A non-progress report
My apologies for the long interval between entries on this blog, but my contemplating time has been taken up preparing papers for a seminar in Australia, which I rashly promised to provide. If you are involved in Intrinsic Safety now is a good time to get involved in rewriting the standards, which you [or is it possibly just me ?] are always complaining about.
The IEC 31G committee has drafts for comment [CDs] on both the apparatus standard IEC 60079-11 and the system standard IEC 60079-25 in progress. These should be available from your national committee [usually contactable via a trade association] and it may be in your interest to make your views known. Comments made at this stage are the most effective because it is easier to make changes and introduce new concepts.. Later the document acquires its own ‘momentum’ and changes are less acceptable and tend to be deferred until the next edition. This introduces a five to ten year delay, which is not ideal but almost inevitable. A system of maintenance teams was introduced to speed up the process but the interval between editions is still about five years.
Any comments will be discussed in Kuala Lumpur in November this year. There is also a voting document [CDV] on the Fieldbus standard IEC 60079-27 but while this is passed the point of fundamental changes, it is worthwhile reading if you are involved
There is some thought being given to the subject of the risk presented by combined gas and dust hazards. There are a number of questions were the required technical knowledge is not available and consequently anyone who can make a contribution in this area would be welcomed with open arms (Contact your local committee)
The whole process of creating IEC standards is far from ideal, but is the only system in existence and the known alternatives are no better or even worse. Inevitably the majority of the delegates to IEC committees have one or more of the following characteristics. They are passed their sell by dates, have particular interests to defend, have large egos and epitomise their national stereotypes. The selection process is not ideal. What is needed is some new blood with new ideas to counteract the existing inertia and combine with the more experienced participants to produce better standards. The negative side of participation is that it takes time and attending meetings is expensive. The positive side is that some of the participants are worth knowing and are good company, plus the meetings tend to be in interesting places !
November 15, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Very interesting. In fact, maybe all social groups tend to defend their particular interests and is not difficult to find large egos. But regarding IEC TC-31, the task is particularly not easy, because members need to know explosion protection topics and electrical circuits theory also. Not all members have expertise in both. Some representatives came from their National Safety Organizations, with their day-to-day routine related with legal demands and not technical themes. In these cases, it is difficult for them to take a position during MT meetings – and these moments are very important during the standard’s development process. Of course, some new blood with new ideas is necessary – and desirable – but they need to find a “fertile soil” to grow. The participation takes time and attending meetings is expensive, but some big companies are entering in this field. So, I think that one way is to encourage active professionals in this field to participate. The standards need experienced people to develop them, and we need to seek them.