Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2
Bill, This is an intriguing question. According to the legislative record publicly available, this change of text was part of what the Commission put into the revision mill and it was not challenged by Parliament or Council. Ref http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2002:0759:FIN:EN:PDF http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Le UriServ.do?uri=COM:2002:0759:FIN:EN:PDF There may have been a preperatory study that prompted the change, or it may have occured unilaterally by the Commission person who had the dossier at the time. The above linked document uses the term end user several times and it may give you some idea what they were on about. You may well be able to contact the Commission on this point and get some satisfaction. If you do, be sure to share ;-) Cheers, -- Lauren Crane (mr.) Product Regulatory Analyst | Corporate Product EHS | Applied Materials Office 512.272.6540 | Mobile 512.736.7201 | America - Europe - Asia external use ** Save paper and trees! Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. From:Bill Owsley wdows...@yahoo.com To:emc-p...@ieee.org, pat.law...@slpower.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:01/11/2011 04:32 PM Subject:Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2 Sent by:emc-p...@ieee.org And who but the end user would be using an apparatus? Since it is a finished product, it is not being assembled, and if a the end user has not yet acquired it, it might be in distribution where it is not likely to turned on. yay verily, if ye turn it on, ye are the end user. Us test types are excluded from this designation. ;-) Attitude is Mind over Matter. If you don't Mind, it doesn't Matter... This email has been displayed using 100% recycled electrons and 100% pure virgin photons. --- On Tue, 1/11/11, pat.law...@slpower.com pat.law...@slpower.com wrote: From: pat.law...@slpower.com pat.law...@slpower.com Subject: Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2 To: emc-p...@ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tuesday, January 11, 2011, 4:52 PM Hi Nick: Can you give examples of significant impacts caused by the new wording? How does your quoted paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; differ from this edited paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, --- --- --- and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; Pat Lawler EMC Engineer SL Power Electronics Corp. Nick Williams nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk wrote on 01/11/2011 01:36:57 PM: I realise that the (ominous?) silence which has greeted my earlier enquiry is probably the result of me failing to be clear enough in my original question, so I will re-state it. Please ignore my earlier post! The concept of 'end user' to which I refer is contained in the definition of what is within the scope of the EMC Directive, contained in article 2(1)b: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; According to this clause, products which are not intended for the 'end user' are not within the scope of the EMC Directive. I would like to gain some insight into how the concept of end user came to be included within the new Directive, and what it means. To re-iterate what I said earlier, the phrase 'end user' was not in the original EMC Directive 89/336/EEC, nor was it introduced by any of the amendments brought in before the whole Directive was replaced by 2004/108/EEC in 2007. However, the phrase is used in the UK Regulations which implemented 89/336/EEC, and these include a definition. The phrase was introduced into the new EMC Directive 2004/108/EC, although it is not actually defined in the Directive itself. This usage in the section defining scope is carried through to the UK Regulations (as one would expect) but the definition of the term 'end user' which was in the 2005 Regulations is no longer in the 2006 version. The Commission guide on the new Directive contains some guidance which is broadly consistent with, although by no means the same as, the definition in the UK's 2005 Regulations. The reason for my interest is that, on the face of it, the change to make the EMC Directive only applicable to products intended for an end user has a very
RE: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2
In that case, the directive does not apply, only so long as the signal has not reached the end. 8-)) Attitude is Mind over Matter. If you don't Mind, it doesn't Matter... This email has been displayed using 100% recycled electrons and 100% pure virgin photons. --- On Tue, 1/11/11, Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com wrote: From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Subject: RE: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2 To: 'Bill Owsley' wdows...@yahoo.com, emc-p...@ieee.org, pat.law...@slpower.com Date: Tuesday, January 11, 2011, 6:34 PM But what if you don’t use the end, what if you use the beginningJ Just kidding. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Bill Owsley Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 2:32 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org; pat.law...@slpower.com Subject: Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2 And who but the end user would be using an apparatus? Since it is a finished product, it is not being assembled, and if a the end user has not yet acquired it, it might be in distribution where it is not likely to turned on. yay verily, if ye turn it on, ye are the end user. Us test types are excluded from this designation. ;-) Attitude is Mind over Matter. If you don't Mind, it doesn't Matter... This email has been displayed using 100% recycled electrons and 100% pure virgin photons. --- On Tue, 1/11/11, pat.law...@slpower.com pat.law...@slpower.com wrote: From: pat.law...@slpower.com pat.law...@slpower.com Subject: Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2 To: emc-p...@ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tuesday, January 11, 2011, 4:52 PM Hi Nick: Can you give examples of significant impacts caused by the new wording? How does your quoted paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; differ from this edited paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, --- --- --- and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; Pat Lawler EMC Engineer SL Power Electronics Corp. Nick Williams nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk wrote on 01/11/2011 01:36:57 PM: I realise that the (ominous?) silence which has greeted my earlier enquiry is probably the result of me failing to be clear enough in my original question, so I will re-state it. Please ignore my earlier post! The concept of 'end user' to which I refer is contained in the definition of what is within the scope of the EMC Directive, contained in article 2(1)b: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; According to this clause, products which are not intended for the 'end user' are not within the scope of the EMC Directive. I would like to gain some insight into how the concept of end user came to be included within the new Directive, and what it means. To re-iterate what I said earlier, the phrase 'end user' was not in the original EMC Directive 89/336/EEC, nor was it introduced by any of the amendments brought in before the whole Directive was replaced by 2004/108/EEC in 2007. However, the phrase is used in the UK Regulations which implemented 89/336/EEC, and these include a definition. The phrase was introduced into the new EMC Directive 2004/108/EC, although it is not actually defined in the Directive itself. This usage in the section defining scope is carried through to the UK Regulations (as one would expect) but the definition of the term 'end user' which was in the 2005 Regulations is no longer in the 2006 version. The Commission guide on the new Directive contains some guidance which is broadly consistent with, although by no means the same as, the definition in the UK's 2005 Regulations. The reason for my interest is that, on the face of it, the change to make the EMC Directive only applicable to products intended for an end user has a very significant impact on the scope of the Directive and I am surprised that more was not made of this at the time that the new
Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2
In message 7df6c6b0-796f-4265-8c98-a77c1cdc6...@conformance.co.uk, Nick Williams nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk writes The reason for my interest is that, on the face of it, the change to make the EMC Directive only applicable to products intended for an end user has a very significant impact on the scope of the Directive and I am surprised that more was not made of this at the time that the new Directive came into force. Or have I missed something? It's not possible to tell from your messages. It depends on your apparent concept that an end-user may not exist. Well, if a product is never used, obviously it doesn't matter whether the Directive applies or not. So I think you have to tell us what you mean by the concept of product that has no end user. -- This is my travelling signature, adding no superfluous mass. John M Woodgate - 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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@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: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2
And who but the end user would be using an apparatus? Since it is a finished product, it is not being assembled, and if a the end user has not yet acquired it, it might be in distribution where it is not likely to turned on. yay verily, if ye turn it on, ye are the end user. Us test types are excluded from this designation. ;-) Attitude is Mind over Matter. If you don't Mind, it doesn't Matter... This email has been displayed using 100% recycled electrons and 100% pure virgin photons. --- On Tue, 1/11/11, pat.law...@slpower.com pat.law...@slpower.com wrote: From: pat.law...@slpower.com pat.law...@slpower.com Subject: Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Date: Tuesday, January 11, 2011, 4:52 PM Hi Nick: Can you give examples of significant impacts caused by the new wording? How does your quoted paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; differ from this edited paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, --- --- --- and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; Pat Lawler EMC Engineer SL Power Electronics Corp. Nick Williams nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk wrote on 01/11/2011 01:36:57 PM: I realise that the (ominous?) silence which has greeted my earlier enquiry is probably the result of me failing to be clear enough in my original question, so I will re-state it. Please ignore my earlier post! The concept of 'end user' to which I refer is contained in the definition of what is within the scope of the EMC Directive, contained in article 2(1)b: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; According to this clause, products which are not intended for the 'end user' are not within the scope of the EMC Directive. I would like to gain some insight into how the concept of end user came to be included within the new Directive, and what it means. To re-iterate what I said earlier, the phrase 'end user' was not in the original EMC Directive 89/336/EEC, nor was it introduced by any of the amendments brought in before the whole Directive was replaced by 2004/108/EEC in 2007. However, the phrase is used in the UK Regulations which implemented 89/336/EEC, and these include a definition. The phrase was introduced into the new EMC Directive 2004/108/EC, although it is not actually defined in the Directive itself. This usage in the section defining scope is carried through to the UK Regulations (as one would expect) but the definition of the term 'end user' which was in the 2005 Regulations is no longer in the 2006 version. The Commission guide on the new Directive contains some guidance which is broadly consistent with, although by no means the same as, the definition in the UK's 2005 Regulations. The reason for my interest is that, on the face of it, the change to make the EMC Directive only applicable to products intended for an end user has a very significant impact on the scope of the Directive and I am surprised that more was not made of this at the time that the new Directive came into force. Or have I missed something? Nick. - 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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List
Re: EMC Directive + UK Regulations - take 2
Hi Nick: Can you give examples of significant impacts caused by the new wording? How does your quoted paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; differ from this edited paragraph: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, --- --- --- and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; Pat Lawler EMC Engineer SL Power Electronics Corp. Nick Williams nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk wrote on 01/11/2011 01:36:57 PM: I realise that the (ominous?) silence which has greeted my earlier enquiry is probably the result of me failing to be clear enough in my original question, so I will re-state it. Please ignore my earlier post! The concept of 'end user' to which I refer is contained in the definition of what is within the scope of the EMC Directive, contained in article 2(1)b: ‘apparatus’ means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such disturbance; According to this clause, products which are not intended for the 'end user' are not within the scope of the EMC Directive. I would like to gain some insight into how the concept of end user came to be included within the new Directive, and what it means. To re-iterate what I said earlier, the phrase 'end user' was not in the original EMC Directive 89/336/EEC, nor was it introduced by any of the amendments brought in before the whole Directive was replaced by 2004/108/EEC in 2007. However, the phrase is used in the UK Regulations which implemented 89/336/EEC, and these include a definition. The phrase was introduced into the new EMC Directive 2004/108/EC, although it is not actually defined in the Directive itself. This usage in the section defining scope is carried through to the UK Regulations (as one would expect) but the definition of the term 'end user' which was in the 2005 Regulations is no longer in the 2006 version. The Commission guide on the new Directive contains some guidance which is broadly consistent with, although by no means the same as, the definition in the UK's 2005 Regulations. The reason for my interest is that, on the face of it, the change to make the EMC Directive only applicable to products intended for an end user has a very significant impact on the scope of the Directive and I am surprised that more was not made of this at the time that the new Directive came into force. Or have I missed something? Nick. - 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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@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: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
A solenoid causing serious electromagnetic compatibility – say it ain’t so! Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Scott Douglas sdougla...@socal.rr.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:13:53 -0700 To: Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves In a past life I had a real problem with a solenoid causing serious EMC, primarily from the coil discharge. Diodes across the coil helped some, but we ended up having to create a soft drive and a discharge circuit in order to tame the unruly beast. So how anyone can say solenoids are benign from an EMC standpoint is beyond me. Scott Douglas Price, Edward wrote: -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Gordon,Ian Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:32 AM To: White, Ian Cc: IEEE EMC SAFETY PSTC Subject: RE: EMC Directive and solenoid valves Ian et al We manufacture solenoid operated vacuum valves (amongst other things) and obtained a statement from ERA to the effect that they were benign as far as the EMC directive is concerned. Ian Gordon When the solenoid is de-energized, isn't there a large and fast voltage generated? When a solenoid manufacturer puts a diode across the coil to limit the voltage, doesn't the large current flowing through the diode and coil create a spectral distribution of energy? Perhaps the Directive ignores the short duration burst, but I don't think you can call a solenoid coil completely benign. Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com WB6WSN NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Applications San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty - 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 mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com mailto:emcp...@socal.rr.com mailto:emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com mailto:dhe...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
I seem to recall that one of the earliest EMI problems was one that came from solenoids (well a version of one that held the core stationary and used the coil discharge). Resistor wire and resistor plugs reduced the problems to acceptable levels in cars. If you can find any of these parts without the resistance, substitute them into your car and listen to what happens. - Bill --- On Tue, 9/22/09, Scott Douglas sdougla...@socal.rr.com wrote: From: Scott Douglas sdougla...@socal.rr.com Subject: Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves To: Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Date: Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 1:13 AM In a past life I had a real problem with a solenoid causing serious EMC, primarily from the coil discharge. Diodes across the coil helped some, but we ended up having to create a soft drive and a discharge circuit in order to tame the unruly beast. So how anyone can say solenoids are benign from an EMC standpoint is beyond me. Scott Douglas Price, Edward wrote: -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org http://us.m 396.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org http://us.mc396.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=emc-p...@ieee.org ] On Behalf Of Gordon,Ian Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:32 AM To: White, Ian Cc: IEEE EMC SAFETY PSTC Subject: RE: EMC Directive and solenoid valves Ian et al We manufacture solenoid operated vacuum valves (amongst other things) and obtained a statement from ERA to the effect that they were benign as far as the EMC directive is concerned. Ian Gordon When the solenoid is de-energized, isn't there a large and fast voltage generated? When a solenoid manufacturer puts a diode across the coil to limit the voltage, doesn't the large current flowing through the diode and coil create a spectral distribution of energy? Perhaps the Directive ignores the short duration burst, but I don't think you can call a solenoid coil completely benign. Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com http://us.mc396.m il.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ed.pr...@cubic.com WB6WSN NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Applications San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty - 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 http://us.mc396.ma l.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com http://us.mc396.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org h tp://us.mc396.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org htt ://us.mc396.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com http //us.mc396.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
In message 4ab85d11.6030...@socal.rr.com, dated Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Scott Douglas sdougla...@socal.rr.com writes: In a past life I had a real problem with a solenoid causing serious EMC, primarily from the coil discharge. Due to what emission? Frequency range? Diodes across the coil helped some, but we ended up having to create a soft drive and a discharge circuit in order to tame the unruly beast. So how anyone can say solenoids are benign from an EMC standpoint is beyond me. Solenoids are normally included in equipment (or systems), so are covered by the EMC assessment and testing of the equipment (or system). While I don't necessarily want to defend ERA, it is a large organization that doe a huge amount of complex EMC work. If they had no evidence of EMC issues with solenoids, I suppose it is a very rare occurrence. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Things can always get better. But that's not the only option. 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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
In a past life I had a real problem with a solenoid causing serious EMC, primarily from the coil discharge. Diodes across the coil helped some, but we ended up having to create a soft drive and a discharge circuit in order to tame the unruly beast. So how anyone can say solenoids are benign from an EMC standpoint is beyond me. Scott Douglas Price, Edward wrote: -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Gordon,Ian Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:32 AM To: White, Ian Cc: IEEE EMC SAFETY PSTC Subject: RE: EMC Directive and solenoid valves Ian et al We manufacture solenoid operated vacuum valves (amongst other things) and obtained a statement from ERA to the effect that they were benign as far as the EMC directive is concerned. Ian Gordon When the solenoid is de-energized, isn't there a large and fast voltage generated? When a solenoid manufacturer puts a diode across the coil to limit the voltage, doesn't the large current flowing through the diode and coil create a spectral distribution of energy? Perhaps the Directive ignores the short duration burst, but I don't think you can call a solenoid coil completely benign. Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com WB6WSN NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Applications San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty - 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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com mailto:emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
In message 0F877EFE518E4F1FBC7A7B42A829@MmPc21, dated Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes: John, - Original Message - From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk They are usually quite well shielded for electric fields, and the EMC standards are rather 'soft' on magnetic fields because they rarely cause problems. It happened that each time the solenoid was de-energised, our controller was reset and than energised it again - there were no way to open the door. The reason was no diode installed at solenoid. This is not a lack of 'EMC benignity' of the solenoid as a component. The Directive applies to the product that includes the solenoid. That has to meet electric field emission limits, which should protect your controller, IF its immunity is sufficient. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Things can always get better. But that's not the only option. 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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
John, - Original Message - From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk They are usually quite well shielded for electric fields, and the EMC standards are rather 'soft' on magnetic fields because they rarely cause problems. It happened that each time the solenoid was de-energised, our controller was reset and than energised it again - there were no way to open the door. The reason was no diode installed at solenoid. Piotr Galka - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
In message 9d04b979323dcd428297dda95108893e032ae...@bb-corp-ex2.corp.cubic.cub, dated Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com writes: When the solenoid is de-energized, isn't there a large and fast voltage generated? When a solenoid manufacturer puts a diode across the coil to limit the voltage, doesn't the large current flowing through the diode and coil create a spectral distribution of energy? Perhaps the Directive ignores the short duration burst, but I don't think you can call a solenoid coil completely benign. They are usually quite well shielded for electric fields, and the EMC standards are rather 'soft' on magnetic fields because they rarely cause problems. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Things can always get better. But that's not the only option. 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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
-Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Gordon,Ian Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:32 AM To: White, Ian Cc: IEEE EMC SAFETY PSTC Subject: RE: EMC Directive and solenoid valves Ian et al We manufacture solenoid operated vacuum valves (amongst other things) and obtained a statement from ERA to the effect that they were benign as far as the EMC directive is concerned. Ian Gordon When the solenoid is de-energized, isn't there a large and fast voltage generated? When a solenoid manufacturer puts a diode across the coil to limit the voltage, doesn't the large current flowing through the diode and coil create a spectral distribution of energy? Perhaps the Directive ignores the short duration burst, but I don't think you can call a solenoid coil completely benign. Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com WB6WSN NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Applications San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
Ian et al We manufacture solenoid operated vacuum valves (amongst other things) and obtained a statement from ERA to the effect that they were benign as far as the EMC directive is concerned. Ian Gordon --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and are provided solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any copying, disclosure, distribution, or use of this e-mail, its attachments or any information contained therein is unauthorized and strictly prohibited and you should please contact the sender immediately and delete this e-mail and any attachments from your system. No responsibility is accepted for any virus or defect that might arise from opening this e-mail or attachments, whether or not it has been checked by anti-virus software. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
In message 087cc28d5eb4d5488b5ca277488e0f6466b...@whl46.e2v.com, dated Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Barker, Neil neil.bar...@e2v.com writes: It sounds like a component to me, and thus outside the scope of the Directive. If built into other equipment, yes, but it could be a stand-alone part in an installation. Another grey area. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Things can always get better. But that's not the only option. 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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
In message 6ff6a86731e90546846beac470203774359...@ukcheex01.spiraxsarco.com, dated Fri, 18 Sep 2009, White, Ian ianwh...@spiraxsarco.com writes: Could you inform me if solenoids used on solenoid valves come under the EMC Directive 2004/108/EC. We have a supplier who has issued a D of C and anther who has not, and l need to find out what is the correct position to take. They would appear to be as benign as an induction motor, since both produce only magnetic fields. The important point is which standard(s) the DoC cites, so please tell us. A solenoid valve does raise safety issues, and would therefore need a DoC, but, if I recall correctly, the German national committee has drawn attention to there being no standard for such products at present. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Things can always get better. But that's not the only option. 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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive and solenoid valves
Ian It sounds like a component to me, and thus outside the scope of the Directive. I would have thought that the EMC performance of the solenoid would depend greatly on the circuitry driving it and the wiring connecting ti to that circuitry. Best regards Neil Barker CEng CEnv MIET Hon FSEE MIEEE Manager Central Quality e2v 106 Waterhouse Lane, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 2QU, England Tel: +44 (0)1245 453616 Mobile: +44 (0)7801 723735 Fax:+44 (0)1245 453571 www.e2v.com http://www.e2v.com/ P Consider the environment: do you really need to print this e mail? From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of White, Ian Sent: 18 September 2009 09:16 To: IEEE Forum (emc-p...@ieee.org) Subject: EMC Directive and solenoid valves Dear Experts Could you inform me if solenoids used on solenoid valves come under the EMC Directive 2004/108/EC. We have a supplier who has issued a D of C and anther who has not, and l need to find out what is the correct position to take. Thank-you for your help Ian White Project Engineer - Electronics __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com Sent by a member of the e2v group of companies. The parent company, e2v technologies plc, is registered in England and Wales. Company number; 04439718. Registered address; 106 Waterhouse Lane, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 2QU, UK. This email and any attachments are confidential and meant solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender and then deleting this copy and the reply from your system without further disclosing, copying, distributing or using the e-mail or any attachment. Thank you for your cooperation. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
Really? I sure don’t! :-) Exactly how does a PC Motherboard manufacturer demonstrate compliance to the EMC directive? From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim Hulbert Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 7:41 AM To: EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) Subject: RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Again, thanks for all the responses. I have a pretty good understanding now of how the Directive applies to components sub-assemblies. Jim Hulbert From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim Hulbert Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 5:03 PM To: EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) Subject: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Does a PC motherboard by itself fall under the scope of the EMC Directive? Article 2, paragraph 2(a) states that for the purposes of the Directive, the following is deemed an apparatus: components or sub-assemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user, which are liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liabile to be affected by such disturbance. Therefore, I think a PC motherboard (or any other commercially available PC board) falls under the Directive. Am I correct? Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test PItney Bowes - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
Again, thanks for all the responses. I have a pretty good understanding now of how the Directive applies to components sub-assemblies. Jim Hulbert From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim Hulbert Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 5:03 PM To: EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) Subject: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Does a PC motherboard by itself fall under the scope of the EMC Directive? Article 2, paragraph 2(a) states that for the purposes of the Directive, the following is deemed an apparatus: components or sub-assemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user, which are liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liabile to be affected by such disturbance. Therefore, I think a PC motherboard (or any other commercially available PC board) falls under the Directive. Am I correct? Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test PItney Bowes - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
15.32 goes on to say that under the test conditions of (a)(1), the emissions shall not exceed the limit by more than 6db. I guess the presumption is that a typical enclosure cover will provide at least 6dB of additional attenuation. Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test Systems Integration Test / New Product Development Test Tel: 203-924-3621 (442-3621) From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John Barnes Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 9:23 AM To: John M Woodgate; ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Gert, John, The (United States) Federal Communications Commission's (FCC's) approach to approvals of separately-sold personal computer (PC) motherboards is described in Sections 15.32 and 15.102 of FCC 47 CFR Part 15, at http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules/part15/PART15_07-10-08.pdf Paragraph 15.32(a)(1) says: Section 15.32 Test procedures for CPU boards and computer power supplies. Power supplies and CPU boards used with personal computers and for which separate authorizations are required to be obtained shall be tested as follows: (a) CPU boards shall be tested as follows: (1) Testing for radiated emissions shall be performed with the CPU board installed in a typical enclosure but with the enclosure's cover removed so that the internal circuitry is exposed at the top and on at least two sides. ... The rest of this section goes into much more detail about the testing requirements, and an alternative test configuration. Paragraph 15.102(a) says: Section 15.102 CPU boards and power supplies used in personal computers. (a) Authorized CPU boards and power supplies that are sold as separate components shall be supplied with complete installation instructions. These instructions shall specify all of the installation procedures that must be followed to ensure compliance with the standards, including, if necessary, the type of enclosure, e.g., a metal enclosure, proper grounding techniques, the use of shielded cables, the addition of any needed components, and any necessary modifications to additional components. John Barnes KS4GL, PE, NCE, NCT, ESDC Eng, ESDC Tech, PSE, SM IEEE dBi Corporation 216 Hillsboro Ave Lexington, KY 40511-2105 (859)253-1178 phone (859)252-6128 fax jrbar...@iglou.com http://www.dbicorporation.com/ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
Gert, John, The (United States) Federal Communications Commission's (FCC's) approach to approvals of separately-sold personal computer (PC) motherboards is described in Sections 15.32 and 15.102 of FCC 47 CFR Part 15, at http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules/part15/PART15_07-10-08.pdf Paragraph 15.32(a)(1) says: Section 15.32 Test procedures for CPU boards and computer power supplies. Power supplies and CPU boards used with personal computers and for which separate authorizations are required to be obtained shall be tested as follows: (a) CPU boards shall be tested as follows: (1) Testing for radiated emissions shall be performed with the CPU board installed in a typical enclosure but with the enclosure's cover removed so that the internal circuitry is exposed at the top and on at least two sides. ... The rest of this section goes into much more detail about the testing requirements, and an alternative test configuration. Paragraph 15.102(a) says: Section 15.102 CPU boards and power supplies used in personal computers. (a) Authorized CPU boards and power supplies that are sold as separate components shall be supplied with complete installation instructions. These instructions shall specify all of the installation procedures that must be followed to ensure compliance with the standards, including, if necessary, the type of enclosure, e.g., a metal enclosure, proper grounding techniques, the use of shielded cables, the addition of any needed components, and any necessary modifications to additional components. John Barnes KS4GL, PE, NCE, NCT, ESDC Eng, ESDC Tech, PSE, SM IEEE dBi Corporation 216 Hillsboro Ave Lexington, KY 40511-2105 (859)253-1178 phone (859)252-6128 fax jrbar...@iglou.com http://www.dbicorporation.com/ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
In message FCA549BE3ECF9D4CB8CB8576837EA4890537BF@ZEUS.cetest.local, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl writes While this is certainly true, any EMC test result is possibly very dependent of the applied enclosure/supply during test, making the results at least very unreliable. That is widely understood, but the volume of DIY computers is small and any actual problem can in theory be dealt with on an ad-hoc basis (as for usage in N America of Class A products in homes). Unless the manufacturer is able now to produce operational motherboards that pass emission tests without enclosure ! Canned? (;-) -- This is my travelling signature, adding no superfluous mass. John M Woodgate - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
Computer parts supplied to the public for DIY assembly or installation are subject to the Directive. While this is certainly true, any EMC test result is possibly very dependent of the applied enclosure/supply during test, making the results at least very unreliable. Unless the manufacturer is able now to produce operational motherboards that pass emission tests without enclosure ! Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl www.cetest.nl Kiotoweg 363 3047 BG Rotterdam T 31(0)104152426 F 31(0)104154953 Before printing, think about the environment. Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens John M Woodgate Verzonden: Friday, June 19, 2009 8:29 AM Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org Onderwerp: Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards In message 4c5e6457cd7911469a07260381288c283ccee...@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com, Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com writes I think it would depend on your definition of end user. If an end-user is an integrator then yes, Not in Europe: an integrator is a final-stage manufacturer and parts supplied to integrators are not subject to the Directive, except in some very special cases. The Directive applies to the final product, and the integrator is responsible for ensuring that it does. But if your definition is someone who buys a computer to use then they probably would not ever install a mother board under any condition (at least my wife wouldn't) : ) Computer parts supplied to the public for DIY assembly or installation are subject to the Directive. -- This is my travelling signature, adding no superfluous mass. John M Woodgate - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
In message 4c5e6457cd7911469a07260381288c283ccee...@orsmsx502.amr.corp.intel.com, Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com writes I think it would depend on your definition of end user. If an end-user is an integrator then yes, Not in Europe: an integrator is a final-stage manufacturer and parts supplied to integrators are not subject to the Directive, except in some very special cases. The Directive applies to the final product, and the integrator is responsible for ensuring that it does. But if your definition is someone who buys a computer to use then they probably would not ever install a mother board under any condition (at least my wife wouldn't) : ) Computer parts supplied to the public for DIY assembly or installation are subject to the Directive. -- This is my travelling signature, adding no superfluous mass. John M Woodgate - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
Guide for the EMC Directive 2004/108/EC, 21 May 2007 gives the following definition:... end-user means any natural person (e.g. consumer) or legal entity (e.g. enterprise) using or intending to use the apparatus for its intended purpose. Generally an end user is deemed to have no qualifications in the field of EMC. Best Regards, John rehel...@mmm.com Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org 06/18/2009 07:46 AM To emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards I think it would depend on your definition of end user. If an end-user is an integrator then yes, But if your definition is someone who buys a computer to use then they probably would not ever install a mother board under any condition (at least my wife wouldn't) : ) Also spare parts, I believe, do not fall under this category. Bob Heller 3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 John J Radomski jjradom...@ra.ro ckwell.comTo Sent by: Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com emc-p...@ieee.org cc EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) emc-p...@ieee.org 06/18/2009 06:27 Subject AMRe: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Jim, Yes, you are correct. Subassemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user do fall under the scope of the EMC Directive. Best Regards, John Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org To EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) 06/17/2009 05:03 PM emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Does a PC motherboard by itself fall under the scope of the EMC Directive? Article 2, paragraph 2(a) states that for the purposes of the Directive, the following is deemed an apparatus: components or sub-assemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user, which are liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liabile to be affected by such disturbance. Therefore, I think a PC motherboard (or any other commercially available PC board) falls under the Directive. Am I correct? Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test PItney Bowes - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org
RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
Devil's Advocate and EMC amateur I am. For both personal use and for test bench automation at the factory, the MB is chosen with attention to EMC emissions and immunity. So this stuff can be considered important to both residential and industrial end-users. It is not unreasonable for the non-engineer end user to expect that the mb will not require installation in a steel vault with a beryllium gasket around the cover and not be subject to total destruction from a minor ESD event. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Pettit, Ghery Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:04 AM To: rehel...@mmm.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards That's about the only way a new PC shows up in our house - it gets built from parts from a number of different vendors. But, my son and I are nerds. What can I say? -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of rehel...@mmm.com Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 4:46 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards I think it would depend on your definition of end user. If an end-user is an integrator then yes, But if your definition is someone who buys a computer to use then they probably would not ever install a mother board under any condition (at least my wife wouldn't) : ) Also spare parts, I believe, do not fall under this category. Bob Heller 3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 John J Radomski jjradom...@ra.ro ckwell.com To Sent by: Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com emc-p...@ieee.org cc EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) emc-p...@ieee.org 06/18/2009 06:27 Subject AMRe: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Jim, Yes, you are correct. Subassemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user do fall under the scope of the EMC Directive. Best Regards, John Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org To EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) 06/17/2009 05:03 PM emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Does a PC motherboard by itself fall under the scope of the EMC Directive? Article 2, paragraph 2(a) states that for the purposes of the Directive, the following is deemed an apparatus: components or sub-assemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user, which are liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liabile to be affected by such disturbance. Therefore, I think a PC motherboard (or any other commercially available PC board) falls under the Directive. Am I correct? Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test PItney Bowes - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc
RE: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
That's about the only way a new PC shows up in our house - it gets built from parts from a number of different vendors. But, my son and I are nerds. What can I say? From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of rehel...@mmm.com Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 4:46 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards I think it would depend on your definition of end user. If an end-user is an integrator then yes, But if your definition is someone who buys a computer to use then they probably would not ever install a mother board under any condition (at least my wife wouldn't) : ) Also spare parts, I believe, do not fall under this category. Bob Heller 3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 John J Radomski jjradom...@ra.ro ckwell.comTo Sent by: Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com emc-p...@ieee.org cc EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) emc-p...@ieee.org 06/18/2009 06:27 Subject AMRe: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Jim, Yes, you are correct. Subassemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user do fall under the scope of the EMC Directive. Best Regards, John Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org To EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) 06/17/2009 05:03 PM emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Does a PC motherboard by itself fall under the scope of the EMC Directive? Article 2, paragraph 2(a) states that for the purposes of the Directive, the following is deemed an apparatus: components or sub-assemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user, which are liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liabile to be affected by such disturbance. Therefore, I think a PC motherboard (or any other commercially available PC board) falls under the Directive. Am I correct? Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test PItney Bowes - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw
Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
I think it would depend on your definition of end user. If an end-user is an integrator then yes, But if your definition is someone who buys a computer to use then they probably would not ever install a mother board under any condition (at least my wife wouldn't) : ) Also spare parts, I believe, do not fall under this category. Bob Heller 3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 John J Radomski jjradom...@ra.ro ckwell.comTo Sent by: Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com emc-p...@ieee.org cc EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) emc-p...@ieee.org 06/18/2009 06:27 Subject AMRe: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Jim, Yes, you are correct. Subassemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user do fall under the scope of the EMC Directive. Best Regards, John Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org To EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) 06/17/2009 05:03 PM emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Does a PC motherboard by itself fall under the scope of the EMC Directive? Article 2, paragraph 2(a) states that for the purposes of the Directive, the following is deemed an apparatus: components or sub-assemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user, which are liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liabile to be affected by such disturbance. Therefore, I think a PC motherboard (or any other commercially available PC board) falls under the Directive. Am I correct? Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test PItney Bowes - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.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
Re: EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards
Jim, Yes, you are correct. Subassemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user do fall under the scope of the EMC Directive. Best Regards, John Jim Hulbert jim.hulb...@pb.com Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org 06/17/2009 05:03 PM To EMC-PSTC (emc-p...@ieee.org) emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject EMC Directive Applicability to Mother Boards Does a PC motherboard by itself fall under the scope of the EMC Directive? Article 2, paragraph 2(a) states that for the purposes of the Directive, the following is deemed an apparatus: components or sub-assemblies intended for incorporation into an apparatus by the end user, which are liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liabile to be affected by such disturbance. Therefore, I think a PC motherboard (or any other commercially available PC board) falls under the Directive. Am I correct? Jim Hulbert, Team Leader Compliance Engineering Environmental Test PItney Bowes - 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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net mailto:emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
Hi Mark, If you ship the adapter (deemed active or not) with your device then the accountability of shipping a compliant device is your responsibility and will require you to test at system level to meet the requirements of 89/336. It goes back to the ole CE + CE = ??? Regards, Mark Schmidt _ From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Mark Gandler Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:45 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter Group, I am not sure how I ended up caring so much for power adapters recently, but they just will not go away. Would you consider linear power adapter : 240V to 12V/1.5A consists of the transformer, bridge rectifier and capacitor to be EM active device? If it is not active, will it be safe to assume what it will be excluded from 89/336 directive based on EU guidelines? See http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/guides/chapfive.htm Thanks, Mark Gandler _ Watch http://g.msn.com/8HMBENUS/2746??PS=47575 free concerts with Pink, Rod Stewart, Oasis and more. Visit MSN Presents today. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
In message 90511c6e9d0a89419745854eace4c7a8036b5...@whl46.e2v.com, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Barker, Neil neil.bar...@e2v.com writes: As a technicality, forget 89/336/EC. It was repealed and replaced by 2004/108/EC. Not yet, but on 20 July 2007 (for some purposes) and 20 July 2009 (for everything else). -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
RE: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
Mark, The switching spikes of a full wave bridge / capacitor arrangement can be found to extend above 1GHz if the design is poor. In no way is it a passive device! Regards Tim 6239 desk A1S77 P Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Mark Gandler Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 12:45 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter *** WARNING *** This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems Limited 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.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
RE: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
Mark, I would say not. Your adapter includes diodes, which are a form of switching device and will cause interference of some description to an extent that depends on the speed of the diodes. An EM passive device would be something like a filament lamp or an electric heater (providing it doesn't have a thermostat); i.e. items that draw a constant current at supply frequency. You are fortunate that you are considering a low power device, otherwise you would definitely be having to consider harmonic emissions; a simple rectifier/capacitor configuration generates those very well. As a technicality, forget 89/336/EC. It was repealed and replaced by 2004/108/EC. Best regards Neil R. Barker CEng MIET FSEE MIEEE Manager Quality Engineering e2v technologies (uk) ltd 106 Waterhouse Lane Chelmsford Essex CM1 2QU UK Tel: (+44) 1245 453616 Fax: (+44) 1245 453571 Mob: (+44) 7801 723735 P Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Mark Gandler [mailto:markgand...@hotmail.com] Sent: 21 March 2007 00:45 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter Group, I am not sure how I ended up caring so much for power adapters recently, but they just will not go away. Would you consider linear power adapter : 240V to 12V/1.5A consists of the transformer, bridge rectifier and capacitor to be EM active device? If it is not active, will it be safe to assume what it will be excluded from 89/336 directive based on EU guidelines? See http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/guides/chapfive.htm Thanks, Mark Gandler __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ Sent by E2V TECHNOLOGIES PLC or a member of the E2V group of companies. A company registered in England and Wales. Company number: 04439718. Registered address: 106 Waterhouse Lane, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 2QU, UK. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
In message bay142-f29fcc5f0e9f0e511886e27ad...@phx.gbl, dated Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Mark Gandler markgand...@hotmail.com writes: Would you consider linear power adapter : 240V to 12V/1.5A consists of the transformer, bridge rectifier and capacitor to be EM active device? If it is not active, will it be safe to assume what it will be excluded from 89/336 directive based on EU guidelines? No, because it emits mains harmonic currents and, depending on the type of diode in the rectifier, perhaps emits conducted noise above 150 kHz. However, it's certain that its mains harmonic emissions are subject to no limits according to IEC/EN 61000-3-2 (lower bound for the application of limits is 75 W active input power), and 99.99% certain that it meets the limits for conducted emissions above 150 kHz. So, although it's not *excluded*, it can safely be claimed to meet the essential requirements of the EMC Directive without testing. Note that 89/336 is the old Directive, to be superseded for some purposes on 20 July this year and wholly on 20 July 2009 by the new Directive. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use
++ Wir stellen aus: 3. Fachkongress Sicherheit+Automation, 29.3.2007, Stuttgart, http://www.sicherheitundautomation.de www.sicherheitundautomation.de ++ Hi Brian, how are you? The new German EMC act (Draft at this moment) requires that the customer must be informed before he buys the product. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Yours sincerely Dipl.-Ing. Michael Loerzer Managing Director Regulatory Affairs Specialist Fon: +49 30 3229027-50, Direct Call: -51 Fax: +49 30 3229027-59 http://www.Globalnorm.de www.Globalnorm.de Globalnorm GmbH, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Alt-Moabit 94, 10559 Berlin Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dipl.-Ing. Michael Loerzer Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg HRB 105204 B, USt-ID-Nummer: DE251654448 - Original Message - From: brian_mcauli...@dell.com To: emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 1:53 PM Subject: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use Article 9 para 4 in EMC Directive 2004/108/EC reads as follows ….. Apparatus for which compliance with the protection requirements is not ensured in residential areas shall be accompanied by a clear indication of this restriction of use, where appropriate also on the packaging. One way of addressing this requirement is to include information on this restriction in the instructions for use that are part of the user guide on a CD shipped with the product (in this case a PC or PC accessory). The other extreme is a large printed warning on the outside of the shipping carton indicating not suitable for use in a residential environment, together with a hard copy warning notice included in the box. 1. What's the sensible and practical middle ground ? 2. What do they really mean by the words 'clear indication' and in particular ' where appropriate' ? Rgds Brian McAuliffe - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use
In message 201048ea81ba0745aca78e4cc8839001c8b...@desmdswms201.des.grplnk.net, dated Thu, 8 Mar 2007, Haynes, Tim (SELEX) (UK Capability Green) tim.hay...@selex-sas.com writes: My personal view is that the warning should be on the retail packaging so it is seen before the item is purchased. That's what 'where appropriate' means, or at least one meaning. The warning wouldn't be necessary on OEM packaging. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use
In message OFE94AC92B.6116105D-ON85257298.0049D516-85257298.004B18FE@US.Schneider-E lectric.com, dated Thu, 8 Mar 2007, john.radom...@us.schneider-electric.com writes: I believe that this information should be included in a printed user manual. I would also include this warning on the outside of the enclosure, for example: on the rating label. In how many languages? It's a case where a symbol is really necessary. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
RE: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use
Brian, If I was buying a product for use at home and had to wait until I had put the CD in the computer before finding out it was NOT suitable - then I would be pretty hacked off. My personal view is that the warning should be on the retail packaging so it is seen before the item is purchased. Regards Tim 6239 desk A1S77 P Please consider the environment before printing this email. _ From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of brian_mcauli...@dell.com Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:53 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use *** WARNING *** This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. Article 9 para 4 in EMC Directive 2004/108/EC reads as follows ….. Apparatus for which compliance with the protection requirements is not ensured in residential areas shall be accompanied by a clear indication of this restriction of use, where appropriate also on the packaging. One way of addressing this requirement is to include information on this restriction in the instructions for use that are part of the user guide on a CD shipped with the product (in this case a PC or PC accessory). The other extreme is a large printed warning on the outside of the shipping carton indicating not suitable for use in a residential environment, together with a hard copy warning notice included in the box. 1. What's the sensible and practical middle ground ? 2. What do they really mean by the words 'clear indication' and in particular ' where appropriate' ? Rgds Brian McAuliffe - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ 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. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use
1. What's the sensible and practical middle ground ? I believe that this information should be included in a printed user manual. I would also include this warning on the outside of the enclosure, for example: on the rating label. My 2 cents. John Radomski Brian_McAuliffe@ Dell.comTo: emc-p...@ieee.org Sent by: cc: emc-p...@ieee.orgSubject: EMC Directive - indicating restrictions of use 03/08/2007 07:53 AM Article 9 para 4 in EMC Directive 2004/108/EC reads as follows ….. Apparatus for which compliance with the protection requirements is not ensured in residential areas shall be accompanied by a clear indication of this restriction of use, where appropriate also on the packaging. One way of addressing this requirement is to include information on this restriction in the instructions for use that are part of the user guide on a CD shipped with the product (in this case a PC or PC accessory). The other extreme is a large printed warning on the outside of the shipping carton indicating not suitable for use in a residential environment, together with a hard copy warning notice included in the box. 1. What's the sensible and practical middle ground ? 2. What do they really mean by the words 'clear indication' and in particular ' where appropriate' ? Rgds Brian McAuliffe This email has been scanned for SPAM content and Viruses by the MessageL abs Email Security System. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.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...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: EMC Directive interpretation
http://www.ieee-pses.org/symposium http://www.emc2004.org/ I read in !emc-pstc that =?iso-8859-2?Q?Konrad_Stefa=F1ski?= kstef...@poczta.onet.pl wrote (in 002d01c46bfd$50d39d00$0301a8c0@konr ad) about 'EMC Directive interpretation' on Sat, 17 Jul 2004: I would like to ask you how to obtain conformity with EMC Directive to the following product: Tension-converter used in tension-meters or weighting devices. There is a separate Directive for weighing machines, and your product may be within its scope. It is only resistive device, It consist only resistors which could change resistance with tension changes. These resistors are serially connected. It has no other electronic and electric parts in its construction. This converter could only work with other device, but it may be selled as stand alone device. So my questions: 1. Does this device (converter) lay under scope of EMC Directive? Yes, is the simple answer. You might be able to make a case that is doesn't, but it would be difficult, and there would be a permanent risk that your case would be successfully challenged. 2. If YES, is this necessary to do tests in accordance with EMC harmonized standards to show conformity with directive ? I think that this device meets EMC Directive requirements without any tests (only resistive character). You probably don't need to do any tests in order to justify the Declaration of Conformity. But it would be helpful commercially if you could claim, on the basis of tests, that it did not affect the EMC characteristics of whatever it has to be connected to in order to use it. The appropriate tests are probably radiated emissions, ESD and radiated immunity. 3. If NOT, is this device a EM-passive component? 'Passive' is a misleading word. Your device is passive, but it may not be 'benign', that is, it may affect the EMC characteristics of whatever it is connected to. The above points probably apply to ANY device that has no active components and is connected to something else in order to work, if it is placed on the open market by itself. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. The good news is that nothing is compulsory. The bad news is that everything is prohibited. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. IEEE PSES Main Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions for use of the list server: http://listserv.ieee.org/listserv/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EMC Directive: New list Harmonised Standard
Sorry for the mistake in the URL. This one will work: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2004/c_098/c_09820040423en0008002 1.pdf Vriendelijke Groeten, Meilleures salutations, mit freundlichen Gruessen, Best regards, Kristiaan Carpentier Regulatory and Approval Engineer This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EMC Directive, RTTE Directive etc
Try here http://europa.eu.int/cgi-bin/eur-lex/udl.pl?REQUEST=Service-Search http://europa.eu.int/cgi-bin/eur-lex/udl.pl?REQUEST=Service-SearchLANGUAGE =enGUILANGUAGE=enSERVICE=eurlexCOLLECTION=ojDOCID=2003c271PAGENO=32 LANGUAGE=enGUILANGUAGE=enSERVICE=eurlexCOLLECTION=ojDOCID=2003c271PAGE NO=32 Lothar Schmidt BQB Technical Manager EMC/Radio/SAR CETECOM Inc. 411 Dixon Landing Road Milpitas, CA 95035 ' +1 408 586 6214 7 +1 408 586 6299 This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that any disclosure, copying, printing, distribution, or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving them in any manner. Thank you. CETECOM is celebrating 10 years of being your world-wide partner in mobile communications and we would like to welcome you on our newly-arranged website: http://www.cetecom.com http://www.cetecom.com . From: Luke Turnbull [mailto:luke.turnb...@trw.com mailto:luke.turnb...@trw.com ] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 10:35 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; h.knud...@niros.com Subject: Re: EMC Directive, RTTE Directive etc Anyone know where there are pdfs? Luke Turnbull Helge Knudsen h.knud...@niros.com 11/21/03 05:35pm Dear Group, I have just recognized new listings in OJ: RTTE: C271 of 2003-11-12 EMC: C271 of 2003-11-12 Medical Devices: C273 of 2003-11-14 And others Visit: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/wh http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/w h atsnew.html Best regards Helge Knudsen Test Approval Niros Telecommunication Hirsemarken 5 DK-3520 Farum Tel +45 44 34 22 51 Fax +45 44 99 28 08 email h.knud...@niros.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc FREE spam killer: http://eliminatespam.com http://eliminatespam.com * FREE PopUp Buster+: http://popupbuster.net * FREE e-mail: http://riskfreemail.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EMC Directive, RTTE Directive etc
Hello Luke, I will guide you: On the whats new page click on electromagnetic compatibility (if this is one of interest) Go a little down on the new page to Publications in the Official Journal: Here you will find a number of boxes, if you want the PDF file in English you must click on the box marked en. on the next page choose PDF. Best regards Helge Knudsen From: Luke Turnbull To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; h.knud...@niros.com Sent: 24-11-2003 19:34 Subject: Re: EMC Directive, RTTE Directive etc Anyone know where there are pdfs? Luke Turnbull Helge Knudsen h.knud...@niros.com 11/21/03 05:35pm Dear Group, I have just recognized new listings in OJ: RTTE: C271 of 2003-11-12 EMC: C271 of 2003-11-12 Medical Devices: C273 of 2003-11-14 And others Visit: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstd s/wh atsnew.html Best regards Helge Knudsen Test Approval Niros Telecommunication Hirsemarken 5 DK-3520 Farum Tel +45 44 34 22 51 Fax +45 44 99 28 08 email h.knud...@niros.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EMC Directive, RTTE Directive etc
Anyone know where there are pdfs? Luke Turnbull Helge Knudsen h.knud...@niros.com 11/21/03 05:35pm Dear Group, I have just recognized new listings in OJ: RTTE: C271 of 2003-11-12 EMC: C271 of 2003-11-12 Medical Devices: C273 of 2003-11-14 And others Visit: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/wh atsnew.html Best regards Helge Knudsen Test Approval Niros Telecommunication Hirsemarken 5 DK-3520 Farum Tel +45 44 34 22 51 Fax +45 44 99 28 08 email h.knud...@niros.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EMC Directive
Hi Joe It's much more simple then that. The EMC directive references harmonized Standards list. The list of harmonized standards is listed in the Official Journal = LAW. The date of publication of the list is the date that the standard may be used for the first time. The list mentiones dates of withdrawal for older standards = LAW Logic thinking does the rest. Gert Gremmen ce-test, qualified testing http://www.cetest.nl -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Joe P Martin Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 10:20 PM To: John Juhasz Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'; owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EMC Directive John, Article 7 in the Directive discusses using national standards to meet the protection requirements of the Directive. The Directive does not go into detail on DOW's of the standards. Take a look at the Guide to the implementation of directives based on the New Approach and the Global Approach Section 4.5 discusses revisions to the standards. It states ...the relevant European standard organisation lays down the date of publication at national level of the revised harmonised standard, and the date of withdrawal of the old standard. The transitional period is normally the time period between these two dates. During this transitional period, both harmonised standards give presumption of conformity, provided that the conditions for this are met. After this transitional period, only the revised harmonised standard gives a presumption of conformity. These guidelines can be downloaded from the following site. http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/document/ 1999_1282_en.pdf Regards Joe Martin John Juhasz John.Juhasz@GE-interloTo: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org gix.com cc: Sent by: Subject: EMC Directive owner-emc-pstc@majordom o.ieee.org 08/21/2002 10:09 AM Please respond to John Juhasz I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc
Re: EMC Directive
I read in !emc-pstc that John Juhasz john.juh...@ge-interlogix.com wrote (in 2A1845F4CDE8D511B4400090279C703BFB6A53@BCTEXC10) about 'EMC Directive' on Wed, 21 Aug 2002: I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? Your understanding is correct. The 'dow' should be the 'docopocotss' - 'date of cessation of presumption of conformity of the superseded standard', but even Brussels jibbed at that. The relevant text is not in the Directive, because it applies generally, not just to EMC. I don't know which publicly-available document explains the meanings of 'doa', 'dop' and 'dow', because I have them only in committee papers. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: EMC Directive
John, Article 7 in the Directive discusses using national standards to meet the protection requirements of the Directive. The Directive does not go into detail on DOW's of the standards. Take a look at the Guide to the implementation of directives based on the New Approach and the Global Approach Section 4.5 discusses revisions to the standards. It states ...the relevant European standard organisation lays down the date of publication at national level of the revised harmonised standard, and the date of withdrawal of the old standard. The transitional period is normally the time period between these two dates. During this transitional period, both harmonised standards give presumption of conformity, provided that the conditions for this are met. After this transitional period, only the revised harmonised standard gives a presumption of conformity. These guidelines can be downloaded from the following site. http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/document/1999_1282_en.pdf Regards Joe Martin John Juhasz John.Juhasz@GE-interloTo: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org gix.com cc: Sent by: Subject: EMC Directive owner-emc-pstc@majordom o.ieee.org 08/21/2002 10:09 AM Please respond to John Juhasz I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee
RE: EMC Directive
Partially Wrong. The only reference you will have to use in Europe with the Compliance matters and standards is the published list of Harmonized Standards . Dates (DoW) printed in the standard itself may or may not be the same but are irrelevant in CE Europe. The reason for this is that standards are private documents created by private organisations. The EMC directive is law as well as the list of harmonised standards. This list is available at many sources . The list includes dates on which any standard is superseded by it' successor. The product will have to comply with the new standard regardless of any modification. If you or any client does not agree, the route 10.2 of the technical construction file may be used. A NB will review your design and measures that have been taken to comply with essential requirements. Often this will lead to the same result as using the new standard, especially if new phenomenae are to be tested in the revised standard which were not in the earlier. No escape route though, but may be used if injustice would have been done to your product. The EMC directive directly points to this list of harmonized standards, and that should justify that your opinion is right. Gert Gremmen ce-test, qualified testing -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of John Juhasz Sent: woensdag 21 augustus 2002 19:09 To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: EMC Directive I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EMC Directive
John you are correct and your friend is not. You can find the Commission's explaination at the following site. http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/guides/emcguide.ht m Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International -Original Message- From: John Juhasz [mailto:john.juh...@ge-interlogix.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 1:09 PM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: EMC Directive I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EMC Directive/Repaired Apparatus
Joe, I've given this topic a fair amount of thought. I believe the intent of the new approach directives is only for equipment being put into service for the first time. My understanding is if the repair is only a repair and not an upgrade of any kind, then you may simply put it back into service at the same place where it was originally placed into service. There are a number of documents that give good guidance at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/index.htm There are a number of documents linked to this page and I suggest a full reading before deciding a course of action. I got the most useful information at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/legislati on.htm This is a guide to the implementation of the new approach directives and there is a single PDF version near the top of the page. In this guide I found several items of interest plus a fairly good clarification of exactly what is placing on the Community market (or put into service) for the first time. This would seem to exclude repair, refurbishment or renovation of products. The implications are many and here are a few that come to mind, 1) I believe products which have been repaired without changing the original performance, purpose or type, are not subject to further assessment. 2) I also understand that if you are installing any sort of upgrade to the product which was made available after the applicable directive came into force, then the entire product needs to be assessed to current requirements. 3) I do not believe you or the company doing the repair are allowed to keep an inventory of refurbished service spares on hand as the guidance document seems to indicate that the original (serialized) unit must remain where it was first put into service (i.e. no stock piling). 4) Exactly how one provides markings and a declaration for this situation, I cannot say ... 5) Applicable product directives take precedence over provisions set out in this guide. For example, if you are using products to the Medical Equipment Directive, then you should be familiar with discussion it has on repair and refurbishment. Regards, -doug --- Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. Mail stop: 203024 1626 Sharp Point Drive Ft. Collins, CO 80525 mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com --- -Original Message- From: Joe P Martin [mailto:marti...@appliedbiosystems.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 7:13 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive/Repaired Apparatus To all, The following scenario is in regards to the EMC Directive. We are a manufacturer located in the US. We have various products that were placed on the EU market prior to the enforcement of the EMC Directive. We need to repair some of these products. The repairs will not modify the product to an as new piece of apparatus. We want to have the products repaired in the US. Questions: 1. Following the repairs, do we need to meet the requirements of the Directive? If so, why? 2. If not, how do we get the products back into the EU without the CE Marking? Hopefully someone has had some experience with this issue. All responses are appreciated. Regards Joe Martin EMC/Product Safety Engineer Applied Biosystems marti...@appliedbiosystems.com ___ This message, including any attachments, may contain information that is confidential and proprietary information of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. The dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this message or any of its attachments is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EMC Directive/Repaired Apparatus
Hi Joe, I believe you already spoke with Jason, but you may also find this link very useful in this particular instance. Best regards, Garry Hojan CEO/ President Strategic Compliance Services (SCS) a Division of NRL, L.L.C. 11402 E Mariposa Rd. Stockton, CA 95215 Tel:209-465-0619 Fax:209-812-1931 Mobile: 209-662-4322 Email: gho...@regulatory-compliance.com Web:www.regulatory-compliance.com -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Joe P Martin Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 6:13 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:EMC Directive/Repaired Apparatus To all, The following scenario is in regards to the EMC Directive. We are a manufacturer located in the US. We have various products that were placed on the EU market prior to the enforcement of the EMC Directive. We need to repair some of these products. The repairs will not modify the product to an as new piece of apparatus. We want to have the products repaired in the US. Questions: 1. Following the repairs, do we need to meet the requirements of the Directive? If so, why? 2. If not, how do we get the products back into the EU without the CE Marking? Hopefully someone has had some experience with this issue. All responses are appreciated. Regards Joe Martin EMC/Product Safety Engineer Applied Biosystems marti...@appliedbiosystems.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EMC Directive
Be careful of declarations that include a specific model manufactured by another company. Without engineering control or intercompany agreements the other product could change without notice, technically negating your declaration. Nothing prevents the competent body from insisting on a cooperative agreement between both companies to assure future compliance. Is this related to your earlier question about an UPS? David Sterner __ Reply Separator _ Subject: EMC Directive Author: wo...@sensormatic.com SMTP:wo...@sensormatic.com at ADEMCONET List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:5/4/2000 10:18 AM Assume a product requires the use of an external device in order to comply with a particular immunity test. Assume that the product is marketed without the external device and the device is readily available in the EU member states. Is it acceptable to create a TCF for the particular essential requirement, obtain an opinion from a Competent Body, and declare compliance with notes in the declaration and installation instructions that the product is compliant if and only if it is used with the specified external device? Richard Woods --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC Directive revisions
Hoping this reaches the right eyes. Our comments on the document: 1. In many places, the English is not idiomatic and lays stress inappropriately, often by incorrect use of the negative or of does. For instance this phenomenon needs not to be considered means it is compulsory not to consider it! Sometimes this doesn't matter; sometimes it would have legal significance. If the English text is to carry legal weight, it should be edited by a native English speaker to ensure that it does not convey the wrong meaning; the same applies of course to all the other languages. 2. In annex II section C.1 concerning documentation accompanying a product, there is the requirement that documents (presumably all of them, including instruction manuals, declarations of conformity etc. etc.) have to be available in one of the official languages of the member state where the apparatus is to be taken into service ... I understand the desirability of this for consumer goods, where it is generally followed today, but for professional equipment I think it is unnecessarily onerous. A manufacturer such as Dolby might sell only one or two samples per year of an apparatus into say Finland or Portugal, and to have to translate and print multipage documents into those languages would be uneconomic. 3. Article 5 contains a section that states: Member States shall not impede for reasons relating to electromagnetic compatibility the placing on the market and/or the taking into service for its intended use of equipment conforming to this directive. As you are well aware, states and smaller administrative areas such as cities are currently impeding installation of equipment that conforms to the present Emc and low voltage directives, despite CE marking and accompanying declarations of conformity . I suggest that this clause should be strengthened to make clear that it applies not only to national governments but to others as well. Chris James Dolby Labs Inc -Original Message- From: John Juhasz [mailto:jjuh...@fiberoptions.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 3:19 PM To: 'wo...@sensormatic.com'; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Here we go . . . 'indirect' trade barrier . . . forget Class A. To whom can we directly raise our concerns (besides product trade associations)? John Juhasz Fiebr Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: wo...@sensormatic.com [ mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com ] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 7:39 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Thanks Brian. I have some very serious concerns about this draft. Art 3A, 1a: General type products appear to have to be able to function in any EMC environment including industrial. Class A type products just went out the window since the product must also be able to function in a residential environment. Annex II, A1,1: Testing immunity to DC current or voltage on AC networks Annex II, B.1: Oh great! Now we have to design so emissions are reduced as far as possible. I can just see now that we ship every system is a sealed, welded steel container. Annex II B.1.1: and B.2.1: If a standard lists several levels of emissions and immunity, the product must comply with the most severe limits. They have to be kidding! If this is the outcome of SLIM, I would hate to see the outcome of FAT! Richard Woods -- From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 4:06 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: EMC Directive revisions Ed, Richard, and everyone Following discussions in the SLIM working group, the Commission has now produced a draft of the revised EMC Directive. This is a complete rewrite, not an amendment. The major change is removal of the requirement for fixed installations to be assessed and CE marked prior to taking into service, but the possibility for investigation by enforcement authorities, should interference be caused, remains. The distinction between systems which continue to require CE marking, and fixed installations is unclear at present. It is expected that the draft will undergo further development and changes at SLIM working group meetings during this year before a draft is published for comment. I will be presenting a paper in one of the poster sessions at the EMC Symposium in Washington DC, on the latest position. Best wishes Brian Jones EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line
RE: EMC Directive revisions
Hoping this reaches the eyes. Our comments on the document: 1. In many places, the English is not idiomatic and lays stress inappropriately, often by incorrect use of the negative or of does. For instance this phenomenon needs not to be considered means it is compulsory not to consider it! Sometimes this doesn't matter; sometimes it would have legal significance. If the English text is to carry legal weight, it should be edited by a native English speaker to ensure that it does not convey the wrong meaning; the same applies of course to all the other languages. 2. In annex II section C.1 concerning documentation accompanying a product, there is the requirement that documents (presumably all of them, including instruction manuals, declarations of conformity etc. etc.) have to be available in one of the official languages of the member state where the apparatus is to be taken into service ... I understand the desirability of this for consumer goods, where it is generally followed today, but for professional equipment I think it is unnecessarily onerous. A manufacturer such as Dolby might sell only one or two samples per year of an apparatus into say Finland or Portugal, and to have to translate and print multipage documents into those languages would be uneconomic. 3. Article 5 contains a section that states: Member States shall not impede for reasons relating to electromagnetic compatibility the placing on the market and/or the taking into service for its intended use of equipment conforming to this directive. As you are well aware, states and smaller administrative areas such as cities are currently impeding installation of equipment that conforms to the present Emc and low voltage directives, despite CE marking and accompanying declarations of conformity . I suggest that this clause should be strengthened to make clear that it applies not only to national governments but to others as well. Chris James Dolby Labs Inc -Original Message- From: John Juhasz [mailto:jjuh...@fiberoptions.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 3:19 PM To: 'wo...@sensormatic.com'; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Here we go . . . 'indirect' trade barrier . . . forget Class A. To whom can we directly raise our concerns (besides product trade associations)? John Juhasz Fiebr Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: wo...@sensormatic.com [ mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com ] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 7:39 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Thanks Brian. I have some very serious concerns about this draft. Art 3A, 1a: General type products appear to have to be able to function in any EMC environment including industrial. Class A type products just went out the window since the product must also be able to function in a residential environment. Annex II, A1,1: Testing immunity to DC current or voltage on AC networks Annex II, B.1: Oh great! Now we have to design so emissions are reduced as far as possible. I can just see now that we ship every system is a sealed, welded steel container. Annex II B.1.1: and B.2.1: If a standard lists several levels of emissions and immunity, the product must comply with the most severe limits. They have to be kidding! If this is the outcome of SLIM, I would hate to see the outcome of FAT! Richard Woods -- From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 4:06 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: EMC Directive revisions Ed, Richard, and everyone Following discussions in the SLIM working group, the Commission has now produced a draft of the revised EMC Directive. This is a complete rewrite, not an amendment. The major change is removal of the requirement for fixed installations to be assessed and CE marked prior to taking into service, but the possibility for investigation by enforcement authorities, should interference be caused, remains. The distinction between systems which continue to require CE marking, and fixed installations is unclear at present. It is expected that the draft will undergo further development and changes at SLIM working group meetings during this year before a draft is published for comment. I will be presenting a paper in one of the poster sessions at the EMC Symposium in Washington DC, on the latest position. Best wishes Brian Jones EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line
RE: EMC Directive revisions
Now I am really confused!! As I understand it the EMC Directive was never intended to INSTRUCT folks what tests to run or indeed what levels etc..to demonstrate compliance. Indeed one of the statements from the SLIM was the Directive per se was just fine and that the standards etc were the real problem area. Are these messages referring to the Guidelines in meeting the EMC Directive? Has the Directive really changed? -Original Message- From: George Sparacino [mailto:george.sparac...@bostonacoustics.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 12:09 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Gentlemen..where does one get a copy of the draft for review ? -Original Message- From: John Juhasz [mailto:jjuh...@fiberoptions.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 9:19 AM To: 'wo...@sensormatic.com'; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Here we go . . . 'indirect' trade barrier . . . forget Class A. To whom can we directly raise our concerns (besides product trade associations)? John Juhasz Fiebr Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: wo...@sensormatic.com [ mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com ] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 7:39 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Thanks Brian. I have some very serious concerns about this draft. Art 3A, 1a: General type products appear to have to be able to function in any EMC environment including industrial. Class A type products just went out the window since the product must also be able to function in a residential environment. Annex II, A1,1: Testing immunity to DC current or voltage on AC networks Annex II, B.1: Oh great! Now we have to design so emissions are reduced as far as possible. I can just see now that we ship every system is a sealed, welded steel container. Annex II B.1.1: and B.2.1: If a standard lists several levels of emissions and immunity, the product must comply with the most severe limits. They have to be kidding! If this is the outcome of SLIM, I would hate to see the outcome of FAT! Richard Woods -- From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 4:06 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: EMC Directive revisions Ed, Richard, and everyone Following discussions in the SLIM working group, the Commission has now produced a draft of the revised EMC Directive. This is a complete rewrite, not an amendment. The major change is removal of the requirement for fixed installations to be assessed and CE marked prior to taking into service, but the possibility for investigation by enforcement authorities, should interference be caused, remains. The distinction between systems which continue to require CE marking, and fixed installations is unclear at present. It is expected that the draft will undergo further development and changes at SLIM working group meetings during this year before a draft is published for comment. I will be presenting a paper in one of the poster sessions at the EMC Symposium in Washington DC, on the latest position. Best wishes Brian Jones EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
RE: EMC Directive revisions
Gentlemen..where does one get a copy of the draft for review ? -Original Message- From: John Juhasz [mailto:jjuh...@fiberoptions.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 9:19 AM To: 'wo...@sensormatic.com'; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Here we go . . . 'indirect' trade barrier . . . forget Class A. To whom can we directly raise our concerns (besides product trade associations)? John Juhasz Fiebr Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: wo...@sensormatic.com [ mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com ] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 7:39 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Thanks Brian. I have some very serious concerns about this draft. Art 3A, 1a: General type products appear to have to be able to function in any EMC environment including industrial. Class A type products just went out the window since the product must also be able to function in a residential environment. Annex II, A1,1: Testing immunity to DC current or voltage on AC networks Annex II, B.1: Oh great! Now we have to design so emissions are reduced as far as possible. I can just see now that we ship every system is a sealed, welded steel container. Annex II B.1.1: and B.2.1: If a standard lists several levels of emissions and immunity, the product must comply with the most severe limits. They have to be kidding! If this is the outcome of SLIM, I would hate to see the outcome of FAT! Richard Woods -- From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 4:06 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: EMC Directive revisions Ed, Richard, and everyone Following discussions in the SLIM working group, the Commission has now produced a draft of the revised EMC Directive. This is a complete rewrite, not an amendment. The major change is removal of the requirement for fixed installations to be assessed and CE marked prior to taking into service, but the possibility for investigation by enforcement authorities, should interference be caused, remains. The distinction between systems which continue to require CE marking, and fixed installations is unclear at present. It is expected that the draft will undergo further development and changes at SLIM working group meetings during this year before a draft is published for comment. I will be presenting a paper in one of the poster sessions at the EMC Symposium in Washington DC, on the latest position. Best wishes Brian Jones EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC Directive revisions
Here we go . . . 'indirect' trade barrier . . . forget Class A. To whom can we directly raise our concerns (besides product trade associations)? John Juhasz Fiebr Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 7:39 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC Directive revisions Thanks Brian. I have some very serious concerns about this draft. Art 3A, 1a: General type products appear to have to be able to function in any EMC environment including industrial. Class A type products just went out the window since the product must also be able to function in a residential environment. Annex II, A1,1: Testing immunity to DC current or voltage on AC networks Annex II, B.1: Oh great! Now we have to design so emissions are reduced as far as possible. I can just see now that we ship every system is a sealed, welded steel container. Annex II B.1.1: and B.2.1: If a standard lists several levels of emissions and immunity, the product must comply with the most severe limits. They have to be kidding! If this is the outcome of SLIM, I would hate to see the outcome of FAT! Richard Woods -- From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 4:06 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: EMC Directive revisions Ed, Richard, and everyone Following discussions in the SLIM working group, the Commission has now produced a draft of the revised EMC Directive. This is a complete rewrite, not an amendment. The major change is removal of the requirement for fixed installations to be assessed and CE marked prior to taking into service, but the possibility for investigation by enforcement authorities, should interference be caused, remains. The distinction between systems which continue to require CE marking, and fixed installations is unclear at present. It is expected that the draft will undergo further development and changes at SLIM working group meetings during this year before a draft is published for comment. I will be presenting a paper in one of the poster sessions at the EMC Symposium in Washington DC, on the latest position. Best wishes Brian Jones EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC Directive revisions
Thanks Brian. I have some very serious concerns about this draft. Art 3A, 1a: General type products appear to have to be able to function in any EMC environment including industrial. Class A type products just went out the window since the product must also be able to function in a residential environment. Annex II, A1,1: Testing immunity to DC current or voltage on AC networks Annex II, B.1: Oh great! Now we have to design so emissions are reduced as far as possible. I can just see now that we ship every system is a sealed, welded steel container. Annex II B.1.1: and B.2.1: If a standard lists several levels of emissions and immunity, the product must comply with the most severe limits. They have to be kidding! If this is the outcome of SLIM, I would hate to see the outcome of FAT! Richard Woods -- From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 4:06 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: EMC Directive revisions Ed, Richard, and everyone Following discussions in the SLIM working group, the Commission has now produced a draft of the revised EMC Directive. This is a complete rewrite, not an amendment. The major change is removal of the requirement for fixed installations to be assessed and CE marked prior to taking into service, but the possibility for investigation by enforcement authorities, should interference be caused, remains. The distinction between systems which continue to require CE marking, and fixed installations is unclear at present. It is expected that the draft will undergo further development and changes at SLIM working group meetings during this year before a draft is published for comment. I will be presenting a paper in one of the poster sessions at the EMC Symposium in Washington DC, on the latest position. Best wishes Brian Jones EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: EMC Directive revisions
Ed, Richard, and everyone Following discussions in the SLIM working group, the Commission has now produced a draft of the revised EMC Directive. This is a complete rewrite, not an amendment. The major change is removal of the requirement for fixed installations to be assessed and CE marked prior to taking into service, but the possibility for investigation by enforcement authorities, should interference be caused, remains. The distinction between systems which continue to require CE marking, and fixed installations is unclear at present. It is expected that the draft will undergo further development and changes at SLIM working group meetings during this year before a draft is published for comment. I will be presenting a paper in one of the poster sessions at the EMC Symposium in Washington DC, on the latest position. Best wishes Brian Jones EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: EMC Directive Revisions
Ed Was this a SLIM document? Alan E Hutley nutwoo...@msn.com www.emc-journal.co.uk - Original Message - From: Price, Ed ed.pr...@cubic.com To: emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 04:17 Subject: EMC Directive Revisions I found an interesting document a few days ago. This is a draft of late 1999 revisions, actually amendments, to the EMC Directive. It looks like this will supplement, not necessarily replace, the existing Directive. Since nothing looked newer, and this is several months old, maybe this is nearly a final version. FWIW, no guarantee about the veracity of this document! I haven't read it in detail yet, but notice: 1. failure modes of which the user would not be aware 2. testing all manners of use 3. the need for an analysis The document is in the form of a 140K MS Word rtf. As I did last year with the 461E document, I'll return a copy of this EMC Directive Amendments draft by attachment to your email. (Email your request directly to me, not the list.) Ed :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):- ):-):-):-) Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):- ):-):-):-) --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC Directive Revisions
Ed, do you know what group produced this document? Richard Woods -- From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 10:17 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: EMC Directive Revisions I found an interesting document a few days ago. This is a draft of late 1999 revisions, actually amendments, to the EMC Directive. It looks like this will supplement, not necessarily replace, the existing Directive. Since nothing looked newer, and this is several months old, maybe this is nearly a final version. FWIW, no guarantee about the veracity of this document! I haven't read it in detail yet, but notice: 1. failure modes of which the user would not be aware 2. testing all manners of use 3. the need for an analysis The document is in the form of a 140K MS Word rtf. As I did last year with the 461E document, I'll return a copy of this EMC Directive Amendments draft by attachment to your email. (Email your request directly to me, not the list.) Ed :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-) Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-) --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: EMC Directive Field Testing of Large Equipments
At 4:22 PM -0500 12/18/98, Doug Frazee wrote: I would like to compile thoughts and techniques that members of this group use to perform in situ tests on large industrial apparatus. The basic protection requirements of the EMC directive state in effect that the apparatus shall not cause undue interference, and shall operate in a reasonably robust manner, in the EM environment in which it is located and operated. An analysis of potential EM threats to an EUT and potential victims of the EUT's emissions, when presented to the competent body in the TCF, can result in cases being made for using hand-held radios for RF immunity testing, radiated emissions testing outside the building housing the EUT (instead of inside where reflections and power lines distort the field), and using current probes to measure line conducted RF emissions. Tom Cokenias EMC Consultant - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: EMC Directive Field Testing of Large Equipments
Doug A bulk current injection test (MIL-STD-461D, CS114, CS115, CS116) can be considered in lieu of radiated immunity, at least up to VHF and low UHF frequencies. DB -- From: Doug Frazee[SMTP:dfra...@windermeregroup.com] Sent: Friday, December 18, 1998 1:22 PM To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' Subject: EMC Directive Field Testing of Large Equipments I would like to compile thoughts and techniques that members of this group use to perform in situ tests on large industrial apparatus. Considerations I have typically encountered include: Current draw in excess of available LISN capacity. Use CISPR voltage probe Current draw in excess of available EFT surge coupling network capacity. EFT, use 33nF cap. Surge,? 3 or 10m EUT to antenna distance not achievable and/or high ambients. Lab type radiated immunity not practical due to interference potential. Large equipments requiring multiple antenna locations or search and optimize considerations for radiated emissions. I am especially interested in potential alternate techniques for radiated immunity. Potential solutions may include ad hoc testing using actual transmitters, eg cell phones, VHF, etc. Testing at discrete frequencies of known public broadcast bands. Extended frequency conducted immunity testing. If you have thoughts or other considerations, please respond to the group. As US labs are granted CAB status, consensus on these, and other issues will be helpful. Doug Frazee Lead Compliance Engineer Windermere Military/Commercial Compliance Laboratory Annapolis, MD USA dfra...@windermeregroup.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: EMC Directive and Small DC motors
I agree with Robert, that you generally have to test your product. Especially because conducted disturbancies on the power supply lines could induce disturbancies on other signal and power supply lines in a system. Since one can expect only conducted emissions you only had to do this test ( I assume you have no electronics in your product). The costs for such a test should be less than 800$. Regards George Robert F. Martin ITS/QS-Box wrote: While it seems simple enough, the product is more than just a component. It can be considered an apparatus by EU standards because it has an intrinsic function. If the pump was restricted to a specific application, and would not work without it, you might get away without testing it. Because that is not the case, and they seem to have general purpose uses, then CE marking is appropriate if you sell into the EU. If you only sell to people (in the US) who incorporate the pumps into products which THEY sell in Europe, then any requirement for testing/marking is contractual, not regulatory. As for the problems experienced with previous testing, you should, in fact operate the motor with a battery. If the power supply was the source of the problems you had, they should go away. With regard to testing the new vendor, you are obligated to demonstrate compliance of the new motor. If you did not already follow the TCF route, it may be appropriate for you to consider it for these pumps. In that way, you may be able to do abbreviated tests when designs (or vendors) change. (TCFs do, however, generally have higher initial cost) Likewise, you may be able to do reduced tests if you add new products. Bob Martin ITS- Northeast r...@itsqs.com The opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily those of my employer. -- From: Russell, Ray To: 'IEEE PSTC' Subject: EMC Directive and Small DC motors Date: Tuesday, April 07, 1998 1:50PM Greetings, We manufacturer a small line of vacuum pumps that use very small (1/16 hp) 12, 6 and 4 VDC motors. Just a DC motor and a pump. We have had some EMC testing performed to the EN 55014 and EN 55104 standards where there was some high conducted emissions that required a .1 uf capacitor across the positive and negative terminals. But I believe this is more of an issue of the power supply source, and lead lengths than the motor. These items are considered components because they need a power supply to operate. However, they could use battery power, but I assume that there would not be an emission problem in this mode. We now have another source for motors, and I have been asked to retest. I am very reluctant to spend thousands of dollars on testing, when I personally do not understand the benefit or risk. Of course the test house highly recommends additional testing. So I come seeking some advice or alternatives. Here are some of my thoughts: Since this is a component, could we just assign a declaration of incorporation? Are there any reasonable limits to what should be tested, as far as power/frequency/application in the directives? Is there a justifiable reason to test this product? Thank you for your consideration, any thoughts would be appreciated. Ray Russell ray_russ...@gastmfg.com -- ** * Dr. Georg M. Dancau * HAUNI MASCHINENBAU AG * * g.m.dan...@ieee.org * Manager EMC Lab * * TEL: +49 40 7250 2102 * Kampchaussee 8..32 * * FAX: +49 40 7250 3801 * 21027 Hamburg, Germany * ** * home: Tel: +49 4122 99451 * Hauptstr. 60a * * Fax: +49 4122 99454 * 25492 Heist, Germany* **
RE: EMC Directive and Small DC motors
While it seems simple enough, the product is more than just a component. It can be considered an apparatus by EU standards because it has an intrinsic function. If the pump was restricted to a specific application, and would not work without it, you might get away without testing it. Because that is not the case, and they seem to have general purpose uses, then CE marking is appropriate if you sell into the EU. If you only sell to people (in the US) who incorporate the pumps into products which THEY sell in Europe, then any requirement for testing/marking is contractual, not regulatory. As for the problems experienced with previous testing, you should, in fact operate the motor with a battery. If the power supply was the source of the problems you had, they should go away. With regard to testing the new vendor, you are obligated to demonstrate compliance of the new motor. If you did not already follow the TCF route, it may be appropriate for you to consider it for these pumps. In that way, you may be able to do abbreviated tests when designs (or vendors) change. (TCFs do, however, generally have higher initial cost) Likewise, you may be able to do reduced tests if you add new products. Bob Martin ITS- Northeast r...@itsqs.com The opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily those of my employer. -- From: Russell, Ray To: 'IEEE PSTC' Subject: EMC Directive and Small DC motors List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tuesday, April 07, 1998 1:50PM Greetings, We manufacturer a small line of vacuum pumps that use very small (1/16 hp) 12, 6 and 4 VDC motors. Just a DC motor and a pump. We have had some EMC testing performed to the EN 55014 and EN 55104 standards where there was some high conducted emissions that required a .1 uf capacitor across the positive and negative terminals. But I believe this is more of an issue of the power supply source, and lead lengths than the motor. These items are considered components because they need a power supply to operate. However, they could use battery power, but I assume that there would not be an emission problem in this mode. We now have another source for motors, and I have been asked to retest. I am very reluctant to spend thousands of dollars on testing, when I personally do not understand the benefit or risk. Of course the test house highly recommends additional testing. So I come seeking some advice or alternatives. Here are some of my thoughts: Since this is a component, could we just assign a declaration of incorporation? Are there any reasonable limits to what should be tested, as far as power/frequency/application in the directives? Is there a justifiable reason to test this product? Thank you for your consideration, any thoughts would be appreciated. Ray Russell ray_russ...@gastmfg.com
Re: EMC Directive
Davide Ripamonti wrote: Dear All The EMC Directive involving any kind of electrical or electronic apparatus introduced many problems in the industry and caused the price for satisfy the quality to quite grow. But today anyone know really what percentage of producers in Europe, and especialy in Italy, met completely the Directive and append with certainty the CE mark ?? Best Regards Davide Ripamonti E-mail: tprb0...@cdc8g5.cdc.polimi.it Actually, the advent of the CE marking did not represent anything new to most global manufacturers. The old VDE CISPR 22 requirements were not unlike the present harmonized EMC standards. Many European countries required products to meet IEC 950 or their equivalent before the Low Voltage Directive. So the CE marking is mostly a difference in required documentation, not a difference in the design of the products. It is my understanding that NO ITE products may now be accepted by EU member states without CE marking attesting to cconformity with the EMC and Low Voltage Directives. George Alspaugh Lexmark International [These are only my opinions and have not been officially certified by my wife.]
Re: EMC Directive
Davide Ripamonti wrote: Dear All The EMC Directive involving any kind of electrical or electronic apparatus introduced many problems in the industry and caused the price for satisfy the quality to quite grow. But today anyone know really what percentage of producers in Europe, and especialy in Italy, met completely the Directive and append with certainty the CE mark ?? Best Regards Davide Ripamonti E-mail: tprb0...@cdc8g5.cdc.polimi.it We do. Ciao, MP -- ESAOTE S.p.A. Ing. Massimo Polignano Research Product Development Regulatory Affairs Via di Caciolle, 15 50127 Firenze - Italy Tel: ++ 39 (0)55 4229 402 Fax: ++ 39 (0)55 4223305 e-mail regr...@esaote.it
RE: EMC Directive...3
Enclosed document is third part of Guidelines on the application
of EMC Directive in Word 6.0 for Windows published by EEC DGIII
in Brussels in April 1996.
Because of the size of file, it will be posted in three pieces.
Regards,
Mirko Matejic
The Foxboro Company
begin 644 GUIDE3.DOC
MT,\1X*QN$`.P`#`/[_0!
M`0``$@$```#^``#_
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M___])P```/[___\H!08'
M`D*PP-#@\0$0```!(3
M%!46%P```!@9@```!L'0```!X`
M```?($B(P```0E)@```H```#^*0``
M`/[___\K+TN+P```#`Q,@```#,T
M-0```#8W./[_
M
M
M
M
M
M_U(`;P!O`'0`(`!%
M`X`=`!R`'D`
M```6``4`__\#``D``#`1@``
M`(838JNI+L!`P```$`$`0!#`\`;0!P`$\`8@!J
M
M`!(``@'___\`
M8@!7`\`@!D`$0`;P!C`'4`;0!E`X`=```
M@``?__
M__\$_P``
M``0```#8P```$\`8@!J`4`8P!T`%``;P!O`P`
M```6``$!`0(```#_
M``YCJG*2[`8;F,*JI+L!`-0-
M-!1`!-0-`0```/[___\#!`4!P@)@``
M``L,#0X/$/[_
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M__\!`/[_`PH``/\`0(``,``
M``!'$UI8W)OV]F=!7;W)D(#8N,!$;V-U;65N=``*35-7
M;W)D1]C`!!7;W)D+D1O8W5M96YT+C8``#L``P#^_PD`!@``
M`0$``/[_```#@$```#@
MA9_R^4]H$*N1``K)[/9,'`#```.!P```)@W`0`
M``#``0``.0!```,`(```LL`@``#0```%/=`(`
M`!8`@``@```+P```2X`(```X$`P``0```@#```3
M3`,``/__'@```@```!#
M.EQ-4T]1DE#15Q724Y73U)$7%1%35!,051%7$Y/4DU!3Y$3U0`
M```V@```$=5241%3$E.15,@3TX@5$A%($%04$Q)
M0T%424].($]($-/54Y#24P@1$E214-4259%(#@Y+S,S-B]%14,@3T8@,R!-
M05D@,3DX.2!/3B!42$4@05!04D]824U!5$E/3B!/1B!42$4@3$%74]RE90`S
MP`D$`4#``#$1```W,`
M``U00X`7@``K```
M``!``LK%X```L7@```*QK%X```L7@``
M%%9?5E\```!67P```%9?5E\```P```!B
M7P``@```Q?```N5E\68@``90```)I?FE\``!8`
M``P7P```+!?L%\```P7P```+!?L%\`
M``#\7P```+E@N6Y8```'P```-A@``0
M:$``)#X80``'@```'MB``!4SV(```T!```68@``
M``L7@```+!?```G`@``0`'`+!?
ML%\`L%\```P7P```!9B
ML%\```L7@```*QL%\`
MFE\```P7P```+!?L%\```P7P``
M`*QL%\```L7@```+!?_%\`
MP%X``#@```#X7@``7@```*QK%X```L
M7@```*QL%\```#\7P```+!?``!,L%\`
M
M``U4
M:4@;6%N=69A8W1UF5R('1A:V5S(%L;!M96%S=7)ER!N96-EW-AGDL
M(EN(]R95R('1H870@=AE(UA;G5F86-T=7)I;F@')O8V5SR!E;G-U
MF5S(!C;VUP;EA;F-E(]F('1H92!M86YU9F%C='5R960@')O9'5C=',@
Re: EMC Directive
I agree with Tony that a RAID (not RAID Array - there's no such thing!) is unlikely to be found in a residential installation, with one caveat. The RAIDs that my company produces are becoming used in an increasingly large amount by people producing digital video. Most of these people either work out of their homes or they have shops in small offices located in residential areas. The only good thing I can see from this situation is that they don't use RAID 3 or RAID 5 units. They prefer the speed they get from a RAID 0 system. Thus, we qualify our RAID 3/5 systems to class A (since they're used almost exclusively by banks, magazines, newspapers, and the sort), and our less complicated RAID 0 systems to class B for EMC. We qualify the safety of all of these systems to the various variations of the 950 standard, as required by the markets in which we sell. 60MHz systems can be problematic, especially if you're running single-ended SCSI. I hope you're not, since the 60MHz stuff has a lot of problems that are EMC and non-EMC related if you're single-ended. Are you running 60MHz interfaces on the disk drives, the RAID controller, and the host? If so, you have fewer problems than if you're mixing in fast SCSI with Ultra (should I have mentioned that word?). Well, good luck, Philip. Disk drive systems are such fun! Steve Chin FWB, Inc. Menlo Park, CA, USA steve_c...@fwb.com
RE: EMC Directive
Hi, A RAID Array is not the type of product that will turn up in a residential application. It is not under the scope of EN 60555-2. It is under the scope of the 61000-3-2 which was published in the OJ last September. That topic has pretty much been beat to death on this alias, but we could revive it and smack it around all over again (not this again!!!). This product falls squarely under the category of ITE and thus is subject to the Generic Immunity and Emissions Standards and EN55022. Depending on how you define its use environment, you can qualify it for Class A EMI with restrictions on use in the instruction manual or Class B EMI for unrestricted sale and use. Those restrictions for Class A would specifically exclude use of the product in residential environments and perhaps even exclude powering the product of power supply mains which are shared by residential users. The design considerations are not really special wrt to other ITE equipment. Of course all of the considerations on what to do to design a product with 60 MHz fundamentals within can and does fill books. Hopefully you or someone else in your company has some experience with EMI design or you may want to hire a good consultant in the design phase of the project. I think there are quite a few good ones on this alias. Regards, tony_fredriks...@netpower.com -- From: PS To: emc-pstc Subject: EMC Directive List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tuesday, April 16, 1996 5:51PM To Whom It May Concern, I got details of your forum through an e-mail transmission to one of my associates, by Ron Pickard. I would appreciate any information you may be able to supply concerning the EMC Directive, in relation to possible problem areas when developing our new enclosures for RAID porducts. The basic enclosure houses a controller (crytsals on this controller operate at 60 Mhz max.) And three 150W hot replacement PSU's. What sort of areas should we pay particluar attention to in the design? Would it be correct to state that the PSU's fall into the EN60555-2 standard? As it still seems that the EMC Directive is very vague in this country I would be glad of any information you may have available. Thanks and best regards, Philip Scott - Cork, Ireland. phi...@glenm.ie
