Luvxom SH-501

A smaller one than the interface suggests, and this is the trap on the sheet. The published VESA patterns of 75 by 75 and 100 by 100 mm correspond to the mounting standard used for displays up to roughly 32 inches, so that a large monitor will bolt straight on. The load-bearing range stops at 4 kg, and screens approaching that diagonal are routinely heavier. The bolt pattern and load rating therefore point to different sizes, and only one is a structural limit. Weigh the intended display first, check it against the supplied load rating, and treat the VESA figure as a compatibility check rather than a sizing guide.

That claim needs evidence, and the sheet doesn't provide it. Installation is given as a wall expansion screw, and the substrates named include hollow wall and light brick alongside concrete and solid red brick. An expansion anchor works by converting tightening torque into outward pressure on the hole wall, so it needs a substrate that is hard, continuous and will neither crush nor split. Hollow, lightweight substrates give that pressure less to act against, which is why anchor selection for those materials usually moves to a different fixing type. Ask for the anchor type, diameter, embedment depth and edge distance, and for published pull-out and shear data against each of the four named substrates with the safety factor applied.

More than it looks. Under the GB Biocidal Products Regulation, an article incorporating a biocidal product whose own primary function is not biocidal is a treated article. Two things follow. It may only be placed on the market if every active substance is approved for the relevant product type and use, and GB approval status changes, with dates after which new treated articles containing a non-approved active cannot enter the supply chain. Where a biocidal claim is made, the label must state that the article incorporates biocidal products, name the biocidal property where it is substantiated, name every active substance, and name any nanomaterials with the word nano in brackets. Ask for the active substance name, its current GB approval status, whether it is nanoscale, and the label artwork.

Sometimes, under conditions this sheet does not describe. Silver surfaces have shown real reductions in bioburden in controlled hospital work; one study on high-touch surfaces reported a mean reduction of around 1.8 log over six months. The effect is conditional in ways that matter here. Silver needs moisture to release ions, and silver-containing surfaces have been reported as showing no antibacterial activity at the low indoor humidity typical of a ward. Application method matters too: one recovery-unit study found spray application on dry, textured surfaces associated with more contamination, while roller application on smooth, frequently cleaned surfaces reduced it. This finish is sprayed, and activity declines with repeated cleaning. Ask for the test standard, the organisms, the log reduction achieved and the number of cleaning cycles the claim survives.

No. National guidance expects shared patient-care equipment to be decontaminated after use with manufacturer-recommended products, and an antibacterial finish does not replace that. It is supplementary at best, and its contribution on a dry vertical surface at ward humidity is uncertain. The more useful point is that this sheet still recommends no cleaning product for the aluminium or the coating, which is what the guidance actually asks for. Request a written compatibility statement covering both, and ask whether chlorine-releasing agents strip the finish.

Less than it appears: until two things are attached to it, a cycle count is only meaningful against a stated load and a stated failure criterion, and the sheet gives neither. Two hundred thousand cycles at 0.5 kg is a different claim from the same figure at 4 kg, and failure might mean the arm ceases to hold position, or that a joint separates. Ask what load the test ran at, what counted as the end point, which of the two load bands was tested, and whether the test was to an external standard or in-house.

Larger than the rating, because the reach multiplies it. A load held at the end of 1200 mm acts on the wall plate through that whole distance, so 4 kg produces roughly 47 newton metres of bending moment before the 2.7 kg bracket is added at its own centre of gravity, which is not published. The anchors resist that moment in the 0.7 kg base plate, and the plate dimensions, hole pattern and anchor count are all absent. Ask for a wall reaction figure at full extension with the heaviest permitted display, and for the base plate drawing.

One model code covers two bands, 0.5 to 2 kg and 2 to 4 kg, and the sheet doesn't say how to choose. Arms of this type balance through a spring or friction assembly matched to a weight range, so the two are most likely separate builds rather than an adjustment on one. An arm set for the light band will drift under a heavier screen, and one set for the heavy band will not stay put under a light one. Weigh the display, specify the band on the order, and check that any cycle test or load certificate names the band it covers.

On the published wording, very probably not. The mount has no medical purpose of its own, and the accessory route does not obviously apply. An accessory must be intended by its manufacturer for use with one or more particular medical devices, to enable those devices to be used as intended or to assist their medical functionality directly. That connection has to be to named devices rather than to medical equipment in general. Suppose the supplier claims accessory status; ask which named devices. If not, the duties are those on anyone supplying an article for use at work under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, with the General Product Safety Regulations and the employer's duties under PUWER. The biocidal obligations described above sit alongside those and are not displaced by them.

Not to the mount by itself. The assembly contains no electrical parts, so it is not medical electrical equipment. Clause 9.8 of that standard covers mechanical hazards associated with support systems, including systems carrying an external load, and sets safety factors between the intended load and the failure point. When this mount is combined with medical electrical equipment into a system, whoever assembles the system must satisfy that clause, and they will want a tested failure load rather than a working load. The anchor side runs on the same logic, since published anchor capacities are ultimate values de-rated by a factor of at least four.

Anyone planning to hang a 32-inch display on it because the bolt pattern fits. Any installation into hollow or lightweight masonry without per-substrate anchor data and a competent fixing design, given the moment a 1200 mm reach generates. Any organisation that cannot accept an unsubstantiated biocidal claim on its asset register, since the treated-article obligations attach whether or not anyone intended them. Where the wall is solid, the display is light, the band is specified, and the coating paperwork arrives, it reaches further than most positions require and folds back out of the way.

Send it as one list. It covers the active substance name with GB approval status, nanoscale status and Article 58 label artwork, the antibacterial test standard with organisms, log reduction and cleaning-cycle durability, per-substrate anchor pull-out and shear data with safety factors, anchor type, diameter, embedment and torque, the base plate drawing with hole pattern and anchor count, a wall reaction figure at full extension, the load and failure criterion behind the cycle figure, which load band ships, the maximum screen diagonal and mass, tilt, swivel and rotation ranges, locking or friction adjustment, cable management, cleaning compatibility for aluminium and coating, packed dimensions and mass, and the warranty.