My comments do not necessarily reflect the policies or opinions of my employer.
The UL 'AM' guideline says this: "Generally, existing standards that cover similar types of equipment used in similar operating environments may be used for equipment associated with additive manufacturing. These standards are considered suitable since, although the application of the technology associated with additive manufacturing is relatively new, the basic hardware and technology used in the equipment are similar to other forms of hardware and technology covered by existing equipment standards." And yet we have this move by ANSI: https://www.ansi.org/news_publications/news_story.aspx?menuid=7&articleid=042f7406-dacf-4830-be11-c00c35a53312&source=whatsnew081516 Does the IEEE PSES have an official policy on the introduction of new standards just for the heck of it? Should TC108 and other scoped TCs stomp on this before we have yet another half-baked 'specialty' safety standard? Other than for medical stuff, or industrial equipment that would fall under NFPA79, is there any reason that UL/CSA62368-1 + -xx could not be used to properly assess AM? If AM was used to make another Brian, would that be a redundant, recursive, or a circular reference? Brian - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]>
