----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Jones" <[email protected]> > > Since each fixed installation is different in some way, it is for the > responsible person to decide what constitutes the fixed installation for > which he is responsible, but as the UK guidance says, they cannot exclude > any part of it that is within their control, unless it forms part of > another > fixed installation.
Does that mean that if I change my PC-mouse from any reason I should follow this change with some sophisticated documentation ? Are there anywhere ready to copy such documentation to not spend few hours thinking how to document the good engineering practices ? I have heard that we should protect environment (the trees (the paper) also) but it had to be a joke ;-) Regards Piotr Galka > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Haynes, > Tim > (SELEX) (UK Capability Green) > Sent: 20 July 2007 12:32 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: New EMC Directive, new standards list > > Neil, Alan, All, > > As Neil says, this legislation applies to "fixed installations". > The printer and the PC will be certified by the manufacturer, as will a > network switch, server etc. > The network that is built from all these has never been certified (and > does not need to be) but the installation must not cause interference. > > However, once the fixed installation is "identified" all the equipment > collected at that point and that can contribute to the EM > characteristics form part of that installation. > > Obviously, the standard items that you buy will be certified as normal > apparatus. Either the custom equipment, specific to the installation, > will have a performance agreed with the supplier, or what the supplier > has assessed as needed. > > The only disagreement (if there is any) is where Neil refers to the > intent to control interference from "built-in plant". > > I do not see where the UK Regulations, or the Directive, limit the scope > of the responsible person's responsibility only to those portions of the > installation that contain "built-in plant". For instance, not all the > commercial test equipment, assembled as a system that is specific to the > needs of the manufacturer, that has been created by the manufacturer, is > allowed to cause interference. How many times has it been said that > CE+CE does not equal CE? > > What is the point in making a person responsible for the "built-in" > equipment and not the rest of the potentially interfering devices that > are bought together? Remember a fixed installation means "a particular > combination of several types of apparatus and, where applicable, other > devices, which are assembled, installed and intended to be used > permanently at a pre-defined location" > > I think that the "several types of apparatus" neatly catches everything > that falls within the boundary of the fixed installation. > > Anyone else with an interpretation? > > > Regards > Tim > 6239 > desk A1S77 > P Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Barker, > Neil > Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 11:49 AM > To: Hudson, Alan (BAE Systems) (UK); [email protected] > Subject: RE: New EMC Directive, new standards list > > *** WARNING *** > > This mail has originated outside your organization, > either from an external partner or the Global Internet. > Keep this in mind if you answer this message. > > Alan, > > This part of the legislation affects 'fixed installations', not movable > equipment such as printers and PCs, which will be compliant in their own > right. It is intended to control interference from built-in plant and > machinery, IT networks and such like. In other words it is concerned > with > the equipment that is fixed in the premises and not capable of being > completely assessed prior to installation. The intent is to promote good > practice in the construction and installation of such equipment. > The good practices may include such aspects as construction of > enclosures, > provision of filtering, separation of power and data cables, shielding > of > power and data cables, earthing and bonding, etc.. The requirement is > simply > that these good practices are both considered and documented as evidence > of > due diligence. > > Best regards > > Neil R. Barker CEng MIET HonFSEE MIEEE > Manager > Quality Engineering > e2v technologies (uk) ltd > 106 Waterhouse Lane > Chelmsford > Essex CM1 2QU > UK > > Tel: (+44) 1245 453616 > Fax: (+44) 1245 453571 > Mob: (+44) 7801 723735 > > P Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hudson, Alan (UK) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 20 July 2007 10:35 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: New EMC Directive, new standards list > > > Brian Jones wrote: >> If you are based in the EEA and change your fixed installations > (offices, factories, etc.) >> from today in a way that may affect the electromagnetic compatibility, > you must appoint a >> responsible person and document the good engineering practices > involved in the change (not the whole installation). > > > Out of (more than passing) interest - why do you think it affects > offices and factories? (Apart from the obvious need for a factory/office > not to interfere with local services, passing aircraft, etc - but that > was always the case anyway.) > > Is there some particular wording of the Directive or Regulations that > implies factories & offices are included? Let's face it - bringing in > one new printer or PC for your office affects the factory/office EMC > "profile", and if every office is going to have to document simple > things like that it is going to cost industry a fortune! > > Almost all EU Directives are aimed at products for a free market, and > making sure they are up to the job. I find it hard to believe that the > Directive was intended to include industry's factories and offices, > especially considering the costs that will be invoked. > > Hmmm? > > Alan > > BAE Systems > > Sent by E2V TECHNOLOGIES PLC or a member of the E2V group of companies. > A > company registered in England and Wales. Company number: 04439718. > Registered address: 106 Waterhouse Lane, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 2QU, 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 > > > SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems Limited > Registered Office: Sigma House, Christopher Martin Road, Basildon, Essex > SS14 3EL > A company registered in England & Wales. Company no. 02426132 > ******************************************************************** > This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended > recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. > You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or > distribute its contents to any other person. > ******************************************************************** > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 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 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 ______________________________________________________________________
