As we all know, compliance to emissions and immunity standards do not guarantee electrical equipment won't interfere will each other. But you have to draw the line somewhere, and the experts to-be has done so with the goal of trying to minimize interference without over burdening the industry.
As a manufacturer you have to look not only at what is required to legally sell your product into different markets, but you have to look at the environments your products are used and how they are used. If interference is likely then you must take that into consideration and design your products accordingly. This is why manufacturers are required to do both a "Conformity Assessment" (what is required to meet the legal or market requirements) as well as an "EMC Compatibility Assessment" (what is takes for you product to play well with EE in the environments and conditions your product is likely to be used). If such conditions requires your product to emit lower emissions or to be tested at higher immunity levels, then that is what the manufacturer is required to do. I believe most (I hope) companies perform at least some of the EMC tests at stricter levels than what is required by the market for sales. It all depends on the product and what issues it might have in the environments and conductions your products are used in. A good example is where the air conditioner blower motor controller interfered with the stereo system in a combine (yes, those farmers like their tunes). Individually, both systems passed the required EMC tests, but when used in close proximity they interfered with each other. Who is to blame? Small hand held electronic devices can find themselves right next to other such devices in purses, backpacks, etc. but we still expect them to work correctly. Our company sells products uses near coal mines which could be located hundreds of miles from the nearest city and often generate their own power. We test our power supplies at much strictly levels for surges, brown out, and drop out conditions. Safety wise, in such locations, medical help could be hours if not days way, so additional design considerations are made to avoid injuries way beyond what is required by safety standards and local codes and regulations. Bottom line, I believe that the future of EMC testing will be similar to Safety. Manufactures of EE will need to do an EMC Compatibility Assessment of their products and justify the EMC test levels their products will need to be tested to based on environment and conditions of use. It is really like that now but most companies just test to whatever levels are required for the market. Most of the time, this is adequate but for those products where it is not, the current system does addresses this. The Other Brian From: Ghery S. Pettit [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 8:11 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment John, Good points and questions. Sounds like a good discussion for CISPR H. Without interference complaints being noted by regulators and reported to CISPR there would have to be a significant research project to see if the existing limits are adequate. I'm not aware of interference complaints due to inadequate limits in CISPR 22 or CISPR 32, but that doesn't mean that there aren't problems out there. As far as immunity test levels are concerned, there are valid arguments calling for higher test levels for certain tests. I haven't seen any proposals for higher test levels in CISPR 24 or CISPR 35, but that doesn't mean that such a push couldn't happen in the future. However, unless there are field failures due to perceived inadequate test levels, I don't see there being any significant efforts to raise the test levels. Do you have data that would impact this work in the future? Ghery S. Pettit From: John Allen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 3:16 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment Oh, and one other thing, I sometimes ponder is whether some of the immunity withstand limits (especially for radiated and conducted RF) for Class B equipment are higher enough for the "modern world" ,because: - Modern dwellings, especially in Europe and the Far East, are much smaller and more closely crowded together than they were 30-40 years ago, and so emission/immunity limits based on 10m (33 ft!) distances are now often totally unrealistic (many people live in dwellings where 10m is the distance to the next but one dwelling - not the next)! - There are vastly larger numbers of electronic products in many urban environments than there were then, and thus the cumulative electronic noise levels must be much higher now than then; - The frequency spectra of those devices is much wider now (all the way up to 5GHz+ - and rising!) than it was then! "Informed" opinions on the above would be interesting! John Allen W.London, UK From: John Allen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 08 December 2015 22:41 To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment On the issue of the "residential" environment, I think that whole issue is now becoming very blurred in reality with the (at least in the UK) trend to using former industrial buildings for residential use - as well as the more general diffusion of the physical barriers between residential and industrial premises, because what can now really be defined as one or the other now that businesses are being located in what would generally be considered as "residential locations" (at least in the "developed" countries)? Personally, I think that only equipment specifically intended for "totally heavy industrial machinery/installations" should be Class A - and "everything else" should be Class B. John Allen W.London, UK From: Ronald Pickard [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 08 December 2015 19:32 To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment Hi Ian, The "residential" environment is generally understood to be the household/domestic environments where humans typically "reside". With that said and further into EN 55032 clause 4, there is a subtle and a bit of a loose Class B definition: "The Class B requirements are intended to offer adequate protection to broadcast services within the residential environment." Such residential broadcast services would typically include radio and television for personal consumption, and possibly including Wi-Fi now-a days. And, I'm not sure what "adequate protection" actually means in this case, but given Ghery's statement below, I doubt that it will get any more definitive. Best regards, Ron Pickard Regulatory Compliance Engineer Compound Photonics D | +1 (602) 883-8039 From: Ghery S. Pettit [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 12:00 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment Disclaimer - While I am the Vice Chairman of CISPR I, the following is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Chairman or other members of CISPR I, its working groups, national committees or IEC HQ. That said... I don't recall seeing Gert at CISPR I meetings, nor CISPR I WG2 (emissions) or CISPR I WG4 (immunity) meetings (he isn't a member of either WG). If he were present, he would know that the reason such regulatory statements are not in CISPR standards such as CISPR 22, 24 or 32 is that CISPR standards may not contain regulatory statements. Defining which products must meet Class A or Class B limits is up to regulators. There as even been discussion about the "legality" of the Class A warning label in CISPR 22 and 32. CISPR 32 does have language that gives guidance to help the user of the standard properly apply it, but a regulator is free to ignore or change this at their discretion. So, to say that CISPR I has been "notorious" is a bit of a stretch, in my opinion. There has been no serious work done to have two different immunity levels in CISPR 24 or 35 as it has not been felt to be needed. Join your national committee (or contact it) and make a proposal if you feel that such additional test levels would be warranted. A persuasive argument would be given a fair hearing. Be aware that any new requirements will take years to incorporate into a standard. Remember, CISPR I has been trying to get CISPR 35 published for nearly 15 years as it is, but feel free to make a proposal for an amendment to add different test levels for Class A products. Just remember, we've gotten along well with single limits in CISPR 24 since it was originally published in 1997, so a convincing argument will be needed. Ghery S. Pettit Vice Chairman, CISPR SC I From: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 9:55 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment 1. Independent of the standards, the EMC directive requires marking on typeplate and/or documentation if an equipment is non-residential. 2. Unwilling standards committees have been "reluctant" in including the definitions in written in their standards. CISPR I has been notorious in these for years, by not even defining Class A for immunity (CISPR 24). There are ample standards and EC documents giving an appropriate definitions, in general something like: If it is predominantly used for households or is connected to a residentially used power newtwork the equipment will be residential or often said "Class B". If connected to a private power network then it should be Industrial or "Class A". One standard that comes to mind that gives a good description including examples is EN 61326-1:2013. An EC document TC210/Sec0515/INF from 2007 addresses the topic in full and includes the recommendation to include a common definition in all harmonized standards. Gert Gremmen Van: Bill Stumpf [mailto:[email protected]] Verzonden: dinsdag 8 december 2015 14:38 Aan: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Onderwerp: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment Ian, There is no definition of "residential" environment in the standard or the EMC Guide. For reference, the FCC classifies products into consumer (Class B) and non-consumer (Class A) categories. In Europe the manufacturer has a similar responsibility to make a product that meets the EMC requirements appropriate for the intended use of the product. For some products it is more or less up to the end user to determine if a Class A or Class B compliant product is appropriate. You will find the Class A warning statement in the EN 55032 standard, Clause 7. Class A equipment shall have the following warning in the instructions for use, to inform the user of the risk of operating this equipment in a residential environment: W arning: This equipment is compliant with Class A of CISPR 32. In a residential environment this equipment may cause radio interference. Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc. 166 South Carter Street Genoa City WI 53128 Ph: 262-279-0210 From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:55 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment Dear colleagues In the 2015 edition of EN 55032 an interesting statement in clause 4. "Equipment intended primarily for use in a residential environment shall meet the class B limits. All other equipment shall comply with the Class A limits." I am unable to locate a definition for residential environment in the standard. Does anyone know of an official definition? Would sports stadia, theatres, hospitals, commercial industrial estates located in residential housing be included in residential environments? If the product is Class A, is the warning notice still required? "Warning. This is a Class A product. In a domestic environment this product may cause radio interference in which case the user may be required to take adequate measures." This used to be a requirement in EN 55022. Many thanks in advance. Ian McBurney Design & Compliance Engineer. Allen & Heath Ltd. Kernick Industrial Estate, Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK T: 01326 372070 E: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Allen & Heath Ltd is a registered business in England and Wales, Company number: 4163451. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of the company. - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. Thank you. - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> ________________________________ 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. 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]>
