RE: non CE upgrades in the EU
The European Council has also published a guideline document on the application of the EMC Directive. You can download it at : http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/newguide.html Paragraph 7 discusses, reconditioned, reconfigured and refurbished equipments, both CE marked and not. In the case of non CE marked apparatus, application of the EMC Directive is not mandatory unless, as a result of the modifications, it becomes as-new apparatus. As-new apparatus is defined as having identical (or similar) performance as, and adapted to the technical progress to the new apparatus placed on the market at the same time. If the modified equipment is not as-new, the EMC Directive does not apply. Doug Frazee EMC Compliance Engineer Windermere Information Technology Systems MILCOM Compliance Laboratories (MCL) division 401 Defense Highway Annapolis, MD 21401 USA (410) 266-1793 (410) 266-1751 FAX dfra...@windermeregroup.com -Original Message- From: Richard Cass [SMTP:richard_c...@iris.scitex.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 8:12 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:non CE upgrades in the EU Greetings, We have a situation where we have ITE equipment installed at a commercial sites in the EU that were delivered before January 1, 1996. They do not carry the CE mark. We are now working on some field retrofitable design changes that can be installed in these old machines. The upgrade is done by a service engineer and mostly involves exchanging circuit boards. It will be economically impossible to make this upgrade of an old configuration machine meet standards that would apply to new products shipped to the EU today (e.g. EN50081 class B). My questions boil down to these: 1.) Given that the specific machine was already placed in service in the EU before 1/1/96, does this mean selling a customer this upgrade kit forces us to meet the latest standards and then CE mark the product? 2.) Does the upgrade kit (a bunch of loose boards that do not function outside our machine, other parts, and instructions in box) have to be CE marked? I am pretty certain that the answer to 2 is NO and I am fairly certain (which is less than pretty certain) that the answer to 1 is also NO. Can anyone help me substantiate these answers or correct me if I am wrong? Thanks in advance for the usual insightful responses. Regards, Richard Cass Iris Graphics Bedford,MA USA
Re: CBEMA Curve and IEEE 446 Orange Book
Hello Mike, The ITIC (Information Technology Industry Council) was formerly known as CBEMA (Computer Business Equipment Manufacturers Association, Inc., - I believe). An ITIC link can be found on the Safety Link (http://www.safetylink.com) Regards, Art Michael, Editor -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- |http://www.safetylink.com | || | The Safety Link is the most comprehensive collection | |of product safety and standards links on the WEB| |Check our latest offer | || || | Int'l Product Safety News | | Celebrating our 10th Aniversary, 1988-1998 | || | P.O.Box 1561 - WWW | |Middletown CT 06457-8061 U.S.A. | | Phone: (860) 344-1651 Fax: (860) 346-9066 | |email: i...@connix.com | -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, MikSherman wrote: Quick quiz time: What does CBEMA stand for on the voltage sag and drop-out curves, such as in the IEEE 446 orange book and other places? Someone here at work asked me, and I'm stumped! thanks! Mike Sherman FSI International miksher...@aol.com
Israel
George Greetings, Can anyone tell me whether CE or FCC UL/CSA are accepted in Israel for a wireless telecom product? Or perhaps what agency I could contact to find out more? Many Thanks -- George Stults CTS, Seattle WA Transmitters need Type Approval from the Israel Ministry of Communications. Equipment connected to the telephone network also needs Type Approval from the Ministry of Communications. In both cases Type Approval can be based on results in test reports from FCC or cetain European approval bodies, without further testing, as long as the results show compliance with Israeli requirements. Compliance with Israel Standard 961 Part 6 (equivalent to CISPR 22 with national deviations) is required. For mains connected equipment, compliance with Israel Standard 1121 (equivalent to IEC 950 with national deviations) is required. Application to the Ministry of Communications can only be made by local importer/distributor to ensure local support for product. For further information try: http://www.itl.co.il Regards, Jon Griver ITL (Product Testing) Ltd. Tel: +972-3-5339022 Fax: +972-3-5339019 email: stand...@itl.co.il
CBEMA Curve and IEEE 446 Orange Book
Quick quiz time: What does CBEMA stand for on the voltage sag and drop-out curves, such as in the IEEE 446 orange book and other places? Someone here at work asked me, and I'm stumped! thanks! Mike Sherman FSI International miksher...@aol.com
EN55013 Question.
Hello EN55013 Experts, I have been reviewing EN55013 and think I understand most of it, however I have a question that perhaps someone in the group can answer. Clause 3.2 of EN55013 (I have the 1990 version) is titled Limits of mains terminal disturbance voltage and includes this paragraph: If the measurements with the quasi-peak detector give values equal or less that the limits for the measurement with the average detector, then the limit for the measurement with the average detector need not be carried out. I understand that this clause applies to conducted emission measurements. My question is this; does the paragraph quoted above apply to Clauses 3.3 through 3.5 as well? The way Clauses 3.3 through 3.5 are written it is my guess that it does not since it appears that the paragraph in Clause 3.2 is not referred to by any of the other clauses. If my guess is correct, then that would indicate that I can chose either the quasi-peak or the average measurement method for performing tests in accordance with Clause 3.5 without having to use the average measurement method as a final check. Is this the common interpretation and understanding? Just doing a sanity check... Kaan L. Gregersen Compliance Engineering Manager Harman Music Group (801) 569-7615
RF Exposure
Looking for a supplier of mannequins (head, upper torso, whole body?) to simulate and measure the absorption of RF energy from very close emitters (cell phones, man-pack radios, telemetry). Anyone have any leads for anything from raw materials to complete dummies? -- Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 619-505-2780 List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 03/17/98 Time: 11:51:54 --
Re: non CE upgrades in the EU
Richard, Per section 7.2.1.1 of the latest Guidelines on the Application of the EMC Directive you would only have to comply with the EMC directive if you were bringing the equipment up to as-new status. That is, if you made the equipment competitive with new devices used for the same purpose. Otherwise the updated old equipment could have a competitive advantage partly because it would not need to comply. This same section does, however, suggest that you be ready to justify your decision in case you're ever challenged. Dick Shultz Complinace Approvals Manager Brooktrout Technology, Inc. On 3/17/98 9:11 AM Richard Cass richard_c...@iris.scitex.com said: Greetings, We have a situation where we have ITE equipment installed at a commercial sites in the EU that were delivered before January 1, 1996. They do not carry the CE mark. We are now working on some field retrofitable design changes that can be installed in these old machines. The upgrade is done by a service engineer and mostly involves exchanging circuit boards. It will be economically impossible to make this upgrade of an old configuration machine meet standards that would apply to new products shipped to the EU today (e.g. EN50081 class B). My questions boil down to these: 1.) Given that the specific machine was already placed in service in the EU before 1/1/96, does this mean selling a customer this upgrade kit forces us to meet the latest standards and then CE mark the product? 2.) Does the upgrade kit (a bunch of loose boards that do not function outside our machine, other parts, and instructions in box) have to be CE marked? I am pretty certain that the answer to 2 is NO and I am fairly certain (which is less than pretty certain) that the answer to 1 is also NO. Can anyone help me substantiate these answers or correct me if I am wrong? Thanks in advance for the usual insightful responses. Regards, Richard Cass Iris Graphics Bedford,MA USA
Shielded keyboard connector
I am looking for a shielded keyboard connector ( Standard 5 pin DIN ). We manufacture industrial computer chassis and I need a shielded keyboard connector that will be mounted on the bulkhead in the front of the unit. The bulkhead has a D shaped hole that the connector is inserted through and then a collar is screwed onto the back. We have found several metal connectors, but the shield pin is not connected to the metal body. This requires that we use a ground lead from the shield pin to the chassis and we do not have a convenient connection point nearby. I need a bulkhead mounted connector that does not require the use of an additional ground lead to connect the shield to the chassis. Jeff Busch Compliance Engineer je...@ibus.com I-Bus619-974-8470 San Diego 619-268-7863 fax
Israel
Greetings, Can anyone tell me whether CE or FCC UL/CSA are accepted in Israel for a wireless telecom product? Or perhaps what agency I could contact to find out more? Many Thanks -- George Stults CTS, Seattle WA
non CE upgrades in the EU
Greetings, We have a situation where we have ITE equipment installed at a commercial sites in the EU that were delivered before January 1, 1996. They do not carry the CE mark. We are now working on some field retrofitable design changes that can be installed in these old machines. The upgrade is done by a service engineer and mostly involves exchanging circuit boards. It will be economically impossible to make this upgrade of an old configuration machine meet standards that would apply to new products shipped to the EU today (e.g. EN50081 class B). My questions boil down to these: 1.) Given that the specific machine was already placed in service in the EU before 1/1/96, does this mean selling a customer this upgrade kit forces us to meet the latest standards and then CE mark the product? 2.) Does the upgrade kit (a bunch of loose boards that do not function outside our machine, other parts, and instructions in box) have to be CE marked? I am pretty certain that the answer to 2 is NO and I am fairly certain (which is less than pretty certain) that the answer to 1 is also NO. Can anyone help me substantiate these answers or correct me if I am wrong? Thanks in advance for the usual insightful responses. Regards, Richard Cass Iris Graphics Bedford,MA USA
RE: EU Languages for User Instructions
Eric, Tania and group Tania makes some correct remarks about the EN 60950, and by applying this standard she's right. The LVD directive, and it's essential requirements do no implicitly talk about language. As the EN 60950 and any other European standard are no law, but just give presumption of compliance, no item in the standard has legal force. I want to encourage the statement that any EU official language may be used for documentation allover the EU. No exceptions can be tolerated regarding national languages. If they want it, let them amend the directive ! As a human being concerned with safety however, i recommend any manufacturer to add essential safety requirements in all EU languages to any item shipped to Europe. Let's not get mixed up between what we want and what we are enforced to do ! Regards Gert Gremmen == CE-test, qualified testing, Consultancy, Compliance tests for EMC and Electrical Safety 15 Great EMC-design tips available ! Visit our site : http://www.cetest.nl The Dutch Electronics Directory http://www.cetest.nl/electronics.htm == -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van:Grant, Tania [SMTP:tania.gr...@octel.com] Verzonden: dinsdag 17 maart 1998 2:17 Aan:emc-p...@ieee.org ; eric.lif...@natinst.com Onderwerp: RE: EU Languages for User Instructions Eric, 1.7.14 of EN60950 states: Instructions and equipment marking related to safety shall be in a language which is acceptable in the country in which the equipment is to be installed. Note:-- Documentation intended for use only by SERVICE PERSONNEL is permitted to be in the English language. However, as you point out, Annex ZC has this German deviation that requires ALL equipment instructions be translated into German. Tania Grant, Lucent Technologies, Octel Messaging Division tgr...@lucent.com __ Reply Separator _ Subject: EU Languages for User Instructions Author: eric.lif...@natinst.com [SMTP:eric.lif...@natinst.com] at CORP List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:3/16/98 4:09 PM I'd like to get the current info regarding user instructions and all requirements that may exist for translation into local member-state languages for certain directives of the CE Mark. My research so far indicates that: Machinery Directive: the directive states that instructions must exist in one EU language, and when ultimately placed into use, the original instructions must also be accompanied by a translation into the local language. In other words, for most of the EU two sets of user instructions are required whenever equipment subject to the MD is placed into use. This seems clear. Low Voltage Directive: this directive does not speak to user instruction translations; unless, a particular annexed safety standard has explicit user information requirements? EMC Directive: this directive does not speak to user instruction translations. German Deviation to EN 60950: known as Annex ZC 1.7.14, a local deviation, requires translation of maintenance instructions into German. My application is primarily lab, measurement, and control equipment (largely board/module level devices) under the EMC/LVD, with some interest in the MD since our newest motion products may easily end up embedded in machinery applications. The MD applications are integrated and resold by other parties, which I believe shifts the translation burden to the integrator anyway. Otherwise, I suspect that translation requirements are basically local laws and are independent of the CE Mark Directives, except for the MD of course. Thanks and Regards, Eric Lifsey Compliance Engineer National Instruments
RE: Singapore, Poland and Australia
Kamran, I can advise in terms of Australian requirements. It is important to define what is meant by commercial. For example the Australian legislation for EMC considers commercial equipment as that which would only be used in a computer room type environment, ie rack mounted equipment etc. For what the Australian legislation considers commercial equipment, the EMC requirements would be compliance with either AS/NZS 3548 CLASS A, EN55022 CLASS A or CISPR-22 CLASS A. Approval is a Supplier Declaration scheme very similar to that of Europe whereby the Supplier or importer (therefore local organisation) is responsible for establishing a Compliance Folder (like a Euro TCF) comprising test reports and product information etc. plus a signed Declaration of Conformity (DoC). The DoC must be signed by someone from a local organisation. Safety is AS/NZS 3260. This standard is the Australian national standard version of IEC 950 with Australian deviations. No approval required unless the product is a telecomms product. Best regards, Kevin RichardsonPh: 02-43-29-4070 Stanimore Pty Limited Fax: 02-43-28-5639 The Technology Requirements Specialists Int'l: +61-2-43-2x- Email: Internet: k...@compuserve.com Compuserve: 100356,374
RE: EU Languages for User Instructions
Eric, 1.7.14 of EN60950 states: Instructions and equipment marking related to safety shall be in a language which is acceptable in the country in which the equipment is to be installed. Note:-- Documentation intended for use only by SERVICE PERSONNEL is permitted to be in the English language. However, as you point out, Annex ZC has this German deviation that requires ALL equipment instructions be translated into German. Tania Grant, Lucent Technologies, Octel Messaging Division tgr...@lucent.com __ Reply Separator _ Subject: EU Languages for User Instructions Author: eric.lif...@natinst.com [SMTP:eric.lif...@natinst.com] at CORP List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:3/16/98 4:09 PM I'd like to get the current info regarding user instructions and all requirements that may exist for translation into local member-state languages for certain directives of the CE Mark. My research so far indicates that: Machinery Directive: the directive states that instructions must exist in one EU language, and when ultimately placed into use, the original instructions must also be accompanied by a translation into the local language. In other words, for most of the EU two sets of user instructions are required whenever equipment subject to the MD is placed into use. This seems clear. Low Voltage Directive: this directive does not speak to user instruction translations; unless, a particular annexed safety standard has explicit user information requirements? EMC Directive: this directive does not speak to user instruction translations. German Deviation to EN 60950: known as Annex ZC 1.7.14, a local deviation, requires translation of maintenance instructions into German. My application is primarily lab, measurement, and control equipment (largely board/module level devices) under the EMC/LVD, with some interest in the MD since our newest motion products may easily end up embedded in machinery applications. The MD applications are integrated and resold by other parties, which I believe shifts the translation burden to the integrator anyway. Otherwise, I suspect that translation requirements are basically local laws and are independent of the CE Mark Directives, except for the MD of course. Thanks and Regards, Eric Lifsey Compliance Engineer National Instruments
