Re: [PSES] RED EU radio restrictions

<http://www.efis.dk> Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Join ACB for a training seminar in Milan on 5 and 6 June, 2019: <https://acbcert.com/seminars/2019-Wireless-Approvals-Workshop/2019-Wireless -Approvals-Workshop.ht

Re: [PSES] Fwd: [PSES] FCC label

interference that may cause undesired operation. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Join ACB for a training seminar in Copenhagen on 6 and 7 March or Milan on 5 and 6 June, 2019: https://acbcert.com/seminars/2019-Wireless-Approvals-Workshop/2019-Wireless- Approvals

Re: [PSES] UK Gov Using The UKCA Mark

. From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com] Sent: 05 February 2019 13:16 To: Michael Derby ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] UK Gov Using The UKCA Mark Hello Michael. Am I right in believing that you can now affix the FCC logo to products when using

Re: [PSES] UK Gov Using The UKCA Mark

Anyone with a test site that meets the requirements of ANSI C63.4.:) Michael. From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] Sent: 05 February 2019 10:52 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] UK Gov Using The UKCA Mark Glyn For sDoC... there is no

Re: [PSES] UK Gov Using The UKCA Mark

UK-USA talks happened very quickly after the referendum, so they are quite advanced I think. Michael. From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk] Sent: 05 February 2019 11:06 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] UK Gov Using The UKCA Mark I don't know. Maybe the UK

Re: [PSES] UK Gov Using The UKCA Mark

at this time. But as was mentioned before with the MRAs, I’m sure they’ve at least drafted their application. :) Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Join ACB for a training seminar in Copenhagen on 6 and 7 March or Milan on 5 and 6 June, 2019

Re: [PSES] Brexit requirements for UK manufacturers.

Regarding this: * CE mark is replaced by UK mark. Hmm. I wonder why the UK or any country can’t recognize the CE mark as indicative of the relevant performance of the product? I’m sure the UK could choose to accept a compliance ‘effort’ of similar level to that needed to CE

Re: [PSES] Antenna Colocation test

Hi Ian, I don’t know if you found answers to these yet, or not. But below are my comments [MD]: Michael. From: Schroeder, Ian [mailto:ian.schroe...@dish.com] Sent: 27 November 2018 21:27 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Antenna Colocation test A US only

Re: [PSES] product marking detail for FCC marking

Hello, Why is a test lab telling a manufacturer how to label their devices? I wonder if you mean their TCB for certification, and the characters in the FCC ID? I agree that a O and 0 look very different and have not seen a 0 with a slash on an FCC ID. Michael Derby (TCB

Re: [PSES] EN 55032 - and other EN standards

[mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl] Sent: 27 November 2018 12:33 To: Michael Derby ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 55032 - and other EN standards Thank you Michael, You correctly emphasize the importance of a risk analysis in front of testing and standard selection. And as well

Re: [PSES] EN 55032 - and other EN standards

That's a good summary from Gert. I think one important thing to remember is that the EU (LVD + EMCD, or RED) approach to compliance is the manufacturer assessing their device in any way possible, to show compliance with a Directive. It's not a certification to a standard. So, if a product

Re: [PSES] NFC (near field communication): FCC Approach?

into EN 300 330. 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: <mailto:micha...@acbcert.com> micha...@acbcert.

Re: [PSES] NFC (near field communication): FCC Approach?

I agree with Michael that this needs to be tested and authorised (certified) to FCC 15.225. Another Michael. From: Heckrotte, Michael [mailto:michael.heckro...@ul.com] Sent: 20 October 2018 04:00 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] NFC (near field

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] DoC - 3rd party device to be included?

Hi Amund, I think a lot of it depends if the adapter is already available on the market in the EU; or if you are the first person placing it on the market? Assuming it is already on the market, and you are not the manufacturer of it, then you should not need to declare the compliance of

Re: [PSES] EN62311 - Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields

It's not quite an "unintentional radiator" but if you had a wireless charger which did not contain any communication (e.g., a dumb charging signal without handshaking), then it would come within the scope of the EMCD and the LVD (not the RED), and RF Exposure would therefore be an issue under the

Re: [PSES] RED products in EMC compliance part

Hello, The big problem with that approach is the change to the ‘state of the art’ (many more radios) and the fact that the technical requirements changed from the R to the RED (additional emphasis on receiver testing). So, quite simply, there are many cases where the old R standard would

Re: [PSES] New Guide to the EMC Directive

Typically the Directives are written by people who don’t have English as their first language; and therefore their English is better than mine. I tend to write with good and/or bad English at any time, without warning and/or prejudice. Michael. -Original Message- From: Brian

Re: [PSES] New Guide to the EMC Directive

Hello Matthew, Yes, I think you’re right that they mean broadcast ‘receivers’ which connect to cable, and not to an antenna. Only those ‘receivers’ which are fitted with an antenna (for ‘radiated’ reception) would be within the RED. Thanks, Michael. From: Matthew Wilson

Re: [PSES] EU Harmonized RF Exposure Standards per RED for 13.56 MHz RFID

ng else of the RED is relevant. John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk <http://www.woodjohn.uk> Rayleigh, Essex UK On 2018-04-04 14:51, Michael Derby wrote: John, I think the physical agents Directive is concerned with the workplace, not with

Re: [PSES] EU Harmonized RF Exposure Standards per RED for 13.56 MHz RFID

John, I think the physical agents Directive is concerned with the workplace, not with products. For assessment of RF Exposure risk/safety from products, the RED is indeed the correct Directive and it would be covered in Article 3.1a. Thanks, Michael. Michael Derby

Re: [PSES] Use of Notified Body number under RED

...@westin-emission.no] Sent: 13 March 2018 14:15 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Use of Notified Body number under RED Thanks all! Is this "only NB number under Annex IV Module H" regime new for RED, or was it the same under RTTE? Br. Amund On 2018-03-13 11:23, Mic

Re: [PSES] Use of Notified Body number under RED

under Annex III (Module B) and get an EU-Type Examination Certificate, you list the Notified Body and their number on your Declaration of Conformity (DoC). Thanks, Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry Web

Re: [PSES] FCC 433 MHz

It really depends on those "commercial devices" you mean. The most common use of 433 MHz that I see, is simple little remote control devices; certified for momentary operation under FCC 15.231. Michael. From: Schmidt, Mark [mailto:markschm...@xrite.com] Sent: 09 February 2018 14:36

Re: [PSES] TGN 16 - Guidance on GPS/GNSS and other Receive-only Equipment

recommend you use EN 300 440 and EN 301 489-3" However, with the RED, we have the dedicated standards of EN 303 413 and EN 301 489-19, so the need for a dedicated TGN is a little less now. Thanks, Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Ce

Re: [PSES] Wired radio receiver & RED

Hello, The RED only applies to a receiver if it has (or can have) an antenna attached. Not a wired (only wired) receiver. Thanks, Michael. From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] Sent: 15 November 2017 21:13 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Wired

Re: [PSES] Marking on Remote Controls

Hi Scott, Did you try removing the battery cover, taking the batteries out, and looking for a label under the batteries? That would be a ‘permanent’ part of the product (the battery cover itself would not), and as long as the remote control is shipped without the batteries in it, then

Re: [PSES] RED and customer removable/replaceable USB radio modules in a host

. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry Web: www.acbcert.com <http://www.acbcert.com/> e-mail: <mailto:micha...@acbcert.com> micha...@acbcert.com Mobile phone: (+44) 7939 88082

Re: [PSES] Composite Systems and Intentional Radiators

Hello, I'm re-sending this because I received comments that nobody had answered it (and I guess people were expecting me to answer it :) ) Thanks, Michael. From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] Sent: 08 September 2017 09:18 To: 'Grasso, Charles' <charles.

Re: [PSES] Composite Systems and Intentional Radiators

Hi Charles, I added some comments in red text to your mail below... Michael. From: Grasso, Charles [mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com] Sent: 07 September 2017 18:17 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Composite Systems and Intentional Radiators Hello, I am

Re: [PSES] RED DoC and LVD

:( Regards, Piotr W dniu 2017-08-02 o 16:10, Michael Derby pisze: > Hi Piotr, > > You would not have a situation where the RED and the LVD both apply to a > product. > > Product safety for radio devices (transmitter, receiver, transceiver) is > covered by Article 3.1a of the RED.

Re: [PSES] RED DoC and LVD

Hi Piotr, You would not have a situation where the RED and the LVD both apply to a product. Product safety for radio devices (transmitter, receiver, transceiver) is covered by Article 3.1a of the RED. So, you assess safety "in a similar way as the LVD", but you do not actually apply the LV

Re: [PSES] FCC testing of intentional vs unintentional radiators

DB. My personal interpretation of the right combination is A/D, but since I got different opinions I might well be wrong and I decided to seek some directions within this esteemed forum. Sounds like you’re more right than some, but don’t re-test everything! Thanks, Michael. Michael

Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

those for (GPS) Receivers, here a NB is needed, but as there is no standard available, what will the NB have to impose ? Gert Gremmen Van: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] Verzonden: woensdag 28 juni 2017 20:04 Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IE

Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

available, what will the NB have to impose ? Gert Gremmen Van: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] Verzonden: woensdag 28 juni 2017 20:04 Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Onderwerp: Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards I think the

Re: [PSES] RED Harmonised Standards

I think they've been putting all their effort into getting the Article 3.2 standards onto the OJ as soon as they can (because those are the ones which the manufacturer needs, to self declare without a Notified Body). Most of the EN 301 489 standards are published or at least in a final draft;

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] RED ZigBee 6 GHz Immunity Testing: Technical Risk?

Hello, Typically the only ‘radio’ (Article 3.2) testing you would most likely do is the transmitter spurious emissions (or any other ‘radiated’ style tests). Transmitter/Receiver antenna port measurements (like bandwidth, duty cycle, etc.) are often not re-tested at the host level.

Re: [PSES] Q on Systems Integration and Testing Requirements

Hi Charles, I have not looked closely into this, but here are my first thoughts on the matter, off the cuff... Michael. From: Grasso, Charles [mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com] Sent: 17 May 2017 21:50 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Q on Systems Integration and Testing

Re: [PSES] EN 55020

Hi all, If they’re applicable to sound and broadcast receivers, then of course they will have been removed from the EMCD OJ and LVD OJ because those Directives would not apply anymore. Instead, it would now be in the RED. And we don’t have any of the CENELEC standards listed in the

Re: [PSES] Frequency range & transitted power for RED

tly you’re asking. Sorry for my confusion! Michael. From: Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com] Sent: 18 April 2017 14:53 To: Michael Derby <micha...@acbcert.com>; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Frequency range & transitted power for RED Dear Michae

Re: [PSES] Frequency range & transitted power for RED

ing to the standards? Or are you checking the accuracy of the user manual statements? Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry Web: www.acbcert.com <http://www.acbcert.com/>

Re: [PSES] RED, "Radio Equipment" and USB Dongle and the like

Hi Mike, I have added comments in red text below… Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry Web: www.acbcert.com <http://www.acbcert.com/> From: Mike Sherman - Or

Re: [PSES] RE_D question Marine Product

ople could ask you, is: "If we don't use EN 60945, what shall we use?" I hope this was a little helpful, at least. Sorry that I appear to have given you more questions than answers! Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe

Re: [PSES] body-won decives - RF requirements

Hi Amund, Which geographical region are you interested in? For example: If you look to FCC KDB 447498 and section 4.3, you can see an equation for assessing if a SAR test is needed. You can consider the output power and user distance, to see if it is permitted with, or without, a SAR test. For

Re: [PSES] FCC labelling

Hi Ian, This is a useful link for you: https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=27980 =P And in particular this one:

Re: [PSES] Conformity assessment under RED

directive or another. Thanks, Michael. From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] Sent: 01 March 2017 18:03 To: 'msherma...@comcast.net' <msherma...@comcast.net>; 'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: RE: [PSES] Conformit

Re: [PSES] Conformity assessment under RED

hat comes with an infrared remote controller and latest TV that comes with BT or RF remote controller, does it fall into RED scope? Thanks, Scott From: Scott Xe <scott...@gmail.com <mailto:scott...@gmail.com> > Date: Tuesday, 21 February 2017 at 12:25 AM To: Michael

Re: [PSES] Conformity assessment under RED

and BT/Wifi enabled units, it can use the HSs in RED/LVD/EMC of OJEU without the use of NB as per the interpretation of below. Thanks, Scott On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 6:00 AM, Michael Derby <micha...@acbcert.com <mailto:micha...@acbcert.com> > wrote: Hi Nick, You ar

Re: [PSES] EN 55020

Meanwhile; for Article 3.2 of the RED, remember that the new standard is EN 303 345. http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/303300_303399/303345/01.01.01_20/en_3033 45v010101a.pdf And for the Bluetooth, of course it would be EN 300 328 V2.1.1. Thanks, Michael. From: Larry K.

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

ilto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 7:34:19 AM Subject: Re: [PSES] Co-located modules The latest chatter I gathered on this topic is that the FCC considers collocated as "in the same enclosure". Indications are that any reference to <20cm bei

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Hi Stephen, One thing to remember is that “must not be co-located” really just means “must not be co-located without some additional effort” For example, co-locating two modules and then calculating the new combined RF Exposure MPE value to verify that the product still meets the

Re: [PSES] Conformity assessment under RED

Hi Nick, You are completely correct. Actually, this approach (NB is only needed for deviations in testing to Articles 3.2 and 3.3; but not needed for deviations in testing for 3.1) was apparently the original intention with 1999/5/EC, but it was not correctly or clearly written. 2014/53/EU

Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

And let's not forget that Americans drive on the wrong side of the road! From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: 08 November 2016 12:40 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles. Nothing wrong with that except it ignores human nature.

Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles [General Use]

And the firmware version number listed on your car insurance documents? (Software company liable for accidents?) From: Price, Andrew (Leonardo, UK) [mailto:andrew.p.pr...@leonardocompany.com] Sent: 08 November 2016 11:08 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Automated vehicles

Re: [PSES] ETSI EN 302 195 V2.1.1

Hi Grace, Are you asking because the word “Harmonised” appears in the title of the standard? No, it does not mean that it can be used for presumption of conformity to the RED. Basically….. When you work at ETSI, the basic document template you start with… has that wording in the

Re: [PSES] FW: Testing to EN 55013 or EN 55032

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 D

Re: [PSES] Fire ants

open on a hot day. Antennas on a bug, simply means he’s calling home. Unless, as John pointed out, a bee is using his GPS. Michael. From: IEEE [mailto:d...@ieee.org] Sent: 15 September 2016 13:59 To: Michael Derby <micha...@acbcert.com> Cc: IEEE EMC PSTC <

Re: [PSES] Fire ants

I feel like this is not going to do anything positive to solve all the miss-use of the word ‘antennae’ in technical documents! :-) Soon we’ll have ants with antennae and antennas. Michael. From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] Sent: 15 September 2016 13:42

Re: [PSES] Cell phone power output, legal limits in USA

Hi Ken, Yes, CFR 47. Here are some examples: Part 22H http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=8cf1eb153c71745420e7f1e37c2dd17d=true=se47.2.22_1913=div8 Part 24E http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=8cf1eb153c71745420e7f1e37c2dd17d=true=se47.2.24_1232=div8 Part 27

Re: [PSES] EU OJ today - EN55013/20 missing

(depending on the understanding of the person you’re talking to); but it should be very easy to justify that those are the correct standards to use. Thanks, Michael. From: Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com] Sent: 15 August 2016 18:06 To: Michael Derby <micha...@acbcert.com>; EM

Re: [PSES] EU OJ today - EN55013/20 missing

Hello, You are correct that you can continue to use the EMCD and LVD until the end of the RED transition period. (See this useful document: http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/11983/attachments/1/translations/en/r enditions/native ) It's true that if the standards are not listed in

Re: [PSES] SAFETTY FEATURES controlled by ....SOFTWARE

I guess you would get a similar answer from Volkswagen these days. :-) Michael. -Original Message- From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] Sent: 03 August 2016 18:10 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] SAFETTY FEATURES controlled by SOFTWARE Dear

Re: [PSES] EU OJ today

Thanks Charlie. I think you make a good point. The fact is that for the EMC Directive; using a harmonised standard on a presently valid OJ gives you presumption of conformity. Of course need to do a risk assessment that nothing has been missed out by your device being ahead of the

Re: [PSES] NFC Near Field Communication Devices

and therefore do require Japanese certification too. Thanks, Michael. From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] Sent: 05 May 2016 15:06 To: 'Kunde, Brian' <brian_ku...@lecotc.com>; 'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: RE: [PSES] NFC Near Field C

Re: [PSES] NFC Near Field Communication Devices

Hi Brian, Which geographical region are you interested in? USA. FCC Certification to FCC 15.225 Test lab must presently be listed with FCC, but will require a recognised accreditation very soon. Unlicensed transmitter, but certification is required. Canada. ISED Certification to

Re: [PSES] Maximum Allowed Duty Cycle Correction Factor per FCC 15.35

Hi Grace, I think this is a mistake. I think there is not a maximum allowed duty cycle of 20 dB. I think this mistake comes from the fact that there is a peak limit which exists at 20 dB higher than the average limit.

Re: [PSES] Prototype batch ... CE applies?

Hello Amund, I agree that you should be CE Marking these devices, as they are placed on the market for normal use. If there is any flexibility to be found, then maybe it is in your application of the Directive. For example, the typical way to comply with the Directive would be to fully apply

Re: [PSES] Colour of affixed CE Mark?

erent forms (e.g. colour, solid/hollow) as long as it remains visible, legible and respects its proportions." Thanks, Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry Web: www.acbcert

Re: [PSES] Bluetooth audio product

it with minimal testing effort and no additional radio authorisation. If the Bluetooth is not a module, or it is a module which is not certified, then it will need to be tested and certified. Please let me know if this has given you any answers, or just more questions! Michael. Michael Derby

Re: [PSES] One DoCs vs multiple DoCs

Hello Brian, As the various EU Directives become recast and/or re-written, they will all include the requirement to issue one DoC for the whole product, for all the applicable Directives. As you mentioned, you could have one for RoHS, EMD and Safety. It is acceptable to have a dossier of

Re: [PSES] FCC Labelling

Hi Ian, You are almost correct. The FCC's logo is only for devices which have been authorised under the DoC process. Devices which have verification or certification, do not show the FCC logo. Of course, if there is a mixture of authorisation routes and one of them is DoC, then the

Re: [PSES] FW: EMCTLA - White Paper - Modes of Operation for EMC Testing

Hello, Yes, I think taking the comments to GEL 210 would be on the agenda for this working idea. ETSI too, of course. The history of it is this Some members had noticed a lot of EMC test reports which simply don't explain how the device was tested, monitored or assessed for compliance.

Re: [PSES] New EMC Directive 2014/30/EU LV Directive 2014/35/EU

Hi Scott, Annex IV of 2014/53/EC is similar to Annex V of 1999/5/EC. It’s an alternative compliance route, not necessarily a test report issue. Michael. From: Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com] Sent: 24 August 2015 14:59 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] New

Re: [PSES] FCC market surveillance

Hello Amund, The FCC do perform market surveillance on certified products and every TCB must also perform market surveillance on 5% of the devices they have certified. The TCB must report the findings of their surveillance to the FCC each year. I think the results are not openly reported, but I

Re: [PSES] EU Customs and EMC test report

Hello, As others have said, I do not think the Directive needs to be listed in the test reports. You test to standards and the manufacturer deals with the Directive. Probably, the person saw the incorrect Directive reference and flagged it up. If there had not been any reference to any

Re: [PSES] DoC on final product

Hello Amund, Yes, I would say that you do need to list the module's radio standards on the DoC of the final product. After all, the person putting the final product on the market is effectively using those standards to state compliance of their new radio product. Those standards are used to

Re: [PSES] Radio in class A product

Hello Dieter, In addition to the responses you already received (which I like), I would ask you to check that your host ITE product is really 'ancillary equipment', as defined in EN 301 489-1. I think that as others have pointed out, your host product will most likely continue to need to

Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven

This isn't a particularly helpful contribution, but when I use my microwave (used correctly, with the door closed), my Bluetooth speaker completely stops working and any WiFi activity grinds to a halt. I try to keep the kids away from the microwave when it's in use, as much as I can. Michael.

Re: [PSES] Integrating radio COSTs into other equipment

. -Original Message- From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com] Sent: 12 May 2015 00:11 To: Michael Derby; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] Integrating radio COSTs into other equipment Michael, Do you think this applies to the case for installing a finished product

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Integrating radio COSTs into other equipment

reasons, which justifies re-testing on the final product? Amund -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] Sendt: 11. mai 2015 13:10 Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Emne: Re: [PSES] Integrating radio COSTs into other equipment Hello Amund

Re: [PSES] Integrating radio COSTs into other equipment

Hello Amund, This is a general reply about installing CE Marked radio modules into host products.. The important thing to remember is that there no certification process under the RTTE Directive and also no modular approvals. Anyone installing the module into a product becomes responsible

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] 802.11a (5GHz WiFi) requires CE Alert sign, right?

Hello Amund, I don't know if your question relates to the RED timing conversation below (which I think has been fully answered by Nick); or if this is a new question relating to the general requirements of the RTTE Directive (and perhaps the RED in the future). So, I will assume it's a

Re: [PSES] Harmonised Standards for EMC Directive 2014/30/EU and Low Voltage Directive 2014/35/EU

Hello all, I don't know if this helps and maybe it's not the full answer, but I remember the conversation regarding colour photographs on the DoC when we were progressing the early drafts of the new Radio Equipment Directive. There is an attempt to harmonise the administrative requirements

Re: [PSES] EMC on Industrial Cut-Off Saws

themselves confidence. but of course the type of companies who discuss this with me might not represent a true demographic of all manufacturers out there. :-) Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe -Original Message- From: CR [mailto:k

Re: [PSES] EMC on Industrial Cut-Off Saws

…..” If they fix that, I’ll have to start talking about SAR levels and then I won’t get invited to dinner any more. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com] Sent: 03 February 2015 15:22 To: EMC-PSTC

Re: [PSES] EMC on Industrial Cut-Off Saws

Ha ha ha. You know you’re in a boring job when you pretend to be a drug dealer to enhance your social acceptability. J Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com] Sent: 04 February 2015 13:38 To: EMC-PSTC

Re: [PSES] Brick power supplies and test errors (two topics)

engineer who is happy to stay in the test lab. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe -Original Message- From: Brian Oconnell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] Sent: 17 December 2014 21:36 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Brick power

Re: [PSES] Brick power supplies and test errors (two topics)

appear to be really busy. So, there’s hope yet. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: Anthony Thomson [mailto:ton...@europe.com] Sent: 18 December 2014 10:35 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Brick power supplies and test

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

a practical point of view, it is also impossible. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: Anthony Thomson [mailto:ton...@europe.com] Sent: 29 October 2014 15:00 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

of them don’t seem to know how to test. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: Anthony Thomson [mailto:ton...@europe.com] Sent: 30 October 2014 09:16 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

Hi John, What would the disclaimer be in this case? Disclaimer: We are not a Notified Body to the RE Directive and this document is legally invalid as a Notified Body certificate ? It doesn't sound like a very useful certificate. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

Yes, ETSI are working on new standards and updates to old standards. As you say, they do have a timeline goal to work towards! Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: rpick...@rpqconsulting.com [mailto:rpick...@rpqconsulting.com] Sent: 30

Re: [PSES] weird stuff in agency agreement form

is that the Notified Body must be able to turn up and check. At least, that's what I was told. Michael. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk] Sent: 11 September 2014 23:03 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Re: [PSES] Applicable SAR standard for a VoIP GSM Gateway

. Michael Derby Senior Regulatory Engineer Director ACB Europe From: Michael Loerzer [mailto:loerzer_mob...@globalnorm.de] Sent: 05 September 2014 15:58 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Applicable SAR standard for a VoIP GSM Gateway Hi, regarding health and safety

Re: [PSES] E-Labelling?

and EMC, so the user should not be plugging a device into a mains charger if they have not yet seen the CE Mark. J Thanks, Michael. Michael Derby Regulatory Engineer ACB Europe From: Mike Violette [mailto:mi...@acbcert.com] Sent: 01 August 2014 19:42 To: EMC-PSTC

Re: [PSES] E-Labelling?

HI Paul, Good point…. Disclaimer, I only had my RTTE hat on. J Michael. Michael Derby Regulatory Engineer ACB Europe From: Paul Lovell (plovell) [mailto:plov...@cisco.com] Sent: 04 August 2014 11:20 To: Michael Derby; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] E

Re: [PSES] E-Labelling?

if there are mixed messages about whether it is just for customs and MSAs, or if it's for the user also? Not disagreeing, just thinking. Michael. Michael Derby Regulatory Engineer ACB Europe -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: 04 August 2014 11:14

[PSES] European RTTE Class 1 and 2 devices.

Hello all, As we've been talking about the RTTE Class 1 and 2 devices, the lists have been updated: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/documents/index_en.htm#h2-5 Michael. Michael Derby Regulatory Engineer ACB Europe Certification Resource for the Wireless

Re: [PSES] 802.11a (5GHz WiFi)

/official/word/ECCDec0408.doc Also, it's listed as a Class 2 device on the EU website: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/files/rtte-subclass2_en.pdf Scroll down to page 2 and it confirms why it is Class 2. Indoor use only. Thanks, Michael. Michael Derby Regulatory

Re: [PSES] 802.11a (5GHz WiFi) requires CE Alert sign, right?

. Look which one is number 1 on the list… J …. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/files/rtte-subclass2_en.pdf Thanks, Michael. Michael Derby Regulatory Engineer ACB Europe From: Dave Heald [mailto:emcp...@gmail.com] Sent: 31 July 2014 18:38 To: EMC-PSTC

Re: [PSES] Definition of unsafe product

. There are plenty of things which must be assessed by manufacturers independently before they make it into harmonised standards. So, maybe it was unsafe? Michael. Michael Derby Regulatory Engineer ACB Europe -Original Message- From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com] Sent: 31

  1   2   >