> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2016 7:23 AM
> *To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: [PSES] EN 55035 / CISPR 35
>
>
>
> Hi John,
>
>
>
> So EN 55035 (CISPR 35) may not filter through to the OJ Harmonised list
> until end of 2019?
>
>
>
>
[mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 2:57 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 55035 / CISPR 35
There was a huge argument when the GHz tests were first introduced over whether
the use of pulse modulation was justified. It seems that any differences from
sine
-a-m.com]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 8:08 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 55035 / CISPR 35
Hi David,
I would have thought they would keep it at the 80% 1kHz AM modulation, so
potentially 30V/m CW calibration, then apply the modulation on the test run, to
give 54V/m
.
This would open up a lot of re-testing on products that comply with the current
standards.
Rob.
From: Schaefer, David [mailto:dschae...@tuvam.com]
Sent: 20 May 2016 16:45
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 55035 / CISPR 35
There’s a separate question on CISPR 35 I would like answered
calibration. Pulse
modulation makes more sense, but it isn’t in the draft.
David
From: Robert Dunkerley [mailto:robert.dunker...@s-a-m.com]
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 7:23 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 55035 / CISPR 35
Hi John,
So EN 55035 (CISPR 35) may not filter through
:16
To: Robert Dunkerley; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] EN 55035 / CISPR 35
It is most unlikely that 55035 will be brought into mandatory effect without at
least 3 years transition. It appears that the CISPR FDIS is forecast for
October 2016, and CENELEC will for sure need time
It is most unlikely that 55035 will be brought into mandatory effect without at
least 3 years transition. It appears that the CISPR FDIS is forecast for
October 2016, and CENELEC will for sure need time to process it into an EN.
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
7 matches
Mail list logo
