[PSES] Reduce Speed of Moving Part to Reduce Risk

Greetings All. The IEC/EN 61010-1 table 12, Risk assessment of mechanical hazards to body parts, states that a hazard can be avoidable if the speed of the motion was reduced. Reduced to what speed? It says, "The motion is visible and velocity is low enough for body parts to be removed without

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-3

Hi Peter That is correct. We discussed that also on TC108 and confirmed. Standard 62368-3 will be replaced by 63315 in the future. Best regards Bostjan Glavic SIQ Poslano iz Outlook za Android Od: peterh...@aol.com

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-3

In the 3rd edition of IEC 62368-1, it reads, “Additional requirements for equipment having the capability to supply DC power over commonly used communication cables, such as USB or Ethernet (PoE), are given in IEC 62368-3.” Ralph From: peterh...@aol.com

[PSES] IEC 62368-3

Hello group, Would I be correct to say that even though the above standard is reference in IEC 62368-1 3rd Ed but it is considered optional and not mandatory?  Thank you Peter - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety

[PSES] Product Compliance Symposium / Looking for Presentations

John Allen and I are looking for Papers and Presentations for the IEEE Symposium on Product Compliance Engineering, sponsored by the IEEE PSES. This year's ISPCE will be held in Chicago Illinois, April 30 through May 2. There will be four tracks on product compliance. John is looking for

Re: [PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on RJ45 and XLR sockets

Hi Chuck: I don't know why your lab wants to do the primary-circuits-to-ground hi-pot test to "unearthed socket terminals." I assume your secondary circuits are grounded, and, if so, the pins of sockets (RJ45 and XLR) are therefore referenced to ground and are subject to the

Re: [PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on RJ45 and XLR sockets

If you test that connector with the blunt test probe (aka finger probe) using the procedure described in the standard and it does not touch the connector pins (and you have minimum clearance) then your certifier should reconsider the dielectric test level. Many standards still use basic and

Re: [PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on RJ45 and XLR sockets

Thank you for pointing to IEC 62911 standard. Chuck From: Boštjan Glavič Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 11:35 PM To: Chuck August-McDowell ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on RJ45 and XLR sockets [THIS EMAIL IS FROM AN

Re: [PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on RJ45 and XLR sockets

Hello Chuck, Typical issue with reading the standard. Standard IEC 62368-1 3rd Ed only defines routine tests on some components, where there is a reference to routine tests (e.g. transformer, optocoupler,... - search for reference to 5.4.9.2). Complete unit shall be tested in production based

[PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on RJ45 and XLR sockets

I'm working with a new lab and new product using IEC 62368-1 3rd Ed. they are asking the company to perform production line test dielectric voltage withstand test of 3600 Vp or DC 1 to 4 seconds on Ethernet port connector RJ45 and Pro Audio XLR connector sockets? "Between primary to other

[PSES] China SRRC Certification

Dear Colleagues, Need help on China SRRC certification requirement. To get a license from SRRC China Radio Type Approval. One of the test items they need is a single carrier transmission method. Please help on how to do this test. Regards, Cecil Gittens -

Re: [PSES] RS or RI Modulation?

Hi Patrick, I’d be happy to participate.. just give me a heads up when.Cheers,Derek.Sent from my iPadOn Jan 14, 2024, at 9:58 AM, Patrick wrote:Is anyone interested in a discussion surrounding use of modulation during radiated immunity/susceptibility?I'm developing some new project-specific

[PSES] RS or RI Modulation?

Is anyone interested in a discussion surrounding use of modulation during radiated immunity/susceptibility? I'm developing some new project-specific procedures for RI/RS. My guess is I'm not the first one to think deeply about modulation? I would like to gather insight from industry experts and

Re: [PSES] UKCA Extension .... again

Lauren Just to confirm - the extension to 2027 is only for how the product must be labelled to show compliance with UKCA, and not whether it must comply with UKCA - i.e. they're allowing manufacturers and extra 3 years to update product labels, artwork and rating plates. Best regards Charlie

Re: [PSES] UKCA Extension .... again

Thanks for this Dean, In part it, pointed me towards the current UK incarnation of the LVD - that is to say, I had not noticed until now that the LVEESR (Low Voltage Electrical Equipment Safety Regulations) SI 1989 No. 728 had been replaced by the EESR (Electrical Equipment Safety Regulations)

Re: [PSES] UKCA Extension .... again

Hello Colleagues, RE: Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 2016 Here is what I was able to find: General guidance site: On this site page: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/using-the-ukca-marking “The government intends to introduce legislation to extend recognition of goods that meet EU

Re: [PSES] UKCA Extension .... again

Lauren "The Government intends to introduce" Is as much as we have so far. It's a press release / announcement from one Government department that does not have responsibilities for all UK regulations (for example, it doesn't enforce RoHS which is applicable to lots of products covered by

[PSES] Seeking semi-rigid N cables for a HP/Agilent/Keysight 8546A EMI receiver

I am trying to locate replacement semi-rigid cables cables for my old HP 8546A EMI Receiver. The HP/Agilent/Keysight part number is 85460-20036 but are no longer available from any source that I can find. These are the (3) cables with type N connectors joining the EMI receiver (top box) to

[PSES] UKCA Extension .... again

Hello Experts, In Nov 22 we (this listserve) were discussing the UKCA extension aiming to allow CE marking to stand in for UKCA for a longer period. We were tracking a related statutory instrument, which I believe has been released as SI 2022 No. 1393

Re: [PSES] EN, ISO, or IEC adhesive label durability standards?

Doug: Happy New year, friend: I haven’t dealt with Labeling issues for few years. But here are two links that may help. labeling for EU: https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/eu-labelingmarking-requirements

Re: [PSES] EN, ISO, or IEC adhesive label durability standards?

Doug, back when I had to deal with labels, the oversea agencies accepted the CSA and UL standards. I never found any other standards. Jim Bacher, WB8VSU ja.bac...@outlook.com or j.bac...@ieee.org From: Doug Nix Sent:

[PSES] EN, ISO, or IEC adhesive label durability standards?

Dear colleagues, I am looking for EN, ISO, or IEC standards that are equivalent to CSA C22.2 No. 0.15, Adhesive Labels or UL 969 2023, Marking and Labeling Systems. I’ve done some searching on cencenelec.org, iso.org, and webstore.iec.ch, without finding any standards that appear to cover

Re: [PSES] Is certification 'voided' by improper operational conditions?

Hi Lauren, MCCB (molded case circuit breakers) get hot when they are run close to their handle rating, even open bench. If installed in a panel (dead air space) at 40C ambient temperature, I would expect they would easily exceed 50C on their molded case long before say 3 hours have expired

Re: [PSES] Is certification 'voided' by improper operational conditions?

Hi Lauren: The part was run for 8 hours at a temperature above its rated temperature. Supposedly, the manufacturer's rated temperature is the maximum temperature for "non-deterioration" of the part and its materials. So, the part, supposedly (and we must expect), has suffered some

Re: [PSES] Is certification 'voided' by improper operational conditions?

Hello Lauren, I am not sure about UL voiding due to operating outside of its parameters. What circuit breaker is it ? What application is it Assuming a standard Thermo Magnetic device (TMD) At 50 Degrees C the breaker would trip faster at this elevated temperature due to the Heating

[PSES] Is certification 'voided' by improper operational conditions?

Hello Experts, If I have UL certified component and operate it for a period of time outside its specified conditions of operation, and then return the conditions to specified levels, is it appropriate to still think of the component as certified, or is the certification somehow voided by this

Re: [PSES] Metallic table for conducted emissions?

Resonance is something I had not considered, but could be an issue if it occurs below 30 MHz.  Not sure what exactly is going to resonate here, though.  The capacity of the test sample enclosure relative to the floor ground has to tank with an inductance. The only inductance is if there is

Re: [PSES] Metallic table for conducted emissions?

I agree with your interpretation of the enquiry. I think it is necessary to watch out for the legs. if they are frames (or some more complex construction) rather than single pillars, becoming resonant loops at some frequencies. I suppose single pillars could also resonate. On 2023-12-28

Re: [PSES] Metallic table for conducted emissions?

Ken et al, I think the query was just the opposite.  The tabletop is wooden, but do the legs need to be wooden as wel?   The FCC paradigm (AFAIK) places the test sample 80 cm above ground, thus limiting parasitic capacity. My gut response is they should be fine with metal legs, as long as

[PSES] Metallic table for conducted emissions?

Hello fellow experts, we're looking to build a conducted emission pre-compliance test station to FCC Part 15 Subpart B requirements (residential applications).Is a non-metallic table a necessity for reasonable accuracy? We have a number of lab benches with wood tops and metal legs that would

Re: [PSES] FCC label for White Labeled products

-- Original Message -- From: Charlie Blackham To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC label for White Labeled products Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 15:40:25 + > If you have integrated a FCC module, with modular certification, your product > label should state

[PSES] Position at Microsoft

There is a job opening for a Senior Product Safety Engineer at Microsoft. Anybody interested can find more information here. Senior Product Safety Engineer | Microsoft Careers Ted Eckert Principal Safety &

Re: [PSES] FCC label for White Labeled products

Hi Brian, I think you’re asking about doing a change in ID. KDB 249634 has information on the process. https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=188453=P Thanks, [cid:image218315.jpg@32FB2749.66BFF514] David Schaefer Technical Manager Element Materials Technology

Re: [PSES] FCC label for White Labeled products

Brian If you have integrated a FCC module, with modular certification, your product label should state "contains FCC ID:XX" where XX is the FCC ID of the module. Unless you have separately certified your product as a radio transmitter, there's no other FCC ID label for you to

[PSES] FCC label for White Labeled products

Hello experts, Our existing product label has our FCC ID, just under the FCC logo in the classic form:x-y, where x = the FCC ID of the imbedded, compliant WiFi model ("Grantee Code" in FCC lingo), and y = our product name, per the UL label. ("Product Code" ). We're

Re: [PSES] Lithium battery label / marking

Amund: Markings and cautions are described in the product safety Standards i.e., UL (UL 1973) some IEC (IEC 62133-1). You may want to refer to them for battery models, rating of the cabinet or battery pack, replacement instructions etc. Best Regards and Be Safe Bansi Patel BRP

[PSES] Lithium battery label / marking

Product (Multimedia Equipment) that contains Lithium battery We know there are various required labels on packaging for ground/air transportation. But the product itself, does it need a battery label / marking on the outside enclosure? Can’t remember seeing such a label. BR Amund -

Re: [PSES] EU Cyber Resilience Act

Amund It's very likely to be in scope for that reason. The Commission are writing a guide for this which will be published next year Best regards Charlie Charlie Blackham Sulis Consultants Ltd Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ Registered in England and Wales, number

[PSES] SV: [PSES] EU Cyber Resilience Act

I guess such "in house temp sensor" is within the Cyber security scope . https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:864f472b-34e9-11ed-9c68-0 1aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1 =PDF

[PSES] SV: [PSES] EU Cyber Resilience Act

Great Information, Charlie. One thing . Let's say a temperature sensor on NB-IoT (sim card) is definitely a radio product which is connected to the internet. But what about the same temperature sensor when using BLE, Zigbee or other typical smart house protocols, not directly connected to

Re: [PSES] EU Cyber Resilience Act

Amund The RED has requirements that are separate, but aligned with, the Cyber Resilience Act Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/30 which relates to Articles 3.3(d), 3.3(e), and 3.3(f) of the Radio Equipment Directive (RED), which is now applicable from 1st August 2025 as per Delegated Regulation

[PSES] EU Cyber Resilience Act

I have heard rumors about August 01, 2025, from that date the EU Cyber Resilience Act is mandatory and part of the CE marking (for relevant RED/radio products) Is it correct rumors? BR Amund - This message is from the IEEE

[PSES] PSES presentation this Wednesday, 29 November

IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society SCV/SF/OEB Joint Chapter presents THIS WEDNESDAY: *"Regulatory Changes forAI/ML Devices and Cybersecurity"*(Co-hosted by the EMBS SCV Chapter and the EMBS

Re: [PSES] American Vs. European 30 Ground Fault Leakage Current Standards

Internationally, this type of protection is provided by a Residual Current Device. Application note from Eaton here that should be

Re: [PSES] American Vs. European 30 Ground Fault Leakage Current Standards

Thanks Richard, Looking UL-943 the voltage ranges outlined cap out at 120/240 VAC. Does anyone know if GFCI standards for higher voltages like 400/230 VAC exist? Best, Ronan From: Richard Nute Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 3:18 PM To: Ronan Shanley ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject:

[PSES] A high voltage Power Quality test?

Has anyone come across a Maximum HV Bus Voltage Impulse test before and how did they implement it? This test starts with a steady state at 850V then has a 1.5mSec Rise Time to 1200V and immediately drops 1.5mS Fall time back to 850V. The impulse being a triangular waveform. Trying to work out

Re: [PSES] American Vs. European 30 Ground Fault Leakage Current Standards

Hi Ronan: GFEP North America: https://www.eaton.com/us/en-us/skuPage.GFEP130.pdf GFEP Europe: https://library.e.abb.com/public/a9cd966c1794415d945b232fb2d7a9ee/1SXU430091 L0201_GFEP_Info_Tool.pdf According to: https://forums.mikeholt.com/threads/gfci-vs-gfep.116424/ "GFCI and

[PSES] American Vs. European 30 Ground Fault Leakage Current Standards

Hello Experts, Does anyone know if a GFEP breaker, that meets the USA standards, will meet the EU standard for human protection? If not, why is that? What is the difference between the USA and EU standards? Best, Ronan Shanley Automation Engineer SIO Electrical

Re: [PSES] 10m chambers in Colorado?

Thanks Ken,you are the master! The NTS facility is alive and well, just not advertising much! Colorado Brian -- Original Message -- From: Ken Wyatt To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] 10m chambers in Colorado? Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 14:54:26 -0700 As far as I

Re: [PSES] Very Small Product; Many Certification Marks

One of my wireless mice from 5-10 years ago had markings in its battery compartment.  On 11/15/2023 6:18 PM CST John Woodgate wrote:     I'm sure you will never get a definitive answer, and in any case it depends on whether

Re: [PSES] Very Small Product; Many Certification Marks

I'm sure you will never get a definitive answer, and in any case it depends on whether you look at the symbols in rows or columns. I would prioritize the Bluetooth logo and then US and European marks, assuming the product is for those markets. But if it needs the CE mark, that probably won't

[PSES] Very Small Product; Many Certification Marks

Hello all, I'm seeking guidance please on what the best practice is for handling a very small electronic product (a Bluetooth key fob) that holds many certifications. There simply isn't room on the body of the unit for all of the marks that apply. Is there an order of precedence that should be

[PSES] Has anyone done an FDA 2877 Declaration for a laser before?

I have been asked about the requirements for submitting an FDA 2877 DECLARATION FOR IMPORTED ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO RADIATION CONTROL STANDARDS, for a laser used as a light source for microscopy. The goal is to use the exemption under 21 CFR 1020.50 (a) 3, "Used by trained individuals

[PSES] Chapter presentation in November

Hello All - If you are interested in AI, cybersecurity or medical devices, then this presentation might be for you. IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society SCV/SF/OEB Joint Chapter presents: *Regulatory Changes for AI/ML Devices and Cybersecurity* (Co-hosted by the EMBS SCV Chapter and the EMBS

Re: [PSES] Class 1 appliance

Dear John, Thanks for your comments. I have some below results of further investigation to share with you. On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 at 22:22, John Woodgate wrote: > I put some comments below. > On 2023-11-06 14:08, Scott Xe wrote: > > Last week, we received a sample of an induction hob from a

Re: [PSES] The NPR news quiz

The message was meant for my kids. I don’t know how I sent it to PSES. Apologies. Rich From: Ken Javor Sent: Friday, November 10, 2023 4:03 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] The NPR news quiz I didn’t know the answer to a single question. I feel smarter than

Re: [PSES] The NPR news quiz

I didn’t know the answer to a single question. I feel smarter than if I had known any of the answers.  And I feel really smart not paying any attention to all of that. -- Ken Javor (256) 650-5261 From: Richard Nute Reply-To: Date: Friday, November 10, 2023 at 4:38 PM To: Subject:

Re: [PSES] The NPR news quiz

7/11. Good-ish On Fri, Nov 10, 2023, 5:38 PM Richard Nute wrote: > > *Final score: 5/11.* Lackluster. > > >

[PSES] The NPR news quiz

Final score: 5/11. Lackluster. https://www.npr.org/2023/11/10/1211700159/donald-trump-election-debate-gop-a nimals-npr-news-quiz?utm_source=npr_newsletter_medium=email_content= 20231110_term=9074533_campaign=news_id=61871060=151_at t1= -

Re: [PSES] 10m chambers in Colorado?

Hi Brian Call Bob Polverari at (720) 745-6024. Bob manages the Element Longmont Environments Lab. Bob should be able to get you the local Element EMC contact. Good luck! -Patrick On Wed, Nov 8, 2023, 13:54 Ken Wyatt wrote: > As far as I know, NTS is now the only 3rd party test lab in

[PSES] Seeking volunteers to join the IEEE PSES RATC (Risk Assessment Technical Committee)

Greetings fellow members, I am looking for any volunteers to join the IEEE PSES Risk Assessment Technical Committee. It would only take a few hours of your valuable time out of every month at most. One of the main functions of this Technical Committee is to promote activities in our field and

Re: [PSES] 10m chambers in Colorado?

As far as I know, NTS is now the only 3rd party test lab in Colorado with 10m chambers. Kenneth WyattWoodland Park, COSent from my iPhone.On Nov 8, 2023, at 14:25, Brian Gregory wrote:   Hello experts,   once upon a time, there were several 10m chambers in Colorado, 3-4 north of Denver that I

[PSES] 10m chambers in Colorado?

Hello experts, once upon a time, there were several 10m chambers in Colorado, 3-4 north of Denver that I knew about.The only one I know should still exist is at NTS in Longmont; the ones that were at Hp and StorageTek are long gone, I'm afraid. NTS is now owned by Element, with whom I've

Re: [PSES] EN 55011:2016 + A2:2021

On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 15:56:55 +0100, Amund Westin wrote: > I can’t find any reference to A2:2021 in any EMC Harmonized standard list. > > Does it mean we should not make any reference to in in the DoC? For Directive 2014/30/EU and similar directives/regulations, as it is also written in the

[PSES] EN 55011:2016 + A2:2021

I can’t find any reference to A2:2021 in any EMC Harmonized standard list. Does it mean we should not make any reference to in in the DoC? BR Amund - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society

Re: [PSES] Class 1 appliance

I put some comments below. On 2023-11-06 14:08, Scott Xe wrote: Last week, we received a sample of an induction hob from a supplier. The unit is fitted with a 3-core power card and does not have a class II symbol. The earthing core is terminated at a small copper pad on the printed circuit

[PSES] Class 1 appliance

Last week, we received a sample of an induction hob from a supplier. The unit is fitted with a 3-core power card and does not have a class II symbol. The earthing core is terminated at a small copper pad on the printed circuit board with a protective ground symbol (IEC 60417 - 5019) next to the

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

There is an article here on the new European safety law: https://digital.incompliancemag.com/issue/november-2023/ On 2023-11-02 10:24, Glyn Payne wrote: There is always the RoHS Directive that demands the CE Mark even if no other Directives apply. Glyn Payne *From:*John Woodgate *Sent:*

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

There is always the RoHS Directive that demands the CE Mark even if no other Directives apply. Glyn Payne From: John Woodgate Sent: 01 November 2023 20:20 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD) Somewhere in all the

Re: [PSES] SV: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Hi Amund, Apart from EMC, RoHS is likely to apply as well. If the product is out of scope of the LVD, that just means that you are out of the harmonized area but will still be in scope of the national safety regulations. In the end, your product will have to meet the corresponding product

[PSES] SV: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Thanks, Ted, I fully support your comments. BR Amund Fra: John Woodgate Sendt: 1. november 2023 20:01 Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Emne: Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD) Precisely. It's utter folly not to carry out, and document, appropriate

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

There are many directives that are not CE marking directives, including both the GPSD and GPSR. Other examples are WEEE and the energy/ecodesign requirements for products. For example, computers must comply with 617/2013, but the CE mark is not specified to show compliance. Many energy

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

I found that too, but isn’t the GPSD a “new approach” directive ? I am sure it must be; it was certainly published after 1985. By that criterion alone, it seems appropriate to apply the mark. From: John Mcbain Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 1:49 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Correct. Or more specifically - https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/single-market/ce-marking_en#:~:text=It%20is%20compulsory%20only%20for,origin%20of%20a%20product%20either . Best regards, John McBain On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 1:20 PM John Woodgate wrote: > Somewhere in all the Byzantine

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Somewhere in all the Byzantine rules, there is a ban on applying the CE mark if *no* Directive or Regulation that demands it applies to the product. On 2023-11-01 19:58, Ralph McDiarmid wrote: Furthermore, I have not found anything document which says that you cannot CE mark a product having a

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

What is meant by “safety information on the Declaration of Conformity”? A DofC contains a list of applicable EU directives and standards. I’ve never been asked to draft a DofC for signature with “safety information” in it. Furthermore, I have not found anything document which says that you

Re: [PSES] 2 simple questions on EMC

Hi BrianI have done a number of comparisons between 3 m and 10 m test distances at many labs. In almost every case below 100 MHz the 3 m case produces worst results. So it would be reasonable to assume that if you moved out to 10 m you would have a better passing margin. Additionally, I’d like to

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Precisely. It's utter folly not to carry out, and document, appropriate safety tests. On 2023-11-01 18:35, Ted Eckert wrote: Hello Amund, The GPSR is not a CE-marking Directive, and products that fall under the GPSR can be placed on the market without safety information on the Declaration

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Hello Amund, The GPSR is not a CE-marking Directive, and products that fall under the GPSR can be placed on the market without safety information on the Declaration of Conformity if they do not fall under any other Directive that requires a declaration for safety. However, that is only related

Re: [PSES] 2 simple questions on EMC

The EMC standard with which I am familiar (CISPR11, EN55022) are well written and provide examples of best practice setup and how to arrange excess cable length. I suggest going over the standard with the test technician at the EMC lab to better understand the requirement. If it were my

[PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EN 62368-1 : 2014

Great Boštjan ! Fra: Boštjan Glavič Sendt: 1. november 2023 15:10 Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Emne: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EN 62368-1 : 2014 Hello Amund 2 years is normal transition period. So once standard EN IEC 62368-1:2023 +A11 +A12 will be adopted as harmonised

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EN 62368-1 : 2014

Hello Amund 2 years is normal transition period. So once standard EN IEC 62368-1:2023 +A11 +A12 will be adopted as harmonised standard, there will be a transition period where both editions will be harmonised. Best regards Boštjan Poslano iz Outlook za Android

[PSES] SV: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EN 62368-1 : 2014

Thanks Boštjan Have I understood correctly, that EN62368-1:2014 will be valid for a minimum of 2 more years, whether EN62368-1:2023 will soon be approved & harmonized or not? BR Amund Fra: Boštjan Glavič Sendt: 1. november 2023 11:42 Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Emne: Re: [PSES]

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EN 62368-1 : 2014

Amund, TC108X responsible for EN IEC 62368-1 established WG6, to work on comments from HAS consultants (they do assessment of draft standards for EU commission). Currently comments received on CD/CDV version of EN IEC 62368-1:2023. We still wait for assessment of FDIS. However, WG6 prepared

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EN 62368-1 : 2014

Amund If a standard is listed in the OJ, it continues to provide a “presumption of conformity” even it has been “withdrawn” by the standards committee. The 2020 version of 62368-1 will not be listed in the OJ The 2023 version of 62368-1 was rejected by the EU Commission but it looks as

Re: [PSES] UL1007 vs VW-1 Flammability ratings

Morning Guys, Thank you for your replies This is the item in question – apologies If I am not permitted to post a link. https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/products/detail/mpd-memory-protection-devices/BH34AAW/1987384 The data sheet states : “Wire - 26 AWG, UL1007, CSA - TR-64, 300V,

Re: [PSES] SV: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Amund The difficult part is ensuring "which can't be bought or even used by consumers" - even if it is only sold or supplied on a B2B basis, is it the type of product and employee could take home with them for personal use or whilst "working from home". Most national legislation requires

[PSES] SV: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Thanks Ted, As I read your comments and take they into an example - . consider a professional electronic product, which can't be bought or even used by consumers, will not under any circumstances be covered by GPSD/GPSR. Right? And if product is low powered (not within LVD), then maybe only

[PSES] SV: [PSES] EN 62368-1 : 2014

Hi all Any news about the future standing for the EN62368-1 : 2014? My understanding is that EN62368-1 : 2020 is still not listed in OJ, even though it should replace EN62368-1 : 2014 in June 2024. In parallel, EN62368-1 : 2023 is still under work and what do we expect as a date to

Re: [PSES] UL1007 vs VW-1 Flammability ratings

Hi Steve, I think you meant UL 1007 Style wire and VW-1 flammability testing. This is common in USA, Most UL 1007 Style wire is duel rated to Style 1569 also. The UL standard for Appliance Wiring Material (AWM) is UL 758. “UL Standard 758 Appliance Wiring Materials was developed to consolidate

[PSES] 2 simple questions on EMC

Hi, 1. Our unit is passing by a whisker, under 1dB @ 30 Mhz in a 3m chamber against SubpartB requirements. Can we expect margin to improve in a 10m chamber? 2. It's lightly loaded in the chamber (10% of FL), we do expect the peak to squash down a bit with full load; they do when going from

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

Hello Amund, The GPSR has these definitions. I recommend you use them as the basis to determine if you are providing "consumer products" as covered by the scope of the GPSR. "'product' means any item, whether or not it is interconnected to other items, supplied or made available, whether

[PSES] General Product Safety Directive (GPSD)

General Product Safety Directive ... Do I interpret correct that GPSD only apply to consumer products? Not for any professional products? And the new General Product Safety Regulation (GPSR) do the same? BR Amund - This message

Re: [PSES] UL1007 vs VW-1 Flammability ratings

Hi Richard, EN62368-1 asks for Flammability of VW-1 But the manufacturers data sheet states UL1007 for the wiring I am trying to compare to see if they are equivalent or similar. Regards Steve Clarke Test Engineer Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Electrical Safety :

Re: [PSES] UL1007 vs VW-1 Flammability ratings

Hi Steve: VW-1 is roughly equivalent to V-1 except applies to wire. Richard Bend, Oregon From: Stephen Clarke [U3C] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 8:50 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] UL1007 vs VW-1 Flammability ratings Hello Experts I have a battery box

[PSES] UL1007 vs VW-1 Flammability ratings

Hello Experts I have a battery box that has wiring to UL1007. I can see that UL1007 has a vertical flame test requirement. How dose this compare with UL VW-1 ? Regards Steve Clarke Test Engineer Unit 3 Compliance Ltd EMC : Electrical Safety : Environmental & Vibration : CE &

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Wire insulation - Flammability - IEC/EN 62368-1

Hi Amund, Yes, load up to worst case and then measure after 3 seconds for worst case LOAD fault (6.2.2.2) and SOURCE fault (6.2.2.3) Load fault is simple. We do this with an electronic load with a progressively stepped constant current load. 5 second dwell time and keep going until power

Re: [PSES] NRTL label correction process?

Hi, Ken, The products are large and returning to factory for relabeling would be expensive. I'm trying to get a picture to confirm, but I believe it's a case of a wrong file/factory location number due to multiple factory locations (i.e. an additional factory was brought online and there was a

Re: [PSES] NRTL label correction process?

Hi Adam; Is the product small/light enough that it could be returned to the factory for relabelling? What exactly is wrong with the labels? You mentioned the ratings are correct. Is the NRTL logo or file number incorrect? Some parts of the label may be changed without a field marking exercise,

[PSES] SV: [PSES] Wire insulation - Flammability - IEC/EN 62368-1

Thanks James, As I understand you, the 15W limit must not be exceeded after a single fault (within 3 seconds). Right? BR Amund Fra: James Pawson (U3C) Sendt: 24. oktober 2023 10:41 Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Emne: Re: [PSES] Wire insulation - Flammability - IEC/EN 62368-1 Hi

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >