cmk1991 发表于 2016-11-5 09:30

灯的驱动有认证

二类灯具驱动有认证，报告是按照class II还是class III来写呢？一类灯具驱动有认证，报告是按照class I还是class III来写呢？

Nezof 发表于 2016-11-5 10:36

问题都没说清楚啊

liu3404139 发表于 2016-11-5 12:23

一般来说都是要做为一个整体来做认证，不分开。

amylin 发表于 2016-11-5 15:47

可分离的驱动按照Class III来申请的

cmk1991 发表于 2016-11-5 15:57

amylin 发表于 2016-11-5 15:47 static/image/common/back.gif
可分离的驱动按照Class III来申请的

要用工具拆除的驱动（驱动有认证的）呢？

YLXC_YHL 发表于 2016-11-5 18:44

cmk1991 发表于 2016-11-5 15:57 static/image/common/back.gif
要用工具拆除的驱动（驱动有认证的）呢？

那就是按照一类的来了。

Mark.Li 发表于 2016-11-6 22:12

amylin 发表于 2016-11-5 15:47 static/image/common/back.gif
可分离的驱动按照Class III来申请的

目前除了SAA，可分离的按 Class II 来做。

amylin 发表于 2016-11-7 09:36

Mark.Li 发表于 2016-11-6 22:12 static/image/common/back.gif
目前除了SAA，可分离的按 Class II 来做。

jsspace 发表于 2016-11-9 10:08

请参考DSH0826决议：

Question
How a product should be marked and/or classified when it consists of a set of:
1. An independent control gear (Class I or Class II) with SELV output
and
2. A luminaire (one or more) which is detachable from the control gear (by hand)?

Decision
- The independent control gear shall be classified as Class I or Class II;
- The luminaire shall be marked as Class III;
- The whole product may be marked as Class I or Class II on the package. Another way is to mark the
package with the rated voltages of the control gear and the luminaire. Class III marking on the
package may be misleading, and if applied alone, the marking will be incorrect;
- The control gear shall be tested according to Class I or Class II and the luminaire according to Class
III.

页: [1]
查看完整版本: 灯的驱动有认证