Battery Charger:Testing for CE Compliance
Stuart, I think that not only has our EMC discussions not fully answered your original question, what specific tests, but the discussions have completely left product safety requirements to the wind. Our company (a commercial test lab) tests many products of this sort for compliance to EU standards for the CE Mark. We test for multiple manufacturers worldwide and we've all agreed on the requirements below. But first the disclaimer: The exact test plan and standards we would follow will depend on more product specifics than I currently have. But, let's assume it's a desktop charger for batteries of the type used in cell phones, radios, laptops, etc. that can be used in the home or office environment. You'll have both EMC requirements and Product Safety Requirements. You'll go to the EN50081-1/EN50082-1 and/or EN55024 for the EMC requirements. They will point you to the following specific set of tests. EMC REQUIREMENTS: Emissions to: EN55022 Class B Immunity to: EN61000-4-2 Electrostatic Discharge EN61000-4-3 Radio Frequency Immunity (make sure to include ENV5024: Keyed Carrier) EN61000-4-4 Electrical Fast Transients EN61000-4-5 Surge EN61000-4-6 Conducted Immunity EN61000-4-8 Power Frequency Magnetic Fields (probably could be omitted for your charger) EN61000-4-11 Voltage Dips and Interruptions EN61000-3-2 Harmonics EN61000-3-3 Flicker PRODUCT SAFETY REQUIREMENTS: This is where it gets a little confusing. IEC/EN60950 for the product safety of general ITE equipment is a catch all here, but you may find product specific standards more closely apply to your product and its marketability. EN60335-2-29 is the non-harmonized European standard specifical ly for battery chargers and has an international IEC standard relating, but outside of the EU it is not nearly as recognized. A great deciding factor is your end product, in your case, what is being charged? Most manufacturers go with the EN60950 standard. It is harmonized and allows easy crossing over to US safety approvals. Although some care should be taken here as UL mandates UL1310 / CSA223 not UL1950. Look into the type of product you'll charge (is it ITE? If yes, go with 60950) and where the product will be sold (if EU only, go with 60335-2-29). Good Luck. Best Regards, Scott Proffitt Advanced Compliance Solutions, Inc. Atlanta, GA 770-831-8048 From: Stuart Lopata stu...@timcoengr.com To: Internet Mail::[emc emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org] Subject: Testing for the EMC directive List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 8/15/01 9:59 AM I have a consumer battery charger. What set of tests need to be done for CE mark approval? Sincerely looking for answers, Stuart Lopata Timco Engineering
RE: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
Don, I do not believe that circuit-to-circuit testing is required between low-voltage circuits. The test is intended to prevent shock hazards caused by insulation leakage between high-voltage circuits and low-voltage circuits. I would group the circuits for production testing and only test them separately (for diagnostic purposes) if the test failed. Scott Lacey -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of don_macart...@selinc.com Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 2:13 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Manufacturing Hipot Testing Dear Group: A Hipot standard which we must run for CE compliance requires that circuit-to-circuit and circuit-to-ground testing be performed on a routine basis. The test is applied for 10s. The products I deal with have many circuits (Inputs, outputs, etc.) so test time is excessive . To speed test time the standard allows for grouping of similar circuits and decreasing the test time to 1s (with increased voltage). There is a problem with the grouping method because faults between circuits in the group are masked. A better way of performing dielectric strength testing would be to automate a process where each individual circuit is hipot tested to ground for 1 second. The problem is that this method doesn't match what the CE standard requires. Some of you have probably been in similar circumstances. What did you do? What do you suggest? Do I meet the standard no matter the cost? What is the risk of having my CE Mark pulled and perhaps my company sued if I do not meet the entire standard? Regards, Don MacArthur --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
virus targeting list?
Hello Group, This is a little off topic but possibly of interest. I just received an email from a location in Mexico, from someone I don't know at some college, that contained the virus 'sircam.' I thought it might be of interest because EMCPSTC is the only forum I'm monitoring and responding to, so I'm guessing that someone on the list got hit and that it may be that many of you will see it as well. Here is a link that talks about it: http://www.datafellows.com/v-descs/sircam.shtml The message you'll see is like this: From: [user@address] To: [user@address] Subject: [document name without extension] Hi! How are you? 'I send you this file in order to have your advice' or 'I hope you can help me with this file that I send' or 'I hope you like the file that I sendo you' or 'This is the file with the information that you ask for' See you later. Thanks If a system's language is set to Spanish the worm sends messages in Spanish: Hola como estas ? 'Te mando este archivo para que me des tu punto de vista' or 'Espero me puedas ayudar con el archivo que te mando' or 'Espero te guste este archivo que te mando' or 'Este es el archivo con la informaci n que me pediste' Nos vemos pronto, gracias. Needless to say, delete it. Regards, George Stults --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: current carrying conductors
Richard, The larger single wire, with appropriate ring lug, is actually the preferred construction. The two wire method is used in cases where something else in the system, such as a multi-wire connector, will only accept the smaller gauge wire. In that case each ring lug MUST be secured with its own star washer and nut. The stack up would be: Ring lug #1, star washer, nut, ring lug #2, star washer, nut. The screw or stud must be long enough for the top nut to have full thread engagement. Hope this is of help. Scott Lacey -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Stone, Richard A (Richard) Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:01 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: current carrying conductors Group, can you substitute one large wire 6 awg. ( handlles 63 amps. max ) for two smaller wires ( 10 awg. carries 32 amps. max. ) in Parallel. They would 1/2 the current and disperse heat better. The accepting screw terminal would allow for proper threading and tightness of connection. since you would have 2 ring lugs on one terninal instead of two. thank you, Richard, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: Manufacturing Hipot Testing
I read in !emc-pstc that don_macart...@selinc.com wrote (in 88256AAB.00 640e1a...@edison.selinc.com) about 'Manufacturing Hipot Testing', on Fri, 17 Aug 2001: A Hipot standard which we must run for CE compliance requires that circuit-to-circuit and circuit-to-ground testing be performed on a routine basis. You don't tell us which standard you are applying. You may have misinterpreted it, but we can't tell. The 'routine' production-line 100% test is NOT intended to be a time- consuming process. The people who wrote the test procedure (which did not include me) do have *just a little* experience of volume production. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: EMC and power supply
I read in !emc-pstc that Frazee, Douglas (Douglas) dfra...@lucent.com wrote (in E5AD48E09D48D511AFB800805F6FE96611BB2F@NJ7460EXCH006U) about 'EMC and power supply', on Fri, 17 Aug 2001: If the product in question is a PC, this is not the case. Both the FCC and EU allow PC's to be assembled from CE-marked components without additional testing. That is EXCEEDINGLY MISLEADING. It is *strictly* true, insofar as the EMC Directive does not require ANY TESTING AT ALL, of any sort of product. It only requires that the Declaration of Conformity be true. But that is not even half of the story. See FCC rules and EMC Directive guidelines for full details. However, the points made are correct. Yes, here is the BIG BUT: CE+CE=CE is not guaranteed and the manufacturer/integrator is responsible for the compliance of the product. How can you be sure that the Declaration is true if you do not do any tests? -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: CE test suite for computers
I read in !emc-pstc that Rich Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com wrote (in 200108171905.maa00...@epgc196.sdd.hp.com) about 'CE test suite for computers', on Fri, 17 Aug 2001: Agreed! Well, see my direct response to G. P. EN 61000-3-2 is driven by Euro power distributors who don't want to correct for non-linear loads. (But who have no quarrel with correcting for phase angle.) That's because it's practicable to correct for phase angle but it is not practicable (yet) to correct for harmonics at system level. Electricité de France has one of the first experimental system-level compensators now under trial. I don't understand the drive for EN 61000-3-3. See my comments about voltage change tolerance in my other post. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co..uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: CE test suite for computers
I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote (in d5e932f578ebd111ac3f00a0c96b1e6f09506...@orsmsx31.jf.intel.com) about 'CE test suite for computers', on Fri, 17 Aug 2001: Also EN 61000-3-3 needs to be considered. Useless standards, if you ask me. That's because you, like most Americans, do not understand the problems in Europe. Because the power distribution networks in Europe and the Americas are very differently configured, you have far fewer problems with harmonics and voltage changes, and voltage changes seem to be much more tolerated, in USA anyway. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co..uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: CE test suite for computers
Hi Ghery: Also EN 61000-3-3 needs to be considered. Useless standards, if you ask me. Agreed! EN 61000-3-2 is driven by Euro power distributors who don't want to correct for non-linear loads. (But who have no quarrel with correcting for phase angle.) I don't understand the drive for EN 61000-3-3. Best regards, Rich --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: CE test suite for computers
Also EN 61000-3-3 needs to be considered. Useless standards, if you ask me. Ghery -Original Message- From: Frazee, Douglas (Douglas) [mailto:dfra...@lucent.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:19 AM To: 'Pettit, Ghery'; 'Stuart Lopata'; emc Subject: RE: CE test suite for computers Ghery, I believe 61000-3-2, Class D is also required. Doug Frazee Regulatory Compliance Manager Lucent Technologies, Broadband Carrier Networks Access Technology Division InterNetworking Systems (301) 809-4415 (301) 352-4730 FAX dfra...@lucent.com -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [mailto:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:39 PM To: 'Stuart Lopata'; emc Subject: RE: CE test suite for computers Stuart, For ITE the requirements are EN 55022:1994 (through 1 August 2003) and EN 55024:1998. If you wish to test to anything else, you need to go through a Competent Body and convince them that the alternate standards are adequate. Ghery Pettit Intel -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata [mailto:stu...@timcoengr.com] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 12:14 PM To: emc Subject: CE test suite for computers Any info about the test suite for computers (for commercial professional markets in EU) to meet the EMC directive for the CE mark? Also wondering if there is any collection of non-harmonized standards that are currently accepted for CE mark testing? to my knowledge, EMC testing for computers requires the following. (so far) EN 55022 for ITE equipment EN 61000 3-1 through 3-11 Sincerely, Stuart Lopata
RE: CE test suite for computers
Ghery, I believe 61000-3-2, Class D is also required. Doug Frazee Regulatory Compliance Manager Lucent Technologies, Broadband Carrier Networks Access Technology Division InterNetworking Systems (301) 809-4415 (301) 352-4730 FAX dfra...@lucent.com -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [mailto:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:39 PM To: 'Stuart Lopata'; emc Subject: RE: CE test suite for computers Stuart, For ITE the requirements are EN 55022:1994 (through 1 August 2003) and EN 55024:1998. If you wish to test to anything else, you need to go through a Competent Body and convince them that the alternate standards are adequate. Ghery Pettit Intel -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata [mailto:stu...@timcoengr.com] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 12:14 PM To: emc Subject: CE test suite for computers Any info about the test suite for computers (for commercial professional markets in EU) to meet the EMC directive for the CE mark? Also wondering if there is any collection of non-harmonized standards that are currently accepted for CE mark testing? to my knowledge, EMC testing for computers requires the following. (so far) EN 55022 for ITE equipment EN 61000 3-1 through 3-11 Sincerely, Stuart Lopata
RE: EMC and power supply
I've read several responses that all indicate that the modified ITE MUST be retested for CE-compliance. If the product in question is a PC, this is not the case. Both the FCC and EU allow PC's to be assembled from CE-marked components without additional testing. See FCC rules and EMC Directive guidelines for full details. However, the points made are correct. CE+CE=CE is not guaranteed and the manufacturer/integrator is responsible for the compliance of the product. Therefore, it is a question of how much risk that you are willing to take. Under these guidelines, the power supply manufacturer is supposed to perform a full 55022/55024/FCC part 15 test program with the power supply installed into a representative PC, complete with monitor keyboard. Power supply compliance is based on testing results of this PC. Perhaps the best approach is to request a full compliance file from the PS manufacturer, examine it carefully and subject the modified PC to a limited or full test program based on your confidence in the PS test reports. Doug Frazee Regulatory Compliance Manager Lucent Technologies, Broadband Carrier Networks Access Technology Division InterNetworking Systems dfra...@lucent.com -Original Message- From: Alex McNeil [mailto:alex.mcn...@ingenicofortronic.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:37 AM To: 'am...@westin.org' Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC and power supply Hi Amund, I have experienced a CE Marked power supply, which was used to replace an existing one failing EMC EN55022 as part of the system i.e. Product + Power Supply. This was purchased to the same specification but from a different manufacturer. It seems that power supply manufacturers tend to EMC test their products with resistive loads only and not always at full load. Also, the loading is obviously different when connected to an actual product. In my opinion you must always re-test the system when one of the major sub-assemblies or components are changed, including alternative parts. You are responsible for the system EMC. The power supply manufacturer is not responsible for his CE marked power supply (assuming he has valid reports etc. to back up his Declaration of Conformity) failing in the system. The rule CE + CE not= CE is a valid statement unless proven otherwise (tested). Always abide by this and you won't go wrong. I hope this helps! Regards ALEX -Original Message- From: am...@westin.org [mailto:am...@westin.org] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 10:33 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:EMC and power supply Hi all, 1. We plan to EMC test a stand alone power supply (PS1) 2. We have an IT product which has passed the EMC test. 3. We want to remove the current power supply in the IT product and replace it with the power supply (PS1) after it has passed the EMC tests. If power supply (PS1) pass the EMC test, do we have to make any re-tests on the IT product ? I recall some talks about CE+CE not CE. Any suggestions ? Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway -- Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the
RE: current carrying conductors
Yes. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Product Safety Manager Sanmina Homologation Services peter.tar...@sanmina.com -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Stone, Richard A (Richard) Group, can you substitute one large wire 6 awg. ( handlles 63 amps. max ) for two smaller wires ( 10 awg. carries 32 amps. max. ) in Parallel. They would 1/2 the current and disperse heat better. The accepting screw terminal would allow for proper threading and tightness of connection. since you would have 2 ring lugs on one terninal instead of two. thank you, Richard, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: current carrying conductors
As a quick and simple answer, No. In a single fault condition, one cable becomes lose / detached. The reaming 32 amp capable see the full 63 amps. The result smoke, flame, etc. Expressly forbidden in some standards and knocked out by others under the single fault conditions. Only way to do this is to fuse each cable individually to 32 amps. Then it might be allowed depending on the exact configuration of the circuit. Stone, Richard A (Richard) wrote: Group, can you substitute one large wire 6 awg. ( handlles 63 amps. max ) for two smaller wires ( 10 awg. carries 32 amps. max. ) in Parallel. They would 1/2 the current and disperse heat better. The accepting screw terminal would allow for proper threading and tightness of connection. since you would have 2 ring lugs on one terninal instead of two. thank you, Richard, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, -- Andrew Carson - Product Safety Engineer, Xyratex, UK Phone: +44 (0)23 9249 6855 Fax: +44 (0)23 9249 6014 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: current carrying conductors
What happen, if one of these wire looses? Sérgio Rocha Loures Siemens Ltda. - Brazil Supply Chain - Quality and Engineering IC SC QE L Tel: +55 41 341-5755 Fax: +55 41 341-5058 E-mail: sergioro...@siemens.com.br Stone, Richard A (Richard) rsto...@lucent.com 17/08/01 10:01 Group, can you substitute one large wire 6 awg. ( handlles 63 amps. max ) for two smaller wires ( 10 awg. carries 32 amps. max. ) in Parallel. They would 1/2 the current and disperse heat better. The accepting screw terminal would allow for proper threading and tightness of connection. since you would have 2 ring lugs on one terninal instead of two. thank you, Richard, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
EMC and power supply
When I managed both EMC and power supply design groups in the '80's, I found the many tech magazine ads for open frame power supplies quite amusing. These always stated that the power supplies met FCC and other EMI requirements. How were these tested? A dummy d.c. load does NOT impose a particular challenge on a power supply. Real life loads are dynamic in nature, and can significantly alter the total EMI measured. From my knowledge of EMI testing, it became apparant that changing ANY part of a system that could conduct electrons could alter the EMI profile. One basic law holds true for electrons in a system; viz. they will always take the path of least resistance in getting from A to B. However, the least resistive path changes with increasing frequency. At the higher frequencies of interest, it is not unusual for the electrons to be racing through the metal covers rather than the intended paths. The reason that CE + CE = CE is not typically true is that a combination of units can produce EMI results that are: A. better than the sum of the individual components B. same as the individual components C. worse than any of the individual components Since global EMC requirements are based on the complete system as it will be used (e.g. PC, monitor, keyboard, mouse, printer,...) it is always best to test the complete system the the very components that will be used. George Alspaugh --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: Testing for the EMC directive
John, thanks for that update. Now I have to wonder if I am testing our ITE correctly. We have an ITE that has a thermostat and heater for outdoor use. We have been testing the heating circuit to the click requirements of EN 55014-1. However, it would appear that one could reverse the CENELEC reasoning and say that primary function determines the standard to be used - in this case it would be EN55022 - and the clicks from the heating circuit would not be evaluated. Strange. Richard Woods -- From: John Woodgate [SMTP:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:41 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Testing for the EMC directive I read in !emc-pstc that wo...@sensormatic.com wrote (in EDFA411E5E4AD2 118D6F00A0C99E4BAC0386B0B5@FLBOCEXU02) about 'Testing for the EMC directive', on Thu, 16 Aug 2001: It is confusing. Yes, the scope of EN 55014-2 does say it applies to equipment even if it contains electronic circuits. But the scope of EN 55014-1 says that the present standard applies unless the rf energy is intentionally generated. That means 'intentionally to USE the r.f.'. In that case, EN55011 applies, not EN55022. The scope goes on to say that the separate parts of the equipment such as motors and switching devices are subject to EN 55014-1. Thus, equipment with motors / switching devices are subject to EN 55014-1 and the rf circuits are subject to EN 55022 EN55022 DOES NOT apply. A battery charger is not within its scope. This point was settled officially (but, one would have thought, unnecessarily) a long time ago. The Irish standards body asked CENELEC whether a washing machine containing a microprocessor was ITE or not. The official answer was that 'Function determines the applicable standard. A washing machine is a washing machine and the standards for washing machines [which happen to be EN55014-1-and -2] apply.' and the complete device is subject to EN55014-2. I guess one could argue that it is sufficient to reference EN 55014-1 and EN55022 on the DoC instead of EN 50081-1. Either way works for me since EN 50081-1 just points to the other documents. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: ATT 54014
You can order the standard at the ATT web site listed under Technical Reference 54014. http://www.att.com/cpetesting/54014.html Ted Eckert Regulatory Compliance Engineer American Power Conversion Corporation ted.eck...@apcc.com The items contained in this e-mail reflect the personal opinions of the writer and are only provided for the assistance of the reader. The writer is not speaking in an official capacity for APC nor representing APC's official position on any matter. Dwight Hunnicutt Dwight.Hunnicutt@vina-To: 't...@world.std.com' t...@world.std.com, 'n...@world.std.com' tech.com n...@world.std.com, 'emc-p...@ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: RE: ATT 54014 o.ieee.org 08/16/01 03:21 PM Please respond to Dwight Hunnicutt Anyone know if ATT's website has ATT 54014 (ACCUNET T45) available? Global doesn't seem to have it. thanks Dwight --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
current carrying conductors
Group, can you substitute one large wire 6 awg. ( handlles 63 amps. max ) for two smaller wires ( 10 awg. carries 32 amps. max. ) in Parallel. They would 1/2 the current and disperse heat better. The accepting screw terminal would allow for proper threading and tightness of connection. since you would have 2 ring lugs on one terninal instead of two. thank you, Richard, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Removable Lithium Battery Requirements
Dear Members, For a removable lithium battery used with a device (such as a celullar telephone) what are the applicable requirements for Europe and North America? PETER S. MERGUERIAN Technical Director I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. 26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022 Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019 Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: EMC and power supply
Hi Amund, I have experienced a CE Marked power supply, which was used to replace an existing one failing EMC EN55022 as part of the system i.e. Product + Power Supply. This was purchased to the same specification but from a different manufacturer. It seems that power supply manufacturers tend to EMC test their products with resistive loads only and not always at full load. Also, the loading is obviously different when connected to an actual product. In my opinion you must always re-test the system when one of the major sub-assemblies or components are changed, including alternative parts. You are responsible for the system EMC. The power supply manufacturer is not responsible for his CE marked power supply (assuming he has valid reports etc. to back up his Declaration of Conformity) failing in the system. The rule CE + CE not= CE is a valid statement unless proven otherwise (tested). Always abide by this and you won't go wrong. I hope this helps! Regards ALEX -Original Message- From: am...@westin.org [mailto:am...@westin.org] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 10:33 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:EMC and power supply Hi all, 1. We plan to EMC test a stand alone power supply (PS1) 2. We have an IT product which has passed the EMC test. 3. We want to remove the current power supply in the IT product and replace it with the power supply (PS1) after it has passed the EMC tests. If power supply (PS1) pass the EMC test, do we have to make any re-tests on the IT product ? I recall some talks about CE+CE not CE. Any suggestions ? Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway -- Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: EMC and power supply
I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote (in 20010816231829.IKX2732.femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com@[65.11.150.27]) about 'EMC and power supply', on Thu, 16 Aug 2001: So one question is how much do you load the power supply when you test it - you may want to load it just as your ITE product does. AFAIK this is specified in EN55022 - full rated load. You can add resistive load if the power supply is under-run in the configuration being tested. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: EMC and power supply
I read in !emc-pstc that am...@westin.org wrote (in 20010816213234.4109 ..qm...@www1.nameplanet.com) about 'EMC and power supply', on Thu, 16 Aug 2001: 1. We plan to EMC test a stand alone power supply (PS1) 2. We have an IT product which has passed the EMC test. 3. We want to remove the current power supply in the IT product and replace it with the power supply (PS1) after it has passed the EMC tests. If power supply (PS1) pass the EMC test, do we have to make any re-tests on the IT product ? I recall some talks about CE+CE not CE. Indeed. CE + CE is not CE in the case of ITE. A switchboard assembly for electric power control (just switches, fuses, circuit breakers and meters) is one of the few cases where it is. You must re-test the whole product, unless you can show on technical grounds that it is not necessary to do so. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: FCC rule interpretation (add'l info)
I read in !emc-pstc that Hare, Paul ph...@pirus.com wrote (in 200108162322.f7gnm8304...@gemini2.ieee.org) about 'FCC rule interpretation (add'l info)', on Thu, 16 Aug 2001: As a side note, I've seen an FCC application where the second harmonic of the device was measured and reported to be at the limit (i.e. 54 dBuV/m). Since the second harmonic was the closest to the limit, the transmitter's power had been increased to a point at which there was zero margin (questionable philosophy considering manufacturing variabilities, I know). The limit is the limit, right?? Unfortunately, 54 dBuV/m is technically greater than 500 uV/m and the FCC wouldn't certify the device. A situation that discredits both parties. Squeezing up to an EMC limit is highly unwise, but 54 dB(uV/m) is 501.1872366... uV/m. Can we assume that the FCC can measure that precisely? In Europe, the limits are specified in dB(uV/m), but no-one has been daft enough to propose limits like 53.9790009... dB(uV/m). -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co..uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: ATT 54014
It's available in paper format for a nominal purchase fee. See URL: http://www.att.com/cpetesting/trs.html At 01:21 PM 8/16/2001 -0700, Dwight Hunnicutt wrote: Anyone know if ATT's website has ATT 54014 (ACCUNET T45) available? Global doesn't seem to have it. thanks Dwight
Re: EMC and power supply
This is interesting to me. I have tested many CE marked computer power supplies and they all met CE requirements at light loads up to about 50% loading, but somewhere over 50% loading the differential mode (dm) CE would go out of spec. This is ok if the typical power supply is derated 50% when it is used in a computer. So one question is how much do you load the power supply when you test it - you may want to load it just as your ITE product does. Another issue is how much noise does your ITE product put back on the 5 and 12 Volt rails and how good a job does each power supply do of isolating the mains from rail ripple and common mode (cm) CE. That can also be assessed but it is more work. -- From: am...@westin.org To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EMC and power supply Date: Thu, Aug 16, 2001, 4:32 PM Hi all, 1. We plan to EMC test a stand alone power supply (PS1) 2. We have an IT product which has passed the EMC test. 3. We want to remove the current power supply in the IT product and replace it with the power supply (PS1) after it has passed the EMC tests. If power supply (PS1) pass the EMC test, do we have to make any re-tests on the IT product ? I recall some talks about CE+CE not CE. Any suggestions ? Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway -- Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
RE: FCC rule interpretation (add'l info)
Stuart, As a side note, I've seen an FCC application where the second harmonic of the device was measured and reported to be at the limit (i.e. 54 dBuV/m). Since the second harmonic was the closest to the limit, the transmitter's power had been increased to a point at which there was zero margin (questionable philosophy considering manufacturing variabilities, I know). The limit is the limit, right?? Unfortunately, 54 dBuV/m is technically greater than 500 uV/m and the FCC wouldn't certify the device. I only make these comments since you have been using 54 and 74 dB in your postings... Paul Hare e: ph...@pirus.com Compliance Engineer w: 978.206.9179 Pirus Networks f: 978.206.9199 43 Nagog Park c: 508.450.0376 Acton, MA 01720 i: www.pirus.com -Original Message- From: Wismer, Sam [mailto:wisme...@ems-t.com] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 1:16 PM To: Stuart Lopata; emc Subject: RE: FCC rule interpretation (add'l info) Not sure if you got my last response. Answer is no(IMO). If the idea is to be able to take peak measurements instead of average measurements to expedite the test, then I suggest you take your peak measurements and compare them to average limits. If the peak measurement meets both the calculated peak limit(5000 uv/m) and the stated average limit(500uv/m), then there is no need to make the average measurement. If, however, the peak measurement meets only the peak limit, you are still obligated to take an average measurement and compare it to the average limit. The stated limit always takes precedence over any derived limits. ~ Sam Wismer Lead Regulatory Engineer/ Radio Approvals Engineer LXE, Inc. (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3654 Visit Our Website at: http://www.ems-t.com http://www.ems-t.com/ -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata [mailto:stu...@timcoengr.com] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 10:51 AM To: emc Subject: Fw: FCC rule interpretation (add'l info) Does this imply that we can use 74 dBuV/m (at 3 meters) rather than the 54 dBuV/m limit if we took measurements employing peak detection? I left that last part out in the previous question.
RE: EN61558 60742
Brian, As of August 1, 2001, EN 60742:1995 should not be used for presumption of conformity to the LVD. EN61558-2-6:1997 supercedes it. The last date of mfr is unimportant. The date which the xfrmrs are placed on the market determines which standards to use in order to demonstrate compliance. Although a device may be built before the date of cessation of superceded standard, it still must comply with the newer standard if that date has passed. Generally speaking, there is a three to four year window between when the new standard is announced in the Official Journal of the European Communities, and when it becomes required. Usually that is a long enough period of time to allow industry to comply with the new standards. See the following file for more info on the standards and dates of the LVD... http://www.conformity.com/lowvoltagestandards.pdf http://www.conformity.com/lowvoltagestandards.pdf Good luck... Paul Hare e: ph...@pirus.com Compliance Engineer w: 978.206.9179 Pirus Networks f: 978.206.9199 43 Nagog Park c: 508.450.0376 Acton, MA 01720 i: www.pirus.com -Original Message- From: boconn...@t-yuden.com [mailto:boconn...@t-yuden.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 12:47 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EN61558 60742 Good People of the PSTC group: Does anyone know the last date of mfr under EN60742? Has EN61558 completely superceded EN60742 for iso xfmrs? thnx much, Brian O'Connell Taiyo Yuden (USA), Inc. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
