Home > Technology Center > Engineering Committees > JT-32 Committee > Minutes

Minutes of JT-32 Committee on Electron Tube Safety
January 29, 2002
Chaparral Suites, Scottsdale, AZ

1.0 COMMITTEE ORGANIZATION AND MEMBERSHIP

1.1 Agenda Additions, Changes and Priorities
No changes were made to the proposed agenda.

1.2 Membership Changes
The membership roster was circulated for corrections and updates. This will be used to update the ECA database.
The committee felt that ECA staff should contact Mr. Jeff Johnson to find out who should represent the tube group of Philips our of Ann Arbor, Michigan for committees JT-6, JT-32, and JT-31.
Changes are to be made to the Schott membership representative is now Robert Taylor

1.3 Approval of Meeting No. 77 Minutes
The meeting minutes of 21 September 2001 were approved with the following editorial: paragraph 1.3.1 change 0 June 2001 to 06 June 2001.

1.4 Correspondence
None since the last meeting

1.5 EDSC
The Electronic Display Standards Council (EDSC) has not met for quite a while. The suggestion was made that it should consider meeting at the next meeting of JT-6 and JT-32 this fall at Corning, NY.

1.6 Other Committee Coordination
JT-6 continues to meet in conjunction with JT-32. JT-31 has not met since June 2001. The next meeting is scheduled to be in conjunction with the SIDs show in Boston in May, 2002.

2.0 International Safety Standards

2.1 IEC 61965 Impact Testing Standard Status
The IEC 61965 standard has been approved internationally.
The US is now studying the document to see how the 5 second glass throw requirement can be implemented.

There is also an issue with regard to the doming or recovery rate. UL has stated that if the rate changes, then the company should test again. With this interpretation, there would appear to be a requirement to measure doming with every new product retest. Doming is very small on a flat screen, about 2-3 mils.

The missile has a dimensional error in the document; length dimensioning.
There also arose a question about both UL and CSA. Could there be one mark? One member stated that his company was extremely concerned about the issue. Outside factories will test with one agency or another and during the transition to this new revision of the standard, the previous mutual recognition agreement between UL and CSA is now apparently in disarray. The question was raised as to whether TV set manufacturers would consider accepting alternative independent test certification laboratories? It was mentioned that CSA now recommends the CSA CB scheme using manufacturers in house testing without witness.

Under definitions, the term "devacuate" compared to the test use of the word are different. This needs to be clarified.

Regarding the ball, the suspension means is to be a certain percentage of the impact object causes problems.

In summary, any new testing will be tested to the new revision only if you request. If a manufacturer had tested to old standards, UL and CSA have different methods of acceptance.

An addendum to 61965 will be coming out dealing with face protector film. It has already been approved in UL and CSA testing.

2.2 IEC/TC39/WG2 X-Radiation Standard Progress Report
Mike Chenowith has worked on this subject, and it appears that it will be a proposed IEC document in two parts; measurements and procedures.

2.3 Test Certification Agency Implementation of IEC61965
VDE, BSI, China, when are they adopting the standard? We do not have a notification system. The committee is unsure of the relationship between BEAB and BSI. It appears to be a relationship similar to that of UL and OSHA in the US. BEAB recognizes the CB scheme, but BSI apparently won't recognize CB reporting.

3.0 Standards and Document Review
The group discussed Draft IEC 62299-1 and -2. These documents will be processed this year through IEC TC39 WG2. The -1 document is based around several EIA 500 series documents. The Netherlands still has to add the 10cm cabinet.

The -2 document basically took the EIA TEP 197 document and several Japanese documents and combined with some European input. Sections 6,7, and 8 are segregated according to who submitted it. Clause 9 appears to be acceptable. The group then discussed Annex B on the Emissions and Radiations from the tube. A considerable amount has to do with the glass. Linear absorption coefficient is a major factor. The Japanese method differs from the US standard. The Japanese method uses values from a table or from an optical method with a thin sheet of glass. The group felt that there must be a JEITA test procedure that covers this subject. Phil will find out if ASAHI can track this down. Techneglas will also attempt to research this.

4.0 Environmental Issues
No action items this reporting period.

5.0 New Business
No new business.

6.0 Next Meeting
The next full committee meeting is tentatively scheduled in conjunction with JT-6. To be held at Corning in Corning, NY on 5-6 September 2002. Mikoski will work with Corning committee members to arrange for the hotel and report back to the chairman. Phil Goldman will also check for any possible major event conflicts during that time.

7.0 Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:00 Noon.

This meeting was conducted in accordance with the EIA legal guidelines and the manual of organization and procedures.

Robert D. Tolliver, Chairperson
Signature on file

Edward F. Mikoski, Jr., Acting Secretary
Signature on file

Return to JT-32 Main