Look at NEC/CEC and IEC60364, and perhaps BS7671. You will find that there a certain combinations of VA, current, and voltage where there is no further consideration to product safety.
In general, look at the requirements for the application of section 725 of NFPA70. In particular, look at the requirements for inherently and non-inherently limited sources in standards such as UL1012, UL1310, IEC61558-x, UL5085-x, IEC60730-x, and UL508. Other than the 3d ed of IEC60601-1, I am not aware of any safety standard that defines discrete 'types' of protection levels. Brian -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 10:52 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Protection system fault-tolerance hierarchy? I don't want to re-invent the wheel, but I'm looking to find a simple way to communicate the idea that some systems don't need protection, others need protection, others need protection that will still protect even with a single-fault present anywhere, and so-on. Somewhere somebody must have codified this idea for example with type 0, type 1, type 2, etc. I'm sure there are standards out there for this - can anyone point me to one or more? Thanks, Jim - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]>
