Some background
At
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/european-standards/harmonised-standards/machinery/index_en.htm
you will find the list of harmonized standards for the machine directive.
Currently listed for electrical safety aspects
are
60745 Electrical Tools
I was watching an interesting BBC documentary TV show the other night; it's
focus was product quality and the publicly perceived image of quality goods.
I had been aware that German consumer goods had at one time been held in
poor repute in the British marketplace; recall the Irish song about
In message 009001cd448d$b4bb6570$1e323050$@cox.net, dated Thu, 7 Jun
2012, Ed Price edpr...@cox.net writes:
The BBC explained that German industry (starting with AEG) began a
corporate and industrial makeover around 1900, emphasizing a
designed-in quality that stretched from the product
You need to look at the DIRECTIVE to see whether it applies to your product -
Standards are just a way of demonstrating compliance with a directive. The
rules/requirements come from the Directive and the National Implementations
thereof.
For many items that are covered by the machinery
I didn’t see the programme, but will make the effort to do so.
However, German quality and reliability is a false perception. ‘German’
consumer goods are generally made in the same Chinese factories using the same
components as the rest of the world’s brands and are generally neither more nor
In message 20120607102558.244...@gmx.com, dated Thu, 7 Jun 2012,
Anthony Thomson ton...@europe.com writes:
However, German quality and reliability is a false perception.
‘German’ consumer goods are generally made in the same Chinese
factories using the same components as the rest of the
I agree with you totally. Something like this needs to be done and probably
should have been done prior to the last release of the Machinery Directive.
Looking at the newest edition of the EN 61010-1 standard, it would appear as if
the team is trying to include the necessary Essential Health
In message
64D32EE8B9CBDD44963ACB076A5F6ABB0261EAA6@Mailbox-Tech.lecotech.local,
dated Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.com writes:
The LVD is only 10 pages long and says things like, “adequate
protection against the danger of physical injury”. Done. Then let the
standards
This is because the LVD is a New Approach Directive, but the Machinery
Directive (like the Automotive Directive) is not.
This reply has me completely baffled!
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 07 June 2012 15:50
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
In message 2CD939E8E14B4A29A69FD97E1970CA80@LENVOR61iJOHN, dated Thu,
7 Jun 2012, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk writes:
This is because the LVD is a New Approach Directive, but the Machinery
Directive (like the Automotive Directive) is not.
This reply has me completely baffled!
In message E88BEB31005540B1B1EAF6BE0BBEDE94@LENVOR61iJOHN, dated Thu,
7 Jun 2012, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk writes:
Standards writers cannot ¡°dictate¡±, that¡¯s for the law, (the
Directives), to do.
Why are you using the strange encoding ks_c_5601-1987?
--
OOO - Own
A Google search like this one, for example?
http://www.newapproach.org/Directives/DirectiveList.asp
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 07 June 2012 16:49
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Laboratory Equipment - the forgotten
In message 6F813CE0E7344D93B321BA6FFF3C6A69@LENVOR61iJOHN, dated Thu,
7 Jun 2012, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk writes:
A Google search like this one, for example?
No: a search shows *explanations* of the meaning of new and old approach
directives.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only.
It seems that the MD formally IS a New Approach Directive, and that is what I
assumed in the first place.
But John, you are not completely ignorant in these, so I expect there is
something behind your statement.
You made me worry (a bit): so now you owe us some
explanation other than a
In message FCA549BE3ECF9D4CB8CB8576837EA489140754@ZEUS.cetest.local,
dated Thu, 7 Jun 2012, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.grem...@cetest.nl writes:
It seems that the MD formally IS a New Approach Directive, and that is
what I assumed in the first place.
Yes, well, I think
Hi
Searching for a contact at Cetecom (Germany) who is involved in Radio
testing. Need to discuss a couple of things.
Any Cetecom folks out there? .
Best regards
Amund
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety
Brian,
I've faced similar situations when dealing with safety engineers in world
areas that tend to take an overly rigid view of requirements. I think the
underlying problem is subtleties getting lost in translation - so to be
safe (that is their job!), a very literal translation of the
Hi,
I've always done this through a third party agent, but the last time I
checked EU reports should suffice.
Also, yes, I believe you will need RF Exposure (SAR) reports in your
submission package depending on what type of radio(s) are present in your
handheld device.
My experience on timeframe
18 matches
Mail list logo
