It must mean that the tool can be moved about because it is not attached
to the building. From the IEV (not an infallible source):
IEV ref 151-16-45
transportable, adj
capable of being moved from one location to another, generally
by using vehicles
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-01-31 19:51, Kunde, Brian wrote:
So in this context, what does “transportable” mean? I always thought
it meant tools that are used on the move, but I cannot image using a
table saw while it is moving.
Thanks,
The Other Brian
*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 2:37 PM
*To:* Kunde, Brian; [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] GFCI vs GFPE
No, It isn't all about hand-held. The list of Sections dropped below
my screen. The relevant standard is probably:
*IEC 62841-3-1:2014 <https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/7454>*
Edition 1.0 (2014-06-04)
Electric motor-operated hand-held tools, transportable tools and lawn
and garden machinery - Safety - Part 3-1: Particular requirements for
transportable table saws
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-01-31 18:57, John Woodgate wrote:
IEC 62841 is a multi-part standard with 23 documents. But it's all
about 'hand-held', so unless the 300 lb product is intended for
Superman or King Kong. they don't apply.
Wiring codes do not specify requirements for load products, except
in very general terms. Safety requirements for products are in
product safety standards.
In Europe, a cut-off saw is a 'machine', so the Machinery
Directive applies. This influences which safety standard is
permitted to be applied to the product.
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-01-31 18:38, Kunde, Brian wrote:
Most interesting. Thanks.
*From:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 1:27 PM
*To:* Kunde, Brian
*Cc:* EMC-PSTC
*Subject:* [BULK] Re: [PSES] GFCI vs GFPE
*Importance:* Low
IEC TC 116 in in the process of folding the 60745-1 (hand held
motor operated tool) standards into the 62841 series (Electric
motor-operated hand-held tools, transportable tools and lawn
and garden machinery). See their dashboard at:
http://www.iec.ch/dyn/www/f?p=103:30:13397277133783::::FSP_ORG_ID,FSP_LANG_ID:4112,25
My reference was not from a part 2, but actually from section
21.16 of 60745-1:
"
Tools employing liquid systems shall protect the user against
the increased risk of
shock due to the presence of liquid under conditions of normal
use and the faults of the liquid
system.
Tools employing liquid systems shall be either:
• of class III construction;
• of class I or class II construction and be provided with a
residual current device and comply
with 14.4, 14.5 and 14.6; or
• of class I or class II construction and be designed for use
in combination with an isolating
transformer and comply with 14.4 and 14.5.
"
Section 14.4 describes using a salt water mix to simulate
overfilling or misassembling and then testing for leakage.
I do not know whether your product falls within scope of
62841; perhaps your favorite NRTL could help. Your favorite
NRTL might even have someone on the committee who could help
with a question.
Mike
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Brian Kunde" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Cc: *"EMC-PSTC" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Sent: *Wednesday, January 31, 2018 11:58:25 AM
*Subject: *RE: [PSES] GFCI vs GFPE
Mike,
Thanks for your offer. I assume the requirement for RCD is
limited to hand-held or portable power tools that uses water.
This is interesting because I didn’t know this was a requirement.
In our case, the cut-off saw we are looking at weighs over 300
lbs. Defiantly not hand-held any probably not considered
portable (depending on your definition).
Do you know if there are similar requirements for
non-hand-held electric saws/tools?
Thanks,
The Other Brian
*From:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:29 PM
*To:* Kunde, Brian
*Cc:* EMC-PSTC
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] GFCI vs GFPE
Brian --
I think I've seen a Part 2 standard for 60745-1, as I recall,
that required a RCD if the tool used water and the water ended
up in the wrong place electrically. If you'd like a screen
shot of the section, I can probably find it for you.
Mike Sherman
Graco Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Brian Kunde" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *"EMC-PSTC" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*Sent: *Wednesday, January 31, 2018 11:06:36 AM
*Subject: *Re: [PSES] GFCI vs GFPE
Where Pete stated, “The Euro systems use of RCDs require this
protection in many installations (but I’m not familiar with
the installation code details)”. This “Code” is probably what
I am seeking.
Has anyone run across a Code rule that requires the Product to
employ a RCCB within the product? If the local electrical
code requires a RCCB, cannot this protection be provided as
part of the site protection? Why burden the cost of a product
where such a requirement may only be necessary in a small
percentage of installations?
The main purpose of my question on this topic is cost. Here
in the USA, a GFCI receptacle is very inexpensive; costing
around $10 at most home stores. But a 3-phase RCD Circuit
Breaker can cost $300-$400. On some products, such as a tile
saw that uses water, this can more than double the cost of the
entire product. So knowing when and where they are required
is very important.
Thanks again to everyone for your consideration. From what I
have read so far on this topic, it is a moving target as
electric codes from different states and countries are always
evolving and the code governing the requirements of RCDs and
GFCIs are common to change.
Thanks,
Brian
*From:*John Woodgate [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 11:13 AM
*To:* Kunde, Brian; [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] GFCI vs GFPE
You can rely on the recent post in this thread by Pete Perkins.
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associateswww.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk>
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-01-31 15:52, Kunde, Brian wrote:
Thanks for the input everyone.
I know that GFCI protectors in North America will trip
between 4-6mA. Do other countries, such as Europe, have
the same requirements?
Or are 30mA protectors used in Europe? If so, does Europe
use 30mA ground fault protectors because of nuisance
tripping even though the studies have shown that 30mA can
be fatal?
These 3-phase cut-off saws that I’m evaluating comes with
a power cord, but no plug. They can be field wired or a
plug could be added and plugged it into a receptacle. The
choice is left up to the customer.
The saw uses water but the work environment would not
normally be considered a “wet location”. It would not be
used in a construction location.
So again, I’m trying to figure out why the saw
manufacturer used the expensive 30mA ground fault breakers
in their product.
Thanks,
The Other Brian
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*LECO Corporation Notice:*This communication may
contain confidential information intended for the
named recipient(s) only. If you received this by
mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the
error. Thank you.
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web
at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
<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/
<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] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
David Heald <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*LECO Corporation Notice:*This communication may
contain confidential information intended for the
named recipient(s) only. If you received this by
mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the
error. Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*LECO Corporation Notice:*This communication may
contain confidential information intended for the
named recipient(s) only. If you received this by
mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the
error. Thank you.
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web
at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
<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/
<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] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
David Heald <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*LECO Corporation Notice:* This communication may contain
confidential information intended for the named recipient(s)
only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and
notify us of the error. Thank you.
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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]>
