Jim, assuming that the essential safety requirements and fuctionality
of your product have not changed, there is no 'placing in the market'
after the repair. Therefore there is no requirement to CE mark according
to LVD, if the product has brought in to an EU country before 1/1997.
An already
This is a tricky question. I can see that there are three cases that can
be considered.
Case 1: Unit is repaired and returned to the original customer. I find
nothing written that says you cannot do this. The unit is being placed
back in service, it is not being placed in service the first time.
Can anyone tell me what Directives there are (other than the LVD and EMCD)
that impact what we can and cannot do in our packaging and manuals? We are
thinking of rules controlling things like recyclability, minimum recycled
content, banned materials, over-packaging, etc. How does this relate
I have seen Directive 94/62/EC of 20, December, 1994: On Packaging and
Packaging Waste.
Directive 94/62/EC also references 75/442/EEC of 15, July, 1975: On Waste.
Perhaps these may be helpful.
Regards,
Doug Henderson
3Com, S2 Division
(508) 490-5954
doug_hender...@3mail.3com.com
-
Doug,
Please elaborate regarding your statement I eventually won in the
end, but it was not easy.
I've run across this OSHA loophole as well and I am curious to find
out what made it go your way.
Was the telco equipment Customer Premise as well
Bob Brister wrote:
Hello,
My interpretation of the criteria listed in 5.4.9 is if,
under simulated fault conditions, a hole forms in the
enclosure, that is not necessarily a failure of the product
to remain safe. Would you agree?
That depends.
The criteria seems to indicate that if
Hello,
I may have inquired of this forum on this subject before, I can't
remember. I
am interested in what your experience has been with overheating of
removable cord sets at the equipment input end. This would include the
cord and the
appliance connector.
I don't know how many folks out there
Keep in mind that the Phone Company has long been exempt from many regulations.
This includes FCC Part 15 as well as the OSHA. The Phone Companies themselves
require that all equipment to be used in the CO or customer Premise be listed
with a NRTL. On the EMC side they require a wider
You wrote
From: Brister%mail.dec.com
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: 02/06/97 08:20:35 AM
Subject: Input power connections with removable cord set.
Hello,
I may have inquired of this forum on this subject before, I can't
remember. I
am interested in what your experience has
While I haven't investigated this type of failure, I can speculate on
some causes to consider. The overheating must be caused by an increase
in resistance in the vicinity of the connector. Possible causes:
* bent contacts allowing a loose pin and socket fit (bad construction or
damaged in
--
From: Rains,Mike[SMTP:mra...@foxboro.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 1997 1:22PM
To:jbie...@canberra.com
Cc:'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: RE: Transformer Approvals
John,
My understanding of IEC1010 is that IEC742 only applies to transformers
that are stand-alone
John,
I just realized that Amendment 1 to IEC1010 added a new section (14.7)
to cover mains transformers not tested as part of the equipment. It
also changes the wording in section 4.4.2.6 for transformers that are
tested as part of the equipment. The overload tests in 14.7 and
4.4.2.6 are more
On the contrary, this has been a long-standing issue before the CSA
Steering Committee on the Canadian Electrical Code, Part II,
although the question here was dealing with cords for things like
electric kettles (we use them in Canada a lot more than in the US)
rather than IT equipment.
The
13 matches
Mail list logo
