Re: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

[Tom Smith]

The answer is yes - each province has an electrical code mandated by law and
a set of the certification marks which are recognized within that province.
In additional, Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations SOR/86-304,
Clause 8.3 mandates compliance of electrical equipment with the Canadian
Electrical Code. In Canada the number of the electrical equipment safety
standards is C22.2 Part. which refers to the Canadian Electrical Code Part 2
(Part 1 being the equivalent of the NEC in the US).  The specific regulation
/ legislation mandating the marks which are acceptable would vary from
province to province but in effect the same agencies are generally accepted
across all provinces of Canada. Prior to being accepted as a certifying
agency in any province, the organization would have to be accredited either
by SCC or by an equivalent agency deemed acceptable to the provincial
authorities.

Tom Smith, P.Eng 

Product Safety and Approvals Consultant 
TJS Technical Services Inc.

Tel: +1 403-612-6664 

Email: tsm...@tjstechnical.com 
http://tjstechnical.com   

Follow us on Twitter: TJS_Technical

 

From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim Hulbert
Sent: November-01-12 2:35 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

 

In the U.S., there are OSHA regulations that require electrical apparatus
used in the workplace be certified to U.S. standards by one of OSHA's
Nationally Recognized Test Laboratories (NRTL's).  Is there a similar
regulation in Canada that requires electrical apparatus used in the
workplace be certified by one of the Standards Council of Canada approved
test laboratories to Canadian standards?

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


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://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 
Mike Cantwell  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  


-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

[Ted Eckert]

I believe that this is the relevant portion of the Ontario regulations.
http://www.esasafe.com/pdf/Ontario_Regulation_438_07.pdf

Ted Eckert
Compliance Engineer
Microsoft Corporation
ted.eck...@microsoft.com

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

From: McInturff, Gary [mailto:gary.mcintu...@esterline.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 2:19 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

Hydro - inspections I believe they are called. It's been awhile, but commercial 
businesses etc were awfully careful about making certain there were 
certifications marks on equipment before they were turned on. I had to make a 
few trips into Canada for trade shows on equipment that had complete the 
process. The hotel's that trade shows were being held at would not allow us to 
even move the equipment to the show floor without the hydro authority 
inspections, and paperwork. It wasn't a very detailed inspection, about I all I 
can remember is making sure there was a ground connection and that the power 
switch was on the hot side of the outlet. It only took about an hour and I 
don't really know what the inspector did other than those two tests. This was 
many years ago so maybe they've changed except I still see references to Hydro 
Authority inspections. Last point the inspection was provincial only, move the 
same equipment with the hydro sticker on it to another province and it required 
a new inspection.

Was all that bad. Lots of slack time and I still wish I could get some Ontario 
Smoke meat - it was pretty tasty

Gary

From: Wiseman, Joshua E [mailto:joshua.e.wise...@carrier.utc.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

Jim,

Yes, I don't remember what code or regulation this is stated in, but when I was 
working at an NRTL occasionally we would have a customer asking how to get 
items through customs because it was not approved.  Canada has a Special 
Inspection program that is similar to field evaluations in the US and it is 
fairly well regulated by the SCC.  There are many manufacturers who ship 
products in to the country and get away with it, but occasionally customs will 
stop shipments until you can provide evidence of compliance or have a special 
inspection performed.

Josh

From: Jim Hulbert [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 3:35 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

In the U.S., there are OSHA regulations that require electrical apparatus used 
in the workplace be certified to U.S. standards by one of OSHA's Nationally 
Recognized Test Laboratories (NRTL's).  Is there a similar regulation in Canada 
that requires electrical apparatus used in the workplace be certified by one of 
the Standards Council of Canada approved test laboratories to Canadian 
standards?
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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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://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 mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>
-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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://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 mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:

Re: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

[McInturff, Gary]

Hydro - inspections I believe they are called. It's been awhile, but commercial 
businesses etc were awfully careful about making certain there were 
certifications marks on equipment before they were turned on. I had to make a 
few trips into Canada for trade shows on equipment that had complete the 
process. The hotel's that trade shows were being held at would not allow us to 
even move the equipment to the show floor without the hydro authority 
inspections, and paperwork. It wasn't a very detailed inspection, about I all I 
can remember is making sure there was a ground connection and that the power 
switch was on the hot side of the outlet. It only took about an hour and I 
don't really know what the inspector did other than those two tests. This was 
many years ago so maybe they've changed except I still see references to Hydro 
Authority inspections. Last point the inspection was provincial only, move the 
same equipment with the hydro sticker on it to another province and it required 
a new inspection.

Was all that bad. Lots of slack time and I still wish I could get some Ontario 
Smoke meat - it was pretty tasty

Gary

From: Wiseman, Joshua E [mailto:joshua.e.wise...@carrier.utc.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

Jim,

Yes, I don't remember what code or regulation this is stated in, but when I was 
working at an NRTL occasionally we would have a customer asking how to get 
items through customs because it was not approved.  Canada has a Special 
Inspection program that is similar to field evaluations in the US and it is 
fairly well regulated by the SCC.  There are many manufacturers who ship 
products in to the country and get away with it, but occasionally customs will 
stop shipments until you can provide evidence of compliance or have a special 
inspection performed.

Josh

From: Jim Hulbert [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 3:35 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

In the U.S., there are OSHA regulations that require electrical apparatus used 
in the workplace be certified to U.S. standards by one of OSHA's Nationally 
Recognized Test Laboratories (NRTL's).  Is there a similar regulation in Canada 
that requires electrical apparatus used in the workplace be certified by one of 
the Standards Council of Canada approved test laboratories to Canadian 
standards?
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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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://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 mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>
-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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://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 mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

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 


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/
Instru

Re: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

[Wiseman, Joshua E]

Jim,

Yes, I don’t remember what code or regulation this is stated in, but when I was 
working at an NRTL occasionally we would have a customer asking how to get 
items through customs because it was not approved.  Canada has a Special 
Inspection program that is similar to field evaluations in the US and it is 
fairly well regulated by the SCC.  There are many manufacturers who ship 
products in to the country and get away with it, but occasionally customs will 
stop shipments until you can provide evidence of compliance or have a special 
inspection performed.

Josh

From: Jim Hulbert [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 3:35 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

In the U.S., there are OSHA regulations that require electrical apparatus used 
in the workplace be certified to U.S. standards by one of OSHA’s Nationally 
Recognized Test Laboratories (NRTL’s).  Is there a similar regulation in Canada 
that requires electrical apparatus used in the workplace be certified by one of 
the Standards Council of Canada approved test laboratories to Canadian 
standards?
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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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://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 mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] Are Product Safety Certifications Mandatory in Canada?

[Jim Hulbert]

In the U.S., there are OSHA regulations that require electrical apparatus used 
in the workplace be certified to U.S. standards by one of OSHA's Nationally 
Recognized Test Laboratories (NRTL's).  Is there a similar regulation in Canada 
that requires electrical apparatus used in the workplace be certified by one of 
the Standards Council of Canada approved test laboratories to Canadian 
standards?
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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

[Carl Newton]

Bryce has hit the nail on the head.  I failed to mention that the standard
involved here is ANSI/AAMI 60601-1 and the Canadian equivalent (3rd ed.
medical).  The NRTL involved is not UL.  This NRTL does have the ability to
perform related EMC tests per collateral standard -1-2, but they will also
accept any ISO 17025 accredited EMC lab reports.  We would also have to pay
the NRTL additional cost for evaluation to the Usability collateral
standard -1-6 to get Listed.  We would be responsible for our own
biocompatibility report.  For the Classification option we do our own EMC
work with any lab of our choice and write-up our own Usability and
Biocompatibility reports.

We've noted that the most direct North American competitor's product is
current LISTED with this same NRTL.  However, the NRTL's position is that
Classification for medical devices in North America is very common (to
Bryce's point).  I'm most interested in Bryce's comment that AHJs have
accepted Classification of medical devices for years.  But again, this
product is also sold into general fitness centers as well.  I don't know
whether the latter is significant from an AHJ inspection point of view.

Thanks to all, this is all excellent input and I very much appreciate it.
 I look forward to any additional remarks that may touch upon these
comments.

Carl

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Bryce Stammerjohan <
bstammerjo...@thoratec.com> wrote:

> Hello group,
>
> UL does in fact issue Classification Marks for products that only comply
> with part of a UL (or ANSI) Standard - all medical devices with the UL
> "Mark" are Classified, since UL does not address biocompatibility, EMC,
> etc. which are all clauses of UL 60601-1.  Med devices are under item (1)
> of the definition Gary posted below, and the Classification Markings on
> each product say such.  AHJs have accepted this for years now.
>
> A fully "listed" medical device would have to have UL evaluate EMC and
> biocompatibility, as well as the basic safety aspects.  UL does not employ
> qualified people to address biocompEMC maybe.
>
> Bryce Stammerjohan
>
>
> 
> From: McInturff, Gary [gary.mcintu...@esterline.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 9:34 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?
>
> CLASSIFICATION SERVICE - A service whereby UL determines that a
> manufacturer has demonstrated the ability to produce a product that
> complies with UL requirements for the purpose of classification or
> evaluation with respect to one or more of the following: (1) specific risks
> only, e.g., casualty, fire or shock, (2) performance under specified
> conditions, (3) regulatory codes, (4) other standards, including
> international standards, or (5) such other conditions as UL may consider
> desirable. UL authorizes the manufacturer to use the Classification Mark on
> products that comply with UL requirements and establishes follow-up service
> as a check of the means the manufacturer exercises to maintain compliance
> with UL requirements.
>
> This is from their web site and somewhat supports your contention,
> although I don’t know if you can say there is not a standard, maybe.
>
> Sheet rock for example is UL classified, as are roofing materials and both
> of them have a single performance issue – fire rating. I think that (4)
> applies to sheetrock.  The ability to contain a fire for X amount of time.
> That rating is used by local authorities in the NEC and building codes
> around the country. Between floors of living spaces 3/8 in sheet rock must
> be used because it has a flame rating acceptable to the building codes. I
> suspect that the classified items were done at the behest or in conjunction
> with national authorities to identify basic functional requirements.
> Conjecture more than absolute knowledge
> Gary
>
> From: Ted Eckert [mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 8:53 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?
>
> Hello Carl,
>
> Some inspectors may not know the difference between Classified and Listed
> marks, and they may accept Classified equipment. However, you may run into
> problems in some jurisdictions without Listing for electrical products. The
> National Electrical Code says “Listed” and that is what some inspectors
> look for. Some NRTLs may not be willing to issue a classified mark where an
> appropriate UL standard exists. Others can correct me if I am wrong, but I
> believe that UL uses the Classified mark for products where a UL standard
> does not exist, yet UL has verified that the product meets the requirements
> of a non-UL standard. UL would not likely allow the use of their Classified
> mark to show that a product has been tested to only a portion of a UL
> standard.
>
> An example is cable trays. UL will verify that cable trays meet the
> grounding and bonding requirements 

[PSES] FW: Listing or Classification in the field?

[Richard Pittenger]

Gary and all,

UL Classification means that UL has investigated a product for, typically, only 
one hazard, such as fire hazard. UL Listing means that the product has been 
subjected to a comprehensive investigation encompassing all known hazards as 
well as a limited amount of abnormal use as well.

I don't think a Classified product would get very far in today's world, 
especially since the UL Classification Mark includes the type of hazard that's 
been investigated.

Regards,
Richard Pittenger
Agency Approval Engineer
Hobart

From: McInturff, Gary [mailto:gary.mcintu...@esterline.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 12:34 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

CLASSIFICATION SERVICE - A service whereby UL determines that a manufacturer 
has demonstrated the ability to produce a product that complies with UL 
requirements for the purpose of classification or evaluation with respect to 
one or more of the following: (1) specific risks only, e.g., casualty, fire or 
shock, (2) performance under specified conditions, (3) regulatory codes, (4) 
other standards, including international standards, or (5) such other 
conditions as UL may consider desirable. UL authorizes the manufacturer to use 
the Classification Mark on products that comply with UL requirements and 
establishes follow-up service as a check of the means the manufacturer 
exercises to maintain compliance with UL requirements.

This is from their web site and somewhat supports your contention, although I 
don't know if you can say there is not a standard, maybe.

Sheet rock for example is UL classified, as are roofing materials and both of 
them have a single performance issue - fire rating. I think that (4) applies to 
sheetrock.  The ability to contain a fire for X amount of time. That rating is 
used by local authorities in the NEC and building codes around the country. 
Between floors of living spaces 3/8 in sheet rock must be used because it has a 
flame rating acceptable to the building codes. I suspect that the classified 
items were done at the behest or in conjunction with national authorities to 
identify basic functional requirements.
Conjecture more than absolute knowledge
Gary

From: Ted Eckert [mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 8:53 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

Hello Carl,

Some inspectors may not know the difference between Classified and Listed 
marks, and they may accept Classified equipment. However, you may run into 
problems in some jurisdictions without Listing for electrical products. The 
National Electrical Code says "Listed" and that is what some inspectors look 
for. Some NRTLs may not be willing to issue a classified mark where an 
appropriate UL standard exists. Others can correct me if I am wrong, but I 
believe that UL uses the Classified mark for products where a UL standard does 
not exist, yet UL has verified that the product meets the requirements of a 
non-UL standard. UL would not likely allow the use of their Classified mark to 
show that a product has been tested to only a portion of a UL standard.

An example is cable trays. UL will verify that cable trays meet the grounding 
and bonding requirements of the National Electrical Code. Classified cable 
trays
 are only tested to the NEC requirement and not a UL standard. Other NRTLs may 
use different terms for the same idea.

If a product isn't Listed and an appropriate UL standard exists, the question 
will always arise of why the product doesn't comply with all the Listing 
requirements. I would recommend Listing where Listing standard exists.

Ted Eckert
Compliance Engineer
Microsoft Corporation
ted.eck...@microsoft.com

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

From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 6:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Listing or Classification in the field?

Group,

I'm working with a company that manufactures high-end exercise equipment that 
is used in both therapeutic and general fitness applications.  They want to 
consider NRTL Classification in lieu of Listing in order to reduce cost and 
complexity of compliance.  My primary concern is acceptance of Classified 
devices by local inspectors in USA and Canada.  Can any of you on the list 
speak to this question?  I've not been able to get what I consider to be solid 
evidence from one NRTL that there won't be  acceptance issues by local 
inspectors if the device is Classified.

Thanks in advance,

Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

[Bryce Stammerjohan]

Hello group,

UL does in fact issue Classification Marks for products that only comply with 
part of a UL (or ANSI) Standard - all medical devices with the UL "Mark" are 
Classified, since UL does not address biocompatibility, EMC, etc. which are all 
clauses of UL 60601-1.  Med devices are under item (1) of the definition Gary 
posted below, and the Classification Markings on each product say such.  AHJs 
have accepted this for years now.

A fully "listed" medical device would have to have UL evaluate EMC and 
biocompatibility, as well as the basic safety aspects.  UL does not employ 
qualified people to address biocompEMC maybe.

Bryce Stammerjohan



From: McInturff, Gary [gary.mcintu...@esterline.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 9:34 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

CLASSIFICATION SERVICE - A service whereby UL determines that a manufacturer 
has demonstrated the ability to produce a product that complies with UL 
requirements for the purpose of classification or evaluation with respect to 
one or more of the following: (1) specific risks only, e.g., casualty, fire or 
shock, (2) performance under specified conditions, (3) regulatory codes, (4) 
other standards, including international standards, or (5) such other 
conditions as UL may consider desirable. UL authorizes the manufacturer to use 
the Classification Mark on products that comply with UL requirements and 
establishes follow-up service as a check of the means the manufacturer 
exercises to maintain compliance with UL requirements.

This is from their web site and somewhat supports your contention, although I 
don’t know if you can say there is not a standard, maybe.

Sheet rock for example is UL classified, as are roofing materials and both of 
them have a single performance issue – fire rating. I think that (4) applies to 
sheetrock.  The ability to contain a fire for X amount of time. That rating is 
used by local authorities in the NEC and building codes around the country. 
Between floors of living spaces 3/8 in sheet rock must be used because it has a 
flame rating acceptable to the building codes. I suspect that the classified 
items were done at the behest or in conjunction with national authorities to 
identify basic functional requirements.
Conjecture more than absolute knowledge
Gary

From: Ted Eckert [mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 8:53 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

Hello Carl,

Some inspectors may not know the difference between Classified and Listed 
marks, and they may accept Classified equipment. However, you may run into 
problems in some jurisdictions without Listing for electrical products. The 
National Electrical Code says “Listed” and that is what some inspectors look 
for. Some NRTLs may not be willing to issue a classified mark where an 
appropriate UL standard exists. Others can correct me if I am wrong, but I 
believe that UL uses the Classified mark for products where a UL standard does 
not exist, yet UL has verified that the product meets the requirements of a 
non-UL standard. UL would not likely allow the use of their Classified mark to 
show that a product has been tested to only a portion of a UL standard.

An example is cable trays. UL will verify that cable trays meet the grounding 
and bonding requirements of the National Electrical Code. Classified cable 
trays
 are only tested to the NEC requirement and not a UL standard. Other NRTLs may 
use different terms for the same idea.

If a product isn’t Listed and an appropriate UL standard exists, the question 
will always arise of why the product doesn’t comply with all the Listing 
requirements. I would recommend Listing where Listing standard exists.

Ted Eckert
Compliance Engineer
Microsoft Corporation
ted.eck...@microsoft.com

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

From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 6:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Listing or Classification in the field?

Group,

I'm working with a company that manufactures high-end exercise equipment that 
is used in both therapeutic and general fitness applications.  They want to 
consider NRTL Classification in lieu of Listing in order to reduce cost and 
complexity of compliance.  My primary concern is acceptance of Classified 
devices by local inspectors in USA and Canada.  Can any of you on the list 
speak to this question?  I've not been able to get what I consider to be solid 
evidence from one NRTL that there won't be  acceptance issues by local 
i

Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

[McInturff, Gary]

CLASSIFICATION SERVICE - A service whereby UL determines that a manufacturer 
has demonstrated the ability to produce a product that complies with UL 
requirements for the purpose of classification or evaluation with respect to 
one or more of the following: (1) specific risks only, e.g., casualty, fire or 
shock, (2) performance under specified conditions, (3) regulatory codes, (4) 
other standards, including international standards, or (5) such other 
conditions as UL may consider desirable. UL authorizes the manufacturer to use 
the Classification Mark on products that comply with UL requirements and 
establishes follow-up service as a check of the means the manufacturer 
exercises to maintain compliance with UL requirements.

This is from their web site and somewhat supports your contention, although I 
don't know if you can say there is not a standard, maybe.

Sheet rock for example is UL classified, as are roofing materials and both of 
them have a single performance issue - fire rating. I think that (4) applies to 
sheetrock.  The ability to contain a fire for X amount of time. That rating is 
used by local authorities in the NEC and building codes around the country. 
Between floors of living spaces 3/8 in sheet rock must be used because it has a 
flame rating acceptable to the building codes. I suspect that the classified 
items were done at the behest or in conjunction with national authorities to 
identify basic functional requirements.
Conjecture more than absolute knowledge
Gary

From: Ted Eckert [mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 8:53 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

Hello Carl,

Some inspectors may not know the difference between Classified and Listed 
marks, and they may accept Classified equipment. However, you may run into 
problems in some jurisdictions without Listing for electrical products. The 
National Electrical Code says "Listed" and that is what some inspectors look 
for. Some NRTLs may not be willing to issue a classified mark where an 
appropriate UL standard exists. Others can correct me if I am wrong, but I 
believe that UL uses the Classified mark for products where a UL standard does 
not exist, yet UL has verified that the product meets the requirements of a 
non-UL standard. UL would not likely allow the use of their Classified mark to 
show that a product has been tested to only a portion of a UL standard.

An example is cable trays. UL will verify that cable trays meet the grounding 
and bonding requirements of the National Electrical Code. Classified cable 
trays
 are only tested to the NEC requirement and not a UL standard. Other NRTLs may 
use different terms for the same idea.

If a product isn't Listed and an appropriate UL standard exists, the question 
will always arise of why the product doesn't comply with all the Listing 
requirements. I would recommend Listing where Listing standard exists.

Ted Eckert
Compliance Engineer
Microsoft Corporation
ted.eck...@microsoft.com

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

From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 6:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Listing or Classification in the field?

Group,

I'm working with a company that manufactures high-end exercise equipment that 
is used in both therapeutic and general fitness applications.  They want to 
consider NRTL Classification in lieu of Listing in order to reduce cost and 
complexity of compliance.  My primary concern is acceptance of Classified 
devices by local inspectors in USA and Canada.  Can any of you on the list 
speak to this question?  I've not been able to get what I consider to be solid 
evidence from one NRTL that there won't be  acceptance issues by local 
inspectors if the device is Classified.

Thanks in advance,

Carl
-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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://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 mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For polic

Re: [PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

[Ted Eckert]

Hello Carl,

Some inspectors may not know the difference between Classified and Listed 
marks, and they may accept Classified equipment. However, you may run into 
problems in some jurisdictions without Listing for electrical products. The 
National Electrical Code says "Listed" and that is what some inspectors look 
for. Some NRTLs may not be willing to issue a classified mark where an 
appropriate UL standard exists. Others can correct me if I am wrong, but I 
believe that UL uses the Classified mark for products where a UL standard does 
not exist, yet UL has verified that the product meets the requirements of a 
non-UL standard. UL would not likely allow the use of their Classified mark to 
show that a product has been tested to only a portion of a UL standard.

An example is cable trays. UL will verify that cable trays meet the grounding 
and bonding requirements of the National Electrical Code. Classified cable 
trays
 are only tested to the NEC requirement and not a UL standard. Other NRTLs may 
use different terms for the same idea.

If a product isn't Listed and an appropriate UL standard exists, the question 
will always arise of why the product doesn't comply with all the Listing 
requirements. I would recommend Listing where Listing standard exists.

Ted Eckert
Compliance Engineer
Microsoft Corporation
ted.eck...@microsoft.com

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

From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 6:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Listing or Classification in the field?

Group,

I'm working with a company that manufactures high-end exercise equipment that 
is used in both therapeutic and general fitness applications.  They want to 
consider NRTL Classification in lieu of Listing in order to reduce cost and 
complexity of compliance.  My primary concern is acceptance of Classified 
devices by local inspectors in USA and Canada.  Can any of you on the list 
speak to this question?  I've not been able to get what I consider to be solid 
evidence from one NRTL that there won't be  acceptance issues by local 
inspectors if the device is Classified.

Thanks in advance,

Carl
-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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://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 mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] wireless approvals matrix

[Sykes, Bob]

Worldly Experts,

Some time ago a few members of this list compiled a list of global wireless 
approval requirements.
Foolishly I did not save any emails containing the link to that document and 
now it would be extremely to me.
It seems the list archives are not working, or the at least the link to them in 
the email footers doesn't work.
Can anyone point me to the wireless approval document?

adTHANKSvance,
Bob Sykes



Please be advised that this email may contain confidential 
information.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us 
by email by replying to the sender and delete this message.  The 
sender disclaims that the content of this email constitutes an offer 
to enter into, or the acceptance of, any agreement; provided that the 
foregoing does not invalidate the binding effect of any digital or 
other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included 
in any attachment.


-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] Listing or Classification in the field?

[Carl Newton]

Group,

I'm working with a company that manufactures high-end exercise equipment
that is used in both therapeutic and general fitness applications.  They
want to consider NRTL Classification in lieu of Listing in order to reduce
cost and complexity of compliance.  My primary concern is acceptance of
Classified devices by local inspectors in USA and Canada.  Can any of you
on the list speak to this question?  I've not been able to get what I
consider to be solid evidence from one NRTL that there won't be  acceptance
issues by local inspectors if the device is Classified.

Thanks in advance,

Carl

-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] LVD Standard EN61010-1:2010 and Annex E

[John Cotman]

A few points, which may, or may not, be useful:

 

1)   Annex E is only informative, not normative

2)   From what you have described, the equipment is operated in an
uncontrolled environment, but is not opened in that environment during
installation or maintenance (at least the PCB, which is the bit you are
concerned about).  We aren't worried about deposition on the outside, the
enclosure, only on the PCB and other components inside.

3)   You then need to know the pollution degree of the macro
environment, basically whether or not it's in a dirty dusty damp environment
or whatever.

4)   That together takes you into the table, and you can see where it
comes out, it might be that X5 or X6 would do.

5)   The IP figures don't make much sense to me, because it seems odd to
only consider the water ingress value, and not also bother with the solid
objects one.  Surely dust ingress is as important, and maybe more important,
than just moisture ingress?

 

John C

 

  _  

From: Ian White (SXS UK) [mailto:ian.wh...@uk.spiraxsarco.com] 
Sent: 31 October 2012 14:49
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] LVD Standard EN61010-1:2010 and Annex E

 

 

Can l have your comments on this please.

 

 

EN61010-1:2010 Annex E deals with the guidelines for the reduction of
pollution degrees due to the micro-environment created by the enclosure.  

 

Is it really saying that any product in a uncontrolled environment must have
a IPX7 or IPX8 enclosure rating before the reduction can take place. See
table below :

 


7

Immersion up to 1 m

Ingress of water in harmful quantity shall not be possible when the
enclosure is immersed in water under defined conditions of pressure and time
(up to 1 m of submersion).

Test duration: 30 minutes

Immersion at depth of 1m


8

Immersion beyond 1 m

The equipment is suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions
which shall be specified by the manufacturer. Normally, this will mean that
the equipment is hermetically sealed. However, with certain types of
equipment, it can mean that water can enter but only in such a manner that
it produces no harmful effects.

Test duration: continuous immersion in water

Depth specified by manufacturer

 

 

 

As l have read Annex E  if a controller (which has a IP65 facia keypad but
IP4X case) which is designed to be fitted into a panel would really require
a IPX7 or IPX8 case (if a pollution reduction was allowed to take place at
the pcb level) as the controller enclosure (not the pcb) would be exposed to
uncontrolled environmental conditions during installation or maintenance. 

 

This does seem a little extreme as these times are very small compared to
the life of the controller and the actual pcb will never be exposed.

 

Do l understand Annex E correctly ?

 

 

Thanks

 

Ian White

Compliance and Reliability

 

 

 

 


_
Spirax-Sarco Engineering Plc. This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by
Verizon Business Internet Managed Scanning Services - powered by
MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.verizonbusiness.com/uk

-



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


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://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 
Mike Cantwell  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  


-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Testing EUT

[John Woodgate]

In message <20121101090042.6...@gmx.com>, dated Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Anthony 
Thomson  writes:


If it is passing, or the test result is yet unknown, you will 
“exercise” the EUT. If it is not passing, then you will need to 
“exorcise” the EUT.


By cutting out any EXOR gates?
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
The longer it takes to make a point, the more obtuse it proves to be.
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 

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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Testing EUT

[ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen]

I think Ron, that you -without knowing me-
found the answer to my confusion.
My wife is French and I learned to speak French
and that must be the cause of it...

Thanks to all that replied !




Regards,

Ing.  Gert Gremmen, BSc



g.grem...@cetest.nl
www.cetest.nl

Kiotoweg 363
3047 BG Rotterdam
T 31(0)104152426
F 31(0)104154953

 Before printing, think about the environment. 



-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Ron Pickard
Verzonden: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 11:27 PM
Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Onderwerp: RE: [PSES] Testing EUT

Actually, I think exercition may be a French word as I seem to recall seeing it 
used in French text a few years ago, but I may be mistaken and probably am. Not 
sure about exercision, but it may have a similar meaning as exercition, but yet 
in another language. Or, is Gert actually testing us?  :-)

Best regards,
Ron

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 1:55 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Testing EUT

In message ,
dated Wed, 31 Oct 2012, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen" 
 writes:

>Exercise / Exercising / Exercision / Exercition    (of  a EUT in order 
>to have it tested)

To exercise - verb

Exercising - participle (I am exercising the EUT) or gerund (Exercising the EUT 
is an essential step.)

Exercision - rare word, not in Chambers' dictionary

Exercition - very rare word, possibly extinct. A form of 'exercitation', also 
very rare?
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk The longer it takes to make a 
point, the more obtuse it proves to be.
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Possible Counterfeit EMC Components?

[Anthony Thomson]

“just switches OFF”
Most half decent power supplied employ various monitoring, control and 
protection circuits… Over-current, low input voltage, temperature, on/off 
control inputs etc., etc. These usually use low level digital control signals, 
perhaps something like this is being asserted internally. Like a spurious 
/reset signal can in a digital system… We’ve all observed that, haven’t we?
T

- Original Message -
From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
Sent: 10/31/12 08:53 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Possible Counterfeit EMC Components?

 Brian, This was an industrial marketed power supply (component) as not 
suitable for use by the end user. Compliance is not required legally, but the 
product is marketed as compliant (and was at its supply side) But what is 
baffling me is that the product just switches OFF, no change of voltage or 
added ripple, but switching OFF. That is the worst that can happen in my view. 
The problem for my customer is now finding a DC power supply that does not 
exhibit any "unexpected" behavior. BTW most DC power supplies do not comply at 
the DC side, only because a choke and a few caps cost 60 dollar cents and the 
standard does not require DC conducted measurements. And it's not only a 
conducted emission problem. If you look at the test set up of DC power supplies 
when exercised (!?!) for radiated emissions and you can get hold of a picture 
you will see load resistor banks connected with 10" of wire because with 
10' they would fail. Now you purchase one of these and include it in yo!
 ur Ethernet equipped super-dupe application, only to find a test failure on 
conducted emission on the ethernet port. How many time it will cost you to find 
out it's the DC power supply leaking through the center tap of the ethernet 
transformer ??? Gert Gremmen -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: 
emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Brian Oconnell Verzonden: 
woensdag 31 oktober 2012 21:29 Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Onderwerp: RE: 
[PSES] Possible Counterfeit EMC Components? Mr. Gremmen, et al, Will assume 
that the unit had previously passed your EMC tests. Otherwise - is this a 
component P/S? Read the EMC report? Test conditions? Compliance level? I have 
previously whined and stamped my feed on this subject. I oft review requests 
for custom power products with some remarkable specs. Most are considered 
doable, with a given budget. But the problem being discussed seems to be 
long-term product/production control. Unless you are a MS or Apple, very 
difficul!
 t to do if the mfr is an Asian contract house. Many more western 'power 
supply' and component companies will leave the market. Those remaining will 
eventually merge and move to Asia and other exotic locations having poor beer. 
So the future expectation will be to AQL each shipment of critical components 
and power supplies at receiving inspection for the life of your product. My 
experience with some Asian component factories is that they have a different 
concept of 'fraud' - where 'fraud' is not an ethics issue, but a business 
issue. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org 
[mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert 
Gremmen Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:22 PM To: 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] Possible Counterfeit EMC 
Components? Had a 200 Watt power supply last week that simply shut-off (fold 
back) at 10V/m . It was applied in a laboratory equipment for creating 
expensive bio-cultures for vaccination ...
  These cultures may cost up to a million dollar. This was not a cheap !
 unknown manufacturer, but one With a quality system implemented. Design update 
without re-test ? I also had a 3 different Iphone charger imitations that were 
exact replicas of the Apple product (including the PCB lay-out), but the EMC 
components were left out. I cannot believe this is ignorance of the problem. 
This is pure fraud. Over 100 dBuV output signal between 150 and 1500 kHz !! 
Gert Gremmen Ce-test, qualified testing -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: 
emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Brian Oconnell Verzonden: 
woensdag 31 oktober 2012 19:50 Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Onderwerp: RE: 
[PSES] Possible Counterfeit EMC Components? As an employee of a power company, 
am very 'sensitive' to control of procurement process. Build to print is not a 
big issue, but component procurement has always been a concern. Have just 
returned from some of employer's Asia factories where a considerable amount of 
time was spent going through supply bins. While at the !
 Shenzhen site, observed a CAB's factory audit. What a load of doo-doo. The 
only time the auditors do anything in an Asian country (other than Japan) is 
when the agency wants to bring in more revenue - which results in some rather 
creative variation notices. But the TJ, Mexico factory, where most of the 
custom st

Re: [PSES] Testing EUT

[Anthony Thomson]

If it is passing, or the test result is yet unknown, you will “exercise” the 
EUT. If it is not passing, then you will need to “exorcise” the EUT.
:-)
 T

- Original Message -
From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
Sent: 10/31/12 08:02 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Testing EUT

 A question for all you out there native english speaking:
 What is the correct way of expressing:
 Exercise / Exercising / Exercision / Exercition (of a EUT in order to have it 
tested)
 Word spelling check won’t help me here…
Regards,

 Ing. Gert Gremmen

 -
 
 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 < 
emc-p...@ieee.org >
 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://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 < emcp...@radiusnorth.net >
 Mike Cantwell < mcantw...@ieee.org >
 For policy questions, send mail to:
 Jim Bacher < j.bac...@ieee.org >
 David Heald < dhe...@gmail.com >

-

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 


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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: