In situ always requires a TCF showing the absolute necessity not to use a standardized setup, isn't it ?
Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen, BSc Owner EMC-Experts LinkeIn group +4000 members. Van: Crane, Lauren [mailto:[email protected]] Verzonden: Thursday, October 17, 2013 6:36 PM Aan: [email protected] Onderwerp: [PSES] Would "in situ" testing be considered OATS FAR SAC TEM or other? In a previous thread I noted EN 61000-6-4:2007 now had A1:2011 as the cited reference for EMCD presumption of conformity. I was trying to understand if this "absolutely" meant retesting of products conforming to EN 61000-6-2:2007 was needed. The sage advice I got from the group was 1. The EMCD does have an explicit obligation in the essential requirements to keep up with the "state of the art", so a rev in standards used to demonstrate conformance has potential impact. 2. HOWEVER, if the rev is not relevant to the EUT, then there is no reason to retest. Doing a fine point analysis on A1, among a few other small changes, the big change is in the test requirements for the enclosure port. Recalling FAR = Full Anechoic Room OATS = Open Area Test Sight SAC = Semi-Anechoic Chamber TEM = Transvers Electromagnetic Mode Prior to A1, the spec was for OATS or SAC test sites, 30 to 1000 MHz. After A1, different limits were added for FAR and TEM in the 30 to 1000 MHz range, and OATS, SAC and FAR (but not TEM) were also given limits in the 1 to 6 GHz range. My question is now...If there was an equipment tested in situ (because of its size) prior to A1, has A1 introduced new criteria? Is "in situ" equivalent to FAR, OATS, SAC, or TEM? If in situ testing is not the same as OATS, SAC and FAR testing, then the A1 changes do not appear relevant. Looking forward to your ideas..... Regards, Lauren Crane KLA-Tencor - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 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]>
