Thanks to all. Your comments were greatly appreciated and helpful. The Other Brian
________________________________ From: Martin, Charles R (GE EntSol, SensInsp) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 6:25 PM To: Kunde, Brian; [email protected] Subject: RE: Deviation of Performance Criteria Hi Brian, I agree with you, I don't see any other statements. Table 2 "evaluation of immunity test results" notes possible combinations of device function, phenomenon and performance criteria. This has been removed in EN 61326-1:2006 and the performance criteria has been added to the immunity test requirements tables for each port and phenomenon. Thanks, Charlie Martin ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kunde, Brian Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:24 PM To: Ted Eckert; [email protected] Subject: RE: Deviation of Performance Criteria As Doug mentioned in his email, the allowance of deviations appear to have been removed in the 2006 version of the EN 61326-1 standard which I believe becomes mandatory in February 2009. Can anyone else confirm this or is there some other statement in the 2006 version that I’m not seeing that allows the deviation? Thanks, The Other Brian ________________________________ From: Ted Eckert [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:53 PM To: Kunde, Brian; [email protected] Subject: RE: Deviation of Performance Criteria As I read EN 61326, it allows the manufacturer to specify the performance criteria for each test. The standard only requires that equipment shall not become dangerous or unsafe as a result of the application of the tests. Table 2 is only an example of evaluation of immunity test results. The note states “…performance criteria B and/or C may be accepted provided that both the specification and the test report highlight such deviation(s) for the relevant combination(s) of function and test.” The standard does require that the deviations be listed in the specifications in addition to the test report. If the published specifications do not describe the deviations, the manufacturer may be considered in noncompliance with the standard. If they have declared compliance via the standard, this could be an issue. If the manufacturer has chosen not to use the standards route but claims compliance with the essential requirements of the directive, you may have an argument if the peripheral is not suitable for its intended use because of the deviation. I agree with David Spencer; you are the customer and the vendor needs to meet your requirements if they want you to buy their products. Ted Eckert Compliance Engineer Microsoft Corporation [email protected] The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 9:59 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Deviation of Performance Criteria Greetings Compliance Experts. Something disturbing came across my desk today I thought I would get your opinion on it. On a CE marked peripheral we buy/sell as part of our laboratory equipment system, failed several immunity tests when we tested it as part of our system. When we notified the peripheral's manufacturer of the problem (yes, I'm being purposely vague) they said the failures were ok and sent us a "Certificate of Compliance" by a very very well know compliance lab with the following statement: Snip EMC Immunity: EN 61326-1:1997/A1:1998/A2:2001 EMC requirements for Electrical equipment for measurement, control, and laboratory use. - General Use for the following test with deviation of performance criteria to Criteria "C" instead of "B". EN 61000-4-2 EN 61000-4-3 EN 61000-4-4 Unsnip The peripheral manufacture said the EMC test lab told them they can put the CE marking on their product as long as they included the above deviation statement in their documentation and DOC. Is this true or was there some kind of miscommunication between the test lab and the peripheral manufacturer? With this line of thinking, our test lab will not have to fail anything in the future; just pass it with a deviation in the requirements. (just kidding). Thanks to all for your opinion. The Other Brian _________________________ LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. - 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 _________________________ LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. - 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 _________________________ LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. - 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
