Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] 160VDC G320
Posted by
Jon Elson
on 2002-01-12 17:32:36 UTC
Doug Harrison wrote:
isolation transformer would be good enough. If someone DID get
hurt with it, you could always show that he violated the warning
printed right on the case. If you are working with motion control
gear, you are already providing gear that could get someone hurt.
I agree, this litigious society is a terrible thing for innovation.
Jon
> > I have a 160VDC prototype of the G320 that I occasionally run for myReally, I think a stenciled warning on the case to not use without
> > own amusement and it works very well indeed. However our lawyers
> > warned us off from putting it in production for the previously
> > mentioned reasons. We pay them the big bucks to see problems I cannot
> > and they earned their money on that one.
> >
> > It disgusts me because it works so well (no xformer).
> >
> > Mariss
>
> Could you design it for 140VDC max with a self destruct feature to prevent
> someone from omitting the transformer?
isolation transformer would be good enough. If someone DID get
hurt with it, you could always show that he violated the warning
printed right on the case. If you are working with motion control
gear, you are already providing gear that could get someone hurt.
I agree, this litigious society is a terrible thing for innovation.
Jon
Discussion Thread
Doug Harrison
2002-01-12 08:42:19 UTC
[CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] 160VDC G320
Jon Elson
2002-01-12 17:32:36 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] 160VDC G320
ccs@m...
2002-01-12 20:42:23 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] 160VDC G320
Brian Pitt
2002-01-12 21:00:10 UTC
Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] 160VDC G320