| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
All, As the teleconference yesterday and today is starting at 1am
in my part of the world, I shall not be taking part. My summary comments on the points under agenda item VI are: VI. Start to review the overall goals of the group. Solicit
new input. a. Life expectancy of 10 years, hopefully more Yes - support. b. Same connector for All device and adapter connections if
detached cable Yes- support. c. Power range >10W – 130W delivered power to
device and is brand, model, and year agnostic Yes-
support. What about defining the voltage output range as well? d. First adapter must work with last device and last adapter
with first device. Standard Compatibility. This is
a good goal to have in mind, but I would not insist on it if it meant that
future requirements could not be accommodated. e. Adapter<->Mobile Device communications required for
higher power safety >7W. Yes- support. f. Standard designed to support Certification testing of
adapter and device (and cable) Ye- support. g. Continuous communications growth to support growth of
UPAMD capability. Yes- support. h. Basic power delivery mechanism i. Must support regular non-battery
and battery powered devices Yes- support. i. Device may be capable of being a source as well as a sink
of power i. To supply power other devices
beyond the USB 10W power range Yes- support. ii. Able to share power for mission
critical or business critical applications if willing
Yes- support. j. Make independent of rapidly changing technology i. Multiple battery technologies
currently used – no common adapter or battery voltage Yes. The Adapter<->Mobile Device communications
should enable this to be done. ii. Consider isolation to meet
medical power needs It would be good to consider
this, but I would not be concerned if it was not in the standard if it was made
clear that power supplies for medical use might have additional requirements to
those defined in the standard. This is effectively a safety requirement in my
view and should be covered already by other standards like IEC 61204. k. Consider future mobile device design options i. Smaller profiles, headed for
10mm to 5mm? Different shape devices, non-edge usage
Yes- support. l. Connector must not mate with any current designs –
product Safety issue – no confusion Yes-
support. m. Apply KISS principle – Keep It Simple Stupid within
the other goals. Yes - support. n. Environmentally friendly to eventual disposal Not in favour to be included in this standard. This is
covered by existing and emerging legislation around the world and I do not
believe a specific standard for power supplies is the place to define those
aspects which will influence eventual disposal. Enjoy the rest of the meeting. Best Regards Stephen Stephen Colclough Senior Manager Samsung Electronics QA Lab Blackbushe Business Park Yateley Hampshire GU46 6GG Tel: +44 (0)1252 863820 Fax: +44 (0)1252 863814 email s.colclough@xxxxxxxxxxx Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited Registered number: 03086621 Registered address: Samsung House, 1000 Hillswood Drive, Chertsey,
Surrey KT16 0PS, England This
communication (including any attachments) contains information which may be
confidential and/or privileged. It
is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s) so, if you have received
this communication in error please
do not distribute, copy or use this communication or its contents but notify
the sender immediately and
then destroy any copies of it. Due
to the nature of the Internet, the sender is unable to ensure the integrity of
this message. Any
views expressed in this communication are those of the individual sender, except
where the sender specifically states them to be the views of the company the
sender works for. |