John, This clause means that IF a detachable plug is used it should not be of a type which is normally used to connect to the network. In other words, if you disconnect the cable from the CE to the LIU, at the LIU, you should not be able to then plug that cable (coming directly from the CE) into a standard network line connection socket.
Hope this clears it up a little. Best regards, Kevin > Sender: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Received: from ruebert.ieee.org (ruebert.ieee.org [199.172.136.3]) > by arl-img-9.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.12) with ESMTP id LAA07709; > Wed, 26 Aug 1998 11:35:21 -0400 (EDT) > Received: by ruebert.ieee.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) > id KAA21826 for emc-pstc-resent; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:07:29 -0400 (EDT) > From: f...@netc.ie > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 98 14:56:55 > Message-Id: <9807269041.aa904168...@netc.netc.ie> > To: emc-p...@ieee.org, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Interpretation of Australian Standard TS001 > Sender: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: f...@netc.ie > X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients <emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org> > X-Listname: emc-pstc > X-Info: Help requests to emc-pstc-requ...@majordomo.ieee.org > X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to majord...@majordomo.ieee.org > X-Moderator-Address: emc-pstc-appro...@majordomo.ieee.org > > > Hi all, > > I have a question regarding TS001 - 1997 which is an Australian > Standard for safety of telecoms equipment for customer use. > > Clause 5.3 permits the use of a separate Line Isolation Unit which is > connected between the telecoms device, typically a modem, and the > network. The purpose of this LIU is to provide electrical separation > from the network to SELV, in the case where the device itself does not > provide that separation. > > Clause 5.3.2 allows three methods to prevent the possibility of the > LIU being bypassed, resulting in the device being directly connected > to the network. The first method is the "Use of detachable cabling > that will not allow direct connection of CE to a telecommunications > network" > > My question is should the above sentence read "non-detachable" istead > of "detachable"? Otherwise can anybody shed some light on the intent? > > All comments appreciated. > > John Fee > > f...@netc.ie > > --------- > This message is coming from the emc-pstc discu Best regards, Kevin Richardson Ph: 02-43-29-4070 Stanimore Pty Limited Fax: 02-43-28-5639 "The Technology Requirements Specialists" Int'l: +61-2-43-2x-xxxx Email: Internet: k...@compuserve.com Compuserve: 100356,374 --------- This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
