Re: [PSES] Device with Bluetooth

[McCallum, Andy]

Bluetooth power levels
The transmitter powers for Bluetooth are quite low, although there are three 
different classes of output dependent upon the anticipated use and the range 
required.
Power Class 1 is designed for long range communications up to about 100m 
devices, and this has a maximum output power of 20 dBm.
Next is Power Class 2 which is used for what are termed for ordinary range 
devices with a range up to about 10m, with a maximum output power of 6 dBm.
Finally there is Power Class 3 for short range devices. Bluetooth class 3 
supports communication only up to distances of about 10cm and it has a maximum 
output power of 0 dBm.
Power control is mandatory for Bluetooth Class 1, but optional for the others, 
although its use is advisable to conserve battery power. The appropriate power 
elvel can be chosen according to the RSSI, Received Strength Signal Indictor 
reading.

Class

Maximum power
dBm

Power control capability

1

20

Mandatory

2

4

Optional

3

0

Optional

Summary of Bluetooth Power Classes


From: Charlie Blackham 
Sent: 02 October 2018 17:50
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Device with Bluetooth

Amund

Yes it is - whilst EN 300 328 applies to "Wide Band Data Transmission" 
equipment, it covers that equipment under 
REC70-03
 Annex 3 which allows maximum transmit power of 100 mW EIRP but also mandates 
adequate spectrum sharing conditions (for transmitters above 10 mW EIRP)

Rec 70-03 Annex 1 also allows operation in the 2400-2483.5 MHz band, but with 
power limited to 10mW EIRP and the cited standard for that is EN 300 440
Bluetooth devices are generally (always?) under 10 mW so either standard could 
be applied

regards
Charlie

Charlie Blackham
Sulis Consultants Ltd
Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317
Web: 
www.sulisconsultants.com
Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247

From: Amund Westin mailto:am...@westin-emission.no>>
Sent: 02 October 2018 17:23
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Device with Bluetooth

Those test reports I have seen on devices with Bluetooth communication, EN 300 
328 has been use.
Now, I came over such a device which has been tested according to EN 300 440 
(SRD). Is that a valid optional standard to use?

BR
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 

Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

[McCallum, Andy]

Bernd

Further:

the European medical directive (93/42/EEC) and UK regulations for medical 
devices (BS EN 60601-1-2) instruct manufacturers that they should minimise the 
risk from foreseeable environmental conditions such as magnetic fields and 
external electrical influences.
BS EN 45502-2-2, harmonised standard under the AIMD, test 27.7 exposes 
pacemakers to fields up to 50 mT  for 1 minute, the device operating normally 
once the field is removed.  



  
BS EN 50527-1 Procedure for risk assessment of AIMD gives a Static field limit 
of 1mT stating exposure to fields in excess of this may influence the operation 
AIMD. Prolonged exposure is not advised but short term transient conditions may 
be tolerated. 
There are approximately 250,000 people fitted with pacemakers in the UK (2010)
BS ISO 14117:2012 Active implantable medical devices specifies static DC 
magnetic field testing at 50 mT.

-Original Message-
From: McCallum, Andy [mailto:andy.mccal...@mottmac.com] 
Sent: 06 July 2018 10:27
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Hi Bernd

It’s a mess but at this time no one seems to want to address the limit. If the 
public exposure limit is 400mT then all equipment including pacemakers should 
operate at this level or higher.

Some progress was made towards the slightly older ICNIRP limit of 40mT

BS ISO 14117:2012 

4.7 Protection from static magnetic fields of flux density up to 50 mT
4.7.1 General considerations
The DUT shall not remain functionally affected after exposure to static 
magnetic fields of flux density of up to 50 mT.
4.7.2 Pacemakers and CRT-P devices
Test equipment: use a field coil that is capable of generating a uniform 
magnetic field of flux density of up to
50 mT ± 5 mT in the region to be occupied by the DUT.
Test procedure: the required field flux density shall be generated before 
placing the DUT in the field. Then the DUT shall be slowly placed in the centre 
of the test coil. After at least 15 s of exposure to the magnetic field, the 
DUT shall be slowly removed from the field.

https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rbht.nhs.uk%2Fabout%2Fnews-events%2Farchive%2Fpacemaker%2F=01%7C01%7CAndy.McCallum%40mottmac.com%7C8ab8be52e7fd4abf03ec08d5e322bb23%7Ca2bed0c459574f73b0c2a811407590fb%7C0=4JPlio918VOy7yMaqcyNb9pvdfBuWRR4KZTscTWw1dQ%3D=0

The easiest was around it is to actually contact the manufacturer and try and 
get some form of reassurance from them. 

Regards

Andy


-Original Message-
From: Dürrer Bernd [mailto:bernd.duer...@wilo.com]
Sent: 06 July 2018 09:53
To: McCallum, Andy ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: AW: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Hello Andy,

Thank you for pointing out the ICNIRP limits: Actually, I recently had a 
request concerning a service technician with a pacemaker and exposure to static 
magnetic fields when handling permanent magnet rotors.
However, when I check ICNIRP resources, I do not find any publication to 
justify higher limits. On the contrary, the “ICNIRP GUIDELINES ON LIMITS OF 
EXPOSURE TO STATIC MAGNETIC FIELDS” 
(https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icnirp.org%2Fcms%2Fupload%2Fpublications%2FICNIRPstatgdl.pdf=01%7C01%7CAndy.McCallum%40mottmac.com%7C15d40e00326b4219a4df08d5e31ddb08%7Ca2bed0c459574f73b0c2a811407590fb%7C0=GtqO0ps18xjo1yE6siOKfeeYPdNzy4Ws7Tv6OcFLzmM%3D=0)
 contain the statement:

“Electromagnetic interference from low-intensity static magnetic fields has 
been observed to affect the operation of pacemakers, particularly those with 
magnetic switches, and other types of medical electronic devices, including 
cardiac defibrillators, hormone infusion pumps (e.g., for insulin), 
neuromuscular stimulation devices (e.g., for the sphincter muscle of the 
bladder), neurostimulators, and electronically operated prosthetic devices 
(e.g., for the limbs and inner ear). In general, the operation of these devices 
is not adversely affected by static magnetic fields below 0.5 mT."

The "ICNIRP GUIDELINES FOR LIMITING EXPOSURE TO TIME-VARYING ELECTRIC AND 
MAGNETIC FIELDS (1 Hz TO 100 kHz)" 
(https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icnirp.org%2Fcms%2Fupload%2Fpublications%2FICNIRPLFgdl.pdf=01%7C01%7CAndy.McCallum%40mottmac.com%7C15d40e00326b4219a4df08d5e31ddb08%7Ca2bed0c459574f73b0c2a811407590fb%7C0=TKolfMPIxVlXj8Gu%2FcuYTd2jpKm2TQpJJY8R%2B4ihA3k%3D=0)
 contain the following statement:

"Compliance with the present guidelines may not necessarily preclude 
interference with, or effects on, medical devices such as

Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

[McCallum, Andy]

Hi Bernd

It’s a mess but at this time no one seems to want to address the limit. If the 
public exposure limit is 400mT then all equipment including pacemakers should 
operate at this level or higher.

Some progress was made towards the slightly older ICNIRP limit of 40mT

BS ISO 14117:2012 

4.7 Protection from static magnetic fields of flux density up to 50 mT
4.7.1 General considerations
The DUT shall not remain functionally affected after exposure to static 
magnetic fields of flux density of up to 50 mT.
4.7.2 Pacemakers and CRT-P devices
Test equipment: use a field coil that is capable of generating a uniform 
magnetic field of flux density of up to
50 mT ± 5 mT in the region to be occupied by the DUT.
Test procedure: the required field flux density shall be generated before 
placing the DUT in the field. Then the
DUT shall be slowly placed in the centre of the test coil. After at least 15 s 
of exposure to the magnetic field,
the DUT shall be slowly removed from the field.

http://www.rbht.nhs.uk/about/news-events/archive/pacemaker/

The easiest was around it is to actually contact the manufacturer and try and 
get some form of reassurance from them. 

Regards

Andy


-Original Message-
From: Dürrer Bernd [mailto:bernd.duer...@wilo.com] 
Sent: 06 July 2018 09:53
To: McCallum, Andy ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: AW: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Hello Andy,

Thank you for pointing out the ICNIRP limits: Actually, I recently had a 
request concerning a service technician with a pacemaker and exposure to static 
magnetic fields when handling permanent magnet rotors.
However, when I check ICNIRP resources, I do not find any publication to 
justify higher limits. On the contrary, the “ICNIRP GUIDELINES ON LIMITS OF 
EXPOSURE TO STATIC MAGNETIC FIELDS” 
(https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icnirp.org%2Fcms%2Fupload%2Fpublications%2FICNIRPstatgdl.pdf=01%7C01%7CAndy.McCallum%40mottmac.com%7C15d40e00326b4219a4df08d5e31ddb08%7Ca2bed0c459574f73b0c2a811407590fb%7C0=GtqO0ps18xjo1yE6siOKfeeYPdNzy4Ws7Tv6OcFLzmM%3D=0)
 contain the statement:

“Electromagnetic interference from low-intensity static magnetic fields has 
been observed to affect the operation of pacemakers, particularly those with 
magnetic switches, and other types of medical electronic devices, including 
cardiac defibrillators, hormone infusion pumps (e.g., for insulin), 
neuromuscular stimulation devices (e.g., for the sphincter muscle of the 
bladder), neurostimulators, and electronically operated prosthetic devices 
(e.g., for the limbs and inner ear). In general, the operation of these devices 
is not adversely affected by static magnetic fields below 0.5 mT."

The "ICNIRP GUIDELINES FOR LIMITING EXPOSURE TO TIME-VARYING ELECTRIC AND 
MAGNETIC FIELDS (1 Hz TO 100 kHz)" 
(https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icnirp.org%2Fcms%2Fupload%2Fpublications%2FICNIRPLFgdl.pdf=01%7C01%7CAndy.McCallum%40mottmac.com%7C15d40e00326b4219a4df08d5e31ddb08%7Ca2bed0c459574f73b0c2a811407590fb%7C0=TKolfMPIxVlXj8Gu%2FcuYTd2jpKm2TQpJJY8R%2B4ihA3k%3D=0)
 contain the following statement:

"Compliance with the present guidelines may not necessarily preclude 
interference with, or effects on, medical devices such as metallic prostheses, 
cardiac pacemakers and implanted defibrillators and cochlear implants. 
Interference with pacemakers may occur at levels below the recommended 
reference levels. Advice on avoiding these problems is beyond the scope of the 
present document but is available elsewhere (IEC 2005b)." (IEC2005b refers to 
IEC 60601-1-2)

Kind regards,

Bernd



Von: McCallum, Andy 
Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Juli 2018 09:41
An: Dürrer Bernd ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Betreff: RE: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Bernd

Pacemakers have DC static magnetic field limits as low as 0.5mT as mentioned in 
the EU EMF directive. Which is a level encountered in many environments not 
least DC Trams and railways. The fact that we don’t see people with pacemakers 
staggering around the underground suggests this limit has been set far too low 
(most likely when pacemakers where first introduced). The ICNIRP public 
exposure limit is400mT which is much more realistic and only encountered 
rarely.

Contacted a number of UK government agencies regarding this and the most honest 
verbal response was we will get rid of that limit after Brexit.

Also note a number of pacemakers are now available which are safe to wear in 
MRI scanners operating at 7Teslas.

Andy

From: Dürrer Bernd [mailto:bernd.duer...@wilo.com]
Sent: 06 July 2018 08:24
To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] AW: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Hi Doug,

I assume that due to your good health you don’t have a pacemaker or any other 
electronic medical implants that might be affected by EM field exposure. As 

Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

[McCallum, Andy]

Bernd

Pacemakers have DC static magnetic field limits as low as 0.5mT as mentioned in 
the EU EMF directive. Which is a level encountered in many environments not 
least DC Trams and railways. The fact that we don’t see people with pacemakers 
staggering around the underground suggests this limit has been set far too low 
(most likely when pacemakers where first introduced). The ICNIRP public 
exposure limit is400mT which is much more realistic and only encountered 
rarely.

Contacted a number of UK government agencies regarding this and the most honest 
verbal response was we will get rid of that limit after Brexit.

Also note a number of pacemakers are now available which are safe to wear in 
MRI scanners operating at 7Teslas.

Andy

From: Dürrer Bernd [mailto:bernd.duer...@wilo.com]
Sent: 06 July 2018 08:24
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] AW: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Hi Doug,

I assume that due to your good health you don’t have a pacemaker or any other 
electronic medical implants that might be affected by EM field exposure. As 
protection and shielding options for such implants are limited (except by the 
surrounding tissue), the remaining other option to reduce the risk of 
malfunction is to limit EM fields.

Stay in the best of health and have a nice weekend,

Bernd

Von: Doug Smith mailto:d...@emcesd.com>>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2018 20:56
An: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Betreff: Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Hi Michael and the group,

With the exception tissue heating generated by some sources at very high 
frequencies, I wonder if the EM field exposure worries today are a bit 
overblown. I started my experiments in high voltage  (100,000+ Volts, and NOT 
static electricity) around age 13 and by age 14 was regularly immersing myself 
in 10,000+V/m, 300 kHz fields. It was fun, heating up screw driver blades from 
induction heating, lighting incandescent light bulbs (as well as fluorescent 
tubes) without wires, and more. About 600 Watts of RF energy was concentrated 
in the relatively small space I was in and I was uninjured! My kids all have 
two arms, two legs, and one head and I am still here almost 60 years later and 
healthier than 90% of adults of any age from 18 on. Some of my friends say this 
explains a lot about me (frying brain cells) though.

I realize this is only one case, but have had a lot of high energy RF exposure 
throughout my life. Such as the field in my dorm room from my amateur radio 
transmitter being so strong that the fluorescent tubes in the room lit up with 
no power and blinked with Morse code. I had to remove the tubes from their 
fixtures and cover with towels so my roommate could sleep.

Still here,
Doug
[https://hostingemail.xo.com/api/storage/d...@emcesd.com/signatures/images/2476c205-f457-4395-87cc-7aa199c734f2]


On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 16:27:12 +0100, Michael Derby wrote:

It’s not quite an “unintentional radiator” but if you had a wireless charger 
which did not contain any communication (e.g., a dumb charging signal without 
handshaking),  then it would come within the scope of the EMCD and the LVD (not 
the RED), and RF Exposure would therefore be an issue under the LVD.

Michael.


From: McCallum, Andy [mailto:andy.mccal...@mottmac.com]
Sent: 05 July 2018 15:33
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

Be surprised if any LVD could cause EMF large enough to pose a danger to Human 
Health. Intentional transmitters maybe, a rare beast to create those levels 
unintentionally at less than 1000V.

Andy

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: 05 July 2018 10:28
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields


It applies to any LVD product, but there is a flow chart that shows that a 
simple assessment is possible if the product has no reasonable likelihood of 
producing sufficiently strong EMF.

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates 
www.woodjohn.uk<https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.woodjohn.uk=01%7C01%7CAndy.McCallum%40mottmac.com%7C3897dc1f76c0406b3a9808d5e259910b%7Ca2bed0c459574f73b0c2a811407590fb%7C0=vOXyjzMm8FtxrbHRrTRbkgWlhb8gQeuv%2FiISyiAwg24%3D=0>

Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-07-05 10:09, Amund Westin wrote:
EN62311 is listed in OJ and a harmonized LVD standard.
Does EN62311apply to any LVD product or only products containing radio 
transmitters?


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

Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

[McCallum, Andy]

Be surprised if any LVD could cause EMF large enough to pose a danger to Human 
Health. Intentional transmitters maybe, a rare beast to create those levels 
unintentionally at less than 1000V.

Andy

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: 05 July 2018 10:28
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields


It applies to any LVD product, but there is a flow chart that shows that a 
simple assessment is possible if the product has no reasonable likelihood of 
producing sufficiently strong EMF.

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates 
www.woodjohn.uk

Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-07-05 10:09, Amund Westin wrote:
EN62311 is listed in OJ and a harmonized LVD standard.
Does EN62311apply to any LVD product or only products containing radio 
transmitters?


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 

Re: [PSES] Automotive EMC question

[McCallum, Andy]

See Keith Armstrongs many papers on this for example:

https://www.emcstandards.co.uk/files/design_techniques_for_emc_1999_part_2_cables_and_connectors.pdf

Andy

From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
Sent: 13 June 2018 15:01
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automotive EMC question

I was hoping to get a virtual dissection right here on this forum :-)

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261


From: John Woodgate mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk>>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:36:08 +0100
To: Ken Javor 
mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com>>, 
mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automotive EMC question



If  capacitors do not work, there must be another solution, and it must be 
known, because it is in use. Perhaps you could dissect your own (or preferably 
someone else's) means of transport to find out.


John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk 

Rayleigh, Essex UK

On 2018-06-13 14:26, Ken Javor wrote:


Re: [PSES] Automotive EMC question I don't doubt that is the rationale.  But 
what is the fix then for high frequencies where you have stringent RE/RS limits 
with a shield grounded at one end only?

 John Woodgate offered one suggestion using caps at the ungrounded end, but to 
me that is a commercial fix where you have RE limits imposed at three meters or 
more above 30 MHz, and RI limits at 1/3/10 V/m, whereas for automotive thee are 
very stringent RE limits imposed down to 150 kHz and at one meter separation, 
and also RS limits up to 200 /m.

 Ken Javor
 Phone: (256) 650-5261




From: Ted Eckert 
<07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
 

 Reply-To: Ted Eckert 
mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com>> 

 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 22:57:00 +
 To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>> 

 Conversation: [PSES] Automotive EMC question
 Subject: Re: [PSES] Automotive EMC question

 Consider my thoughts as pure conjecture. Automotive electronics often use the 
chassis as the return for power. For high power devices, you run one wire and 
tie the device's ground terminal to the chassis nearby. If the shield was 
terminated at both ends, would there be a risk of higher return currents 
flowing on that shield from other devices?


 Ted Eckert
 Microsoft Corporation

 The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my 
employer or the Society of Automotive Engineers.


 From: John Woodgate mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk>> 

 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 2:53 PM
 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 Subject: Re: [PSES] Automotive EMC question

 I hope it also at least recommends that the grounding is at the sending end, 
so that the cable capacitance is charged from the low-impedance source.  I 
guess that, e.g. in the auto environment, the risk of large shield currents is 
too great to allow routine grounding at both ends. But I suppose that grounding 
via a capacitor at the receiving end is not banned. If possible, this capacitor 
should be of the lowest possible inductance, which is not difficult with SMD, 
and if several capacitors are disposed radially around the end of the shield 
and grounded at their outer ends on a metal ring, the grounding should be good 
up to at least 1 GHz.
 John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
 J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk 

 

 

 Rayleigh, Essex UK
 On 2018-06-12 22:41, Ken Javor wrote:

The CAN bus spec says that shield(s) are to be grounded at one end only. How 
does this work vs. meeting stringent rf 

Re: [PSES] FW: Industrial Printer

[McCallum, Andy]

The manufacturer needs to consider which environment they are targeting. BS EN 
50121-4 for the railways has some particularly harsh immunity requirements 
which exceed the standard heavy industrial immunity requirement in EN 61000.

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: 24 May 2018 20:33
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FW: Industrial Printer


The manufacturer can choose which standards to apply. There is no point at all 
in applying two emission standards.

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates 
www.woodjohn.uk

Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-05-24 06:01, itl-emc user group wrote:
An industrial printer has been tested to EN 55011: 2009 + A1: 2010 and EN 
61000-6-2: 2005 + AC: 2006 (latest EMCD OJ).
Another industrial printer has been tested to EN 61000-6-4: 2007 + A1: 2011 and 
EN 61000-6-2: 2005 + AC: 2006 (latest EMCD OJ).
The printers are used in an industrial environment only.
Any opinions as to whether or not CISPR 32 is relevant as well.
Thanks in advance to any responses.


Regards,
David Shidlowsky| Technical Reviewer
Address 1 Bat-Sheva St. LOD 7120101 Israel
Tel 972-8-9186113 Fax 972-8-9153101
Mail : 
dav...@itlglobal.org/dav...@itl.co.il/e...@itl.co.il
  Web 
www.itlglobal.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 
>

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 

[PSES] BS EN 62493:2015 Assessment of lighting equipment related to human exposure to electromagnetic fields

[McCallum, Andy]

Anyone have any experience of this standard?  Do any lighting systems get close 
to the ICNIRP limits?

Any thoughts welcome

Andy

-

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] Correlation between Radiated Fields and Induced currents

[McCallum, Andy]

John

There are a number of volumesof ITU Directives concerning the protection of 
telecommunications lines against harmful effects from electric power and 
electrified railway lines. I think volume 3 might be most useful but its some 
time since I looked at these. The maths is very involved.

“https://www.itu.int/pub/T-HDB-EMC.1-1990-P3”

Regards


Andy



From: John Mcauley [mailto:john.mcau...@cei.ie]
Sent: 11 January 2018 13:23
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Correlation between Radiated Fields and Induced currents

Hi All

I am trying to correlate the conducted levels induced on telecommunication 
cables, e.g. unscreened twisted pair and screened twisted pair, from low 
frequency radiated fields.

I remember an IEC document many years ago that discussed the subject but can’t 
find any record of it now.

Can anyone point me to a standard or other reference that examines the subject? 
I remember there was an assumption that 3 Vrms conducted immunity level was 
supposed to correlate to a radiofrequency field of 3 V/m and this was disputed!

Thanks in advance

John McAuley
-


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] Active Implantable Medical Devices

[McCallum, Andy]

John

TC 106 is for human exposure I was thinking of EMC issues - seems a gap here.

Andy

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 03 April 2017 09:45
To: McCallum, Andy <andy.mccal...@mottmac.com>; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Active Implantable Medical Devices

DC magnetic fields are outside the scope of ETSI, and fall within that of IEC 
TC106. Remember that the question was about the RED, and no-one as far as I 
know, uses DC magnetic fields for radio communication. I might except Gaia, 
because a very broad definition of radio might include communication between 
the geomagnetic field and compass needles. (;-) But that's not strictly DC, as 
it is well-known to vary, albeit rather slowly.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M 
Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

-Original Message-
From: McCallum, Andy [mailto:andy.mccal...@mottmac.com]
Sent: Monday, April 3, 2017 9:23 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Active Implantable Medical Devices

Hi

Just had a brief scan of the standard and it doesn’t appear to cover immunity 
to DC Magnetic fields. I would have thought that many patients fitted with 
these devices would be having on going medical treatment such that they may 
require MRI scans, where they could be subject to magnetic fields of greater 
than 7T. Also wouldn't it be sensible to ensure that all devices met the ICNIRP 
exposure levels ?


Regards

Andy


-Original Message-
From: Dürrer Bernd [mailto:bernd.duer...@wilo.com]
Sent: 03 April 2017 08:37
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] AW: [PSES] Active Implantable Medical Devices

Dear Grace,

you can check the status and scheduled publication date (incl. citation in the 
OJ) of ETSI standards at 
https://portal.etsi.org/webapp/WorkProgram/SimpleSearch/QueryForm.asp

For the 301 489 series standards, click on "EN - European standard 
(Telecommunication series)" in the Type field and enter "301 489" (incl. the 
blank in the middle) as number. The search will return a table of work items: 
The "Status" column contains hyperlinks to the schedule of the standard, that 
includes the target date for citation in the OJ at the bottom of the table.

Kind regards,

Bernd



Von: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 3. April 2017 07:35
An: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Betreff: [PSES] Active Implantable Medical Devices

Dear Members,

For active implantable medical devices to comply with the RED requirements:

1.  Do all active implantable medical devices require Notified Body’s 
involvement per RED?  From online search 
(https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/ce-marking/manufacturers_en), it 
seems the answer is yes.  Could you please confirm?
2.  The 301 489 series EMC standards covering RED have not been 
published/harmonized.  For those manufacturers that do not want to wait for the 
harmonized standards to be published, should the manufacturers proceed with the 
DRAFT version of the standards (and send to NB)?
3.  Do you have any idea when 301 489 series standards covering RED will be 
published?  The current status is “On Approval”.

Thank you very much for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Grace Lin

-

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
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>




WILO SE
Nortkirchenstrasse 100, 44263 Dortmund
Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 21356
www.wilo.com

Vorstand/Executive Board:
Oliver Hermes (Vorsitzender/Chairman), Dr. Markus Beukenberg, Carsten Krumm, 
Eric Lachambre, Mathias Weyers Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender/Chairman of the 
Supervisory Board:
Prof. Dr. Norbert Wieselhuber

Dieses Dokument ist vertraulich zu behandeln. Die Weitergabe sowie 
Vervielfaeltigung, Verwertung und Mitteilung seines Inhalts ist nur mit unserer 
ausdruecklichen Genehmigung gestattet. Alle Rechte vorbehalten, insbesondere 
fuer den Fall der Schutzrechtsanmeldung.

This document has to be treated

Re: [PSES] Active Implantable Medical Devices

[McCallum, Andy]

Hi

Just had a brief scan of the standard and it doesn’t appear to cover immunity 
to DC Magnetic fields. I would have thought that many patients fitted with 
these devices would be having on going medical treatment such that they may 
require MRI scans, where they could be subject to magnetic fields of greater 
than 7T. Also wouldn't it be sensible to ensure that all devices met the ICNIRP 
exposure levels ?


Regards

Andy


-Original Message-
From: Dürrer Bernd [mailto:bernd.duer...@wilo.com] 
Sent: 03 April 2017 08:37
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] AW: [PSES] Active Implantable Medical Devices

Dear Grace,

you can check the status and scheduled publication date (incl. citation in the 
OJ) of ETSI standards at 
https://portal.etsi.org/webapp/WorkProgram/SimpleSearch/QueryForm.asp

For the 301 489 series standards, click on "EN - European standard 
(Telecommunication series)" in the Type field and enter "301 489" (incl. the 
blank in the middle) as number. The search will return a table of work items: 
The "Status" column contains hyperlinks to the schedule of the standard, that 
includes the target date for citation in the OJ at the bottom of the table.

Kind regards,

Bernd



Von: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 3. April 2017 07:35
An: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Betreff: [PSES] Active Implantable Medical Devices

Dear Members,

For active implantable medical devices to comply with the RED requirements:

1.  Do all active implantable medical devices require Notified Body’s 
involvement per RED?  From online search 
(https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/ce-marking/manufacturers_en), it 
seems the answer is yes.  Could you please confirm?
2.  The 301 489 series EMC standards covering RED have not been 
published/harmonized.  For those manufacturers that do not want to wait for the 
harmonized standards to be published, should the manufacturers proceed with the 
DRAFT version of the standards (and send to NB)?
3.  Do you have any idea when 301 489 series standards covering RED will be 
published?  The current status is “On Approval”.

Thank you very much for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Grace Lin

-

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
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 




WILO SE
Nortkirchenstrasse 100, 44263 Dortmund
Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 21356
www.wilo.com

Vorstand/Executive Board:
Oliver Hermes (Vorsitzender/Chairman), Dr. Markus Beukenberg, Carsten Krumm, 
Eric Lachambre, Mathias Weyers Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender/Chairman of the 
Supervisory Board:
Prof. Dr. Norbert Wieselhuber

Dieses Dokument ist vertraulich zu behandeln. Die Weitergabe sowie 
Vervielfaeltigung, Verwertung und Mitteilung seines Inhalts ist nur mit unserer 
ausdruecklichen Genehmigung gestattet. Alle Rechte vorbehalten, insbesondere 
fuer den Fall der Schutzrechtsanmeldung.

This document has to be treated confidentially. Its contents are not to be 
passed on, duplicated, exploited or disclosed without our expressed permission. 
All rights reserved, especially the right to apply for protective rights.

-

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 

[PSES] another email test

[McCallum, Andy]

More testing

-

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] email setting test

[McCallum, Andy]

Email test

-

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] eMail Setting test

[McCallum, Andy]

Testing

-

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] email setting test

[McCallum, Andy]

Testing email setting

-

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] EU Declaration of Conformity

[McCallum, Andy]

Hi

Should all DoC be updated now to reflect the new EMC directive? The Blue Guide 
in section 2.10 suggests DoC for old directive are still valid but then goes on 
to say:

“As of their entry into force, the EU Declaration of conformity will need to 
include the reference to the new Directives for the products placed on the 
market to be considered as compliant.”

Andy McCallum

BEng (Hons), MIET, CEng



Senior EMC Engineer



T +44 (0)1332 220878 ‌M 07720264505 ‌F +44 (0)1332 
220835

andy.mccal...@mottmac.com







[https://www.mottmac.com/download/file/12617?defaultFile=%2FDefaultImages%2FdefaultImage.png=False=127=true]

Mott MacDonald
Clair House
Stores Road
Derby DE21 4BD
United Kingdom

  ‍



Website  |  Twitter 
 |  LinkedIn  |  
Facebook  |  
YouTube





Mott MacDonald Limited. Registered in England and Wales no. 1243967. Registered 
office: Mott MacDonald House, 8-10 Sydenham Road, Croydon CR0 2EE, United 
Kingdom

The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the person or 
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
material. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, the use of this 
information or any disclosure, copying or distribution is prohibited and may be 
unlawful. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete 
the material from any computer.




-

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] Incidental Radiators per FCC Part 15

[McCallum, Andy]

Grace

No a compliant report should not be issued.

You will need to investigate the problem with the DC motor and resolve the 
issue.

Regards

Andy

From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Sent: 22 November 2016 14:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Incidental Radiators per FCC Part 15

Dear Members,

Could you please comment how incidental radiators be handled in a test report?

FCC 15.3 defines "Incidental radiator" as "A device that generates radio 
frequency energy during the course of its operation although the device is not 
intentionally designed to generate or emit radio frequency energy. Examples of 
incidental radiators are dc motors, mechanical light switches, etc."

FCC 15.3 (Incidental radiators) states "Manufacturers of these devices shall 
employ good engineering practices to minimize the risk of harmful interference."

Take a paper dispenser as an example.  Test data with the DC motor running did 
not comply with the Class A/B limits.  Test data without the DC motor running 
complies with the Class B limits.  Should a compliant test report be issued?

Thank you very much for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Grace Lin
-


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] Automated vehicles.

[McCallum, Andy]

John I think the American secret service have enough work to cope with!

From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: 08 November 2016 11:11
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

Mike

That’s an “interesting” concept: maybe one could also do the opposite and 
“persuade” such a vehicle to “accidently” hit someone who was really disliked 
and then blame it on the vehicle systems (a sort of very target-specific 
“suicide bomb” as mentioned in one of my early posts – I can postulate a few 
people that would make good targets!)?

John E Allen
W.London, UK

From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com]
Sent: 08 November 2016 10:53
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

Hey, maybe with face recognition software and access to Linked-In and Facebook, 
it could prioritise customers or family and friends?

☺



From: Jim Hulbert [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com]
Sent: 07 November 2016 13:07
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

So a Mercedes automated vehicle would make the decision of who lives and who 
dies. That’s incredible.

Jim Hulbert

From: Pawson, James [mailto:james.paw...@echostar.com]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 6:23 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

This article in The Guardian is related to your first point regarding human 
drivers “gaming” driverless cars to gain an advantage

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/30/volvo-self-driving-car-autonomous

“The first self-driving cars to be operated by ordinary British drivers will be 
left deliberately unmarked so that other drivers will not be tempted to “take 
them on”, a senior car industry executive has revealed.”

Also

“Meanwhile, Mercedes has made it clear that if a situation arises where a car 
has to choose between saving the lives of its occupants or those of bystanders, 
it will save the occupants. ‘If you know you can save at least one person, at 
least save that one. Save the one in the car,’ Christoph von Hugo, manager of 
driver assistance systems and active safety at Mercedes, told the Paris Motor 
Show recently.”

Bruce Schneier writes a lot on security issues and regularly covers IoT and 
occasionally driverless vehicles. His blog makes for interesting reading - 
https://www.schneier.com/  I’m sure it will end up being the usual round of 
addition of features, poor programming/testing (due to budget constraints), 
vulnerabilities, exploiting, patching, public outcry, legistlation, etc.

All the more reason to buy a bicycle.

James



From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: 06 November 2016 02:17
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

Although it's Saturday, I'll use this as my Friday Question.


In light of two recent reports in the InComplisnce Magazine.  I feel prompted 
to ask if anyone on this forum can address a couple of questions.

http://incompliancemag.com/u-s-dot-releases-federal-policy-on-automated-vehicles/

http://incompliancemag.com/uber-self-driving-truck-delivers-budweiser-beer/

Aside from the obvious concerns about vehicle safety, it occurs to me that 
there two problem that presently are missing in recent media reporting.  In 
particular for the Level 4 & 5 vehicles as described by the SAE and DOT report.

1) I understand that these vehicles, such as the fully automated Budwiser truck 
have avoidance systems. Given the human condition of today, I foresee the 
distinct possibility of drivers in other vehicles "playing around" in such a 
way as to try and force a response from the avoidance algorithms and cause 
these vehicles to crash themselves.  This kind of sport would be exactly what 
some types would enjoy. What sort of preventative measures have been taken in 
this regard?

2) Given the lack of attention to hacking we have already witnessed in the 
Internet of Things (IoT) crowd, how are the driverless vehicle people doing 
with regard to the cyber security of these vehicles. That is, is it conceivable 
that someone may try to hack the truck's operating system and hijack it?

Thanks all,

doug

--

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
-


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/

Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

[McCallum, Andy]

Does anything have to change for the introduction of these systems? Just leave 
all responsibility to the human driver. For routine driving the automatic 
system should reduce accidents and in exceptional circumstances the driver has 
to choose what to do. The driver is responsible all the time.
The driver has to be alert and paying attention all the time which does 
subtract from one of the main benefits of the automatic system but it would 
allow the systems to be introduced and years and years of data to be 
accumulated and analysed.
Fully intelligent automatic systems which take control (responsibility) away 
from the driver could still be 10, 20 or a 100 years away.

Andy

From: Ted Eckert [mailto:07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: 07 November 2016 23:35
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.


I don’t think anybody is arguing that the vehicle will make worse decisions 
than a human driver. The issue I am trying to bring up is that the “blame” for 
any incidents that occur will get shifted. Humans will end up making a decision 
on who the machines are to operate and how fault is to be determined. Humans 
will cede control of an individual vehicle to an automated system. However, 
will humans cede control of the larger driving environment to completely 
automated decisions? We already get people who fight red light cameras arguing 
that the automated system shouldn’t be used to assign fault. It may be an 
excuse to get out of a ticket, but it also shows some of human nature.



Humans will create the system, but humans are terrible at assessing risk and 
most think they are better at it than they actually are. Humans tend to think 
the risk is lower when they are in control than when the risk is out of their 
control. I have a friend who is worried about the risk of terrorism at their 
place of work. However, the same person just moved, increasing their one-way 
commute from 2 miles to 22 miles. The actual risk of death is much higher from 
the long commute, but this person feels that they have control and doesn’t see 
the longer drive as a risk.



Do you want to cede societal norms and rules completely to automated systems? A 
computer making decisions may decide that humans are part of the problem. Will 
we end up with Asimov’s three laws of robotics or the Terminator and Skynet?



Ted Eckert

The opinion express do not necessarily reflect those of my employer, Sarah 
Conner, HAL or R. Susan Calvin.



-Original Message-
From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com]
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 2:36 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.



LMAO….



There was great consternation of the human suitability for control of vehicular 
machinery upon the increasing popularity of automobiles.



For most of these contrived situations, the bottom line is the machine would 
probably make a better decision than a human. And a machine would be less apt 
to enter in a situation where these types of decisions would have to be made.



For my employer's factories, have found that removal of humans from a process 
is the most cost-effective way to increase reliability. All hail our machine 
overlords.



Brian (or my efficient chat-bot)





From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen [mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl]

Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 11:51 AM

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.



In IOT land the rock will warn the cars before it falls…..  ;<)



Gert





Van: alfred1520list [mailto:alfred1520l...@gmail.com]

Verzonden: maandag 7 november 2016 20:39

Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Onderwerp: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.





On November 7, 2016 9:03:11 AM PST, Ted Eckert 
<07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
 wrote:

With a little imagination, I can come up with many scenarios that appear 
“no-win”. Imagine you are driving down a mountain road with a rock face on one 
side and a long drop off a cliff on the other. Vehicle to vehicle 
communications allow your self-driving vehicle to stay close to the car in 
front of you. It is a straight road and high speeds are allowed. Now imaging a 
rock slide starts dropping a large boulder onto the roadway. The vehicle in 
front of yours may hit the rocks, but it remains intact enough to protect its 
occupants. Your vehicle can either hit the vehicle in front of you potentially 
injuring its passengers or take evasive action risking your health. What does 
the vehicle do?



I live in the state of Washington where rock slides are common.

http://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/geology/geologic-hazards/landslides

http://komonews.com/news/local/rock-slide-closes-highway-2-in-central-wash

Re: [PSES] SAFETTY FEATURES controlled by ....SOFTWARE

[McCallum, Andy]

Most (well a lot) railway signalling is now software controlled. The first 
Solid State Interlocking (SSI) was introduced in the UK in the 1980's. Its 
widely used around the world. 

Andy

-Original Message-
From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk] 
Sent: 05 August 2016 11:03
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SAFETTY FEATURES controlled by SOFTWARE

The problem with focusing on the code is that real world experience is that a 
high percentage of the failures which occur with software related safety are a 
failure of the original specification for what the software is supposed to do, 
not failures of the code to do what the programmer intended. Particular 
problems occur if the limits of operation of the equipment are not properly 
understood: a classic example being a passenger aircraft crash caused by the 
avionics being unable to detect when the aircraft wheels had hit the runway in 
very wet conditions due to aquaplaning whereas in the dry conditions under 
which the system was tested it worked perfectly. 

This is why standards which deal with software in safety related applications 
(including those derived from IEC 61508, and the medical devices software 
standard, IEC 62304) focus much more on the overall procedure for specifying 
and designing the software and then checking that the specification has been 
met, and are not overly prescriptive about language, structure or other 
detailed requirements for code. 

Nick. 


> On 4 Aug 2016, at 21:49, B Rowland  wrote:
> 
> Indeed, Brian, there is a difference between a provably-correct code block, 
> and actual execution of the code, in other than a dedicated run-time, without 
> interrupts, or real-time OS, or ... interesting point about the core, whether 
> it has been proven to execute correctly, in every possible case ;-)  That's a 
> couple of test vectors, no?
> 
> Barry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On  04/08/2016, at 21:23 , Brian O'Connell  wrote:
> 
>> Whom considers Ada (the language name is not an acronym) provably correct? 
>> How do you prove the program is deterministic? What if a Verification 
>> Condition is not proven? Is the code incorrect? Is the assertion not correct 
>> or incomplete? Does P = NP ? SPARK 2014 did attempt to address some of this 
>> stuff, BTW.
>> 
>> Do not think that we will find answers to these questions in ISO8652. What 
>> Ada does provide is a formalized programming method for concurrency + design 
>> by contract, which offer a little more hope for code safety and test 
>> coverage.
>> 
>> The weakness for all human code solutions is a provable processor core where 
>> the assumption is a provable algorithm. If a static evaluation indicates a 
>> deterministic algorithm, and if a contract violation occurs at runtime, what 
>> is 'wrong'? The language? The Compiler? The design assumptions? The 
>> processor core? Once you get past Ada (or any other language) compile-time 
>> protection, you return to the electronic jungle where you are part of the 
>> food chain.
>> 
>> Brian
>> 
>> 
>> From: B Rowland [mailto:bfr...@direct.ca]
>> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 11:33 AM
>> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> Subject: Re: [PSES] SAFETTY FEATURES controlled by SOFTWARE
>> 
>> Hi List-colleagues;
>> 
>> I think, if the safety-related functions are life-critical, they need to be 
>> written in a "provably-correct" language/environment, like ADA, or some 
>> equivalent. And, of course, that also means that such functionality needs to 
>> be isolated from software that is NOT provably-correct (is Windows 
>> "provably-correct" ?).
>> 
>> In any case, life-critical systems need to be, at least, redundant, with 
>> fail-safe shutdown if the processes do not agree at timed checkpoints, and 
>> also have hardware-based watchdog timers (sometimes built-in to the 
>> microcontroller, itself) to guarantee continued function. Furthermore, it is 
>> also typical that the software that runs on the redundant processors is 
>> written by different teams, so that an error in a program on one "side" is 
>> not duplicated in the other half/third of the redundant CPUs.
>> 
>> Since, as some have pointed out, it is readily-accomplished to have a 
>> provably-correct hardware implementation of the safety functions that are 
>> "at the edge" of the system, FPGA's, PALs, etc., with ROM, or 
>> check-summed-on-load-firmware, are much more reliable.. 
>> 
>> In another discussion that I had, a while back, we even discussed how 
>> to ensure that the semiconductor devices, at the safety interface, 
>> are made reliable-enough to allow proper operation, even in the 
>> typical fail-short conditions. I think that this is why we have 
>> relays costing > $1000 used in train/subway applications ;-)
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Barry Rowland
>> Muenchen, Bayern
>> 
>> -
>> 
>> This message is from the IEEE 

[PSES] New EMC Directive 2014/30/EU

[McCallum, Andy]

Hi

The old EMC Directive 2002/108/EC was brought into UK law by the Statutory 
Instruments (SI) 2006 No. 3418. As of the 16 April the New EMC Directive 
2014/30/EU replaced 2002/108/EC. However, I can find no reference for a new SI 
bringing in the new directive.

Will a new SI be enacted? If so when?

Regards

Andy


Andy McCallum

BEng (Hons), MIET, CEng



Senior EMC Engineer





-

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] Magnetic H Field Strength Density

[McCallum, Andy]

Hi All

ETSI 300 330 uses the term H Field Strength Density - which I have not come 
across before. It appears to mean the H field strength measured in a particular 
resolution bandwidth on the spectrum analyser.
Can anyone confirm that please?

Any help much appreciated.

Regards

Andy

-

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-EMC on Submersible Product

[McCallum, Andy]

John

Is there anything stopping the device producing noise when it is out of the 
water? If not I would look to test it as for any normal device.

Regards

Andy

-Original Message-
From: John Allen [mailto:jral...@productsafetyinc.com] 
Sent: 18 May 2016 22:19
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] CE-EMC on Submersible Product

Hi,

I would like to get thoughts on if EMC testing is required for CE on a product 
that does generate noise, but is installed 30 feet below the surface of water. 

I'm guessing conducted radiation is still a concern, but what about radiated 
and immunity??  Does it matter if it's 30 feet below or 3 feet??

Best Regards,

John

John Allen
Product Safety Consulting, Inc
www.productsafetyinc.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: 

-

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] SV: [PSES] EU's new approach directive transitions

[McCallum, Andy]

Rich

If you have not done a risk assessment previously it can be daunting - where do 
you draw the line with "what if".
In the UK rail industry an example could be "What happens if the train is hit 
by a comet". Answer everyone dies. So what mitigation can you do - run trains 
in tunnels deep in rock so the train is protected. That's not practical so the 
ALARP principal is introduced (As low as reasonably practical). Also risk is 
about the likelihood of an event - so a comet strike chances of happening are 
so low that it can be ignored.
Your RA could be enormous if  you tried to include every risk that was possible 
(rumour is someone did consider a comet strike but I have not seen it!).
So product knowledge and common sense need to be applied. Consider the risks 
for your product assign them a risk rating ( say 1 - 5 where 1 is no risk and 5 
is risk of death) and then assign a likelihood (1 is incredibly unlikely and 5 
is a daily occurrence). Multiply 1 by the other and you have a risk score 
somewhere between 1 and 25. So a comet strike is likely to a consequence of 
death (score 5) but is incredibly unlikely (Score 1) total risk score 5. Any 
reasonable mitigation? No that's the best you will get move on the next risk.

Hope that helps

Andy




From: Gary Swale [mailto:gary.sw...@ditchwitch.com]
Sent: 14 April 2016 00:48
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EU's new approach directive transitions

>>I don't have experience in RA, so I guess I can't do it.<<

No, not experience in RA, experience and knowledge about the product. The RA is 
all about presenting "what if" scenarios to product experts and the experts 
then work to lower the risk through design, safeguards, and information.

From: Richard Nute [ri...@ieee.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 6:19 PM
To: Gary Swale; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] SV: [PSES] EU's new approach directive transitions


"... Risk Assessment is a qualitative (estimate based on experience) venture."

I don't have experience in RA, so I guess I can't do it.  I guess I have to 
hire someone who has RA experience.

This is very much like the certification house manager who told me that product 
safety is an art that takes many years (and products) of experience to master.  
As a product manufacturer (compared to a certification house), my experience is 
limited and I would not likely master the art.


Rich




This email and any files transmitted with it from The Charles Machine Works, 
Inc. are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or 
entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error 
please notify the sender. Our company accepts no liability for the contents of 
this email, or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the 
information provided, unless that information is subsequently confirmed in 
writing. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are 
solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the 
company. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for 
the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused 
by any virus transmitted by this email.
-


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:  

[PSES] FW: EMCTLA - White Paper - Modes of Operation for EMC Testing

[McCallum, Andy]

All

The EMC test house association has produced a white paper for discussion on 
Modes of operation for EMC testing. Be interested to hear your comments – I can 
provide a pdf copy on request. The abstract reads:

Abstract:
The EMC testing industry is mature but test labs are simply not testing 
products as per the requirements of standards. The standards bodies are also 
not preparing documents that take due account of modern human-machine 
interfaces, leaving large variations in the way products can and should be 
tested. This document is prepared as a starting point for further discussion 
within the industry.

Regards

Andy

Andy McCallum
Senior EMC Engineer









-

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] FW: EMCTLA - White Paper - Modes of Operation for EMC Testing

[McCallum, Andy]

John

Have sent you copy of white paper in separate email. Maybe Michael can provide 
you with an answer on the standards issue.


Regards

Andy 

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 11 September 2015 10:13
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FW: EMCTLA - White Paper - Modes of Operation for EMC 
Testing

In message
<beda313b3e2b304ca6a08001bd61c9c0022b093...@ukmb01.mottmac.group.int>,
dated Fri, 11 Sep 2015, "McCallum, Andy" <andy.mccal...@mottmac.com>
writes:

>The EMC test house association has produced a white paper for 
>discussion on Modes of operation for EMC testing. Be interested to hear 
>your comments – I can provide a pdf copy on request.

Yes, please. Is EMCTLA planning to take its comments on standards to BSI
GEL210 any time soon?
--
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 
<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 <sdoug...@ieee.org>
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.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 <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Re: [PSES] International EMF Scientist Appeal

[McCallum, Andy]

John

EMF can affect things as well as living tissue

http://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPstatgdl.pdf

Electromagnetic interference from low-intensity
static magnetic fields has been observed to affect the
operation of pacemakers, particularly those with magnetic
switches, and other types of medical electronic
devices, including cardiac defibrillators, hormone infusion
pumps (e.g., for insulin), neuromuscular stimulation
devices (e.g., for the sphincter muscle of the bladder),
neurostimulators, and electronically operated prosthetic
devices (e.g., for the limbs and inner ear). In general, the
operation of these devices is not adversely affected by
static magnetic fields below 0.5 mT.


This level is a concern for DC rail systems where currents and thus magnetic 
fields can be high.

Regards

Andy


-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 25 June 2015 22:49
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] International EMF Scientist Appeal

In message
blupr02mb1169bb1c7670572cab43f0ec1...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook
.com, dated Thu, 25 Jun 2015, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com
writes:

Letter that appears to be designed to enable more UN/WHO influence over 
EMC standards.

Don't mix up EMC and EMF. they are totally different; EMC is about things, EMF 
is about people.

www.emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal

Dunno what to think about this stuff. Much of their basis comes from 15 
to 20 year old studies, at least one of which seems to have been 
recently discredited

There is a body of papers of such doubtful provenance.

Personally, prefer to keep my phone close to head - keeps the brain 
warmer. And am looking at buying some land near the Sunrise HV 
distribution line (500kV) so that we can bask in SLF 'radiation'.

Whom is the bigger idiot - myself or these scientists?

There have always been 'outliers' in the scientific community, but because a 
very few have been proved right, they all assume that they are right, too.
--
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 
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 sdoug...@ieee.org
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.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 sdoug...@ieee.org
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

[McCallum, Andy]

Charles/Joe

Yes I was referring to homeplug. Thanks your advice I will follow EN 60950.

Regards

Andy

From: Grasso, Charles [mailto:charles.gra...@echostar.com]
Sent: 23 June 2014 20:19
To: McCallum, Andy; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

Andy - Are you referring to HomePlug?

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

From: McCallum, Andy [mailto:andy.mccal...@mottmac.com]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 4:04 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

Thanks Chet and Joe

So if you have Ethernet over your power cables do you test the mains as a 
telecommunication port or a mains port?

I would think you would have to treat it as a mains port?

Regards

Andy

From: Summers, Chet [mailto:chet.summ...@schneider-electric.com]
Sent: 21 June 2014 01:43
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

Hello Andy-

(Your question seems appropriate for a Friday, asked after the boss and most 
everyone else has left for the weekend and you're sitting at the workbench with 
eyes to the ceiling and palms up, waiting for the answer...)

I think Joe has part of the answer, in that the impedance characteristics of 
telecom networks and twisted pair telecom cables are considerably different 
than for AC mains wiring and distribution.

In addition, telecom ports (at least in the case of Ethernet based networks) 
may have Power over Ethernet (PoE) capability.  PoE circuits from network edge 
devices and from midspan supplies can add substantial noise onto the already 
noisy Ethernet line.  The IEEE 802.3 and related Ethernet standards limit the 
range of filtering a designer may implement in order to maximize single 
integrity and BW.  AC mains circuits on the other hand often demand (but can 
tolerate) a brute force approach to noise filtering, where physical size of the 
filtering components is probably much less a consideration than for Ethernet 
interfaces and the signal is 50/60Hz, not 100MHz, plus.

Just my two cents worth.
Enjoy the weekend,

Chet Summers
Compliance Engineering
Schneider Electric
chet.summ...@schneider-electric.commailto:chet.summ...@schneider-electric.com


From: McCallum, Andy [mailto:andy.mccal...@mottmac.com]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 2:30 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

All

Why are telecommunications port emissions so much higher than AC power ports?


Regards

Andy























__
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
__
-


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.orgmailto: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)http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.commailto: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.orgmailto: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)http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy

Re: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

[McCallum, Andy]

Thanks Chet and Joe

So if you have Ethernet over your power cables do you test the mains as a 
telecommunication port or a mains port?

I would think you would have to treat it as a mains port?

Regards

Andy

From: Summers, Chet [mailto:chet.summ...@schneider-electric.com]
Sent: 21 June 2014 01:43
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

Hello Andy-

(Your question seems appropriate for a Friday, asked after the boss and most 
everyone else has left for the weekend and you're sitting at the workbench with 
eyes to the ceiling and palms up, waiting for the answer...)

I think Joe has part of the answer, in that the impedance characteristics of 
telecom networks and twisted pair telecom cables are considerably different 
than for AC mains wiring and distribution.

In addition, telecom ports (at least in the case of Ethernet based networks) 
may have Power over Ethernet (PoE) capability.  PoE circuits from network edge 
devices and from midspan supplies can add substantial noise onto the already 
noisy Ethernet line.  The IEEE 802.3 and related Ethernet standards limit the 
range of filtering a designer may implement in order to maximize single 
integrity and BW.  AC mains circuits on the other hand often demand (but can 
tolerate) a brute force approach to noise filtering, where physical size of the 
filtering components is probably much less a consideration than for Ethernet 
interfaces and the signal is 50/60Hz, not 100MHz, plus.

Just my two cents worth.
Enjoy the weekend,

Chet Summers
Compliance Engineering
Schneider Electric
chet.summ...@schneider-electric.commailto:chet.summ...@schneider-electric.com


From: McCallum, Andy [mailto:andy.mccal...@mottmac.com]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 2:30 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EN-61000-6-4

All

Why are telecommunications port emissions so much higher than AC power ports?


Regards

Andy























__
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
__
-


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.orgmailto: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)http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.commailto: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.orgmailto: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)http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.commailto: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.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

[PSES] EN-61000-6-4

[McCallum, Andy]

All

Why are telecommunications port emissions so much higher than AC power ports?


Regards

Andy























-

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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

[PSES] Automotive Directive 2004/104/EC and EN 55012

[McCallum, Andy]

All

Can anyone explain the difference in the limits between the directive and EN 
55012.

Regards

Andy


-

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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] Automotive Directive 2004/104/EC and EN 55012

[McCallum, Andy]

Hi Tom

But the difference is only 2dB - I don't see the point.

Regards

Andy

-Original Message-
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.ne.jp] 
Sent: 11 June 2014 13:09
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automotive Directive 2004/104/EC and EN 55012

On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 12:28:44 +0100,
  McCallum, Andy andy.mccal...@mottmac.com wrote:

 Can anyone explain the difference in the limits between the directive and EN 
 55012.

EN 55012 is intended to protect off-board receivers, and 2004/104/EC (and ECE 
R10, CISPR 25, and OEM standards) are intended to protect on-board receivers.

Regards,
Tom

--
Tomonori Sato  vef00...@nifty.ne.jp
URL: http://homepage3.nifty.com/tsato/

-

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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
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.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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] Automotive Directive 2004/104/EC and EN 55012

[McCallum, Andy]

John

Politics ? Oh dear (or words to that affect)
So as 55012 is harmonised under the EMC directive you could in theory meet that 
directive but fail the automotive directive.

Madness oh yes you explained its Politics.

Best Regards

Andy



-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 11 June 2014 13:39
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Automotive Directive 2004/104/EC and EN 55012

In message
beda313b3e2b304ca6a08001bd61c9c00186e49...@ukmb01.mottmac.group.int,
dated Wed, 11 Jun 2014, McCallum, Andy andy.mccal...@mottmac.com
writes:

But the difference is only 2dB - I don't see the point.
Politics.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Quid 
faciamus nisi sit?
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 
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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
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.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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

[PSES] EMC Job - Reading UK

[McCallum, Andy]

All
Seems to be a serious shortage of EMC engineers in the UK at present. I have 
had numerous requests recently  but being new in my post I am not looking to 
move at present. Please pass on the info below to anyone who may be interested 
or contact me off list for any more details.

Regards

Andy
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs2/cap/view/11651165?pathWildcard=11651165trk=job_capjshttp://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Elinkedin%2Ecom%2Fjobs2%2Fcap%2Fview%2F11651165%3FpathWildcard%3D11651165%26trk%3Djob_capjsurlhash=9tHA_t=mbox_prop

My client is a leading product testing and certification service provider, 
they're looking for EMC engineers to join their busy team, the successful 
applicant will:
*  Have experience of EMC Immunity/emissions testing
*  Documentation and report writing throughout testing process
*  Have EMC testing experience of complex electronic products
*  Have experience of existing EMC standards (i.e ETSI EN 301 489-x, 
EN61000-6-x, 95/54/EEC etc.)
*  Testing in a customer facing environment
*  Have a valid driving licence
*  HNC/Degree or equivalent qualification (significant EMC testing will also be 
considered)
*  have experience of checking technical reports.
Desirable skills:
*  French or German speaking to a technical level
*  Degree in Electronics, Physics, Engineering or similar
*  Clean driving licence
*  Product approval testing experience
Multiple positions are available and the role is also open to graduates/junior 
engineers.



-

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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] Curious Situation in Italian Customs

[McCallum, Andy]

Brian

I had some trouble importing equipment from USA a few years ago - for a 
relatively small fee it was sorted out by http://www.techintl.com/ (Charles 
Green I think his name was). They provided a UK address for the US manufacturer.

Hope that helps.

Andy

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com]
Sent: 04 March 2014 08:11
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Curious Situation in Italian Customs

Brian

As other have noted, you may be suffering from some over exuberance in 
enforcement of new requirements, but in fairness to the enforcement 
authorities, almost every week dangerous mains chargers, made in China, are 
withdrawn from the market - details at  
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/safety/rapex/alerts.

You might need to provide Italian customs with a copy of your Technical File - 
after all it is this, and not your reports, that demonstrate how what you have 
actually shipped is compliant.

Regards
Charlie

From: Brian Ceresney [mailto:bceres...@delta-q.com]
Sent: 03 March 2014 19:12
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Curious Situation in Italian Customs

Dear Compliance Professionals,

We currently have a product compliance situation in Italy, which I thought you 
all might find interesting.

Our customer has had a shipment of our battery charger products held by 
customs, on the premise that our CE documentation is not acceptable. The 
documentation we have provided includes our Delta-Q CE Self-Declaration, dated 
and signed, along with our official CB Test Report, and our EMC Test Report, 
(both issued by accredited organizations).

Our customer has been informed by the Customs officials that a CE Declaration 
of Conformity MUST be issued by a European body, and repeatedly use TUV as an 
example. They refuse to accept  our corporate declaration, and seem interested 
in the fact that the products are manufactured in China by Delta-Q.

My response will be to carefully explain the requirements to my customer(and 
customs) in written form, include all of the accreditation information I can 
obtain for both testing labs, and hope that these officials will understand.

Has anybody else been in a similarly sticky situation?


Best Regards,
Brian C.
Delta-Q Technologies Corp.

Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for 
the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and 
privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original 
message.


-


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.orgmailto: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)http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.commailto: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.orgmailto: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)http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.commailto:dhe...@gmail.com

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the 

Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

[McCallum, Andy]

John

It's a UK based Tram - single conductor wire. Traction current return via the 
running rails.

Regards

Andy

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 30 January 2014 15:54
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

In message
beda313b3e2b304ca6a08001bd61c9c01a2a6...@ukmb01.mottmac.group.int,
dated Wed, 29 Jan 2014, McCallum, Andy andy.mccal...@mottmac.com
writes:

Sorry the quoted limits from the installer of the Afil system are from 
BS EN  60118-4:1998 : I will read the 2006 and see if there have been 
any changes.

There have been; the installer really shouldn't be using that old edition.

Meanwhile, there is a crucial piece of information missing. Is the overhead 
system a single wire or two? The terminology for electric vehicles is different 
in American and British English.

British English terms:

tram: a vehicle that runs on rails, which may or may not form the return 
conductor with a single overhead wire. The return conductor may instead be 
overhead, thus giving a 2-wire system.

trolley-bus: A vehicle that runs on tyres and can be steered. Obviously, it 
requires a 2-wire overhead system.

If the system is 2-wire, how far apart are the wires? I seem to remember that 
in Britain the distance is often the same as the railway gauge - 4 ft 8.5 ins.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex 
silvis sumus 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 
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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
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.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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

[McCallum, Andy]

Thanks John

The rectifier is in fact 12 pole in this case giving harmonics at 600Hz. 

We will look to replace the loop system.

Regards

Andy


-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 31 January 2014 10:27
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

In message
beda313b3e2b304ca6a08001bd61c9c01a2a7...@ukmb01.mottmac.group.int,
dated Fri, 31 Jan 2014, McCallum, Andy andy.mccal...@mottmac.com
writes:

It's a UK based Tram - single conductor wire. Traction current return 
via the running rails.

I have now checked and the 15 μT value at 10 m from the track in EN
50121-3 is reasonable. There is a 2013 edition of this standard either 
published or nearing publication. I have taken the conductor height as 6 m. 
There is a question about the length of the current path; I have assumed that a 
vehicle drawing 1000 A and the feed point are 1 km apart, but this dimension is 
so large that it hardly affects the way the field strength varies with distance 
from the track.

But this 15 μT is DC: as such it can't affect an audio-frequency induction 
loop. There is obviously a fluctuation as the vehicle current varies, but this 
is too slow to be an 'audio frequency'. There is ripple on the DC supply, which 
is probably produced by a six-pulse rectifier, so the frequency is 300 Hz with 
rich harmonics. This is certainly 'audio frequency'.

The ripple voltage might be 5% of the DC voltage but we don't know the ripple 
current because we don't know the impedance of the vehicle at these 
frequencies. The writers of the EN probably have test results to support their 
2% figure, so we can say that the 300 Hz field is 2% of 15 μT. To compare with 
the induction-loop standard, we have to convert to amps per metre. 1 A/m is 1.2 
μT (B = μH, μ=4pi x 10^(-7).

So, 2% of 15 μT = 0.3 μT = 360 mA/m, which is practically a full-volume field 
strength (the standard value is 400 mA/m; this is the r.m.s. value of the 
'loudest bit of the programme', not a peak value). 
Since the interfering signal is 'tone-like', it needs to be 40 dB or more down 
in order to be tolerable. The inverse-square law doesn't apply; the field 
strength falls with distance in a more complex way. My calculations show that 
the distance has to be quite large, but there are local factors that can 
seriously affect the results in practice.

This why the standard (IEC/EN 60118-4) strongly recommends a site survey for 
potentially-interfering magnetic fields *before* a loop system is installed.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex 
silvis sumus 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 
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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
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.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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

[McCallum, Andy]

John

Sorry the quoted limits from the installer of the Afil system are from BS EN  
60118-4:1998 :
I will read the 2006 and see if there have been any changes.

Regards

Andy

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 27 January 2014 17:33
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

In message
beda313b3e2b304ca6a08001bd61c9c01a257...@ukmb01.mottmac.group.int,
dated Mon, 27 Jan 2014, McCallum, Andy andy.mccal...@mottmac.com
writes:

EN50121-2:2006 states in Table C1 that the typical magnetic field from 
a 750V catenary railway drawing 1000A at 10m is 15 micro Teslas 
(15000nT or 15 ?T). The field will decay at approximately the distance 
squared ; so at 35m the field will be down to around 10nT.

I'd want to confirm that by my own calculation. I can't do that immediately, 
but later.

BS EN  60118-4:2006. This standard states :

5.2 Environmental audio-frequency magnetic background fields The 
function of the installed induction loop system may not be satisfactory 
if there are undue environmental magnetic background fields. The 
maximum A-weighted environmental magnetic background noise level re 1 
A/m, measured with the time weighting S (as defined in IEC 61672), 
should not exceed – 40 dB anywhere in the operational area.

I don't know where you got that from (maybe a draft or an older edition of the 
standard), but it's nothing like the text of EN 60118-4:2006. 5.2 is about 
speech signals and magnetic noise is in 4.2.2.

I am conducting some tests on the tram tonight which should give me 
some more figures to use.

OK: the spectrum of the field matters. Maybe you can capture it with a free 
audio program such as Audacity.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex 
silvis sumus 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 
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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
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.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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

[McCallum, Andy]

John

EN50121-2:2006 states in Table C1 that the typical magnetic field from a 750V 
catenary railway drawing 1000A at 10m is 15 micro Teslas (15000nT or 15 µT). 
The field will decay at approximately the distance squared ; so at 35m the 
field will be down to around 10nT.

BS EN  60118-4:2006. This standard states :

5.2 Environmental audio-frequency magnetic background fields The function of 
the installed induction loop system
may not be satisfactory if there are undue environmental magnetic background 
fields. The maximum A-weighted environmental magnetic background noise level re 
1 A/m, measured with the time weighting S (as defined in IEC 61672), should not 
exceed – 40 dB anywhere in the operational area.

I am conducting some tests on the tram tonight which should give me some more 
figures to use.


Regards

Andy


-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 24 January 2014 16:29
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

In message
beda313b3e2b304ca6a08001bd61c9c01a257...@ukmb01.mottmac.group.int,
dated Fri, 24 Jan 2014, McCallum, Andy andy.mccal...@mottmac.com
writes:

Anyone aware of any interference from Trams (750V DC Overhead Catenary 
Systems, max current 1000A) on AFIL systems (EN  60118-4:2006). From my 
very basic calculation you need a significant separation distance (in 
excess of 25m). Any previous studies or examples would be most helpful.

I don't have any studies or examples, but I'm heavily involved with that 
standard; I'm actually editing the next edition today! Of course, the system 
doesn't pass DC and very low and high frequencies, so it's a question of 
transients, from about 20 ms down to perhaps 100 μs.

If you care to tell me how you calculated 25 m, I will compare it with my 
calculations. Meanwhile, I'll ask around in the AFILS community.

Any reports submitted here might well contribute to the next but one edition of 
IEC 60118-4 or a planned Technical Report covering all aspects of AFILS - 
purchase, design, installation, maintenance and 'care and feeding'.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Nondum ex 
silvis sumus 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 
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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
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.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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com

[PSES] Audio Frequency Induction Loop

[McCallum, Andy]

Hi

Anyone aware of any interference from Trams (750V DC Overhead Catenary Systems, 
max current 1000A) on AFIL systems (EN  60118-4:2006). From my very basic 
calculation you need a significant separation distance (in excess of 25m). Any 
previous studies or examples would be most helpful.

Regards

Andy

-

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 emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com