Rich is largely correct on this and I must admit my error.  

 

I dug into UL 62, Flexible Cords and Cables, to get the details.  There are 
limited electrical tests for the outer jacket.  The testing for the jacket 
appears to be primarily concerned with mechanical protection.  The outer jacket 
may also carry a flame rating.  However, it generally isn’t tested on its own 
for insulation strength.  Some cords types are required to pass electrical 
tests on the finished cord, but only the spark test in section 5.2.1 will be 
significantly affected by the outer jacket.  UL 62 will help you determine the 
insulation thickness on the inner conductors to determine if they are at least 
0.4 mm thick.

 

Ted Eckert

Compliance Engineer

Microsoft Corporation

[email protected]

 

The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer.

 

 

 


From: Richard Nute [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2009 12:02 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: NRTL Mark vs. NEC Inspector

 

> Depending on the cord type, a jacketed cord will typically have two layers of 
> insulation.  

 

If I recall correctly, in the US and Canada, the 

jacket is for mechanical protection of the conductors, 

and is not tested for its insulation properties.

 

 

Best regards,

Rich

 

-



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]>

 


Reply via email to