Richard,
Regarding your last statement "....I don't believe that they [CSA & UL]
will accept each others marks."
Certain UL and CSA component standards have been "harmonized" and, I
believe, this effort is continuing. If you look at Appendix P.2 [be sure
it is P.2 and not P.1] of UL 1950, 3rd edition, you will find a matrix of
UL and CSA component standards where meeting one or the other is considered
acceptable for meeting the requirements of UL1950, 3rd edition.
Additionally, if you are working with an astute UL engineer, very often they
will inform you of additional components that fall under that category but
have not yet been published in this Appendix.
Tania Grant, Lucent Technologies, Octel Messaging Division
[email protected]
----------
From: WOODS, RICHARD[SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 1999 5:00 AM
To: 'EMC-PSTC - forum'
Subject: RE: Rack System Safety (UL1950/EN 60950) Questions
As I think about this situation, there is a way of obtaining UL Listing on
the rack and have other certification marks on the internal equipment. Have
UL List just the rack without the equipment. Now you can mix and match the
internal certified equipment as you see fit keeping in mind not to exceed
the cooling and electrical capacity of the rack. This is what we use to do a
decade ago at a mini-computer company. We would configure systems from
Listed racks, cpus, disks, tapes, etc.
Now to Jim's point. There is no law that requires one agency to accept the
certification marks of another agency. For example, UL will not accept ETL
marks on components and both are NRTLS. The only way one agency will accept
the marks of another is if there is an agreement between them. The CB scheme
is one good example. CSA and UL have an agreement to accept each others test
data I believe, but I don't believe that they will accept each others marks.
----------
From: Jim Eichner [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 3:23 PM
To: 'EMC-PSTC - forum'
Subject: RE: Rack System Safety (UL1950/EN 60950) Questions
Re Richard's item 5)...
> 5. UL requires that all internal equipment be UL Listed or
> Recognized.
>
If that is true, then the value of the CSA/NRTL mark, and conversely
the
cUL mark if CSA plays this way too, is highly questionable. Do you
have
a direct-from-UL interpretation saying that they are not accepting
the
CSA/NRTL mark? If so, I would expect CSA to take action to defend
its
mark, and UL to have no firm ground to stand on!
Comments?
Jim Eichner
Statpower Technologies Corporation
[email protected]
http://www.statpower.com
Any opinions expressed are those of my invisible friend, who really
exists. Honest.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WOODS, RICHARD [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 11:15 AM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Rack System Safety (UL1950/EN 60950) Questions
>
> 1. Peter, equipment with the standard NEMA plug is considered
to be
> Class A..
> 2. Equipment using the heavy duty Industrial plugs complying
with
> IEC
> are considered to be Class B. I have never seen those used inside
rack
> mounted equipment.
> 3. If the power supply is UL "Listed", then temperature
> measurements
> are not required. However, most power supplies are categorized as
> "Recognized" and are therefore incomplete in construction - that
is,
> they
> cannot pass the safety requirements for a stand alone power
supply.
> Temperature measurements will be required.
> 4. Stability is performed in a worst case situation, but reason
is
> also
> taken into account. Most likely, you will determine that it is
> possible and
> reasonable to assume that more than one assembly can be extending
at
> the
> same time.
> 5. UL requires that all internal equipment be UL Listed or
> Recognized.
>
> ---
> From: [email protected] [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 11:26 AM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Rack System Safety (UL1950/EN 60950) Questions
>
> Dear All,
>
> I would like to know some of your professional advice on
some
> issues reagrding rack systems to be evaluated to UL1950/EN
60
> 950.
>
> 1. For the North America, does a NEMA 125 V, 20 A plug meet
the
> pluggable B definition?
>
> 2. What are some plug configurations which will meet the
> pluggable B equipment requirements for North America and
> Europe?
>
> 3. Does anyone have experience with UL and/or CSA and/or
TUV
> when testing a unit employing a
Recognized/Certified/Approved
> computer type "totally enclosed" power supply? I am
interested
> to
> know if temperatures should be monitored within such a power
> supply. So far, I have been asked to thermocouple various
points
>
> within the power supply and as you all know, it could get
very
> crowded in there. I am interested to know if someone out
there
> knows if such a waiver exists for totally enclosed Approved
> power
> supplies.
>
> 4. When conducting stability tests for rack systems, should
all
> the
> serviceable card cages be extended out or is it enough to do
it
> one
> at a time.
>
> 5. For a CSA NRTLC unit employed in the rack system, does
> anyone know if the CSA NRTLC Mark is automatically accepted
by
> UL or does UL require that the unit must be re-investigated
and
> placed under their Follow-Up Program?
>
> 6. Has the US Robotics Listed "Sporster" card modem been
> evaluated to UL1950 Third Edition?
>
> 7. Can I List/Certify a rack system to UL1950 Third Edition
if
> the
> units within it have been Listed/Certified to UL1950 First
> and/or
> Second Editions? I do not think so, but am interested to
hear
> your
> opinions.
>
> 8. How is a CB test report done for a rack system which
consists
>
> of previously Listed/Certified/Approved units? Does the CB
> scheme
> Recognize the Approvals of the various test agencies
> (UL/CSA/TUV)?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
> PETER S. MERGUERIAN
> MANAGING DIRECTOR
> PRODUCT TESTING DIVISION
> I.T.L. (PRODUCT TESTING) LTD.
> HACHAROSHET 26, P.O.B. 211
> OR YEHUDA 60251, ISRAEL
>
> TEL: 972-3-5339022
> FAX: 972-3-5339019
> E-MAIL: [email protected]
> Visit our Website: http://www.itl.co.il
>
> ---------
> 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).
>
> ---------
> 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).
---------
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).
---------
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).
---------
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).
