Safety Compliance for Electronic/Electrical Industrial Equipment in Singapore

[Eng8492]

We are making a piece of equipment that will be certified to UL-610101-1 for North America. We also want to sell it Singapore.

We cannot find any Singaporean rules with the same purpose as the low-voltage directive or machinery directive for EU. We have only found they require an SG product safety mark for consumer goods.

Anybody have any knowledge of Singapore Compliance Requirements?

 

[mcgyvr]

Your NRTL sales person/project manager should be able to tell you exactly whats needed.
Heck they ALWAYS ask us what countries we want to sell our products in and automatically take care of adding all that into the quote and ensuring we get whatever compliance is needed.

 

[zappedagain]

SGS is one of the NRTLs in North America. They can test against the UL 61010-1 standard and give you an SGS mark for North America too.

Note that UL/IEC 61010-1 2nd edition is invalid as of October. You'll need UL/IEC 61010-1 3rd edition after that.

Z

 

[Eng8492]

Thanks for the info guys.

Here is my problem. Our NRTL wants to sell us on IEC-61010-1. He put it right in the quote. However, as far as I know, there is no Singaporean law that requires IEC-61010-1. THe NRTL guy wont tell us whether or not this is required in Singapore. In fact, the NRTL guy wont even put in writing whether we need FCC Part 15 or not for the US.

Maybe we should be looking for a new NRTL....

In any event, we are sending someone over in Singapore to the Ministry to get an answer. We sure can't get a straight answer out of our NRTL.

 

[zappedagain]

You might fall under FCC 18 instead.

 

[DRWeig]

For FCC in the US, the Part 15 (and others) are mighty easy to read and make your own decision...

http://transition.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules/

As for which standards apply in Singapore: NRTLs are testing labs. They aren't charged with deciding which standards apply to a given product for a given country. That is the design engineer's job. Often, the NRTL will give you a hint, though.

If this were my project, I'd be on the phone with someone knowledgeable in Singapore.

Best to you,

Goober Dave

Haven't see the forum policies? Do so now: Forum Policies

 

[Eng8492]

Sure, Part 15 is easy is read (just like any EN-61000-* document (lol)) , but the section detailing exemptions can offer an unlimited amount of ambiguity. If you think they are straightfoward, then you may never have faced an ambiguous situation.

Part 15 is just an excerpt from CFR, which are laws, which are interpreted by lawyers, although hopefully no one has to end with a lawyer.

See

http://www.emcrules.com/2012/03/fcc-updates-answer-for-exempt.htm

for an example of ambiguity that required FCC action.

Another consideration is cost. $2500 for a day of testing at a facility does not need as much consideration as $20,000 for a large piece of equipment that must be measured in situ in 3 representative configurations.

A wise design engineer does not utter anything when a certified testing body cannot even make a firm determination. One strategy is to locate a firm who will give a written opinion (at least one exists near Buffalo, NY), and another strategy is to examine to examine the risks present for each choice.

 

[Eng8492]

http://www.emcrules.com/2012/03/fcc-updates-answer-for-exempt.html

should be the correct link

 

[DRWeig]

We'll agree to disagree on this one, Eng8492. Two folks, two opinions -- who'd a thunk it?

I stand by my opinion --

1) NRTLs are test labs, nothing more. They are not charged with determining what standards apply; they are only charged with testing to the standards that their client requests.

2) I have had ambiguous situations to deal with regarding FCC and a couple of UL standards in the past. It was my job, as the company's chief engineer, to make the determinations. I'm aware of the external interpretations of the written codes and regulations like the FCC Appliance rule you posted. It's my job to ferret them out, do the research, and come to a conclusion. Years ago when I first saw the appliance exception, my first question was, "What constitutes and appliance?" So I dealt with it.

The same thing happened often when I would design power and lighting for construction. As the specifier, I had to call out the appropriate standards for the equipment on the job. Once in a great while, there were conflicts. It was up to me to make the call, though -- and to take the heat if I messed up. If I couldn't get off the fence, I'd go straight to the person who would be making the end judgement (local authority having jurisdiction) and explain my dilemma.

Sorry, but I've been doing this nigh on 30 years. The folks at UL will often give a hint or a suggestion to save me time (METLAB was good about that too). I've never bothered to ask them for a decision, though.

I would still suggest finding the authority in Singapore whose job is to accept or reject certifications. His or her answer would be the only one that is definitive beyond doubt.

Best to you,

Goober Dave

Haven't see the forum policies? Do so now: Forum Policies

 

[Eng8492]

Well if you go back up a few threads you can see we are doing a bit more than you are advising. Nonetheless, if you cannot count on your certified test lab for expertise and the stakes are high, its best to find another that will give a written opinion like we did. Really, what would you think of a test lab who wouldn't even tell you that you need CE for Europe? Having to do all that research means alot of new products aren't getting designed.

Words mean things... "taking the heat" could mean anything from losing a key customer (or all your customers), creating defective medical products and setting yourself up for a recall, letting your competitors eat your lunch, or just getting a product tested belatedly and writing a letter. I prefer to use experts whenever there are serious consequences.