Please remove me form this message group.
Thanks,
Richard Lee
___
1 Infinite Loop, MS-26A
Cupertino, CA 95014
Phone: 408-974-5143
richard@apple.com
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering
Not if the equipment design provided single-fault tolerance against exposing
the hazard to the operator or the environment where it's used. (i.e. not a
fire or a shock hazard unless two things go wrong with the protection)
For example, cord connected equipment needs both loss of ground
With regard to the use of the word hazard, consider
an equipment supplied from mains.
We would all agree that mains is a hazardous energy
source (or comprises a hazard).
The equipment in question is provided with a suitable
enclosure and fully complies with the applicable
safety standard.
We
EN954-1 was replaced by EN13849-1 in 2007. The latter appeals to me as a math
weenie (it uses a probabilistic approach), but it concerns me that the math is
supposed to be a fix to avoid 'systematic' failures. I do not have any
relevant experience with the safety of machinery, so I would
Thanks Rich and others for your input on this. The discussion so far has been
regarding what level of protection is required for various types of hazards
but what I was after was a system of classification for the protection systems
themselves. In the meantime I came across a reference to EN
I agree with your direction here John. I think of hazard not as a thing
but as the potential for an action with adverse outcome.
Brent DeWitt
Westborough, MA
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 6:25 PM
To:
Princeton's definition is concise and specific.
Wikipedia's definition is, well, something else.
Hmm, sounds like I may need my set of crystal pyramids to measure that
biological energy.
Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com WB6WSN
NARTE Certified EMC Engineer
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic
Hi John:
...but what about chemical and biological agents?
Check the on-line definitions for:
chemical energy: The net potential energy
liberated or absorbed during the course of
a chemical reaction
(Princeton University)
biological energy: In biology, energy is
Hi John:
On 11/1/2010 10:43, John Allen wrote:
Per ISO Guide 51 and ISO14971, Hazard = Potential source of harm (e.g.
electric shock hazard, crushing hazard, cutting hazard, toxic hazard,
etc.). I’m not sure how IEC62368 defines it. Rich?
IEC 62368-1 does not use the word hazard, either
as
In message 4ccf3408.6020...@san.rr.com, dated Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Richard
Nute rn...@san.rr.com writes:
Yes, a noun represents a thing.
The noun hazard supposedly represents a thing.
Can you identify the thing that is a hazard?
Would you say that a safe product is one that has
no hazards?
Trick
Hi Ralph:
On 11/1/2010 10:18, ralph.mcdiar...@ca.schneider-electric.com wrote:
I thought hazard was a perfectly good noun. A hazard is something that
can hurt you or do damage to property. It's the name of a thing, isn't it?
Yes, a noun represents a thing.
The noun hazard supposedly
So besides those 3 items, EN60335-1 will have the same content as IEC 60335-1,
5th edition? There has to be more struggle/controversy if the expected vote
date is Sept 2011. I guess that would be 18months from publication of IEC
version to CENELEC approval, which seems normally paced, doesn’t
Per ISO Guide 51 and ISO14971, Hazard = Potential source of harm (e.g.
electric shock hazard, crushing hazard, cutting hazard, toxic hazard, etc.).
I’m not sure how IEC62368 defines it. Rich?
John Allen
President
Product Safety Consulting, Inc.
605 Country Club Drive, Suites IJ
In message
OFA7AC3278.146EFD8D-ON882577CE.005E48CA-882577CE.005F0A5C@US.Schneider-E
lectric.com, dated Mon, 1 Nov 2010,
ralph.mcdiar...@ca.schneider-electric.com writes:
I thought hazard was a perfectly good noun. A hazard is something
that can hurt you or do damage to property. It's the
In message CD89D7C739C19E4D87BDC404BABBB94BA901DE@HEMC05.hemcs.local,
dated Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Julian Jones ju...@hursley-emc.co.uk writes:
My customer does not badge the products in anyway, if you ordered an
XYX from them you would get the server from bluechip A + the adapter
card.
If your
Some changes – possibly the major ones:-
Ed 5.0 will apply to battery operated equipment also.
Creepage distances defined down to zero voltage for functional insulation
(10V being the lowest)
Safety EMC testing for protective electronic circuits is performed up to 2GHz
for radiated
I thought hazard was a perfectly good noun. A hazard is something that can
hurt you or do damage to property. It's the name of a thing, isn't it?
___
_
Ralph McDiarmid | Schneider Electric | Renewable
One of the things which I know is going to be in it is an annex which
provides guidance on the overlap between the LVD and Machinery
Directives, which as most members of this list will be aware was
substantially altered by the new Directive which came in on 29
December last year.
Nick.
At
Julian
Some country certifications do not require a Mark but certification is
required. You will need to check with the server manufacturer all available
certs.
Some country certifications may have been done under the server importer name
and now that you have a different importer you need
Does any list member have knowledge as to the hold up and comments relating to
the release on EN60335-1? They released an A14 as a stop gap, but is the next
edition so radically different that it is getting help up in CENELEC? Any
ideas as to what changes will be in the final EN60335-1 from the
Dear group,
I have a customer marketing a software product. To function it needs a Server
from a well known bluechip and an interface card from another manufacturer.
They assemble the “package” of HW and SW and only their trained
installation team are responsible for the setting up.
There are several companies that manufacture such devices. While not endorsing
anyone in particular I happen to use a CANbus/fiberoptic converter
www.eks-engle.de http://www.eks-engle.de/ Since they aren’t in the EMC
business but are intended for other reasons don’t expect them to be
completely
Hi,
One of the other problems that cause different emission levels can be put
down to cyclic times.
Many digital devices (and I have nothing to say if yours is or is not
digital) have cyclic times where logic switching happens at a high clock
speed but subsequent divisions of the clock only
Hi Ted,
Most of our products have a HDMI output so I built a battery powered, EMC
benign (as far as I can tell) termination for the HDMI signals. This
obviously means I don't have to worry about the associated issues with finding
good support equipment.
You will also find that the HDMI lead
24 matches
Mail list logo
