[PSES] Harmonics test requirement for Japan

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi,

Is there a requirement to test harmonics in Japan to obtain VCCI on an ITE 
equipment. There is a JIS C 61000-3-2 standard, but it is required by VCCI? If 
yes, I assume it is been tested to Japanese voltage.

Sincerely,


[img]

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer
Electrical / EMC Compliance

dieter.paas...@christedigital.com
Work: (519) 744-8005 Ext. 7211
www.christiedigital.com
[cid:image002.png@01D891EB.0B65E980]

809 Wellington St. N.
Kitchener, Ontario
N2G 4Y7 Canada
[cid:image003.png@01D891EB.0B65E980] 
[cid:image004.png@01D891EB.0B65E980]   
[cid:image005.png@01D891EB.0B65E980] 
  
[cid:image006.png@01D891EB.0B65E980] 
  
[cid:image007.png@01D891EB.0B65E980] 



This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


-

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

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:
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 
_
To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: 
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC=1

Re: [PSES] ESD generated by rotating turntable

[Paasche, Dieter]

I dad that once, It was bad contact or loos contacts on the brushes to ground 
in addition to very dry and not compliant humidity condition. In theory I think 
you should have at least 30% humidity,


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Paolo Roncone 
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 12:22 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] ESD generated by rotating turntable

CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

Hi everybody

we are considering doing radiated emissions scans during the turntable slow 
rotation (about 5min/360deg) in a chamber with turntable flush on the metal 
floor and sliding contacts.
The likely issue is ESD generated peaks coming from the sliding contacts.
Anyone has experience with this setup, and in that case, what kind of 
mitigation techniques (if any) would be available?

I have direct experience with another chamber with a different kind of 
turntable (not flush, , wooden structure raised about 20cm from the ground 
plane) and have no issues in the 30MHz to 18GHz range.

Thanks in advance
Paolo
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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

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

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

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

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

-

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


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

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site 

Re: [PSES] Dual antenna during RE test ?

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi,

I have seen that too at HP in Sacramento, CA. One antenna was in Vertical 
polarization and the other in Vertical. In my personal opinion, it is Ok for 
pre-scan, but I think it is complicated for the final scan. I think you still 
have to test each frequency and polarization one by one.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Manny Barron 
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2022 4:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Dual antenna during RE test ?

CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

Back around 1998 when I worked for Tandem Computers (purchased by Compaq in 
1998, then purchased by HP in 2001), I visited the HP EMC Lab in Washington 
state (I went to see their 10m chamber since we were thinking of getting a 2nd 
10m chamber, which we did).

Well they used two antennas connected to two separate receivers for their RE 
tests. Can't remember if it was horizontal and vertical OR if it was two 
frequency ranges (30-300MHz and 300-1000MHz), but it was definitely two 
antennas and two receivers.  At that time they were also experimenting with 4 
antennas but I think still 2 receivers, but don't know if that was actually 
implemented. They wrote their own custom test software to handle the multiple 
antenna / receiver combinations.  The guy who ran that HP EMC test lab was Bob 
Dockey who later went to Philips Medical, if you can find him maybe he can 
elaborate on their RE test system of the time.

A year later we (now Compaq) purchased a new 10m chamber (now we had two), so I 
was thinking about the two antenna RE test method as well.  But then in 2002 
(now HP), HP shut down two full EMC labs with three 10m chambers (all within 1 
mi area in Cupertino, CA), and laid off almost all EMC personnel, something 
about too many labs and equipment after the corporate merger.  They ended up 
taking equipment to be tested to their Roseville, CA EMC test lab, about 100 
miles north.

So I never got a chance to research and implement the 2 antenna RE test system. 
Had all the equipment,  but it was too late.

Manny Barron



On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:00 AM Patrick 
mailto:conwa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi All -

I'm wondering if there is any academic or practical literature on the use of 
two antennas during an emissions test.  For example, research or experiments on 
the use of two DRH's above 1.0 GHz, side-by-side, one vertical, the other 
horizontal.

Have any researchers looked at this?
Are there any experimental studies?

Thank you.
-Patrick
-


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 

Re: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?

[Paasche, Dieter]

I think that the EMC directive is not specifically mentioned in the MD as it is 
in RED, unless you consider it a radiation (annex 1 section "1.5.10. 
Radiation"). However EMC compliance is required in the electrical safety 
standard for machinery EN60204-1. 

Sincerely, 




    
Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer
Electrical / EMC Compliance
dieter.paas...@christedigital.com
Work: (519) 744-8005 Ext. 7211
www.christiedigital.com




809 Wellington St. N.
Kitchener, Ontario
N2G 4Y7 Canada




This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

-Original Message-
From: scott...@gmail.com  
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2022 9:50 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?

CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.


The MD Directive is quite similar with RED which includes both LVD and EMC.  No 
one quotes LVD and EMC separated from RED.  We can put LVD compliance and 
applicable standards under MD Directive compliance.  Does MD Directive include 
EMC?  If not, EMC if required should be stated in the DoC outside the MD 
compliance.

Regards,

Scott

-Original Message-
From: Oliver Betz 
Sent: Wednesday, 19 January 2022 4:56 pm
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Notice about LVD compliance in a DoC for machinery?

Dürrer Bernd wrote:

(Annex II of the Machinery Directive point 4)

> "a sentence expressly declaring that the machinery fulfils all the 
> relevant provisions of this Directive and where appropriate, a similar 
> sentence declaring the conformity with other Directives
Correct.

In my current understanding, the phrase "shall not refer to the LVD but to the 
MD" means that the DoC has to be issued under the rules of the MD, but it does 
not mean that LVD is a "Directive Which Cannot Be Named"
in a machinery DoC.

Oliver

-

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:
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Femc-pstc.htmldata=04%7C01%7CDieter.Paasche%40christiedigital.com%7Cc5e41a1f915a4d3a71e308d9ddb692ad%7Cdf46f062ad2c407688e6c675c789a0d8%7C0%7C0%7C637784598492771850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=U8bzS2T4GJICLSNiyINWvKM9q8bChnYxP%2FIdXJIcgLU%3Dreserved=0

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fproduct-compliance.oc.ieee.org%2Fdata=04%7C01%7CDieter.Paasche%40christiedigital.com%7Cc5e41a1f915a4d3a71e308d9ddb692ad%7Cdf46f062ad2c407688e6c675c789a0d8%7C0%7C0%7C637784598492771850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=OydyaVDyNgBj7ZycMZDWgOOJ0ajiIM%2BOuGJ4vf0qD%2FE%3Dreserved=0
 can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website:  
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Fdata=04%7C01%7CDieter.Paasche%40christiedigital.com%7Cc5e41a1f915a4d3a71e308d9ddb692ad%7Cdf46f062ad2c407688e6c675c789a0d8%7C0%7C0%7C637784598492771850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=pJHgacvK%2FbjWYckUTIKfOhnNSKOxSs%2Fb38l0o6R82AQ%3Dreserved=0
Instructions:  
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flist.htmldata=04%7C01%7CDieter.Paasche%40christiedigital.com%7Cc5e41a1f915a4d3a71e308d9ddb692ad%7Cdf46f062ad2c407688e6c675c789a0d8%7C0%7C0%7C637784598492771850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=k2T5a1afmftyBRLGlwe5A0vN6BVWnd9qzYwOGzRKw7I%3Dreserved=0
 (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: 
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flistrules.htmldata=04%7C01%7CDieter.Paasche%40christiedigital.com%7Cc5e41a1f915a4d3a71e308d9ddb692ad%7Cdf46f062ad2c407688e6c675c789a0d8%7C0%7C0%7C637784598492771850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=TtPSl0O2adgArboUOWaWsFXSGVObwkEeR1PKzYjWpjg%3Dreserved=0

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

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

-

Re: [PSES] Max Hold Quasi-peak ?

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi,

I agree with the statements mentioned. It depends on the nature of the 
disturbance and you would have to find out what is happening during that period 
of time. I would also suggest to review CISPR 16-2-1, specifically to the 
definition of continuous disturbance.

Section 3 continuous disturbance

RF disturbance with a duration of more than 200 ms at the IF-output of a 
measuring receiver,
which causes a deflection on the meter of a measuring receiver in quasi-peak 
detection mode
which does not decrease immediately

Section 6.5 Interpretation of measuring results.

6.5 Interpretation of measuring results
6.5.1 Continuous disturbance
The following steps shall be applied when interpreting the results for 
continuous disturbance
measurements:
a) At each frequency for which the level of disturbance is close to the limit 
and not steady,
the reading on the measuring receiver is observed for at least 15 s for each 
measurement;
the highest readings shall be recorded. Some product standards allow the 
exclusion of
isolated clicks, which shall be ignored (e.g. CISPR 14-1).

There are more conditions in this sections.

Sincerely,


[img]

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer
Electrical / EMC Compliance

dieter.paas...@christedigital.com
Work: (519) 744-8005 Ext. 7211
www.christiedigital.com
[https://www.christiedigital.com/globalassets/resources/public/signatures/christie_logo.png]

809 Wellington St. N.
Kitchener, Ontario
N2G 4Y7 Canada
[https://www.christiedigital.com/globalassets/resources/public/signatures/gradients/facebook_DB-B.png]
 
[https://www.christiedigital.com/globalassets/resources/public/signatures/gradients/twitter_DB-B.png]
   
[https://www.christiedigital.com/globalassets/resources/public/signatures/gradients/LinkedIn_DB-B.png]
   
[https://www.christiedigital.com/globalassets/resources/public/signatures/gradients/instagram_DB-B.png]
   
[https://www.christiedigital.com/globalassets/resources/public/signatures/gradients/Youtube_DB-B.png]
 


This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Charles Grasso 
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2021 10:08 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Max Hold Quasi-peak ?

CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

Interesting topic!

Completely agree with Brent!.

I would only add the "quality" of the signal can also contribute to the 
variation - by that I mean if there
 is any kind of modulation on the signal then that will contribute to the 
measurement difficulties.
 It is also not unusual for a lab to sit on a signal if the signal has a  noted 
time variance
(this is from experience).


On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 11:46 AM Amund Westin < wrote:

 This message originated outside of DISH and was sent by: 
owner-emc-p...@listserv.ieee.org

Some weeks ago I went to a test lab as an observer on a CE marking project (IT 
product).
I participated on the radiated emission testing and some frequencies were above 
the limit line during the scan (peak measurement). Later on, the Quasi-Peak 
measurement lowered the values significant and therefore with the result Passed.
Later on, I was told that they continued the testing by 10-15 minutes and was 
logging the maximum Quasi Peak value (repetitive QP meas) on spike with the 
highest value. During these 15 minutes, one or two QP measurement was above the 
limit and the result was changed from Passed to Failed.
I have not seen this test procedure before. I'm familiar with just one QP 
measurement on each frequency and not Max Hold QP on each for 10-15 minutes.
Anyone who have experienced the same? Is it a CISPR procedure or just some 
overzealous lab engineers?

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 
emc-p...@ieee.org

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

Re: [PSES] EMC/EMI Cables - Don't cut yourself

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi, 

We got very good results with HDMI Crestron cables.

I have some pictures if anyone wants to see a good shielded versus not that 
good, but still sold as shielded HDMI cables. Big difference. We tested several 
ones and also noticed different results even on good shielded cables. 


Sincerely, 




    
Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer
Electrical / EMC Compliance
dieter.paas...@christedigital.com
Work: (519) 744-8005 Ext. 7211
www.christiedigital.com




809 Wellington St. N.
Kitchener, Ontario
N2G 4Y7 Canada




This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

-Original Message-
From: John E Allen <09cc677f395b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> 
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 1:47 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC/EMI Cables - Don't cut yourself

CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.


"Pretty Similar" story from about 8 yrs ago when working  as a contractor  for 
a UK division of a very large Oil & Gas instrumentation contractor:

The DUT consisted of a surface control & interface  unit and a "downhole" (i.e. 
goes down inside the metal casing of a oil well extraction pipe)  measuring 
unit, and, for testing purposes on the surface, connected by an about 2m long 
cable assembly.

Took it for Class A RE testing at a very local lab, but stopped the test after 
about 20 mins when it was clear that the DUT was "spewing" RF "everywhere" 
across the spectrum

I immediately had a pretty good idea where the problem lay because everything 
but the connecting cable was pretty much solidly metal-cased - thus the cable 
was the prime suspect.

Back in the lab, I disassembled the cable = 2 lengths of reasonably well 
shielded cable -  but joined in the middle by a small electronic interface unit 
in a plastic box with only a very thin stranded conductor between the screens 
of the two cables! (The original designers were generally very good and clued 
up, but had little concept of EMC design  & control!).

Long story cut short: replaced the plastic box with a metal one with 360 deg 
shielded metal cable glands at each end, and introduced 360 deg  shielding on 
the cable connecters to the control unit and the downhole measuring unit -> 
result = passed Class with a reasonable margin, but it cost the company well 
over £300 to replace the cables in each of the 200+ kits that they had already 
shipped, AND a lot of time & effort to do that!

"Simple" good EMC design practice much earlier on would have saved that company 
a LOT of heartache & cash!

John E Allen
W. London, UK.

-Original Message-
From: David Garnier 
Sent: 29 April 2021 18:10
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EMC/EMI Cables - Don't cut yourself

Story.

This happened 20+ years ago so don't shoot me.

An outside vendor was supplying the Operator Interface Console for our new 
Ultrasound machine. This console was a slick EMC design, each of the 11 or more 
rotary encoders that used low power CPU's that went to sleep after rotation. I 
was told the PIC chips were parasitic powered to reduce EMC. Wow, nice 
considering diagnostic Ultrasound was essentially a multi channel sub-microvolt 
receiver with a piezoelectric transducer as the patient antenna.

The new machine was failing RE on the 10m OATS and the operator interface 
console EMC Engineer came to visit us to see why.
"How good are your 360 degree shielded connectors?" "We don't know."
The EMC Engineer then looks at us and says some to the effect, "Oh goody, this 
is the part I like the most." He whips out his pocket knife and starts pealing 
off the hard plastic over-molded connector...
The project engineer and myself looks at each other with our mouths hanging 
open while the connector was being dissected - and then the EMC guy cuts 
himself. I felt bad for him, he was a "sharp" EMC engineer and he did find the 
problem.

Moral to this story - Don't cut yourself!

Dave Garnier - Retired GEHC

Dave Garnier - Retired GEHC

-

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:

Re: [PSES] rationale behind conducted immunity levels in EN 55035 / IEC 61000-4-6

[Paasche, Dieter]

The reduction on the level on radiated emissions might come from the CISPR 20, 
As you might know CIPSR 35 is a combination of CISPR 24 and CISPR 20.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Joe Randolph 
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 1:58 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] rationale behind conducted immunity levels in EN 55035 / 
IEC 61000-4-6

CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

Hi Jeff:

Back in the days when people had ordinary telephones and AM radio stations were 
common, it was a "known thing" that cables near an AM radio transmitter could 
develop common mode voltages up to 3 Vrms.  If the phone did not have perfect 
earth balance at the AM frequency, there would be a common-mode-to-differential 
conversion that would create a differential RF signal on the phone line pair.

Any non-linearity in the phone circuit, such as a diode, would demodulate the 
differential AM RF signal, with the result that the AM radio music/voice could 
be clearly heard in the telephone handset.

I'm describing this to you because it is the only situation where I have 
personally seen a performance degradation due to common mode RF on a cable.  
Hearing AM radio broadcasts in ordinary phones was a common problem.

CISPR has extended this principle to a range of frequencies that is larger than 
the AM band, and to performance degradation that that includes digital 
malfunctions as well.

Presumably they had their reasons for this, but I do not know the rationale.  
All I can say is that I hope the real-world example I described above gives you 
some idea of what CISPR may be concerned about.


Joe Randolph
Telecom Design Consultant
Randolph Telecom, Inc.
781-721-2848 (USA)
j...@randolph-telecom.com
http://www.randolph-telecom.com

From: Jeff Keyzer [mailto:j...@mightyohm.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 1:21 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] rationale behind conducted immunity levels in EN 55035 / IEC 
61000-4-6

Hello all,

I am looking for background information on the rationale behind the conducted 
immunity test levels defined in EN 55035 / CISPR 35 and IEC 61000-4-6.

Specifically, in 55035:2016  table 2, clause 2.1 calls for a test level of 3V 
rms from 0.15 to 10MHz.  It also defines a slope that reduces the signal level 
above 10MHz.

What is the technical rationale behind 3V rms being the desired immunity level 
for ITE equipment?

Second, why does the voltage level taper above 10MHz in 55035, as opposed to 
55024, where the test remains constant from 150kHz - 80MHz?

IEC 61000-4-6 also calls for 1V, 3V, 10V rms test levels and calls for 80% AM 
modulation "to simulate actual threats".  Is the rationale behind this 
documented somewhere? What threats were considered?

I suspect this is a rabbit hole, but curiosity (and a concerned client) has 
gotten the best of me.
--
Jeff Keyzer
MightyOhm LLC
j...@mightyohm.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 

Re: [PSES] Question regarding use of un certified radios.

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi,

There is one exception in the FCC part 15 standard, but the way you are 
presenting the problem it looks to me that you cannot apply, as you might not 
comply with the requirements of 15.5. I put it here anyways.

§15.23   Home-built devices.
(a) Equipment authorization is not required for devices that are not marketed, 
are not constructed from a kit, and are built in quantities of five or less for 
personal use.
(b) It is recognized that the individual builder of home-built equipment may 
not possess the means to perform the measurements for determining compliance 
with the regulations. In this case, the builder is expected to employ good 
engineering practices to meet the specified technical standards to the greatest 
extent practicable. The provisions of §15.5 apply to this equipment.

§15.5   General conditions of operation.
(a) Persons operating intentional or unintentional radiators shall not be 
deemed to have any vested or recognizable right to continued use of any given 
frequency by virtue of prior registration or certification of equipment, or, 
for power line carrier systems, on the basis of prior notification of use 
pursuant to §90.35(g) of this chapter.
(b) Operation of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is 
subject to the conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that 
interference must be accepted that may be caused by the operation of an 
authorized radio station, by another intentional or unintentional radiator, by 
industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment, or by an incidental 
radiator.
(c) The operator of a radio frequency device shall be required to cease 
operating the device upon notification by a Commission representative that the 
device is causing harmful interference. Operation shall not resume until the 
condition causing the harmful interference has been corrected.
(d) Intentional radiators that produce Class B emissions (damped wave) are 
prohibited.



Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] 
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 1:36 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Question regarding use of un certified radios.

Thank you!

From: Dennis Ward mailto:dennis.w...@pctest.com>>
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 11:29 AM
To: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] 
mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Question regarding use of un certified radios.


 This message originated outside of DISH and was sent by: 
dennis.w...@pctest.com
Simple answer, NO it cannot be used.
In fact, it cannot even be used within the companies premises without being 
certified.  Any part 15 intentional radiator, no matter where used, be it on a 
company’s premises or anywhere, must be certified.  The only exceptions to this 
are found in CFR 47 2.805.

In some instances, some try to use the idea that if a wifi device is used by 
the government, it does not require certification.  This too is not correct.  
While government frequencies are not under the authority of the FCC, devices 
using non-government frequencies necessarily fall under the authority of the 
FCC.  Thus, any government agency using a device such as a wifi transmitter 
must use certified wifi devices, or must have their specific wifi device 
certified in order to be used.

Thanks

[cid:image001.png@01D64E2B.A6EBF490]
Dennis Ward
Senior Reviewing Engineer
PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, LLC.
7185 Oakland Mills Road
Columbia, MD  21045
1 410 290 6652)

dennis.w...@pctest.com | 
www.pctest.com
 | 
www.element.com

This communication and any attachment contain information from PCTEST 
Engineering Laboratory, LLC. and is intended for the exclusive use of the 
recipient(s) named above.

From: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] 
mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com>>
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 10:14 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Re: [PSES] Currency requirements for FCC Part 15/ISED transmitter test reports

[Paasche, Dieter]

As far as I know  in Canada and for ISED it is OK provided that you product 
complies to the latest version (issue) of the standard.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Dennis Ward <0dbeaa892a40-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 3:11 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Currency requirements for FCC Part 15/ISED transmitter test 
reports

You are correct in that the actual FCC rules do not prescribe how long a test 
report is good for.  What you will find however, is that the FCC will generally 
require attestations from the grantee that any report older than one year still 
reflects the accuracy of the test results for the device.
Test reports as old as three years or more have been accepted by the FCC as 
long as the attestations are provided.  These attestation must generally come 
from the grantee, not the test lab.  These attestations will generally include 
attestations that the device has not changed in any way that affects the 
emissions characteristics of the device.

As you stated, ISED is different and will not accept test reports after a 
certain time has elapsed.

Thanks

[cid:image001.png@01D64E2B.172F62B0]
Dennis Ward
Senior Reviewing Engineer
PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, LLC.
7185 Oakland Mills Road
Columbia, MD  21045
1 410 290 6652)

dennis.w...@pctest.com | 
www.pctest.com
 | 
www.element.com

This communication and any attachment contain information from PCTEST 
Engineering Laboratory, LLC. and is intended for the exclusive use of the 
recipient(s) named above.

From: Sykes, Bob mailto:bob.sy...@gilbarco.com>>
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 11:53 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Currency requirements for FCC Part 15/ISED transmitter test 
reports


CAUTION:This email originated from outside of Element Materials Technology. DO 
NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know 
the content is safe. Please contact IT Service Desk if you are in any doubt 
about this email.

Worldly Experts,

I seem to recall that exists some sort of shelf life limitation on re-using 
FCC/ISED test reports for subsequent new Certifications.  I am unable to find 
documentation of this in the FCC Rules or KBDs.  Perhaps this is just for 
Canada?  (I have a little more difficulty searching ISED) Or perhaps I was 
dreaming.  Can anyone shed some light?

adTHANKSvance,
Bob Sykes



Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If you 
are not the intended recipient, please notify us by email by replying to the 
sender and delete this 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 
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: 

Re: [PSES] FCC Requirements for in-house test equipment

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi Charles,

depends what it is (do you have a radio or not), but in general you could use 
this section. See if it applies to you.

§15.23   Home-built devices.
(a) Equipment authorization is not required for devices that are not marketed, 
are not constructed from a kit, and are built in quantities of five or less for 
personal use.
(b) It is recognized that the individual builder of home-built equipment may 
not possess the means to perform the measurements for determining compliance 
with the regulations. In this case, the builder is expected to employ good 
engineering practices to meet the specified technical standards to the greatest 
extent practicable. The provisions of §15.5 apply to this equipment.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] 
Sent: viernes, 19 de junio de 2020 05:23 p. m.
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC Requirements for in-house test equipment

Hello EMC Gurus!

We in development of an inhouse piece of test gear and the question is:
What (if any) are the FCC rules and procedure to cover said item.?
How does the FCC cover this type of scenario?

[Working From Home]
Charles Grasso
Dish Technologies
(c) 303-204-2974
(h) 303-317-5530
(e ) charles.gra...@dish.com
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

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

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

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

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

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

-

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


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

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

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

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

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

[PSES] Low power FM or Am transmitter

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi group,

Can I operate an AM or FM very low power transmitter without a license and or 
authorization? I mean that the transmitting power would be below 15.209.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

-

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] ESD - Floating metal knob, otherwise grounded equipment

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi

I had a similar situation.  We ended using the alternative test method, with 
just extending the time between discharges. As per IEC 61000-42 Section 7.4.2.1:

Therefore as an alternative, the following options may be used:
• the time interval between successive discharges shall be extended to the time 
necessary to allow natural decay of the charge from the EUT;

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: DEREK WALTON <00734758d943-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2020 1:31 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] ESD - Floating metal knob, otherwise grounded equipment

Oh Boy Elliott,

you’ll get a few answers here, lol.

My 10 cents is that when you are not discharging each time you are adding more 
and more charge to the isolated control, that eventually will snap over At that 
point you are discharging quite a significantly higher level of chart than an 
individual event.

I would not call that a realistic “ compliance” test.

OTOH, if it’s possible that may happen in the real world with an operator 
continually adding charge as they use your EUT, you may want to find a way of 
adding some way to bleed charge over a few seconds.

Interesting problem, lets see what others say,

Sincerely,

Derek
LFResearch and 
SSCLabs.com



On Mar 12, 2020, at 10:53 AM, Elliott Martinson 
mailto:elliott.martin...@subzero.com>> wrote:

Hi Everybody,

We’re having some disagreements regarding the 61000-4-2 standard. In the 
section “ungrounded equipment”, it states that ungrounded equipment or part(s) 
of equipment shall have the charge removed in between ESD pulses in order to 
not over-test.
We have a product that only fails pre-compliance when repeated ESD pulses are 
applied to a floating metal knob without removing the charge in between 
(eventually there is a second discharge between the knob and the enclosure). 
The product as a whole is “grounded equipment”.
Since the issue only happens when the charge isn’t removed in between pulses, 
is this a pass or a fail?

Thanks,

Elliott Martinson
Controls Engineer
Sub-Zero/Wolf
elliott.martin...@subzero.com
-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/
 can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.
Website:  
http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules:  
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott 

[PSES] Medical equipment with radio

[Paasche, Dieter]

Medical equipment shall comply with IEC or EN 60601-1-2 for EMC which calls out 
CISPR 11 for emissions. This standard currently test the emissions up to 
1.0GHz. Now we introduce an approved 2.4/5GHz radio module. For Europe I would 
re-test the whole system to comply with 301 489-1 and 301489-17 standard for 
EMC.

>From what I read, the FDA required FCC approval for the radio when there is on 
>in a medical equipment. Would the documentation in the FCC webpage be enough 
>or, as in Europe, do I also have to re-test the whole system to comply with 
>part 15.209?


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

-

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] Accredited lab for FCC testing

[Paasche, Dieter]

Dear members,

Is it absolutely mandatory to test a product for EMC in an accredited lab under 
the suppliers declaration of conformity? If yes, where does it clearly say?
This is what I found so far. It seem to me that it does not necessarily need to 
be accredited, but would need to comply with all the accreditation 
requirements. The question comes from the "upon request" of the sentence in 
section 2.948 (2).

And therefore, I would be OK for the FCC, if I know that the test results of a 
non-accredited lab that follows the test site calibration as per standards are 
equivalent to an accredited lab. Is that correct?

§15.31   Measurement standards.
(d) Field strength measurements shall be made, to the extent possible, on an 
open area test site. Test sites other than open area test sites may be employed 
if they are properly calibrated so that the measurement results correspond to 
what would be obtained from an open area test site.

§2.948   Measurement facilities.
(b) A laboratory that makes measurements of equipment subject to an equipment 
authorization under the certification procedure or Supplier's Declaration of 
Conformity shall compile a description of the measurement facilities employed.

(1) The description of the measurement facilities shall contain the following 
information:

(i) Location of the test site.

(ii) Physical description of the test site accompanied by photographs that 
clearly show the details of the test site.

(iii) A drawing showing the dimensions of the site, physical layout of all 
supporting structures, and all structures within 5 times the distance between 
the measuring antenna and the device being measured.

(iv) Description of structures used to support the device being measured and 
the test instrumentation.

(v) List of measuring equipment used.

(vi) Information concerning the calibration of the measuring equipment, i.e., 
the date the equipment was last calibrated and how often the equipment is 
calibrated.

(vii) For a measurement facility that will be used for testing radiated 
emissions, a plot of site attenuation data taken pursuant to paragraph (d) of 
this section.

(2) The description of the measurement facilities shall be provided to a 
laboratory accreditation body upon request.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

-

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] China Compulsory Certificate

[Paasche, Dieter]

Sometimes we get support from SGS taiwan


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Harrington, John [mailto:john.harring...@keithley.com]
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2017 10:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] China Compulsory Certificate

Can anyone recommend a company that can assist in securing a China Compulsory 
Certificate for a part?

Thanks

John

John Harrington

EMC and Safety Compliance Manager

E/ john.harring...@keithley.com

T/ 440.498.2727

tek.com

[Twitter][Facebook][LinkedIn][Google+][Instagram][YouTube][Shopping
 Cart]



[Tektronix Keithley]

[Keithley]

Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If you 
are not the intended recipient, please notify us by email by replying to the 
sender and delete this message. The sender disclaims that the content of this 
email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any agreement; 
provided that the foregoing does not invalidate the binding effect of any 
digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included 
in any attachment.



-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>

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

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

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

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

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

-

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


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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] EMC Measurement Software

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi

I am using TILE for radiated emissions. I use it for Conducted emissions as a 
back-up. Personally, I think there is no software that can do an accurate 
radiated emissions test. I do a pre-scan automatically and then the final scan 
manually. Tile allows you that flexibility although it is not perfect.

If you want some special personal features it is very good. It is similar to 
Labview but easier to program. You would still have to do something, but you do 
not need to be a software programmer expert. Not all functions are available so 
you need to add some commands. I personally like that, but not everybody does.

The lab we have is mostly for prescan and troubleshooting, so it needs to be 
flexible. I work with different engineers and frequently look for different 
things, so TILE allows me that flexibility and still gets me good graphs and 
tables.

Disadvantage: Every run will save all your settings. That means your files are 
big. You can gave all information into one file, but then your file would be 
even bigger. I personally have one file per limit. These files are smaller, but 
then it makes it time consuming when you have to update correction factors for 
example.
You pay an annual fee for maintenance. Not sure about the other software. 
However the support is good.

Back in my old times I used Toyo software. (used to work for Sony) I like it, 
but was not that flexible, Means it is good for users or for certified labs. I 
was very good for all the special audio and video immunity tests.

I also have the experience of somebody writing a software with Labview. It was 
very time consuming and costly The software was very very good. It can do a 
very accurate radiated emissions, although it would take at least 4 hours for 
one run. So if you have time and you want something automatically that one 
would work. However the company that hired the programmer paid a very high 
price and it took at least a year until it was running as everybody wanted.
So, if Labview is difficult, I can imagine that starting from scratch is even 
more difficult.

R, I have seen the EMC32. Personally I have not used it but looks to me good 
enough. The people I have seen using it, seem to like it.

I don't know the rest.

I guess deciding what software you want to use depends on how much flexibility 
you want to spend in testing. (how much for prescan, how much for final scan, 
how much time you have for the software to give you an accurate results. etc.) 
Radiated emissions is especially difficult if you have jumping signals. To get 
accurate test results you would have to run the turntable and antenna mast ery 
slowly and have several iterations done before you really find the worst case 
condition. So I personally ended up doing the final scan manually which was 
faster for the time I had available per unit.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 8:41 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EMC Measurement Software

Hello group,

I'm investigating upgrades to my existing EMC measurement software (R 
ESXS-K1) and have found the following options:


  *   R Elektra (new) / ES-Scan / EMC32
  *   Dare RadiMation
  *   Toyo EMC measurement software
  *   ETS Lindgren TILE!
  *   Nexio BAT-EMC
  *   NI LabView and develop own routines
  *   Write own from scratch (VB / C#)

Are there any others worth considering? What "gotchas" or issues am I likely to 
run into?

It needs to drive a R ESHS 10 (conducted) and a ESVS 10 (radiated). Bonus 
points for support for R FSP 30 and custom turntable control.

Many thanks in advance!
James


James Pawson
Unit 3 Compliance



[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png]

Virus-free. 
www.avg.com

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>

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] Quasipeak definition

[Paasche, Dieter]

How would you define the Quasipeak detector to somebody that is not EMC 
knowledgeable.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


-

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] RED Harmonised Standards

[Paasche, Dieter]

If I insert a radio module into a system that is compliant to the RED and to 
the latest 301 489 series, do I have to re-test the whole system towards the 
301 489 series?

The system already complies with other regular EMC standards (CISPR 12) without 
the module.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com<http://www.christiedigital.com/>

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 2:59 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

As far as I understand:

Use EMCD HS for EM aspectsart 3.1 (No NB needed)  ; that includes the 301 
489 series for EMC of auxiliary equipment  (intentionally left out of RED 
should never have been on the RTTE list either as it was EMC)
Use LVD HS for electrical safety also art 3.1 (No NB Needed)
Use RED HS  for radio Art 3.2 (No NB needed) (radio properties  /  spurious 
emissions: those are not EMI, but strictly harmonics and mixer products)

This ends the confusion there always was on EMC standards and LVD standards in 
the RTTE list,

>From the beginning one was supposed to use 3 directives for Radio products

There are still missing red standards, notably those for (GPS) Receivers, here 
a NB is needed, but as there is no standard
available, what will the NB have to impose ?

Gert Gremmen



Van: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com]
Verzonden: woensdag 28 juni 2017 20:04
Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Onderwerp: Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

I think they've been putting all their effort into getting the Article 3.2 
standards onto the OJ as soon as they can (because those are the ones which the 
manufacturer needs, to self declare without a Notified Body).

Most of the EN 301 489 standards are published or at least in a final draft; so 
the manufacturer can use them and explain it in their risk assessment.   It may 
not be on the RED OJ, but that does not mandate the use of a Notified Body.


Michael.


From: Paasche, Dieter [mailto:dieter.paas...@christiedigital.com]
Sent: 28 June 2017 16:22
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards


Interesting. One additional question is I don't see any of the 301 489 series. 
Is this going to be published in the RED harmonized standards list, as it is 
strictly speaking and EMC requirement, or is this part of the article 3.1 b 
requirement:" an adequate level of electromagnetic compatibility as set out in 
Directive 2014/30/EU.?"
The EMC directive only lists 301 489-1 and 301 489-34.



Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com<http://www.christiedigital.com/>

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Douglas Nix [mailto:d...@mac.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 2:27 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

Colleagues,

I just heard about a new Communication and list of Harmonised Standards under 
the RED:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2017.180.01.0005.01.ENG=OJ:C:2017:180:TOC

--
Doug Nix
d...@mac.com<mailto:d...@mac.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<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)<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 <sdoug...@ieee.org<mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org&

Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

[Paasche, Dieter]

Interesting. One additional question is I don't see any of the 301 489 series. 
Is this going to be published in the RED harmonized standards list, as it is 
strictly speaking and EMC requirement, or is this part of the article 3.1 b 
requirement:" an adequate level of electromagnetic compatibility as set out in 
Directive 2014/30/EU.?"
The EMC directive only lists 301 489-1 and 301 489-34.



Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Douglas Nix [mailto:d...@mac.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 2:27 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

Colleagues,

I just heard about a new Communication and list of Harmonised Standards under 
the RED:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2017.180.01.0005.01.ENG=OJ:C:2017:180:TOC

--
Doug Nix
d...@mac.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] CE Compliance [General Use]

[Paasche, Dieter]

Agreed, but the for the new Radio Directive the DoC shall be included with the 
product;

Article 1.9

Manufacturers shall ensure that each item of radio equipment is accompanied by 
a copy of the EU declaration of conformity or by a simplified EU declaration of 
conformity. Where a simplified EU declaration of conformity is provided, it 
shall contain the exact internet address where the full text of the EU 
declaration of conformity can be obtained.


For all other Directive it is not mandatory. As an alternative it can be an 
electronic copy on a webpage. 



Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 9:04 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] CE Compliance [General Use]

The Declaration of Conformity is essential. While it is not compulsory to 
supply it to the end-user unasked, it is advisable to do so and many end-users 
insist on it.

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: Price, Andrew (Leonardo, UK)
[mailto:andrew.p.pr...@leonardocompany.com]
Sent: 20 June 2017 13:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] CE Compliance [General Use]

Hi all,

Can a statement that a product is compliant with the EMC Directive 2004/108/EC 
or 2014/30/EU in the support documentation be regarded as proof of conformity 
or does there have to be a Declaration of Conformity which states compliance 
with the Directive via appropriate standards???
Also to refresh my memory does the DofC have to be supplied to the end user or 
can it be held by the products distributor in the EU??

Regards
Andy




 Andrew Price
 Land & Naval Defence Electronics Division
 Prinicpal Environmental Engineer (EMC)

 Leonardo MW Ltd
 Sigma House, Christopher Martin Rd, Basildon SS14 3EL, UK
 Tel  EMC LAB : +44 (0)1268 883308
 Mobile: +44 (0)7507 854888
 
andrew.p.pr...@leonardocompany.com
 leonardocomapany.com
HELICOPTERS / AERONAUTICS / ELECTRONICS, DEFENCE AND SECURITY SYSTEMS / SPACE

* Please consider the environment before printing this email.




Leonardo MW Ltd
Registered Office: Sigma House, Christopher Martin Road, Basildon, Essex
SS14 3EL A company registered in England & Wales.  Company no. 02426132

This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and 
may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it 
from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its 
contents to any other person.


-

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: 

[PSES] FCC part 18

[Paasche, Dieter]

Dear group,

In FCC part 15.103 does the term "test equipment" refer to the medical 
equipment only or to the industrial and commercial equipment as well.

(c) A digital device used exclusively as industrial, commercial, or medical 
test equipment

Means if I have an industrial or commercial digital device (e.g cash register 
or industrial computer?) that is not for testing, would it have to comply with 
FCC part 15?.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


-

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] Korea KN 32

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi group,

CISPR 32 allows class A products to be tested at 3m. Would KN 32 accept it as 
well?

I appreciate it If anybody can let me know where I can get a copy of KN 32 in 
English.

Thanks.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


-

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] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

[Paasche, Dieter]

If this helps, some time ago I heard about how the testing of class B  - 3m 
distance was determined for radiated emission. It looks that 3m would be a 
distance that two electronic devices could be when located in an apartment 
house. For example the TV from one guy to the TV of his neighbor living wall to 
wall.

That been said, if the your equipment can be close by 3m from an apartment 
house than it would be a residential and therefore have to meet residential 
requirements. The rest I would just called it not residential and therefore a 
class A product  For most standards and mainly emissions it would not matter if 
it is industrial, heavy industrial or light industrial because they all have to 
comply with class A limits. Immunity you might see some differences.

As you mentioned there are many people that manufacture equipment in different 
environments complying with class B residential limits for emissions and use 
the stricter levels for immunity. It is very common practice.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 3:01 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

Thanks all – at least I am not the only one unsure.

I am trying to establish a set of criteria that I can ask our engineers and 
marketers that will determine the classification. A decision tree, if you will. 
 This arose from a device that met the less stringent criteria, but not the 
more stringent and then what to do. To prevent the need to debate this topic 
over and over, I was hoping to establish a go forward approach.  Ideally, that 
approach would be “design for both industrial AND non-industrial and be done 
with it.” However, other factors are at play than just my druthers.

-Jamison

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 12:44 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

For Europe, the sources are the Generic standards, which are substantially 
consistent with CISPR 11.

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.

From: Doug Nix [mailto:d...@ieee.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 5:25 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

My understanding has always been based on the Class and Group designations in 
CISPR 11 / EN 55011 for ISM equipment (based on the 2009 edition):

5.3 Division into classes
Class A equipment is equipment suitable for use in all establishments other 
than domestic and
those directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which supplies 
buildings used
for domestic purposes.

Class A equipment shall meet class A limits.
Warning: Class A equipment is intended for use in an industrial environment. In 
the
documentation for the user, a statement shall be included drawing attention to 
the fact that
there may be potential difficulties in ensuring electromagnetic compatibility 
in other
environments, due to conducted as well as radiated disturbances.
Class B equipment is equipment suitable for use in domestic establishments and 
in
establishments directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which 
supplies
buildings used for domestic purposes.
Class B equipment shall meet class B limits.

The key in all of this is the source of power supply for the equipment. If the 
equipment is supplied from mains that are shared with domestic establishments, 
then it must meet Class B requirements IMO.

If the equipment is intended for industrial use, i.e., Class A, where the power 
supply from the mains is not shared with domestic establishments, then Class A 
performance is acceptable.

The deciding factor is the sharing of the supply with domestic establishments. 
If a location is fed from its own substation and there are no dwellings 
supplied from that substation, it’s an industrial location, and therefore Class 
A.

Doug Nix
d...@ieee.org
+1 (519) 729-5704

On 18-Oct-16, at 08:44, Kortas, Jamison 
> wrote:

Good Morning,

What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which a 
device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.

It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 

Re: [PSES] [RFI] Part 15 isn't enough..

[Paasche, Dieter]

In general I believe that changing part 15 will be very difficult since it is a 
legal  (political) document and would need congress approval for changes. 
Different that than in the EU where you have directives and harmonized 
standards somehow separately.

Also the US is part of international committees and heavily participates on 
emissions and immunity standards. However implementation and enforcing is 
always difficult.

And finally, isn't FCC indirectly stating that immunity has to be met as well?  
FCC Part 15.5 (b)
§15.5   General conditions of operation.
(a) Persons operating intentional or unintentional radiators shall not be 
deemed to have any vested or recognizable right to continued use of any given 
frequency by virtue of prior registration or certification of equipment, or, 
for power line carrier systems, on the basis of prior notification of use 
pursuant to §90.35(g) of this chapter.
(b) Operation of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is 
subject to the conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that 
interference must be accepted that may be caused by the operation of an 
authorized radio station, by another intentional or unintentional radiator, by 
industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment, or by an incidental 
radiator.
(c) The operator of a radio frequency device shall be required to cease 
operating the device upon notification by a Commission representative that the 
device is causing harmful interference. Operation shall not resume until the 
condition causing the harmful interference has been corrected.
(d) Intentional radiators that produce Class B emissions (damped wave) are 
prohibited.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche



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] test message

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi John, 

Received it too. Could it be that your own address is in your junk mail list?

Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: +1 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 1:16 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] test message

Test message. I'm still not seeing any of my posts reflected back to me.
Are they appearing on the list?

With best wishes OOO - Own Opinions Only www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

-

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] Radiated Emissions testing of Emergency Luminaire with 2.4GHz transceiver

[Paasche, Dieter]

How about section 8.2 second paragraph?

My opinion is. The radio section shall comply with class B of EN 55022 and the 
light fixture to EN 55015.

"8.2 Enclosure of ancillary equipment measured on a standalone basis

This test is only applicable to ancillary equipment not incorporated in the 
radio equipment and intended to be measured on a stand-alone basis, as declared 
by the manufacturer. This test shall be performed on a representative 
configuration of the ancillary equipment.

This test is not applicable for ancillary equipment incorporated in the radio 
equipment, or for ancillary equipment intended to be measured in combination 
with the radio equipment. In these cases the requirements of the relevant 
product standard for the effective use of the radio spectrum shall apply."


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: +1 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Elliott Martinson [mailto:elliott.martin...@etcconnect.com]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 10:54 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Radiated Emissions testing of Emergency Luminaire with 2.4GHz 
transceiver

Hi all,

I have a product family to run pre-compliance measurements on. They are 
lighting fixtures, so normally they'd fall under the scope of EMCD and IEC/EN 
55015. However, these particular fixtures have a wireless transmitter and 
receiver, so my (limited) understanding is that these would fall under R 
In EN 301 489-1 
(http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301400_301499/30148901/01.09.02_60/en_30148901v010902p.pdf
 ), the row for radiated emissions in the table in 7.1 (EMC emission) 
references 8.2, which says to test to 55022 class B. However, the same table 
row lists the application as "enclosure of ancillary equipment". According to 
the definition of ancillary equipment as specified in the European standards, 
the fixture is not ancillary equipment, as it can function on its own without 
the transmitter/receiver. So what emission limits apply? FCC testing is easier, 
because as long as one uses an already-certified transmitter component in a 
product, the normal radiated emissions testing applies as if the transmitter 
wasn't in the product.

Elliott Martinson
Product Assurance Specialist I
Electronic Theatre Controls
3031 N PLEASANT VIEW RD
MIDDLETON WI 53562-4809
Work: 608.824.5696 / Cell: 608.209.9897
elliott.martin...@etcconnect.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] Source for Quality Video Cables

[Paasche, Dieter]

Brian, 

Also noted many differences in cables

In our case, we first made sure all signal pins on the board were filtered. 
We grounded all unused pins on the board side.  

If that did not help we removed unused pins from the cable. 


Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.



-Original Message-
From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 10:43 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Source for Quality Video Cables

We are in need of a reasonably priced source for quality and reliable video 
cables; specifically a Single Link DVI Male to Male in a variety of lengths. In 
one application we would prefer one end of the cable to be a right angle.

We have received and tested numerous over the counter DVI cables; some test 
great, some are absolutely horrible (Radiated Emissions Test).  So we started 
purchasing the ones that tested good only to find out later that they do not 
hold up. Flexing the cable and connector a few times will break loose the 
Backshell to Cable shield connection.

So now, before we test, we are cutting open the over-mold and examining how the 
Back-shell to cable shield connection is made. What an eye opener. Some cables 
just use the over-mold to hold it all together. Most cables, if you flex the 
cable 2 or 3 times you can completely  pull the cable shield away from the 
back-shell if it even has a backshell. One cable we cut open, they just wrap 
the ends with coper tape (no solder) and then overmold it.

We are also finding that even cables made by the same company are made 
differently. How this termination is done on a 6 ft cable is different than a 
10 ft cable from the same company. No consistency. This is becoming a nightmare.

I was hoping someone could help me out and point me in the right direction.  
Our company is not big enough to influence a cable manufacture directly (we 
purchase through distribution), have such a cable custom made, and it would be 
very expensive to bring in the tools to build it ourselves.

Thanks for any suggestions or advice.

The Other Brian


LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential 
information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by 
mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you.

-

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] Bluetooth audio product

[Paasche, Dieter]

Just to add some information to Michaels very good comments.

The R Directive will be replaced by the new RED directive soon. European 
member states must apply the Directive requirements from 13 June 2016.

For FCC and if you use an approved module (highly recommended) here is a link 
to the FCC ID search.

https://www.fcc.gov/general/fcc-id-search-page

If you use an approved module,  make sure you use it as it was certified. Any 
critical change (Like changing to an antenna with an higher gain) might need 
re-certification.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: +1 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 10:04 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Bluetooth audio product

Hello Ian,

Your product will now need to meet the R Directive.   No longer will it be 
the EMCD and LVD.

You'll still need to consider your audio operation during your EMC testing 
(does my audio still work when I apply EMC tests?), just as you have always 
done.
But now, in addition, you will need to test that the Bluetooth link also 
continues to work during the EMC tests.   The standard to look at there is EN 
301 489-17 and it calls up EN 301 489-1.

You will need to test the Bluetooth radio performance to an appropriate 
standard too, such as EN 300 328.

EN 300 328, EN 301 489-17 and EN 301 489-1 all come in versions which are 
harmonised standards, assuming you use the correct version numbers (Vx.x.x, 
etc.) and you test correctly.   (Accredited test lab is not needed, but it 
might give you confidence)
When you have fully applied harmonised standards, you are free to sign your own 
DoC to the R Directive and you do not need a Notified Body.


For the FCC, you should check in case you are installing a module which is 
already FCC certified, because the USA does have a modular approvals process.
If the Bluetooth module is certified, you can install it with minimal testing 
effort and no additional radio authorisation.
If the Bluetooth is not a module, or it is a module which is not certified, 
then it will need to be tested and certified.


Please let me know if this has given you any answers, or just more questions!


Michael.


Michael Derby
Senior Regulatory Engineer
Director
ACB Europe

Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry
Web:   www.acbcert.com

e-mail:micha...@acbcert.com
Direct phone:(+1) 703 468 1746   (USA area code)
Mobile phone:   (+44) 7939 880829   (UK area code)

Corporate office phone: USA:   (+1) 703 847 4700
Corporate office fax:USA:   (+1) 703 847 6888






From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com]
Sent: 09 February 2016 08:44
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Bluetooth audio product

Dear Colleagues.

I have an audio product that is Powered over Ethernet, has Bluetooth capability 
and has various audio inputs and outputs. The product can be used in a 
residential/consumer environment. I am very familiar with testing audio 
products without wireless capability but this is the first product I have 
encountered with Bluetooth that requires EMC and safety testing.
I believe that when a product has wireless capability that the EMC testing is 
more formal. For example; am I required to use a notified body as I assume the 
RED/RTTE directive will apply? Do I have to register the product with the FCC?
Please can someone advise me regarding the process for the EU and FCC 
compliance.

Many thanks in advance,

Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.

Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com


Allen & Heath Ltd is a registered business in England and Wales, Company 
number: 4163451. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual 
and not necessarily those of the company.
-


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.

Re: [PSES] Acceptance of CB EMC Test Reports and Certificates

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi,

I think I disagree on the FCC part.

According to FCC part 15.109 (g), the FCC accepts CISPR 22, although just the 
3rd edition. I guess to avoid testing on telecom ports.

(g) As an alternative to the radiated emission limits shown in paragraphs (a) 
and (b) of this section, digital devices may be shown to comply with the 
standards contained in Third Edition of the International Special Committee on 
Radio Interference (CISPR), Pub. 22, “Information Technology Equipment—Radio 
Disturbance Characteristics—Limits and Methods of Measurement” (incorporated by 
reference, see §15.38). In addition:

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 7:59 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Acceptance of CB EMC Test Reports and Certificates

Dear Members,

I am curious to learn the acceptance (value) of CB EMC test reports and 
certificates by the (government) regulatory agencies.

Is there any regulatory agencies accept CB EMC test reports and certificates 
(without additional evaluation and testing)?  Countries interested are China, 
Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, and Singapore.

In the US, for unintentional radiators, FCC accepts test reports per 47CFR Part 
15 Subpart B (not CCISPR 22, etc.).  In EU, a DoC with appropriate directive(s) 
supported by test reports works (no need for a CB one).

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

Best regards,
Grace

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>

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

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

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

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

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

-

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


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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum

[Paasche, Dieter]

Could that principle apply to USB key's too? I see some of them have CE  mark 
others not. 

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 12:19 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Friday night conundrum

In message
04cab9802ba27a409548dd47de1da7efd342a72...@slomailprd01.polycom.com,
dated Fri, 14 Aug 2015, Pearson, John john.pear...@polycom.com
writes:

Should a Credit Card carry the CE mark

Chip and pin along with NFC

Like a digital watch, it's regarded as 'EMC benign', so no EMC test and no CE 
mark.
--
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

[PSES] Radio in class A product

[Paasche, Dieter]

Dear members,

I am adding a radio (WiFi module)  to an ITE class A product. The product is 
tested under CISPR 22/24. I was told now that, because of the radio, the 
standard to apply is EN 301489-1, and therefore my product has to meet the 
class B of EN 55022 for emissions.

My opinion is that product and radio have to be tested separately and test the 
product to EN 55022/24 (without radio, or with the 2.4 GHz transmission 
frequency filtered), and the radio or radio module by itself under EN 31489-1. 
Is that correct? Where can I find the right interpretation?



Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

-

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] Radio in class A product

[Paasche, Dieter]

In my interpretation, the main product is not an ancillary equipment from EN 
301 489-1 point of view. The main function has nothing to do with radio. The 
product uses data from the internet and process it into any display. The Wifi, 
is now an add on so you can also get the information wireless. Hence I think 
that EN 301 489 would not apply, or maybe just for the radio module.

Reading through EN 300328 and under section 5.1.5 ( or better say 5.1.5.2.2.3) 
it looks to me that I can have host equipment and radio tested separately, and 
therefore have a class A for the host equipment and  class B for the radio.  
Even if the radio is part of the host equipment, it looks to me that I can test 
the host equipment with the radio in standby mode or receiving mode.

Any comments?

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: +1 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
www.christiedigital.comhttp://www.christiedigital.com/

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 2:06 PM
To: Paasche, Dieter; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Radio in class A product

Hello Dieter,

In addition to the responses you already received (which I like), I would ask 
you to check that your host ITE product is really 'ancillary equipment', as 
defined in EN 301 489-1.

I think that as others have pointed out, your host product will most likely 
continue to need to meet EN 55022 Class A, whilst you should check that the 
emissions from your WiFi operation meets the emissions limits of EN 300 328 
(and/or EN 301 893).


Thanks,   Michael.



From: Paasche, Dieter [mailto:dieter.paas...@christiedigital.com]
Sent: 27 May 2015 16:29
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Radio in class A product

Dear members,

I am adding a radio (WiFi module)  to an ITE class A product. The product is 
tested under CISPR 22/24. I was told now that, because of the radio, the 
standard to apply is EN 301489-1, and therefore my product has to meet the 
class B of EN 55022 for emissions.

My opinion is that product and radio have to be tested separately and test the 
product to EN 55022/24 (without radio, or with the 2.4 GHz transmission 
frequency filtered), and the radio or radio module by itself under EN 31489-1. 
Is that correct? Where can I find the right interpretation?



Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
-


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 sdoug...@ieee.orgmailto:sdoug...@ieee.org
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/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] Quasi Peak - Length of Measurement Time for Final Spot Measurement?

[Paasche, Dieter]

From CISPR 22 Section 6.2

6.1 Limits below 1 GHz
The EUT shall meet the limits of Table 5 or Table 6 when measured at the 
measuring
distance R in accordance with the methods described in Clause 10. If the 
reading on the
measuring receiver shows fluctuations close to the limit, the reading shall be 
observed for at
least 15 s at each measurement frequency; the highest reading shall be 
recorded, with the
exception of any brief isolated high reading, which shall be ignored.


We have had similar situation and tested the highest busts. I don't think you 
can classify the reading as a brief isolated high reading.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: +1 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
www.christiedigital.comhttp://www.christiedigital.com/

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Pawson, James [mailto:james.paw...@echostar.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 11:02 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Quasi Peak - Length of Measurement Time for Final Spot 
Measurement?

Dear group,

When measuring emissions using a Quasi Peak detector are there any regulations 
or guidance concerning the amount of time one should dwell on a single 
frequency for a measurement?

I know it depends on the nature of the signal. In this case, the signal of 
interest results in a burst of emissions of a high duty cycle followed by a 
long period (i.e. several minutes) of low duty cycle activity. If I use a QP 
detector and measure for 1 second just as the burst happens then I would get a 
high QP reading. If I measure in the steady state period I would get a lower QP 
reading.

In this case, knowing the signals involves, would the intention to be to measure

1.  one full representative cycle of emissions i.e. the initial burst and 
the low duty period after
2.  during the maximum duty cycle only
3.  during the steady state only

I can imagine that the measurement difference between 1) and 3) in this case 
would be small as the level measured during the high duty period would have had 
time to decay down to the same level as the steady state due to the QP time 
constant.

I'm asking this question in the context of both EN 55022 and FCC 15.

Googling for quasi peak measurement time and similar phrases is not proving 
helpful

Many thanks
James Pawson

-


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 sdoug...@ieee.orgmailto:sdoug...@ieee.org
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/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] FCC and immunity

[Paasche, Dieter]

It is my impression that FCC's would leave the immunity as a self-regulated 
requirement between manufacturer and user and just mentioned that the device 
must accept harmful interference.

Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: +1 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] 
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 7:22 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC and immunity

Still no EMC immunity requirements within FCC Part 15, right?
Is immunity on the agenda or does it seems that only radiated and conducted 
emission will be the tests for the nearest future?

Thanks.

#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 
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

-

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] Misuse mains cordset

[Paasche, Dieter]

This reminds me to the following help desk statement: The cup holder on my 
computer stopped working.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/helter-skelter/8385454193/

Reasonable foreseeable misuse? Looks that many are doing this. 


Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


-Original Message-
From: Ted Eckert [mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 4:55 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Misuse mains cordset

I recognize that I am taking my own risk by posting a potentially contrary 
response to the esteemed Mr. Nute. 

I'm not sure that I agree that foreseeable misuse is an oxymoron, although I 
prefer the term reasonably foreseeable misuse. We know that certain types of 
products will either be used for something that is not the original intended 
purpose or they will be used for their intended purpose in an inappropriate 
fashion. 

For the first example, I can state that a wooden pencil is intended to be used 
for writing. However, I can foresee that some users will chew on their pencils. 
The pencil is not designed, intended or marketed to be used for stress relief, 
but we know that people will chew on them. One design safeguard would be to 
make sure none of the materials used are toxic if ingested.

For the second example, I will cite people standing on the top level of a 
ladder. The user places themselves in an unstable position if they stand too 
high on the ladder. The ladder is still being used for its intended purpose, 
but it is being used in a way that that significantly increases the risk to the 
user. In this case, a design safeguard becomes much more difficult to 
implement. Most ladder manufacturers implement instructional safeguards. Modern 
ladders are now plastered with caution and warning statements. 

Mr. Nute asks what foreseeable misuse of a computer would be. I would propose 
that using a computer outside of the published environmental conditions is 
foreseeable. I can foresee somebody cleaning the keyboard on their laptop with 
a wet rag. I can foresee leaving a laptop in a car on a hot day. Either case 
may create a potential hazard for lithium-ion batteries. Many computer 
manufacturers implement both design and instructional safeguards for both of 
these conditions. Neither is the intended use of a computer, but might they be 
considered foreseeable?

The problem comes with determining what reasonably means. Many courts will 
interpret this to be what a reasonable person would do. This only shifts our 
problem to defining what a reasonable person is. 

I will offer a slightly more humorous view of misuse in the following video. Is 
this a reasonable person or reasonably foreseeable?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SarpypNskcc

Ted Eckert
Compliance Engineer
Microsoft Corporation
ted.eck...@microsoft.com

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

-Original Message-
From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org]
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 11:33 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Misuse mains cordset

Misuse is unique to what you want
to do.  You use (misuse) the
product to accomplish your
particular objective which differs
from the intended use of the
product.  You stand on a chair
(intended for sitting) to reach
something that would otherwise be
out of reach.  The US TV program
MacGyver (~1985-1991) was based on
misuse of common things to solve a
problem.  

Foreseeable misuse is an
oxymoron.  You can't foresee misuse
of a product unless you know what
the user wants to do (his
objective).  The product and its
misuse was the fun of the MacGyver
TV program.  More seriously, what
is a foreseeable misuse of a
computer?

The term foreseeable misuse has
been foisted upon us for years, but
we don't know what it means or how
to protect against it (even though
we are required by some safety
standards to provide safeguards
against foreseeable misuse).
How do you protect someone who
stands on a chair?  How do you
protect someone who misuses a
computer?

My neighbor took the guard off his
portable saw and was injured.  This
was clearly misuse.  How do you
provide protection when the user
removes the safeguard?

For an eye-opening treatise on
misuse, see Don Norman's
Psychology of everyday things and
his other books.


Best regards,
Rich




-Original Message-
From: Doug Powell
[mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014
10:06 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Misuse mains
cordset

In recent 

Re: [PSES] FCC listing of test facility

[Paasche, Dieter]

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm



Dieter
From: Paolo Roncone [mailto:paoloc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 8:45 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC listing of test facility

Hi all,

can anyone help me find the right path to follow for applying for FCC 
registration (or listing) of a test site facility ?
I started in www.fcc.govhttp://www.fcc.gov, but then I got lost and putting 
test site listing and the like in the search engine didn't bring up anything 
useful. May be the terminology is changed?

Thanks!
Paolo
-


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/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] Television Manufacturing Documentary From The Late 1950's - YouTube

[Paasche, Dieter]

Testing has changed over time, or not?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TF2DZ0E0Q4


Dieter


-

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] CISPR 32, colour bar with moving element

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi, 

Are there any news about what is FCC going to do? As it stand right now (and I 
do have an official answer) H patterns are required by the FCC. Which means 
by some international companies double testing, one with H patterns and one 
with color bar. 

I have seen a worst case using H pattern, so I wonder if I can get away with 
just testing with the H pattern as it is also in the CISPR 32 table. 

Any suggestions? 


Dieter Paasche


-Original Message-
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.ne.jp]
Sent: 05 April 2014 08:51
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] CISPR 32, colour bar with moving element

Hello,

We used to use scrolling-Hs test pattern for CISPR 22 and ANSI C63.4, but CISPR 
32 requires ITU-R BT.1729 colour bar with small moving element for computer 
displays and similar devices.

Now, I made web pages which will display the test pattern on web browsers.

If you are interested, please try it, at:

http://homepage3.nifty.com/tsato/scrolling-h/colorbar.html

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

-

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] New EMC Directive publication

[Paasche, Dieter]

There is also a new Low Voltage Directive 2014/35/EU. 

Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche


-Original Message-
From: Brian Jones [mailto:e...@brianjones.co.uk] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:25 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] New EMC Directive publication

Everyone

The new EMC Directive 2014/30/EU was published in the Official Journal of
the European Union on 29 March.  It can be downloaded in the various
official languages of the EU from here
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.096.01
.0079.01.ENG (beware word wrap - if necessary, copy and paste the whole
URL).

Member States have until 19 April 2016 to publish their laws implementing
the directive.  These new laws apply from 20 April 2016.

Best wishes

Brian Jones
EMC Consultant

-

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] LED Indicator Safety

[Paasche, Dieter]

Searching the website I found this

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:114:0038:0059:EN:PDF

Would that help? There are some numbers in Annex I

Dieter Paasche
Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7421
www.christiedigital.comhttp://www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.


From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 4:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] LED Indicator Safety

They want the LED itself to be bright so it shines through the Light Pipe with 
good intensity. LED brightness is a relative thing. If your product is used in 
a relatively dark ambient room the indicators appear too bright (get out the 
black tape). But it if is installed in a very bright room, then you get 
complaints that the customer cannot read the indicators. You cannot win.

The LED in question is only rated 150mcd (millicandelas) which doesn’t seem 
very high to me. Is there a “Light Intensity” level in which you have to be 
concern about being too bright? I would like to just give Engineering a value 
and tell them to keep their LEDs below that level and you will have no problem.

Thanks,
The Other Brian

From: Anthony Thomson [mailto:ton...@europe.com]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 10:33 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] LED Indicator Safety

Hello Brian,

It’s my experience that as the brightness of LED indicators increase, they 
become distracting and annoying way before they come anywhere near being 
hazardous. If your indicators are so bright as to even think they could be 
hazardous, I’d be asking myself why they’re so bright in the first instance.

I have two pieces of equipment at home with small squares of black tape over 
stand-by (red) and power (blue) LEDs.

Tell your engineers that it is OK to drive LEDs at less than 20mA!

Regards,
Tony



- Original Message -

From: Kunde, Brian

Sent: 01/13/14 02:56 PM

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: [PSES] LED Indicator Safety


Greetings to all.



I'm being asked by Engineering regarding the brightness of a Green LED 
Indicator they want to use on the front of an upcoming product. The LED is 
quite bright and is used with a Light Pipe which shows through the front panel. 
However, if you remove to front panel to perform a maintenance operation while 
the unit is still turned on (which is desired) you can see the LED.



If you look directly at the LED it is bright and hurts to look at it for more 
than a second. However, you would have to deliberately look directly at it to 
receive the full brightness. At normal angles and distance the light causes no 
discomfort to look at it.



The IEC/EN/UL/CSA 61010-1 safety standard only includes information about UV 
light. The EUT is classified as Laboratory Equipment.



My Google research mentions the standard IEC 60825 and IEC 62471 and test 
method ANSI/IESNA RP-27. Would it be helpful to read these standards without 
having the test equipment to test it?



For visible light such as this isn't there a simple test method such uses a 
basic light meter to determine if a hazard exists or not?



Are LEDs classified by the manufacturer for their Risk Group? What Risk Group 
can I use and declare it not hazardous?



Sorry for being such a NUBE on this topic. I know this topic has been discussed 
in the past but I was hoping new LIGHT might have been shined on it recently 
with all the new super bright LEDs on the market.



Thanks in advance.



The Other Brian





LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential 
information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by 
mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you.



-



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)

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



For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Re: [PSES] Korean EMC Standards

[Paasche, Dieter]

From personal experience,

CISPR and KN standards are very similar, but interpretations a little 
different. For example. Test should be done at Korean voltages and frequency. 
Korea likes to add the measurement uncertainty in the limits. Etc.

So usually we re-test our product in a KN accredited lab in Korea.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

From: itl-emc user group [mailto:itl...@itl.co.il]
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2013 3:24 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Korean EMC Standards

Hi,
Does anyone know where I can get/purchase copies of KN 22: 2009 and KN 24: 2011 
?
Is anyone familiar with the differences between KN 22 and CISPR 22/EN 55022 and 
KN 24 and CISPR 24/EN 55024?
Thanks for your help

Regards,
David Shidlowsky | Technical Writer
Address 1 Bat-Sheva St. POB 87, LOD 71100 Israel
Tel 972-8-9186113 Fax 972-8-9153101
Mail e...@itl.co.il/dav...@itl.co.ilmailto:e...@itl.co.il/dav...@itl.co.il  
Web www.itl.co.ilhttp://www.itl.co.il/

Fill out Customer Satisfaction 
Surveyhttp://app.sqm.co.il/SitePages/Questionnaire.aspx
Global Certifications You Can Trust

-


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/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] EMC Directive Test Plan

[Paasche, Dieter]

Isn't this also a requirement of ISO 17025, which accredited labs should follow?

Section 5.10.2 h) reference of the sampling plan and procedures used by the 
laboratory or other bodies where these are relevant to the validity or 
application of the results.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]
Sent: October 8, 2013 5:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

The description of needing a test plan may be a fair summary of the forth 
bullet in the declaration requirements.

2. EC declaration of conformity
The EC declaration of conformity must contain, at least, the following:
- a reference to this Directive,
- an identification of the apparatus to which it refers, as set out in Article 
9(1),
- the name and address of the manufacturer and, where applicable, the name and 
address of his authorised representative
in the Community,
- a dated reference to the specifications under which conformity is declared to 
ensure the conformity of the apparatus
with the provisions of this Directive,
- the date of that declaration,
- the identity and signature of the person empowered to bind the manufacturer 
or his authorised representative.

Which the Commission guidance explains (pg35) means...

In most cases, the dated references to the specifications under which
conformity is declared, will be those of the European harmonised
standards that are applicable to the apparatus in question as listed in the
OJEU. If European harmonised standards have not been used or only
partially, a reference to the manufacturer's technical documentation needs
to be included and a reference to any identifiable non-harmonised
standards or specifications that have been applied.

Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor

From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 3:48 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

David,

The EMC Directive does not mandate testing, so it's can't mandate a test plan. 
I suspect someone in a test lab has been giving you their spin.

The Directive requires you to do an assessment, although you can substitute 
testing for the assessment if you want to.

Of course, your assessment may conclude that you need to test.

Nick.



On 7 Oct 2013, at 17:01, David 
barid61...@yahoo.commailto:barid61...@yahoo.com wrote:

All,

I have been told that the EMC directive requires a test plan to be created 
before testing begins, especially when using a third party lab.  I flipped 
through the directive and guide to 2004/108/EC, and was unable to find this 
requirement.

Did I miss something?  Is it just that the manufacturer is supposed to do an 
EMC assessment?

Thanks,

David
-


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

Nick Williams
Director
Direct line: +44 1298 873811
Mobile: +44 7702 995135
email: nick.willi...@conformance.co.ukmailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk

-

Conformance Ltd - Product safety, approvals and CE-marking consultants
The Old Methodist Chapel, Great Hucklow, Buxton, SK17 8RG England
Tel. +44 1298 873800, Fax. +44 1298 873801, 
www.conformance.co.ukhttp://www.conformance.co.uk
Registered in England, Company No. 3478646

-


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: 

Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

[Paasche, Dieter]

Isn't this also a requirement of ISO 17025, which accredited labs should follow?

Section 5.10.2 h) reference of the sampling plan and procedures used by the 
laboratory or other bodies where these are relevant to the validity or 
application of the results.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]
Sent: October 8, 2013 5:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

The description of needing a test plan may be a fair summary of the forth 
bullet in the declaration requirements.

2. EC declaration of conformity
The EC declaration of conformity must contain, at least, the following:
- a reference to this Directive,
- an identification of the apparatus to which it refers, as set out in Article 
9(1),
- the name and address of the manufacturer and, where applicable, the name and 
address of his authorised representative
in the Community,
- a dated reference to the specifications under which conformity is declared to 
ensure the conformity of the apparatus
with the provisions of this Directive,
- the date of that declaration,
- the identity and signature of the person empowered to bind the manufacturer 
or his authorised representative.

Which the Commission guidance explains (pg35) means...

In most cases, the dated references to the specifications under which
conformity is declared, will be those of the European harmonised
standards that are applicable to the apparatus in question as listed in the
OJEU. If European harmonised standards have not been used or only
partially, a reference to the manufacturer's technical documentation needs
to be included and a reference to any identifiable non-harmonised
standards or specifications that have been applied.

Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor

From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 3:48 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

David,

The EMC Directive does not mandate testing, so it's can't mandate a test plan. 
I suspect someone in a test lab has been giving you their spin.

The Directive requires you to do an assessment, although you can substitute 
testing for the assessment if you want to.

Of course, your assessment may conclude that you need to test.

Nick.



On 7 Oct 2013, at 17:01, David 
barid61...@yahoo.commailto:barid61...@yahoo.com wrote:

All,

I have been told that the EMC directive requires a test plan to be created 
before testing begins, especially when using a third party lab.  I flipped 
through the directive and guide to 2004/108/EC, and was unable to find this 
requirement.

Did I miss something?  Is it just that the manufacturer is supposed to do an 
EMC assessment?

Thanks,

David
-


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

Nick Williams
Director
Direct line: +44 1298 873811
Mobile: +44 7702 995135
email: nick.willi...@conformance.co.ukmailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk

-

Conformance Ltd - Product safety, approvals and CE-marking consultants
The Old Methodist Chapel, Great Hucklow, Buxton, SK17 8RG England
Tel. +44 1298 873800, Fax. +44 1298 873801, 
www.conformance.co.ukhttp://www.conformance.co.uk
Registered in England, Company No. 3478646

-


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: 

Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

[Paasche, Dieter]

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche x7211

From: Paasche, Dieter
Sent: October 9, 2013 9:06 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

Isn't this also a requirement of ISO 17025, which accredited labs should follow?

Section 5.10.2 h) reference of the sampling plan and procedures used by the 
laboratory or other bodies where these are relevant to the validity or 
application of the results.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche

From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]
Sent: October 8, 2013 5:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

The description of needing a test plan may be a fair summary of the forth 
bullet in the declaration requirements.

2. EC declaration of conformity
The EC declaration of conformity must contain, at least, the following:
- a reference to this Directive,
- an identification of the apparatus to which it refers, as set out in Article 
9(1),
- the name and address of the manufacturer and, where applicable, the name and 
address of his authorised representative
in the Community,
- a dated reference to the specifications under which conformity is declared to 
ensure the conformity of the apparatus
with the provisions of this Directive,
- the date of that declaration,
- the identity and signature of the person empowered to bind the manufacturer 
or his authorised representative.

Which the Commission guidance explains (pg35) means...

In most cases, the dated references to the specifications under which
conformity is declared, will be those of the European harmonised
standards that are applicable to the apparatus in question as listed in the
OJEU. If European harmonised standards have not been used or only
partially, a reference to the manufacturer's technical documentation needs
to be included and a reference to any identifiable non-harmonised
standards or specifications that have been applied.

Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor

From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 3:48 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC Directive Test Plan

David,

The EMC Directive does not mandate testing, so it's can't mandate a test plan. 
I suspect someone in a test lab has been giving you their spin.

The Directive requires you to do an assessment, although you can substitute 
testing for the assessment if you want to.

Of course, your assessment may conclude that you need to test.

Nick.



On 7 Oct 2013, at 17:01, David 
barid61...@yahoo.commailto:barid61...@yahoo.com wrote:

All,

I have been told that the EMC directive requires a test plan to be created 
before testing begins, especially when using a third party lab.  I flipped 
through the directive and guide to 2004/108/EC, and was unable to find this 
requirement.

Did I miss something?  Is it just that the manufacturer is supposed to do an 
EMC assessment?

Thanks,

David
-


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

Nick Williams
Director
Direct line: +44 1298 873811
Mobile: +44 7702 995135
email: nick.willi...@conformance.co.ukmailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk

-

Conformance Ltd - Product safety, approvals and CE-marking consultants
The Old Methodist Chapel, Great Hucklow, Buxton, SK17 8RG England
Tel. +44 1298 873800, Fax. +44 1298 873801, 
www.conformance.co.ukhttp://www.conformance.co.uk
Registered in England, Company No. 3478646

-


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

Re: [PSES] Production Assurance Tests for EMC

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi,

Form CISPR 22 Section  7.2.2 Subsequent test are necessary from time to time 
on equipment taken at random from production.

From past experience both in EMC labs and manufacturing, it looks that big 
companies that can afford an EMC facility and/or have a dedicated compliance 
person usually do EMC production control. Smaller companies usually do not.

For emissions I have seen a common practice to try to pass with more than 3 or 
4 B margin during the compliance test to avoid any measurement uncertainty and 
differences on production units.  Not too much on the immunity side.

Practically, we do test on production units and get still get surprises from 
time to time although the whole design/production/compliance process is very 
well controlled. So in my opinion you should always do testing on production 
control.

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Product Developer, Electrical
R  D
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
Fax: 519-744-9255
www.christiedigital.comhttp://www.christiedigital.com/

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records

From: Luke Turnbull [mailto:luke.turnb...@trw.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:35 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Production Assurance Tests for EMC

Dear Group,

I have familiarity with how the aerospace and automotive industries deal with 
testing and manufacture of systems, but am less familiar with products tested 
to commercial standards.

What is the custom and practice for demonstrating continued compliance to EMC 
requirements for products that are in production for a long time?  I assume 
that over time, the construction of e.g. capacitors may change - leading to 
different stray characteristics, even for the same manufacturer and component 
value; and that IC's may be functionally similar, but again have a different 
internal construction.  Do system suppliers generally re-test for EMC when 
components become obsolescent?  Do system suppliers generally re-test 
periodically in case components have been unknowingly changed, or in case 
production processes have been changed without considering their effect on EMC 
compliance?

Thanks for your help.


Dr Luke Turnbull
EMC Technical Manager
TRW Conekt
Stratford Road
Solihull
West Midlands B90 4GW
United Kingdom

Tel:+44 (0)121.627.3966

email:  luke.turnb...@trw.com
web: www.conekt.co.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.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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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]

[Paasche, Dieter]

SET EMC-PSTC MAIL


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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] Fixed Installation vs Apparatus

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi group,

At which point could you define a piece of machinery a fixed Installation?

What are the differences in reference to EMC testing? It looks to me that 
regardless of a piece of machinery being  considered an apparatus or a fixed 
installation, it still has to be tested to comply with EMC requirements.

Thanks

Dieter Paasche


-

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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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] Fixed Installation vs Apparatus

[Paasche, Dieter]

Hi ,

I have the feeling I am still in the grey area, mainly in the definition of 
what is a mobile system.

Also, the guidelines mentions in section 1.3.1 (4th Paragraph) that Large 
machines, in the usual sense of this term, are normally apparatus and have to 
be treated as such.

In my opinion, if the machine has its own control panel and can operate its 
function independently, then it is to be considered as an apparatus. Am I wrong?

It looks however from John's comments that a machine is a fixed installation, 
if it is custom made and there will never be another machine like that in 
another place. So, if I have two of the same machines in different locations, 
then they are not fixed installation. Is that correct?

In any case, apparatus and fixed installation reference Article 5, so strictly 
speaking from the testing point of view, both have to be tested for EMC. Is 
that correct?

Thanks

Dieter Paasche


From: Doug Nix [mailto:d...@complianceinsight.ca]
Sent: July 10, 2013 2:37 PM
To: Paasche, Dieter
Subject: Re: [PSES] Fixed Installation vs Apparatus

Dieter,

Have a look at the attached Guidance document from the EC. On page 15, Section 
1.1.5 and flowchart 2 show how to determine whether the equipment is apparatus 
or a fixed installation.

Regards,

Doug NIX, C.E.T.
Compliance InSight Consulting Inc.

Know Risk... Design Safety

Office: +1 (519) 650-4753
Mobile: +1 (519) 729-5704
Skype: cic-inc
email: d...@complianceinsight.camailto:d...@complianceinsight.ca
Want to meet?http://doodle.com/DougNix

On 10-July-2013, at 14:22, Paasche, Dieter 
dieter.paas...@christiedigital.commailto:dieter.paas...@christiedigital.com 
wrote:


Hi group,

At which point could you define a piece of machinery a fixed Installation?

What are the differences in reference to EMC testing? It looks to me that 
regardless of a piece of machinery being  considered an apparatus or a fixed 
installation, it still has to be tested to comply with EMC requirements.

Thanks

Dieter Paasche

-


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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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] NSA

[Paasche, Dieter]

For and NSA do you HAVE TO use an identical pair of antennas?

Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche


-

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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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] NRTL requiring duplicate testing

[Paasche, Dieter]

How about going to NRTL3? 

Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche

-Original Message-
From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org] 
Sent: April 29, 2013 5:03 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] NRTL requiring duplicate testing

Hi Carl:


I suggest you take it up a notch with NRTL2. Take it up the management chain at 
NRTL2. NRTL managers tend to be more open to issues of added cost to their 
client, especially where the value of the requirement is questionable.

At the same time, the manager has some duty to support his engineers even 
though the imposed requirement may not be clearly a good or logical one.

So, a high degree of finesse is necessary. Ideally, you want the NRTL2 engineer 
to take it up the management chain. You have to ask the NRTL2 engineer if he 
can present your case without bias.

If this fails, you should be prepared to physically visit the NRTL2 site and 
discuss it with their management.

This is an interesting requirement because there is no money in it for NRTL2. 
Usually, not accepting NRTL1 involves re-testing the requires you to pay NRTL2 
for the same work as NRTL1. But, here, it appears that
NRTL2 gets no money by imposing testing on you.


Good luck!
Rich




On 4/29/2013 11:54 AM, Carl Newton wrote:

 Customer has a medical wall-wort power supply that has the typical 
 NRTL (call them NRTL1) safety mark that you'd expect to see on a power 
 supply marketed within the USA. Customer's entire device is located 
 within the secondary of that wall-wort power supply and includes no 
 connections to other mains connected devices.

 Now another one of the large well-known NRTLs (I'll call them NRTL2) 
 which is handling the AAMI 60601-1 project for customer's end product 
 is requiring that 100% dielectric voltage withstand testing be 
 repeated on the power supplies. The power supply manufacturer has 
 provided sections of their NRTL1 File that details the requirement for 
 100% testing of their supply in manufacturing as well as the voltage 
 amplitude and duration required. Still, customer's NRTL2 is demanding 
 that this test be repeated upon 100% of the power supplies at 
 customer's premises. It appears that I have no choice but to agree to 
 repeat the additional testing. This adds cost to manufacturing and 
 flies in the face of great efforts on the part of American 
 manufacturers that try to keep their operations within the USA by 
 maximizing productivity. I've worked on many other projects with 
 wall-wort and external brick power supplies with other NRTLs and this 
 has never been a requirement.

 I try to keep an open mind even when I'm disagreed with. But I think 
 that this is the first time in my 30ish years of compliance work that 
 I've seen engineering judgment _completely_ thrown out the window. I'm 
 interested in other points of view.

 Carl



-

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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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] FCC and very low-power wireless devices

[Paasche, Dieter]

Can I use any frequency if my transmission level is below the class B limit? 

Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche x7211


-Original Message-
From: Thomas Cokenias [mailto:t...@tncokenias.org] 
Sent: March 12, 2013 5:30 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC and very low-power wireless devices

Hi John

Section 15.209 has general requirements for radiated emissions for intentional 
radiators (transmitters).  At these frequencies you would be allowed 200 uV/m 
at 3m, not much but you aren't allowed higher power until you get to 902-928 
MHz band.

best regards

Tom

On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:28 PM, John Woodgate wrote:

 Does the FCC allow very low power wireless devices (transmitting speech for 
 assisted hearing for disabled people) to operate on 863 MHz or nearby?
 --
 OOO - Own Opinions Only. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk SHOCK HORROR! 
 Dinosaur-like DNA found in chicken and turkey meals 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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
 For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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] FCC and very low-power wireless devices

[Paasche, Dieter]

Is there a similar list for Europe?

Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche x7211


-Original Message-
From: Thomas Cokenias [mailto:t...@tncokenias.org] 
Sent: March 14, 2013 10:56 AM
To: Paasche, Dieter
Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC and very low-power wireless devices

Below 30 MHz there are different limits, above 30 MHz 15.209 limits are same as 
class B.


On Mar 14, 2013, at 7:27 AM, Paasche, Dieter wrote:

 Can I use any frequency if my transmission level is below the class B limit? 
 
 Sincerely,
 
 Dieter Paasche x7211
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Thomas Cokenias [mailto:t...@tncokenias.org]
 Sent: March 12, 2013 5:30 PM
 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC and very low-power wireless devices
 
 Hi John
 
 Section 15.209 has general requirements for radiated emissions for 
 intentional radiators (transmitters).  At these frequencies you would be 
 allowed 200 uV/m at 3m, not much but you aren't allowed higher power until 
 you get to 902-928 MHz band.
 
 best regards
 
 Tom
 
 On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:28 PM, John Woodgate wrote:
 
 Does the FCC allow very low power wireless devices (transmitting speech for 
 assisted hearing for disabled people) to operate on 863 MHz or nearby?
 --
 OOO - Own Opinions Only. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk SHOCK HORROR! 
 Dinosaur-like DNA found in chicken and turkey meals 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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
 For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
 For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
 For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

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

For policy

Re: [PSES] Test Setup for a Display Powered by a PoE Injector

[Paasche, Dieter]

Dear members,

I would like to add a question to Lin's message. Should the touch panel be 
touched during the test (maybe with some moving fixture)?

Dieter Paasche

From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 7:51 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Test Setup for a Display Powered by a PoE Injector

Dear Members,
Could you please give your comments on the test setup for a display 
(touchpanel) powered by a PoE (power over Ethernet) injector? More specifically:
1. Does the PoE injector need to be part of the EUT (equipment under test) and 
placed on the turntable next to the EUT? Or, can the PoE injector be placed 
remotely (under the ground plane or outside of the chamber)? The PoE injector 
is marketed/packaged separately from the EUT. Both the EUT and PoE injector are 
marketed by the same manufacturer.
2. There are two ports, in addition to the power port, from the PoE injector: 
PoE LAN and LAN. PoE LAN port connects to the EUT. Need the LAN port of 
PoE injector be connected to LAN?
3. Need the LAN port of PoE injector be exercised? If yes, is Ping command 
good enough?
Thank you very much for your time and 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 
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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@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://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

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

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