ebowles wrote:

Thank you Jim.....I'm glad I was able to make a contribution

One other question while you're on topic.....the equation itself, to me, doesn't make sense......the term I1 is being solved for as a function of itself.....it's like having an equation such as X = 4X instead of X = 4Y......in the first equation, if X = 2, then it can't also be equal to 8.

I'll look forward to your response, and thanks!

Ernie Bowles

EB Consulting

After considerable thought my conclusion is - you might be the first to have actually read Annex I

This material is a carry over from the 2002 standard and the information was from a specific manufacturer and from what I understand was based on that manufacturer's devices. I believe it was an attempt to simplify what was known in 2002 and of course we know orders of magnitude more now.

Specific to your question: I agree equation I.4 seems like something is not correct. It is the same equation from 2002. I don't know if the "dot" should be a different operator such as + or what happened. I believe the people behind the original work are no longer involved.

The simple (?) solution is ignore it and focus on the 2018 equations.

Great question Ernie, it certainly got me scratching my head! (which now hurts)

btw, this is my personal view and can't be taken as an official position of IEEE or any other standards organization.

Thanks

- Jim