Re: [PSES] US vehicle EMC regulations

2021-12-20 Thread Ken Javor 
It is worth noting that about one hundred years ago, in the complete absence
of EMC departments or even acknowledgement of such a discipline, electrical
engineers worked out what was necessary to adequately suppress ignition
noise to allow for AM BCB reception in automobiles. Whereas today, Tesla for
instance, with a full-up EMC department, punted on AM BCB reception in their
electric vehicles.

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261



From: Bill Owsley <00f5a03f18eb-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>
Reply-To: Bill Owsley 
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 03:25:20 +
To: 
Subject: Re: [PSES] US vehicle EMC regulations

 
Long ago, when US auto manufacturers were the main stream norm, and they
worked out a deal with the FCC to regulate themselves and not be subject to
the FCC.  
The FCC agreed since any interference would be obvious and the FCC has the
primary interference clause, thou shall not interfere, or they would impose
Federal regs on the auto industry.
If has worked well, but has not in the US, come up with a common set of auto
EMC standards.
So for Auto EMC, map out the "big three" requirements and stay under the
composite levels.

Aside:  anyone remember non=resistive plugs and copper spark plug wires and
radios with tubes that used a vibrator (old style) to generate AC to then
generate the correct DC needed to run the radio ?
And listening to AM with cars around you ?   Buzzzing noise !

ps. The EU is quite different.

- Bill Owsley
EMC First LLC (Jan 2022)


  
 
  
 On Friday, December 17, 2021, 10:52:58 AM EST, Ken Javor
 wrote:
 

 

 
CISPR 25 is used for equipment-level emissions (CE & RE).  This is for the
purpose of protecting on-board radio reception and has nothing to do with
the FCC. ISO 11452-X provide a variety of immunity requirements. And, as
noted previously, various OEMS have their own internal requirements.  The
only FCC overview of any of this concerns SAE J551, where they measure
vehicle-level emissions at ten meters separation from the vehicle, for the
protection of roadside licensed broadcast receivers.

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261



From: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)" 
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 12:05:33 -
To: 
Subject: [PSES] US vehicle EMC regulations

Hi all,
 
I¹m familiar with UNECE Regulation 10 that covers EMC for vehicles and
Electronic Sub Assemblies in Europe.
 
Is there an equivalent set of vehicle EMC standards for the US?
 
Presumably CFR47 Part 15 applies to unintentional and intentional radiators
as well?
 
Thanks and all the best
James
 
 
 
James Pawson
The EMC Problem Solver
 
Unit 3 Compliance Ltd
EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA :
Consultancy
 
www.unit3compliance.co.uk    |
ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk 
+44(0)1274 911747  |  +44(0)7811 139957
2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL
Registered in England and Wales # 10574298
 
 



  This email has been checked for
viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com 
  <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
-


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 Safe

Re: [PSES] RoHS III references on the DoC?

2021-12-20 Thread Douglas E Powell 
Thank you everyone. As always, very informative.

-Doug


Douglas E Powell
Laporte, Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com
LinkedIn 

On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 9:05 PM Bill Owsley <
00f5a03f18eb-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> wrote:

> And if asked to provide evidence, documents, etc backing up the
> declaration, there will be a limited time to do so.
> Management might take the position to get the doc's when asked, and hope
> that they are indeed in compliance.
> The consequence can be banned from the market for a period.
> That happened due to a manufacturing defect and insufficient quality
> control to detect the defect.
> Near a year to correct and demonstrate compliance before getting off the
> ban.
>
> So nothing moves into our distribution control without solid evidence of
> compliance.
> A letter from an importer does not suffice, but if often offered.
> Even a big time manufacturer has offered to print anything we want on the
> label.
>
>
>
> On Thursday, December 16, 2021, 3:30:12 PM EST, John Woodgate <
> j...@woodjohn.uk> wrote:
>
>
> My advice is always cite, because Mr. Militant Customs Man can challenge
> your import because there is no proof on the DoC that you have taken all
> the amendments into account. You don't need to list every amendment; 'and
> all amendments up to the date of dispatch' should be enough.
>
> ==
> Best wishes John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
> www.woodjohn.uk
> Rayleigh, Essex UK
> Istae nunc praetereunt nisi non ubicumque
>
>
>
> On 2021-12-16 20:23, Charlie Blackham wrote:
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> It’s not required – the applicable Directive is still 2011/65/EU
>
>
>
> 2015/863 Directive amended it…….as did 60 or so Commission Delegated
> Directives
>
>
>
> Whether you like it or not, declaring compliance to RoHS means that you
> are declaring compliance with RoHS, as amended, with applicable permitted
> exemptions if permitted, at the time of signing.
>
>
>
> Lots of people like ask to see it on the DoC, so I agree that it won’t
> hurt, probably isn’t “wrong”, but also is not “required”
>
>
>
> You do not however declare compliance to RoHS III (it doesn’t exist)
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
> *Charlie Blackham*
>
> *Sulis Consultants Ltd*
>
> *Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317*
>
> *Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/  *
>
> Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
>
>
>
> *From:* John Woodgate  
> *Sent:* 16 December 2021 20:19
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] RoHS III references on the DoC?
>
>
>
> It can't hurt to cite it. There are cases where a citation is not allowed,
> but I don't think this is one of them.
>
>
> ==
> Best wishes John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
> www.woodjohn.uk
> Rayleigh, Essex UK
> Istae nunc praetereunt nisi non ubicumque
>
>
> On 2021-12-16 19:48, Douglas E Powell wrote:
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Given that Directive 2011/65/EU has been amended by Directive (EU)
> 2015/863, is it now necessary to reference the amendment on the Declaration
> of Conformity?
>
>
>
> This is an amendment to Annex II, and "RoHS III" appears terminology used
> by the unwashed masses.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> -Doug
>
>
>
>
>
> Douglas E Powell
>
> Laporte, Colorado USA
>
> doug...@gmail.com
>
> LinkedIn 
>
> -
> 
>
> 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.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 
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> Virus-free. www.avg.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 archiv

Re: [PSES] US vehicle EMC regulations

2021-12-20 Thread Lfresearch 
LOL Ken, maybe if you want to listen to AM Radio you probably shouldn’t be 
driving a Tesla. ;-)

I have to say, personally, I’m on Teslas side here. They realize that other 
means exist to get radio stations anywhere, if you really want that.

As long as my car gets internet, I’m happy.

Have a very happy Holiday everyone.

Cheers,

Derek.

> On Dec 20, 2021, at 9:48 AM, Ken Javor  wrote:
> 
> It is worth noting that about one hundred years ago, in the complete absence 
> of EMC departments or even acknowledgement of such a discipline, electrical 
> engineers worked out what was necessary to adequately suppress ignition noise 
> to allow for AM BCB reception in automobiles. Whereas today, Tesla for 
> instance, with a full-up EMC department, punted on AM BCB reception in their 
> electric vehicles.
> 
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
> 
> 
> From: Bill Owsley <00f5a03f18eb-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org 
> >
> Reply-To: Bill Owsley >
> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 03:25:20 +
> To: >
> Subject: Re: [PSES] US vehicle EMC regulations
> 
> 
> Long ago, when US auto manufacturers were the main stream norm, and they 
> worked out a deal with the FCC to regulate themselves and not be subject to 
> the FCC.  
> The FCC agreed since any interference would be obvious and the FCC has the 
> primary interference clause, thou shall not interfere, or they would impose 
> Federal regs on the auto industry.
> If has worked well, but has not in the US, come up with a common set of auto 
> EMC standards.
> So for Auto EMC, map out the "big three" requirements and stay under the 
> composite levels.
> 
> Aside:  anyone remember non=resistive plugs and copper spark plug wires and 
> radios with tubes that used a vibrator (old style) to generate AC to then 
> generate the correct DC needed to run the radio ?
> And listening to AM with cars around you ?   Buzzzing noise !
> 
> ps. The EU is quite different.
> 
> - Bill Owsley
> EMC First LLC (Jan 2022)
> 
> 
>   
> 
>  
>  On Friday, December 17, 2021, 10:52:58 AM EST, Ken Javor 
> > wrote: 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> CISPR 25 is used for equipment-level emissions (CE & RE).  This is for the 
> purpose of protecting on-board radio reception and has nothing to do with the 
> FCC. ISO 11452-X provide a variety of immunity requirements. And, as noted 
> previously, various OEMS have their own internal requirements.  The only FCC 
> overview of any of this concerns SAE J551, where they measure vehicle-level 
> emissions at ten meters separation from the vehicle, for the protection of 
> roadside licensed broadcast receivers.
> 
> Ken Javor
> Phone: (256) 650-5261
> 
> 
> From: "James Pawson (U3C)"  >
> Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)"  >
> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 12:05:33 -
> To: >
> Subject: [PSES] US vehicle EMC regulations
> 
> Hi all,
>  
> I’m familiar with UNECE Regulation 10 that covers EMC for vehicles and 
> Electronic Sub Assemblies in Europe.
>  
> Is there an equivalent set of vehicle EMC standards for the US?
>  
> Presumably CFR47 Part 15 applies to unintentional and intentional radiators 
> as well?
>  
> Thanks and all the best
> James
>  
>  
>  
> James Pawson
> The EMC Problem Solver
> 
> Unit 3 Compliance Ltd
> EMC : Environmental & Vibration : Electrical Safety : CE & UKCA : Consultancy
> 
> www.unit3compliance.co.uk  >   |  ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk 
>   > 
> +44(0)1274 911747  |  +44(0)7811 139957
> 2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL
> Registered in England and Wales # 10574298
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  > This email has been checked for 
> viruses by AVG antivirus software. 
> www.avg.com  > 
>  <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> 
> -
> 
> 
> 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 l