Need comply with

One questione need one who can help me to confirm:
we have one itme energy saving ligthing product,It was used PLC 10w and equiped with a ballast,it means the product its temp will very lower at its shade position,( this is floor lamp its height 1.8M),when i do bleow simple test to check its resistance to fire :
i used the igniter to lit the plastic shade and found the shade continuosely burned.
From EN 60598-1 says the non-metalic parts contain current parts or protect elctric shock then need comply with"resistance to fire" but this shade it looks NOT act as above two functions.
And from EN 60335-1 it was diffrently said as EN 60598 it was said if it was non-metal parts should compy with "resistance to fire"
i am think this shade parts need comply with "resistance to fire".how do all of you think???????

全部回復(22)

只看樓主

正序查看

倒序查看

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-12 18:11

have to need need comply with "resistance to fire"!!

see the standard iec60598-2-22 22.15

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-12 22:14

@terry.feng

havetoneedneedcomplywith"resistancetofire"!!seethestandardiec60598-2-2222.15

iec 60598-2-22 is for emergency lighting product.
but my product is a floor lamp (energy saving product)?
so its shade is Ok if failed for "resistance to fire"?
Thanks

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-13 09:43

@superjohnyao

iec60598-2-22isforemergencylightingproduct.butmyproductisafloorlamp(energysavingproduct)?soitsshadeisOkiffailedfor"resistancetofire"?Thanks

can you upload the product's photo?

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-13 12:31

@terry.feng

canyouuploadtheproduct'sphoto?

unfortunately i have not take this images .
in simple words. the lamp shade was upward and inside just have a energy saving bulb with lampholder ( the dia for lamp shade was 260mm)

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-13 12:58

@superjohnyao

unfortunatelyihavenottakethisimages.insimplewords.thelampshadewasupwardandinsidejusthaveaenergysavingbulbwithlampholder(thediaforlampshadewas260mm)

i see.
the lamp shade like a chimney,isn't it?
i think this part no want to comply.
this is my idea..

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-13 20:32

@terry.feng

isee.thelampshadelikeachimney,isn'tit?ithinkthispartnowanttocomply.thisismyidea..

Thanks a lot.
yes.from IEC 60598-1, It seems ok.
i am not understand why IEC 60335-1 was strict than iec 60598-1 for this "resistance to fire" issue.
as you know iec 60335-1 sais "all non-metalic enclosure need resistance to fire.........."

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-13 22:37

@superjohnyao

Thanksalot.yes.fromIEC60598-1,Itseemsok.iamnotunderstandwhyIEC60335-1wasstrictthaniec60598-1forthis"resistancetofire"issue.asyouknowiec60335-1sais"allnon-metalicenclosureneedresistancetofire.........."

其實598是有很多不足或嚴謹的地方,這是行業內公認的,不然會有這么多CTL決議啊,但耐火這條我個人認為并不是比335不嚴謹,598只是根據不同燈具產品有相應的不同要求,應急燈就是一個好例子.有些燈的燈罩作用偏向于一個裝飾物,不必符合耐火試驗,反而我覺得它這點比家電標準靈活點.

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-13 22:49

@terry.feng

謝謝,假如燈頭外的塑膠部分要耐火嗎?它是用來SUPPORT 燈罩的,叫燈杯.我個人認為要.

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-13 22:52

@superjohnyao

謝謝,假如燈頭外的塑膠部分要耐火嗎?它是用來SUPPORT燈罩的,叫燈杯.我個人認為要.

THANKS.YOU ARE STILL ONLINE?

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-13 22:53

@superjohnyao

謝謝,假如燈頭外的塑膠部分要耐火嗎?它是用來SUPPORT燈罩的,叫燈杯.我個人認為要.

這個不是用598考究啦,燈座應該有相應的標準考究它,參閱相關的燈座標準.

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-13 22:56

@terry.feng

這個不是用598考究啦,燈座應該有相應的標準考究它,參閱相關的燈座標準.

I WILL ATTACHED THE IMAGES TO SHOW THE PLASTIC PARTS.
I AM NOT SAYING THE LAMPHOLDER.
THANKS

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-13 22:59

@superjohnyao

IWILLATTACHEDTHEIMAGESTOSHOWTHEPLASTICPARTS.IAMNOTSAYINGTHELAMPHOLDER.THANKS

let me see see.

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-13 23:04

@superjohnyao

IWILLATTACHEDTHEIMAGESTOSHOWTHEPLASTICPARTS.IAMNOTSAYINGTHELAMPHOLDER.THANKS

Self—ballasted lamps ?

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-13 23:16

@terry.feng

Self—ballastedlamps?

IT WAS A ENERGY SAVING BULB WITH BALLAST

回復

yuz318

LV.1

2006-02-14 09:47

其實要看好多問題的.例如燈座部件本身符不符合2類要求?不符合的話,沒有了燈罩,手指會不會碰到,碰到的話就是說燈罩是防觸電了,因此就要做GLOW-WIRE了,反之,則不用.但是,見IEC/EN 60598-1 clause 4.15,也有提到,不起絕緣的燈罩也可能要“resistance to fire". 這是本人意見,有錯的,請多多提點.

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-14 10:09

@yuz318

其實要看好多問題的.例如燈座部件本身符不符合2類要求?不符合的話,沒有了燈罩,手指會不會碰到,碰到的話就是說燈罩是防觸電了,因此就要做GLOW-WIRE了,反之,則不用.但是,見IEC/EN60598-1clause4.15,也有提到,不起絕緣的燈罩也可能要“resistancetofire".這是本人意見,有錯的,請多多提點.

是啊!最主要是看著樣品才能判定準確.

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-14 12:43

@terry.feng

是啊!最主要是看著樣品才能判定準確.

1139892138.doc
這是燈罩和燈杯的位置

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-14 13:03

@superjohnyao

1139892138.doc這是燈罩和燈杯的位置

是2類燈具吧?要看燈杯是否與一些電原線的基本絕緣觸及,若是碰到基本絕緣物件的話就要做650灼熱絲,還要進行耐熱試驗75或相應的溫升+25度——————個人理解標準的看法.
我想問問你起初是否做ul產品的?

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-14 13:24

@terry.feng

是2類產品.歐洲市場,燈杯里面是燈頭.

回復

superjohnyao

LV.2

2006-02-14 13:37

@terry.feng

Terry.feng:
謝謝你的評論.我當時就放貨了.因為我發現這兩部分都不是IEC60598-1 說的"起防護觸電,里面含有帶電體的非鐵部件".而且節能燈溫度很低,這兩部分不可能由于產品短路而起火.
我懷疑是因為我發現IEC 60335-1 里面說的"非鐵部件外殼要RESISTANCE TO FIRE" 而且UL 產品好象也有次要求.所以我想是不是要求產品外殼防火不但是可以防止產品短路而起火和如果產品周圍起火的話也可以防止燃燒到產品本身.因而可以防止燃燒到電氣等以降低災害的蔓延?我個人看法

回復

terry.feng

LV.5

2006-02-14 13:49

@superjohnyao

Terry.feng:謝謝你的評論.我當時就放貨了.因為我發現這兩部分都不是IEC60598-1說的"起防護觸電,里面含有帶電體的非鐵部件".而且節能燈溫度很低,這兩部分不可能由于產品短路而起火.我懷疑是因為我發現IEC60335-1里面說的"非鐵部件外殼要RESISTANCETOFIRE"而且UL產品好象也有次要求.所以我想是不是要求產品外殼防火不但是可以防止產品短路而起火和如果產品周圍起火的話也可以防止燃燒到產品本身.因而可以防止燃燒到電氣等以降低災害的蔓延?我個人看法

如你所說那就不用進行這方面的測試啦

回復