Which Edition of IEC 61111 Applies to Your Matting Order — and Which Regional Adoption

A PO that says "IEC 61111" leaves two things open: which edition, and which regional adoption. IEC 61111:2026 has cancelled the 2009 edition, and CAN/ULC-61111-10 is a modified adoption, not a reprint.

Which Edition of IEC 61111 Applies to Your Matting Order — and Which Regional Adoption

A purchase order that says "insulating mat to IEC 61111" is not yet a specification. It leaves two things open: which edition of the standard, and which regional adoption of it. Both get settled by someone, and if the buyer does not settle them, the supplier will.

That is not a formality. A Canadian substation, a European panel builder and an Australian utility can all be buying "IEC 61111 matting" and still be holding three different documents.

The edition question

IEC 61111:2009 is the second edition, and it is what almost every product datasheet and compliance file in circulation still cites. That is why quoting it feels safe.

It is no longer the current edition. IEC 61111:2026 is the third edition, and its catalogue record is explicit: *"This third edition cancels and replaces the second edition published in 2009."*

Both statements are true at once, and that is the situation you have to write into a PO:

• The 2009 second edition is still the edition on the paperwork of most matting being sold today.
• The 2026 third edition has cancelled and replaced it at the standard level.

So the specification should name an edition rather than name the standard alone. "IEC 61111" invites the answer the supplier prefers; "IEC 61111:2009" or "IEC 61111:2026" invites the answer you asked for.

This is not an argument that every 2009 mat is now non-compliant, and it is not a claim that the 2026 edition has swept the market. It is a claim about paperwork: if the edition is not written down at the enquiry stage, it cannot be verified at the goods-in stage.

Regional adoptions are separate documents

"EN 61111", "CAN/ULC-61111" and "AS/NZS IEC 61111" are not alternative spellings of IEC 61111. Each is a national or regional document that adopts the IEC text, and in at least one case it adopts it with modifications.

The Canadian entry is the one that catches people out, because it is a modified adoption, not a verbatim one. ULC's own standards bulletin describes it as *"a Canadian adoption with modifications of the Second Edition of IEC 61111:2009 including all amendments as of July 2009."*

A modified adoption means the Canadian document is its own standard. It is derived from IEC 61111:2009, it is not a reprint of it.

The European entry deserves a similar care with wording. EN 61111:2009 corresponds to the IEC 2009 text as a harmonised adoption. What this article will not do is describe them as identical clause for clause, because that is a claim about the documents' contents rather than about their relationship, and it is not one we can support.

Why the difference bites at goods-in

If a mat arrives marked to CAN/ULC-61111-10 and the inspection sheet asks for IEC 61111:2009, the inspection fails on a document mismatch even though the product may be perfectly serviceable. The reverse also happens: a mat marked to IEC 61111 offered against a Canadian specification.

The fix is not a technical one. It is to write the adoption into the specification, and to ask for the declaration of conformity to that document, not to the family name.

What the mat has to carry

Whichever document applies, marking is where the compliance becomes checkable. Insulating matting carries, at minimum:

• the manufacturer's identification
• the live-working double-triangle symbol
• the reference to the standard
• the month and year of manufacture
• the category, where applicable
• the class designation

The colour code applies to the double-triangle symbol only — red for Class 0, white for Class 1, yellow for Class 2, green for Class 3, orange for Class 4. Colour is not a substitute for reading the class designation, and it is not a substitute for confirming which document the marking cites.

On roll material the markings repeat along the length — commonly every 400 mm, and not less than once per metre — so that a cut section still carries its identification. That detail matters more than it looks: a workshop that cuts a roll into bays can otherwise end up with pieces that no longer say what they are.

Writing the PO line

A line that can actually be checked names four things:

1. 1the document and its edition — for example `IEC 61111:2009`, or `CAN/ULC-61111-10` where Canada is the destination
2. 2the class, and therefore the voltage, in the standard's own terms
3. 3the thickness, if the buyer is specifying one, as a separate requirement rather than as an assumption about the class
4. 4the marking the goods must carry, and the declaration to be supplied with them

The fourth item is the one most often left out, and it is the one that decides whether goods-in can verify anything at all.

What this article does not claim

Three boundaries, stated plainly:

• We do not describe which clauses the Canadian or European documents changed relative to IEC 61111. We do not have the comparative text, and a guess would be worse than a gap.
• We do not describe IEC 61111:2026 as being in force across any particular market. Its status as the current edition is a fact about the standard; national adoption of it is a separate question.
• We do not give a thickness figure here as if it followed from a class. Thickness requirements belong to the document being specified, and to the product's own datasheet.

FAQ

Is a mat marked to IEC 61111:2009 still usable? Usability is an in-service question governed by your own inspection and re-test regime, not by the existence of a newer edition. What changes is the paperwork: a specification that names 2026 and goods that cite 2009 is a mismatch to resolve at the ordering stage.

Can one mat satisfy both the IEC and the Canadian document? A product can be declared against more than one document, but the declarations are separate and should be requested separately. Assume nothing about one from the other, especially given that the Canadian document is a modified adoption.

Which document applies in Europe? EN 61111:2009 is the European harmonised adoption corresponding to the IEC 2009 text. As with every entry in the table above, the practical requirement is that the document be named on the order.

How do we check the edition on goods that have already arrived? Read the marking on the mat itself. It cites a standard, and the edition question then becomes a comparison between that marking and your specification — which is why both need to be written down before the order is placed.

Does the class system change between documents? Class designations are the shared language across this family of documents, which is precisely why they get treated as sufficient. They are not: a class says what the mat is rated for, and the document says how that rating is established and declared.