In classification for CISPR 11, one should consider whether the RF energy is intended to perform a function related to the intended use of the device. For Group 1 the RF energy is "necessary for internal functioning of the equipment ", which implies that any external RF radiation would be unintentional. While the Group 2 definition specifies "treatment of material", it can be appropriate in many other cases where RF energy is intentionally generated to perform the equipment function. For an NMR diagnostic device, I think that a good case can be made that the device should be Group 2.
Lyle Luttrell Luttrell & Associates -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> List-Post: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, June 30, 1998 11:47 AM Subject: NMR device classification > > > >We have some trouble about the classification according to CISPR 11 of a >diagnostic NMR device. In my opinion the radio frequency energy is NOT >genereted for treatment of material (human body). This condition applies >only to therapy equipment that produce some change in the body. For that >reason this is a group 1 device. Someone else disagree with me, of course. >Does anybody have any opinion or experience about the matter?. >Thanks. >------------------------------------------------------- >ESAOTE S.p.A. Massimo Polignano >Research & Product Development Regulatory Affairs >Via di Caciolle,15 tel:+39.055.4229402 >I- 50127 Florence fax:+39.055.4223305 > e-mail: [email protected] >
