CE (LVD) for Fruit Juicers
Hi Group, Looking through the OJEC LVD Standards list, I could not find under EN 60335 and its many parts a particular part that covered a juicer. Does anyone know which particular part of this standard this product falls under? Also, not having seen this device, if it has blades like a blender, will the Machinery Directive also be applicable? Thanks for sharing your knowledge. Sincerely, Robert R. Loop Engineering Supervisor - Product Safety ph: (256) 837-4411 x313 fax:(256) 721-0144 email: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com This email transmission is confidential and intended for the addressee only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the person or organization to whom it is addressed, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance upon it. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
(Thanks) Consultant - Class 1 Div 1
To all who responded to our clients need, thank you. I have passed on everyone's contact information to our client and they will advise us who they select. Sincerely, Robert R. Loop Engineering Supervisor - Product Safety ph: (256) 837-4411 x313 fax:(256) 721-0144 email: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com This email transmission is confidential and intended for the addressee only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the person or organization to whom it is addressed, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance upon it. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Consultant - Class 1 Div 1 Locations
Group, We have a client in Orange County, California that needs a consultant for a product intended to be used in a Class 1 Div 1 location. They would prefer someone to work with them on a one-to-one basis and time is of the essence. If anyone with the proper credentials in UL 1203 or FM 3610 would like to contract to assist them, please contact me off line and I will put you in contact with them. Sincerely, Robert R. Loop Engineering Supervisor - Product Safety ph: (256) 837-4411 x313 fax:(256) 721-0144 email: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com This email transmission is confidential and intended for the addressee only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the person or organization to whom it is addressed, you must not copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance upon it. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
EN60204-1 Question
Group: The definition of controlgear in EN60204-1 is somewhat vague to me. If I have a machine that has an operator display, keyboard and mouse that are an integral part of the equipment (which I would define as the operator control station), are these devices considered to be controlgear within the meaning of the standard? Enlightenment is welcomed as knowledge is bliss. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Product Safety Engineering Position
Hello Group, A colleague of mine, who is a senior product safety engineer for one of the NRTL's, is looking for a position near Orlando, Florida. I can state from personal knowledge that this person has impeccable credentials. If any of the group knows of a potential employer in the aforementioned area, please reply to me directly and I will forward your e-mail. Thanks for any help rendered. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: Mains cords
Hi Rob, The quick answer to your question is no. If you do not supply the cordset, you must supply a description of the cordset that is suitable for your equipment. The description can be in the form of a flyer or a part of your installation guide and in the language of the country in which it is sold. The description should include information on the following: * The maximum length (4.5 m/15 feet) * The nominal size of the conductors expressed in mm squared * The cordage should bear the HAR mark of the approval mark of the country in which it is sold * A description of the attachment plug * If the cordset is used as the disconnect device, there should be a statement about plugging it into an unobstructed wall outlet Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com -- From: rob.humph...@reuters.com[SMTP:rob.humph...@reuters.com] Reply To: rob.humph...@reuters.com Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 11:28 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Mains cords Can anyone tell me if equipment supplied as compliant to IEC60950 and has an IEC mains inlet plug has to be supplied with its mains cord if it is not supplied to an end user? Thanks for any help Rob -- -- Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Grounding Continuity Testers for UL 60950
Good Morning Group, Does anyone have any information regarding high amperage continuity testers that might be purchased for testing compliance with Sub-Clause 2.6.3 of UL 60950? My concern is regarding high amperage equipment and the requirement to test at two times the circuit current. We are looking at a product rated at 100 amps. Where in the world can we get a tester that would go up to 200 amps with a 12 V output? Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Class I Division 1 versus Class I Division 2
Hello Group, I need some education on Classified/Hazardous locations. What is the difference between a product that is certified to Class I Division 1 versus Class I Division 2? If I had a product that was certified to Division 2, what would be needed to make it pass Division 1 requirements? I apologize for my ignorance, there are simply too many standards out there and this is out of my league. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: Risk assessment
Hi Stig, One of my side jobs is in the Army National Guard Field Artillery. We perform a risk assessment at each firing point we pull into using an Army manual, FM 100-14 (Risk Management). I was surprised to see how closely their documentation parallels EN 1050 in many aspects. Here's a quick look at some of the terms and definitions used that relate to your inquiry: Hazard Severity: * Severity - The expected consequences of an event in terms of degree of injury, property damage or mission-impairing factors. *Catastrophic - Death or permanent total disability, system loss, major damage, significant property damage or mission failure. * Critical - Permanent partial disability, temporary total disability in excess of three months, major system damage, significant property damage or significant mission degradation. * Marginal - Minor injury, lost workday incident, minor system damage, minor property damage, or some mission degradation. * Negligible - First aid or minor medical treatment, minor system impairment, little or no impact on mission. Hazard Probability: * Probability - The likelihood an event will occur. * Frequent - Occurs often or continuously experienced. * Likely - Occurs several times. * Occasional - Occurs sporadically. * Seldom - Unlikely, but could occur at some time. * Unlikely - Can assume it will not occur Hope this is helpful. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com -- From: Stig Jorgensen[SMTP:jorgen...@skyskan.com] Reply To: Stig Jorgensen Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 2:24 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Risk assessment Hi Group, Dec 07,2000 I am in the process of establishing the potential for an injury from a hazard. I can get a reasonable 'expression' to describe the potential for a hazard to turn into an accident (event). I am looking for the words that classifies the degree of an injury. Can some one direct me to some standard definitions? Do we base it on the length of work stoppage? i.e. a minor burn on a finger tip smarts for an hour or two. A good shock working with vacuum tubes, 300V, slowed you down for the rest of the day and so on. Has some one worked out a practical scale for the degree of an injury. It can be numbers or words as long as they are defined. If it does not exist let us generate one that we all agree on.-- or most of us. When it comes to property damage I think that a monetary replacement cost would be expressed in 'small', 'medium', 'large' etc where each is defined in 'very' general monetary terms. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely Stig W. Jorgensen jorgen...@skyskan.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Got another beef about an NRTL (haven't we all?)
Hi Tania, At Wyle Laboratories (one of the many NRTL's), we typically will accept test data from another NRTL. Our assumption is that other NRTL demonstrated proficiency to OSHA requirements and probably many others (A2LA, NVLAP, ISO Guide 25, etc.), hence their test data is assumed to be valid. It is not practical to retest every approved component or sub-assembly as if it had never been investigated by another NRTL. The time and cost to the customer would put us out of the product safety business. Each standard that we investigate a product to is done on a clause-by-clause basis to ensure nothing is missed. And the test methodology is adequately described in the standard to ensure uniformity of testing. As long as the COA's are reviewed and tested accordingly in the end-product application, we have done our job in ensuring the safety of the final assembly. One of the complaints from industry that has lead to worldwide harmonized standards was that different countries were using safety marks as a trade barrier. My personal opinion is that this holds true with any NRTL that will not accept test data from another NRTL without a signed MRA in place. It is not an easy accomplishment to achieve NRTL status, OSHA holds the bar pretty high up. Refusing to accept test data from another NRTL, is a way of saying that OSHA doesn't know its business on how to qualify a lab (again, my opinion). UL has a stranglehold on component recognition by requiring retesting of any component approved by another NRTL. The net effect is that this denies a large segment of business to its competitors. Fair? Hardly. Smart business strategy? Absolutely! That is my not-for-profit opinion and not my employers. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com -- From: Grant, Tania (Tania)[SMTP:tgr...@lucent.com] Reply To: Grant, Tania (Tania) Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 5:37 PM To: 'duncan.ho...@snellwilcox.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Got another beef about an NRTL Importance: High All right, let's get specific here and actually use some names! UL has a Mutual Recognition Agreement with CSA to accept each other's test reports. This agreement also specifies details about how they conduct the various tests (it used to be that earth leakage current measurements were performed differently by the two agencies). The agreement also allows them to harmonize standards, and many have been harmonized since the MRA was first signed. Where the standards still differ, my understanding is that both UL and CSA will perform both sets of test to satisfy both agencies' requirements. I am not aware that MRAs exist between the different NRTLs. And how is one NRTL going to know whether the test procedures are the same between the different NRTLs? In other words, there is no allegiance between them. And yes, they do compete. But so did UL and CSA, but now they sing the same tune. Any NRTL mark is good, per OSHA and the U.S. NEC, for end-use product. But if you are incorporating components and other equipment into your systems, you need to specify your expectations when you purchase parts. We specify X NRTL and we get that. Tania Grant, tgr...@lucent.com Lucent Technologies, Switching Solutions Group Intelligent Network and Messaging Solutions -Original Message- From: duncan.ho...@snellwilcox.com [ mailto:duncan.ho...@snellwilcox.com mailto:duncan.ho...@snellwilcox.com ] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 3:58 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Got another beef about an NRTL Group, What about another scenario that I have been in with two NRTL's. For the sake of embarrassment,lets call them 'NRTL A' and 'NRTL B' Firstly any components or equipment recognised or listed by an NRTL are deemed 'acceptable' to OSHA so long as it is used as prescribed in its conditions of acceptability or use. so can I presume that as OSHA accepts any NRTL mark they are all of equal standing. Why is it then that NRTL A will not accept a power supply approved by NRTL B. The latter is true for NRTL B who will accept NRTL A's mark with no problems (in all cases the conditions of acceptability are followed) So long as the conditions of acceptability are followed and there are no engineering reasons for NRTL A to reject NRTL B's approval then what happens next. Is there any recourse or would we have to go to one NRTL and get the whole lot retested. If there is no engineering reason, can an NRTL reject anothers recognition just because it distlikes it or maybe sees it as competition! Has anyone else had a similar experience, if so what did you do to resolve it without paying out for more NRTL approvals on an already recognised component. Any comments would be greatly
IEC/EN Standard for Independent Lamp Control Gear
Group: I need information on what standard covers an independent lamp control device. This product is used in a commercial environment, has a data interface to a computer and is used to turn fluorescent light fixtures on and off (not dim). It is self-contained in its own enclosure and uses electro-mechanical relays to provide mains power to a series of lights. It was suggested by another forum subscriber that we look at EN60598-1 Luminaries. Unfortunately, in order to look at an EN standard, one generally has to purchase them and they are not inexpensive. To make a long story short, EN60598 only covers the light fixture itself, not the device that is used to turn it on and off. After reviewing all of the standards covered under the LVD in the OJEC, nothing jumps out and says here I am. The only standard I could find that might be applicable: EN60669-2-2:1997 - Switches for household and similar fixed installations. Section 2: Electromagnetic remote-control switches. Can anyone say yes, you're right, or no, you're out in left field? Any help is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: US Approval
Daryl: The last information that I have (and somebody please advise if this is outdated), is that not one EU test lab that has applied for NRTL status has been approved by OSHA. This seems to be the main sticking point for implementing the US-EU MRA. In other words, it exists, but is not yet implemented. So, to answer your question, if a product being sold in the USA requires NRTL approval (it doesn't have to be UL, it can be any of the other NRTL's), then having CE marking is not adequate. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com -- From: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com[SMTP:jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com] Reply To: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 9:43 AM To: Alden; Daryl; 'n...@world.std.com'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'; t...@world.std.com Subject: Re:US Approval forwarding for daryl.al...@edwards.boc.com Reply Separator Subject:US Approval Author: Alden; Daryl daryl.al...@edwards.boc.com Date: 9/29/00 4:10 AM Can anybody advise me whether an MRA (mutual recognition agreement )exsists between the EU and the US? If so does this mean that electrical and mechanical products tested to CE standards do not need further approval (UL?) to be marketed in the states. Thanks. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
EU Equivalent Standard
Group: Can anyone advise what the European equivalent standard to UL 1431, Personal Hygiene and Health Care Appliances is? The product I have been questioned about is a cosmetic device (non-medical) that temporarily reduces the appearance of cellulite using a vacuum process. Many thanks in advance to those that respond. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Why routine hipot is required.
Mike: Here's the beef. The hi-pot test on the completed assembly, or final product, should be done as close as possible to the point of production where the product is boxed up for shipping and/or storage. The purpose of this is to try and find a defect in the primary side of the product wiring that may have been induced as part of the assembly process, such as a cable being pinched where the insulation is now broken. Even if the component power supply you are installing in your product is Listed (most are Recognized), there may be an instance where someone on the production line had too much weekend and wired something incorrectly (such as the input to the supply). In my days of working for a computer manufacturer, I can recall a specific instance where a listed molded cordset had ground and line reversed on one end. What a happy surprise for the test operator that was. Bottom line is that the production hi-pot test is the last line of defense in assuring that the manufacturer is not sending out a liability inducing, honey, we just lost the farm death trap. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com __Reply Separator -- From: Mike Morrow[SMTP:mi...@ucentric.com] Reply To: Mike Morrow Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 12:40 PM To: EMC Society Subject: Why routine hipot is required. I've been asked why a routine hipot test is required on an end assembly computer when it uses a Listed power supply that has already been hipot tested. So far I don't like the way I've worded my response. Basically what I've said is that a power supply is approved as a component. The end safety of the device depends on the installation. Can anyone add some more beef to this statement. Thanks. Mike Morrow Senior Compliance Engineer Ucentric Systems 978-897-6482 mi...@ucentric.com www.ucentric.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Hong Kong, Brazil and India; EMC and Safety Requirements
Peter: For EMC and Safety for Hong Kong and PRC, please contact Mr. Harry Yeung of the Hong Kong Standards and Testing Centre. His e-mail address is harry_ye...@hkstc.com. I recently had the opportunity to meet Mr. Yeung and was most impressed with his extensive knowledge. My regrets that I cannot help you with Brazilian and Indian requirements. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com -- From: Peter Merguerian[SMTP:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] Reply To: Peter Merguerian Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 9:53 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Hong Kong, Brazil and India; EMC and Safety Requirements Hello All! Anyone can help with the safety emc requirements in the countries specified above? Thanks Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
EN61010-1 Question
Group: A question on interpretation of Clause 6.3.1.1 and 6.3.1.2: If a product has an operator accessible cable that exits the equipment and operates normally at a level of 250 Vdc /200 uA, is it required to be marked with the hazardous voltage label? The cable is a probe where the user (a trained technician) could touch bare metal on the probe operating at the level noted. My thanks to those that respond. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
CE Informative Report
Dear Group: Could someone explain to me what a CE Informative Report is? How does this differ from a normal test report? Or is testing even involved? My thanks in advance to those who reply. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
European Standards for Combination Smoke and CO detectors
Dear Listmembers: Can anyone provide information on which EN or IEC standard covers a combination smoke and carbon monoxide detector or any related information? Thanks very much. Sincerely, Robert Loop Engineering Supervisor Wyle Laboratories Product Safety ph - (256) 837-4411 x313 fax- (256) 721-0144 e-mail: rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
