In message 31055D8BD7404A289D7B06775D423EC8@MmPc21, dated Fri, 14 Nov
2008, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes:
Thanks, I'm very glad that you have enough time to watch EMC-PSTC and
take part in discussions.
It's all part of keeping up to date, which a consultant must do. One of
: Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:04 PM
Subject: RE: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.
Piotr,
Please also consult the EU's EMC Directive guidance document for further
clarification, which can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise
In message 7861714BC9794A2C8FE39FAD9F42BC3C@MmPc21, dated Thu, 13 Nov
2008, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes:
I have in mind the open (without case) boards question just from the
beginning of my interest in EMC (2 years before we joined EU in 2004)
because since 1992 we have in
- Original Message -
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
Then you use the procedure given in Annex III of the 2004/108/EC Directive
to get a formal acceptance of your solution by a Notified Body. You can
then, under Article 7, apply the CE mark.
And probably it is the only
In message B3AA818630C942DBA06B45F1E778B315@MmPc21, dated Thu, 13 Nov
2008, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes:
Reading this Annex it looks that I first have to have the device and
then can ask if it is OK.
Well, what I would do is to determine how far away from the board the
- Original Message -
From: Sterner, David (NY80) david.ster...@honeywell.com
Under EMC directive 2004/108/EC, apparatus means any finished
appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single
functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate
, November 12, 2008 4:54 AM
To: EMC-PSTC; Sterner, David (NY80)
Subject: Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.
- Original Message -
From: Sterner, David (NY80) david.ster...@honeywell.com
Under EMC directive 2004/108/EC, apparatus means any finished
appliance
- Original Message -
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
In the early days of the old Directive, it was considered that educational
products did not have to be tested but that Article 4 applied: if
interference occurred it must be prevented.
I don't see anything about this
In message EB68941A997545109E32136A716A995D@MmPc21, dated Fri, 7 Nov
2008, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes:
Where should I ask my questions to have the problem solved once for always?
You should take the problem to the Polish National Standards body and
ask the relevant committee
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
You should take the problem to the Polish National Standards body and
ask the relevant committee to submit your case to CENELEC TC210 for an
official 'interpretation'. It may be that TC210 would also need to refer
your case to the Commission's
In message 074D7671D8D74339973279276937D262@MmPc21, dated Fri, 7 Nov
2008, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes:
Do you know that way takes few weeks/months/years ?
You asked 'how to have the problem solved once for always'. There is no
other way than the one I described to do that.
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
And you seem to think that the emissions would be excessive anyway, so
it's doubtful that you would get a positive report from the Notified Body.
My main problem is how to make evident in papers that it is CE OK if
education circuits can be ESD
In message 8D6DAA21BC8A460FBCA6AE9A5229C9DA@MmPc21, dated Fri, 7 Nov
2008, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes:
My main problem is how to make evident in papers that it is CE OK if
education circuits can be ESD damaged because I don't see any solution
to that.
No possibility of
.
Cortland
KA5S
[Original Message]
From: Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl
To: EMC-PSTC emc-p...@ieee.org; John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
Date: 11/7/2008 8:59:55 AM
Subject: Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
And you seem
- Original Message -
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
I should be able to limit the emission just making square being not square
and persuade the pupil that it is really square what they see ;-)
Instead of work-arounds, there should be an EMC standard (or a pair, for
- Original Message -
From: Cortland Richmond k...@earthlink.net
1) Use less than 9 KHz for a clock.
1MHz generator is standard in such systems.
AM and FM receivers are a kind of basic electronic in my opinion so I'd like
to allow for taking frequency characteristics of 465kHz and
To: EMC-PSTC; John Woodgate
Subject: Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
I should be able to limit the emission just making square being not
square and persuade the pupil that it is really square what they see
;-)
Instead of work
Piotr Galka wrote:
1MHz generator is standard in such systems.
AM and FM receivers are a kind of basic electronic in my opinion so I'd
like
to allow for taking frequency characteristics of 465kHz and 10.7MHz
filters,
and see AM and FM demodulators working.
Ah, NOW I see your dilemma.
For
In message 380-220081157185821...@earthlink.net, dated Fri, 7 Nov
2008, Cortland Richmond k...@earthlink.net writes:
If connecting to an oscillator circuit with an oscilloscope violates
the EMC directive, we may all be out of business.
In the early days of the 89 Directive, people did ask
: RE: Deviation of Performance Criteria
Hi Brian,
I agree with you, I don't see any other statements.
Table 2 evaluation of immunity test results notes possible combinations of
device function, phenomenon and performance criteria. This has been removed in
EN 61326-1:2006
In message 9CDAF73DC0CB442B85AB1E465A56B716@MmPc21, dated Thu, 6 Nov
2008, Piotr Galka piotr.ga...@micromade.pl writes:
I plan to produce the electronic education system.
If I have the PCB with single transistor amplifier (or some OpAmp
circuit) to allow pupil to measure it I have to make all
Brian,
Most of the immunity standards allow the manufacture to state some lesser
performance criteria when the product doesn't meet the requirements. In most
cases a test lab can't dictate product performance and specifications. Only
note the results in a test report.
IMO,
One way of
As I read EN 61326, it allows the manufacturer to specify the performance
criteria for each test. The standard only requires that equipment shall not
become dangerous or unsafe as a result of the application of the tests. Table
2 is only an example of evaluation of immunity test results. The
that allows the
deviation?
Thanks,
The Other Brian
From: Ted Eckert [mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:53 PM
To: Kunde, Brian; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: Deviation of Performance Criteria
As I read EN 61326
24 matches
Mail list logo
