CE testing

The test lab that I mostly use for EMC and safety testing (Intertek) sometimes take their test gear to large industrial sites, which suggests that these are not exempt just because they are large. John

I don't know of anything forbidding you doing the CE assessment & declaration on something that doesn't need it. It might encourage suspicion in some quarters.

NT

I've been researching the CE standards. What a nightmare! Millions of lines of bureaucratic legalese.

How do you even figure which standards you should test against? There are hundreds, maybe thousands, and apparently each has to be purchased for a couple hundred dollars.

Any guess which CE standards would apply for a rackmount electronic instrument powered by a wall wart?

The UL/CSA 60950 electrical safety spec is apparently equivalent to IEC 60950, and that's available online.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

tirsdag den 19. juni 2018 kl. 23.09.15 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:

you call a company that does CE testing for a living and fork over some money and they'll tell you and optionally do the testing

Here you are touching upon an aspect of the EU that makes lots of people detest it, and make some want to leave it (one country already has decided to do so). It has started out as a good thing but it has overshot so much that it has become unworkable.

The original idea was that it would be a good idea to have an open market with common regulations for all countries so it would be easy to trade products without having to conform to 25 different local standards, but in practice the EU has made things much more complicated... (the EC regulation 2257/94 specifying the curvature of bananas was already mentioned in the thread...)

Of course there are always people who like these things because it is their business or it is otherwise in their advantage.

it is simple so you know exactly what you will get when you order a box of class 1 bananas, bananas that look like bananas if you don't care how they look order class 2

Are there no other differences?

Rick C.

If may be exempt from EMC requirements, but not CE in general. As an example, it still must be safe to use.

Just write to DoC that why it's exempt (reference to something) and that's it.

--
mikko

First time I was doing accredited EMC measurements I wondered why Wurth (or someone else) had all of their most expensive ferrites and stuff freely available in the lab for anybody.

After a cup of coffee I understood - you're in trouble and get you stuff through with their stuff. In their best case you've got a stamped document stating that their expensive parts are mandatory part of your product to pass EMC! Easy sales.

--
mikko

That was probably requested by big business to ensure they could be packed/transported/etc easily.

It's smart sales tactics. Almost similar to the "almost free" CAD that universities get. Once the students have their degrees they'll want that same CAD at the job.

--
Regards, Joerg 

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Having too many laws is almost equivalent to having no laws. Just don't attract attention.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

That's only in a police state. There's a Cuban law against 'dangerousness' that supports arrest for... almost anything.

IBM once had a Russian office, but after a while, trying to pay all the taxes and fill out all the forms, they found that they couldn't compete with the locals (who thought of those laws as suggestions).

Thanks, looks encouraging. I suspect a lot of the "advice" on websites is produced by entities who have an interest in you maximising use of their testing services. Such as the conformance.co.uk stuff perhaps.

To me (32) seems to be talking about equipment designed for a single particular ("a given") installation. If your stuff was for use with an experiment at the the NIF say that ought to be OK. If it is more like a wired power supply marketed for use by multiple customers / sites then it would seem to not be covered by that exemption.

I think (36) is talking about the installation as a whole, e.g. the entire test cell or engine factory perhaps.

--

John Devereux

Hi

The "rackmount electronic instrument powered by a wall wart" is too generic (and the "wall wart" part may not even be relevant).

You did not specifically say, what the thing is doing (or for what purpose it is primarily intended). That would be the first question.

From what you said, it seems to be a piece of laboratory, test or measurement equipment ("it's going into a test cell ...").

Note that this category also includes things outputting signals rather than measuring them, like pulse generators, signal generators and the like - signal sources being treated essentially the same as meters.

Laboratory, test and measurement equipment would be under IEC 61010-1, (for electrical safety) and any circuits thereof exposed for the purpose of test or measurement (like signal inputs and outputs for signals to / from equipment under test) under IEC 61010-2-30.

Note that the term "measurement circuit" from 61010-2-30 has a rather generic meaning and applies to an output from a signal source just as well as it applies to an input to e.g. a voltmeter. The criterion is that it accepts or supplies a signal for test or measurement purposes.

Ports for other signals, especially those for communication would be covered by other standards. Ethernet, USB, and anything else that is intended to be connected to PCs (or networks with PCs) is typically covered by IEC 60950 (and soon will be by its replacement IEC 62368-1, with IEC 60950 being slowly phased out).

Note that this means that you may have to apply multiple safety standards to one piece of equipment. This includes decisions, which standard is applied to which part, and how to properly separate them.

If (for example) you have an electrically powered (through a wall wart or not) device that measures or outputs a test signal and is controlled from information technology equipment (via ethernet or similar), you'd have to apply all 3 standards mentioned above.

In this case, the primary function of the device ("Is it primarily a signal source with added networking capabilities or is it primarily an information technology equipment with some added signal output?") will determine the "leading" standard. That is, the standard being applied to the device as a whole. In addition to this leading standard, other standards may apply to particular parts and subcircuits (ethernet ports, embedded PCs or similar computing sub-equipment and the like) of the device.

The declaration of conformity (for CE) mentions the "leading" standard (actually all the applicable leading standards, there may be one for safety, another one for EMC, and so on).

Note that for electronic test equipment, there will usually be a question concerning the measurement category ("CAT") ratings. These come from IEC 61010-2-30 and apply to "measurement circuits".

You've most likely seen CAT III or IV ratings on multimeters.

Every piece of measurement equipment that can have its signal inputs (or outputs, consider a multimeter in "Ohms" mode) connected to the mains, needs an appropriate "measurement category" rating for the inputs (or outputs) in question. Note that this also includes accidental connection in the "wrong" mode as well (like "Ohms"), if the test equipment is technically capable of being placed in such a mode.

For ports NOT intended to be connected to mains, like those of signal generators, you need to specifically rate them as "measurement circuits without a measurement category". They have their own small chapter (in IEC 61010-2-30) and their own requirements for electrical safety.

In addition to the technical safety requirements, there is also a symbol for these ports and some text that needs to go into the user manual, which includes all safety-relevant electrical ratings. Typically the manufacturer will also need to include a warning that the port in question is not rated for a direct connection to mains power.

Note that the IEC 61010-1 standard is a rather generic one, and it applies to laboratory and test equipment not otherwise covered by a more specific standard for the particular type of equipment. It's a "fall-back" option for test equipment for which no more specific safety standard is applicable.

Note also that all the above is based on my (more or less wild) guess, and I don't know your device. Also all the above is from memory. My recollection of the standards mentioned is limited, and certainly missing a lot of things that would have to be evaluated properly.

Regards Dimitrij

There are thousands of IEC specs, and some come in multiple parts, and each costs about $200. How do you know which specs apply to a piece of gear, such as to allow the CE sticker?

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics

I have asked

in the past, paid by the amount of time they spent on helping me. They were not doing our testing, so had not much incentive to list more standards than necessary. You can also put the testing job out to quote with a few different test houses and see whether they come back with a consistent list of standards.

It is pretty outrageous that standards required by law are not available to read free of charge, and it is a problem in many countries. You might like the work of Carl Malamud:

You might find a local library that you can visit, that has paid for a licence to view the standards.

No. It doesn't actually work like that. I recently helped a test equipment product through testing for CE marking and USA sale. It had ethernet and various other communication ports as well as measurement inputs and test signal outputs.

The whole thing was safety tested according to the test equipment standard 61010-1. It was not necessary to apply 62368-1 or 60950.

There is a lot of work going on to rationalise standards and mutual acceptance of test results so as to make CE and USA requirements converge.

The new 62368-1 standard is not just a replacement for 60950 as it also merges in the old standard for audio and video equipment. This makes a lot of sense because A/V and computer equipment are often indistinguishable nowadays. It also introduces a new way of thinking about hazards in a more generic way as energy sources, harm that can be caused by those energy sources and barriers or other mechanisms (including documentation) to prevent that harm.

It is currently acceptable to use safety critical components tested to 60950 as part of a 62368-1 product. This will eventually change.

John

I had some equipment EMC tested by a consultant many years ago. It needed a few filters added.

Luckily, his brother-in-law's company made just the right parts.

Cheers

--
Clive