News

Digitalisation is rapidly transforming hazardous industries. From maintenance and inspection to asset management and remote collaboration, field workers increasingly depend on mobile technology. Atexxo Manufacturing now brings Samsung’s latest rugged tablet technology into explosive atmospheres with ATEX-certified versions of the Samsung Galaxy Tab Active5 and Galaxy Tab Active5 Pro.

The compact Samsung Galaxy Tab Active5 ATEX is designed for use in gas Zone 1 and dust Zone 21 environments. Atexxo converts the original Samsung tablet using a modified aluminium enclosure and protected electrical circuitry, while retaining the functionality required by modern field workers. The device is certified as II 2G Ex db IIC T6 Gb and II 2D Ex tb IIIC T85°C Db under ATEX, with corresponding IECEx certification.

Its 8-inch, 120Hz display offers excellent visibility, while 5G, Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth, Samsung Knox and physical SIM or eSIM connectivity support connected-worker applications. The tablet is available in Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi-plus-5G configurations, with 128GB or 256GB storage options.

For applications requiring a larger workspace, Atexxo offers the Samsung Galaxy Tab Active5 Pro ATEX for gas Zone 2 and dust Zone 22. Its 10.1-inch display provides additional space for technical drawings, digital work instructions, inspection forms and industrial software. The Atexxo version carries the markings II 3G Ex ec ic IIC T4 Gc and II 3D Ex tc IIIB T85°C Dc.

The Tab Active5 Pro combines 5G connectivity with a powerful processor, Samsung Knox security, glove-compatible operation and reinforced tether points. The original Samsung platform also offers a 120Hz display, up to 600-nit brightness and expandable storage, making it suitable for demanding industrial workflows.

Together, the two tablets provide organisations with a choice between a highly portable Zone 1/21 solution and a larger Zone 2/22 productivity platform. Applications include petrochemical facilities, offshore installations, hazardous-goods storage, maintenance, digital inspections, connected-worker systems and safe industrial photography.

With these new products, Atexxo enables companies to introduce modern Samsung mobile technology into hazardous locations without compromising explosion safety.

For more information, visit www.atexxo.com

EXAIR Cabinet Cooler^® systems provide a rugged, industrial duty solution for cooling and purging electronic cabinets. They are CE compliant and available with cooling capacities up to 5,600 BTU/Hr. and UL listed NEMA 12, NEMA 4, and NEMA 4X enclosure ratings. There are also UL Classified Hazardous Location models for use with purge systems. With the breadth of available options, choosing the best Cabinet Cooler for a specific environment can be a tedious task and depends on a few key factors. EXAIR’s new Cabinet Cooler system Calculator, found online at www.EXAIR.com in the Knowledge Base, makes it fast and easy to find the ideal model of Cabinet Cooler system for any specific application.

            By providing certain information like size of the enclosure, NEMA rating needed, and environmental conditions, our new calculator will sort through our large selection of ready-to-ship Cabinet Cooler^® Systems and provide instant feedback on the best model number for any applicable electrical enclosure.  Taking the guess work out of the equation, EXAIR’s Calculator ensures the customer that they can be confident in selecting the correct product for their unique specifications.

            EXAIR’s complete line of Cabinet Cooler systems include 120V AC, 240V AC and 24V DC thermostat voltage, continuous operation, type 316 stainless steel and high temperature models – all of which are selectable with the new calculator. Find this new tool on the website EXAIR.com, in the Knowledge Base Calculator Library along with many other resources, such as the CAD Library and Application Database, which also help customers choose a perfect solution. https://exair.co/190-cccalc

First industrial deployments of AI safety agent achieve a perfect recommendation capture rate across real production environments, as Ultimo expands AI offering across maintenance, safety, and operations

Ultimo today released results from the first commercial deployments of its health, safety & environment (HSE) digital worker, an AI agent built for industrial safety teams. Across a controlled trial group of manufacturing businesses, the agent did not miss a single recommended safety action - a result that matters in a sector where the International Labour Organization estimates¹ nearly three million workers die from work-related accidents and diseases every year, and a further 395 million sustain non-fatal injuries.

The HSE digital worker continuously monitors work orders and shift logs. It surfaces recommended safety actions before they become incidents, handles compliance reporting automatically, and flags conditions that warrant attention from safety teams - without replacing the professionals who act on them. Every recommendation is audit-logged. The human makes the final call. The agent can be purchased and operated independently of the Ultimo EAM platform, giving industrial organizations a direct route to benefit from AI-assisted safety management across every site in their organization.

Agristo, a major European potato processor, was among the first to deploy the digital worker in production. "Ultimo's AI suggests our HSE actions. Reliable, smart, and to date not a single measure has missed the mark," said Piet Gabriël, Group Maintenance Engineer at Agristo.

The pattern held across the trial group. AI-generated safety recommendations were acted on, compliance workflows that previously required manual review were automated, and safety teams redirected time toward analysis and prevention rather than administration.

"Industrial safety teams are being asked to track more hazards, across more assets, with the same headcount,” added Steven Elsham, CEO of Ultimo. "The regulatory environment is tightening, and the consequences of a missed action are severe. In hazardous industrial environments, that pressure falls on skilled people who should be focused on the complex, high-stakes decisions that only they can make - not on routine monitoring and compliance administration. What we have built handles that load automatically, so the humans who work in these environments can direct their expertise where it counts. These early results validate the approach, and we are moving quickly to put it in the hands of more customers."

The HSE digital worker is part of a broader suite from Ultimo covering maintenance planning, technician guidance, and natural-language reporting. Each agent can be deployed independently or alongside the Ultimo EAM platform. These agents don't stand still - the HSE digital worker learns continuously from every work order, shift log, and safety action it handles, growing sharper and more capable over time. It is the first of an expanding line-up of Ultimo digital workers, with more scheduled to join across maintenance, operations, and safety through 2026 and beyond. Details will be announced at www.ultimo.com.

Ultimo is a 2025 Gartner Customers' Choice award winner (4.7/5, 90 percent recommend) and a Verdantix Green Quadrant Leader for EAM software for two consecutive years. The company supports more than 150,000 technicians managing over 22 million assets across 2,500-plus customers in manufacturing, logistics, energy & utilities, and healthcare worldwide.

ATEX projects rarely become expensive because of one test alone. More often, they become expensive because manufacturers start too late, choose the wrong conformity route, or underestimate what the marking already implies.

If you want to place explosion-protected equipment on the EU market, the first question is not price. It is scope. You need to confirm that the product really falls under ATEX 2014/34/EU as equipment, a protective system, or a component intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres. Many projects become inefficient from the start because companies begin budgeting before confirming that ATEX applies in the product sense at all.

The marking already tells you a lot

Once scope is clear, the next major indicator is the marking. In practice, the marking already tells you a great deal about future cost and difficulty.

A Category 3 product is usually the lightest route. It still requires proper technical documentation, risk assessment, and compliant marking, but notified body involvement is normally more limited. A Category 2 non-electrical product is a step up: the route may remain manageable, but the technical file may still need to be lodged with a notified body. A Category 2 electrical product, or equipment involving internal combustion engines, usually becomes more demanding because EU-type examination and production quality elements are more likely to apply. Category 1 products are typically the heaviest route in both time and money.

Why simple products become expensive

The category is only part of the story. Some markings make a project harder even when the product looks simple. IIC is harder than IIA or IIB. T6 is often more restrictive than T4 or T3. Dust protection can create additional design and temperature-control challenges. So can extended ambient ranges, batteries, encapsulation, cable entries, plastics, display windows, and multiple variants within one certification scope.

What you actually pay for

Manufacturers also need to understand when ATEX cost moves beyond testing. In some routes, the real budget includes more than laboratory work and certificate issue. It can include EU-type examination, technical file handling, factory audit, quality assurance assessment, surveillance visits, corrective actions, and reassessment after design changes. That is especially important for serial production.

What usually delays the project

ATEX timelines usually slip for practical reasons: the design is still changing, the sample does not match the final product, the BOM is not frozen, drawings are not production-ready, ignition hazard assessment is incomplete, or critical components do not have stable traceability.

What to review before you budget

The most reliable way to estimate ATEX cost before spending money is to review four things together: intended marking, conformity route, production readiness, and change-control risk. That is usually where the real budget and timeline are decided.

Danem Test supports manufacturers with testing, inspection, certification and regulatory compliance for international market access, including ATEX / IECEx, CE marking, CBAM, industrial testing and third-party inspection.

Website

LinkedIn

From 1 January 2027, businesses importing goods into the UK from the aluminium, cement, fertiliser, hydrogen, and iron and steel sectors will need to keep records to comply with the new UK Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).

CBAM aims to tackle carbon leakage, helping to achieve net zero by 2050.  

HM Revenue and Customs’ Head of CBAM Policy Peter Connell outlines what it means for businesses and what they can do to start preparing for it.

What is CBAM?

CBAM is a new tax designed to address the risk of carbon leakage by ensuring certain highly traded, carbon intensive goods imported into the UK face a comparable carbon price to equivalent goods produced in the UK.

What’s happening from January 2027?

From 1 January 2027, businesses importing into the UK specific goods from the aluminium, cement, fertiliser, hydrogen, and iron and steel sectors will need to begin keeping records.

Businesses can check whether they need to register and what records to keep on GOV.UK.

Keeping records of CBAM imports

From 1 January 2027, businesses importing CBAM goods are required to keep records relating to CBAM goods they have imported. Records must be kept for 6 years.

Businesses that do not keep adequate records relating to CBAM may be liable for penalties, so it’s important to find out what you need to do beforehand and to get it right.

More information about the record-keeping requirements is available on GOV.UK.

I use a carrier when importing, aren’t they responsible?

No. If someone imports CBAM goods or completes the import declaration on your behalf, such as a customs broker, freight forwarder, haulier or tax agent, you may still be classed as the importer and therefore responsible for meeting CBAM obligations.

Find out more about who is classed as the importer on GOV.UK.

I’ve started keeping records for CBAM. What happens next?

Businesses importing CBAM goods into the UK must keep records of those goods from 1 January 2027, regardless of whether they will need to register for CBAM.

Registration for CBAM will open on 1 January 2028. If the value of the goods imported is more than £50,000 for the previous 12 months, or you are expecting to import within the next 30 days, you will need to register with HMRC.

How much do I pay and when?

HMRC will publish further guidance on CBAM rates, default emissions values and monitoring, reporting and verifying emissions in the coming months.

If you are registered for CBAM, you must submit a return – even if there is no tax to pay – and pay any liability for the 1 January to 31 December 2027 accounting period by 31 May 2028.

Find out more about preparing for CBAM on GOV.UK.

For pharmaceutical manufacturers, cleanrooms and ATEX-rated hazardous zones present some of the most challenging operating environments in modern industry. To maintain strict ISO cleanliness classifications and prevent cross-contamination, access to these controlled zones is heavily restricted. At the same time, compressed air systems, process gas lines, and electrical switchgear running inside these environments must be monitored constantly, since even a small leak or electrical fault can compromise safety, product integrity, or energy efficiency. To address these challenges, facilities are turning to remote ultrasonic acoustic imaging as a way to inspect hazardous and hard-to-reach areas without physically entering them.

The Hidden Cost of Compressed Air and Gas Leaks

Compressed air and process gases such as nitrogen are essential utilities in pharmaceutical manufacturing, used for pneumatic controls, purging, and formulation processes. Leaks in these systems are notoriously difficult to detect with the human ear, especially in noisy production areas or elevated piping runs. Left undetected, they translate directly into wasted energy, unstable process conditions, and unplanned maintenance work. In ATEX zones, tracking down a leak by ear or by hand-held contact methods is not only inefficient, it can require shutting down equipment or donning heavy protective gear just to get close enough to investigate.

Electrical Anomalies and Partial Discharge

Electrical switchgear and connections operating in cleanroom and hazardous environments are also vulnerable to partial discharge, corona, and tracking, early warning signs of insulation breakdown that can eventually lead to equipment failure or fire risk. Because these anomalies emit distinctive ultrasonic signatures, they can be detected long before they become visible or audible to a technician standing nearby, provided the right tool is used at a safe distance.

Safe Remote Inspection with Acoustic Imaging

Setting up ladders or wearing heavy protective suits to inspect elevated piping or electrical switchgear is slow, labor-intensive, and introduces contamination risks to sterile cleanrooms. Using an ATEX-certified CRYSOUND acoustic camera, maintenance teams can conduct safe, non-contact remote inspections of both compressed air/gas systems and electrical assets.

These acoustic cameras use high-performance MEMS microphone arrays to convert ultrasonic sound waves into a color-coded visual "bloom" displayed on a real-time optical screen. This visual feedback allows technicians to locate and document compressed air leaks, nitrogen leaks, vacuum bypasses, or electrical partial discharge from a safe distance of up to 200 meters, completely eliminating the need to enter restricted zones, climb infrastructure, or interrupt active production.

Because inspections are non-contact and can be performed from outside the immediate hazard area, they also reduce the risk of introducing particulates or contamination into sterile cleanroom zones.

Conclusion

Maintaining energy efficiency and electrical safety in ATEX and cleanroom environments requires visibility into problems that are otherwise invisible and inaudible. By adopting remote ultrasonic acoustic imaging, pharmaceutical manufacturers can detect compressed air and gas leaks, identify electrical anomalies before they escalate, and protect both personnel and product, all without compromising cleanroom integrity or hazardous area safety.

www.sdtultrasound.com

For more information, scan:

A device is installed in a hazardous area. The nameplate looks reassuring: Ex ia IIC T4. It has been assessed for intrinsic safety under IEC 60079-11, the loop parameters have been checked, and the equipment is suitable for the intended zone and gas group.

For many projects, this feels like the hazardous-area question is closed. But if the same device is part of a safety instrumented function under IEC 61508 or IEC 61511, another question remains: will it perform when the plant needs it most?

Explosion protection asks whether equipment can become an ignition source. Functional safety asks whether a safety function can achieve the required risk reduction. A device can be correctly Ex-certified and still need further evidence if it supports a shutdown function, protective loop or safety device.

This gap often appears late in a project. The ATEX or IECEx file may look complete. Then, during SIL review, HAZOP follow-up or commissioning, a new question appears: what is the probability that this safety function will fail when demanded?

Consider a 4–20 mA pressure transmitter that freezes at a normal value while the real pressure continues to rise, with nothing in the loop diagnosing the failure. Its Ex ia certificate remains valid. Yet if that transmitter protects against overpressure, this dangerous undetected failure could be the difference between a shutdown and an incident.

In functional safety, the failure that matters most is the one nobody sees coming: a dangerous failure that no diagnostic detects. This rate, λDU, is the driver of how often a safety function fails to act on demand. Alongside diagnostic coverage, safe failure fraction, hardware fault tolerance and proof-test interval, it determines whether the complete function meets its SIL target.

For this reason, two important standards have been published to address the challenges created when Ex equipment depends on a safety device or safety-related function. EN 50495 addresses safety devices required for safe functioning with respect to explosion risks. IEC TS 60079-42 brings this thinking into the IEC 60079 series for safety devices used to control potential ignition sources from Ex equipment.

These standards show why Ex evidence and functional safety evidence must speak to each other.

For manufacturers and integrators, the practical message is simple: do not treat Ex and functional safety as two separate files that meet only at the end. Align the evidence early by asking:

What is the safety function?
What SIL or risk reduction is required?
Which assumptions are made for diagnostics and proof testing?

Does the Ex assessment support the same operating limits as the functional safety case?
Are the proof-test assumptions consistent with how the equipment will actually be maintained?

This is the gap ExVeritas and NMi Group are addressing with the Functional Safety service: helping customers go one step beyond Ex certification and prove that the complete safety function can achieve the required risk reduction.

An Ex certificate remains essential. But the better question is no longer only: Is it Ex-certified?

It is: Can we prove the complete safety function?

www.exveritas.com

Navigating the confusion between refrigerant monitoring and leak detection

By Bryan Redmond, MSA Safety

The terms ‘refrigerant monitor’ and ‘refrigerant leak detector’ are frequently used interchangeably across the industry - yet they serve fundamentally different purposes. Bryan Redmond, a technical specialist at MSA Safety, unpacks the regulatory requirements and practical applications of each, offering guidance for operators navigating both safety compliance and sustainability goals.

In the modern HVAC-R landscape, ‘refrigerant monitor’ and ‘refrigerant leak detector’ are often used interchangeably - yet from a regulatory and operational standpoint, they serve fundamentally different purposes. Understanding this distinction is more than semantic precision; it's the difference between meeting life-safety compliance and achieving meaningful refrigerant emissions reduction.

Let's examine the why, when, and how of these two important systems.

Refrigerant monitors: the life-safety sentinel

Refrigerant monitors are often installed to achieve compliance with EN 378 and Regulation 573/2024 (F-Gas), which govern refrigeration systems and heat pumps. The core philosophy of EN 378 is straightforward: safeguard individuals from the harmful effects of refrigerant exposure, whether from toxicity or asphyxiation.

When and why are they required?

A refrigerant monitor - typically a diffusion-based point detector - is a mandated safety device for most HVAC/R applications in Europe. Monitoring is generally required under EN 378 when the volume of refrigerant that could potentially escape into a space is sufficient to pose a danger to occupants.

These devices are engineered for speed and reliability. Where applicable, EN 378 requires monitors to activate an audible and visual alarm within 30 seconds of detecting refrigerant gas at a concentration above a particular pre-set value. Other mitigation actions may also be activated by the alarm, such as mechanical ventilation or shutdown.  Units are typically pre-set to trigger at concentrations well below the occupational exposure limit of the particular refrigerant used (or for flammable refrigerants, well below 25% of the lower explosive limit (LEL)). For most refrigerants, alarm set points between 100 and 150 ppm fall well below harmful levels, providing crucial early warning to evacuate.

The maths of safety: is your room at risk?

Determining whether a specific room requires a monitor isn't guesswork, it's a calculation based on the "Practical Limit" of the refrigerant in use. For every individual room in a facility, the following assessment is performed:

If the resulting figure equals or exceeds the Practical Limit defined in EN 378, a refrigerant monitor is required under EN 378. Different refrigerants have different practical limits – R-410A, for example, has a Practical Limit of 0.44 kg/m³. If your system charge divided by the room volume exceeds this threshold, installation of a refrigerant monitor is mandatory.

Refrigerant leak detectors: high-sensitivity system oversight

If the refrigerant monitor exists to help keep occupants safe, an aspirated refrigerant leak detector is designed for high-sensitivity, ongoing system oversight.

Aspirated systems typically use a centralised Non-Dispersive Infrared (NDIR) sensor to actively draw air samples from various locations. Unlike diffusion-based monitors which typically alarm at 100ppm or more, these systems are engineered with a Minimum Detection Level (MDL) of 1 ppm.

Why low-level detection matters

Why detect at 1 ppm when the safety alarm doesn't trigger until 100 ppm? The answer lies in cumulative refrigerant loss.

Standard refrigerant monitors cannot always detect small leaks- that's not their purpose. However, a system can sustain a persistent, minor leak that loses hundreds of kilograms of refrigerant annually without ever reaching the 100–150 ppm threshold at the monitor's location. This is particularly true in large rooms or spaces with high air-change rates.

By the time a refrigerant monitor alarms, the leak is already significant. When an aspirated leak detector alarms, the issue remains a manageable maintenance task. Detecting these small leaks enables prompt repairs, drastically reducing refrigerant replacement costs and helping facilities meet their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) targets.

It's worth noting that the majority of refrigerant loss occurs through undetected small leaks - not catastrophic blowouts that would trigger safety alarms.

The critical difference: why not use one system for both?

This is the question I encounter most frequently: If an aspirated detector is so sensitive, why can't I use it for my EN 378 safety compliance?

The answer comes down to cycle time.

The 30-second rule under EN 378

Because aspirated systems must sequentially sample each zone - drawing air through tubing, analysing it, and purging the sensor before moving to the next location- a cycle time is introduced. Depending on the number of zones and total tubing length, it could take up to 90 minutes for a 16-zone unit with maximum line lengths of 300 metres to return to any given location.

While this timeline is appropriate for identifying slow-developing leaks and reducing long-term emissions, it is unsuitable for life safety. If a sudden, large-scale leak fills a room with refrigerant, you cannot wait for an aspirated detector to cycle back to that location.

Under EN 378, refrigerant monitors must be installed in any space where the practical limit could be reached or exceeded. These devices must alarm within 30 seconds of detecting a pre-set concentration of refrigerant. Aspirated systems - regardless of their sensitivity - cannot fulfil this mandatory rapid-response role.

Conclusion - a multi-layered approach

The choice between a refrigerant monitor and an aspirated leak detector is not an either/or proposition - it's a both/and strategy for effective facility management.

Refrigerant monitors are non-negotiable where EN 378’s “Practical Limit” is reached. They are the silent sentinels helping to prevent mechanical failure from becoming a human tragedy. However, relying solely on refrigerant monitors means accepting the hidden cost of slow, undetected leaks that drain budgets and may harm the environment.

By implementing aspirated refrigerant leak detection alongside required refrigerant monitors, operators can achieve both objectives: a compliant, safe environment for occupants and a higher-efficiency, lower-emission refrigeration system that delivers measurable returns through reduced refrigerant costs.

In a market increasingly defined by stringent environmental regulations and rising refrigerant costs, understanding this distinction has become a business imperative.

with appropriately specified refrigerant monitors, then consider where aspirated leak detection can deliver additional value through early identification of minor leaks.

The investment in both technologies pays dividends - not only in regulatory peace of mind, but in reduced refrigerant costs, lower emissions, a stronger position as sustainability reporting requirements continue to evolve, and perhaps most important, in improving safety.

Discover how MSA Safety can help you combine life-safety monitoring with high-sensitivity leak detection to support safer, more efficient and lower-emission operations.

EEMUA is pleased to announce that EDF’s Nuclear Operations Business Unit has joined the Association as a Corporate Member, forming a joint membership with existing member EDF Power Solutions. This expansion brings the full scope of EDF’s low carbon generation activities in the UK and Ireland (spanning nuclear, renewable, storage and emerging hydrogen technologies) into closer engagement with EEMUA’s cross industry community.

EDF manages the UK's nuclear power plant sites. Its remit includes the safe and reliable operation of nuclear assets, decommissioning activities, and the delivery of major new build projects. The organisation plays a central role in maintaining energy security and supporting the UK’s transition to net zero.

EDF Power Solutions has been an active participant in EEMUA for several years, contributing through its portfolio of onshore and offshore wind farms, solar installations, battery storage sites and green hydrogen projects.

EEMUA Chief Executive, Stefan Kukula, said: “It is great news that EDF’s Nuclear Operations Business has decided to join EEMUA alongside EDF Power Solutions. Our members span many different specialties and markets but have common interests in safety and asset integrity, while maintaining operational efficiency. I know that they will seize the opportunity to share good practice and learnings across technologies and sectors and look forward to meeting their staff at our events.”

http://www.eemua.org/