--Original Message-
From: scott...@gmail.com
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2022 9:50 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?
CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments
: Saturday, January 22, 2022 9:50 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?
CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the conten
outside the MD
compliance.
Regards,
Scott
-Original Message-
From: Oliver Betz
Sent: Wednesday, 19 January 2022 4:56 pm
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?
Dürrer Bernd wrote:
(Annex II of the Machinery Directive point 4
Dürrer Bernd wrote:
(Annex II of the Machinery Directive point 4)
"a sentence expressly declaring that the machinery fulfils
all the relevant provisions of this Directive and where appropriate,
a similar sentence declaring the conformity with other Directives
Correct.
In my current
treff: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?
[Sie erhalten nicht oft E-Mail von "list...@gmx.net". Weitere Informationen,
warum dies wichtig ist, finden Sie unter
"http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification;.]
Hi all,
the "Guide to application of the Mach
I have had resistance to placing both directives on a single DoC. Mostly
from strong proponents of the MD who believe that all equipment is under
their control. It was the same people who told me that even a mechanical
writing instrument such as a ball point pen is "machinery".
It should be noted
We have also had issues with Turkish customs interpretation of the Directives
and it’s nice to know we are not alone.
I’m curious now and hoping the knowledgable readership can explain, how does
the law work in Turkey/ EU around these interpretations if they are off base?
How do they get
Charlie Blackham wrote:
The issue is that the legal bit stating that only the MD applies and not
the LVD is in the MD (below) and not included in the list of exemptions
in Annex II of the LVD
1.5. RISKS DUE TO OTHER HAZARDS
1.5.1. */Electricity supply/*
Where machinery has an electricity
While I pay close attention to the Guide, I am doubtful that going against its
guidance to, in effect, over document, is sufficient to invalidate a DoC.
I have not ever encountered resistance to listing both MSD and LVD---has anyone
on this listserv?
Mike Sherman
> On 01/17/2022 10:54 AM
In my opinion, the Guide is making too fine a distinction. I know that when I
examine a DoC for electrically powered machinery, I expect to see both the MSD
and LVD. This gives me some assurance that the manufacturer has considered both
aspects.
Also in my experience, Turkish customs sometimes
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?
Other that the fact that the statement is "the manufacturer’s EC Declaration of
conformity shall not refer to the LVD but to the MD".?
My guess is that you could invalidate the DoC if you violate that r
Other that the fact that the statement is "the manufacturer’s EC
Declaration of
conformity *shall not* refer to the LVD but to the MD".?
My guess is that you could invalidate the DoC if you violate that
requirement.
Chas
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 9:41 AM Oliver Betz wrote:
> This message
Hi all,
the "Guide to application of the Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC",
Edition 2.2: https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/38022 states:
"...Thus, whilst machinery with an electrical supply, which is not in
any of the categories listed in Article 1(2) (k) of MD, shall fulfil the
safety
13 matches
Mail list logo
