Mr. Griver's answer is dead on correct (assuming you are purchasing an approved external power supply). Your device doesn't fall within the scope of the LVD, however, for Marketing and Liability issues you should obtain approval.
As Mr. Griver noted, most requirements will be N/A. This is primarily a paperwork exercise that should take no test lab longer than 2 man days. I worked for a test lab for 12 years and your situation is not unique. Getting the approval is the smart thing to do, it will protect the company's interest , and save you from explaining the subtleties of the LVD to those who are less familiar with it. Good Luck. Jim Linehan Compliance Engineer Cisco Systems, Manchester NH At 07:17 PM 1/13/00 +0200, Jon Griver wrote: > >John, > >Such a product does not fall within the scope of the LVD, but the >manufacturer would be very unwise not to have it evaluated to the >applicable safety standard. The EU has a Product Liability Directive, which >basically requires that manufacturers ensure that their products are safe. > >Even if a product of this type presents no electrical hazard, it could >still be a fire hazard or a mechanical hazard, for instance a battery short >circuit could cause a fire. > >In case of an 'incident', the manufacturer should be able to present the >documentation to show that he has done his 'due diligence' with regard to >the safety of the product. In this case it may be a safety test report with >most paragraphs marked as 'Not Applicable', but that may be the difference >between being found criminally negligent, or just liable for damages. > >Regards, > >Jon Griver >i-Spec.com Ltd. >http://www.i-spec.com >The On-line Guide to Compliance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >>Hello all, >> >>Does a hand-held field device that operates mainly on 12Vdc from a >>group of batteries and alternatively uses an AC/DC adapter need to be >>assessed for safety according to the LVD? >> >>I read somewhere that for LVD the DC voltage should be between 75 and >>1500V. Does this mean that such a device does not need to be evaluated >>for safety at all ? A client is awaiting a response from me in a >>couple of hours so I would appreciate any views on this matter. >> >>Thanks for your usual co-operation. >> >>John Whitfield >>Safety Engineer >>Rhein Tech Labs >> >> >>--------- >>This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. >>To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org >>with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the >>quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, >>jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or >>roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). >> >> >> > > >--------- >This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. >To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org >with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the >quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, >jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or >roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). > > > --------- This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
