The compressor standard is IEC 60335-2-34. The product standard will vary
based on what the product is but will likely be listed in the 60335 family as
John mentioned.
Josh Wiseman
Senior Compliance Engineer
“It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit.”
–
I agree with Dave here, but I will say that Turkey sometimes will demand a copy
of a EMC report and they will note discrepancies like this. That has been an
issue that I have faced within the last year. Since Turkey is not a member
state of the EU they don’t follow the same EU procedures all
IEC/EN 60335-2-25 and IEC/EN 60335-2-90 have limits on the radiation emitted
from the microwave with the door open. This includes testing with the seal
broken and the door closed, when possible. The limits are pretty strict so I
would be a little surprised by this. I haven’t read the
Brian,
The FileOpen control is not in place on the multiuser copies of their
standards. I store our copies on a network drive with limited access to about
50 users. I purchase the 2 license copy of it the standard knowing that it
will be rare that more than 2 will use it at the same time.
Years ago I worked for a company that produced an ITE product. The power
supply manufacturer had sent a batch of power supplies that the nut was not
properly tightened on the PE conductor to chassis. We actually found the
problem during our production line ground bond testing. After some
Gert,
If you buy the multi-user versions from Estonia I don't think it is tied to the
Adobe and Fileopen. I always buy 2 license copies when I get standards from
them and place the files on our network. Our preferred pdf reader is not
always Adobe and there have been no problems.
Josh
Richard,
This depends on what type of equipment the end product is. There are
regulations being drafted by the EPA as we speak. Some types of equipment have
extensions being granted while other types are expected to have a ban on R134a,
possibly as soon as Jan 1, 2016. Another consideration
David,
Some safety labs will rely on the EMC test house to verify the applicable
Clause 5 requirements from an EMC aspect. This was something I saw at times
when I was working at an NRTL.
Josh
From: itl-emc user group [mailto:itl...@itl.co.il]
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 11:36 PM
To:
Brian,
The French customs has been my thorn for the past 9 months or so. It seems
that every shipment gets held for some reason or another. Our distributor
actually setup a liaison 5km from the customs office because it has been so
difficult. We had issues with them demanding that general
I sent this a while back but never received the link to the posting. We are
still looking for candidates.
We at Taylor Company, http://www.taylor-company.com/, have begun a search for
an additional Approval Engineer. The official posting is on indeed.
Dave,
SAP can do just about anything with the right programmer. Your best bet here
is to talk with your IT group and let them know what you need. There is a good
chance they can do it for you, or contract someone who can.
Josh
From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com]
Brian,
I believe you are on the right track. I have dealt with these standards on the
periphery. It is not a bad idea to have a copy and to read through them, it
will take some help to test and possibly to understand everything though.
Josh
-Original Message-
From: Kunde, Brian
Additionally, most agencies have a process to repeal or elevate a decision
beyond the engineer that you are directly working with.
Josh
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 8:53 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject:
Will is correct. I have gotten around this type of fan issue in the past by
simply running the normal heating test with the fan disconnected. If you can
pass normal temperature rise limits without the fan then your argument becomes
easier as the fan is no longer critical, it is simply a
I have been asked to pass the word about this position.
We at Taylor Company, http://www.taylor-company.com/, have begun a search for
an additional Approval Engineer. The official posting is not on Monster or
Careerbuilder yet, but it will be soon.
In any event we are looking for someone with
Doug,
I was recently doing some searching for requirements for equipment being used
in Marine applications and came across some chemical restriction requirements
for wiring. I believe what you might be seeing is CE marking according to the
RoHS2 directive based on the info that I ran into.
I believe so. “EC” is being replaced by “EU” in the directives.
Josh
From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 7:34 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [External] Re: [PSES] Rejected Manufacturer Declarations
Nice summary!!
Shouldn’t it be, “EU
The customs in Poland and Turkey has historically been tough to work with for
us. Both countries ask for items above and beyond the minimum requirements. I
have a folder set up for each country just waiting for the call from our
importer that they are asking one of the several questions that
We used to provide them on request and that was pretty much it. Recently I
convinced our export group to include a copy with the shipping docs for every
shipment that goes to the EU. This seems to be reducing a lot of the questions
(delays) we were having.
Josh
-Original Message-
This falls into a unique area of the NRTL program. If a standard is not listed
in the scope of the NRTL program than any NRTL can issue approvals to that
standard because the approval/certification mark is owned by the NRTL. With
that said, if/when a standard is added to the NRTL scope
] Standards Dates
Very good explanation. Thank you very much.
The Other Brian
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.orgmailto:emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On
Behalf Of Wiseman, Joshua E
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 10:36 AM
To: Boštjan Glavič;
EMC-PSTC
The safety standard for microwaves is IEC/EN 60335-1 and IEC/EN 60335-2-25 or
IEC/EN 60335-2-90 for Commercial microwaves. I agree with John on the use of
EN 55011 due to the use of RF by the device.
Josh
From: Price, Andrew (Selex ES, UK) [mailto:andrew.p.pr...@selex-es.com]
Sent: Tuesday,
A little background first. I am testing single phase commercial soft serve ice
cream machine similar to what you might find at a fast food restaurant or a
local ice cream vendor. The unit normally draws less than 1A of current until
the compressor and motors turn on, at that point the current
Not all of UL is Not-For-Profit. The UL organization started creating the
different business units as profit driven organizations some time ago. A
couple years ago there was rumor of them dropping the Not-For-Profit moniker.
I am not sure what happened with that.
Josh
-Original
Is that an European or African swallow?
Josh
-Original Message-
From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 2:41 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] VTM-2 Rated Film - Proper Electrical Barrier
Yes, but what is the airspeed of
be.
Josh
From: McInturff, Gary [mailto:gary.mcintu...@esterline.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 4:19 PM
To: Wiseman, Joshua E; '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
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
Gary,
60335 does not specify EMC standards directly. Clause 19 has reference to some
EMC testing for some conditions. Most people who use 60335 series standards
apply 55014-1, -2 for EMC.
Regards,
Josh
Taylor Company
A division of Carrier Commercial Refrigeration, Inc
From: McInturff, Gary
Carl,
What if it is addressed in your RMF? Considering it is ANSI/AAMI instead of
IEC/EN, and the intended market, I would think this would be an area you could
use the RMF and address it that way. If needed you could possible address this
using Clause 4.5 (although, this might be a bit of a
Derek,
You might check EN 61508 and whatever ISO standard is referenced for Risk
Assessment. My guess is it will depend on the risk and the severity of that
risk that you are trying to avoid.
Regards,
Josh
Joshua Wiseman
Taylor Company
A division of Carrier Commercial Refrigeration, Inc
30 matches
Mail list logo
