Greetings All, I would like to take John Woodgate's comment "...an abuse that the IEEE (or other relevant body) should consider..." (see below for it's origination and details), and propose to the group, is there enough interest within the group to start product technical committees? Since there is a new IEEE Society, the Product Safety Engineering Society (PSES), that is dedicated to service and represent all aspects of product safety, can we not form a group to solve a particular issue and use the PSES as a conduit for the change to whomever is the owner of a particular standard? There are a lot of excellent people with a great deal of knowledge and experience in this emc-pstc group regarding safety issues, that there should not be a reason to form 'technical committees' under the banner of the PSES.
For example, it can start out as a virtual technical committee, (as our IEEE emc-pstc is based almost solely on emails with great success), that a cohesive solution can be investigated and resolved, and then presented to the owner of the standard. With the IEEE PSE Society as the main sponsor and supporter of such technical committees, wouldn't we as product safety engineers have a better chance of changes that would reduce inconsistencies between similar standards? And since the IEEE emc-pstc is world wide, there is more of a pool of ideas that can make a standard more universal. I am sure there are other issues to contend with when forming a technical committee, but we have to start somewhere, and if the PSE Society can provide a louder voice or provide the infrastructure, then why not build upon what the PSE Society started? Just a thought. Richard ===== Richard Georgerian Compliance Engineer Carrier Access Corporation 5395 Pearl Parkway Boulder, CO 80301 USA Tele: 303-218-5748 Fax: 303-218-5503 mailto:[email protected] RE: Fuse Ratings for thermal considerations -----Original Message----- From: John Woodgate [ mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Fuse Ratings for thermal considerations I read in !emc-pstc that POWELL, DOUG <[email protected]> wrote (in <[email protected]>) about 'Fuse Ratings for thermal considerations' on Mon, 15 Dec 2003: >Your second suggestion is what I've considered to be the case all along. >Occasionally, because of size or complexity, some of our products have >been evaluated "in-situ", as a part of the OEMs system. In these cases, >I've even had the local building inspector scrutinizing our products. >It's like the "song that never ends" when we try to tell the inspectors >and OEMs that the building or facility standards do not apply to the >internal workings of our products. > >I am to the point of wanting to just do what they say, for the sake of >keeping the peace. Only, if I do that, I now have this problem with >nuisance tripping in high ambient. It's an abuse that the IEEE (or other relevant body) should consider doing something about, I suggest. An explanatory document, written in easy words, with a big official logo on it, can be effective. Meanwhile, specify your rated current at 80% of the fuse rating you need to use. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
