That is how we might deal with "CE+CE isn't CE." However, any derivative standard we may produce is 1) peculiar to own firm(s) and 2) lacks the force of law.
If your firm is called, say, "Verizon" -- grin! -- you can impose standards on an entire industry, but "Widget Works Work Rule 1(b)EMC" cuts no ice with people who don't _really_ need the business. Cortland Richmond Ken Javor wrote >> Assuming that a conducted emission test still will be levied, that requires the kind of derivative limit and isolation requirement I suggested below. Plus, you are now dependent on how clean the power supply is, instead of using a laboratory grade power supply. > From: "Sterner, David [S&FS]" <[email protected]> > [SNIPPED] > Why not test with the USB device connected to a USB hub and regard the > PC as AUX EQUIPMENT. - 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 [email protected] Instructions: 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: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
