Boiler emergency e-stop

[Spoon]

I re-iterate the OP is in the USA.
CE markings and BS, EN, standards therefore don't mean a thing.

The USA have their own standards that they have to work to, so the principle still applies.

 

[Darkwood]

As an overview here to simplify it a bit, you have to treat an E-Stop actuator like a normal stop button, on it's own it is not an E-Stop even it it complies with the standards by design, it is only an E-Stop when part of an E-Stop system that meets relevant standards.
It is like sticking a Lamborghini badge on a Fiesta, the badge does not change the car to a Lamborghini and on its own the badge is not a Lamborghini even if it is made for one, the same applies to the various stop actuators that comply to be used as E-Stops.

 

[JeremyJones]

As an overview here to simplify it a bit, you have to treat an E-Stop actuator like a normal stop button, on it's own it is not an E-Stop even it it complies with the standards by design, it is only an E-Stop when part of an E-Stop system that meets relevant standards.
It is like sticking a Lamborghini badge on a Fiesta, the badge does not change the car to a Lamborghini and on its own the badge is not a Lamborghini even if it is made for one, the same applies the various stop actuators that comply to be used as E-Stops.

I think you're right about that. They are using the word e-stop wrong. They just want something to kill power to the boiler if there's an emergency or issue

 

[netblindpaul]

I re-iterate the OP is in the USA.
CE markings and BS, EN, standards therefore don't mean a thing.

I didn't see that stated anywhere. ?‍
The USA are catching up with the ISO & IEC standards requirements as they are members of both organisations.
They are just a bit slower than the rest of the world because of the difference in the way they blame people and mandate PPE rather than addressing the real hazards.
Also their equipment design is about 20 years behind the world that has embraced the IEC standards, having assessed both, the US equipment is positively dange in comparison to equipment to base IEC requirements.
Almost all BS & EN standards are derived from ISO & IEC source document, some are identical, and if North America was not so stuck in its ways and arrogant about their so called supremacy, they would accept the standards they had a hand in writing, and save millions in currency and massive global resources.
Plus some of the documents I have quoted are ISO standards so the USA are bound to implement them in the same way the UK has to implement IEC 60364.
The control philosophy in the US is aligning and the intent is similar.

 

[Lister1987]

I didn't see that stated anywhere. ?‍
The USA are catching up with the ISO & IEC standards requirements as they are members of both organisations.
They are just a bit slower than the rest of the world because of the difference in the way they blame people and mandate PPE rather than addressing the real hazards.
Also their equipment design is about 20 years behind the world that has embraced the IEC standards, having assessed both, the US equipment is positively dange in comparison to equipment to base IEC requirements.
Almost all BS & EN standards are derived from ISO & IEC source document, some are identical, and if North America was not so stuck in its ways and arrogant about their so called supremacy, they would accept the standards they had a hand in writing, and save millions in currency and massive global resources.
Plus some of the documents I have quoted are ISO standards so the USA are bound to implement them in the same way the UK has to implement IEC 60364.
The control philosophy in the US is aligning and the intent is similar.

They do have NFPA 79 which would be their regional variant of the ISO standard