Posted for non-member:
------------------------ From: [email protected] Subject: Re: Protective Earthing Terminal Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 08:54:17 +0000 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Peter, > > You asked: > > >Question 1: Can we rely on the two screws securing the appliance inlet > as > >a means for bonding? > > Not for 3-wire, Class I products! As you have said the safety agencies > don't like it. I expect this cannot be relied upun as these parts may be > replaced in the field if they are found to be faulty. The replacement > may > be similar, but we cannot control that it will be an approved part if > replaced by the end user themselves and necessarily have adequate > grounding. > > >Over the years, I have been told by various safety agencies that such > >construction is unacceptable. > > >Question 2: Am I correct in assuming that the appliance earthing > >terminal for the above Listed/Certified products was considered as the > >main protective earthing terminal? > > This is true for the 3-wire, Class I product. > > >Question 3: Why do most other ITE manufacturers use the "stud on the > >chassis method" for protective earthing terminal? > > To get past the agencies. > > Cheers, > > Colin. > > ---------------End of Original Message----------------- -------------------------- Ed Price [email protected] Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 619-505-2780 List-Post: [email protected] Date: 03/19/1999 Time: 07:37:47 -------------------------- --------- This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected] with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected] (the list administrators).
