date:20161018

[PSES] IEC 62368-1

2016-10-18 Thread McBurney, Ian

Dear Colleagues.

I have been informed that China, Japan & Australia have not adopted IEC 62368-1 
yet.
Does anyone know of a document or website where I can check to see which 
countries have adopted the above standard?
I am having to test products to the above standard but with the national 
deviations for the countries that have not adopted the standard tested to 
60065. This is adding a certain amount to the test cost.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem?

Thanks in advance;

Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.

Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com


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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

There is such a document but it is an internal IEC TC108 HBSDT document. If
your company were a member of a trade association represented on BSI
committee EPL108 you could obtain a copy, but I don't think there is any
legitimate way otherwise. 
 
I have proposed that the document (frequently updated) should be made
publicly available, but without success.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] IEC 62368-1
 
Dear Colleagues.
 
I have been informed that China, Japan & Australia have not adopted IEC
62368-1 yet.
Does anyone know of a document or website where I can check to see which
countries have adopted the above standard?
I am having to test products to the above standard but with the national
deviations for the countries that have not adopted the standard tested to
60065. This is adding a certain amount to the test cost.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem?
 
Thanks in advance;
 
Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.
 
Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com  
 
 
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
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)  
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald 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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

I doubt that it's an IEC policy, it's more a case of committee members not
giving it  'a high priority'.  By the way, BSI itself couldn't supply the
document, I think, but a committee member could obtain it for the
organization he/she represents.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:20 PM
To: John Woodgate ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] IEC 62368-1
 
Hello John.
 
Do you know why the IEC doesn't make this information available to the
public?
It would be very useful to those manufacturers who sell their products
worldwide.
 
Kind regards;
 
Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.
 
Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com  
 
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 12:31
To: McBurney, Ian mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com> >; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 
Subject: RE: [PSES] IEC 62368-1
 
There is such a document but it is an internal IEC TC108 HBSDT document. If
your company were a member of a trade association represented on BSI
committee EPL108 you could obtain a copy, but I don't think there is any
legitimate way otherwise. 
 
I have proposed that the document (frequently updated) should be made
publicly available, but without success.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk   J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] IEC 62368-1
 
Dear Colleagues.
 
I have been informed that China, Japan & Australia have not adopted IEC
62368-1 yet.
Does anyone know of a document or website where I can check to see which
countries have adopted the above standard?
I am having to test products to the above standard but with the national
deviations for the countries that have not adopted the standard tested to
60065. This is adding a certain amount to the test cost.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem?
 
Thanks in advance;
 
Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.
 
Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com  
 
 
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
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)  
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 
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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

[PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread Kortas, Jamison

Good Morning,

What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which a 
device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.

It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).

I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
those are what are typically followed in practice.

I appreciate any thoughts.

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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

2016-10-18 Thread McBurney, Ian

Hello John.

Do you know why the IEC doesn't make this information available to the public?
It would be very useful to those manufacturers who sell their products 
worldwide.

Kind regards;

Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.

Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com


From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: 18 October 2016 12:31
To: McBurney, Ian ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

There is such a document but it is an internal IEC TC108 HBSDT document. If 
your company were a member of a trade association represented on BSI committee 
EPL108 you could obtain a copy, but I don't think there is any legitimate way 
otherwise.

I have proposed that the document (frequently updated) should be made publicly 
available, but without success.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates 
Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

Dear Colleagues.

I have been informed that China, Japan & Australia have not adopted IEC 62368-1 
yet.
Does anyone know of a document or website where I can check to see which 
countries have adopted the above standard?
I am having to test products to the above standard but with the national 
deviations for the countries that have not adopted the standard tested to 
60065. This is adding a certain amount to the test cost.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem?

Thanks in advance;

Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.

Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com


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 
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)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

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

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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

For Europe, 'industry' means heavy industry - large machines, high-power
electrical installation, not powered from the public low-voltage supply. No
broadcast radio or TV receivers likely to be within 30 metres.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for
EMC testing purposes
 
Good Morning,
 
What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in
which a device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or
non-industrial? I have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to
use.
 
It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store =
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).
 
I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure
that those are what are typically followed in practice.
 
I appreciate any thoughts. 
 
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
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)  
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald 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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

No, because light industry premises are often very close to residential
premises, get power from the low-voltage supply and broadcast receivers can
be much closer than 30 m (the assumption for emission limit purposes is 10
m, but of course they could be even closer).
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Schmidt, Mark [mailto:markschm...@xrite.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 3:57 PM
To: John Woodgate ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes
 
Hi John,
 
Would this be applicable for Light Industrial equipment as well?
 
Thank you.
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes
 
For Europe, 'industry' means heavy industry - large machines, high-power
electrical installation, not powered from the public low-voltage supply. No
broadcast radio or TV receivers likely to be within 30 metres.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
  J M Woodgate and Associates
Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for
EMC testing purposes
 
Good Morning,
 
What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in
which a device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or
non-industrial? I have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to
use.
 
It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store =
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).
 
I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure
that those are what are typically followed in practice.
 
I appreciate any thoughts. 
 
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
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)
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
  
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 
-

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread Schmidt, Mark

Hi John,

Would this be applicable for Light Industrial equipment as well?

Thank you.

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

For Europe, 'industry' means heavy industry - large machines, high-power 
electrical installation, not powered from the public low-voltage supply. No 
broadcast radio or TV receivers likely to be within 30 metres.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
 J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC 
testing purposes

Good Morning,

What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which a 
device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.

It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).

I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
those are what are typically followed in practice.

I appreciate any thoughts.

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 
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)
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

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

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread John Allen

You often get heavy electrical machinery in residential, light commercial
and hospital (etc.) (especially multi-story) premises - think local power
transformers, air-conditioning systems, lifts/elevators, water/sewage
pumping equipment, etc - and that can (and has certainly been seen to)
affect domestic, IT and medical electronic equipment in those premises.

 

It's the end-use environment that is (or should be) the determining factor
in deciding with which category of requirements the EUT must comply.

 

John E Allen

W.London, UK

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 16:10
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

No, because light industry premises are often very close to residential
premises, get power from the low-voltage supply and broadcast receivers can
be much closer than 30 m (the assumption for emission limit purposes is 10
m, but of course they could be even closer).

 

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

www.jmwa.demon.co.uk   J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Schmidt, Mark [mailto:markschm...@xrite.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 3:57 PM
To: John Woodgate ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

Hi John,

 

Would this be applicable for Light Industrial equipment as well?

 

Thank you.

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

For Europe, 'industry' means heavy industry - large machines, high-power
electrical installation, not powered from the public low-voltage supply. No
broadcast radio or TV receivers likely to be within 30 metres.

 

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

www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
  J M Woodgate and Associates
Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for
EMC testing purposes

 

Good Morning,

 

What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in
which a device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or
non-industrial? I have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to
use.

 

It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store =
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).

 

I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure
that those are what are typically followed in practice.

 

I appreciate any thoughts. 

 

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


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)

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

Yes, the 'zoning' is not perfect, but can you think of an improvement? I
can't.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 4:31 PM
To: 'John Woodgate' ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes
 
You often get heavy electrical machinery in residential, light commercial
and hospital (etc.) (especially multi-story) premises - think local power
transformers, air-conditioning systems, lifts/elevators, water/sewage
pumping equipment, etc - and that can (and has certainly been seen to)
affect domestic, IT and medical electronic equipment in those premises.
 
It's the end-use environment that is (or should be) the determining factor
in deciding with which category of requirements the EUT must comply.
 
John E Allen
W.London, UK
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 16:10
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes
 
No, because light industry premises are often very close to residential
premises, get power from the low-voltage supply and broadcast receivers can
be much closer than 30 m (the assumption for emission limit purposes is 10
m, but of course they could be even closer).
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk   J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Schmidt, Mark [mailto:markschm...@xrite.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 3:57 PM
To: John Woodgate mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com> >;
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: RE: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes
 
Hi John,
 
Would this be applicable for Light Industrial equipment as well?
 
Thank you.
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes
 
For Europe, 'industry' means heavy industry - large machines, high-power
electrical installation, not powered from the public low-voltage supply. No
broadcast radio or TV receivers likely to be within 30 metres.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
  J M Woodgate and Associates
Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for
EMC testing purposes
 
Good Morning,
 
What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in
which a device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or
non-industrial? I have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to
use.
 
It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store =
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).
 
I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure
that those are what are typically followed in practice.
 
I appreciate any thoughts. 
 
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
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

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread Doug Nix

My understanding has always been based on the Class and Group designations in 
CISPR 11 / EN 55011 for ISM equipment (based on the 2009 edition):

> 5.3 Division into classes
> Class A equipment is equipment suitable for use in all establishments other 
> than domestic and
> those directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which supplies 
> buildings used
> for domestic purposes.
> 
> Class A equipment shall meet class A limits.
> 
> Warning: Class A equipment is intended for use in an industrial environment. 
> In the
> documentation for the user, a statement shall be included drawing attention 
> to the fact that
> there may be potential difficulties in ensuring electromagnetic compatibility 
> in other
> environments, due to conducted as well as radiated disturbances.
> 
> Class B equipment is equipment suitable for use in domestic establishments 
> and in
> establishments directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which 
> supplies
> buildings used for domestic purposes.
> 
> Class B equipment shall meet class B limits.

The key in all of this is the source of power supply for the equipment. If the 
equipment is supplied from mains that are shared with domestic establishments, 
then it must meet Class B requirements IMO.

If the equipment is intended for industrial use, i.e., Class A, where the power 
supply from the mains is not shared with domestic establishments, then Class A 
performance is acceptable.

The deciding factor is the sharing of the supply with domestic establishments. 
If a location is fed from its own substation and there are no dwellings 
supplied from that substation, it’s an industrial location, and therefore Class 
A.

Doug Nix
d...@ieee.org
+1 (519) 729-5704

> On 18-Oct-16, at 08:44, Kortas, Jamison  wrote:
> 
> Good Morning,
>  
> What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which 
> a device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
> have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.
>  
> It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
> products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
> industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).
>  
> I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
> those are what are typically followed in practice.
>  
> I appreciate any thoughts. 
>  
> 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 
> 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) 
> List rules:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
> Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
> David Heald 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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread Kortas, Jamison

Thank you -

In your example of lifts or a/c it would need to comply with the more 
restrictive criteria (residential for emissions and industrial for immunity) 
even though the location may itself not be powered by low-voltage supply. The 
devices I am working with would not be considered fixed installations, as an 
elevator would be, so it isn't apples to apples, but disregarding that 
difference, any idea?

Also, what about a large shopping mall? Or are there different types of 
environments within the shopping mall: i.e., mechanical room with boilers, 
HVAC, etc. and stores, walkways, etc.?

Thanks,

-Jamison

From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:31 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

You often get heavy electrical machinery in residential, light commercial and 
hospital (etc.) (especially multi-story) premises - think local power 
transformers, air-conditioning systems, lifts/elevators, water/sewage pumping 
equipment, etc - and that can (and has certainly been seen to) affect domestic, 
IT and medical electronic equipment in those premises.

It's the end-use environment that is (or should be) the determining factor in 
deciding with which category of requirements the EUT must comply.

John E Allen
W.London, UK

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: 18 October 2016 16:10
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

No, because light industry premises are often very close to residential 
premises, get power from the low-voltage supply and broadcast receivers can be 
much closer than 30 m (the assumption for emission limit purposes is 10 m, but 
of course they could be even closer).

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
 J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: Schmidt, Mark [mailto:markschm...@xrite.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 3:57 PM
To: John Woodgate mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

Hi John,

Would this be applicable for Light Industrial equipment as well?

Thank you.

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

For Europe, 'industry' means heavy industry - large machines, high-power 
electrical installation, not powered from the public low-voltage supply. No 
broadcast radio or TV receivers likely to be within 30 metres.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
 J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC 
testing purposes

Good Morning,

What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which a 
device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.

It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).

I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
those are what are typically followed in practice.

I appreciate any thoughts.

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 
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

[PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread Rajneesh Raveendran

Hi All,

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

Regards,
Rajneesh

-

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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread John Allen

Jamison

 

The shopping mall example could be a "difficult" situation, but for me that
means that there will be quite a lot of Class A ITE such as servers and the
like (and even a lot of that is now likely to be Class B because that is
what many large end-use customers now specify and expect) in the server
rooms, but probably also a much larger amount of Class B equipment like
counter terminals, PCs (etc.), vending machines, tv's and other consumer
electronics on displays, games arcades (etc.) in the office, shop and public
areas - and then there will also generally be large numbers of essentially
Class B equipments (phones, tablets and the like) being carried and used by
the shopping public, and it would not be "good publicity" for the mall if
the customers kept complaining that their equipment won't  work when they in
the mall or just outside it.

 

Therefore, I would advise that the "heavy stuff" should be Class B for
emissions and Class A for immunity.  OTOH, if the "heavy stuff" is located a
well-defined long distance away from the areas where the more sensitive
stuff is likely to be then you might be able to justify Class A for both.
That might work for bespoke installations where the equipment supplier can
be fairly sure of the exact end-use environment and equipment locations, but
almost certainly not for equipment for general sale where the equipment
supplier has no real idea of what the end-customers' specifying and
installing companies will do with it.

 

John E Allen

W. London, UK

 

From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 16:53
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

Thank you -

 

In your example of lifts or a/c it would need to comply with the more
restrictive criteria (residential for emissions and industrial for immunity)
even though the location may itself not be powered by low-voltage supply.
The devices I am working with would not be considered fixed installations,
as an elevator would be, so it isn't apples to apples, but disregarding that
difference, any idea?

 

Also, what about a large shopping mall? Or are there different types of
environments within the shopping mall: i.e., mechanical room with boilers,
HVAC, etc. and stores, walkways, etc.?

 

Thanks, 

 

-Jamison

 

From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:31 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

You often get heavy electrical machinery in residential, light commercial
and hospital (etc.) (especially multi-story) premises - think local power
transformers, air-conditioning systems, lifts/elevators, water/sewage
pumping equipment, etc - and that can (and has certainly been seen to)
affect domestic, IT and medical electronic equipment in those premises.

 

It's the end-use environment that is (or should be) the determining factor
in deciding with which category of requirements the EUT must comply.

 

John E Allen

W.London, UK

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 16:10
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

No, because light industry premises are often very close to residential
premises, get power from the low-voltage supply and broadcast receivers can
be much closer than 30 m (the assumption for emission limit purposes is 10
m, but of course they could be even closer).

 

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

www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
  J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Schmidt, Mark [mailto:markschm...@xrite.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 3:57 PM
To: John Woodgate ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

Hi John,

 

Would this be applicable for Light Industrial equipment as well?

 

Thank you.

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial
for EMC testing purposes

 

For Europe, 'industry' means heavy industry - large machines, high-power
electrical installation, not powered from the public low-voltage supply. No
broadcast radio or TV receivers likely to be within 30 metres.

 

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

www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread Ghery S. Pettit

Rajneesh,

 

You are correct in your understanding.  Existing products will have to be shown 
to be compliant with EN 55032 by March of next year.  The good news is that you 
may be able to get the lab to evaluate how the testing to EN 55022 was 
performed and if it is still compliant with EN 55032 you won’t have to repeat 
the tests, only have the test report amended to show EN 55032.  Not knowing 
your products or how they were tested, I can’t say one way or the other, but 
this is a path worth investigating.

 

Ghery S. Pettit, NCE

 

 

From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:46 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

Hi All,

 

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

 

Regards,

Rajneesh

-


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 


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 
Mike Cantwell  

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald  


-

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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

Yes, the docopocoss for EN 55022 is 5 March 2017. Products leaving the factory 
after that must meet EN 55032.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 5:46 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Hi All,
 
For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?
 
Regards,
Rajneesh
-

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 
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) 
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald 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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen

There is an on-going (silent) conflict between the European commission and a
number of  cenelec and cispr committees, notably those responsible
for EN 55032 and EN 55011.
While the EC has expressed their opinion in the generic standards,
and expressed their desire that all product committees comply with
the definitions and limit therein, the market (standard committees) does not 
comply to that,
and the EC lacks power (or will) to change that.
Therefore the discrepancy between definitions.

Note that it’s a rather complex matter as the standards are born as Worldwide 
standards (CISPR) and are “common modified” to EN versions.
So CISPR11 (world wide) becomes EN 55011 (Europe harmonised)  without
changing the “Industrial” definition. 


Regards,

Ing.  Gert Gremmen, BSc
 

 
g.grem...@cetest.nl
www.cetest.nl

Kiotoweg 363
3047 BG Rotterdam
T 31(0)104152426
F 31(0)104154953
 
 Before printing, think about the environment.



Van: Doug Nix [mailto:d...@ieee.org] 
Verzonden: dinsdag 18 oktober 2016 18:25
Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Onderwerp: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial 
for EMC testing purposes

My understanding has always been based on the Class and Group designations in 
CISPR 11 / EN 55011 for ISM equipment (based on the 2009 edition):

5.3 Division into classes
Class A equipment is equipment suitable for use in all establishments other 
than domestic and
those directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which supplies 
buildings used
for domestic purposes.

Class A equipment shall meet class A limits.
Warning: Class A equipment is intended for use in an industrial environment. In 
the
documentation for the user, a statement shall be included drawing attention to 
the fact that
there may be potential difficulties in ensuring electromagnetic compatibility 
in other
environments, due to conducted as well as radiated disturbances.
Class B equipment is equipment suitable for use in domestic establishments and 
in
establishments directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which 
supplies
buildings used for domestic purposes.
Class B equipment shall meet class B limits.

The key in all of this is the source of power supply for the equipment. If the 
equipment is supplied from mains that are shared with domestic establishments, 
then it must meet Class B requirements IMO.

If the equipment is intended for industrial use, i.e., Class A, where the power 
supply from the mains is not shared with domestic establishments, then Class A 
performance is acceptable.

The deciding factor is the sharing of the supply with domestic establishments. 
If a location is fed from its own substation and there are no dwellings 
supplied from that substation, it’s an industrial location, and therefore Class 
A.

Doug Nix
d...@ieee.org
+1 (519) 729-5704

On 18-Oct-16, at 08:44, Kortas, Jamison  wrote:

Good Morning,
 
What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which a 
device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.
 
It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).
 
I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
those are what are typically followed in practice.
 
I appreciate any thoughts. 
 
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 

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 
Mike Cantwell 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher 
David Heald 

-

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 

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.htm

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

For Europe, the sources are the Generic standards, which are substantially 
consistent with CISPR 11.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Doug Nix [mailto:d...@ieee.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 5:25 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes
 
My understanding has always been based on the Class and Group designations in 
CISPR 11 / EN 55011 for ISM equipment (based on the 2009 edition):
 
5.3 Division into classes
Class A equipment is equipment suitable for use in all establishments other 
than domestic and
those directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which supplies 
buildings used
for domestic purposes.
 
Class A equipment shall meet class A limits.
Warning: Class A equipment is intended for use in an industrial environment. In 
the
documentation for the user, a statement shall be included drawing attention to 
the fact that
there may be potential difficulties in ensuring electromagnetic compatibility 
in other
environments, due to conducted as well as radiated disturbances.
Class B equipment is equipment suitable for use in domestic establishments and 
in
establishments directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which 
supplies
buildings used for domestic purposes.
Class B equipment shall meet class B limits.

The key in all of this is the source of power supply for the equipment. If the 
equipment is supplied from mains that are shared with domestic establishments, 
then it must meet Class B requirements IMO.
 
If the equipment is intended for industrial use, i.e., Class A, where the power 
supply from the mains is not shared with domestic establishments, then Class A 
performance is acceptable.
 
The deciding factor is the sharing of the supply with domestic establishments. 
If a location is fed from its own substation and there are no dwellings 
supplied from that substation, it’s an industrial location, and therefore Class 
A.
 
Doug Nix
d...@ieee.org  
+1 (519) 729-5704
 
On 18-Oct-16, at 08:44, Kortas, Jamison mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com> > wrote:
 
Good Morning,
 
What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which a 
device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.
 
It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).
 
I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
those are what are typically followed in practice.
 
I appreciate any thoughts. 
 
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 < 
 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>
 
-

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 
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) 
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread Charlie Blackham

Rajneesh

Please note, compliance with EN 55032 is not “required” after March 2017 any 
more than EN 55022 is “required” now – it might be heavily recommended, but it 
is not “required”.

A Harmonised Standard:

· Provides a presumption of Conformity with a Directive

· Is what market enforcement authorities “expect to see” (and is what I 
would typically recommend that you apply)


The legal requirement is to comply with the Directive and the Directive does 
provide more than one way to do that.

The other thing to note, is that a presumption of conformity is obtained when a 
Harmonised Standard is “applied” and not “tested against”.
You may find that an analysis of your test set-up and results allow you to make 
a technical justification that the product meets 55032, so you can “apply” the 
new standard without necessarily having to re-test

The responsibility remains with the manufacturer and not with the test lab – 
they should be expert at testing, but it is the manufacturer who must 
demonstrate compliance with the Directive.


Regards
Charlie

From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Hi All

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

Regards,
Rajneesh
-


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 
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)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

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


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread Bill Stumpf

EN 55032 and EN 55022 are harmonized Standards which can be tested to in order 
for presumption of conformity to the EMC Directive.  Once EN 55022 is withdrawn 
you will need to update your DOC to indicate compliance with EN 55032, assuming 
you continue to use the Harmonized Standard route to compliance.  EN 55032 adds 
several types of equipment to the scope of the standard, along with appropriate 
test procedures.  Basic radiated and conducted testing of ITE remains close to 
the same with the exception of how the EUT periphery is measured with respect 
to the distance to the measurement antenna.  You may find from a review of the 
testing done on your product for EN 55022 compliance that continued compliance 
with EN 55032 can be shown.  In that case you may not need to perform any 
re-test to the new standard.  If so, then keep your formal review as part of 
your technical file and update your DOC.

Bill



From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Hi All

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

Regards,
Rajneesh
-


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 
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)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald 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 
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)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

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


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

Mediaeval scholars used to answer any question by beginning with the Creation. 
I think that answers should be kept strictly simple and not explore the whole 
Universe.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Rajneesh
 
Please note, compliance with EN 55032 is not “required” after March 2017 any 
more than EN 55022 is “required” now – it might be heavily recommended, but it 
is not “required”.
 
A Harmonised Standard:
*Provides a presumption of Conformity with a Directive
*Is what market enforcement authorities “expect to see” (and is what I 
would typically recommend that you apply)
 
The legal requirement is to comply with the Directive and the Directive does 
provide more than one way to do that.
 
The other thing to note, is that a presumption of conformity is obtained when a 
Harmonised Standard is “applied” and not “tested against”.
You may find that an analysis of your test set-up and results allow you to make 
a technical justification that the product meets 55032, so you can “apply” the 
new standard without necessarily having to re-test
 
The responsibility remains with the manufacturer and not with the test lab – 
they should be expert at testing, but it is the manufacturer who must 
demonstrate compliance with the Directive.
 
 
Regards
Charlie
 
From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Hi All
 
For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?
 
Regards,
Rajneesh
-

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 
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) 
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald 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 
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) 
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald 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 


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

Fo

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

A simple, undefined assertion is of no value. What is not correct?
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:31 PM
To: John Woodgate ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Your previous comment…..
 
>From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
>Sent: 18 October 2016 18:24
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
>Yes, the docopocoss for EN 55022 is 5 March 2017. Products leaving the factory 
>after that must meet EN 55032.
 
…was simple, but it wasn’t correct
 
Regards
Charlie
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 20:38
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
 
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Mediaeval scholars used to answer any question by beginning with the Creation. 
I think that answers should be kept strictly simple and not explore the whole 
Universe.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Rajneesh
 
Please note, compliance with EN 55032 is not “required” after March 2017 any 
more than EN 55022 is “required” now – it might be heavily recommended, but it 
is not “required”.
 
A Harmonised Standard:
*Provides a presumption of Conformity with a Directive
*Is what market enforcement authorities “expect to see” (and is what I 
would typically recommend that you apply)
 
The legal requirement is to comply with the Directive and the Directive does 
provide more than one way to do that.
 
The other thing to note, is that a presumption of conformity is obtained when a 
Harmonised Standard is “applied” and not “tested against”.
You may find that an analysis of your test set-up and results allow you to make 
a technical justification that the product meets 55032, so you can “apply” the 
new standard without necessarily having to re-test
 
The responsibility remains with the manufacturer and not with the test lab – 
they should be expert at testing, but it is the manufacturer who must 
demonstrate compliance with the Directive.
 
 
Regards
Charlie
 
From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Hi All
 
For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?
 
Regards,
Rajneesh
-

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 
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) 
 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald 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 
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-

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread John Woodgate

This is not productive. The enquirer is clearly using the standards route , so 
there is no point in introducing the alternative and much less certain route.
 
Yes, I could have written 'de facto but not de jure'  but would it have helped 
the enquirer one iota?
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:56 PM
To: John Woodgate ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
> What is not correct?
 
The statement
“Products leaving the factory after that must meet EN 55032”
Is not correct
There is no requirement for that anywhere.
 
Regards
Charlie
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 21:50
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
 
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
A simple, undefined assertion is of no value. What is not correct?
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:31 PM
To: John Woodgate mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com> >; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Your previous comment…..
 
>From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
>Sent: 18 October 2016 18:24
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
>Yes, the docopocoss for EN 55022 is 5 March 2017. Products leaving the factory 
>after that must meet EN 55032.
 
…was simple, but it wasn’t correct
 
Regards
Charlie
 
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 20:38
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
 
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Mediaeval scholars used to answer any question by beginning with the Creation. 
I think that answers should be kept strictly simple and not explore the whole 
Universe.
 
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England
 
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
 
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Rajneesh
 
Please note, compliance with EN 55032 is not “required” after March 2017 any 
more than EN 55022 is “required” now – it might be heavily recommended, but it 
is not “required”.
 
A Harmonised Standard:
*Provides a presumption of Conformity with a Directive
*Is what market enforcement authorities “expect to see” (and is what I 
would typically recommend that you apply)
 
The legal requirement is to comply with the Directive and the Directive does 
provide more than one way to do that.
 
The other thing to note, is that a presumption of conformity is obtained when a 
Harmonised Standard is “applied” and not “tested against”.
You may find that an analysis of your test set-up and results allow you to make 
a technical justification that the product meets 55032, so you can “apply” the 
new standard without necessarily having to re-test
 
The responsibility remains with the manufacturer and not with the test lab – 
they should be expert at testing, but it is the manufacturer who must 
demonstrate compliance with the Directive.
 
 
Regards
Charlie
 
From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG  
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032
 
Hi All
 
For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?
 
Regards,
Rajneesh
-

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 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-ps

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread Charlie Blackham

Your previous comment…..

>From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
>Sent: 18 October 2016 18:24
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

>Yes, the docopocoss for EN 55022 is 5 March 2017. Products leaving the factory 
>after that must meet EN 55032.

…was simple, but it wasn’t correct

Regards
Charlie

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: 18 October 2016 20:38
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Mediaeval scholars used to answer any question by beginning with the Creation. 
I think that answers should be kept strictly simple and not explore the whole 
Universe.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates 
Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Rajneesh

Please note, compliance with EN 55032 is not “required” after March 2017 any 
more than EN 55022 is “required” now – it might be heavily recommended, but it 
is not “required”.

A Harmonised Standard:

· Provides a presumption of Conformity with a Directive

· Is what market enforcement authorities “expect to see” (and is what I 
would typically recommend that you apply)


The legal requirement is to comply with the Directive and the Directive does 
provide more than one way to do that.

The other thing to note, is that a presumption of conformity is obtained when a 
Harmonised Standard is “applied” and not “tested against”.
You may find that an analysis of your test set-up and results allow you to make 
a technical justification that the product meets 55032, so you can “apply” the 
new standard without necessarily having to re-test

The responsibility remains with the manufacturer and not with the test lab – 
they should be expert at testing, but it is the manufacturer who must 
demonstrate compliance with the Directive.


Regards
Charlie

From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Hi All

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

Regards,
Rajneesh
-


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 
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)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald 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 
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)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

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

-

This message is from th

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread Kortas, Jamison

Thanks all – at least I am not the only one unsure.

I am trying to establish a set of criteria that I can ask our engineers and 
marketers that will determine the classification. A decision tree, if you will. 
 This arose from a device that met the less stringent criteria, but not the 
more stringent and then what to do. To prevent the need to debate this topic 
over and over, I was hoping to establish a go forward approach.  Ideally, that 
approach would be “design for both industrial AND non-industrial and be done 
with it.” However, other factors are at play than just my druthers.

-Jamison

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 12:44 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

For Europe, the sources are the Generic standards, which are substantially 
consistent with CISPR 11.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
 J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: Doug Nix [mailto:d...@ieee.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 5:25 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for 
EMC testing purposes

My understanding has always been based on the Class and Group designations in 
CISPR 11 / EN 55011 for ISM equipment (based on the 2009 edition):

5.3 Division into classes
Class A equipment is equipment suitable for use in all establishments other 
than domestic and
those directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which supplies 
buildings used
for domestic purposes.

Class A equipment shall meet class A limits.
Warning: Class A equipment is intended for use in an industrial environment. In 
the
documentation for the user, a statement shall be included drawing attention to 
the fact that
there may be potential difficulties in ensuring electromagnetic compatibility 
in other
environments, due to conducted as well as radiated disturbances.
Class B equipment is equipment suitable for use in domestic establishments and 
in
establishments directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which 
supplies
buildings used for domestic purposes.
Class B equipment shall meet class B limits.

The key in all of this is the source of power supply for the equipment. If the 
equipment is supplied from mains that are shared with domestic establishments, 
then it must meet Class B requirements IMO.

If the equipment is intended for industrial use, i.e., Class A, where the power 
supply from the mains is not shared with domestic establishments, then Class A 
performance is acceptable.

The deciding factor is the sharing of the supply with domestic establishments. 
If a location is fed from its own substation and there are no dwellings 
supplied from that substation, it’s an industrial location, and therefore Class 
A.

Doug Nix
d...@ieee.org
+1 (519) 729-5704

On 18-Oct-16, at 08:44, Kortas, Jamison 
mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com>> wrote:

Good Morning,

What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which a 
device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.

It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).

I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
those are what are typically followed in practice.

I appreciate any thoughts.

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 
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

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

2016-10-18 Thread Douglas Nix

Gert,

You mention that there is a conflict, but you don't explain what the conflict 
is. Can you tell me how the EC definition varies from the definition I quoted 
from EN 55011?

Sent from my iPhone 
Doug Nix

d...@mac.com
Mobile: (519) 729-5704

> On Oct 18, 2016, at 13:55, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen 
>  wrote:
> 
> There is an on-going (silent) conflict between the European commission and a
> number of  cenelec and cispr committees, notably those responsible
> for EN 55032 and EN 55011.
> While the EC has expressed their opinion in the generic standards,
> and expressed their desire that all product committees comply with
> the definitions and limit therein, the market (standard committees) does not 
> comply to that,
> and the EC lacks power (or will) to change that.
> Therefore the discrepancy between definitions.
> 
> Note that it’s a rather complex matter as the standards are born as Worldwide 
> standards (CISPR) and are “common modified” to EN versions.
> So CISPR11 (world wide) becomes EN 55011 (Europe harmonised)  without
> changing the “Industrial” definition. 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ing.  Gert Gremmen, BSc
>  
> 
>  
> g.grem...@cetest.nl
> www.cetest.nl
> 
> Kiotoweg 363
> 3047 BG Rotterdam
> T 31(0)104152426
> F 31(0)104154953
>  
>  Before printing, think about the environment.
> 
> 
> 
> Van: Doug Nix [mailto:d...@ieee.org] 
> Verzonden: dinsdag 18 oktober 2016 18:25
> Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Onderwerp: Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial 
> for EMC testing purposes
> 
> My understanding has always been based on the Class and Group designations in 
> CISPR 11 / EN 55011 for ISM equipment (based on the 2009 edition):
> 
> 5.3 Division into classes
> Class A equipment is equipment suitable for use in all establishments other 
> than domestic and
> those directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which supplies 
> buildings used
> for domestic purposes.
> 
> Class A equipment shall meet class A limits.
> Warning: Class A equipment is intended for use in an industrial environment. 
> In the
> documentation for the user, a statement shall be included drawing attention 
> to the fact that
> there may be potential difficulties in ensuring electromagnetic compatibility 
> in other
> environments, due to conducted as well as radiated disturbances.
> Class B equipment is equipment suitable for use in domestic establishments 
> and in
> establishments directly connected to a low voltage power supply network which 
> supplies
> buildings used for domestic purposes.
> Class B equipment shall meet class B limits.
> 
> The key in all of this is the source of power supply for the equipment. If 
> the equipment is supplied from mains that are shared with domestic 
> establishments, then it must meet Class B requirements IMO.
> 
> If the equipment is intended for industrial use, i.e., Class A, where the 
> power supply from the mains is not shared with domestic establishments, then 
> Class A performance is acceptable.
> 
> The deciding factor is the sharing of the supply with domestic 
> establishments. If a location is fed from its own substation and there are no 
> dwellings supplied from that substation, it’s an industrial location, and 
> therefore Class A.
> 
> Doug Nix
> d...@ieee.org
> +1 (519) 729-5704
> 
> On 18-Oct-16, at 08:44, Kortas, Jamison  wrote:
> 
> Good Morning,
>  
> What do you use for criteria when reviewing the intended environment in which 
> a device will be placed to determine if it is industrial or non-industrial? I 
> have seen and read varying opinions on what criteria to use.
>  
> It ranges from a transformer isolated factory to the nature of the other 
> products in the immediate vicinity (a mechanical room in a grocery store = 
> industrial due to the equipment in its immediate environment).
>  
> I am familiar with some of the definitions in places, but am not so sure that 
> those are what are typically followed in practice.
>  
> I appreciate any thoughts. 
>  
> 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 
> 
> 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 
> Mike Cantwell 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Jim Bacher 
> David Heald 
> 
> -
> 
> This m

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread Charlie Blackham

> What is not correct?

The statement
“Products leaving the factory after that must meet EN 55032”
Is not correct
There is no requirement for that anywhere.

Regards
Charlie

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: 18 October 2016 21:50
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

A simple, undefined assertion is of no value. What is not correct?

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates 
Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:31 PM
To: John Woodgate mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Your previous comment…..

>From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
>Sent: 18 October 2016 18:24
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

>Yes, the docopocoss for EN 55022 is 5 March 2017. Products leaving the factory 
>after that must meet EN 55032.

…was simple, but it wasn’t correct

Regards
Charlie

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: 18 October 2016 20:38
To: Charlie Blackham; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Mediaeval scholars used to answer any question by beginning with the Creation. 
I think that answers should be kept strictly simple and not explore the whole 
Universe.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates 
Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Rajneesh

Please note, compliance with EN 55032 is not “required” after March 2017 any 
more than EN 55022 is “required” now – it might be heavily recommended, but it 
is not “required”.

A Harmonised Standard:

· Provides a presumption of Conformity with a Directive

· Is what market enforcement authorities “expect to see” (and is what I 
would typically recommend that you apply)


The legal requirement is to comply with the Directive and the Directive does 
provide more than one way to do that.

The other thing to note, is that a presumption of conformity is obtained when a 
Harmonised Standard is “applied” and not “tested against”.
You may find that an analysis of your test set-up and results allow you to make 
a technical justification that the product meets 55032, so you can “apply” the 
new standard without necessarily having to re-test

The responsibility remains with the manufacturer and not with the test lab – 
they should be expert at testing, but it is the manufacturer who must 
demonstrate compliance with the Directive.


Regards
Charlie

From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Hi All

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

Regards,
Rajneesh
-


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 
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)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

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


This message is from the IE

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

2016-10-18 Thread Ghery S. Pettit

How do you figure that?  If they are using testing to harmonized standards as 
the means for issuing the DoC, after 5 March 2017 EN 55022 is of no use.  
Anything placed on the market (not just manufactured) as of that date must have 
been evaluated against EN 55032.  To the original poster – it’s the date a 
product is placed on the market in the EU, not the date of manufacture.  If it 
takes a while for a product to get from manufacturing to the market you need to 
start a bit earlier.

 

Ghery

 

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:56 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

> What is not correct?

 

The statement

“Products leaving the factory after that must meet EN 55032”

Is not correct

There is no requirement for that anywhere.

 

Regards

Charlie

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 21:50
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

A simple, undefined assertion is of no value. What is not correct?

 

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

  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 9:31 PM
To: John Woodgate ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

Your previous comment…..

 

>From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
>Sent: 18 October 2016 18:24
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

>Yes, the docopocoss for EN 55022 is 5 March 2017. Products leaving the factory 
>after that must meet EN 55032.

 

…was simple, but it wasn’t correct

 

Regards

Charlie

 

From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 20:38
To: Charlie Blackham; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

Mediaeval scholars used to answer any question by beginning with the Creation. 
I think that answers should be kept strictly simple and not explore the whole 
Universe.

 

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

  www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and 
Associates Rayleigh England

 

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

 

From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 8:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

Rajneesh

 

Please note, compliance with EN 55032 is not “required” after March 2017 any 
more than EN 55022 is “required” now – it might be heavily recommended, but it 
is not “required”.

 

A Harmonised Standard:

· Provides a presumption of Conformity with a Directive

· Is what market enforcement authorities “expect to see” (and is what I 
would typically recommend that you apply)

 

The legal requirement is to comply with the Directive and the Directive does 
provide more than one way to do that.

 

The other thing to note, is that a presumption of conformity is obtained when a 
Harmonised Standard is “applied” and not “tested against”.

You may find that an analysis of your test set-up and results allow you to make 
a technical justification that the product meets 55032, so you can “apply” the 
new standard without necessarily having to re-test

 

The responsibility remains with the manufacturer and not with the test lab – 
they should be expert at testing, but it is the manufacturer who must 
demonstrate compliance with the Directive.

 

 

Regards

Charlie

 

From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org] 
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

 

Hi All

 

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

 

Regards,

Rajneesh

-


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 


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 w

[PSES] Uncertainty Measurement Calculations [General Use]

2016-10-18 Thread Price, Andrew (Leonardo, UK)

Hi all

Can anyone shed some light on working up the Uncertainty Measurement 
Calculations based on UKAS Lab34 for MIL-STD-461 CS115 and CS116.
I need to show the uncertainty values for these tests as follows:
Uncertainty in overall test level = 2.2dB, Uncertainty in time measurement = 
1.91%, Uncertainty in Amplitude measurement = 0.82%

MIL-STD-461 defines
4.3.1 Measurement tolerances.
Unless otherwise stated for a particular measurement, the tolerance shall be as 
follows:
a. Distance: ±5%
b. Frequency: ±2%
c. Amplitude, measurement receiver: ±2 dB
d. Amplitude, measurement system (includes measurement receivers, transducers, 
cables,
and so forth): ±3 dB
e. Time (waveforms): ±5%
f. Resistors: ±5%
g. Capacitors: ±20%

Also what equipment do I include, ie. DSO, Current Probes, Calibration Jig, 
Transient Generator, etc. and what do I exclude

I hope there are some group members that have already done this process and can 
help.

Regards
Andy


LEONARDO
 Land & Naval Division
 Andrew Price
 Land & Naval Defence Electronics Division
 Prinicpal Environmental Engineer (EMC)

 Leonardo MW Ltd
 Sigma House, Christopher Martin Rd, Basildon SS14 3EL, UK
 Tel  EMC LAB : +44 (0)1268 883308
 Mobile: +44 (0)7507 854888
 
andrew.p.pr...@leonardocompany.com
 leonardocomapany.com

HELICOPTERS / AERONAUTICS / ELECTRONICS, DEFENCE AND SECURITY SYSTEMS / SPACE

P Please consider the environment before printing this email.



Leonardo MW Ltd
Registered Office: Sigma House, Christopher Martin Road, Basildon, Essex SS14 
3EL
A company registered in England & Wales.  Company no. 02426132

This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.


-

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 


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 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald:

[PSES] IEC 62368-1

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

[PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-1

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

[PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Criteria for determining industrial vs. non-industrial for EMC testing purposes

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Re: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

[PSES] Uncertainty Measurement Calculations [General Use]

29 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information