Regards,
Ing. Gert Gremmen
I object….
>You don't HAVE to do any testing at all. What you have to do is decide
>what tests YOU need to do to be sure that your product meets the
>Essential Requirements of the Directive. You may well decide that you do
>need to apply EN 55022 and EN 55024 in respect of the data port.
While theoretically correct, that conclusion is too academic, and the 1st phrase
is suggestive. In a world where many malfunctions in equipment are caused by EMC
and a lot of serious accidents with "equipment" smell like EMC, we as experts
need not
to discourage manufacturers to seek real compliance. (Not even UK based experts
;<))
In my practice of emc-consultant I found much too much examples of equipment
that carry the CE-mark but do not comply, sometimes without the need for me to
test. Only this week I came over a set of power supplies in a
medical environment that emitted that much conducted interference that
nearby ECG-like equipment was disturbed by the CM voltage.
This is a power supply delivered with a piece of Medical equipment, often
used in conjunction with such equipment.
I suppose John, that this manufacturer read your 1st phrase only, and
then just purchased ce-labels. The situation is bad enough as it is,
and with (in Europe) with the new UHF band to be used for wireless
mobile internet, a whole new interference opportunity is created.
The EMCD in the previous version required compliance to a harmonized standard
only, and the manufacturer
only needed to be compliant (if cougth) to fullfil all requirements, the way he
achieved that
was irrelevant.
The EMCD in the latest version requires compliance to a harmonized standard AND
(written) proof of that compliance
to obtain presumption of compliance with the essential requirements to. If
that proof is not obtained by testing, I cannot think of many
cases but the well known and obvious light bulb, where a test can be skipped
for physical reasons.
OR
Creating Presumption of compliance any other way, which in practice
comes down to creating a similar test suite to the generic standards set
with exceptions based on knowledge of the product and written argumentation
of that. In addition you need to consider if there is any EM phenomena
that you might have overlooked up to 400 GHz.
Of all new equipment brought to our lab 95-99 % is initially
NON-compliant. For US customers we test for that has been 100%.
Only recurring customers achieve better rates.
g.grem...@cetest.nl <mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl>
ce-test, qualified testing bv
www.cetest.nl
Kiotoweg 363
3047 BG Rotterdam
T 31(0)104152426
F 31(0)104154953
Before printing, think about the environment.
Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens John Woodgate
Verzonden: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 7:27 AM
Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re: CISPR 11 & CISPR 22
In message <5AA25764446A4A7296F2174FC6877C0C@christopher>, dated Mon, 9
Aug 2010, Chris Wells <radioactive55...@comcast.net> writes:
>I have an industrial product that has fallen under CISPR 11 but now has
>an Ethernet port.
>
>Do I need to test to both? Looking at competitors documentations that
>is what they appear to be doing.
You don't HAVE to do any testing at all. What you have to do is decide
what tests YOU need to do to be sure that your product meets the
Essential Requirements of the Directive. You may well decide that you do
need to apply EN 55022 and EN 55024 in respect of the data port.
>
>
>
>My product also has many different field circuits.
>
>For CISPR 22 does each circuit group need a LISN or just the Ethernet
>port and the power supply when testing?
Again, you have to decide. It seems to me that you need to connect these
ports to auxiliary equipments or to suitable dummy loads. I'm not sure
that LISNs are appropriate for such circuits.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
If at first you don't succeed, delegate.
But I support unbloated email http://www.asciiribbon.org/
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<emc-p...@ieee.org>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <emcp...@socal.rr.com>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<emc-p...@ieee.org>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <emcp...@socal.rr.com>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com>
