Searching \ for '[OT]: agency approval for battery device?' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: techref.massmind.org/techref/power/batterys.htm?key=battery
Search entire site for: 'agency approval for battery device?'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]: agency approval for battery device?'
2006\01\30@160652 by alan smith

picon face
If a device is battery operated, low clock frequency (under 1Mhz I think) are there any agency approvals that are really required?  I've seen some products marked UL even tho they are battery powered.  Yes, this would be a consumer device as well.


               
---------------------------------

What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos

2006\01\30@161415 by David VanHorn

picon face
On 1/30/06, alan smith <spam_OUTmicro_eng2TakeThisOuTspamyahoo.com> wrote:
>
> If a device is battery operated, low clock frequency (under 1Mhz I think)
> are there any agency approvals that are really required?  I've seen some
> products marked UL even tho they are battery powered.  Yes, this would be a
> consumer device as well.


If I remember right, the clock frequency limit for part 15, is something
like 9kHz, with an exemption for digital watches at 32.7 kHz.

2006\01\30@163027 by Harold Hallikainen

face picon face
Looks like battery operated devices operating at less than 1.705MHz are
exempt. See http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2006/15/103/

Harold


{Quote hidden}

> -

2006\01\30@174151 by Marcel duchamp

picon face
Harold Hallikainen wrote:
> Looks like battery operated devices operating at less than 1.705MHz are
> exempt. See www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2006/15/103/
>
> Harold
>
Even if it puts out 1KW of RF?

That was a joke but there must be more to it than just Fo and battery
operated... no?

2006\01\30@180037 by David VanHorn

picon face
>
>
> Even if it puts out 1KW of RF?
>
> That was a joke but there must be more to it than just Fo and battery
> operated... no?


Intentional emitters are different.

2006\01\30@181216 by Paul Hutchinson

picon face
> -----Original Message-----
> From: piclist-bouncesspamKILLspammit.edu On Behalf Of Marcel duchamp
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 5:36 PM
>
> Harold Hallikainen wrote:
> > Looks like battery operated devices operating at less than 1.705MHz are
> > exempt. See www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2006/15/103/
> >
> > Harold
> >
> Even if it puts out 1KW of RF?
>
> That was a joke but there must be more to it than just Fo and battery
> operated... no?

Yes there is more, the device can not intentionally radiate any RF and there
can not be any way to operate it while connected to AC power.

Paul

2006\01\30@181305 by alan smith

picon face
Sort of brings up something else.  OK, say you design a battery power widget and hang a RF transmitter (akin low power still....) that is FCC approved, do you then have to get the product approved as a whole?

Marcel duchamp <.....marcel.duchampKILLspamspam.....sbcglobal.net> wrote:  Harold Hallikainen wrote:
> Looks like battery operated devices operating at less than 1.705MHz are
> exempt. See www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2006/15/103/
>
> Harold
>
Even if it puts out 1KW of RF?

That was a joke but there must be more to it than just Fo and battery
operated... no?

2006\01\31@050511 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
alan smith wrote:

>If a device is battery operated, low clock frequency (under 1Mhz I think) are there any agency approvals that are really required?  I've seen some products marked UL even tho they are battery powered.  Yes, this would be a consumer device as well.
>
>
>                
>---------------------------------
>
> What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos
>  
>
If it has a clock that will radiate, it needs Part 15 testing. But NOT
UL, as long as the
highest possible current (short) is less than 8A.

--Bob

--
Note: To protect our network,
attachments must be sent to
EraseMEattachspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTengineer.cotse.net .
1-520-850-1673 USA/Canada
http://beam.to/azengineer

2006\01\31@151355 by Peter Todd

picon face
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 03:05:12AM -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:

You know, all this talk about UL makes me wonder... At what point should
I start worrying about this sort of stuff? I mean, right now I make
things, that get sold, in quantities of one or two, to people that I
personally know. Mostly they are powered by off the shelf AC adapters,
but sometimes I build my own power supplies for odd requierments. (5V,
40A...)

Are there volume or market requierments before you really should
consider getting stuff UL listed?

{Quote hidden}

> --

2006\01\31@165334 by alan smith

picon face
UL or TUV, now actually NRTL (deregulation) ensures that a device has been tested for certain safety standards.  Creepage, clearance of voltages between conducting elements (traces, wires, etc) are tested, as well as the ability not to cause harmfull damage( shock, fire, etc) to a user in the course of normal operation.  It gives a confidence to a user that under normal usage, this device is safe.
 
 And if your product does cause harmfull damage, it *helps* in a lawsuit, but of course does not give a protection from being sued.  If the user is found to have misused, and the device under question has been tested to be safe when properly used, it helps.
 
 On the other hand, I also have helped develop products under contract, that has never been NRTL tested, and are being sold by the hundreds if not thousands.  Its not cheap to get thru testing, as the product is tested, documented and the manufacturer process is also gone thru, including the tracability of components.  And each year, you get to enjoy renewing the registration.  I just saw a bill for one product family, and it was $1500 for two devices in the family.
 
 I orignally posted the question about battery operated devices, as all the products that I have worked on have been AC powered, in one form or another.

Peter Todd <@spam@peteKILLspamspampetertodd.ca> wrote:
 On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 03:05:12AM -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:

You know, all this talk about UL makes me wonder... At what point should
I start worrying about this sort of stuff? I mean, right now I make
things, that get sold, in quantities of one or two, to people that I
personally know. Mostly they are powered by off the shelf AC adapters,
but sometimes I build my own power supplies for odd requierments. (5V,
40A...)

Are there volume or market requierments before you really should
consider getting stuff UL listed?

{Quote hidden}

> --

2006\01\31@173930 by Peter Todd

picon face
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 01:53:34PM -0800, alan smith wrote:
> UL or TUV, now actually NRTL (deregulation) ensures that a device has been tested for certain safety standards.  Creepage, clearance of voltages between conducting elements (traces, wires, etc) are tested, as well as the ability not to cause harmfull damage( shock, fire, etc) to a user in the course of normal operation.  It gives a confidence to a user that under normal usage, this device is safe.
>    
>   And if your product does cause harmfull damage, it *helps* in a lawsuit, but of course does not give a protection from being sued.  If the user is found to have misused, and the device under question has been tested to be safe when properly used, it helps.
>    
>   On the other hand, I also have helped develop products under contract, that has never been NRTL tested, and are being sold by the hundreds if not thousands.  Its not cheap to get thru testing, as the product is tested, documented and the manufacturer process is also gone thru, including the tracability of components.  And each year, you get to enjoy renewing the registration.  I just saw a bill for one product family, and it was $1500 for two devices in the family.
>    
>   I orignally posted the question about battery operated devices, as all the products that I have worked on have been AC powered, in one form or another.

Yuck, very expensive alright. But from the sounds of it, NRTL listing
isn't so much a legal thing in the sense of "don't do this and you go to
jail" as in "when someone sues you it'll be a little easier to defend"

My budgets are so small that if someone sues me I'm totally !@#$ed no
matter what so...

--
RemoveMEpeteTakeThisOuTspampetertodd.ca http://www.petertodd.ca

2006\01\31@181807 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
I've consulted for a few big companies, and I've seen how important it is.

One of my clients makes a gadget that allows the customer to virtually
"sign"
their receipt during a financial transaction. I was there when a lady
from Chicago
insisted that she was electrically "shocked" by the pen portion of the
device.
Working with my client's lawyers, it made my job very simple when I was able
to show how impossible that was, and could generate a rebuttal deposition
based on their UL approval of the product. The lawsuit was bogus- and
everybody
knew it- but juries hold UL/CE in very high regard, and facing that, the
lady
decided to take her lawsuit elsewhere.

On the other hand, I was at the Comdex trade show about 12 years ago
when the
FCC went down the  aisles fining companies who were selling PC peripherals
without FCC  Compliance Stickers. The FCC can be BAD NEWS.

The problem is that the specs and the applicable designs change almost
daily.
You have to keep up.

--Bob

Peter Todd wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
Note: To protect our network,
attachments must be sent to
spamBeGoneattachspamBeGonespamengineer.cotse.net .
1-520-850-1673 USA/Canada
http://beam.to/azengineer

2006\01\31@212150 by Peter Todd

picon face
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 04:18:07PM -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:
> I've consulted for a few big companies, and I've seen how important it is.
>
> One of my clients makes a gadget that allows the customer to virtually
> "sign"
> their receipt during a financial transaction. I was there when a lady
> from Chicago
> insisted that she was electrically "shocked" by the pen portion of the
> device.
> Working with my client's lawyers, it made my job very simple when I was able
> to show how impossible that was, and could generate a rebuttal deposition
> based on their UL approval of the product. The lawsuit was bogus- and
> everybody
> knew it- but juries hold UL/CE in very high regard, and facing that, the
> lady
> decided to take her lawsuit elsewhere.

Very scary alright.

> On the other hand, I was at the Comdex trade show about 12 years ago
> when the
> FCC went down the  aisles fining companies who were selling PC peripherals
> without FCC  Compliance Stickers. The FCC can be BAD NEWS.

Definetely, and I'm already pretty sure some of my art would fail FCC
tests. My 8^2 Automaton has 64 stepper motors and pic chips in it,
totally unshielded, with dozens of feet of equally unshielded wire
connecting up the i2c interface... Also add in an equal number of feet
of power runs, using a total of 40A max...

So under what circumstances must a product be FCC complient? Are there
minimum volume/sales exemptions of an kind?

> The problem is that the specs and the applicable designs change almost
> daily.
> You have to keep up.

Sounds expensive overall, a big fixed cost for a very small operation
like me.

Might explain why I've *never* heard of anyone making UL certified
electronic art, no matter how big the budgets were... :)

--
TakeThisOuTpeteEraseMEspamspam_OUTpetertodd.ca http://www.petertodd.ca


'[OT]: agency approval for battery device?'
2006\02\01@024016 by Bob Axtell
face picon face
Peter Todd wrote:

<respectful snip>

>
>So under what circumstances must a product be FCC complient? Are there
>minimum volume/sales exemptions of an kind?
>
>  
>
What falls under the compliance requirement is spelled out under the FCC
website
(or used to be). Certain equipment is exempt, such as some medical
equipment, test
equipment, and yes - even certain commercial motor controllers.

Yes, it makes it hard on the little guy. But we can't have somebody's
widget interfering
with airplane approach beacons, can we? That's EXACTLY what it is for.
That's what
the FCC does.

--Bob

--
Note: To protect our network,
attachments must be sent to
RemoveMEattachspamTakeThisOuTengineer.cotse.net .
1-520-850-1673 USA/Canada
http://beam.to/azengineer

2006\02\02@001415 by Peter Todd

picon face
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:40:15AM -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Thanks, I've heard some bad examples of stuff like that happening
myself.

Sounds like my best bet would be to follow the guidelines of the FCC
(well actually it's Canadian equivilent) as much as possible, do some
research into what those exemptions are, (art! I hope) and if needed,
pay for testing as a last resort.

Thanks for you help and advice.

--
peteEraseMEspam.....petertodd.ca http://www.petertodd.ca

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006 , 2007 only
- Today
- New search...