Re: IEC 1010-1 : CREEPAGE/CLEARANCE/,Ratings Interpolations of Handheld Multimeters
Look at IEC 664-1 for a back door around the "no interpolation" requirement in the 1010-based standards. IEC 664 is the document referenced by all the 1010 standards for the tables in Annex D. Refer to Table 4 in IEC 664; creepage distances are listed for 250, 320, 400, 500, 630, 800, 1000 volts, rather than only 150, 300, and 600 volts in 1010. Be sure not to take this out of context though, be sure to read 664 carefully to see what tables apply, etc. Jeff Gray Product Safety Compliance West >I have been asked to investigate an issue of Interpolation of CREEPAGE >AND CLEARANCE regarding the ratings of handheld multimeters. Clause >D.2 of IEC 1010-1 (and the harmonized equivalents; ANSI/ISA >S82.01-1994, CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 1010-1: 1992 and EN 61010-1:1993) >sets forth the CREEPAGE and CLEARANCE determination requirements if >the working voltage is up to 1000 V and if installation categories >(overvoltage categories) are applicable. This includes the ratings of most >handheld DMM's. Clause D.2.1 points to the applicable tables for BASIC or >DOUBLE INSULATION and INSTALLATION CATEGORY according to >annex J. Clause D2.2 "Application of Tables D.1 to D.12" allows >interpolation of CLEARANCE only for a circuit or part which has now >direct connection to the mains supply...". It further requires CREEPAGE >DISTANCE to always be at least as large as the value specified for >CLEARANCE. > >This seems to say that the rating for any product that directly connects to the >mains supply must be at one of the incremental voltages >(50,100,150,300,600,1000) listed in Tables D.1 thru D.12. > >I have polled CSA's Vancouver BC office, TUV Product Services in San >Diego and UL's Primary UL 3111 engineer in Melville. So far (with the >exception of UL, whose response is under consideration and review by UL) >the response has been consistant with the above paragraph. > >Here's the question for the experts at the agencies (UL, TUV, VDE, CSA and >others), or elsewhere: Is it possible within the bounds of IEC 1010-1 to >rate a handheld DMM for example at 750 V and interpolate the CREEPAGE >and CLEARANCES in spite of the above ? > >Thanks in advance for your comments, > >Best regards, > >Dan Teninty P.E. >Senior Design Engineer >Product Safety >teni...@tc.fluke.com >FLUKE Corporation >Everett, Washington >(206) 356-6035 >(206) 356-6490 fax > > > > > > >
Status of prEN 50116?
I'm trying to determine the status of prEN 50116 which addresses production-line testing. In particular, I'm curious as to requirements for hipot testing and ground continuity testing contained therein. ThanX n regards, Art Michael, Editor * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * International Product Safety News * *Check out our current offer on the * * Safety Link at http://www.safetylink.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CE marking & quality system
PSNet Regarding whether or not one must have an ISO 9000 registered quality system to apply the CE mark, some specifics are laid out for us... In the LVD, including the modifications by the CE marking amendment 93/68, states in concluding Annex IV - Internal Production Control: 5) The manufacturer must take all measures necessary in order that the manufacturing process shall ensure compliance of the manufactured products with the technical documentation referred to in point 2 and with the requirements of this Directive that apply to them. The manufacturer must, therefore, have some sort of a control process in place. It does not specifically require that it be ISO 9000 registered. However, if a manufacturer is questioned regarding his ability to control the manufactured product, I believe that ISO 9000 will be used as the basis for evaluation of the control process. My point is that even if your process is not registered, it ought to be good enough to be registered - that's the litmus test... So use ISO 9000 as the basis for your Quality System... :>) br, Pete Perkins _ _ _ _ _ Peter E Perkins, PE Principal product safety consultant Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 503/452-1201phone/fax p.perk...@ieee.org visit our www homepage: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/peperkins _ _ _ _ _
Re: (Fwd) Re- NPF Returns
RE>(Fwd) Re: NPF Returns 30/4/96 -- To Chris Dupres + emc-pstc I had to ask a similar question regarding shipment of pre-1996 equipment around Europe and possibly back to the US for repair. I asked my local Trading Standards Officer in West Sussex this question and received the following useful letter:- " I confirm that as the items of equipment referred to in your fax of April 2nd are second hand and have not undergone further manufacture then they will be exempt from the Electromagnetic Compatibility Regulations 1992(as amended). Regulation 16 applies in these circumstances." Before responding to me he had also checked his reply with the UK Department of Trade and Industry who confirmed this and indicated that this should apply across the European Union as the regulations are based on a Community Directive. I'm keeping his letter on file. Jerry Roberton --- Forwarded Message Follows --- From: Self To:steve_c...@mail.fwb.com Subject: Re: NPF Returns Reply-to: cdup...@vacgen.fisons.co.uk List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:53:22 Steve Chin asks: > I have a dumb question. How do the EU directives apply to a unit that was put into service prior to Jan. 1, 1996 (without a CE mark on it), which has been returned to its US manufacturer for serve c > , and is being returned to its owner with No Problem Found (no repair work was performed on the unit, only an examination for functionality). Does a unit found to be NPF need to have a CE mark app i > d to it before it can be sent back to its owner? > The UK Regs 16 (1) state that 'these regulations do not apply to second hand apparatus' where 16 (3) ' "second-hand apparatus" means apparatus which has previously been used by an end user.' Of course the equipment, if supplied after end 1995 would comply anyway, and if supplied before is exempt (Regs 11 (a) (i)). Loosely, you are not supplying, only returning after borrowing , and if you are supplying then you are supplying second hand equipment. (ok, it's to the original owner and there is no charge but the interpretation holds, I think). Lets see what the others think. Chris Dupres Chris Dupres EMC Specialist. VG Microtech. cdup...@vacgen.fisons.co.uk tel +44 (0) 1825 761077 fax +44 (0) 1825 768343 'Opinions expressed are personal, not necessarily Corporate' -- RFC822 Header Follows -- Received: by Mac2.net.com with SMTP;30 Apr 1996 01:20:20 -0800 Received: from mail.ieee.org by unet.net.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id BAA07971; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:17:01 -0700 Received: by mail.ieee.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id DAA05998 for emc-pstc-list; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 03:23:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199604300732.iaa22...@uckmail.vacgen.fisons.co.uk> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Chris Dupres" To: emc-p...@ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 08:19:41 + Subject: (Fwd) Re: NPF Returns Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.23) Sender: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Chris Dupres" X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients X-Listname: emc-pstc X-List-Description: Product Safety Tech. Committee, EMC Society 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
Merger of Component Manufactures
For whoever's benefits, merger is not seldomly seen these days. I have a problem with it when any of the safety critical component manufacturers has a merger. They still manufacture the same components but the label is changed. Then we have to modify our safety reports to reflect the changes otherwise you'll get variation notices from different safety agency inspectors. Each of these minor changes will cost the company several hundred dollars. If we don't use many of the component and the component and the unit are cheap, we will have a great cost increase. I feel something wrong in this process. I would like to hear from other safety professionals how you handle the situation. TIA. Tom Bao t...@superlink.net Courtesy of RCIC http://uc.com/compliance_engineering/
New ITE Immunity Standard
Does any one have any information on the new ITE immunity standard? I am particularly interested in the date of announcement and mandatory implementation date. Thank you.
re:Power cord length
Mel, The requirement can be found in CSA C22.2 No. 950/UL 1950 (Bi-National Standard) in Annex NAE, Clause No. 3.2.4. Maximum cord length: 4.5 m Minimum cord length: 1.5 m (with some exceptions) These are North American deviations based on the National Electrical Code and the Canadian Electrical Code. Best regards, Dave EMC Corporation 171 South Street Hopkinton, MA 01748 508-435-1000, x7518 508-435-5067 (fax) loru...@emc.com (email) --[Reply - Original Message]-- Sent by:mjen...@yak.cray.com (Mel Jensen) All; Can anyone provide guidance as to allowable length(s) for attached power cords for ITE equipment? Either e-mail or post responses. And thank you in advance for any and all help. Mel Jensen, P.E. Cray Research, Inc. TEL:715-726-8374 1050 Lowater Rd. FAX:715-726-6715 Chippewa Falls, WI 54729 EMAIL:mjen...@cray.com ___ =
Re[2]: Who can apply the CE Mark?
Hi Vic: You have mentioned the CTE directive and that is a subject that has had no mention of lately. I attended the CommEd conference on March 26th - 28th and the main topic was supposed to be the CTE directive. Well, we received little to no information! Piero Ravaioli, Head of Division DG XIII, addressed the delegates but did not say much. We were expecting the CTE directive to be talked about in detail and it simply was not ready. Did your conference go any better? I would be interested in finding out any details you, or anyone else, might have picked up. About the only information we received was that the CTE directive should (who knows) open up the self-declaration route to approvals even more. As you can now self declare to safety and EMC, you may be able to do the same for some/all of the telecom portion of the requirements. Looking forward to some feedback. Best Regards, Mike. Michael Miele Phone: 508-656-9360 Telebit CorporationFax:508-656-9352 One Executive DriveE-mail: m_mi...@telebit.com Chelmsford, MA 01824 USA __ Reply Separator _ Subject: Re: Who can apply the CE Mark? Author: "Victor L. Boersma" <102126@compuserve.com> at Internet List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:4/30/96 12:23 AM I attended a conference in Amsterdam on March 18th (had to dump my poor wife in a motel on Cocoa Beach for the week-end to do it) where Mr. Joergen Richter of DG XIII introduced a draft for the new Connected Telecommunications Directive (CTE). The gist of the story is that the Commission is having a change of heart on how to best regulate. The point was made repeatedly that under the current system they can't track the original parties that made the declaration. They want to go even so far that they want the notified bodies to hold the files WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE FILES and require that the EC mark comes with the number of the notified body that holds the files, even for a Module A conformity assessment. (Needless to say, the Notified Bodies were less than enthralled with that notion). The fun is only beginning. Regards, Vic
RE: Power cord length
Mel, I am not familiar with any national regulatory restrictions, but I do know, at least a few years ago, some local electrical codes caused us some heart ache due to restrictions on cord length. Regards, Bob Brister Digital Equip. Corp
[Fwd: Power cord length]
Hi Mel, the only restriction to length of power cords I see in IEC 950 is in sub-clause 3.2.4 in the conditions to Table 11. This restrictions in length apply only if you choose the smaller cross-sections in brackets. There is no restriction in IEC 950 in the use of extension cords of any length. There may be, however, a limitation in the installation rules (e.g. NEC) or in the wire standards which I am not aware of. -- Horst Dierich, Karlsbader Str. 32 71139 Ehningen - Germany dier...@ibm.net --- Begin Message --- All; Can anyone provide guidance as to allowable length(s) for attached power cords for ITE equipment? Either e-mail or post responses. And thank you in advance for any and all help. Mel Jensen, P.E. Cray Research, Inc. TEL:715-726-8374 1050 Lowater Rd. FAX:715-726-6715 Chippewa Falls, WI 54729 EMAIL:mjen...@cray.com ___ --- End Message ---
Re: Who can apply the CE Ma
Bob Newall asks if you must have an approved quality system to self declare compliance. I take it by this he means without a certificate from an approved body for that directive, since declarations of conformity are always made by the manufacturer or his authorised representitive. The answer is that with some directives this is required but for the LVD, EMC and Machinery directives, if type examinationl is not require, a manufacturer can declare compliance based on his own or any others measurements without any quality system being mandatory. Nick Rouse
Re: NPF Returns
It would certainly apply throughout the EEA in the terms as originally asked, that is items returned untouched as this would mean that they were first placed on the market before the deadline. The Commission guidelines of October 1993 state that the term placed on the market in Article 2 of the directive means the first making available ...of a product covered by the directive in the community market. The specific reference to the exclusion of repairs in the definitions given in regulation 3 (2) of the UK statutory instrument is a UK peculiarity and is not mentioned in the directive or the commission guidelines. I am not aware of it being in any other countries implementation. It is certainly not in the German implementation and will not be in the implementations of those countries, like France who chose to pass the directive verbatim into national law. In such countries there may be arguments as to whether repaired products are the same products as placed on the market originally. I would think you would have a good chance of winning such an argument but it is not clear cut as it is in the UK Nick Rouse
Re: Who can apply the CE Mark?
Your customer seems to want to gain all the kudos of being the manufacturer without incuring any of the liabilities that this involves. There are limits to which this can be done I can give some guidance on UK law in this respect and I suspect other EU countries will have similar requirements. It is a requirement of the Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994 No. 3260) that equipment must be marked with the manufacturer's brand name or trade mark where possible and on the packaging where not (Schedule 3. 1(b)) Thus if your customer is going to put their brand and not yours on the equipment, they are declaring themselves to be the manufacturers of the equipment and must bear the liability that that entails. CE marking must be applied and the declaration issued by the manufacturer or his authorised representitive establised in the commuity in respect of the EMC directive (SI 1992 No.2373 regulation 30(c) and 30(d) and from next year for the Low Voltage Directive (SI 1994 No. 3260 regulation 9 and 10. This declaration must have the name and address of the manufacturer and the identity of the person signing the declaration as, or on behalf, of the manufacturer or their authorised representitive in the community. This declaration must be keep in the community at the disposal of the authorities. The manufacturer as a body corporate and the signatory personally are liable for the validity of the declaration. They can use third party information (e.g yours) as the basis for this declaration but the must take all reasonable steps to ensure this is valid. They cannot just pass on your assurance, unchecked and evade responsibility. Nick Rouse
(Fwd) Re: NPF Returns
--- Forwarded Message Follows --- From: Self To:steve_c...@mail.fwb.com Subject: Re: NPF Returns Reply-to: cdup...@vacgen.fisons.co.uk List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:53:22 Steve Chin asks: > I have a dumb question. How do the EU directives apply to a unit that was put > into service prior to Jan. 1, 1996 (without a CE mark on it), which has been > returned to its US manufacturer for serve c > , and is being returned to its owner with No Problem Found (no repair work > was performed on the unit, only an examination for functionality). Does a > unit found to be NPF need to have a CE mark app i > d to it before it can be sent back to its owner? > The UK Regs 16 (1) state that 'these regulations do not apply to second hand apparatus' where 16 (3) ' "second-hand apparatus" means apparatus which has previously been used by an end user.' Of course the equipment, if supplied after end 1995 would comply anyway, and if supplied before is exempt (Regs 11 (a) (i)). Loosely, you are not supplying, only returning after borrowing , and if you are supplying then you are supplying second hand equipment. (ok, it's to the original owner and there is no charge but the interpretation holds, I think). Lets see what the others think. Chris Dupres Chris Dupres EMC Specialist. VG Microtech. cdup...@vacgen.fisons.co.uk tel +44 (0) 1825 761077 fax +44 (0) 1825 768343 'Opinions expressed are personal, not necessarily Corporate'
Re: Who can apply the CE Mark?
I attended a conference in Amsterdam on March 18th (had to dump my poor wife in a motel on Cocoa Beach for the week-end to do it) where Mr. Joergen Richter of DG XIII introduced a draft for the new Connected Telecommunications Directive (CTE). The gist of the story is that the Commission is having a change of heart on how to best regulate. The point was made repeatedly that under the current system they can't track the original parties that made the declaration. They want to go even so far that they want the notified bodies to hold the files WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE FILES and require that the EC mark comes with the number of the notified body that holds the files, even for a Module A conformity assessment. (Needless to say, the Notified Bodies were less than enthralled with that notion). The fun is only beginning. Regards, Vic
