Hello,

 

I think you're possibly correct, but I also see that happening regularly
with the attempts to squeeze more users into the finite amount of spectrum.

 

A long time ago now, the decision was made that "effective use of spectrum"
in the EU RED would mean that all radios have receiver performance tests,
and in many cases some additional 'spectrum sharing' (like the adaptivity we
see in the WLAN standards, or low duty cycle requirements).

It was then decided that part of the solution to this requirement was the
addition of the receiver tests.

 

This is one of the main reasons why a test report used as compliance for
article 3.2 of the R&TTE Directive, is not sufficient for compliance against
article 3.2 of the RE Directive.   Simply, there are new test cases added
for the RED, that did not exist under the R&TTED.   The receiver tests.

And FM radio receivers (and other broadcast receivers, such as television)
are within scope of the RED.

(They were specifically excluded from the R&TTED, but they are not excluded
from the RED).

 

A few years ago, the FCC made significant changes to their Part 90 rules in
some frequency bands.   'Narrowbanding' was one of the terms used.   They
basically phased out the use of channels which are "wider than they need to
be".   For example, if you used a 25 kHz channel for a simple voice call
which could be done in 6.25 kHz or 12.5 kHz, then you were no longer
permitted to use the 25 kHz channel.   It was phased out over a few years
and now it's just not permitted.

I think it's all part of looking at how people use the spectrum.

 

You could say that this is an example of manufacturers being forced to use a
modulation scheme which is most efficient.

 

To quote (almost) the phrase which was used during the creation of the WLAN
adaptivity tests..

 

Sharing of radio spectrum to all users.   And in the case of conflict, a
graceful degradation of all.

 

 

You know we'd just get bored if these things didn't keep changing, right?

 

 

Michael.

 

 

Michael Derby 

Senior Regulatory Engineer 

Director 

ACB Europe 

 

Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry 

Web:       www.acbcert.com <http://www.acbcert.com/>  

  

e-mail:    micha...@acbcert.com <mailto:micha...@acbcert.com>  

Direct phone:    (+1) 703 468 1746   (USA area code) 

Mobile phone:   (+44) 7939 880829   (UK area code) 

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 19 September 2016 08:32
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

Who decides if a given technology makes 'efficient use'? For example, simple
AM could be disallowed because it's not as 'efficient use' as 16-OFDM.

 

I am concerned because a certain novel technique may quite possibly be
unusable in Europe because of this 'efficiency' provision.

 

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only

 <http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk/> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 8:00 AM
To: John Woodgate <jmw1...@btinternet.com <mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com> >;
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: RE: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

I'm not sure whether or not you're being serious, but I'll bite - It's got
nothing to do with "suppressing stuff"

 

Excerpt the Directive "whereas"

 

In order to ensure that radio equipment uses the radio spectrum effectively
and supports the efficient use of radio spectrum, radio equipment should be
constructed so that: in the case of a transmitter, when the transmitter is
properly installed, maintained and used for its intended purpose it
generates radio waves emissions that do not create harmful interference,
while unwanted radio waves emissions generated by the transmitter (e.g. in
adjacent channels) with a potential negative impact on the goals of radio
spectrum policy should be limited to such a level that, according to the
state of the art, harmful interference is avoided; and, in the case of a
receiver, it has a level of performance that allows it to operate as
intended and protects it against the risk of harmful interference, in
particular from shared or adjacent channels, and, in so doing, supports
improvements in the efficient use of shared or adjacent channels.

 

One example, would be a TV viewer hoping that their TV might still work
whilst they're sat 2m away accessing the internet using a 700 MHz band LTE
mobile phone.

This problem didn't exist in the 1990's when the R&TTE directive was
written...

 

Charlie

 

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 September 2016 21:37
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: RE: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

As I said, nodded through. This 'efficient use' provision is carte blanche
for suppression of anything the government doesn't like. 

 

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only

 <http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk/> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 9:04 PM
To: John Woodgate <jmw1...@btinternet.com <mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com> >;
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: RE: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

John

 

Receiver Sensitivity is an Article 3.2 RF Spectrum matter and not an EMC
matter.

 

Article 3.2 of the R&TTE Directive requires:

radio equipment shall be so constructed that it effectively uses the
spectrum allocated to terrestrial/ space radio communication and orbital
resources so as to avoid harmful interference.

 

Article 3.2 of the Radio Equipment Directive has an additional requirement
in that it requires:

Radio equipment shall be so constructed that it both effectively uses and
supports the efficient use of radio spectrum in order to avoid harmful
interference.

 

Article 3.2 Harmonised Standards  are effective mandatory as any
manufacturer not wishing to apply them in full must obtain a Notified Body
opinion and the Notified Body should really consider Harmonised Standards
where they have been published.

 

Regards

Charlie

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 September 2016 20:45
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: RE: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

The draft specifies receiver sensitivity, which is surely not an EMC matter
and severely restricts manufacturers' freedom of design and offering of a
range of products at different prices. It could even be challenged as a
restraint of trade. But I expect it will be nodded through.

 

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only

 <http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk/> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 8:01 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

David

 

The other thing to add is that this is within scope of the Radio Equipment
Directive, which must be applied from 13th June 2017, so you may wish to
look at the receiver performance requirements in Draft ETSI EN 303 345
V1.1.1
<http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en%5C303300_303399%5C303345%5C01.01.01_20%
5Cen_303345v010101a.pdf> 

 

Regards

Charlie

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 September 2016 08:58
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

EN 55032 is the successor of EN 55013, but 55013 is still valid at present,
so you could use either, But if the product will continue in production for
a year or two at least, it would be sensible to apply 55032, and EN 55035
rather than EN 55020 for immunity.

 

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only

 <http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk/> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: itl-emc user group [mailto:itl...@itl.co.il] 
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 8:31 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

 

Hi

Would an FM receiver used in a motorcycle helmet be subject to testing under
EN 55013 or EN 55032?

Thanks in advance for any opinions.

 

Regards,

David Shidlowsky | Technical Reviewer

Address 1 Bat-Sheva St. LOD 7120101 Israel

Tel 972-8-9186113 Fax 972-8-9153101

Mail :  <mailto:dav...@itlglobal.org> dav...@itlglobal.org/dav...@itl.co.il
<mailto:dav...@itl.co.il> /e...@itl.co.il  Web  <http://www.itl.co.il/>
www.itl.co.il

 

 <http://app.sqm.co.il/SitePages/Questionnaire.aspx> Fill out Customer
Satisfaction Survey

Global Certifications You Can Trust 

This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. 

If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use,
disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any
way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by
forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender.

 

 

 

 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

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
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

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 <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

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
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

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 <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

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
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

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 <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

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
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

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 <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 


-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

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 <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Reply via email to