Re: IEC/EN Standard for Independent Lamp Control Gear
Hello Robert, you could check into: IEC 60926:1995 + A1:1999 Auxiliaries for lamps ? Starting devices (other than glow starters) ? General and safety requirements. There is currently a proposal under development to refer to this standard in IEC 60950 to address safety requirements for high pressure lamps and their circuitry to generate starting pulses. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-642-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany Loop, Robert rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com on 02.10.2000 20:36:42 Please respond to Loop, Robert rl...@hnt.wylelabs.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc:(bcc: Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM) Subject: 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: Paint
Hello Bill, RAL is a private German organisation (RAL, Deutsches Institut für Gütesicherung und Kennzeichnung e.V. ), which would translate into 'German Institute for Quality Assurance and Marking'. In their web-site (which is also available in English) http://www.ral-colours.de/ you will find information regarding the coding system. The 4-digit RAL Colours have been the standard for choosing colours for more than 70 years now. At the beginning the colour collection included 40 different colours. Its number has risen to more than 200 today. They also contain safety- and signalling colours. Hope that helps, mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-642-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany Bill Somerfield bi...@eliz.com on 27.07.2000 13:43:18 Please respond to Bill Somerfield bi...@eliz.com To: emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM) Subject: Paint Group, Is there an international standard for paint color? I've seen RAL , but can't really find what ist stands for? Thank you for your help, Bill Somerfield Bill Somerfield QA/Compliance Manager Elizabeth-Hata International bi...@eliz.com 412-829-7700 FAX 412-829-7330 --- 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: EN60950, 3rd Edition . . .
Hello Carla, EN 60950 has already been ratified by CENELEC BT, dated January 1, 2000. The following related dates have been set: doa (date of announcement, publication in the EU Official Journal): July 1, 2000 dop (date of publication in at least one European member country): January 1, 2001 dow ( date of withdrawal of conflicting standards, which is EN 60950 2nd edition A11:1998): January 1, 2005. This date will also be the date of cessation (doc), by which the superseded standard looses its presumption of conformity with the essential requirements of the Low Voltage Directive. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-642-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany Carla Robinson carla_robin...@mw.3com.com on 15.05.2000 17:46:10 Please respond to Carla Robinson carla_robin...@mw.3com.com To: emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM) Subject: EN60950, 3rd Edition . . . Greetings! I am seeking information on when will the 3rd Edition of the EN60950, L.V. Directive, go into effect? When will it be ratified for the European Community? Carla Robinson 3Com Corp. 847-262-2494 carla_robin...@mw.3com.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: Fwd:Isolations on inner layers
Hello Jim and Mihai, According to IEC 60950 3rd. edition, Clause 2.10.5.3, the distance between two adjacent tracks on the same inner layer of a printed circuit board is treated as distance through insulation, and therefore 0,4 mm apply for supplementary or reinforced insulation. Your question regarding air bubbles or other defects is should be covered by the applied electric strength test. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-642-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com (Jim Bacher) on 17.03.2000 13:50:53 Please respond to jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com (Jim Bacher) To: emc-p...@ieee.org cc: mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro (bcc: Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM) Subject: Fwd:Isolations on inner layers forwarding for mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro ... Jim Forward Header_ Subject:Isolations on inner layers Author: Mihai Vintila mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 3/16/00 7:34 PM Hello, I have a question concerning isolations for hazardous voltages on inner layers of a multilayer PCB. The material is standard FR4. I have read the EN60950 spec and it seems like for copper on different inner layers an isolation of 0.4mm would be good enough. Now what I could not figure is about traces on the same inner layer. In this case an isolation of 0.4 mm is as good as it is between different layers, or should I take into consideration the manufacturing errors (impurities, air bubbles, a.s.o.) and make a bigger isolation, but how much bigger? The voltages I am working with are some of them TNV1 and others 220VAC (mains). Many thanks, Mihai --- 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: standard for lead shot dielectric testing
Hello Barry, you might check IEC 60851-5 (Test methods for winding wires) where Clause 4, (Test 13) uses the metal shot when determining breakdown voltages of a twisted winding wire. This test is also referenced in IEC 60950 Annex U.2.1. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-642-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany barrym bar...@spaceship.com on 16.03.2000 22:26:37 Please respond to barrym bar...@spaceship.com I'm looking for reference to any standard which may provide specifics for using lead shot for dielectric strength testing. I know this done for insulation system qualifications, just have not identified a standard for the test set up. Thanks, Barry Marks --- 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: Frequency of temporary overvoltages on the mains supply/no data
Dear Peter, yesterday I received a very interesting document which includes a lot of information and data on sources of overvoltages on the mains supply. It also contains a large bibliography. The document is a preliminary version of a technical report IEC 62066 (General basic information regarding surge overvoltages and surge protection in low-voltage a.c. power systems). The document is called 64/1034/CD and can be obtained through your national standards committee. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany P Lewis qsl_dir...@compuserve.com on 10.10.99 23:04:42 Please respond to P Lewis qsl_dir...@compuserve.com To: Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM@IBMDE cc: Subject: Re: Frequency of temporary overvoltages on the mains supply/no data Dear Volker Many thanks for the reply. I understand you have not yet received any statistical information on the frequency of voltage transients yet. If you are successful in the future, perhaps you would be so kind as to send me some details. With kind regards Peter Lewis Message text written by INTERNET:volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Dear Peter, it is rather difficult to obtain statistical material. So far I was not successful, but I have had some dicussions with people dealing with installation of buildings. They gave me some hints whom to talk to. I assume it will take a while before I really get the required data. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: Varistors to ground
You have raised an interesting question, especially in light of CE marking. Once a CE marked product is placed on the EU market, there are no further restrictions to limit its distribution or use in other member states. I do not think it is possible to restrict usage in one specific country based on an information in the users guide, especially if safety is involved. In other cases of country specific restrictions, like 'Special National Conditions' in European Norms, the design has to cover all of them to be able to state compliance to this standard and to apply CE marking. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49 7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: 3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org on 15.12.98 22:52:54 Please respond to wo...@sensormatic.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc: Subject: RE: Varistors to ground Volker, thank you for this useful information. You indicated that the decisions are to be followed by all of the test houses, yet many of the decisions appear to be accepted in only some countries. If all of the test houses are expected to follow the decision, why are country exceptions allowed and what does it mean to us designers? - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: Varistors to ground
Hello Jim, there is currently work ongoing in IEC TC74 to include requirements for varistors into IEC 60950. However, until those proposals have reached a level to be included into an amendment of the 3rd edition may take a while. I understand that varistors without fuses and sparc gaps in series are only allowed if separately approved as mentioned, and with the indicated country limitations. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49 7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: 3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org on 16.12.98 02:55:01 Please respond to jeich...@statpower.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc: Subject: RE: Varistors to ground Volker: Thanks for the explanation. I am left with 2 questions: 1. You wrote The new decision is not part of the upcoming safety standard for IT products, IEC 60950 3rd edition, which is likely to be available beginning of next year. What does that omission tell us? If the 3rd edition has been written by people aware of the OSM/EE decisions, who consciously did not include the decisions in the new edition, then do they mean that varistors to ground are acceptable and not subject to the requirements in the 2 decisions you quoted? 2. It isn't clear whether the recent decision allows a varistor approved to IEC 601051-1 without a spark gap and fuse or whether the new decision overrules the old decision in this respect. Thanks again for any clarification anyone can offer. Regards, Jim Eichner Statpower Technologies Corporation jeich...@statpower.com http://www.statpower.com Any opinions expressed are those of my invisible friend, who really exists. Honest. -Original Message- From: Volker Gasse [SMTP:ga...@de.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 2:34 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Varistors to ground The mentioned Cenelec decision is taken from the 'List of decisions from CENELEC Operational Staff Meeting for Electronic Equipment (OSM/EE)'. Here representatives from EU Testhouses meet to discuss interpretations of clauses in safety standards such as EN 60950 for IT products. These decisions are to be followed by all European testhouses. However, those decisions should be interpretations/clarifications to the existing standards, but not addition of new requirements. For EN 60950, Clause 1.5.1, Decision 98/2 states: 'A combination of a varistor in series with a spark gap (Gas-Tube) [between the mains and the protective earth] complying with Basic Insulation, and with a fuse will be accepted for a. Pluggable equipment Type B and permanently connected equipment: by all countries b. Pluggable equipment Type A: by all countries except DK, UK and SE. For pluggable equipment Type A two fuses are required.' (To be sure that even by non-polarized plugs a fuse is provided) This interpretation is an extension to a decision which was already issued in 1/94: 'If a Varistor is separately approved according to Publications IEC 601051-1 and IEC 601051-2, it can be accepted without a protective device. If a Varistor is not separately approved, a protective device against the short-circuit is required. Varistors tested according to CECC 42200 are considered as acceptable in the same way as tested to IEC 601051. Varistors between the mains and the protective earth cannot be accepted by the following countries: Pluggable equipment, type A: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.' The new decision is not part of the upcoming safety standard for IT products, IEC 60950 3rd edition, which is likely to be available beginning of next year. One of the reasons for requiring the spark gap in series with the varistor is a possible increase in leakage current if the varistor has been exposed to several mains transients. It should be noted, that IEC/EN 60950 does not require the use of transient suppressing components. Concerning the mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49 7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: 3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany -- Forwarded by Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM on 15.12.98 11:20 --- owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org on 15.12.98 02:11:00 Please respond to jeich...@statpower.com To: j...@bighorn.dr.lucent.com cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Varistors to ground John: Sorry I can't help, but I am interested in what replies you get. I also wonder what force the Decision carries. Is it a mandatory part of the Low Voltage Directive? How does it relate to the LVD or to the various EN's in force under the LVD? Thanks in advance for any light you can shed on these murky waters! Regards, Jim Eichner Statpower Technologies Corporation jeich
RE: Varistors to ground
The mentioned Cenelec decision is taken from the 'List of decisions from CENELEC Operational Staff Meeting for Electronic Equipment (OSM/EE)'. Here representatives from EU Testhouses meet to discuss interpretations of clauses in safety standards such as EN 60950 for IT products. These decisions are to be followed by all European testhouses. However, those decisions should be interpretations/clarifications to the existing standards, but not addition of new requirements. For EN 60950, Clause 1.5.1, Decision 98/2 states: 'A combination of a varistor in series with a spark gap (Gas-Tube) [between the mains and the protective earth] complying with Basic Insulation, and with a fuse will be accepted for a. Pluggable equipment Type B and permanently connected equipment: by all countries b. Pluggable equipment Type A: by all countries except DK, UK and SE. For pluggable equipment Type A two fuses are required.' (To be sure that even by non-polarized plugs a fuse is provided) This interpretation is an extension to a decision which was already issued in 1/94: 'If a Varistor is separately approved according to Publications IEC 601051-1 and IEC 601051-2, it can be accepted without a protective device. If a Varistor is not separately approved, a protective device against the short-circuit is required. Varistors tested according to CECC 42200 are considered as acceptable in the same way as tested to IEC 601051. Varistors between the mains and the protective earth cannot be accepted by the following countries: Pluggable equipment, type A: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.' The new decision is not part of the upcoming safety standard for IT products, IEC 60950 3rd edition, which is likely to be available beginning of next year. One of the reasons for requiring the spark gap in series with the varistor is a possible increase in leakage current if the varistor has been exposed to several mains transients. It should be noted, that IEC/EN 60950 does not require the use of transient suppressing components. Concerning the mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49 7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: 3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany -- Forwarded by Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM on 15.12.98 11:20 --- owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org on 15.12.98 02:11:00 Please respond to jeich...@statpower.com To: j...@bighorn.dr.lucent.com cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Varistors to ground John: Sorry I can't help, but I am interested in what replies you get. I also wonder what force the Decision carries. Is it a mandatory part of the Low Voltage Directive? How does it relate to the LVD or to the various EN's in force under the LVD? Thanks in advance for any light you can shed on these murky waters! Regards, Jim Eichner Statpower Technologies Corporation jeich...@statpower.com http://www.statpower.com Any opinions expressed are those of my invisible friend, who really exists. Honest. -Original Message- From: Boucher, John [SMTP:j...@bighorn.dr.lucent.com] Sent: Monday, December 14, 1998 9:07 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: Varistors to ground All: I have received a copy of a CENELEC Decision (dated 6/98) regarding the use of varistors between mains conductors and ground. This particular Decision is written in a rather unclear fashion (at least its unclear to me...I tend to be rather literal in my interpretations of written requirements), and I am struggling with defining the actual requirements. If anyone out there has received this Decision, and believes they are clear about what the actual bottom line requirements are, please let me know. I have muddled through some of the issues, but need some confirmation on a couple of points (see the questions below). It may seem to some that the answers to these questions are straight-forward in the Decision, but I have studied this Decision (maybe too much) and find these points unclear. 1) Is this Decision only for pluggable equipment type A, or is the spark-gap / fuse requirement in effect for pluggable equipment type B as well? 2) Will Denmark, UK, and Sweden accept varistors to ground if the circuit contains a spark-gap and two fuses? 3) The installation instructions for our PABX systems include the requirement for a permanently connected ground wire between the equipment ground and an approved building ground (this ground wire is in addition to the green wire lead in the AC mains). This wire is required for all our PABX systems (AC and DC powered systems, pluggable type A, type B, and permanently connected systems). Does this permanent ground connection provide an exemption to this Decision? If this Decision means DK, UK, SE will simply not accept varistors to ground, then a lot of small pluggable type A equipment intended
LVD Standards
Hello Peter, the following Internet Address points to lists of standards for most of the EU Directives. http://www2.echo.lu/nasd/index.html But you have to be careful as this may not always contain the latest level of applicable standards. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49 7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: 3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany Home Page: http://www.de.ibm.com/kn/tu/tu_tu.html -- Forwarded by Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM on 10.11.98 09:17 --- owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org on 10.11.98 06:44:57 Please respond to peterh...@aol.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc: Subject: LVD Standards Hello All, Can someone let me know if I can get the list of LVD standards published in the OJ on the WWW? Many thanks Peter Hays prterh...@aol.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: VDE 0565
Massimo, VDE 0565 contains 8 parts, the one dealing with chokes is part 2, part 2-1 and 2-2 which correspond to EN 138000, EN 138100 and EN 138101. (all dated march 1997) I could not find a corresponding IEC standard. Mit freundlichen Gruessen/ Best regards, Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, D3114/7103-91, Tel: +49 7031-16-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: ga...@de.ibm.com owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org on 30.01.98 16:03:15 Please respond to regr...@esaote.com @ internet To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org @ internet cc: Subject: VDE 0565 Hello! Within the technical data of a power line choke I read: compliance with VDE 0565. I guess it's a large German standard about safety (?) and performances (?) of passive components used in power line filters. Does anybody know the corresponding IEC or CENELEC standards (if any)? The manufacturer claims a CE conformity. Is the compliance with this national standard enough? Thanks Massimo --- ESAOTE S.p.A. Massimo Polignano Research Product Development Regulatory Affairs Via di Caciolle,15 tel:+39.55.4229402 I- 50127 Florencefax:+39.55.4223305 e-mail: regr...@esaote.com
ERGONOMICS/Color Red Restrictions
From: V. Gasse, Product Safety Authority.TEL 49-(0)7031-16-6796 IBM Germany, Technical Relations...FAX 49-(0)7031-16-6916 e-mail: ga...@de.ibm.com What has been said about the use of red indicators in Standards like IEC 73 and IEC 950 is correct. Here Red Indicators are allowed, if it is clear that safety is not involved. However, some testhouses in Germany have restricted the use of the color red only to be used as safety indicator, because only if used exclusively in this sense, red is meaningful as a safety relevant indication. This interpretation is based on a German Safety Directive VBG 125. Attempts to achieve harmonisation within other EU countries have been made and are ongoing. Does anyone know if there are any formal restrictions to using red colored lights for front panel displays and indicators? Is there a harmonized European standard or regulation or a specific national regulation that requires the restriction of the color red for warning, danger, etc. It seems it may have been a German ergonomic requirement before various standards were harmonized. Can anyone shed some light on this issue? Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic End of mail text Additional SMTP headers from original mail item follow: Received: from ruebert.ieee.org by E-MAIL.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Wed, 22 Jan 97 16:49:09 EST Received: (from daemon¹localhost) by ruebert.ieee.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA1032 for emc-pstc-list; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:39:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: c=US%a=_%p=Sensormatic%l=SENSORMATI/SFLAEXCHAN/00018084¹flgwyex1. ensormatic.com X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.837.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-emc-pstc¹majordomo.ieee.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: UMBDENSTOCK, DON UMBDENSTOC¹Sensormatic.com X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients emc-pstc¹majordomo.ieee.org X-Listname: emc-pstc X-List-Description: Product Safety Tech. Committee, EMC Society X-Info: Help requests to emc-pstc-request¹majordomo.ieee.org X-Info: ÜUnðSubscribe requests to majordomo¹majordomo.ieee.org X-Moderator-Address: emc-pstc-approval¹majordomo.ieee.org Mit freundlichen Gruessen/Best regards, V. Gasse
Re: Magnet wire
From: V. Gasse, Product Safety Authority.TEL 49-(0)7031-16-6796 IBM, Technical Relations Germany,..FAX 49-(0)7031-16-6916 Egon, being a member of the mentioned TC74 workgroup I would like to point out, that Amd.4 of IEC 950 still only allows polyimid or FEP wires to be used in Scl. 2.9.4.4 together with the Annex U tests. The proposed widening of the scope to 'equivalent material' could not be implemented into this amendment, and will happen in IEC 950 3rd edition. However there is an optional path to qualify the wire according to 2.9.4.2 (Thin film insulation) with an electric strength test. There is a common modification for EN 60950 Amd.4 in process that would allow the use of other materials under Scl. 2.9.4.4. This Common Modification is currently out for vote in the National Committees. I can backup your observation about the proactive role of Furukawa. They are instrumental in improving the current standard especially the Annex U, which in it's present form gives manufacturers and testhouses a hard time. Mit freundlichen Gruessen/Best regards, V. Gasse INTERNET: ga...@de.ibm.com *** Forwarding note from I1467402--IBMMAIL 08/30/96 04:57 *** = List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 29 Aug 96 21:18:45 EDT From: Egon H. Varju 73132.¹CompuServe.COM To: IEEE emc-pstc¹ieee.org Cc: Shigeo Yamaguchi /c=JP/a=NIFTY/p=SVC/s=QWL01633/¹X400.compuserve.com Subject: Re: Magnet wire On 29/8/96 Peter Tarver wrote: On the other side of the coin, Annex U only allows winding wire that is = spirally wrapped in polyimide film, which the subject wire is not. = Properly used, I'm confident that TEX-E will make it through most any UL = evaluation, particulalry for ITE, since that was my goal in doing the = work. The same probably applies to CSA (Egon?). However, you will = probably have more difficulty with the application elsewhere than in the = northern bits of North America. There are several manufacturers of such extruded triple-insulated wire, many of which, including Furukawa Electric, have received CSA certification and UL recognition. Of course I can not recommend or endorse any particular manufacturer, and I'm sure that they are all equally suitable for the application. But purely by coincidence, I've also had occasion to meet with Furukawa. Both CSA and UL have accepted this kind of wire for use in ITE products. Before the inception of Annex U, this was accepted based on the requirements of thin film insulation. Test were done to special productions of the subject wire that were made especially for CSA/UL, with only 2 layers of insulation (both inner and both outer ones). There were no test failures. Annex U has complicated things however, by specifying the specific materials that can be used; namely polyimide. The subject wire uses polyamide. Not being a chemical or materials engineer, I really don't know what the difference is, but needless to say, this is now no longer officially acceptable. Of course, since it was accepted before, I'm sure CSA and UL will continue to accept it for the time being. The same policy appears to apply to most European agencies, since they had also accepted this wire in the past. However, there is one European agency that is currently flatly refusing to accept this kind of wire. They are being strictly correct in rejecting this, since it doesn't comply with the wording in IEC950. This situation is not expected to change until the publication of Ammendment 4 By the way, it is my PRIVATE opinion that IEC950 should not specify specific materials at the exclusion of enything else. I'm certainly not a materials expert and neither are most agency product safety professionals, so I'd rather see a test that can be performed. If Annex U is suitable for certain types of wire, then it should apply to all types. At the time I was performing the evaluation on the subject winding wire, = the proposal for Annex U had been made, but was not yet voted on in TC74 = or in some similar state of being. It was my understanding then that = there was either one or a small core of magnet wire manufacturers in = Europe (German, meguesses) that pushed for Annex U. I urged Furukawa to = take the issue up with TC 74, but haven't heard or read anything on topic = since. As it happens, I also urged them to lobby TC74. In fact we managed to get them a one hour presentation at the TC-74 meeting in Copenhagen last September, and again at the Paris meeting in April. To give credit where credit is due, UL was also instrumental in helping to secure these hearings (thanks Al and Lal|) We also helped them prepare the technical arguments, test data and presentation materials, which were received very well by the members of TC74. They gave an excellent presentation and, as a result, it is my understanding that the wording in IEC950 will change to allow for polyimide ... OR EQUIVALENT in compliance
