Fellow safety experts, Machinery Electrical Safety Standard EN 60204-1, clause 11.3 provides guidance on degrees of protection for controlgear enclosures against ingress of solid objects and liquids. How do members of this forum, who are familiar with Machinery Safety standards, interpret that clause? How much leeway do manufacturers have in defining an appropriate degree of protection? There are phrases in the clause such as "depending upon the conditions where installed, another degree of protection can be appropriate" and the protection "shall be adequate taking into account the external influences under which the machine is intended to operate (i.e. the location and physical environmental conditions)". Do these phrases give the manufacturer the opportunity to define a degree of protection that may not follow the typical values provided in the NOTE 3 table if the installation environment is sufficiently controlled? Any thoughts on this are appreciated. Jim Hulbert Pitney Bowes
________________________________ - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 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]>
