ulstandards.ul.com · Web view2020/12/02 · Blank IEC form (for information documents, etc.) According to sub clause 22.20 IEC 60335-1; Edition 5.2 2016-05; “22.20 Direct contact

61(Web/AG28)02g_V2

June 2020Revised 10 December 2020

INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE NO. 61SAFETY OF HOUSEHOLD AND SIMILAR ELECTRICAL APPLIANCES

Report from AG 28

Since the last meeting of TC 61, TC 61/AG28, responded to following enquiries:

Standard Clause(s) Reference

60335-1 7.14 HK01 CN02

60335-1 22.20 IR01

60335-1 30.1 CN01

60335-2-9 24.2 KR01

60335-2-14 20.2 IR02

60335-2-15 19.102 NL01

60335-2-23 24.1 NO01

60335-2-80 8.2 BR01

60335-2-80 22-102 LK01

These Enquiries and the draft responses are listed in Annex in the order of standards/Country.

You are requested to review the responses and either confirm or comment on them for final discussion and decision of the TC in the Webmeetings in October 2020.

The following shall be noted.

The answers provided are for the standards as written. The use made of these answers by the originators of the inquiry, and by others, is their own responsibility. No guarantee can be given that subsequent amendments of the standards will support the answers.

®

Annex to 61(2020Web/AG28)02g

Reference Date Provided to

HK-01 CN02 (Webmeetings 2020)

2019.12.11 AG 28

Standard Subclause(s) Keywords

IEC 60335-1Edition 5.2 2016-05

7.14 Signal words WARNING, CAUTION, DANGER – Contrasting colours

Question

I’m seeking clarity on the marking requirement as stated in clause 7.14 of IEC60335-1 A2:2016. Hope you can help me answer the following questions.

1. Is the last sentence “…stamped markings shall be either raised above or have a depth below the surface of at least 0,25 mm.” intended for the signal words WARNING, CAUTION, DANGER only or is it intended for all moulded-in markings including texts and symbols?

2. “Unless contrasting colours…” It is a common practice to use two different surface finishing to enhance visibility of moulded-in markings. For example, using glossy on font face while matte for background. Will this be considered “contrasting colours”? If the answer is yes, then the 0.25mm minimum height/depth requirement will not be required. See illustration below.

AG 28 Answer

1. The last sentence of 7.14 “…stamped markings shall be either raised above or have a depth below the surface of at least 0,25 mm” relates to all marking required by the standard.

2. The proposed solution is not acceptable. Contrast means obvious/significant difference between two or more elements, matt black versus glossy is not considered a contrast in colour.

TC 61 Decision

2



IR-01(Webmeetings 2020) 2020.01.08 AG 28


60335-1: Edition 5.2 22.20 Non-corrosive, non-hygroscopic and non-combustible

Question

According to sub clause 22.20 IEC 60335-1; Edition 5.2 2016-05; “22.20 Direct contact between live parts and thermal insulation shall be prevented unless such material is non-corrosive, non-hygroscopic and non-combustible. NOTE Glass-wool is an example of thermal insulation which is satisfactory for the purpose of this requirement. Non-impregnated slag-wool is an example of corrosive thermal insulation. Compliance is checked by inspection and, if necessary, by appropriate tests.” In your opinion, how do I check them? By what criteria should I be checked? There are some standards: ASTM C553: 2013, ISO 7345:1987, ISO 20393: 2007, EN ISO 1716, EN 13823, EN ISO 11925-2, BS EN 16724: 2015.But I don't know witch standard is suitable.

AG 28 Answer

None of the mentioned standards is specifically applicable to the overall verification of compliance with 22.20. Some of those standards may be used for the verification of the non-combustibility.

For the verification of compliance, reference can be made to the documentation supplied by the Manufacturer of the insulating material, which can also make reference to what stated in the note to 22.20 taking into account the use environment of the appliance.TC 61 Decision

3



CN-01_(Webmeetings 2020) 2020.5.24 IEC/TC61 AG28


IEC 60335-1:2016 Ed5.2 30.1 - Touch control - Support live part

Question

A touch control on a blender shown in Figure 1a, is operated by the finger touch on the surface of the touch panel/enclosure to “switch-on” the control (Figure 1b) like it is for no-button-cell phone screen, rather than a push-push button. The spring and electrode of touch control are not insulated from 220V mains, and are regarded as “live parts”.The original length of the spring before installation is 15mm, reduced to 10mm after the touch panel/enclosure is assembled (Figure 2).

Note: the length of the live spring is 10 mm after the end-product is assembled

Figure1a - touch control Figure1b - Fi

Note: the length of the live spring is 15 mm before it is assembled.

Figure2 touch control

4


Key 1:PCB board connected with the spring by soldering 2:live spring 3: live electrode connected with the spring by mechanical connection 4: touch panel/enclosure (accessed by user’s finger) F1: force applied by touch panel/enclosure

F2: force applied by the spring and electrode

Figure 3 - contruction of the touch control Question: as far as ball pressure test of the touch panel/enclosure according to clause 30.1 of IEC 60335-1is concerned, does the touch panel/enclosure “support” the electrode (live part) or just “touches” the electrode?

The key argue point is whether the touch panel/enclosure presses the electrode from top to bottom could be “regarded” as if the enclosure “supports” the electrode.

Opinion1: No, it is “contact” not “support”, it is the PCB board which “supports” the spring and electrode live parts, rather than the enclosure. The ball pressure test at 125 °C ± 2 °C, for parts supporting live parts is not applicable.

Opinion2: Yes. It is hard to understand how can a part “support” another part from top to bottom, however, just put the blender appliance up-side-down to imagine, see figure 4. It is obvius that the spring–electrode-live parts are supported by the PCB and touch panel/enclosure at the same time.If the enclosure is removed, the spring and electrode will not remain in original place and will move 5 mm. So ball pressure test at 125 °C ± 2 °C, for parts supporting live parts is applicable.

Figure 4 - force analysis (figure 3 up-side-down)

Which opinion is correct?

5


AG 28 Answer

It is considered that the touch panel/enclosure is supporting the live part.It shall be noted that "support" in this context is not limited to the effects of gravity, but is also applicable to the consistent and reliable placement and location of the live part within the appliance. Of the three options for determining whether a ball pressure test is required (external parts, support live parts, supplementary/reinforced insulation), it is the only option that addresses this context.

TC61 Decision

6



KR-01(Webmeetings 2020) 2019.11.06 AG 28


60335-1:2010+AMD1:2013+AMD2:2016

24.2 and 25.2 Means of connection to the supply mains – switches –automatic controls

Question

Explanation of the productOne product is the outdoor barbecue appliance and portable appliance. Another product is the rotary spit appliances and portable appliance. Each product works independently. (Each product has a power plug). But Barbecue appliance and rotary spit appliance can be used together. It is not assembled with screws and the like. Simply rotary spit is put on the barbecue appliance. Please refer to the pictures.

Barbecue Rotary spit

7


Clause 25.2 in IEC 60335-1 states

1st QuestionWhen barbecue appliance and rotary spit are used together, it seems that they have two means of connection to the supply mains. I cannot make a decision whether this product (barbecue appliance + rotary spit) is complied with clause 25.2 or not.

--------------------Clause 24.2 in IEC 60335-1 states

Appliance is fitted with RCD in flexible cord

8


RCD(PRCD) has functions: There is a temperature controlling device at the end of the power supply cord which enters the appliance and the RCD is installed in the power supply cord as shown in the photo.The reset button (I) and the test button (T) of the RCD are considered to check whether the RCD(Residual current device) is operating normally. For example, do not use the product if the test function fails (when the indicator light does not turn off).2nd QuestionThis appliance is fitted with PRCD in flexible cord. PRCD is tested by IEC 61540.I think it is not complied with clause 24.2 because it seems like switches or automatic controls, but I got a different opinion. It is not switches and controls. So it is complied with clause 24.2.Please give me your decision whether this product is complied with clause 24.2 or not. AG 28 Answer

1st QuestionThe submitted construction and mode of operation complies with 25.2 as each appliance is provided by its specific means of connection to the supply mains.

When performing the tests (e.g. 11, 13, 16, 19, etc.) care shall be taken on the reciprocal influence the two appliances have when working together.

2nd QuestionClause 24.2 prohibits PRCDs being fitted in flexible cords; please also see an enclosed response already confirmed by IEC TC 61 for a similar case.

TC 61 Decision

9

Temperature controlling

device



IR-02(Webmeetings 2020) 2020.03.05 AG 28


60335-2-14: Edition 5.2 20.2 Test probe – feed opening

Question

According to sub clause 20.2, IEC 60335-2-14; ED 5.2:

“The test probe is not applied to feed openings having a throat with the following dimensions:

– a height of at least 100 mm, measured from the upper edge of the cutting blade;

– an average of the maximum and minimum cross-sectional dimensions of the feed opening that does not exceed 65,5 mm;

– a maximum cross-sectional dimension of the feed opening that does not exceed 76 mm.”

What are the minimum and the maximum dimensions of cross-sectional in circle?

As you know, In terms of logic and mathematical rules, the shortest chord of a circle is any point on the circumference of that circle. Which means, the smallest chord having length as zero and, by other hand, Diameter of a circle is the longest or largest chord of that circle which again is infinite in no.

For this appliance we measured:

1. Highest 183 mm (approximate),2. Maximum cross-sectional dimension 75 mm (approximate) and minimum is 0, average is 37.5 mm (approximate),3. Maximum cross-sectional dimension 75 mm (approximate).

In your opinion No 2 is correct?

Some people disagree; they say in the circle, that the minimum and maximum cross-sections are the same.

In this case measurement changes to:

2. Maximum cross-sectional dimension 75 mm (approximate) and minimum is 75 mm (approximate) too, so average gets 75 mm (approximate).

If No one opinion is correct the appliance is pass and if No second opinion is correct it is fail.

10


11


Proposed answer

The second opinion is correct, but it is not appropriate to state that the opening does not comply. The correct statement would be that the test probe must be applied to this feed opening to determine compliance.

TC 61 Decision

12



NL-01 (Webmeetings 2020) 2020.05.13 AG 28


IEC 60335-2-15:2012 + A1:2016 + A2:2018

19.102 Self-resetting thermal cut-out

Question

Clause 19.102 which states the following:

The question is if the kettle that is subject to the 100 times test, shall be able to complete the 100 cycles or if it is acceptable that the appliance become defect (in a safe way) before the 100 cycles have been completed? We have been testing water kettles that during the 100 cycles test of 19.102 ceases to operate (the kettle becoming defect) but in a safe way (meaning the appliance meets 19.13 after the test of 19.102). The 100 cycles tests obviously aim to ensure the adequate and reliable operation of the TCO. From this perspective it seems important that the TCO is really tested for 100 cycles and not less than 100 cycles. However, the standard in many cases also allows the appliance to become defect if this happen in a safe way. Clause 19.1 (of part 1) states for instance:

AG 28 Answer

According to the requirements in 19. and to the overall analysis of the standard, it is considered that the TCO shall be able to complete the 100 cycles. The compliance criteria are given in 19.13.

The enquirer refers to the statement in clause 19.1 of part 1: “Unless otherwise stated, the tests are carried out until ..” and this is exactly what is done in clause 19.102 of part 2-15 where there is something “otherwise stated”, namely that the test is carried out 100 times.

Not completing the test for 100 times makes the test inconclusive. The aim of requiring the test to be carried out 100 times is to make a judgement on the reliability of the system to protect against an abnormal fault condition.TC 61 Decision

13



NO-01 (Webmeetings 2020) 2020.01.24 AG 28


IEC 60335-2-23: Edition 6.1 24.2 Swivel connection in flexible cord

Question

There are hairdryers on the market with a swivel connection in the flexible cord, as shown below.

It has been found that a separate certification of a supply cord with swivel connection was made back in 2009 ( acc. to 60335-1/60335-2-23), and it is assumed that products with this construction have been on the market since then.The swivel connection is placed in the cord close (approx. 20 cm) to the appliance, in order to be able to perform its intended function. Due to this placement the component will not be subjected to more severe mechanical impacts than the appliance itself (will not be stepped on) and will during testing of an appliance be subjected to the impact tests as for the appliance itself, i.e. spring hammer test and drop test of 21.101.

1. Is this construction acceptable with reference to 24.2 of IEC 60335-1:2010: edition 5.1?2. If yes to 1, is it acceptable with reference to IEC 60335-1: edition 5.2, which added “and the like” in

24.2? Or was this addition intended to cover any kind of component in the flexible cord?

AG 28 Answer

This is an acceptable construction. There are no additional safety issues related to this construction, in addition to those being present if the swivel was placed at the end of the appliance.

In addition:

if the intention was to cover any kind of component in the flexible cord the requirement of 24.2 should simply say so. It would then not be necessary to specify any specific components

the swivel shall comply to all specific requirements in 60335-1 and 60335-2-23.

by looking at 2-17 and 2-32, which accept switches and controls in the cord, there

14


are no additional mechanical requirements given, and it seems the main issue is to avoid contact with the floor

if the supply cord with a swivel 10cm from an end is replaced, the result would be complying construction because a swivel is not required

there is no known information from the market about problems with this construction, after at least 10 years of sale

It is considered that a revision/clarification of this requirement in the standard is needed. It should specify any additional mechanical requirements (if/when necessary) and possibly other changes necessary to cover components in the flexible cord.

TC 61 Decision

15



BR-01(Webmeetings 2020) 2019.12.09 AG 28


IEC 60335-2-80:2015 8.2 – 7.12 Contact with basic insulation in class II - disconnection

Question

AG 28 Answer

The appliance is not in compliance with 8.2. The requirement in 7.12 is an additional safety precaution, but it does not exempt the appliance to meet the requirement in 8.2 which must be satisfied by design and construction.

TC 61 Decision

16



LK-01(Webmeetings 2020) 2019.11.11 AG 28


IEC 60335-2-80:2015 22.102 Failure fixing device

Question

This refers to Clause 22.102 of IEC 60335-2-81:2015 IEC 60335-2-80. We are having a doubt whether a sample of Celling Fan shall comply all Clauses 22.102.1, 22.102.2, 22.102.3, 22.102.4 and 22.102.5 or if the sample comply any one of these clauses is good enough.

In our opinion there are three possible interpretations on how the requirements of 22.102 and relevant 22.102.1, 22.102.2, 22.102.3, 22.102.4 and 22.102.5 shall be applied:

Interpretation 1Ceiling Fan shall comply all five requirements specified in 22.102.1, 22.102.2, 22.102.3, 22.102.4 and 22.102.5 of IEC 60335-2-80.

Interpretation 2Ceiling Fan shall comply with one of the five requirements

Interpretation 3As stated in second paragraph of 22.102 of IEC 60335-2-80, test of 22.102.1, 22.102.2, 22.102.3,22.102.4 or 22.102.5, shall be performed as appropriate for the design, as follows: Design 1 (with safety wire and electrically disconnecting switch): shall comply with

22.102.1, 22.102.2 and 22.102.5. Design2 (with suspension system via a threaded down rod): shall comply with 22.102.3

and 22.102.5. Design 3 (constructed with additional through bolt): shall comply with 22.102.4 and

22.102.5.

It will be greatly appreciated if you could clarify the correct interpretation on Clause 22.102 of IEC 60335-2-80 as early as possible for proper implementation.AG 28 Answer

As indicated in the compliance clause of 22.102: Compliance is checked by the requirement and inspection or test of 22.102.1, 22.102.2, 22.102.3, 22.102.4 or 22.102.5, as appropriate for the design. After the test, the ceiling fan shall not be damaged to such an extent that compliance with Clause 8.1, 16.3, 29.1 and 29.2 are impaired.

It is clear that the fan has to be designed to guarantee, as defined in the standard to avoid “that a failure of the fixing device of the motor to the mounting rod could give rise to risk of injury to the user or surroundings…”.

It means that those tests from 22.102.1 to 22.102.5, applicable/relevant considering the specific design of the appliance under testing shall be performed.TC 61 Decision

17

Documents

ulstandards.ul.com · Web view2020/12/02 · Blank IEC form (for information documents, etc.) According to sub clause 22.20 IEC 60335-1; Edition 5.2 2016-05; “22.20 Direct contact