Raymond,
The answer depends on the type of products you supply. If you could be more
specific the replies you receive would be more focused.
Richard Hughes
In a message dated 15/03/2005 17:55:59 GMT Standard Time,
raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk writes:
The scope of LVD directive include
John,
As Kaz pointed out by his web link, the document has now reached revision 5.
However, the proposals were developed in a small(ish) working group where not
all Member States were present. Also, many comments by those who participated
in the development of this document were not resolved in
Peter,
Discussions on the revision of the LVD seem to have been given a lower
priority over the last year and, as a sign of this, the consultation promised
for March/April of this year still hasn't happened. In the mean time the
European Commission is all-change, with new Commissioners identifie
http://www.ieee-pses.org/symposium
http://www.emc2004.org/
Folks,
First let me say that I do not intend to enter into the technical debate or the
personal remarks on this subject.
I do however find it strange that the original Email and John's reply to it
never made it through to me
Vic,
As always, the Devil's in the detail...
You are correct in thinking that the requirement is Basic Insulation from a
primary circuit and protective earth. However, in this case the 'earthed
part' must meet all the requirements of clause 2.6 (if the base standard is
taken to be IEC 60950-1).
Time,
peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com writes:
Richard -
It has to start somewhere. Saying nothing returns the same.
Peter
From: richhug...@aol.com
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 9:42 AM
Peter,
The emc-pstc list is a good place to exchange ideas between
engineers but not a good forum for
Peter,
The emc-pstc list is a good place to exchange ideas between engineers but not
a good forum for actioning change.
However, many of the subscribers of this forum (whether contributors or not)
are also members of trade associations. Any effective trade association
should have links to their
Peter,
I do not have the URL of a website that can answer your questions but is
hidden from the likes of Google, which I guess you've tried anyway. Perhaps
others can oblige here.
As I guess you know, some CEN standards are derived from ISO standards and if
you can find this out then at least yo
Ed,
In England and Wales there is a subscription-based on-line, searchable,
database that gives the legal profession access to the results of cases heard
in the higher courts. It therefore seems likely that such a system exists for
the USA too (or perhaps at the individual State level?). If you
John,
I did not have the intention of singling you out, only of finishing our thread.
It has disappointed me that, seemingly, the great majority of information flow
on this thread has been due to individuals in Europe explaining how CENELEC
standards relate to IEC standards but not how standards
;B'.
Regards,
Richard Hughes
In a message dated 15/11/2003 09:23:08 GMT Standard Time, j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
writes:
I read in !emc-pstc that richhug...@aol.com wrote (in <1e4.13640b3e.2ce6
b...@aol.com>) about 'IEC and EN standard relationships' on Fri, 14 Nov
2003:
> The
John,
There are not always technical deviations between IEC and EN standards, for
instances there are no differences in the body of the standard between the
latest versions of IEC 60825-1 and EN 60825-1. Of course, CENELEC standards
have a Date of Withdrawal of conflicting standards which IEC sta
Stuart,
Technically, BS EN 60xxx is the same as NF 60xxx with the exception that the BS
version is in English and the NF version is in French. All language variants
of an EN contain all national differences and Common Modifications.
If you look at the listing of standards in the OJEC you will
Doug,
Guidelines, whether relating to the LVD, EMC Directive or whatever do not have
the same 'weight of law' as the requirements of the directives themselves.
Strictly speaking, Directives are not themselves law. They are first and
foremost instructions to individual Member States (think count
Dave,
Firstly you need to decide what EU directives apply. This may sound a little
obvious, but the LVD (for example) excludes equipment from its scope if these
are covered by other regulatory provisions. Such considerations could apply
to your military and aerospace products. The same would als
John,
Others have provided the URL to download the latest draft of the LVD, as
discussed during a Commission meeting in late October. The next iteration of
draft text is not yet available.
Still under discussion is the process of how to cover low risk products (e.g.
battery powered watches, musi
Peter,
I understand that the origins were a US MIL spec. Although I have not
checked, I seem to recall that pretty much the same information was also
contained in IEC 380. We are therefore going way, way, back in the annals of
time.
Have you tried looking up the electro-potentials in a book of
Jim,
You have answered your own point. It doesn't matter if you raise the bar by
one notch or ten, at the end of the day you are still talking about liability
REDUCTION when it comes to meeting product safety standards.
As you say, "shxx happens". Agreed, and this is one reason why reputable
ma
John,
I think that you and I have gone through the merits and demerits of the way
IEC 60950 and IEC 60065 cover fuse markings already in this forum, let's not
go over old ground again.
Richard
Folks,
Apologies for bombarding you with the same Email. This was because AOL sent
me a message that my message couldn't be sent and so I re-tried. If its any
consolation, that means I got extra helpings of "so-and-so is out of the
office" messages.
Richard Hughes
John,
Regarding your comment:
"Aren't you trying to conform to IEC 60950? If so, the code that I posted is
what is required. I am surprised that clause 1.7.6 is so vague, when the
corresponding clause in IEC 60065 is very explicit that the code specified in
IEC 60127 shall be used"
There are ple
John,
Regarding your comment:
"Aren't you trying to conform to IEC 60950? If so, the code that I posted is
what is required. I am surprised that clause 1.7.6 is so vague, when the
corresponding clause in IEC 60065 is very explicit that the code specified in
IEC 60127 shall be used"
There are ple
John,
Regarding your comment:
"Aren't you trying to conform to IEC 60950? If so, the code that I posted is
what is required. I am surprised that clause 1.7.6 is so vague, when the
corresponding clause in IEC 60065 is very explicit that the code specified in
IEC 60127 shall be used"
There are ple
John,
Regarding your comment:
"Aren't you trying to conform to IEC 60950? If so, the code that I posted is
what is required. I am surprised that clause 1.7.6 is so vague, when the
corresponding clause in IEC 60065 is very explicit that the code specified in
IEC 60127 shall be used"
There are ple
Peter,
I cannot answer for the committee of test laborarories, but I have been a
member of the committees involved with writing IEC 60950-1 and its
predecessors for many years and so I can at least provide my perspective on
what the intended requirements are.
For me, the question is clearly ans
In a message dated 22/08/2003 00:05:42 GMT Standard Time,
pmerguerian2...@yahoo.com writes:
Dear All,
Many of today's equipment utilizes software which is also relied for safety.
This is true in Machinery, NEBS, Alarm Systems, Medical Systems and CPU
cooling in many computers, etc.
I am inter
Bob,
Firstly you are confusing regulations (R&TTED) and standards.
The 'radio' part of the R&TTED would not apply. You do not say what IR link
is for, but it seems unlikely that your equipment would be Terminal Equipment
either - in which case the R&TTED would not apply.
If the equipment is ma
John,
You said: For the EMC Directive (and the LVD), there IS a clear answer. The
manufacturer must sign, irrespective of where he is based. The authorities
realised that no-one but the manufacturer would be in a position to know
whether *production units* met the same requirements as the test sam
Charlie,
Perhaps you have not received a sufficiently clear answer because you have not
bounded your question sufficiently tightly?
Many people talk about declarations of conformity as though the only reason to
create one is to satisfy the requirements of some directive or other, but DoCs
can be
John,
As lots of people have already said, and as is described in IEC 60384-14, Y
caps are placed where there is a risk of electric shock were the capacitor to
fail short-circuit. If we consider a 230V ac mains supply with 2.5 kV
transient voltages on it (i.e. Installation Category II per IEC 606
Ilan,
The "date of cessation" as given in the Official Journal of the European
Communities is not the last date for modifications but the last date on which
a statement of compliance to a particular version of a standard offers a
presumption of compliance with the safety objectives of the LVD (and
Hi,
Those interested in knowing what the UK requirements are should take a look at
the January 2003 edition of MPT 1570 "Radiation Limits and Measurement
Specification - Electromagnetic radiation in the range 9 kHz to 1.6 MHz from
material substances forming part of a telecommunication system". T
Dave,
Further to Alex's reply, you should decide for yourself what level of
documentation is required from the modem supplier (and the power supply
provider for that matter).
>From what you say, you will be incorporating these sub-assemblies into a
product of your design. Presumably, that produc
Bob,
Compliance with translation requirements for safety is a regulatory
requirement in many countries within the EU, but you are presumably not
talking safety for your software interface?
This means that primarily you are concerned with supplying a product that
carries out a particular function
Hi,
You will not, I suspect, find a universal answer applicable to all Directives
that call for CE marking. A number of people in the past have identified
where it is possible to download copies of the Commission's guides to such
Directives as the LVD and the EMCD and you should certainly refer t
John,
Ah! but there is such a thing as information overload!
Richard
From: john.al...@era.co.uk [mailto:john.al...@era.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 12:20 PM
To: richhug...@aol.com; nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: CE without LVD?
Richard
John,
If proof were needed that one branch of the Commission doesn't know what the
other branch is doing then [COM(2003) 252 Final, of 12 May 2003] is it.
All I can say is that many times now I have sat in rooms in Brussels with the
European Commission; the DTI and their counterparts in other Mem
Rich,
RN> I'm surprised that, today, a SMPS would used screen/
shield construction.
[R_Hughes >] Not all power supplies are switch mode, even today. I bet that
the HiFi addicts who say that they can hear the difference between a valve
amp and a transistor amp would absolutely hate the idea o
Ron,
I found a more up to date URL for what's happening to the LVD which seems to
be open to all (it didn't ask me for a password). It can be found by
following:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/electr_equipment/lv/direct/review.htm
By looking at LVD.3 you will be able to see that not only
Nick,
Agreed it is not yet a done deal and the UK does have one or two other
Member States on its side. However, unless significantly more Member States
(and certain parts of industry I may add) come over to the UK way of looking
at things, then it seems highly likely that the output document f
th in our morning so we just had to make do with arguing with one
another! Glad to see you've joined the fray!
Richard
From: ri...@sdd.hp.com [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 5:43 AM
To: j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk; richhug...@aol.com
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Su
.@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Dielectric withstand voltage for power supplies
I read in !emc-pstc that richhug...@aol.com wrote (in <44E75E95.7A170092
0ba45...@aol.com>) about 'Dielectric withstand voltage for power
supplies' on Thu, 26 Jun 2003:
>[R_Hughes >] Technicall
.@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Dielectric withstand voltage for power supplies
I read in !emc-pstc that richhug...@aol.com wrote (in <44E75E95.7A170092
0ba45...@aol.com>) about 'Dielectric withstand voltage for power
supplies' on Thu, 26 Jun 2003:
>[R_Hughes >] Technicall
Group,
Please see my comments below...
Richard Hughes
From: j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 9:24 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Dielectric withstand voltage for power supplies
I read in !emc-pstc that Alexandru Guidea
Peter,
Most people want the output to meet the requirements for an SELV Circuit.
Probably the transformers and opto-couplers (if any, in the feedback loop)
within the power supply will meet the requirement for Reinforced Insulation
and this implies an ability to withstand 3,000 Vac. However, ma
Brian,
I think that my Email of 30/4/2003 should answer your questions. In regard
to your second substantive para, you will see that it is not always required
to test at the highest ambient temperature. An extract is below...
Richard Hughes
Are you REQUIRED to conduct heating tests at
Doug,
Linguistically, how can an inanimate object such as a fuse be "good" or
"bad"? Can it also be "angelic" or "evil"?
I may be able to train a dog by telling it that it is a "good boy" when it
does what I want it to do (plus offer a suitable reward, of course) or
prevent it from not doin
Doug,
Linguistically, how can an inanimate object such as a fuse be "good" or
"bad"? Can it also be "angelic" or "evil"?
I may be able to train a dog by telling it that it is a "good boy" when it
does what I want it to do (plus offer a suitable reward, of course) or
prevent it from not doin
Rich,
Your colleague may be correct in his theory, but the only 'real-life'
example I am aware of relates to deterioration of a connector containing EMI
suppression capacitors. The capacitors were hi-pot tested as components,
were tested again as part of the connector by a second manufacturer,
From: peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com [mailto:peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 6:00 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: UK in-service continuing compliance testing (was: RE: Safety
testing after equipment repair)
All -
As a matter of curiosity, are there any rec
Rich, Gregg,
Gregg, your memory is slipping - clearly you have been away from the UK for
too long, or you're enjoying the American wine too much! The referenced
document is "The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989" and they were
implemented as a Statutory Instrument under the "Health and Safet
Peter,
I presume that you replying here for product use in North America only?
If the power supply is powered from the ac mains supply and it is intended
for use in Europe (and many other parts of the world) then no amount of
testing (e.g. to UL 1310) will be able to prove compliance with IEC/
Doug,
Thanks for confirming that CSA 60950-1 has followed IEC 60950-1 and EN
60950-1 in specifying absolute temperatures rather than a delta above
ambient.
Are you REQUIRED to conduct heating tests at the highest rated ambient
temperature - in your example 30 degC? Well, that depends on whe
Richard,
The circuit you describe would not be acceptable if your intention is to
have the LEDs touchable by a person. This is because you have not provided
adequate isolation between the source of hazardous voltage (230 Vac-rms
mains) and an accessible part. The only capacitor type that provi
Brian,
I will concentrate on replying in connection to EN 60950-1 and let others
confirm, or otherwise, applicability to EN 601010-1.
I would suggest first of all that you look at the first edition of EN
60950-1 rather than the third edition of EN 60950, unless you have a good
reason to use to
Richard,
As I mentioned in my original reply, the building wiring rules vary from one
country within the EU to another. While it is true that the UK Wiring
Regulations (BSI 7671) are based on the CENELEC Harmonised Document HD384,
which is itself based on the IEC 60364 series of standards, it w
Hi Rich,
> First, do we have clear, unambiguous definitions for our safety symbols?
Based on the very short definitions in 417, I think not.
> I believe we need much more work on the definitions.
As you know, standards are not static things set in stone. If you think
that IEC 60417 needs to
Rich,
Thank you for explaining that words were made from letters and sentences
were made from a mixture of words (and letters by the way). It's simply
amazing how informative these exchanges can be!
You said "We in the product safety industry must be very careful that we use
symbols in strict
Rich,
As you say, this web site provides a discussion on the exclamation symbol.
However, the discussion is slanted in one direction that not everyone in the
safety fraternity would necessarily subscribe to. For instance, I have seen
the 'high voltage flash' sign used as a symbol in an internet
In a message dated 16/04/2003 21:23:18 GMT Daylight Time, dcerece...@pelco.com
writes:
David
The wiring regulations in Europe are based on a CENELEC Harmonised Document
(HD) rather than a European Norm (EN) and, as such, it is permissible for
requirements to vary from country-to-country in E
Peter,
Article 296 of the Treaty of Rome exempts certain weapons from other
community laws. As for "Products specially or exclusively intended for
military or police purposes" this has been discussed, for instance, with
respect to the revised LVD.
There are a number of practical problems th
61 matches
Mail list logo