I don't know, Steve. That might be jumping from the frying pan into the
fire;-- has the dummy been evaluated to be a safe toy??????????? ;)
Tania Grant, [email protected]
Lucent Technologies, Switching Solutions Group
Intelligent Network and Messaging Solutions> ---------- > From: Steve Brody[SMTP:[email protected]] > Reply To: Steve Brody > Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 1:21 PM > To: Kevin Harris > Cc: EMC-PSTC (E-mail) > Subject: Re: Odd CE Marking Question > > > Having read through most of the responses as of this writing, and finding, > as > expected, very valid and well positioned recommendations and suggestions, > I > submit that if this is intended to be a dummy intended to make people > believe > that it is what it is supposed to be, even if it is not, then a CE Marking > and > other labels may be required to complete the ruse. If, as some of our > colleagues believe that CE Marking and claiming compliance to LVD or EMC > is not > valid and should not be done, then treat the dummy as it is and claim > compliance > to the Toys Directive and mark the product with a CE Marking. > > Steve Brody > Sr. Compliance Engineer > Thermo NESLAB > [email protected] or [email protected] > . > > Kevin Harris wrote: > > > Hello Group, > > > > I just had a question posed to me that made me think a little bit. So I > will > > pose it to all of you. First some preamble. A device is going to be > made > > for the European market. It is in fact a "dummy" device in that it looks > > like the real thing but it is not. The only electronics inside is a > bridge > > rectifier and a RC circuit to blink a LED. The device can be powered by > > either an AC or DC source up to 30 V. The power source is not supplied. > For > > this industry (security) there is a product family standard for EMC. The > > device is not a mock up for store display purposes but is in fact used > in > > the industry to give the impression that there are more of these devices > > around than there really are. > > > > So the moment has arrived, do you CE mark the device? If you say yes, > what > > directive did you apply? If you say no, what is your reasoning? > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Kevin Harris > > Manager, Approval Services > > Digital Security Controls > > 3301 Langstaff Road > > Concord, Ontario > > CANADA > > L4K 4L2 > > > > Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378 > > Fax +1 905 760 3020 > > > > Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > > > Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ > > > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > > [email protected] > > with the single line: > > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > > Michael Garretson: [email protected] > > Dave Heald [email protected] > > > > For policy questions, send mail to: > > Richard Nute: [email protected] > > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > > > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > > http://www.rcic.com/ click on "Virtual Conference Hall," > > > ------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > [email protected] > with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Michael Garretson: [email protected] > Dave Heald [email protected] > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: [email protected] > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > http://www.rcic.com/ click on "Virtual Conference Hall," >
<<application/ms-tnef>>
