Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen I object…. >You don't HAVE to do any testing at all. What you have to do is decide >what tests YOU need to do to be sure that your product meets the >Essential Requirements of the Directive. You may well decide that you do >need to apply EN 55022 and EN 55024 in respect of the data port. While theoretically correct, that conclusion is too academic, and the 1st phrase is suggestive. In a world where many malfunctions in equipment are caused by EMC and a lot of serious accidents with "equipment" smell like EMC, we as experts need not to discourage manufacturers to seek real compliance. (Not even UK based experts ;<)) In my practice of emc-consultant I found much too much examples of equipment that carry the CE-mark but do not comply, sometimes without the need for me to test. Only this week I came over a set of power supplies in a medical environment that emitted that much conducted interference that nearby ECG-like equipment was disturbed by the CM voltage. This is a power supply delivered with a piece of Medical equipment, often used in conjunction with such equipment. I suppose John, that this manufacturer read your 1st phrase only, and then just purchased ce-labels. The situation is bad enough as it is, and with (in Europe) with the new UHF band to be used for wireless mobile internet, a whole new interference opportunity is created. The EMCD in the previous version required compliance to a harmonized standard only, and the manufacturer only needed to be compliant (if cougth) to fullfil all requirements, the way he achieved that was irrelevant. The EMCD in the latest version requires compliance to a harmonized standard AND (written) proof of that compliance to obtain presumption of compliance with the essential requirements to. If that proof is not obtained by testing, I cannot think of many cases but the well known and obvious light bulb, where a test can be skipped for physical reasons. OR Creating Presumption of compliance any other way, which in practice comes down to creating a similar test suite to the generic standards set with exceptions based on knowledge of the product and written argumentation of that. In addition you need to consider if there is any EM phenomena that you might have overlooked up to 400 GHz. Of all new equipment brought to our lab 95-99 % is initially NON-compliant. For US customers we test for that has been 100%. Only recurring customers achieve better rates. [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ce-test, qualified testing bv www.cetest.nl Kiotoweg 363 3047 BG Rotterdam T 31(0)104152426 F 31(0)104154953 Before printing, think about the environment. Van: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Namens John Woodgate Verzonden: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 7:27 AM Aan: [email protected] Onderwerp: Re: CISPR 11 & CISPR 22 In message <5AA25764446A4A7296F2174FC6877C0C@christopher>, dated Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Chris Wells <[email protected]> writes: >I have an industrial product that has fallen under CISPR 11 but now has >an Ethernet port. > >Do I need to test to both? Looking at competitors documentations that >is what they appear to be doing. You don't HAVE to do any testing at all. What you have to do is decide what tests YOU need to do to be sure that your product meets the Essential Requirements of the Directive. You may well decide that you do need to apply EN 55022 and EN 55024 in respect of the data port. > > > >My product also has many different field circuits. > >For CISPR 22 does each circuit group need a LISN or just the Ethernet >port and the power supply when testing? Again, you have to decide. It seems to me that you need to connect these ports to auxiliary equipments or to suitable dummy loads. I'm not sure that LISNs are appropriate for such circuits. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK If at first you don't succeed, delegate. But I support unbloated email http://www.asciiribbon.org/ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]> - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]>
