Re: [PSES] EMC Benign devices (was:RE: [PSES] Friday night conundrum)

[John Woodgate]

In message <55d54220.5070...@earthlink.net>, dated Wed, 19 Aug 2015, CR 
 writes:


Semi-OT: An EPA paper published some decades ago noted high RF fields 
close to, and voltages alleged to cause burns on contact with entirely 
passive metal railings, pipes and the like in the vicinity of radio 
broadcast stations.


When the BBC 45 MHz TV transmissions started in 1936, the musicians' 
music stands emitted sparks, because they were resonant antennas.

--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] EMC Benign devices (was:RE: [PSES] Friday night conundrum)

[Ted Eckert]

Hi RF fields can do a lot of interesting things. A few years ago, I jogged up 
to the top of a hill near my house where there are a number of broadcast 
antennae and other equipment. My MP3 player started to change songs and do 
strange things. I suspect I was doing some impromptu radiated susceptibility 
testing. The sign linked below may give a hint as to the field strength in the 
area.
http://1drv.ms/1PnkCdh

I decided to leave the vicinity well before my 4 minutes and 24 seconds was up.

Ted Eckert
The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer.

-Original Message-
From: CR [mailto:k...@earthlink.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:58 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC Benign devices (was:RE: [PSES] Friday night conundrum)

On 8/17/2015 8:14 PM, Ted Eckert wrote:
> Article 2, Section 2 (d) exempts the following.
>
> "Equipment the inherent nature of the physical characteristics of 
> which is such that: (i) it is incapable of generating or contributing 
> to electromagnetic emissions which exceed a level allowing radio and 
> telecommunication equipment and other equipment to operate as 
> intended;

Semi-OT: An EPA paper published some decades ago noted high RF fields close to, 
and voltages alleged to cause burns on contact with entirely passive metal 
railings, pipes and the like in the vicinity of radio broadcast stations.


Cortland Richmond
KA5S

-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] EMC Benign devices (was:RE: [PSES] Friday night conundrum)

[CR]

On 8/17/2015 8:14 PM, Ted Eckert wrote:

Article 2, Section 2 (d) exempts the following.

"Equipment the inherent nature of the physical characteristics of which is such 
that: (i) it is incapable of generating or contributing to electromagnetic emissions 
which exceed a level allowing radio and telecommunication equipment and other 
equipment to operate as intended;


Semi-OT: An EPA paper published some decades ago noted high RF fields 
close to, and voltages alleged to cause burns on contact with entirely 
passive metal railings, pipes and the like in the vicinity of radio 
broadcast stations.



Cortland Richmond
KA5S

-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[Larry]

Amund,
 
Regarding your circuit board failures, were they due to "Conductive Anodic
Filament (CAF) Formation" from either the spacing of via holes or poorly
drilled holes (dull drill bits)?  We may be having the same issue and
increasing the spacing from the drill hole to the inner layer copper as an
additional safety margin (as well as hole to hole spacing).
 
Regards,
Larry Merchell 
 
From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 2:55 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission
 
Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB with
good results.
 
Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. That's
because the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between via holes and
inner layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB manufacturer. The spacing
between the via holes and inner layers will now be increased by approximate
0.1mm.
 
I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the
radiated emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components on the
PCB and all the traces are unchanged. There will be different coupling
between the via hole and inner layer planes. Can less coupling result in
higher radiated emission? Maybe because of resonances due to less area for
inner layers, but we talk about very small changes . 0.1mm.
 
Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz. 
Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not make
any significate change, I guess.
 
Comments?
 
Best regards
Amund
 
 
 
-

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe)  
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell  
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  

-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] 2014/35/EU Requirement for Postal Address

[Kevin . McCandless]

Hello Experts,

 

I am looking for some clarification/understanding of the new postal
address requirement in the LVD 2014/35/EU.

Article 6 section 6 states:  "Manufacturers shall indicate on the
electrical equipment their name, registered trade name or registered
trade mark and the postal address at which they can be contracted or,
where that is not possible, on its packaging or in a document
accompanying the electrical equipment." This is a new requirement and is
causing a panic if we have to change 100's of product labels and /or
placards.

 

It has been my view that the postal address on the DoC is the "single
point at which the manufacturer can be contacted."

Also, the new LVD reads as if there may be multiple addresses required
on the product or packaging by the time the product gets to the end-user
(manufacturer, importer and possibly others).

 

Here's my shameless attempt to find a loop-hole...who determines what
satisfies the "or, where that is not possible," clause?

What if the current labeling cannot grow? Or our product management
group refuses to allow the aesthetics of the product to get cluttered
with another label (closer to the truth)?

If the postal address can be shipped with the product, either in an
installation instruction or on the DoC, this would be a much more
palatable option as opposed to label changes.

 

Any words of wisdom (relating to this topic) would be greatly
appreciated.

 

Best regards,


___ 

Kevin McCandless   |   Schneider Electric   |   Partner Business   |
Regulatory Engineer - Hardware




*** Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

 


-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[Doug Smith]

Hi Chas and the group,

I have noticed in my measurements that sometimes a signal via will 
casuse significant radiated emissions not from the via itself but from 
voltage generated between the planes. I have seen this effect at much 
lower frequencies than via effects normally, at the resonant frequency 
of the board as a whole, often a few hundred MHz.  And having a 
gnd-gnd via 1/40 of a wavelength away is much too distant to cut down 
significantly on the emissions. I present the data in some of my 
courses and presentations (IEEE and such) which some people on the list 
have seen. 


Doug

University of Oxford Tutor
Department for Continuing Education
Oxford, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom
---
Doug Smith
P.O. Box 60941
Boulder City, NV 89006-0941
TEL/FAX: 702-570-6108/570-6013
Mobile: 408-858-4528
Email: d...@dsmith.org
Web: http://www.dsmith.org
---

On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 19:52:04 , "Grasso, Charles" 
 wrote:


0.1mm = 4mils (right?)
 
IMO – the change will NOT change your emissions profile. 
However – only another emissions test will be definitive. 
 

Your trace impedance* will *change so I suggest you
use a solver to ensure that final impedance  will still be acceptable. 
 

 
Best Regards
 
Charles Grasso
 
Compliance Engineer
 
Echostar Communications
 
(w) 303-706-5467
 
(c) 303-204-2974
 
(t) 3032042...@vtext.com
 
(e) charles.gra...@echostar.com
 
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com
 
 
From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 3:55 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission
 
 
Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB 
with good results. 
 

 
Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. 
That’s because the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between 
via holes and inner layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB 
manufacturer. The spacing between the via holes and inner layers will 
now be increased by approximate 0.1mm. 
 

 
I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the 
radiated emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components 
on the PCB and all the traces are unchanged. There will be different 
coupling between the via hole and inner layer planes. Can less coupling 
result in higher radiated emission? Maybe because of resonances due to 
less area for inner layers, but we talk about very small changes … 
0.1mm. 
 

 
Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz. 
 
Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not 
make any significate change, I guess. 
 

 
Comments?
 
 
Best regards
 
Amund
 
 
 
 
-

 
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 

 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

 
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site 
at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in 
well-used formats), large files, etc. 
 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 
 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald 
 
-

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 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site 
at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in 
well-used formats), large files, etc. 
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald 

-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.o

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[Grasso, Charles]

Warning :  Frivolous comment below:

Of course a shorted pcb will have a wonderful emissions profile!

You were Warned!!

Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Compliance Engineer
Echostar Communications
(w) 303-706-5467
(c) 303-204-2974
(t) 3032042...@vtext.com
(e) charles.gra...@echostar.com
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com

From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:12 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] SV: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

Thanks Gert,

The test was carried out on an error free PCB. The shorts came up on the next 
PCB production batch.

#Amund

Fra: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen [mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl]
Sendt: 19. august 2015 14:07
Til: Amund Westin mailto:am...@westin-emission.no>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Emne: RE: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

No , you will probably not notice any difference; my experience says < 0.5 dB.
Unless the short-circuits  impacted the functionality in such a way that 
emission dropped also !

Gert Gremmen


From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Wednesday 19 August 2015 11:55
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB with 
good results.

Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. That's because 
the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between via holes and inner 
layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB manufacturer. The spacing between 
the via holes and inner layers will now be increased by approximate 0.1mm.

I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the radiated 
emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components on the PCB and all 
the traces are unchanged. There will be different coupling between the via hole 
and inner layer planes. Can less coupling result in higher radiated emission? 
Maybe because of resonances due to less area for inner layers, but we talk 
about very small changes ... 0.1mm.

Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz.
Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not make any 
significate change, I guess.

Comments?

Best regards
Amund



-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto: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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto: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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Re: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[Grasso, Charles]

0.1mm = 4mils (right?)
IMO - the change will NOT change your emissions profile.
However - only another emissions test will be definitive.
Your trace impedance* will *change so I suggest you
use a solver to ensure that final impedance  will still be acceptable.

Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Compliance Engineer
Echostar Communications
(w) 303-706-5467
(c) 303-204-2974
(t) 3032042...@vtext.com
(e) charles.gra...@echostar.com
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com

From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 3:55 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB with 
good results.

Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. That's because 
the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between via holes and inner 
layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB manufacturer. The spacing between 
the via holes and inner layers will now be increased by approximate 0.1mm.

I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the radiated 
emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components on the PCB and all 
the traces are unchanged. There will be different coupling between the via hole 
and inner layer planes. Can less coupling result in higher radiated emission? 
Maybe because of resonances due to less area for inner layers, but we talk 
about very small changes ... 0.1mm.

Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz.
Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not make any 
significate change, I guess.

Comments?

Best regards
Amund



-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto: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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] EN 61000-3-3:2013

[Jim Hulbert]

Thank you John.  That's encouraging.  I'll obviously make my own decision after 
reviewing the updated standard, but it looks like I shouldn't have any big 
issues for my type of product.

- Jim
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 1:16 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 61000-3-3:2013

In message
<7B9D892F88F070469771832D78B3086E2CE57B05@013-BR1MPN1-013.MGDPBI.global.p
vt>, dated Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Jim Hulbert  writes:

>EN 61000-3-3:2008 is superseded by EN 61000-3-3:2013.   What is the
>likelihood a product that passes the 2008 version with wide margin
>would also pass the 2013 version?  Are the differences that great?  I?m
>ordering the 2013 version to review for myself but would like to know
>how others are generally reacting (essentially are people re-testing or
>not).

It's mostly a matter of clarification, without significant changes to
the actual requirements. But because of the need for clarification, some
people may have interpreted the standard wrongly in some details.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 



-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] Relay Circuits

[Justin Robinson]

I am currently evaluating a temperature control meter being powered by 120 Vac 
MAINs to 61010-1 2010 edition.  Would a 3A 250 Vac relay output be classified 
as MAINs or secondary circuit?  If one looks at definitions, MAINs circuits 
purpose is to power the equipment and the relay circuit is not powering the 
equipment, MAINs is.  Secondary circuits are circuits where separation from 
MAINs circuits is achieved by a transformer of DI, RI, or grounded.  There is a 
DI transformer between MAINs and the relay circuit but not between relay and 
input/output terminal.  The relay meets RI/DI but does that satisfy definition 
for secondary circuits which only mentions transformer?

Justin Robinson, Quality Assurance Engineer
Red Lion Controls | www.redlion.net
+1 (717) 767-6961 x6303 office




-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] EN 61000-3-3:2013

[John Woodgate]

In message 
<7B9D892F88F070469771832D78B3086E2CE57B05@013-BR1MPN1-013.MGDPBI.global.p

vt>, dated Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Jim Hulbert  writes:

EN 61000-3-3:2008 is superseded by EN 61000-3-3:2013.   What is the 
likelihood a product that passes the 2008 version with wide margin 
would also pass the 2013 version?  Are the differences that great?  I?m 
ordering the 2013 version to review for myself but would like to know 
how others are generally reacting (essentially are people re-testing or 
not).


It's mostly a matter of clarification, without significant changes to 
the actual requirements. But because of the need for clarification, some 
people may have interpreted the standard wrongly in some details.

--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] Relay Circuits

[Justin Robinson]

I am currently evaluating a temperature control meter being powered by 120 Vac 
MAINs to 61010-1 2010 edition.  Would a 3A 250 Vac relay output be classified 
as MAINs or secondary circuit?  If one looks at definitions, MAINs circuits 
purpose is to power the equipment and the relay circuit is not powering the 
equipment, MAINs is.  Secondary circuits are circuits where separation from 
MAINs circuits is achieved by a transformer of DI, RI, or grounded.  There is a 
DI transformer between MAINs and the relay circuit but not between relay and 
input/output terminal.  The relay meets RI/DI but does that satisfy definition 
for secondary circuits which only mentions transformer?
Justin Robinson, Quality Assurance Engineer
Red Lion Controls | www.redlion.net
+1 (717) 767-6961 x6303 office




-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] EN 61000-3-3:2013

[Jim Hulbert]

EN 61000-3-3:2008 is superseded by EN 61000-3-3:2013.   What is the likelihood 
a product that passes the 2008 version with wide margin would also pass the 
2013 version?  Are the differences that great?  I'm ordering the 2013 version 
to review for myself but would like to know how others are generally reacting 
(essentially are people re-testing or not).

Thanks.
Jim Hulbert





-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] CE DoI and DoC in one document.

[Douglas Powell]

  All,I have seen two DoC with one shipment, one for the EMC portion and one for the LVD. When‎ I asked why, the answer was for administrative purposes. Apparently it was easier for the company to manage changing regulatory requirements and ECOs in this way.  I found no reason why this was not allowed and to my knowledge there is no clearly stated restriction on this practice.     I suspect you can manage a DoI in the same way, but mixing DoI and DoC seems to leave room for ambiguity or confusion. Since most companies want their declarations on a single page, it could be more difficult to clearly segregate the two aspects of a document like that.‎Best, DougDouglas E Powelldoug...@gmail.comhttp://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01    From: Nyffenegger, DaveSent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 9:19 AMTo: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGReply To: Nyffenegger, DaveSubject: Re: [PSES] CE DoI and DoC in one document.







I write a single Declaration of Incorporation and include all applicable directives, Machinery, EMC, RoHS, etc.  The directives want all of the declarations to be together but if memory serves they also allow
 individual declarations to be bundled so you could also have a DoI bundled with a DoC.   Since the DoI distinction is important I would not put it in a sub-heading within a DoC.
 
-Dave
 


From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]

Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 11:08 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] CE DoI and DoC in one document.


 
A Declaration of Incorporation is only applicable to the Machinery Directive. All other CE Marking directives applicable to a product must have a Declaration of Conformity. I have seen some “all in one” documents that are titled as Declarations
 of Incorporation but have compliance declarations for the other directives within them. I have seen others where the document title is Declaration of Conformity but they include a sub-heading for a DoI bit.
 
Does anyone know if there is a defined ‘right’ way to mix the two?

 
Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor
 
-

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 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell  
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  



-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.


Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher  
David Heald 


-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.


Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 

Re: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[Ravinder Ajmani]

Hi Amund,

One impact of increasing the via clearance (increasing the anti-pad size) is 
that the signals that are routed too close to the via may not have adequate 
ground return.  This can have Signal Integrity as well as EMI implications.  I 
would go through the layout to check such signals, and improve the layout if 
needed.

Regards
Ravinder Ajmani
HGST, a Western Digital company
5601 Great Oaks Pkwy
San Jose, CA 95119-1003
ravinder.ajm...@hgst.com


From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 2:55 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB with 
good results.

Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. That's because 
the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between via holes and inner 
layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB manufacturer. The spacing between 
the via holes and inner layers will now be increased by approximate 0.1mm.

I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the radiated 
emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components on the PCB and all 
the traces are unchanged. There will be different coupling between the via hole 
and inner layer planes. Can less coupling result in higher radiated emission? 
Maybe because of resonances due to less area for inner layers, but we talk 
about very small changes ... 0.1mm.

Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz.
Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not make any 
significate change, I guess.

Comments?

Best regards
Amund



-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>
HGST E-mail Confidentiality Notice & Disclaimer:
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential or 
legally privileged information of HGST and are intended solely for the use of 
the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the 
intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken 
or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited.  If you have received 
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the 
e-mail in its entirety from your system.

-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] CE DoI and DoC in one document.

[Crane, Lauren]

A Declaration of Incorporation is only applicable to the Machinery Directive. 
All other CE Marking directives applicable to a product must have a Declaration 
of Conformity. I have seen some "all in one" documents that are titled as 
Declarations of Incorporation but have compliance declarations for the other 
directives within them. I have seen others where the document title is 
Declaration of Conformity but they include a sub-heading for a DoI bit.

Does anyone know if there is a defined 'right' way to mix the two?

Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor


-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] JDQ and SAE automotive test

[David]

Does anyone have experience with John Deere's JDQ 53.3 or JDQ 202? I'm looking 
at the magnetic field collapse transient, and don't see a good way to do it. 
The damping factor is incredibly low - it is a 450 V pulse at 1 MHz, that has 
only dropped to 200 V after 10 us. We've got a CS116 generator and RTCA 
lightning equipment, but those decay much faster. 
SAE J1113-11 is also giving me an issue. The 2012 edition requires a 10 second 
rep rate for load dump. I can find no commercially available transient systems 
that will do load dump that quickly. Best I've found is around 20 seconds.  
That also seems unnecessarily rapid. Load dump is simulating disconnecting a 
load from the alternator. I don't think that's happening every ten seconds in a 
vehicle. 
Does anyone have a suggestion here? 
Thanks,

David


-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] CE DoI and DoC in one document.

[Nyffenegger, Dave]

I write a single Declaration of Incorporation and include all applicable 
directives, Machinery, EMC, RoHS, etc.  The directives want all of the 
declarations to be together but if memory serves they also allow individual 
declarations to be bundled so you could also have a DoI bundled with a DoC.   
Since the DoI distinction is important I would not put it in a sub-heading 
within a DoC.

-Dave

From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 11:08 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] CE DoI and DoC in one document.

A Declaration of Incorporation is only applicable to the Machinery Directive. 
All other CE Marking directives applicable to a product must have a Declaration 
of Conformity. I have seen some "all in one" documents that are titled as 
Declarations of Incorporation but have compliance declarations for the other 
directives within them. I have seen others where the document title is 
Declaration of Conformity but they include a sub-heading for a DoI bit.

Does anyone know if there is a defined 'right' way to mix the two?

Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor

-


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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto: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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum

[ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen]

Free movement of goods throughout the EU.  ;<)

Gert Gremmen

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday 19 August 2015 15:08
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum

In message <7a35c33bdc1b47e78c2167cf7c4a4...@sehste15d1be4.hs20.net>,
dated Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Charlie Blackham 
writes:

>A: assume you mean devices similar to those used for RFID; readers 
>(including terminals, interrogators) and transponders (including tags, 
>contactless cards and similar devices) all fall within the definition 
>of "radio equipment? and must be assessed against the essential 
>requirements of the Radio Equipment Directive.

I wonder which 'essential requirement' a simple tuned circuit could
violate.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk When
I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow John Woodgate, J M
Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum

[John Woodgate]

In message <7a35c33bdc1b47e78c2167cf7c4a4...@sehste15d1be4.hs20.net>, 
dated Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Charlie Blackham  
writes:


A: assume you mean devices similar to those used for RFID; readers 
(including terminals, interrogators) and transponders (including tags, 
contactless cards and similar devices) all fall within the definition 
of "radio equipment? and must be assessed against the essential 
requirements of the Radio Equipment Directive.


I wonder which 'essential requirement' a simple tuned circuit could 
violate.

--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum

[Charlie Blackham]

John (P)



Back in the office this afternoon...



Interpretation on Tags:

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/documents/interpretation_en.htm#h2-36



there's a TUV 
Q&A
 on the RED,, which includes the following :

Q: Do passive transponders fall into the scope of the RED?

A: assume you mean devices similar to those used for RFID; readers (including 
terminals, interrogators) and transponders (including tags, contactless cards 
and similar devices) all fall within the definition of "radio equipment" and 
must be assessed against the essential requirements of the Radio Equipment 
Directive.



This was also the subject of a TCAM meeting, 21 (06) 36, in 2006, which 
concluded:



1.  Products that are tagged are not radio equipment;

2.  Passive tags attached to them are relevant components in the sense of 
the Directive and as such covered by its provisions;



The R&TTECA also produced a Technical Guidance Note, TGN12, which  notes:
Where the manufacturer is the manufacturer of the transponder only he shall 
assess the transponder in conjunction with at least one representative reader, 
with which the transponder is intended to interact, for compliance with the 
essential requirements.



Regards

Charlie



-Original Message-
From: Pearson, John [mailto:john.pear...@polycom.com]
Sent: 17 August 2015 11:57
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum



Hi



Thanks



When the card is inserted in the reader it is powered.  Thus it also makes 
sense to test the "card" in a "representative reader" as well as the other way 
around.



Re CE marking I can't find the document on Europa you referred to Charlie to 
(can you point to it please for interest).  Can John remember what TUV Sud said?



I don't understand "de Minimus".  Clearly better read than me (that's not hard, 
don't ever partner with me in a pub quiz.  Useless)



John





-Original Message-

From: CR [mailto:k...@earthlink.net]

Sent: 15 August 2015 15:00

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum



On 8/15/2015 9:01 AM, John Woodgate wrote:

> The enquiry was about credit cards, not RFID.





Good to be reminded.  If the card contains a device used only in the reader, it 
would make sense for the *reader* to be tested -- with representative cards.



Near-field reading is possible with some cards, and those could only be tested 
in the presence of a properly operating near-field reader, which includes the 
transmission of verification codes to prevent unauthorized access to financial 
and personal data (and funds!), not just just an energizing EM field.



THAT applies to a number of access cards/badges used since the 1980's , so 
presumably has already been addressed some years ago in the appropriate 
standards.





Cortland Richmond



-



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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>



All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html



Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.



Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html



For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>

Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>



For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher:  mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>

David Heald: mailto: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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>



All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html



Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.



Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html



For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>

Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>



For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher:  mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>

David Heald: mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

This m

[PSES] SV: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[Amund Westin]

Thanks Gert,

 

The test was carried out on an error free PCB. The shorts came up on the
next PCB production batch.

 

#Amund

 

Fra: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
[mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl] 
Sendt: 19. august 2015 14:07
Til: Amund Westin ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Emne: RE: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

 

No , you will probably not notice any difference; my experience says < 0.5
dB.

Unless the short-circuits  impacted the functionality in such a way that
emission dropped also !

 

Gert Gremmen

 

 

From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] 
Sent: Wednesday 19 August 2015 11:55
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

 

Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB with
good results.

 

Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. That's
because the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between via holes and
inner layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB manufacturer. The spacing
between the via holes and inner layers will now be increased by approximate
0.1mm.

 

I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the
radiated emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components on the
PCB and all the traces are unchanged. There will be different coupling
between the via hole and inner layer planes. Can less coupling result in
higher radiated emission? Maybe because of resonances due to less area for
inner layers, but we talk about very small changes . 0.1mm.

 

Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz. 

Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not make
any significate change, I guess.

 

Comments?

 

Best regards

Amund

 

 

 

-


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
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe)  
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto: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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen]

No , you will probably not notice any difference; my experience says <
0.5 dB.

Unless the short-circuits  impacted the functionality in such a way that
emission dropped also !

 

Gert Gremmen

 

 

From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] 
Sent: Wednesday 19 August 2015 11:55
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

 

Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB
with good results.

 

Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. That's
because the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between via holes
and inner layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB manufacturer. The
spacing between the via holes and inner layers will now be increased by
approximate 0.1mm.

 

I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the
radiated emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components on
the PCB and all the traces are unchanged. There will be different
coupling between the via hole and inner layer planes. Can less coupling
result in higher radiated emission? Maybe because of resonances due to
less area for inner layers, but we talk about very small changes ...
0.1mm.

 

Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz. 

Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not
make any significate change, I guess.

 

Comments?

 

Best regards

Amund

 

 

 

-


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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe)  
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  


-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[John Woodgate]

In message <01d0da65$2272df10$67589d30$@westin-emission.no>, dated 
Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Amund Westin  writes:


I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the 
radiated emission tests.


Do a 'pre-compliance' test and if there is no problem, document what was 
done and why yo didn't go for a full re-test.

--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

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 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] PCB via holes - radiated emission

[Amund Westin]

Have previously done some radiated emission tests on a multi-layer PCB with
good results.

 

Now, all the via holes will change in the next layout revision. That's
because the original PCB had a lot of short-circuits between via holes and
inner layers, due to inaccurate process by the PCB manufacturer. The spacing
between the via holes and inner layers will now be increased by approximate
0.1mm.

 

I can hardly see that this change will cause any major impact on the
radiated emission tests. It will still be the same (clock) components on the
PCB and all the traces are unchanged. There will be different coupling
between the via hole and inner layer planes. Can less coupling result in
higher radiated emission? Maybe because of resonances due to less area for
inner layers, but we talk about very small changes . 0.1mm.

 

Right now, we have 10dB margin @ 1600MHz. 

Increased distance between via holes and inner layer by 0.1mm will not make
any significate change, I guess.

 

Comments?

 

Best regards

Amund

 

 


-

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 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: