Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Richard Nute]

 

The object of fire safety is to prevent ignition in the first place.  

 

Given that we seldom know how to do this, we assume ignition and specify
requirements for flame retardant (otherwise flammable) materials and fire
enclosures.  We assume that these measures will slow the fire growth and
maybe lead to the fire dying before it escapes the product.  

 

Fire of any source produces toxic gasses, some visible (smoke and other
airborne particulates) and some invisible.  (This is why we have chimneys
and furnace flues, and why firefighters have breathing apparatus.)
Depending on the material, some gasses are more toxic (poisonous) than
others.  The fact that flame-retardant chemicals decompose and are given off
as gas and particulates is slightly more dangerous to breathe in than the
other combustion gasses and particulates.  

 

Best regards,

Rich

 

 

From: Peter Tarver  
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2019 4:25 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

 

Not quite so long ago as high voltage vacuum tubes, I am aware of one
incident where a small "fire" (more accurately, smoke escaped and the
enclosure melted) occurred in in a TV. IIRC, this was a case where the
production of the molded plastic yielded material too thin, but this was on
the order of 25 years ago.

 

On another front, there is an area where flame retardants are the enemy of
compliance: in "other spaces for environmental air." Flame retardants emit
copious amounts of particulates as they resist ignition. This can cause the
opacity and density of smoke in the test chamber to exceed proscribed
limits. If a fire enclosure is not needed (e.g., LSP or LVLE or similar are
all that's involved) and a metal enclosure is not a cost effective option
the best approach is to use a lower flammability classified material with
low doping load of flame retardant and possibly a high percentage of
inorganic fill material (e.g., glass fibers, etc.).

 

 

Peter Tarver

 

From: Ted Eckert <07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org
<mailto:07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> > 
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:56 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

 I seem to recall that long ago, when televisions had vacuum tubes, high
voltage and high power, fires were an issue. I'm not positive, but I thought
that the requirements for flame retardants came from investigations of a
number of fires of plastic enclosed televisions. I believe that the basis
for the requirement is sound. It's been decades since flammable plastics
were commonly used for IT and A/V products. The fact that there have been
few issues may be due to the effectiveness of flame retardants. 

 

Ted Eckert

Microsoft Corporation

 

The opinions experessed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of
my employer.

 

From: Pete Perkins <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org
<mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> > 
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

 

Rich, et al,   Like many issues we see raging around us this is one
which got caught up in political correctness before it had a large public
face.  I personally felt that the science of flame retardants is well
understood and making a change involved adding in risks which were not well
understood therefore bad practice.  Thanx for bring this around again.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 1067

Albany, Ore  97321-0413

 

503/452-1201

 

IEEE Life Fellow

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

Entropy ain't what it used to be

 

From: Richard Nute mailto:ri...@bendbroadband.com>
> 
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

 

 

 
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scien
tificamerican.com%2Farticle%2Fdo-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics%2F&
data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790
%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984040539&sdata=ub7Kt
AnUqaUapbaX027V6wPDQk2RvtChpLUtsSzI0so%3D&reserved=0>
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-el
ectronics/

 ".there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer
products have resulted in death or injury reduction," says
<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scien
tificamerican.com%2F

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Peter Tarver]

Not quite so long ago as high voltage vacuum tubes, I am aware of one incident 
where a small "fire" (more accurately, smoke escaped and the enclosure melted) 
occurred in in a TV. IIRC, this was a case where the production of the molded 
plastic yielded material too thin, but this was on the order of 25 years ago.

On another front, there is an area where flame retardants are the enemy of 
compliance: in "other spaces for environmental air." Flame retardants emit 
copious amounts of particulates as they resist ignition. This can cause the 
opacity and density of smoke in the test chamber to exceed proscribed limits. 
If a fire enclosure is not needed (e.g., LSP or LVLE or similar are all that's 
involved) and a metal enclosure is not a cost effective option the best 
approach is to use a lower flammability classified material with low doping 
load of flame retardant and possibly a high percentage of inorganic fill 
material (e.g., glass fibers, etc.).


Peter Tarver

From: Ted Eckert <07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:56 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

 I seem to recall that long ago, when televisions had vacuum tubes, high 
voltage and high power, fires were an issue. I'm not positive, but I thought 
that the requirements for flame retardants came from investigations of a number 
of fires of plastic enclosed televisions. I believe that the basis for the 
requirement is sound. It's been decades since flammable plastics were commonly 
used for IT and A/V products. The fact that there have been few issues may be 
due to the effectiveness of flame retardants.

Ted Eckert
Microsoft Corporation

The opinions experessed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer.

From: Pete Perkins 
<0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org<mailto:0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

Rich, et al,   Like many issues we see raging around us this is one 
which got caught up in political correctness before it had a large public face. 
 I personally felt that the science of flame retardants is well understood and 
making a change involved adding in risks which were not well understood 
therefore bad practice.  Thanx for bring this around again.

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 1067
Albany, Ore  97321-0413

503/452-1201

IEEE Life Fellow
p.perk...@ieee.org<mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org>

Entropy ain't what it used to be

From: Richard Nute mailto:ri...@bendbroadband.com>>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?



https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scientificamerican.com%2Farticle%2Fdo-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984040539&sdata=ub7KtAnUqaUapbaX027V6wPDQk2RvtChpLUtsSzI0so%3D&reserved=0>

 "...there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction," says Vytenis 
Babrauskas<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scientificamerican.com%2Farticle%2Fdo-furniture-flame-retardants-save-enough-lives-justify-environmental-damage%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984050495&sdata=k0o04eDHG0IbRIzN9hu559U5Pt3dlddOXHZngjKEt2c%3D&reserved=0>...

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking.

Enjoy!

Rich
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Femc-pstc.html&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984050495&sdata=sguIpc6uyhsihuftvffJXtbmcZ5zXEA0FAveJ82pl9g%3D&reserved=0>

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compl

Re: [PSES] AW: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Richard Nute]

Hi Bernd:

Flame retardancy that I am familiar with, UL 94 and its IEC clones, is really 
an ignition test, and less of a burning test.  Flame-retardant materials under 
UL 94 will burn continuously with enough continuous heat.  Some years ago, we 
proved this when we were testing TVs to determine whether HB or V0 was the best 
material rating.  The test was with a candle flame (simulating an overturned 
candle) at various parts of the enclosure.  Depending on the enclosure 
construction, the candle flame could create sustained burning of V0-rated 
material. 

What I am saying is that the flame-retardant material rating is only good for 
ignition from a time-limited source.  So, it is important that the heat or 
flame source in an electrical product is limited in time.  

Fires occur under product fault conditions.  And, many electrically-caused 
fires start small.  

I like Pete's anecdote that an oxygen-limiting enclosure can slow (time-limit) 
or suppress the fire. 

Best regards,
Rich



-Original Message-
From: Dürrer Bernd  
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 1:34 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] AW: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

Hello Richard,

Thank you for sharing this interesting article. I remember from the Grenfell 
Tower fire discussion on this list, that Adam Dixon shared this UK data source 
for incidents:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/fire-statistics-data-tables

This also includes statistics on the cause of fire:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/fire-statistics-data-tables#cause-of-fire

As can be seen, cooking appliances, space heating appliances, central and water 
heating appliances, electrical distribution, and other electrical appliances 
are primary causes of fire. Therefore, the use of flame-retardants, especially 
in appliances intended for unattended operation, is more than justified by 
available data.

In addition, the author of the article neglects that electronic components 
(much more than wooden furniture) contain other potentially harmful substances 
(when released to the environment) that are not related to fire prevention. 
Typically, these are contained in larger proportion in electronics than 
flame-retardants. So banning flame-retardants will only partly reduce 
environmental risks by increasing the risk of ignition. At least for electronic 
components, I do not support the claim that "companies typically do not share 
information on which flame retardants they use": To comply with EU's RoHS 
Directive and REACh regulation, we have requested Full Materials Disclosures 
(FMD) from our suppliers and the vast majority has supplied such data. As 
general source of reference to identify substances typically used as 
flame-retardants I recommend the IEC 62474 Declarable Substance List at 
http://std.iec.ch/iec62474.

Kind regards,

Bernd


Von: Richard Nute 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. September 2019 01:00
An: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Betreff: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?


Well, the obvious way to determine whether flame-retardants have reduced the 
incidence of death or injury is to stop using flame-retardants and compare 
before and after.  The problem, of course, is if we are wrong…

This is one argument that is often used to retain ALL requirements in safety 
standards.  However, in many cases scientific or engineering analysis can show 
(or not show) that a requirement contributes to the product’s safety.

I’m not aware of illness or injury due to any flame-retardant in normal 
operation of products, although there is plenty of evidence of illness and 
injury from the chemicals themselves and disposal of the products.

Rich


On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute <mailto:ri...@bendbroadband.com> 
wrote:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/
 “…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction,” says 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-furniture-flame-retardants-save-enough-lives-justify-environmental-damage/…
The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking.
Enjoy!
Rich
-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on 
the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Bill Owsley]

 Many years ago, we used the EMC grill, top and bottom of chassis, coated with 
an intumescent material that swelled with heat above a certain temperature to 
shut off the air flow and starve the fire.  Max ventilation was essential to 
normal operation, thus the coating for a fire condition, also temp detector to 
shut off the fans.

On Tuesday, September 17, 2019, 2:00:25 PM EDT, Pete Perkins 
<0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> wrote:  
 
 
Oh yes, I remember doing safety consulting with a company on a telecom product 
but they wanted to handle all of the telecom GR issues themselves.  One morning 
the technician hauled me into a small conference room and showed me a video of 
the burn test which was started by putting a burner into the product to start 
the fire.  This compact product burned from rail to rail in the 19” rack each 
board lighting off its neighbor till all that was left was fiberglass with any 
remaining components which had not fallen out flaming to the ground; the V-1 
boards couldn’t hold back the spread of fire.  He was appalled, they didn’t 
know what to do about it.  I led him thru the sequence just watching the fire 
move along.  He took me to the ME manager who was incensed that the tech had 
shown me the video.  It took a couple of weeks but then I was called in to go 
over the fire with the product development team.  I arranged to project the 
video on the wall in front of the team so large that they could see the details 
vividly and talked them thru the two views taken of the fire -15 minutes each.  
When they understood the details they attacked the problem and finally found a 
solution that they could live with.  The solution involved reducing the 
ventilation holes in the top and bottom such that the fire choked because of 
lack of Oxygen and didn’t spread so quickly.  It took a long time to fix it and 
the ME manager was reassigned during the process.  

  

:>) br,  Pete

  

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 1067

Albany, Ore  97321-0413

  

503/452-1201

  

IEEE Life Fellow

p.perk...@ieee.org

  

Entropy ain’t what it used to be

  

From: N. Shani  
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 10:00 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

  

Just a small addendum: while indeed GR-1089 has all kind of immunity 
requirements, it is GR-63 that has the non-electrical requirements, one of 
which is the flame spread testing.

  

Having witnessed a few of those passing or failing tests, the various RBOCs had 
their own spin on those requirements. Recall Verizon? SBC? Each with their own 
emphasis.

  

Naftali Shani, Ottawa, ON

Happily retired


On Sep 17, 2019, at 12:47, Cortland Richmond  wrote:


When I went to work at DSC/Alcatel USA in 1997, we had to meet GR-1089. 
Telcordia had/has a lot of immunity and ruggedness requirements.  Yes, we did 
flammability tests.    I've been in the Hinsdale Central Office too (I was 
looking at an EMI complaint at one of their subscribers)  ad got the "real 
story" from some folks who'd been there when they had their famous fire. Don't 
open a door to get hoses in until  it's cooled down enough that oxygen doesn't 
turn the whole bay into an inferno...

https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/95/Illinois%20Bell%20Telephone%20Fire,%201988.pdf?sequence=2

Cortland Richmond
Ret. but "on-call" at Belcan

On 9/16/2019 19:00 PM, Richard Nute wrote:


 

Well, the obvious way to determine whether flame-retardants have reduced the 
incidence of death or injury is to stop using flame-retardants and compare 
before and after.  The problem, of course, is if we are wrong…

 

This is one argument that is often used to retain ALL requirements in safety 
standards.  However, in many cases scientific or engineering analysis can show 
(or not show) that a requirement contributes to the product’s safety. 

 

I’m not aware of illness or injury due to any flame-retardant in normal 
operation of products, although there is plenty of evidence of illness and 
injury from the chemicals themselves and disposal of the products. 

 

Rich

 

 

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute  wrote:


 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/

 “…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction,” says Vytenis Babrauskas…

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking. 

Enjoy!

Rich


-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Pete Perkins]

Oh yes, I remember doing safety consulting with a company on a telecom product 
but they wanted to handle all of the telecom GR issues themselves.  One morning 
the technician hauled me into a small conference room and showed me a video of 
the burn test which was started by putting a burner into the product to start 
the fire.  This compact product burned from rail to rail in the 19” rack each 
board lighting off its neighbor till all that was left was fiberglass with any 
remaining components which had not fallen out flaming to the ground; the V-1 
boards couldn’t hold back the spread of fire.  He was appalled, they didn’t 
know what to do about it.  I led him thru the sequence just watching the fire 
move along.  He took me to the ME manager who was incensed that the tech had 
shown me the video.  It took a couple of weeks but then I was called in to go 
over the fire with the product development team.  I arranged to project the 
video on the wall in front of the team so large that they could see the details 
vividly and talked them thru the two views taken of the fire -15 minutes each.  
When they understood the details they attacked the problem and finally found a 
solution that they could live with.  The solution involved reducing the 
ventilation holes in the top and bottom such that the fire choked because of 
lack of Oxygen and didn’t spread so quickly.  It took a long time to fix it and 
the ME manager was reassigned during the process.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 1067

Albany, Ore  97321-0413

 

503/452-1201

 

IEEE Life Fellow

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

Entropy ain’t what it used to be

 

From: N. Shani  
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 10:00 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

 

Just a small addendum: while indeed GR-1089 has all kind of immunity 
requirements, it is GR-63 that has the non-electrical requirements, one of 
which is the flame spread testing.

 

Having witnessed a few of those passing or failing tests, the various RBOCs had 
their own spin on those requirements. Recall Verizon? SBC? Each with their own 
emphasis.

 

Naftali Shani, Ottawa, ON

Happily retired


On Sep 17, 2019, at 12:47, Cortland Richmond mailto:k...@earthlink.net> > wrote:

When I went to work at DSC/Alcatel USA in 1997, we had to meet GR-1089. 
Telcordia had/has a lot of immunity and ruggedness requirements.  Yes, we did 
flammability tests.I've been in the Hinsdale Central Office too (I was 
looking at an EMI complaint at one of their subscribers)  ad got the "real 
story" from some folks who'd been there when they had their famous fire. Don't 
open a door to get hoses in until  it's cooled down enough that oxygen doesn't 
turn the whole bay into an inferno...

https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/95/Illinois%20Bell%20Telephone%20Fire,%201988.pdf?sequence=2

Cortland Richmond
Ret. but "on-call" at Belcan

On 9/16/2019 19:00 PM, Richard Nute wrote:

 

Well, the obvious way to determine whether flame-retardants have reduced the 
incidence of death or injury is to stop using flame-retardants and compare 
before and after.  The problem, of course, is if we are wrong…

 

This is one argument that is often used to retain ALL requirements in safety 
standards.  However, in many cases scientific or engineering analysis can show 
(or not show) that a requirement contributes to the product’s safety. 

 

I’m not aware of illness or injury due to any flame-retardant in normal 
operation of products, although there is plenty of evidence of illness and 
injury from the chemicals themselves and disposal of the products. 

 

Rich

 

 

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute mailto:ri...@bendbroadband.com> > wrote:

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/

 “…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction,” says  
<https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-furniture-flame-retardants-save-enough-lives-justify-environmental-damage/>
 Vytenis Babrauskas…

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking. 

Enjoy!

Rich

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[N. Shani]

Just a small addendum: while indeed GR-1089 has all kind of immunity 
requirements, it is GR-63 that has the non-electrical requirements, one of 
which is the flame spread testing.

Having witnessed a few of those passing or failing tests, the various RBOCs had 
their own spin on those requirements. Recall Verizon? SBC? Each with their own 
emphasis.

Naftali Shani, Ottawa, ON
Happily retired

> On Sep 17, 2019, at 12:47, Cortland Richmond  wrote:
> 
> When I went to work at DSC/Alcatel USA in 1997, we had to meet GR-1089. 
> Telcordia had/has a lot of immunity and ruggedness requirements.  Yes, we did 
> flammability tests.I've been in the Hinsdale Central Office too (I was 
> looking at an EMI complaint at one of their subscribers)  ad got the "real 
> story" from some folks who'd been there when they had their famous fire. 
> Don't open a door to get hoses in until  it's cooled down enough that oxygen 
> doesn't turn the whole bay into an inferno...
> 
> https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/95/Illinois%20Bell%20Telephone%20Fire,%201988.pdf?sequence=2
> Cortland Richmond
> Ret. but "on-call" at Belcan
>> On 9/16/2019 19:00 PM, Richard Nute wrote:
>>  
>> Well, the obvious way to determine whether flame-retardants have reduced the 
>> incidence of death or injury is to stop using flame-retardants and compare 
>> before and after.  The problem, of course, is if we are wrong…
>>  
>> This is one argument that is often used to retain ALL requirements in safety 
>> standards.  However, in many cases scientific or engineering analysis can 
>> show (or not show) that a requirement contributes to the product’s safety.
>>  
>> I’m not aware of illness or injury due to any flame-retardant in normal 
>> operation of products, although there is plenty of evidence of illness and 
>> injury from the chemicals themselves and disposal of the products.
>>  
>> Rich
>>  
>>  
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute  wrote:
>>  
>> 
>> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/
>> 
>>  “…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
>> retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer 
>> products have resulted in death or injury reduction,” says Vytenis 
>> Babrauskas…
>> 
>> The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking.
>> 
>> Enjoy!
>> 
>> Rich
>> 
>> -
>> 
>> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
>> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>> 
>> 
>> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
>> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>> 
>> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
>> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in 
>> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>> 
>> Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>> Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
>> unsubscribe)
>> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>> 
>> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>> Scott Douglas 
>> Mike Cantwell 
>> 
>> For policy questions, send mail to:
>> Jim Bacher 
>> David Heald 
>> 
> -
> 
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
> 
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
> 
> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
> formats), large files, etc.
> 
> Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
> Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
> unsubscribe)
> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Scott Douglas 
> Mike Cantwell 
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Jim Bacher 
> David Heald 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Cortland Richmond]

When I went to work at DSC/Alcatel USA in 1997, we had to meet GR-1089. 
Telcordia had/has a lot of immunity and ruggedness requirements.  Yes, 
we did flammability tests.    I've been in the Hinsdale Central Office 
too (I was looking at an EMI complaint at one of their subscribers)  ad 
got the "real story" from some folks who'd been there when they had 
their famous fire. Don't open a door to get hoses in until  it's cooled 
down enough that oxygen doesn't turn the whole bay into an inferno...


https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/95/Illinois%20Bell%20Telephone%20Fire,%201988.pdf?sequence=2

Cortland Richmond
Ret. but "on-call" at Belcan

On 9/16/2019 19:00 PM, Richard Nute wrote:


Well, the obvious way to determine whether flame-retardants have 
reduced the incidence of death or injury is to stop using 
flame-retardants and compare before and after.  The problem, of 
course, is if we are wrong…


This is one argument that is often used to retain ALL requirements in 
safety standards.  However, in many cases scientific or engineering 
analysis can show (or not show) that a requirement contributes to the 
product’s safety.


I’m not aware of illness or injury due to any flame-retardant in 
normal operation of products, although there is plenty of evidence of 
illness and injury from the chemicals themselves and disposal of the 
products.


Rich

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute > wrote:



https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/

“…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that
flame retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in
consumer products have resulted in death or injury reduction,”
says Vytenis Babrauskas

…

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless,
thought-provoking.

Enjoy!

Rich

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society 
emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your 
e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html


Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities 
site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for 
graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.


Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>



-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion 
list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Cortland Richmond]

Some years ago, in another century, I was hired to work in the EMC labs 
at Tandy Corporation, in Fort Worth Texas. When I showed up, they 
realized they hadn't actually budgeted funds to pay me – but they did 
have money for consultants, and so they had me build, from the piled-up  
panels,  a double-sized. copper mesh shielded room in the basement of 
one of the two buildings. That was probably all the interview they 
needed with me, because I was there until the computer business was sold 
to AST Research.  I was the last one out of that lab, too; another story.


*Flame retardant's.* I didn't see this, I read about it and I heard 
about it. Back in the days of the Model 2000, 8186 computer, beside 
having to pull it out of stores because someone had sent it out for 
marketing before it got FCC approval, there were problems with 
peripherals. (I later bought my mother one of those computers when Radio 
Shack was getting rid of them for pennies on the dollar – she wrote 
several books using it, even though the 5 MB hard drive sometimes had to 
be twisted around the axis of rotation to start.)


Of that approximate vintage, it was discovered that another item bought 
from the HDD's Korean firm, now one of the larger chaebols, a monitor 
whose specifications and nomenclature I don't remember, was capable of 
operating at modes it hadn't been designed for – and if I recall 
correctly, it was necessary to issue a warning not to use anything more 
then the modes the manuals prescribed; apparently, they apparently 
caught fire if they were operated beyond the limits of the vendor's 
design.  That firm would later have problems with AST Research as well, 
when they bought it and tried to run the outfit the same way as a Korean 
one.


Cortland Richmond
Retired, but "on call" at Belcan


On 9/16/2019 16:55 PM, Ted Eckert wrote:

Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

I seem to recall that long ago, when televisions had vacuum tubes, 
high voltage and high power, fires were an issue. I’m not positive, 
but I thought that the requirements for flame retardants came from 
investigations of a number of fires of plastic enclosed televisions. I 
believe that the basis for the requirement is sound. It’s been decades 
since flammable plastics were commonly used for IT and A/V products. 
The fact that there have been few issues may be due to the 
effectiveness of flame retardants.


Ted Eckert

Microsoft Corporation




-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion 
list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] AW: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Dürrer Bernd]

Hello Richard,

Thank you for sharing this interesting article. I remember from the Grenfell 
Tower fire discussion on this list, that Adam Dixon shared this UK data source 
for incidents:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/fire-statistics-data-tables

This also includes statistics on the cause of fire:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/fire-statistics-data-tables#cause-of-fire

As can be seen, cooking appliances, space heating appliances, central and water 
heating appliances, electrical distribution, and other electrical appliances 
are primary causes of fire. Therefore, the use of flame-retardants, especially 
in appliances intended for unattended operation, is more than justified by 
available data.

In addition, the author of the article neglects that electronic components 
(much more than wooden furniture) contain other potentially harmful substances 
(when released to the environment) that are not related to fire prevention. 
Typically, these are contained in larger proportion in electronics than 
flame-retardants. So banning flame-retardants will only partly reduce 
environmental risks by increasing the risk of ignition. At least for electronic 
components, I do not support the claim that "companies typically do not share 
information on which flame retardants they use": To comply with EU's RoHS 
Directive and REACh regulation, we have requested Full Materials Disclosures 
(FMD) from our suppliers and the vast majority has supplied such data. As 
general source of reference to identify substances typically used as 
flame-retardants I recommend the IEC 62474 Declarable Substance List at 
http://std.iec.ch/iec62474.

Kind regards,

Bernd


Von: Richard Nute 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. September 2019 01:00
An: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Betreff: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?


Well, the obvious way to determine whether flame-retardants have reduced the 
incidence of death or injury is to stop using flame-retardants and compare 
before and after.  The problem, of course, is if we are wrong…

This is one argument that is often used to retain ALL requirements in safety 
standards.  However, in many cases scientific or engineering analysis can show 
(or not show) that a requirement contributes to the product’s safety.

I’m not aware of illness or injury due to any flame-retardant in normal 
operation of products, although there is plenty of evidence of illness and 
injury from the chemicals themselves and disposal of the products.

Rich


On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute <mailto:ri...@bendbroadband.com> 
wrote:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/
 “…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction,” says 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-furniture-flame-retardants-save-enough-lives-justify-environmental-damage/…
The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking.
Enjoy!
Rich
-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>




WILO SE
Nortkirchenstrasse 100, 44263 Dortmund
Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 21356
www.wilo.com

Vorstand/Executive Board:
Oliver Hermes (Vorsitzender/Chairman), Georg Weber, Mathias Weyers
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender/Chairman of the Supervisory Board:
Prof. Dr. Norbert Wieselhuber

Dieses Dokument ist vertraulich zu behandeln. Die Weitergabe sowie 
Vervielfaeltigung, Verwertung und Mitteilung seines Inhalts ist nur mit unserer 
ausdruecklichen Genehmigung gestattet. Alle Rechte vorbehalten, insbesondere 
fuer den Fall der Schutzrechtsanmeldung.
This document has to be treated confidentially. Its contents are not to be 
passed on, duplicated, exploited or disclosed without our expressed permission. 
All rights reserved, especially the right to apply for protective rights.

Datenschutz ist uns wichtig! Daher gehen wir sorgsam mit Ihren Daten um. 
Näheres finden Sie in unsere

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[lauren . crane]

Well perhaps not 'consumer' electronics... but for industrial machinery (e.g., 
semiconductor manufacturing equipment used in clean rooms), one of the major 
insurers sets (via insurance rates) an upper limit on the kg/sqft of materials 
that are *not*, e.g., FM4910 compliant (which focuses also on particle and 
smoke generation). If plastics are in the construction, then flame retardants 
are really the only way to achieve 4910 compliance. I'd bet they have lots of 
statistics underpinning this position.


Writing the above dropped a penny to the effect of "sure, maybe not reduction 
of death or injury, but certainly for property damage".

-L

From: Richard Nute 
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 3:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?



https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/

 "...there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction," says Vytenis 
Babrauskas<https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-furniture-flame-retardants-save-enough-lives-justify-environmental-damage/>...

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking.

Enjoy!

Rich
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Richard Nute]

 

Well, the obvious way to determine whether flame-retardants have reduced the 
incidence of death or injury is to stop using flame-retardants and compare 
before and after.  The problem, of course, is if we are wrong…

 

This is one argument that is often used to retain ALL requirements in safety 
standards.  However, in many cases scientific or engineering analysis can show 
(or not show) that a requirement contributes to the product’s safety. 

 

I’m not aware of illness or injury due to any flame-retardant in normal 
operation of products, although there is plenty of evidence of illness and 
injury from the chemicals themselves and disposal of the products. 

 

Rich

 

 

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute mailto:ri...@bendbroadband.com> > wrote:

 

 

 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/

 “…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction,” says  

 Vytenis Babrauskas…

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking. 

Enjoy!

Rich


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Ted Eckert]

I seem to recall that long ago, when televisions had vacuum tubes, high voltage 
and high power, fires were an issue. I'm not positive, but I thought that the 
requirements for flame retardants came from investigations of a number of fires 
of plastic enclosed televisions. I believe that the basis for the requirement 
is sound. It's been decades since flammable plastics were commonly used for IT 
and A/V products. The fact that there have been few issues may be due to the 
effectiveness of flame retardants.

Ted Eckert
Microsoft Corporation

The opinions experessed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer.

From: Pete Perkins <0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

Rich, et al,   Like many issues we see raging around us this is one 
which got caught up in political correctness before it had a large public face. 
 I personally felt that the science of flame retardants is well understood and 
making a change involved adding in risks which were not well understood 
therefore bad practice.  Thanx for bring this around again.

:>) br,  Pete

Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant
PO Box 1067
Albany, Ore  97321-0413

503/452-1201

IEEE Life Fellow
p.perk...@ieee.org<mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org>

Entropy ain't what it used to be

From: Richard Nute mailto:ri...@bendbroadband.com>>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?



https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scientificamerican.com%2Farticle%2Fdo-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984040539&sdata=ub7KtAnUqaUapbaX027V6wPDQk2RvtChpLUtsSzI0so%3D&reserved=0>

 "...there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame 
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer products 
have resulted in death or injury reduction," says Vytenis 
Babrauskas<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scientificamerican.com%2Farticle%2Fdo-furniture-flame-retardants-save-enough-lives-justify-environmental-damage%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984050495&sdata=k0o04eDHG0IbRIzN9hu559U5Pt3dlddOXHZngjKEt2c%3D&reserved=0>...

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking.

Enjoy!

Rich
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Femc-pstc.html&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984050495&sdata=sguIpc6uyhsihuftvffJXtbmcZ5zXEA0FAveJ82pl9g%3D&reserved=0>

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fproduct-compliance.oc.ieee.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984060451&sdata=ncZX0xSggWYyoFWh0yHaS0EIjujBASGwIAqYgG9b%2BJw%3D&reserved=0>
 can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984060451&sdata=%2BBwnWOqJtK6jhRbhXjczqNcGzManVHXf%2BMmV%2Bm1nY4Q%3D&reserved=0>
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flist.html&data=02%7C01%7Cted.eckert%40microsoft.com%7C6f8624a753274fc2dda608d73ae6f790%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C1%7C637042635984070410&sdata=kBD0MN95Wh9%2FLHvyK4TMCBmXGhIY3e1heO5rD4Jwlm8%3D&reserved=0>
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Pete Perkins]

Rich, et al,   Like many issues we see raging around us this is one
which got caught up in political correctness before it had a large public
face.  I personally felt that the science of flame retardants is well
understood and making a change involved adding in risks which were not well
understood therefore bad practice.  Thanx for bring this around again.  

 

:>) br,  Pete

 

Peter E Perkins, PE

Principal Product Safety & Regulatory Affairs Consultant

PO Box 1067

Albany, Ore  97321-0413

 

503/452-1201

 

IEEE Life Fellow

 <mailto:p.perk...@ieee.org> p.perk...@ieee.org

 

Entropy ain't what it used to be

 

From: Richard Nute  
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 1:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

 

 

 
<https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-e
lectronics/>
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-el
ectronics/

 ".there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer
products have resulted in death or injury reduction," says
<https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-furniture-flame-retardants-sa
ve-enough-lives-justify-environmental-damage/> Vytenis Babrauskas.

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking. 

Enjoy!

Rich

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Douglas Powell]

Interesting,

Nevertheless, flame retardant is entrenched and in my experience I've never
had the need of it except for product certification purposes. Possibly this
is mainly a CYA exercise (*cover your anatomy*).  In any case, I've
personally witnessed a few of the UL 94 tests, and they really do work.

Best,  Doug



Douglas E Powell
Laporte, Colorado USA
doug...@ieee.org
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:32 PM Richard Nute 
wrote:

>
>
>
> *https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-electronics/*
> 
>
>  “…there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame
> retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer
> products have resulted in death or injury reduction,” says *Vytenis
> Babrauskas*
> 
> …
>
> The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Rich
> -
> 
>
> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <
> emc-p...@ieee.org>
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
> Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
> Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
> unsubscribe) 
> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Scott Douglas 
> Mike Cantwell 
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Jim Bacher 
> David Heald 
>


-- 

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] Do We Need Flame Retardants in Electronics?

[Richard Nute]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-need-flame-retardants-in-el
ectronics/

 ".there has never been any valid statistical demonstration that flame
retardant chemicals of the types and concentrations used in consumer
products have resulted in death or injury reduction," says Vytenis
Babrauskas
 .

The article is more than 5 years old.  Nevertheless, thought-provoking. 

Enjoy!

Rich


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: