Return to the thumbnail page Display/hide file information See previous file See next file

LED status indicator lamp.

LED status indicator lamp.

Click to view full size image

LED status lamp. This is designed to be fitted inside a small prismatic lens to indicate the status of an industrial machine. In this case, the light comes on when a fault is detected. There are 4 white LED's, 2 main ones on each side and also a couple of smaller ones pointed to the side.

Can run on AC. Note the bridge rectifier.

DPP00000716.jpg DPP_4385.JPG DPP00000487.JPG DPP_3250.JPG

Light Information

Light Information

Manufacturer:Werma
Model Reference:258.644.001AB
Electrical
Voltage:24v DC or AC

File information

File information

Download: Download this File
Filename:DPP00000487.JPG
Album name:FrontSideBus / Solid state
Keywords:Lamps
File Size:2093 KB
Date added:Feb 02, 2015
Dimensions:1920 x 1280 pixels
Displayed:447 times
Date Time:2015:02:01 12:29:52
DateTime Original:2015:02:01 12:29:52
Exposure Bias:1 EV
Exposure Time:25/10 sec
FNumber:f 16
Flash:No Flash
Focal length:60 mm
ISO:100
Make:Canon
Model:Canon EOS 70D
Software:Digital Photo Professional
White Balance:0
URL:https://www.lighting-gallery.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-103916
Favorites:Add to Favorites
Comments
rjluna2
Sr. Member
****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery

Robert


GoL
View Profile Offline
Feb 02, 2015 at 06:14 AM Author: rjluna2
Looks like the board was tested via Underwriters Laboratories before it has been released to the public

Pretty, please no more Chinese failure.

Medved
Hero Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery

View Profile Offline
Feb 02, 2015 at 12:53 PM Author: Medved
@rjluna2: That means nothing, unless you have the protocol. They test just what you (as the manufacturer) specify to be tested (and according to which standard) and nothing else (yoo do not have to go through all the tests in that standard). And if those tests you specify to be tested pass, you may use the logo. So to legally use the logo is way sufficient to specify just those tests, where you do not expect any issues and just do not specify the others... Of course, the performed tests are listed in the test report, so if someone is careful and asks for that report before specifying your product, he may miss some test and so do not buy the product from you...

That's how the UL in the reality works...

No more selfballasted c***

FrontSideBus
Jr. Member
**
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery


View Profile Offline
Feb 02, 2015 at 01:08 PM Author: FrontSideBus
I don't think Allen-Bradley would skimp on components to be honest.

UK out of the EU!
http://www.lighting-gallery.net/gallery/index.php?cat=11271

rjluna2
Sr. Member
****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery

Robert


GoL
View Profile Offline
Feb 02, 2015 at 08:10 PM Author: rjluna2
I know about the Underwriter Laboratories because I used to work at that place for a while. If it doesn't measured up with their specification, the board will not earn the UL symbol here.

Pretty, please no more Chinese failure.

Medved
Hero Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery

View Profile Offline
Feb 03, 2015 at 12:59 PM Author: Medved
About which specification? When we want something tested by UL (our customers wanted that), the first the UL guys ask was which standard to use and which tests to perform. It was our responsibility to ask exact relevant tests, we were responsible for the completeness and relevance of the performed tests.
Part of the UL sign is the ID of the related test report, so you should be able to find it and see, what was tested, what was the exact result (not just "pass/fail") and what not.

By the way the report quality uses to be quite often quite a disaster there. Sometimes they are perfect, but frequently we had to urge UL to fix the problems there: Photos supposed to document the exact test setup show some competitors component on it (so clearly no genuine setup photos at all - so how to convince the customers the results are genuine and belong really to our part?), the exact part number not listed in the report (how can we then convince our customer the report is valid for the given part?), mess in chart numbering, sometimes not clear what result is supposed to be linked to which set of limits and many similar. It really looks like the work is done by students (that is nothing bad at all, they have to learn the standard procedures somewhere), but with severe lack of checking and supervision (that is the problem - such errors should have been caught by the supervisor and corrected way before it was released to us) We know the standard and know our product from our internal measurement, but to our customer it tells nothing at all. And they are really looking into the results in detail, just the "pass" is by far not enough for them (and frequently they even do not mind the "fail", if they understand the exact causes and judge those are not relevant for their use)...

No more selfballasted c***

© 2005-2021 Lighting-Gallery.net | Powered by: Coppermine Photo Gallery