Thanks for the great update, Glyn! You are absolutely right about my message.
Doug Nix
d...@mac.com
“The last of human freedoms - the ability to chose one's attitude in a given
set of circumstances.” Viktor Frankl
Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make
mistakes.
I completely agree, Ron. That is the problem.
--
Doug Nix
d...@mac.com
(519) 729-5704
Assumptions are the death of possibility. James Mapes
On 10-May-10, at 18:49 , Ronald R. Wellman wrote:
Very interesting, but I have a different view on this that is not
science
fiction or left to
Brian,
Thanks for assigning me to TC184 - I would be happy to serve with that
group. Alas I am not directly involved with ISO/IEC at the TC level...
--
Doug Nix, A.Sc.T.
IEEE PSES Toronto Chapter
Toronto Section, Ontario, Canada
d...@ieee.org
mobile (519) 729-5704
fax (519) 653-1318
1) Also to mention, a US standard for AGV's and related equipment in the
industrial area:
ANSI B56.5 Safety Standard for Guided Industrial Vehicles and Automated
Functions of Manned Industrial Vehicles
This standard is available (free?) from its publisher, the Industrial Truck
Standards
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Very interesting, but I have a different view on this that is not science
fiction or left to academia.
If you use risk analysis or hazard based safety engineering, you can assess
hazards to a point where risks are tolerable or not by setting limits,
As a member of the BiNational Working Group (now defunct)
that 'harmonized' IEC 60950-1 for use in the US and Canada,
I can state without reservation that the CSA staff that
were a part of that WG made every effort to address
Canadian National Differences. If it's not in the
standard, it's
Are there any labs that can do ANSI T1.413 testing (specifically Annex
E testing).
Preference for labs in California (LA area).
Thanks.
Anil
Anil Allamaneni
Compliance Manager
Occam Networks.
805-692-3533
a...@occamnetworks.com
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering
Peter:
The only thing I can say is… it happens!
This is more often the case, I believe, with supplementary standards or
references to standards written by other standards bodies.
In the case of the fuse marking, I recall that being in traditional, non-IEC
based UL standards but not
Here is a link to an article that I discovered this weekend that is timely
with regard to this discussion, but a bit sensationalistic I'm afraid. They
mention IEEE ICRA 2010 which took place last week. Apparently the IEEE
Robotics and Automation Society is looking into these issues as well,
In the case of your example, is the text mandatory or can you just put the
Caution symbol and explain it in multilingual text in the manual? Can you use
the nomenclature (such as “F5AL 250V”) for fuse types in place of the
text?
The reason for having international symbols are to avoid
Thanks Ted, my understanding was that it was the ICES-003 so if it’s not
there I’ve been misinformed by a NRTL or two. I’ve always had the room so
it’s always been on the product – obviously other may not. Thanks also for
the acronym definition.
Gary McInturff
208 635 8306
ICES-003 http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/
mt-gst.nsf/vwapj/ices003e.pdf/$FILE/ices003e.pdf does list the English and
French text “This Class [*] digital apparatus complies with Canadian
ICES-003. Cet appareil numérique de la classe [*] est conforme à la norme
NMB-003 du Canada.” However, this is
Mr Nix is a member of TC184, so will defer to his comments on industrial
robotic safety as authoritative. The following comments are for those of us
that do not have Mr. Nix's background.
The OP referenced mobile robotic (software) safety for a non-technical
(residential ?) environment.
Just to add fuel to the fire – I believe that ICES03 (Candian
telecommunications) is pretty transparent if you have FCC approval but I
believe there is a requirement for the FCC statement “This devices complies
with FCC with part 15 of FCC……..” to be in French as well as English. I
don’t see that
Don,
There must be a reason the NRTLs and the SCCLs are not enforcing it and maybe
someone can enlighten us as to why.
One of the cautionary markings that I see which is most common on equipment
with accessible fuseholders and required by most North American standards:
CAUTION: For continued
Thanks to Mr Gies - precisely the phrase that I had been looking for...
Another glorious day of battle in the service of the emperor.
Brian
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf
Of Don Gies
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 4:32 AM
To:
Hello Group,
English and French markings are required for all cautions and warning
markings by CAN/CSA C22.2 No.0, General Requirements -Canadian Electrical
Code, Part II. CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 0 is a normative reference in all CSA
C22.2 electrical standards.
Clause 5.3.1. Under Language of
Hi
FDA has certified some consultants which can help with a 510k and at the same
time speed up the FDA acceptance.
Where do I find a list of these certified companies?
I’m looking for one in EU close to Denmark.
Best regards
Mr. Kim Boll Jensen
Bolls Rådgivning
Ved Gadekæret
18 matches
Mail list logo
