John, thanks for that update. Now I have to wonder if I am testing our ITE
correctly. We have an ITE that has a thermostat and heater for outdoor use.
We have been testing the heating circuit to the click requirements of EN
55014-1. However, it would appear that one could reverse the CENELEC
reasoning and say that primary function determines the standard to be used -
in this case it would be EN55022 - and the clicks from the heating circuit
would not be evaluated. Strange.
Richard Woods
----------
From: John Woodgate [SMTP:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:41 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Testing for the EMC directive
I read in !emc-pstc that wo...@sensormatic.com wrote (in
<EDFA411E5E4AD2
118D6F00A0C99E4BAC0386B0B5@FLBOCEXU02>) about 'Testing for the EMC
directive', on Thu, 16 Aug 2001:
>It is confusing. Yes, the scope of EN 55014-2 does say it applies
to
>equipment even if it contains electronic circuits. But the scope of
EN
>55014-1 says that the present standard applies "unless the rf
energy is
>intentionally generated".
That means 'intentionally to USE the r.f.'. In that case, EN55011
applies, not EN55022.
>The scope goes on to say that the separate parts
>of the equipment such as motors and switching devices are subject
to EN
>55014-1. Thus, equipment with motors / switching devices are
subject to EN
>55014-1 and the rf circuits are subject to EN 55022
EN55022 DOES NOT apply. A battery charger is not within its scope.
This
point was settled officially (but, one would have thought,
unnecessarily) a long time ago. The Irish standards body asked
CENELEC
whether a washing machine containing a microprocessor was ITE or
not.
The official answer was that 'Function determines the applicable
standard. A washing machine is a washing machine and the standards
for
washing machines [which happen to be EN55014-1-and -2] apply.'
> and the complete device
>is subject to EN55014-2. I guess one could argue that it is
sufficient to
>reference EN 55014-1 and EN55022 on the DoC instead of EN 50081-1.
Either
>way works for me since EN 50081-1 just points to the other
documents.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Eat mink and be dreary!
-------------------------------------------
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:
Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org
Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net
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.rcic.com/ click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"
-------------------------------------------
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:
Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org
Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net
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.rcic.com/ click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"
