As far as safety goes, My opinion is that every product should be reviewed, whether it's a 350Watt AC powered design, or a 5 Watt battery powered design. To me, the voltage exception helps determine if you want to undergo a third party review or not.
Much of this depends upon how much expertise you have in house and what your usual sales quantities are for the device. It also depends upon whether or not you have ever submitted a similar product for a third party lab safety evaluation. If you have; then you can use the report from that product as a template of what needs to be looked at. I would take the stance of "We have to prove this product is safe; and we need to have documentation to show that product safety was considered" Let that be the impetus for an internal review to begin with. Then, if there is anything that your engineering team is still uncomfortable about; call on an expert third party (i.e. lab) to perform the review. If you need a copy of the standard to perform the internal review; it's probably worth the cost. Most safety standards cost $200 to $1,000. If it can save you one day at the lab ($1500); it's paid for itself. Even if you still use a lab; you'll be saving them a hassle by performing the internal review first. If nothing else, the internal review will help you to gather the data that you'll need to provide to the lab when your product goes to them. Best regards, Chris Maxwell M.Sc Electrical Engineer Critical Imaging LLC > Chris, > >> Since the modem interface is a USA version perhaps this model could be >> excluded from having a > CE mark. > > My intial answer was based on the assumption that your equipment to be > placed on the EEA market > will not equipped with any R&TTD devices.. > >> it will be used in automation and power distribution gear. > > I do not believe that EN60950 is a good choice. > >> Is there reason why the product should be reviewed despite the 24VDC >> rating? > > There is at least one good reason: potencial liability. If no safety > measures are applied and > (for example) a factory is burned down due to a failure (for example: > fire) of your equipment > ...... > > Regards, > > John > > > > > "Chris Wells" > <radioactive55man@c To: > <[email protected]> > omcast.net> cc: > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: LVD voltage > level exception rule > 02/13/2007 05:02 PM > > > > > > John - yes it will be used in automation and power distribution gear. > Some of our devices are EN61010-/UL61010 and I suppose that would be > better. > Even so that standard recognizes EN60950 for the LAN/WAN and telecome > detail. > > But regardless of the European standard choosen the LVD topic still is my > issue. > Is there reason why the product should be reviewed despite the 24VDC > rating? > > Thanks > > Chris Wells > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[email protected]> > To: "Chris Wells" <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 7:47 AM > Subject: Re: LVD voltage level exception rule > > >> Chris, >> >> UL508 is for "Industrial Control Equipment". Do you have plans to sell >> the >> said product as an >> Information Technology Equipment in the EEA? If the product is intended >> for use in an >> industrial environment, as some kind of controller, EN60950 would not be >> the best choice. >> >> John Radomski >> Principal Engineer >> Schneider Automation Inc. >> >> >> >> >> "Chris Wells" >> <radioactive55man@c To: >> <[email protected]> >> omcast.net> cc: >> Sent by: Subject: LVD voltage >> level exception rule >> [email protected] >> >> >> 02/13/2007 07:04 AM >> >> >> >> >> >> I am looking for help rationalizing when a product must be evaluated to >> the LVD. >> This is for a product my company is considering namebranding. >> I would like to see the product evaluated to EN60950 but the vendor is >> arguing that due to the >> 24VDC, low voltage rating the product does not need to be formally >> evaluated to an European >> safety standard to claim the CE mark. The product does meet UL508. >> >> Background - The product is a communication gateway with the following >> ports: >> DC power in put 24VDC ~ 10W (not internally fused) >> Ethernet, Cat5 RJ45 twisted pair LAN/WAN interface >> RS485 multipoint subnetwork (Modbus, cable up to ~ 4K') >> Proprietary twisted pair multipoint network similar to RS485 (cable >> up to 10K') >> RS232 port for connecting to external modem like devices >> USB slave - temporary programming port >> Modem Interface - optional (not found on all models) >> In my view the Modem interface is very hazardous and so the product >> should >> be formally >> evaluated. >> Since the modem interface is a USA version perhaps this model could be >> excluded from having a >> CE mark. >> Anything else stand out as requiring evaluation to EN60950? >> >> Also I remember reading that this voltage limit exception topic is under >> review. >> >> Thanks >> >> Chris Wells >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> This email has been scanned for SPAM content and Viruses by the MessageL >> abs Email Security System. >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This >> message is from the >> IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. >> Website: >> http://www.ieee-pses.org/ >> >> >> To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] >> >> >> Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html >> >> >> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html >> >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> >> >> Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] >> >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> >> >> Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] >> >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> >> >> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc >> >> - >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society >> emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ >> >> To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] >> >> Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html >> >> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html >> >> For help, send mail to the list administrators: >> >> Scott Douglas [email protected] >> Mike Cantwell [email protected] >> >> For policy questions, send mail to: >> >> Jim Bacher: [email protected] >> David Heald: [email protected] >> >> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: >> >> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned for SPAM content and Viruses by the MessageL > abs Email Security System. > ________________________________________________________________________ > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society > emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ > > To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] > > Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html > > List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > > Scott Douglas [email protected] > Mike Cantwell [email protected] > > For policy questions, send mail to: > > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > David Heald: [email protected] > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > > http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc > - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
