Mr. Woodgate, I don't know the specifics of EN61326, however, I thought the purpose of the EMC Directive was to ensure the quality of "goods" imported to the EU. Why should one class of "goods" be exempt while other are not? Why should generic "goods" be exempt, while test equipment is not? As for your comment about not buying the goods, isn't that the reason behind the EMC Directive? Such that "Joe Blog" shouldn't have to worry about what he buys provided it has the CE mark. The United States has the process of let the consumer find the err in their ways. As I understand, they have Wal-Mart too... Kind regards, Ashworth
John Woodgate <[email protected]> wrote: In message <08bfa5ada9462e4f96e4a31a270fc86b03b88...@usa0300ms02.na.xerox.net>, dated Wed, 28 Mar 2007, "Spencer, David H" writes: >Can anyone explain the immunity performance criteria for (or the >rational behind) EN61326. It's probably the same principle as applied in EN 55103-2. Products are so diverse, and the applications of a particular product may vary widely, that any numerical immunity requirements would be useless. >Unlike EN55024, which gives specific levels for a product, EN61326 >Table 2 gives "examples" of how to apply the performance criteria. >Furthermore, the manufacture must only provide the performance >criteria to the user upon request. Well, the user who is concerned about immunity should do just that. The provision is just to save the manufacturer sending out copies of the information that are just thrown away. If the information had always to be supplied, there would be pressure to minimize the amount. As it is, there is no reason why comprehensive information should not be supplied. For this sort of product, the user is expected to be technically aware, and able to compare the immunity requirements in his/her particular application with the performance stated by the manufacturer. Products to which IEC 61326 applies may be operated in all sorts of unusual, extreme and rare EMC environments. > >The generic immunity standard is more stringent than this. The Generics assume that the users are EMC-naive. It would clearly be wrong to assume otherwise. > >A company could choose, provided there is no damage to the product >during immunity testing and the emissions requirements are met, declare >compliance with EN61326. It could. Whether anyone would buy it, it another matter. -- 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 [email protected] 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 [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 John Woodgate <[email protected]> wrote: In message <08bfa5ada9462e4f96e4a31a270fc86b03b88...@usa0300ms02.na.xerox.net>, dated Wed, 28 Mar 2007, "Spencer, David H" writes: >Can anyone explain the immunity performance criteria for (or the >rational behind) EN61326. It's probably the same principle as applied in EN 55103-2. Products are so diverse, and the applications of a particular product may vary widely, that any numerical immunity requirements would be useless. >Unlike EN55024, which gives specific levels for a product, EN61326 >Table 2 gives "examples" of how to apply the performance criteria. >Furthermore, the manufacture must only provide the performance >criteria to the user upon request. Well, the user who is concerned about immunity should do just that. The provision is just to save the manufacturer sending out copies of the information that are just thrown away. If the information had always to be supplied, there would be pressure to minimize the amount. As it is, there is no reason why comprehensive information should not be supplied. For this sort of product, the user is expected to be technically aware, and able to compare the immunity requirements in his/her particular application with the performance stated by the manufacturer. Products to which IEC 61326 applies may be operated in all sorts of unusual, extreme and rare EMC environments. > >The generic immunity standard is more stringent than this. The Generics assume that the users are EMC-naive. It would clearly be wrong to assume otherwise. > >A company could choose, provided there is no damage to the product >during immunity testing and the emissions requirements are met, declare >compliance with EN61326. It could. Whether anyone would buy it, it another matter. -- 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 [email protected] 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 [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 _____ Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43909/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail> and always stay connected <http://us.rd.yah o.com/evt=43909/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail> to friends. - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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/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 ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
