Addendum to my earlier post. This grouping of equipment topic is the kind of grey area that is difficult to fit into regulations. That is exactly why the EC opted for the system of essential requirements and not for the "Technical Standards = Law " system. In any of such strict regulations there is space for doubt and grey areas. In each of such cases one should refer to the essential requirements and use a technical file method to obtain presumption of compliance.
THIS is the difference between the EC (New Approach) and the (for example) FCC approach. The FCC parts grow bigger and bigger in an everlasting attempt to cover new(er) technologies and always lags real world. New technologies in the EC are immediately covered by the Essential requirements and the associated technical standards are left to the market (CENELEC CEN ETSI) to be created. That these latter institutions do a lousy job, is a topic for another discussion. Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl 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: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:04 AM Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual constituant chassis In message <hutyiahslk6kf...@jmwa.demon.co.uk>, dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009, John Woodgate <j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk> writes: >>The EU - for quite a while - has had the opinion that CE+CE does NOT = >>CE (necessarily). >> >>This is a very perplexing question! > >No, it isn't. The principles were established LONG ago: they just >haven't penetrated, a situation not helped by Brussels not agreeing to >spell things out in plain language. My attention has been drawn to a question of interpretation of Jim's original message. He wrote: I am wondering what the industry experience is regarding basing EMC or Safety product certification on individual chassis (or subsystems/components) that may comprise the product, vs. certification at the product level? In particular, I have some products that are 40U racks containing multiple chassis, each of which is compliant and has its own certification. The expression 'chassis (or subsystems/components)' is perhaps ambiguous, but the following sentence indicates to me that these 'chassis' are finished products which are individually certified compliant for EMC and safety, and my responses use that interpretation. -- 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 Help stamp out intolerance! - 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>
