In message <003001cadc19$3ddff120$d600a...@tamuracorp.com>, dated Wed, 14 Apr 2010, Brian O'Connell <oconne...@tamuracorp.com> writes:
> >For now, I cannot think of any reason that IEC60950-1 and CISPR22 could >not be used. Neither of them were written with wireless transfer of power in mind. So they need a lot of 'interpretation' in places, and some factors are not covered, such as human exposure. In Europe, EN 55022 and EN 55024 would not apply, because as an intentional radiator, the product would come within the terms of reference of either CISPR/B (so CISPR 11/EN 55011 would apply) or of ETSI (which would involve a performance standard, with EMC clauses or a separate EMC standard). -- 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 I should be disillusioned, but it's not worth the effort. - 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>
