27
858-485-2537 - phone
858-485-3788 - fax (unattended)
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 3:23 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual constituant
chassis
In message ,
to:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John
Woodgate
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 3:23 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
In message ,
dated Fri, 30 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
wri
In message ,
dated Fri, 30 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes:
>Custom or not. It's the same.
>CE marking applies also to single items to its full extend. The word
>"custom" is not mentioned in the guide, nor "rack".
>
>From the Guide to 2004/108/EC :
What you hav
In message ,
dated Fri, 30 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes:
>I'd prefer not to refer to Guides to
>withdrawn directives. Not in general,
>nor in this specific case.
>
>The term installation has been removed.
>The choice now is:
>
>Apparatus or
>Fixed Installation
n: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens John Woodgate
Verzonden: Friday, October 30, 2009 9:35 AM
Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
In message , dated Fri, 30 Oct 2009,
John Woodgate writes:
>My ad
..@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Verzonden: Friday, October 30, 2009 9:14 AM
Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
CC: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
In message ,
dated Fri, 30 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified
In message , dated Fri, 30 Oct 2009,
John Woodgate writes:
>My advice refers to **custom assemblies**, NOT single items of
>commerce, which must be tested for EMC and safety as a whole, as I have
>said many times.
Maybe it would help if you looked at 6.5.2 of the Guidelines to the
former EMC
In message ,
dated Fri, 30 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes:
>
>Please all, be aware that this is a grey area in regulations in the EC
>and I must all advice you to be careful when just assemble piles of
>equipment in a rack, and put that on the EC market.
AGAI
's
customers to any avoidable risk.
Gert Gremmen
Ce-test, qualified testing
Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens John Woodgate
Verzonden: vrijdag 30 oktober 2009 8:01
Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant
In message <380-2200910429224138...@earthlink.net>, dated Thu, 29 Oct
2009, Cortland Richmond writes:
>Willful ignorance -- choosing to ignore a fact one knew or should have
>known -- is far from being a defense when questioned on compliance
>matters. Would the choice not to test for combined
Jim et al,
I have been following this with a certain fascination.
Willful ignorance -- choosing to ignore a fact one knew or should have known
-- is far from being a defense when questioned on compliance matters. Would
the choice not to test for combined leakage current in a medical device ren
In message
<690230e9cf51aa4ebf639fae9216d5b166e...@mer2-exchrec1.echostar.com>,
dated Thu, 29 Oct 2009, "Grasso, Charles"
writes:
>There IS a difference between the two scenarios that you lay out John.
>On the one hand you (or your company) assembles a number of products
>into a rack for a s
) 303-706-5467
(c) 303-204-2974
(t) 3032042...@vtext.com
(e) charles.gra...@echostar.com
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John M
Woodgate
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 4:24 AM
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: Re: certifying overall produc
In message <006401ca58b8$1b179ec0$5146dc40$@com>, dated Thu, 29 Oct
2009, Dennis Ward writes:
>However, if a company has this great little idea of selling the same 5
>PCs and 5 cell phones devices connected all together in a 'rack', it is
>extremely naïve of them to think that just because one
2009 1:21 AM
To: John Woodgate; EMC-PSTC
Subject: RE: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual constituant
chassis
It doesn't matter if I agree, as it's technically not true.
The EMC behavior will NOT be the same
and in case of 4 identical equipments, having an emission
spect
t.-ID:
DE 127472241
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John M Woodgate
Sent: Donnerstag, 29. Oktober 2009 11:24
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual constituant
chassis
In message ,
"ce-test, qualified testing bv
In message ,
"ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes
>
>If you (John) as a private person will do that, there is no problem,
>buy a rack or cupboard from Ikea: it's the same.
>
>But if you ask a company to assemble such as
>system (custom made) and sells it to you (independent of
products vs. certifying individual constituant
chassis
In message
<690230e9cf51aa4ebf639fae9216d5b166e...@mer2-exchrec1.echostar.com>,
dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009, "Grasso, Charles"
writes:
>What changes is if the four identical pieces are sold as a system and
>now - as a system
amens John Woodgate
Verzonden: Thursday, October 29, 2009 7:04 AM
Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
In message , dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009,
John Woodgate writes:
>>The EU - for quite a while - has had the opinion tha
c-p...@ieee.org] Namens John Woodgate
Verzonden: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:01 PM
Aan: EMC-PSTC
Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
In message ,
dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes:
>>&
In message , dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009,
John Woodgate writes:
>>The EU - for quite a while - has had the opinion that CE+CE does NOT =
>>CE (necessarily).
>>
>>This is a very perplexing question!
>
>No, it isn't. The principles were established LONG ago: they just
>haven't penetrated, a situation
In message
<690230e9cf51aa4ebf639fae9216d5b166e...@mer2-exchrec1.echostar.com>,
dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009, "Grasso, Charles"
writes:
>What changes is if the four identical pieces are sold as a system and
>now - as a system - need to comply with the EU standards.
>
>The EU - for quite a while - h
: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
In message ,
dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes:
>>>Not true for identical equipment.
>
>>Please cite the standard or regulation that supports that
In message ,
dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes:
>>>Not true for identical equipment.
>
>>Please cite the standard or regulation that supports that opinion.
>
>If it were valid for a rack of equipment, then that configuration would
>have been part of
multiple equipment in a rack are not tested it is not to be
considered as true.
Gert
Van: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Verzonden: woensdag 28 oktober 2009 8:31
Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
CC: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. c
In message ,
dated Wed, 28 Oct 2009, "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen"
writes:
>
>Not true for identical equipment.
Please cite the standard or regulation that supports that opinion.
>Any single product was tested as a single equipment and interaction in
>the close field between
alified testing bv
Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens John Woodgate
Verzonden: woensdag 28 oktober 2009 7:15
Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
In message <463247.69084...@web112009.mail.gq1.
In message <463247.69084...@web112009.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>, dated Tue, 27
Oct 2009, peter merguerian writes:
>
>For EMI, I know the physics tto ebeaches us that CE + CE does NOT equal
>CE (i.e. one compliant chassis combined with another compliant chassis
>does not assure a compliant combinati
Regarding the product safety issue, I have found there are five concerns:
1. Enclosure - rarely the rack has been relied on for enclosure of
(recognized) products.
2. Stability - predictable with measurement data but its easier to directly
test
3. Temperature - a difficult problem to predict. Compo
Hello Jim,
See below
--- On Tue, 10/27/09, Knighten, Jim L wrote:
From: Knighten, Jim L
Subject: certifying overall products vs. certifying individual
constituant chassis
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Cc: "Rowson, Stuart"
Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 2:
I have not done systems that are as physically big or as yours, but this
is how we have danced at the 'component vs systems' party. If you have
data that indicates each combination of boxen has unique performance, then
you must certify at system, so you ignore the following.
1. Provide, to marketi
In message
,
dated Tue, 27 Oct 2009, "Knighten, Jim L"
writes:
>I get increasing pressure internally (economically driven) to declare
>product certification done if all the constituent chassis are compliant
>and certified.
In Europe, the position is, or ought to be, fairly clear. If these a
32 matches
Mail list logo
