@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Withdrawal of EN 55024:2010
Chris
EU Directives don't require assessing (to new standards) to "remain compliant"
- they require re-assessing to maintain a "Presumption of Conformity".
There is no grandfathering under CE marking as standards are
directives)
Market enforcement and customers expect Harmonised Standards to be applied, and
that’s the recommended approach.
Depending on the product, and how it was configured and monitored when tested
against EN 55024, you may find that only partial re-testing is required. This
is much more
FORWARD:
In an Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/455 issued in mid-March, the Commission
moved to replace the 2010 edition of EN 55024, Electromagnetic compatibility -
Product family standard for audio, video, audio-visual and entertainment
lighting control apparatus for professional use - Part 2
https://www.vde-verlag.de/standards/1800179/e-din-en-55024-a1-vde-0878-24-a1-2015-02.html
From: Schaefer, David [mailto:dschae...@tuvam.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 8:56 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EN 55024 updates
Hi all,
Can anyone share knowledge of the 2015
: [PSES] EN 55024 updates
https://www.vde-verlag.de/standards/1800179/e-din-en-55024-a1-vde-0878-24-a1-2015-02.html
From: Schaefer, David [mailto:dschae...@tuvam.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 8:56 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EN 55024 updates
Hi all,
Can anyone share
In message
d04de1c6f926664c84bc7812d23b820b650...@suspedu01001.us001.itgr.net,
dated Tue, 24 Feb 2015, Schaefer, David dschae...@tuvam.com writes:
Can anyone share knowledge of the 2015 Amendment of EN 55024? I haven?t
heard details of what is being changed.
It isn't actually published
Hi all,
Can anyone share knowledge of the 2015 Amendment of EN 55024? I haven't heard
details of what is being changed.
Thanks,
David Schaefer
The mail and/or attachments are confidential and may also be legally
privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
In message
blupr02mb1169482a16ec13861c52311c1...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook
.com, dated Tue, 24 Feb 2015, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com
writes:
https://www.vde-verlag.de/standards/1800179/e-din-en-55024-a1-vde-0878-2
4-a1-2015-02.html
That says' published', but it isn't
In message c374971c.8a7e%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Thu, 29
Nov 2007, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
An excellent point, which I had not considered. At the time IEC
1000-4-6 was written, the short cables that were contained on the
desktop were not USB, but keyboard and
-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:54:27 -0800 (PST)
To: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: EN 55024 Conducted Immunity
Ken,
You are correct, and that is probably the rationale behind the exemption.
However, if the other end
or potential becomes vanishingly small at low frequencies.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: Leber Jody-G19980
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:33:36 -0500
To:
Conversation: EN 55024 Conducted Immunity
Subject: EN 55024 Conducted Immunity
All,
Does anyone know the reasoning behind
At 11/29/2007, Jody Leber wrote:
Does anyone know the reasoning behind the exemption to cables 3 m or
less for conducted immunity on signal ports? It would appear that if
the product is supplied with a USB cable 3 m or less the test would not
be required. Am I interpreting this correctly or
Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: Leber Jody-G19980 jody.le...@motorola.com
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:33:36 -0500
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Conversation: EN 55024 Conducted Immunity
Subject: EN 55024 Conducted Immunity
All,
Does anyone know the reasoning behind the exemption to cables 3 m
All,
Does anyone know the reasoning behind the exemption to cables 3 m or
less for conducted immunity on signal ports? It would appear that if
the product is supplied with a USB cable 3 m or less the test would not
be required. Am I interpreting this correctly or possibly missing
something?
To: jim.hulb...@pb.com ; emc-p...@ieee.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 3:20 PM
Subject: RE: Performance Criterion B in EN 55024
Criterion B is Self-Recoverable without user intervention which means it
must return to normal operation on its own after the test. BUT during the
test, your printer is allowed
In message
ofb1abd61b.bddeeaad-on852572d7.0045c32d-852572d7.00470...@pb.com,
dated Thu, 10 May 2007, jim.hulb...@pb.com writes:
My question is, what are the limits of an operator response to return
to normal operation? Is there any futher guidance or explanation as to
what is acceptable
.
regards
David Spencer
EMC Engineer
Xerox Corp
_
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of
jim.hulb...@pb.com
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 8:56 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Performance Criterion B in EN 55024
Performance criterion B applies for EFT/Burst
Hey TOB - have a look at Annex D, part D.2 of the standard...
Jon Larkin
- Original Message -
From: Kunde, mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com Brian
To: jim.hulb...@pb.com ; emc-p...@ieee.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 3:20 PM
Subject: RE: Performance Criterion B in EN 55024
...@ieee.org
Subject: Performance Criterion B in EN 55024
Performance criterion B applies for EFT/Burst and ESD tests under EN 55024.
The product under test is a high speed commercial printer intended to be
connected to a PC through either USB or Ethernet. The criterion allows for
degradation
Subject
AMPerformance Criterion B in EN 55024
Performance criterion B applies for EFT/Burst and ESD tests under EN 55024.
The product under test is a high speed commercial printer intended to be
connected to a PC through either USB or Ethernet. The criterion allows for
degradation of performance during the test. After the disturbance
Tim,
Amendment A2:2003 to EN 55024:1998 is the same as Amendment A2:2002 to
CISPR 24:1997. It becomes a legal requirement for the CE Mark on
December 1, 2005. This amendment only affects the testing of
multifunction equipment, that falls under multiple product standards.
Amendment A1:2000 to EN
Hello,
I need to know what the amendment A2: 2003 to EN 55024 requires. I would like
to know if it is even applicable to my equipment before I purchase this
ammendment. When does this ammendment A2 need to be applied?
For the EN 55022 standard, is it time to apply amendments A1 A2? I
http://www.ieee-pses.org/symposium http://www.emc2004.org/
--
Hello group,
Could someone, copy for me the second paragraph of EN 55024, Annex B, B1.2
Criterion B.
I have the Polish version PN-EN 55024 and suppose a translation mistake (not
sure
I read in !emc-pstc that Gelfand, David david.gelf...@ca.kontron.com
wrote (in DAE684A26044B6469EF0A1E15651168221F83D@semsl131) about 'EN
55024 / IEC 61000-4 questions', on Fri, 1 Feb 2002:
Why does EN 55024 call IEC 61000-4-x and not EN 61000-4-x? Are there any
significant differences between
Why does EN 55024 call IEC 61000-4-x and not EN 61000-4-x? Are there any
significant differences between the IEC and EN 61000-4-x series, regarding
test methods or limits?
Thanks,
David.
David Gelfand
Regulatory Approvals
Kontron Canada
Hi David,
You asked/stated:
Caps to ground can not be greater than .022 uF for FCC impedance
to ground during ringing limit of 100k ohms, it will still pass FCC leakage
current test at 6.8 mV @ 1000V. Have I missed anything about impact of
caps to ground for European requirements?
Don't
Hello,
I finally passed rf conducted immunity on my telephone cards! As it turned out,
not only the telephone card using the Legerity 79R70 was demodulating but also,
the card
towards the network using a Mitel/Zarlink MH88437AD-P.
To each card I added a common mode choke (TDK ZJYS51R5-2PB),
...³INTERNET:cet...@cetest.nl
Subj: RE: EN 55024 Annex A.1
Chrg: $0.00 Imp: Norm Sens: StdReceipt: NoParts: 3
From: CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more...
Subject: RE: EN 55024 Annex A.1
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 18:38:30 +0200
Reply-To: CE
-
From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of David Gelfand
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 8:27 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: EN 55024 Annex A.1
Help!
When we inject as per IEC 61000-4-6, the 1 kHz tone is demodulated
Engineer
Paxar - Monarch
e-mail: jim_bac...@monarch.com
voice: 1-937-865-2020
fax: 1-937-865-2048
Reply Separator
Subject:RE: EN 55024 Annex A.1
Author: Colgan; Chris chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: 5/25/01
...@tagmclarenaudio.com
* http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com
-Original Message-
From: David Gelfand [SMTP:gelf...@memotec.com]
Sent: 24 May 2001 19:28
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: EN 55024 Annex A.1
Help!
When we inject as per IEC 61000-4-6, the 1 kHz tone is demodulated and
is VERY
If possible, I would suggest to do the test with CDN and do it in a shielded
room with all the measuring equipment located outside of the room.
David Gelfand gelf...@memotec.com 05/25/01 04:06am
Joe,
The test was done by Nemko Canada using the clamp method. The clamp was
calibrated a few
Joe,
The test was done by Nemko Canada using the clamp method. The clamp was
calibrated a few hours before my test. The equipment was 10 cm over a ground
plane, and they were monitoring the test voltage with a clamp to be sure not to
overtest. Is the coupling network a better bet than the
In a message dated 5/24/01, David Gelfand writes:
When we inject as per IEC 61000-4-6, the 1 kHz tone is demodulated and is
VERY loud in the telephone earpiece! This happens no matter which i/o
cable we inject, even the power cord.
Hi David:
While it is not surprising for an
To: Praveen Rao
Cc: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: RE: EN 55024 particular conditions--Re-sending
Praveen,
The criteria A, B C have been present for some time in
the generic immunity spec EN50082-1. The body of EN55024
covers the detail of the criteria, in particular section 7.1
...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: EN 55024 particular conditions--Re-sending
-Original Message-
From: Praveen Rao
Sent: Friday, 19 January 2001 4:59 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: EN 55024 particular conditions
Dear Members,
For immunity tests in accordance with EN 55024 : 1998
-Original Message-
From: Praveen Rao
Sent: Friday, 19 January 2001 4:59 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: EN 55024 particular conditions
Dear Members,
For immunity tests in accordance with EN 55024 : 1998, 'Telecommunications
terminal equipment' (analogue and digital), have
Dear Members,
For immunity tests in accordance with EN 55024 : 1998, 'Telecommunications
terminal equipment' (analogue and digital), have particulat test conditions
in Annex A of the standard. It is highlighted in the standard (section 7.2)
that the criteria given in Annex takes precedence over
: Andrews, Kurt [mailto:kandr...@tracewell.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 9:34 AM
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: EN 55024 Immunity testing
Importance: High
Group,
I have been asked to come up with information on what is involved in EN
55024 Immunity testing. Specifically what are the various voltages
Thanks very much to all who responded to my request for information on EN
55024. I now have all of the information that I need. Whenever I have a
compliance question I can always count on this group to come up with the
answers. Thanks again.
Kurt Andrews
Compliance Engineer
Tracewell Systems
Kurt,
You should also be aware that the EN 55024 standard refers to another
eight or more standards (ESD, Radiated RF, Electrical Fast Transients, Surge,
Conducted Field Immunity, Magnetic Fields and Voltage Dips / Interruptions
and EN 55022 for definitions)
Larry Stillings
Compliance
: Andrews, Kurt [SMTP:kandr...@tracewell.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 12:34 PM
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: EN 55024 Immunity testing
Importance: High
Group,
I have been asked to come up with information on what is involved in
EN
Group,
I have been asked to come up with information on what is involved in EN
55024 Immunity testing. Specifically what are the various voltages,
currents, etc. used for each test. I do not have a copy of the standard and
my company does not want to purchase it at this time. For instance I know
Thanks for the quick response regarding the EN50082-1 question.
Now, what does EN 55024:1998 specify regarding surge? How does it compare
to EN 50082-1 : 1997?
Marvin Wolak
Marconi Communications
EMC Engineering, Product Integrity
Ph: 724-742-7453
Fx: 724-742-7474
EMail: marvin.wo
forwarded for wolfgang_josenh...@3com.com... Jim
Forward Header_
Subject:RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
Author: wolfgang_josenh...@3com.com
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: 3/3/00 12:16 PM
Jim,
One other thing
In the Test-Setup Section, Conditions during Testing of EN 55024 it is said:
Test should be made in the most representative mode.
To my understanding, in the present days most ITE Equipment and Peripherals
comes with a 3-prong plug, i.e. it is grounded.
So, if the EUT has external ports
...@pb.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 8:52 AM
To: Lacey,Scott; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
Scott,
The product I'm currently looking at uses a 2 -prong AC mains plug.
Actually
the supply
PM
Please respond to Lacey,Scott sla...@foxboro.com
To: 'Jim Hulbert' hulbe...@micro2.pb.com
cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org (bcc: Jim Hulbert/MSD/US/PBI)
Subject: RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
Jim,
I'm not quite sure from the description what your product looks
-
From: Colgan, Chris [SMTP:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2000 4:41 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
Let's say I'm testing a Class II double insulated CD player
. Then YOU will have more control of the situation and the
pass/fail criteria.
Regards
John Allen
Racal
--
From: Colgan, Chris[SMTP:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com]
Sent: 02 March 2000 09:40
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
Let's say I'm
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
Colleagues,
EN 55024 calls for surge pulses to be applied line-to-line and
line-to-earth on
the AC mains port and line-to-ground on signal and telecommunications
ports that
connect directly to outdoor cables
Mike,
can't agree with you on this one. See Scotts comments in his e-mail. You test
to prove things are as you think they are... Otherwise why test at all?
Derek Walton
Invensys
---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical
mhopk...@keytek.com
-Original Message-
From: Jim Hulbert [SMTP:hulbe...@pb.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 10:32 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
Colleagues,
EN 55024 calls for surge pulses to be applied line-to-line and
line
Colleagues,
EN 55024 calls for surge pulses to be applied line-to-line and line-to-earth on
the AC mains port and line-to-ground on signal and telecommunications ports that
connect directly to outdoor cables. However, if my EUT is encased in plastic
covers and has no direct earth ground
gst...@iphase.com
-Original Message-
From: Sandy Mazzola [SMTP:mazzo...@symbol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 1999 12:18 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:EN 55024 and Performance Criteria Applicability
To All,
With specifics to EN 55024 Information
...@symbol.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 1999 1:18 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: EN 55024 and Performance Criteria Applicability
To All,
With specifics to EN 55024 Information Technology Equipment-Immunity
Characteristics-Limits and Measurements and the EN 61000-4-2 ESD
To All,
With specifics to EN 55024 Information Technology Equipment-Immunity
Characteristics-Limits and Measurements and the EN 61000-4-2 ESD requirement.
ESD requirement of +/-8 Kv Air Search and +/- 4 KV Contact/Indirect is usually
tested gradually for example +/- 2KV, +/- 4 KV
...@majordomo.ieee.org
cc:(bcc: Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US)
Subject: Re(2): EN 55024 Question
From: plaw...@west.net (Patrick Lawler)
To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: EN 55024 Question
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 17:02:22 GMT
Reply-to: plaw
From: plaw...@west.net (Patrick Lawler)
To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: EN 55024 Question
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 17:02:22 GMT
Reply-to: plaw...@west.net (Patrick Lawler)
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 11:54:25 +, Geoff Lister
geoff.lis
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 11:54:25 +, Geoff Lister
geoff.lis...@motionmedia.co.uk wrote:
snip
My interpretation of the above, and it is only my opinion - please
feel free to differ, is that for ITE with its related sub-categories,
EN55024 supersedes both EN50082-1 and -2. This would indeed
Rick, Jim,
As System Integrators this apparent easing of standards is of great concern.
Initially when the idea of the two environments was muted it seemed a good idea
and destined to make my life a little easier. Just make sure the equipment is
CE marked to the appropriate level, take any
As I understand it, this is the Light Industrial
category. Does EN55024 (or any other ITE standard) also replace EN50082-2
Heavy Industrial?
To Jeff and everyone concerned:
EN55024 covers only ITE and, as such, it is not intended to
replace
Lister
From: Jim Hulbert hulbe...@pb.com
To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 15:58:26 -0400
Subject: Re: EN 55024 Question
Reply-to: Jim Hulbert hulbe...@pb.com
This is an interesting question. EN 55024 is a product family standard
This is an interesting question. EN 55024 is a product family standard for ITE
and takes precedence over generic standards. Therefore, ITE previously tested
to either to EN 50082-1 or EN 50082-2 will now be tested to EN 55024. For ITE
used in heavy industrial environments, this represents
In the attached thread it indicates that the EN55024 will replace EN50082-1
for ITE applications. As I understand it, this is the Light Industrial
category. Does EN55024 (or any other ITE standard) also replace EN50082-2
Heavy Industrial?
Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com
-Original
. CISPR 24 will be submitted for parallel voting in CENELEC (i.e. if
approved, the document will be published as both CISPR 24 and EN 55024).
3. The latest draft I have seen (which was a preliminary version of
the final draft) did not include test methods but referred to the IEC
1000-4 series
Can someone confirm that the final draft of EN 55024, Immunity of ITE,
has been submitted for a parallel IEC/CENELEC vote? I understand the
IEC reference is CISPR/G/113/FDIS. I also understand that the deadline
for comments to the national committees may be 1 Feb.
Richard Woods
Sensormatic
68 matches
Mail list logo
