In message , dated Tue, 15 Nov 2011,
John Woodgate writes:
In message
o
soft.com>, dated Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Ted Eckert
writes:
If the fryer is used by laymen, IEC 60335-2-13 is likely the correct
standard. Its scope includes the following text.
"Appliances intended for normal household
In message , dated Mon, 14 Nov 2011,
John Woodgate writes:
In message , dated
Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Pete Perkins writes:
Looking for input on requirements for CE marking of a commercial
deep-fat fryer.
What's the latest?
IEC 60335-2-13
Edition 6.0 (2009-12-14)
Household and simi
In message ,
dated Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Nick Williams
writes:
60335-2-37 is for commercial appliances but isn't much use for gas
fired or food factory type equipment.
That's peculiar: I thought that such a standard existed but a search of
the IEC SC61E web site didn't show it. I think I know
In message
soft.com>, dated Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Ted Eckert
writes:
If the fryer is used by laymen, IEC 60335-2-13 is likely the correct
standard. Its scope includes the following text.
"Appliances intended for normal household and similar use and that may
also be used by laymen in shops, in
In message <4ec19e99.7060...@aol.com>, dated Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Derek
Walton writes:
I guess I find this nonsense. ANYTHING abused looks dangerous.
More examples of Nanny state control.
Yes, but if they didn't do it, UL would be sued for $100 by
everyone who sets their fryer o
Agreed Ken. In fact, I'm not at all convinced that products in the USA
or Canada require 3rd party safety "blessing" from an agency. The new
approach directive in the EU for product safety appears to work perfectly
well without any agency involvement. I'd like to see that approach
adopted h
I disagree. Some devices like lawn-mowers, table-saws, snow-blowers and
chainsaws are inherently dangerous by necessity, because of their intended
function. I don't know how (or whether) one needs to design a lawn-mower
or a chainsaw to be "idiot proof". When used properly with due care and
Ralph,
The answer to your question is in the US arm of your
own company. Drop a line to James Moellmann, who has
recently been to the IEC meetings in China and IEEE meetings
in Florida all concerned with yet more standards on
MOV-protected devices and equipment.
Regards
Mick
On 14/11/20
Hi Doug,
I guess I find this nonsense. ANYTHING abused looks dangerous.
More examples of Nanny state control.
Cheers,
Derek.
On 11/14/2011 4:13 PM, dougp01 wrote:
Never heard of this in Europe, for N.A. look at this video.
http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/offerings/perspectives/consumer
No, I think UL has a point here.
As you can see from the Video that Turkey fryer is Gas fired, so there is
always a ingnition source present.
As far as I recall Deep Fat Fryers for home use in Europe:
- are electrically heated, with the heat source inside and protected by an
outside enclosure tha
These are not necessarily problems due to the fryer
itself. Instead, the problems are due to the behavior
of the user.
As with lawnmowers and table saws, the fryer can be
(and probably should be) designed to thwart any behavior
shortcomings.
Rich
> -Original Message-
> From: emc-p.
That is a wonderful bit of propaganda put out by UL to justify their decision
to categorically refuse to NRTL list turkey fryers as being intrinsically
unsafe/ unable to be used safely by the general public. And yet one easily
finds them on the shelves of Wal-Mart, Target, etc. (with no UL mark,
Well, UL is a company, not the gov't. Agree the gov't has no business
certifying products, but that is water under the bridge at this point. If
UL, as a private company, feels that a significant fraction of the potential
customer base could harm themselves using this product, then they have every
60335-2-37 is for commercial appliances but isn't much use for gas fired or
food factory type equipment.
Nick.
On 14 Nov 2011, at 22:14, John Woodgate wrote:
> In message , dated Mon, 14
> Nov 2011, Pete Perkins writes:
>
>> Looking for input on requirements for CE marking of a co
Never heard of this in Europe, for N.A. look at this video.
http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/offerings/perspectives/consumer/productsafety/turkeys/
doug powell
-Original Message-
From: Pete Perkins
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 2:00 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PS
If the fryer is used by laymen, IEC 60335-2-13 is likely the correct standard.
Its scope includes the following text.
"Appliances intended for normal household and similar use and that may also be
used by laymen in shops, in light industry and on farms are within the scope of
this standard. Ho
In message , dated
Mon, 14 Nov 2011, Pete Perkins writes:
Looking for input on requirements for CE marking of a commercial
deep-fat fryer.
What's the latest?
IEC 60335-2-13
Edition 6.0 (2009-12-14)
Household and similar electrical appliances - Safety - Part 2-13:
Particular req
Hi Pete,
By commercial, do you mean for use in a restaurant or retail (take away)
environment or in a food factory?
Is it gas heated or electric?
Any powered moving parts?
Nick.
On 14 Nov 2011, at 21:00, Pete Perkins wrote:
> PSNet,
>
> Looking for input on requirements for CE marki
To further abuse a meme - moar standards! [insert troll-face here]
Another member has previously commented that there a several type of
components used to arrest a surge. For the purpose of my OP, was focused on
a MOV-type SPD as defined under UL CCNs VZCA2 and VZCA8, where the effective
standards
PSNet,
Looking for input on requirements for CE marking of a commercial
deep-fat fryer.
What's the latest?
:>) br, Pete
Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety Engineer
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe 97281-3427
503/452-1201 fone/fax
p.perk...@ieee.org
-
---
Does the industry really need another standard, I wonder?
_
Ralph McDiarmid | Schneider Electric | Renewable Energies Business |
CANADA | Regulatory Compliance Engineering
From:
John Woodgate
In message , dated Mon,
14 Nov 2011, Brian Oconnell writes:
I probably should be concerned if our capitalist AC was converted to
marxist/extremist DC power.
Teslacity will always overcome Edisonism. (;-)
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
John Woodgate,
Previously, have done the ITAR forms as 'not required' 'not applicable'.
Current customer, whom has much experience dealing with this, says the 8MHz
microprocessor with an embedded 400kHz analog-to-digital converter puts
device within scope. I cannot find anything in 22 CFR parts 120 and 121 to
sup
UL and CSA do have recognized or certified labeling systems which involve the
paper, ink, and adhesive for the material upon which it is applied. The CB
folks don't trust it and we have to have a sample tested every time. Not than
being annoyed in having to send a sample every time I haven't run
Hi,
thanks for all input.
I have read a handbook for UL/CSA approbals published by a Siemens approval
engineer. He describes that manufacturers of type plates as “sticker” (for
gluing) requires a UL-/CSA approval (UL-recognized, CSA-accepted).
CSA has an additional requirement: CSA-ap
Hello all,
I wonder if someone can point me to a supplier who tested and passed
(successfully!) the pre-conditioning requirements and bubble test in IEC
60079-15 for component sealing. The specific pre-conditioning is as follows:
- 33.3.2.1: thermal endurance to heat is determined by submittin
Peter
That is understood as the overall product standard applies (I do not have the
CSA version of 60950-22), but it was only a hypothetical question, based on the
original one – see the exchange of emails with John R Allen at Product Safety
Inc.
Regards
John Allen
London, UK
Fr
27 matches
Mail list logo
