Unfortunately, few of us have access to the C drive of your computer
Kind Regards, John
Metal enclosure with 3rd amendment.
- Thread starter ericmark
- Start date
Kind Regards, John
Sponsored Links
Whoops!
Try the first link on this page: http://www.beama.org.uk/en/publications/technical-bulletins.cfm
Try the first link on this page: http://www.beama.org.uk/en/publications/technical-bulletins.cfm
Whoops!
Try the first link on this page: http://www.beama.org.uk/en/publications/technical-bulletins.cfm[/QUOTE]
Thanks. Unfortunately, it tells us of the problem of which we are already aware:How on earth is this regulation going to be workable, let alone enforceable/policeable?
Kind Regards, John
It does deal with some of the other questions that arise though.
Sponsored Links
It does, and that's helpful - but is still leaves major uncertainties about what is required to satisfy the new regulation. As I've said, I can but hope that manufacturers will jump in and try to help - but if they cannot be sure of the intent of "non-combustible", I'm not sure that even they will necessarily know whether their products are compliant!
Had I realised this problem at DPC stage I would certainly have made some representations about it, but I naively assumed that "non-combustible" would/must be defined somewhere! As things are, isn't it an entirely unsatisfactory regulation?
Kind Regards, John
I submit that it cannot be a regulation.
It does not mandate ferrous metal, but it does not define non-combustible. If it does not require compliance with a European standard which does, then it has no meaning.
Nor will any claims from manufacturers of "AMD 3 compliance".
It does not mandate ferrous metal, but it does not define non-combustible. If it does not require compliance with a European standard which does, then it has no meaning.
Nor will any claims from manufacturers of "AMD 3 compliance".
But it does. It requires compliance with BS EN 61439-3. The IEC Working Group who wrote the standard from which the BS EN is derived (without technical change) felt that the hot wire test was adequate verification of non-combustibility.
The wording that follows the reference to the product standard is redundant.
Edit: corrected the standard number.
Even if it was unintentional, is that additional wording much worse than 'redundant' since it appears to implying something which you are saying is not true? One would not really expect "shall comply with BS EN 60439-3" and "shall comply with BS EN 60439-3 and shall have their enclosure manufactured from non-combustible material" to have the same meaning. You may well be right in what you're saying about 'intent' but the regulation, as written, certainly appears to be requiring something that goes beyond compliance with 60493-1.
Kind Regards, John
I would agree that it seems that way to the ill-informed!
You're being pretty defensive - "ill-informed" and "not having a crystal ball" are not really the same thing! It just seems dreadful wording to me. I can see only two ways of interpreting - if you are right in saying that those additional words are 'redundant', then the wording is dreadful for strongly implying that the regulation is requiring something beyond 60439-3 compliance. If you are wrong, and the intention was to require something beyond 60439-compliance, then the reg is even more dreadful, for not defining/indicating what that 'something' is!
Any idea when the next DPC (for Amd4 or '18th edition') will be showing it's face
Kind Regards, John
Very, very soon, I hope.
Anyway - if the "and ..." clause can be ignored, then there will be no problem identifying CUs which may be used - they will be the ones which state compliance with BS EN 61439-3.
Anyway - if the "and ..." clause can be ignored, then there will be no problem identifying CUs which may be used - they will be the ones which state compliance with BS EN 61439-3.
Indeed so - although I rather doubt that will b the case!Very, very soon, I hope.
Indeed so - and if that's what they meant/intended, it would have been so so simple (and so so much better) for them simply have written that in the regulation!
Kind Regards, John
No, I have no more knowledge of that than any other member of the public.Any idea when the next DPC (for Amd4 or '18th edition') will be showing it's face
Do you have any idea as to when 'any other member of the public' might expect the next DPC to appear?No, I have no more knowledge of that than any other member of the public.Any idea when the next DPC (for Amd4 or '18th edition') will be showing it's face
Kind Regards, John
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
