I've never heard this from the compliance engineer of any of my employer's customers. But I have observed an agency engineer question the adequacy of an unit's test data (as delineated in the CB report) for the end-user's particular installation. One instance of this was an engineer from the same agency that issued the CB report!
I use TUV, CSA, and UL. I have found them to all be reasonable people (well, most of the time) whose concerns are product safety first, and generating business second. Find another engineer, or agency, if these priorities are reversed. Final note for people building in component power supplies: Conditions of Acceptability and test conditions must be carefully observed in the end-use equipment. If I say use at least 10 cfm air flow when operating at 100% load, locate a fan where the p.s. receives 10cfm. If I say maximum mounting screw penetration is 6mm, do not use a screw 4mm too long. If I say the unit is for Class 1 only, and that the P.E. connection is required, do not assume that you can isolate the p.s. chassis and call it class 2. If I say........ nothing I say represents much of anybody's opinion, other than my dog's and/or cat's influence. R/S, Brian -----Original Message----- From: Peter Merguerian [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 1:30 AM To: 'Chris Maxwell'; "EMC-PSTC (E-mail)" < Subject: RE: subcontracted parts - compliance with EN's Chris, You state: "Another point I wanted to bring out we had a product tested to CSA approvals. Inside, we used a power supply that carried a UL listing with "C US" subscript which said that UL tested it to both UL and CSA standards. A copy of the test report wasn't enough for CSA. Since UL did the testing, they wanted construction details. The manufacturer that we wanted to use refused to provide them (I have to agree on this one.) This left a very sour taste in my mouth regarding the whole "C US" dual approval issue. What is the point of UL providing a "C US" lising if CSA treats it as if it means nothing?" Yes, UL and CSA unfortunately are the only organizations who would like to see their country standards covered by their own laboratories. That means CSA will accept a UL Recognized component when they investigate a product to UL standards but will not accept a UL Recognized component when they investigate a product to CSA standards. Same goes for UL; they will acccept a CSA Certified component when they investigate a product to CSA standards but will not accept a CSA Certified component when they investigate a product to UL Standards. When I asked noth organizations why they do this: they responded that their MOU covers acceptance of the test results but not the follow-ups. This is why each would ask for the complete construction details so that they can cover the components and make money off follow-ups. Regards PETER S. MERGUERIAN ------------------------------------------- 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: Ron Pickard: [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://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
