I am not familiar with any standard or other test method for rough edges and corners.
However, to establish compliance with EN 60950 , I use a slice of emballage foam (the touch one) (not the polystyrene, but the more elastic one, not so white but slightly transparent) used to pack EMC test instruments (you get it: lots of these available here) I decided to cut these into 5x5x10 (cm) slices and put some drafting tape (tesa) on top and side . We then apply the device on 45 degree angle with the corner / side to be tested and apply 50 Newton. At the same time we slide the sample along the side (not on corners) in one fast move for 10 cm. This test should leave no permanent traces (but greasy) on the tesa tape, nor protrude into it. I managed to simulate the cutting effect of paper using this home brew device (though at lower forces and repeated more often) Most alum plates that have not been rounded are protruding the draft tape, but as soon as the corner is rounded the tape folds a little bit but does not protrude. Of course, the foam is not characterized, nor is the drafting tape. I have found that this device is most often more resistant then skin. I think that is because that tape is flatter then skin, and no hard surface is below the tape (as bone in a finger). The next time I want to use a thin 4-5 mm slice and put wood under it to make it more rigid. If anyone here wants to duplicate my efforts, having access to several tapes and foams, we might manage to create a suitable device in this group. Regards, Gert Gremmen, (Ing) Ce-test, qualified testing ================================== Web presence http://www.cetest.nl CE-shop http://www.cetest.nl/ce_shop.htm /-/ Compliance testing is our core business /-/ ================================== -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Richard Pittenger Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 10:57 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: FW: SHARP EDGES/SURFACES Richard: I used to work at UL very close to the engineer who designed the sharp edge tester in the early 1970's. In my experience with him, and since leaving UL, the sharp edge tester is only to be used for a "referee" determination of whether or not a given edge is too sharp. That is, whenever there's a dispute. In the vast majority of situations, a simple test of running your finger across the edge is sufficient to make the determination. I'm not familiar with the radius method but I would think that it would be hard to measure unless it was awfully blunt and, therefore, no question about being a sharp edge. Hope that this information is helpful. Regards, Richard Pittenger Agency Approval Engineer PMI Food Equipment Group Troy, Ohio [email protected] Sent by: [email protected] 03/21/00 11:26 AM Please respond to WOODS To: [email protected] cc: Subject: RE: FW: SHARP EDGES/SURFACES For those of you who perform a risk assessment on enclosures, what objective criteria do you apply to ensure that cutting hazards due to burrs and sharp edges are minimized to an acceptable level? So far I have heard of two methods: a specified minimum radius and a physical test of running tape over edges (the UL test). Richard Woods ---------- From: Dick Grobner [SMTP:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 10:10 AM To: '[email protected]' Cc: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: FW: SHARP EDGES/SURFACES When we perform a "risk assessment" on the design of one of our equipment enclosures, we also consider any possible hazards within the enclosure. Any harm or injury to the patient, operator or bystander (this is where I include service personnel)is not allowed, unless it can be duly justified (we strive to "design out" all potential risks). In some cases we utilize third party service personnel on a worldwide basis. I would not want any undue negative feedback related to personnel injury (or personal liability claims). Yes - I would consider internal hazards as well as external. I hope this clears things a little! -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 8:46 AM To: Dick Grobner Subject: Re: FW: SHARP EDGES/SURFACES Dick, My question was related to SEMI standards and not IEC 601-1. Brian Harlowe gave a very good answer regarding the SEMI requirements. Now back to 950/601/1010 standards, is the requirement stricly for outer surfaces (where operator is likely to touch) or also for places such as within an enclosure where access is restricted to service personnel. I have seen many Listed/Approved units which have rough edges/surfaces which may injure a serviceman if touched (edges of PWB, card guides, heat sinks, etc.). Best Regards At 08:16 21/03/2000 -0600, you wrote: >EN 60601-1 (UL2601)section 23 states: >Surfaces, corners and edges: >Rough surfaces, sharp corners and edges which may cause injury or damage >shall be avoided or covered. >In particular, attention shall be paid to flange or frame edges and the >removal of burrs >Compliance is checked by inspection. > >I'm not familiar with ITE standards, but I would suspect that UL1950 would >address this issue also. > >In addition: a Risk Assessment / Hazard Analysis should be performed on the >design and if such hazards exist they would be identified and addressed / >eliminated. > >Hope this helps!! > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 5:29 AM >To: [email protected] >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: Re: SEMI and SHARP EDGES > > > >Hi Peter > The only reference I can find is in SEMI S8-95 the >ergonomics bit. Clause 10.1.6 states " Sharp edges or corners that >present a personnel safety hazard or potential damage to clothing or >equipment should be suitably protected or rounded" but they do not >give any dimensions. > >Mind you how do you radius the average table top/panel to 2.5ins??? > > >Brian Harlowe > > >------------------------------------------- >This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety >Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > >To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > [email protected] >with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > >For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > Michael Garretson: [email protected] > >For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: [email protected] > > Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: [email protected] website: http://www.itl.co.il ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: [email protected] Michael Garretson: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: [email protected] Michael Garretson: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected]
<<attachment: Gert Gremmen.vcf>>
