5.4 Qualification of a product line
It is possible to qualify a product line (that is, chargers or inverters of a similar design of assorted ratings)
by using all of the following techniques:
a) Perform a type test on sample equipment in accordance with 5.3.1.
15
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
b) Perform a complete analysis of components of the other model ratings, in accordance with 5.1,
to demonstrate that no component of the type aged and qualified in the type tests is stressed at a
rate higher than that in the qualified model, to the extent that a different aging acceleration
would have to be employed. Should the analysis determine that either a different aging
acceleration test is necessary or an entirely new generic type of part be employed, the part shall
be aged and seismic tested as a component or assembly to a level equivalent to the previous
qualification level.
NOTE — Different ratings of the same component family are considered type-qualified if the applied stress does not
exceed that in the qualification model.
c) Verify that the service conditions to which the qualified unit was tested are at least as severe as
those specified of the unit being qualified.
d) Each model rating shall be seismically qualified by testing or analysis, or both, in accordance
with IEEE Std 344-2004, and a determination shall be made that the acceleration of components
or assemblies does not exceed that of the qualified model.
5.5 Extension of qualified life
The methods described in 6.3.5 of IEEE Std 323–2003 are applicable for extending the qualified life of
Class 1E static chargers and inverters.
6. Documentation
6.1 General
The following documents are required to verify that the Class 1E static battery charger or inverter is
qualified for its application, meets the specification requirements of Clause 4, and has its qualified life or
periodic surveillance/ maintenance interval established.
6.2 Qualification plan

--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The qualification plan shall contain a description of the methods and procedures used to qualify a particular
Class 1E static charger or inverter for a specific application. The plan shall contain the following:
a) Identification of the equipment to be qualified, including mounting and interface requirements if
applicable
b) Qualification procedures applicable to the equipment to be qualified
c) Details on the differences between the equipment to be qualified and equipment that is type
tested, and the methods used to justify those differences
d) Description of the acceptance criteria for the equipment to be qualified
e) Description of the safety function of the equipment to be qualified
f) Where applicable, the qualified life objective of the equipment to be qualified
This plan shall be used to ensure consistency between the type-tested equipment and the equipment to be
qualified.
16
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
6.3 Qualification report
The qualification report shall contain the following:
a) Equipment specifications (see Clause 4).

b) Identification of specific features to be demonstrated by the analysis and testing, including a
summary of acceptance criteria met. Specific functions or parameters that may have been
excluded from the qualification should also be listed.
c) Qualification plan (see 6.2).
d) Qualification results, which shall include:
1) Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for nonsafety related components, if applicable
(see 5.1.1).
2) Stress analysis (see 5.1.2.1).
3) Documentation for classification for component qualification (5.1.2.2).
4) Identification of any scheduled surveillance/maintenance, periodic testing, and any parts
replacement required to maintain qualification.
5) Test data, aging data (where applicable) for age-sensitive components, accuracy, and
instrument calibration for each test described in 5.3.1. A seismic test report or analysis shall
be furnished.
6) Documentation for EMI/RFI analysis or test (see 5.3.1.2).
7) Documentation for radiation analysis or test (see 5.3.1.3).
8) Analysis for any failure or anomaly occurring during the qualification type test.
9) Any shelf-life requirements.
10) Where applicable, identification of equipment qualified life with a summary of justification
for the qualified life.
11) Where applicable, extension of qualified life data.
6.4 Qualification of product line
The qualification report (see 6.3) may provide a basis for qualifying Class 1E static battery chargers and
inverters of various sizes and ratings. Documentation shall be provided that verifies that such analysis is
performed in accordance with 5.4.
6.5 Additional documentation requirements
a) Certificate of compliance. A certificate of compliance that certifies that the equipment supplied
meets the requirements of the owner’s specification is required.
b) Approval signature and date. Each of the above documents shall include an approval signature
and date.
c) Qualification report. The qualification report shall include, in addition, the approval signature
of an independent reviewer and date.
17
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE 650-2006
Annex A
(informative)
Stress analysis
A.1 Introduction
This annex outlines a stress analysis procedure and provides an example for performing the stress analysis
required by 5.1.2.1. Other procedures, if properly justified, may be used.
A.2 Objectives
The primary purpose of the stress analysis, as part of the qualification process, is to ensure that no
component is stressed to a point where its aging is accelerated beyond that in expected service conditions.
The stress analysis will indicate where redesign is required for any overstressed components. In addition,
the stress analysis will provide a database for generic product line qualification, enabling a direct design
comparison of other ratings with that originally qualified.
A.3 Definition
stress analysis: An electrical and thermal design analysis of component applications in specific circuits
under the specified range of service conditions. Mechanical cycling evaluation shall be performed on
applicable components to determine the impact on component life.
A.4 Procedures
A.4.1 Analysis
A part-stress analysis of the components of each charger or inverter to be qualified should be performed in
accordance with MIL-HDBK-217F-1995 [B10] (see B.3.2).
a) For stress analysis to be valid, manufacturer’s ratings should never be exceeded.
b) Semiconductors should be analyzed for both thermal and voltage stress.
c) Capacitors should be analyzed for voltage stress.
d) Resistors should be analyzed for thermal stress.
e) Fuses should be analyzed for voltage and thermal stress.
The stress analysis should be performed, assuming an ambient air-inlet temperature of 25 °C, or the
maximum, plus the worst-case internal temperature rise for the inverter or charger (normally, 5 °C to
10 °C). Design information should be obtained from the charger or inverter schematic drawings, assembly
drawings, list of materials, parts catalogs, and data sheets.
The analysis method described above consists of determining electrical stress, thermal stress, and failure
rates of system components based on the proper selection and use of each component and the environment
in which the equipment is to be used.
Stress analysis should be performed in accordance with Section 5.1 of MIL-HDBK-217F-1995 [B10] (see
B.3.2).
18--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
A.4.2 Calculations
In performing the electrical stress analysis, each circuit in the charger or inverter should be analyzed in
detail. Equivalent circuits may be used to determine loop currents and node voltages. From these currents
and voltages, applied stress can be obtained. All stress calculations should be made in accordance with the
methods outlined in MIL-HDBK-217F-1995 [B10] (see B.3.2). Refer to B.3 for the minimum applied
stress ratios. The stress ratios are defined as follows:
For semiconductors:
power applied
stress ratio =
power rated
volts applied
stress ratio =
volts rated
For resistors:
power applied
stress ratio =
power rated
For capacitors:
volts applied
stress ratio =
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
volts rated
Finally, the stress correction factor for each semiconductor device should be determined based on
maximum junction temperature Tmax and operating temperature Ts.
Tmax − Ts
Stress correction factor (CF) =
150
Component stress should be calculated assuming that all possible modes of circuit operation may be used
continuously. Worst-case operating mode conditions should be used. Since worst case cannot occur for all
components simultaneously, the result of the analysis will be conservative.
A.4.3 Stress analysis data
The results of the stress analysis should be tabulated in a form similar to that shown in Table A.1 and
Table A.2. These stress analysis data sheets should list all system electrical components by assembly or
printed circuit board, or both. Components should be arranged by type and circuit application. Identical
components used such that identical maximum stress occurs may be listed together by symbol numbers in
the first column, yielding a part quantity. The component MIL style designations are listed along with a
brief description, permitting identification. Where MIL designations are not available, the accepted industry
type or company source control drawing should be listed. Capacitor values are listed in µF and pF.
Resistors values are in Ω, and stress is in mW, unless otherwise noted.
19
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IEEE 650-2006
Table A.1—Sample stress analysis data sheet

System: INV 253-1-101 Assembly: DC–DC Converter Board
Reference Component Value Description Specification Stress Stress Quantity
designation or part ratio
number
CR122 SiDIODE, 1N4004 MILS-19500 1A <0.1 A 0.1 1
RECT
CR123 RECT 1N4004 1A <0.1 A 0.1
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
CR124 RECT 1N4004 1A <0.1 A 0.1

CR125 VR 1N5352B 5W 0.27 W 0.1
CR126 RECT 1N4004 1A 0.2 A 0.2
CR127 0.2 A 0.2
CR128 0.2 A 0.2
CR129 <0.1 A 0.1
CR130 RECT 1N4004 1A <0.1 A 0.1
CR131 VR 1N7534 400 mW 55 mW 0.2
CR132 SIG 1N914 75 mW <1.0 mA 0.1
CR133 RECT 1N4004 1A <0.1 A
CR134
CR135
CR136
CR137 RECT 1N4004 1A <0.1 A 0.1
CR138 VR 1N5352B 6W 0.57 W 0.2
CR139 SiDIODE, 1N5352B 1111S-19500 5W 0.57 W 0.2 1
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
VR
BRIM SiDIODE, MDA990-3 30 A 1.5 A 0.1 1×4
R BRIDGE
Temperature: 35 °C Environment: GF
Table A.2—Sample stress analysis data sheet

System: INV 253-1-101 Assembly: DC–DC Converter Board
Reference Component Value Description Specification Stress Stress Quantity
designation or part ratio
number
R122 RESISTOR, 10 kΩ RC20 MIL-R-11 500 mW 17 mW 0.1 1
CC
R123 MF 162 kΩ RN60 MIL-R- 125 mW 60 mW 0.5
10509
R124 MF 13.7 kΩ RN60 MIL-R- 125 mW 7 mW 0.1
10509
R125 CC 1 kΩ RN20 MIL-R-11 500 mW 80 mW 0.2
R126 CC 1 kΩ 3 mW 0.1
R127 100 kΩ 2 mW 0.1
R128 2.2 kΩ 90 mW 0.2
R129 470 kΩ 8 mW 0.1
R130 CC 10 kΩ RC20 MIL-R-11 500 mW 20 mW 0.1
R131 WW 0.68 kΩ CW5 MIL-R-26 5 mW 0.68 W 0.2
R132 WW 0.68 kΩ CW5 MIL-R-26 5 mW 0.68 W 0.2
R133 WW 0.68 kΩ CW5 MIL-R-26 5 mW 0.68 W 0.2
R134 CT 1 kΩ RC20 MIL-R-11 500 mW 4 mW 0.1
R135 CC 390 kΩ RC42 MIL-R-11 2 mW 0.58 mW 0.3
R136 CC 470 kΩ RC20 MIL-R-11 500 mW 20 mW 0.1
R137 RESISTOR, 1 kΩ CW10 MIL-R-26 1 mW 2.5 W 0.3 1
WW
Temperature: 35 °C Environment: GF
20
IEEE 650-2006
Annex B
(informative)
Electronic components for which aging is not a failure mechanism
B.1 Introduction
Aging is not a significant failure mechanism for certain electronic components in typical Class 1E static
battery charger and inverter applications.
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
When applied within their design rating, the aging of electronic components occurs at such a low rate that
its effect on failure rate is undetectable. Silicon-base semiconductors, for example, never wear out if
constructed and used according to specifications. All semiconductors, however, contain manufacturing
imperfections (e.g., at the bonding junction) that eventually cause failure. Most devices have only slight
imperfections that allow a lengthy service life. About 1% have defects that cause early infant mortality
failures. The burn-in requirement is used to eliminate as many of these devices as possible.
B.2 Failure rate history for components
To illustrate the failure rate history of these electronic components, refer to Figure B.1. This bathtub curve
has three characteristic sections. The first section reflects a high failure rate due to early failures of weak or
defective components. The components are not representative of the longevity of the others and are usually
eliminated from use by subjecting the sample to a preliminary period of operation, often referred to as a
burn-in period. During this period, the initially high failure rate will continue to decrease until it reaches a
value for which it remains relatively constant with respect to time. The burn-in period is of short duration,
typically 30 h to 100 h. The second section of the failure-rate time history curve represents the random
failure-rate value of the component sample where none of the systematic failure mechanisms are operating,
such as early defects or wearout failures. The duration of this section is several thousand times as long as
the burn-in period. The third section of the bathtub curve is the beginning of the wearout failure mechanism
for the component. Since the desired equipment qualified life falls within the area of the curve in which the
electronic component failure rate is constant, the failure rate of a new (burned-in) component is essentially
equal to the failure rate of a component aged to the equipment qualified life. That is, the wearout period for
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
electronic components falls beyond the equipment qualified life.
Figure B.1—Failure rate history for components, in percent
21
IEEE 650-2006
Although it is true that extended extremes of temperature and humidity can alter this non-aging
characteristic, this annex applies only to applications where the temperature and humidity will remain
within the specified service conditions. Thus, aging within the qualified life period is not a significant
failure mechanism.
B.3 Bibliography—Electronic components
An extensive bibliography has been assembled to justify the non-aging concept presented here.
NOTE—References that contain specific conclusions that support the non-aging concept are followed by an asterisk.
B.3.1 Non-aging concept for electronic components
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EPRI NP-3326, Correlation Between Aging and Seismic Qualification for Nuclear Plant Electrical
Components—Phase 1, Dec. 1983.*
Components —Phase 2, Jan. 1987.*
Balaban, H., “Some effects of redundancy on system reliability.” Sixth National Symposium on Reliability
and Quality Control in Electronics, Washington, DC, Jan. 1960.
Best G. E., Bretts, G. R., McLean, H. T., and Lampert, H. M., “Determination application of aging
mechanisms datain accelerated testing of selected semiconductors, capacitors, and resistors.” National
Symposium on Reliability and Quality Control, 1965, pp. 293–302.*
Davis, D. J., “An analysis of some failure data,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 47,
no. 258, June 1952.
Flehinger, B. J., “Reliability improvement through redundancy at various system levels,” IBM Journal of
Research and Development, vol. 2, Apr. 1958.
Hahn, G. J., and Nelson, W., “Comparison of methods of analyzing censored life data to estimate
relationship between stress and product life,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. R-23, no. 1,
Apr. 1974.*
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Henney, K. (ed.), Reliability Factors for Ground Electronic Equipment, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
Jones, E. R., A Guide to Component Burn-In Technology, Wakefield Thermal Solutions, Inc., Pelham, NH,
1972.
Kahn, H., and Mann, I., “Techniques of system analysis,” Rand Corporation, Research Memorandum RM-
1829–1, June 1957.
Mann, N. R., Schafer, R. E., and Singpurwalla, N. D., Methods for Statistical Analysis of Reliability and
Life Data, New York: Wiley, 1974.*
Mine, H., “Reliability of physical systems,” Transactions of the 1959 International Symposium on Circuit
and Information Theory, IT-5, special supplement, May 1959.
Moskowitz, F., “The analysis of redundant networks,” Communications and Electronics, no. 39,
Nov. 1958.
Reliability Stress Analysis for Electronic Equipment, Technical Report TR-59-416-1, RCA, Camden, NJ,
Jan. 1959.
22
IEEE 650-2006
Smith, W. L.,“Renewal theory and its ramifications,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, series B,
vol. 20, no. 2, 1958.
B.3.2 Silicon semiconductors
The statements made in the references below are based on actual test data on Mil-Spec as well as on
commercial-grade components. This bibliography does not require that Mil-Spec components be used as
long as they are components that have been manufactured using the same techniques as those used to
manufacture the equivalent Mil-Spec components. For the purpose of this standard, Joint Electron Device
Engineering Council (JEDEC) 8 components are considered to be acceptable commercial-grade-equivalent
Mil-Spec components.
EIA Recommended Standard RS-313-B, Thermal Resistance Measurements of Conduction Cooled Power
Transistors, Oct. 1975. 9
Components— Phase 1, Dec. 1983.*
EPRI NP-5024. Correlation Between Aging and Seismic Qualification for Nuclear Plant Electrical
Components— Phase 2, Jan. 1987.*
Gallance, L., “Quantitative measurement of thermal cycling capability of silicon power transistors,”
RCA Application Note, AN-6163.
Grove, A. S., Physics and Technology of Semiconductor Devices, New York: Wiley, 1967, pp. 201–205.
Kemenyk, A. P., “Experimental investigation of the life of semiconductor devices I. Accelerated life tests
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
of transistors under static electrical load and at high temperature storage,” ACTA Technical Academy of
SCI, Coden: ATSHA8, Hungary, vol. 74, no. 1–2, pp. 85–144, 1973.*
Kuno, H. J., “Analysis and characterization of PN junction diode switching,” IEEE Transactions on
Electron Devices, Vol. ED-23, p. 8, Jan. 1964.
Lang, G. A., Fehder, B. J., and Williams, W. D., “Thermal fatigue in silicon power transistors,”
IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, Sept. 1970.
Lukach, V. J., Gallance, L., and Williams, W. D., “Thermal cycling ratings of power transistors,”
RCA Application Note, AN-4783.
MIL-HDBK-217F-1995, Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment.* 10
NOTE—This document contains an extensive bibliography.
Miller, L. E., “Reliability of semiconductor devices for submarine cable systems,” Proceedings of the
IEEE, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 230–244, Feb. 1974.*
Oettinger, F. F., Blackburn, D. L., and Rubin, S., “Thermal characterization of power transistors,”
8
Joint Electron Device Council, 2001 Eye Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, USA.
9
EIA publications are available from Global Engineering Documents, 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, Colorado 80112, USA
10
MIL publications are available from Customer Service, Defense Printing Service, 700 Robbins Ave., Bldg. 4D, Philadelphia, PA
19111-5094, USA.
23
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IEEE 650-2006
IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. ED-23, pp. 831–838, Aug. 1976.
Oettinger, F. F., and Rubin, S., “The use of current gain as an indicator for the formation of hot spots due to
current crowding in power transistors,” Proceedings of the IEEE Reliability Physics Symposium, Las Vegas, NV,
Apr. 5, 1972.
Ower, P. L., Westinghouse Research Labs, Blackburn, D. L., Oettinger, F.F., and Rubin, S. National
Bureau of Standards. “Stable Hot Spots and Second Breakdown in Power Transistors.” IEEE Power
Electronics Specialists Conference, 76CH1084-3AES, 1976, p. 234.
Ravi, K V., “Reliability improvement of 1 mil aluminum wire bonds for semiconductors,” Motorola Inc.,
Contract NAS8-26636, Dec 1971.
Reynolds. F. H., “Accelerated-test procedures for semiconductor components,” Post Office Research
Center, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, U.K.*
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
NOTE—This paper contains an extensive bibliography.
Schmid, E. R., “How to eliminate premature semiconductor failures,” Machine Design, Aug. 25, 1977.*
Von Zastrow, E. E. and Galloway, J. H., “Commutation behavior of diffused high current rectifier
diodes,”IEEE Transactions on Industry and General Applications, vol. IGA-1, no. 2, pp. 157–166,
Mar./Apr. 1965.
Wahl, A. J., “Ten years of power aging of the same group of submarine cable semi-conductor devices,”Bell
Systems Technical Journal, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 987–1005, July/Aug. 1977.*
Wahl, A. J., McMahon, W., Lesh, N. G., and Thompson, W. J., “SF system: Transistors, diodes, and
components,”Bell Systems Technical Journal, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 683–698, May/June 1970.
24
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
Table B.1— Resistors—Fixed resistor selection guide

Section Type Styles Section Type Styles available
available in in standard
standard
101 Composition 302 Film, established RNR50
(MIL-R-11) (insulated) (MIL-R-55182) reliability RNR55
RNR60
102 Film (high stability) RN75 RNR65
(MIL-R-10509) RNR70
103 Film (power type) RD60 303 Wire-wound RBR52
(MIL-R-11804) RD65 (MIL-R-39005) (accurate), RBR53
RD70 established RBR54
reliability
RBR55
104 Wire-wound RBR56
(MIL-R-93) (accurate) RBR57
RBR71
RBR72
106 Wire-wound (power RW29
(MIL-R-26) type) RW31 304 Wire-wound RWR74
RW33 (MIL-R-39007) (power type), RWR78
RW35 established RWR80
reliability
RW37 RWR81
RW38 RWR84
RW47 RWR89
RW56
305 Film (insulated) RLR05
107 Film (insulated) (MIL-R-39017) established RLR07
reliability
(MIL-R-22684) RLR20
RLR32
RLR42
108 Wire-wound (power RE77
(MIL-R-18546) type, chassis mount) RE80 306 Wire-wound RER40
(MIL-R-39003) (power type, RER45
chassis mount),
established
reliability
RER50
301 Composition RCR05 RER55
(MIL-R-39008) (insulated), RCR07 RER60
established reliability
RCR20 RER65
RCR32 RER70
RCR42 RER75
25
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE 650-2006
Table B.2— Resistors—Variable resistor selection guide

Section Type Styles available in standard
201 Composition RV4
(MIL-R-94) (insulated) RV6
202 Wire-wound (low operating RA20
(MIL-R-19) temperature) RA30
203 Wire-wound RP05
(MIL-R-22) (power type) RP06
RP10
RP15
RP20
RP25
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
RP30
204 Wire-wound, precision RR0900
(MIL-R-12934) RR1000
RR1100
RR1300
RR1400
RR2000
RR2100
RR3000
205 Wire-wound, semi RK09
(MIL-R-39002) precision
206 Wire-wound (lead screw activated) RT26
(MIL-R-27208)
207 Nonwire-wound (lead screw activated) RJ12
(MIL-R-22097) RJ22
RJ24
RJ26
RJ50
208 Nonwire-wound RVC5
(MIL-R-23285) RVC6
401 Wire-wound (lead screw activated), RTR12
(MIL-R-39015) established reliability RTR22
RTR24
402 Nonwire-wound (lead screw activated), RJR12
(MIL-R-39035) established reliability RJR24
B.3.3 Resistors
These resistors meet the non-aging criteria when they are applied within their wattage ratings as in
Table B.3.
Table B.3—Maximum applied stress ratios
Type Applied stress in percent of rated Watts
Carbon 50%
Film 50%
Wire-wound 60%
NOTE 1—The above stress values in B.2 were obtained from MIL-Std-199B-1974.
NOTE 2—Various grades of resistors, from Mil-Spec to commercial grade, are available for use in Class 1E
charger/inverter applications. The non-aging criteria apply to the resistors in Table B.1 as long as they are used within
their wattage ratings as stated above and manufactured with techniques used to manufacture the equivalent Mil-Spec
resistors.
26
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
NOTE 3—Mil-Spec resistors are not required by this standard.
“Flameproof Resistors—Select Them Carefully or You May Get Burned,” Electronic Products Magazine,
Aug. 15, 1983.
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
The Truth About Resistors, Ohmite Manufacturing Company, 1977.
B.3.4 Tantalum dry electrolytic capacitors
Components— Phase 2, Jan. 1987*
Didinger, G. H., Jr., “On the reliability of solid tantalum capacitors, and reliability measurement and
prediction for solid tantalum capacitors,” Kemet Company, Union Carbide Corporation, 1961.*
Holladay, A. M., “Guidelines of the selection and application of tantalum electrolytic capacitors in highly
reliable equipment,” NASA TMX-64755 Rev A, Jan. 31, 1978.*
Maguire, D. E., “An Application of the weibull distribution to the determination of the reliability of solid
tantalum capacitors,” Kemet Company, Union Carbide Corporation, 1961.
Mandakis, B. J., “The solid tantalum capacitor—a ‘solid’ contributor to reliability,” Electronic
Communications Inc., St. Petersburg, FL, Proceedings of the 11th Annual Reliability Physics Conference,
1973.
Stout, H. L., “Extended life test of solid electrolyte tantalum capacitors,” Army Electronics Command, Fort
Monmouth, NJ (037620).*
B.3.5 Capacitors (ceramic, paper, plastic film, mica, glass)
With the exception of oil-filled type paper or plastic film capacitors, the non-aging criteria applies,
provided the capacitors are manufactured using the same techniques used in manufacturing the equivalent
Mil-Spec components listed in Table B.2. For additional information, see Mil-Std-198D-1976.
NOTE—This standard does not require the use of Mil-Spec components.
Components—Phase 2, Jan. 1987.*
B.3.6 Integrated microelectronic devices and hybrid microcircuits

--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Components— Phase 2, Jan. 1987.*
27
IEEE 650-2006
MIL-HDBK217E-1986, Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment.
NOTE—This document contains an extensive bibliography.
Aaron, D. and Adam, M., “MOS reliability prediction model,” 9th Reliability and Maintainability
Symposium, July 1970.
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
Fuchs, J. and Lauffenburger, H. A., “System for effective transferal of microelectronic reliability
experience,” 8th Reliability Maintainability Symposium, July 1969.
Lehtonen, D. E., “Microcircuit reliability assessment through accelerated testing,” Electronic Packaging
and Production, July 1977.
Schmid, E. R., “How to eliminate premature semiconductor failures,” Machine Design, Aug. 25, 1977.*
Wahl, A. J., “Ten years of power aging of the same group of submarine cable devices,” Bell System
Technical Journal, vol. 56, no. 6, July/Aug. 1977.*
Weissflug, V. A. and Sisual, E. V., “Cyclic and low temperature effects on microcircuits,” McDonnell
Douglas Astronautics Company, East. Final Technical Report prepared for the George C. Marshall Space
Flight Center, Aug. 1975–Aug. 1977.*
Table B.4—Capacitors
Dielectric Applicable specification
Glass
Fixed MIL-C-23269 (ER)
Variable 1 MIL-C-14409
Mica MIL-C-10950
Button style MIL-C-5
General purpose MIL-C-39001 (ER)
Electrolytic
Tantalum (solid) MIL-C-39003 (ER)
Tantalum (solid) chip MIL-C-55365 (ER)
Paper
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Wax-impregnated MIL-C-12889
Metallized MIL-C-39022 (ER)
Paper-Plastic
Polycarbonate MIL-C-19978 (ER)
Paper & polyethylene
Terephthalate MIL-C-19978 (ER)
Plastic or metallized plastic MIL-C-55514 (ER)
Polyethylene terephthalate MIL-C-19978 (ER)
Ceramic MIL-C-11015
Fixed, general purpose MIL-C-39014 (ER)
Temp compensating MIL-C-20 (ER)
Variable MIL-C-81
Fixed, chip MIL-C-55681 (ER)
Gas or vacuum
Fixed MIL-C-23183
Variable MIL-C-23183
28
IEEE 650-2006
Annex C
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
(informative)
Nonelectronic components for which aging is not a failure mechanism
C.1 General
Aging is not a failure mechanism for certain nonelectronic components used as structural, nonwire
insulating elements, and connections (in typical Class 1E charger/inverter applications) that are processed
using approved methods. The quality assurance procedures required for nuclear safety applications by
ASME NQA-1-1986 (see C.2.1) and 10-CFR-50 (see C.2.1) provide for stringent controls of such
processes as welding, soldering and crimping, and assembly and finishing. One purpose of these controls is
to assure that no degradation of structural integrity occurs to mechanical parts, fasteners, and the like. In
addition, IEEE Std 344-2004 specifically requires that equipment that is to be qualified be subjected to
requirements that simulate the effects of structural-related aging on the equipment. The following
components do not have a significant age-related failure mechanism when used in Class 1E static battery
chargers and inverters:
a) Aluminum
b) Brass
c) Ceramic
d) Copper
e) Steel
C.2 Bibliography—Nonmetallic, nonelectronic components
An extensive bibliography has been assembled to justify that certain nonmetallic components, as used in
typical Class 1E charger/inverter applications, do not have age-related failure mechanisms within a service
life of 40 years.
NOTE—References that contain specific conclusions that support the non-aging concept are followed by an asterisk.
C.2.1 Epoxy fiberglass grade G-10 and G-11 or equivalent (not exposed to bright light for
prolonged periods)
ASME NQA-1-1986, Quality Assurance Requirements for Nuclear Facilities. 11
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
EPRI NP-2129, Report of Radiation Effects on Organic Materials in Nuclear Plants.
11
ASME publications are available from the Order Department, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 22 Law Drive, Box 2300,
Fairfield, NJ 07007-2300, USA.
29
IEEE 650-2006
Darmory, F. P., “Polyimide lamination resin for multilayer printed wiring boards,” Insulation/Circuits,
vol. 21, no. 10, 1974.*
DeForest, W. S., Connelly, H. V., and Marro, S., “The effect of heat aging and related phenomenon on the
black-oxide-epoxy band,” 1977 National Electronic Packaging Conference Proceedings WEST, Mar. 1977,
pp. 1–7.
Eisler, P. The Technology of Printed Circuits. London, U.K.: Heywood and Company, 1959.
Establish Improved Manufacturing Processes for Polyimide Printed Circuit Boards, USAF Contract F33615-76-
5045, Interim Report No. 1–5.
Hayes, L.E., and Mayfield, R. E., “A critical look at polyimide/glass multilayer boards, ” 1975 National
Electronic Packaging Conference Proceedings, 1975.
Mayfield, R. E., “A critical look at polyimide glass multilayer boards,” IPC Publication TP-80, Apr. 1976.
Reliability Study of Polyimide/Glass Multilayer Boards, RADC-TR-73-400, Final Technical Report,

Martin Marietta Aerospace, Jan. 1974.*
Rhodia Technical Information Bulletin on Kerimid 500, Apr. 1973.
Schiavo, J. S. and Mearns, R. M., “Multilayer board reliability,” Electronic Packaging and Production,
vol. 16, no. 1, Jan. 1976.*
Schussler, P., “Preventing delamination of circuit boards and flexible circuits,” Insulation/Circuits, vol. 20,
no. 7, July 1973.
10-CFR-Title 15, Regulations Relating to Foreign Trade, Appendix B, 869-011-000-48-7.
C.2.2 Glass-filled diallyl phthalate
ASME NQA-1-1986, Quality Assurance Requirements for Nuclear Facilities.
EPRI NP-2129, Report of Radiation Effects on Organic Materials in Nuclear Plants.
RADC TR-71-299, Reliability of Ceramic Multilayer Boards (Final technical report, May 1970–Jun. 1971),
AD-737 373. 12
RADC-TR-73-171, Reliability Study Circular Electrical Connectors (Final technical report, Jan. 1972–Jan.
1973), AD-765 609/3.
RADC-TR-73-400, Reliability Study of Polyimide/Glass Multilayer Boards (Final technical report,

Mar. 1972–Jun. 1973), AD-777 194/2.
12
RADC documents are available from Customer Services Staff, NTIS—US Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161, USA.
30
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
RADC-TR-74-88, Infrared Testing of Multilayer Boards (Final report, Sep. 1973–Jan. 1974), AD-780
550/0.
RADC-TR-75-22, Nonelectronic Reliability Notebook (Final report), AD-A005 657/2.
Proceedings of the Tenth Electrical/Electronics Insulation Conference. IEEE 1974, pub no 71C 38-EI.*
10-CFR-Title 15, Regulations Relating to Foreign Trade, Appendix B, 869-011-000-48-7. 13

//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
13
Federal regulations are available from the Government Printing Office, 732 N. Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC 20401, USA.
31
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE 650-2006
Annex D
(informative)
Discussion of failure mechanisms in electromechanical devices
The predominant cause of failure of electromechanical devices used in chargers and inverters is cycle-
induced fatigue. This applies to relays, switches (including contactors), and circuit breakers when applied
properly in the design in terms of electrical stress. This statement applies to electromechanical devices
using approved materials of the types described in Annex C or other qualified components. Thus, an
analysis, in accordance with 5.1.2, of the materials employed in the devices is required.
Some concern has been voiced about relays and other devices that, after being kept in the same state
(energized or de-energized) for a period of years, are called on to act, only to be found frozen into position.
This may not apply to chargers and inverters for the following reasons:
a) Routine plant maintenance of batteries to which the chargers and inverters are connected may
require that the equipment be turned on and off, as well as disconnected, one or two times a
year. This action would cycle all devices in question.
b) Maintenance replacements of limited-life items may occur every few years, again cycling these
devices.
These electromechanical devices have typically been endurance tested by the device manufacturer for tens
and hundreds of thousands of operations. As applied in battery chargers and inverters, these devices will
typically be subjected to only a few hundred operations over their expected qualified life. The actual
operating duty is therefore only a small fraction of the tested life of the device, and thus, it provides a very
high design margin.
As a result of the above, cycling these electromechanical devices to the total number of anticipated cycles
during the qualified life period under equivalent stress (load) conditions, along with the final temperature-
humidity seismic testing of the equipment itself, will provide a reasonable simulation of expected condition
at the end of the qualified life period.
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
32
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

IEEE 650-2006
Annex E
(informative)
Cycling of connectors
In Class 1E battery chargers and static inverters, wire and cable harnesses, and their associated connectors
and terminal blocks, are fixed objects after they have passed final inspection and acceptance by the
customer. Connector disconnect and reconnect may occur on a very low duty cycle basis. This can be
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
demonstrated by performing mean time between failure (MTBF) calculations on the associated circuit
board assemblies to determine their replacement interval. There is no planned maintenance requirement for
operation of the connectors or terminal blocks. Thus, cycling of these devices, as employed in this
equipment, is not an age-related failure mechanism. For more information, refer to
IEEE Std 572-1985 [B5]. 14
14
See Footnote 3.
33
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~"#:$@"**~"~~@^~~~^~:^~~^^:^:~\\
IEEE 650-2006
Annex F
(informative)
Bibliography
--`,,```,,,,````-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
[B1] ANSI/NEMA PE 5-2003, Utility Battery Chargers. 15
[B2] IEEE 100, The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms, Seventh edition. 16
[B3] IEEE Std 308-2001, IEEE Standard Criteria for Class 1E Power Systems for Nuclear Power
Generating Stations.
[B4] IEEE Std 352-1987, IEEE Guide for General Principles of Reliability Analysis of Nuclear Power
Generating Station Safety Systems.
[B5] IEEE Std 572-1985, IEEE Standard for Qualification of Class 1E Connection Assemblies for
Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
[B6] IEEE Std 603-1998, IEEE Standard Criteria for Safety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating
Stations.
[B7] IEEE Std 944-1986 IEEE Recommended Practice for the Application and Testing of Uninterruptible
Power Supplies for Power Generating Stations.
[B8] IEEE Std 946–2004, IEEE Recommended Practice for the Design of DC Auxiliary Systems for
Nuclear Generating Systems.
[B9] IEEE Std 1205-2000, IEEE Guide for Assessing, Monitoring and Mitigating Aging Effects on Class
1E Equipment Used in Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
[B10] MIL-HDBK-217F-1995, Reliability Prediction Of Electronic Equipment. 17
[B11] NRC Reg. Guide 1.180-2003, Guidelines for Evaluating Electromagnetic and Radio-Frequency
Interference in Safety-Related Instrumentation and Control Systems. 18
15
NEMA publications are available from Global Engineering Documents, 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, Colorado 80112, USA
16
IEEE publications are available from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Service Center, 445 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box
1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855–1331, USA.
17
MIL publications are available from Customer Service, Defense Printing Service, 700 Robbins Ave., Bldg. 4D, Philadelphia, PA
19111-5094, USA.
18
NRC publications are available from Global Engineering Documents, 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, Colorado 80112, USA
34
//^:^^#^~^^":~:*"~#$^@@~


IEEE Standard For Qualification of Class 1E Static Battery Chargers and Inverters For Nuclear Power Generating Stations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE Standard For Qualification of Class 1E Static Battery Chargers and Inverters For Nuclear Power Generating Stations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE Standard For Qualification of Class 1E Static Battery Chargers and Inverters For Nuclear Power Generating Stations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE Standard for Qualification of

Class 1E Static Battery Chargers

IEEE Power Engineering Society

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Copyright The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.