Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mac Kerr]

I thought years ago they were going away from pin plugs.

Please go to your profile and change the "Name" field to your real first and last name as required by the posting rules displayed in the header at the top of the section, and in the Site Rules and Suggestions in the Forum Announcements section, and on the registration page when you registered.

Mac

[Cailen Waddell]

I am relaying the way it was explained to me by my dealer.  One of the criteria for UL listing is meeting the AIA standard.  When AIA changed its standard bates announced they would not update their connector because it would be to costly.  In theory UL should update their processes ASAP upon receiving new AIA standards, at which point it will no longer be UL listed.

I believe you have been mis-informed regarding the standards connection between AIA and UL by your source. It is possible your source confused the ESTA/ANSI standard with AIA. I haven't checked to see if the Bates plugs are still UL listed.

I posted the your response over in the ControlBooth forum, and below is an answer by Steve Terry, ETC vice-president for research and development:

1. As far as I know, there is no AIA standard that relates to pin connectors.
2. Pin connectors are covered by the UL498 standard, UL category code RUFR.
3. A few years back, the UL498 standard changed to adopt by reference the ESTA/ANSI E1.24 standard for pin connectors.
4. This adoption required all pin connectors to be reevaluated by UL for dimensional conformity to E1.24.
5. It is possible that some pin connector manufacturers elected not to conform to E1.24, in which case the UL listing of their connector would have been withdrawn.
6. I cannot comment on the specifics of Bates connectors with regard to UL listing, since I don't know.

So I went back and did some more research...   The long and the short of it is the above is correct, I was not. 

Apologies to all for any confusion. 

Following up on bates connectors, a manufacturer of connector strips stopped using bates connectors because they did not intend to conform with the e1.24 spec at the time the spec was announced, as dimensionally something wasn't right from what I understand.  However I don't have any confirmation that bates did not update their connector. 

I am now going to try to determine if they are UL listed...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Raz Thomas]

Awesome advice guys. I've really learned a lot from your replies so thanks!

[Scott Hofmann]

So I went back and did some more research...   The long and the short of it is the above is correct, I was not. 

Apologies to all for any confusion. 

Following up on bates connectors, a manufacturer of connector strips stopped using bates connectors because they did not intend to conform with the e1.24 spec at the time the spec was announced, as dimensionally something wasn't right from what I understand.  However I don't have any confirmation that bates did not update their connector. 

I am now going to try to determine if they are UL listed...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cailen--
I sent an inquiry to Marinco/Bates, and a technical service person replied: " We did get the bates renewed for  the new UL standard."

[Cailen Waddell]

Cailen--
I sent an inquiry to Marinco/Bates, and a technical service person replied: " We did get the bates renewed for  the new UL standard."

Thanks Scott.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ProSoundWeb Community]