admin

Now that the European Union EMC Directive 2004/108/EC has been “recast”, it’s time for manufacturers, importers, and distributors to adapt their CE Marking conformity assessments processes to the new EMC Directive 2014/30/EU. After April 2016, the new directive will be required for all EMC compliance files, and declarations referencing 2004/108/EC will no longer be valid. 

For the most part, compliance with the new directive 2014/30/EC will not significantly impact conformity assessment. The essential requirements listed in Annex I of the directive remain the same as before and continue to be stated in very general terms. The requirements limit electromagnetic emissions to a level that will not affect telecommunications or other equipment and require products to have immunity to electromagnetic disturbances. For permanently fixed installations, Annex I still specifies applying good engineering practices to assess compliance.

The essential requirements become more clearly defined by way of specific technical details in harmonized EN standards. Just as before, these standards when applied in full provide the “presumption of conformity” with the directive and represent the primary form of due diligence for access to European markets.

The EN harmonized standards in the Official Journal don’t change as a result of the recast directive, so the technical requirements used previously will remain the same going forward.  However, all harmonized standards are regularly updated as they evolve to adapt to new technology. It’s the manufacturer’s obligation to review the Official Journal on a regular basis and ensure their products remain compliant with the most current revision of the harmonized standards.

Some of the more significant changes in the recast 2014/30/EU relate to the operations of Notified Bodies and other practices that may not immediately impact manufacturers. However, we recommend a careful read of the new directive to understand how the changes may impact individual operators and unique cases. Annex VII in the new Directive provides a helpful correlation table that relates requirements in 2004/108/EC to 2014/30/EC.

At a minimum, Elite recommends the following steps to ensure continuing compliance with European EMC requirements:

• Check revision dates of the harmonized standards listed on technical reports.
• Review Annex IV and update the Declaration of Conformity (DoC) accordingly
  • Update the EMC Directive reference to 2014/30/EC
  • List all current revisions of the harmonized standards applied.
  • Clearly identify the apparatus in the DoC to allow traceability. 
• For self-declared products, update technical documentation as specified in Annex II (3).
• Review the CE label and confirm it’s correctly applied
• Confirm the operator’s information and technical instructions comply with Article 18.

There are other EU directives that have also been recast, including the Low Voltage Directive (LVD). Next month, we will cover the significant changes for the LVD and other related compliance requirements. 

For questions concerning the new EMC Directive 2014/30/EU, the conformity assessment process, or testing services contact the Elite sales team. We can review your current technical documentation and consult on the status of your European Union compliance.

Link to the Europa site for more information and a copy of the 2014/30/EC: https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/electrical/emc_en

Labels: EMC Directive; EU Notified Body; CE Mark

Every one of us is more than just our work and the services we provide. We have families, hobbies, and other passions that fulfill our lives and make us better at what we do each day. After working in this industry for a few years, I’ve gotten to know many of the people that make up the EMC community at large and at Elite. Here is a brief look at what makes our Elite family so unique and diverse:

So you know those people who seem to light up a room with their warmth, passion, and infectious sense of curiosity? Well, Stan Dolecki is absolutely one of those guys. Our Automotive Team Leader exudes the right mix of approachability and technical know-how that makes him both a trusted resource for customers and a great mentor for other employees. This enthusiasm and ingenuity also spill over into one of his great passions outside of work and family–scratch modeling. An avid scratch model builder since his Cub Scout days, Stan has currently been putting his skills and talent to work designing and building Steampunk and industrial-style lamps and custom fixtures. (Loosely defined, “Steampunk” is a style that brings together elements of the industrial and antique with things like gears, pipes, old-fashioned bulbs, etc.)

See the pictures on this page for a glimpse of the projects he’s been working on lately and for a better idea of the term. Also after dealing with noise and electrical component complications in his projects, he can definitely empathize with our client base who come in with similar issues day-in, day-out!  Staff like Stan with creativity, dedication, and a deep passion for EMC push us all to find better solutions and be our best selves here. Tune in next month for more surprises from the Elite team! 

Quick Team Member Facts:

• Year he started at Elite: 1988
• Areas of expertise: Automotive and Heavy Vehicle EMC; Whole Vehicle Testing; Test Setup and Test Stand Design; OEM/Company Internal Test Specifications; On-site Consulting to Troubleshoot EMC Problems; Developing Ways to Simulate Issues Seen in the Field; Designing Test Suites and Writing Test Plans to Help Customers Achieve their EMC Compliance Goals

• Education: B.S.E.E.T. DeVry (1989)
• Certifications: iNarte Test Engineer
• Most rewarding aspect of working in EMC at our company: “Any time I walk away from a client and/or team member knowing that I have been able to actually help them resolve an issue. That is the ultimate feather in my cap because taking care of our customers is and has always been our Job #1!” Stan also says he’s proud to be “entrusted with leadership roles that enable him to be a part of the growth and expansion of Elite”
• Favorite Elite anecdote: “James C. Klouda made me realize that I had greater worth, potential, and value than I had realized in one simple act. He not only took a chance in hiring me, but he gave me a chance to step up and make a difference…The difference between an idea and reality is the effort required to make it work.”

Labels: EMC Experts

CISPR is an acronym which stands for the “Comité International Spécial des Perturbations Radioélectriques”. It is the international standards organization responsible for technical requirements that regulate RF interference from electronic devices.   CISPR is part of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). 

There are several CISPR sub-committees and each is comprised of industry EMC experts who volunteer to develop harmonized international regulations for a wide range of industries. For example, CISPR 12 and 25 provide emissions test methods and limits for automotive RF Emissions, and CISPR 11 is the emissions standard for industrial, scientific, and medical equipment.

Many of the CISPR RF emissions standards become the harmonized standards for the European Union EMC Directive. When published in the Official Journal, CISPR standards take the Euro-norm prefix “EN”, as in the case of EN 55032.     

CISPR 32 is a specific standard developed for a class of electronics described as Multi-Media Equipment (MME).  MME are electronics that incorporate a range of functions that include those in Information Technology Equipment (ITE), audio equipment, video equipment, and broadcast receiving equipment.  MME also covers entertainment lighting control equipment as well as combinations of all these equipment types.

CISPR 32 has been developed to address the fact that modern-day ITE equipment now often integrates many different functions, features, and capabilities that were previously assessed by different compliance standards.  For example, personal computers still perform functions such as word processing, database management, spreadsheet calculations, and others, but they increasingly also are used to watch video and television programming. They’re used for listing to music and radio as well as for gaming and other entertainment purposes.

Rather than have separate compliance standards for equipment that can be considered ITE or video or audio equipment, we now have a single standard, CISPR 32, that addresses the case where these different features are integrated to some degree. 

CISPR 32 has been adopted by the European Union for Multimedia Equipment and is now published in the OJ for the EMC and R&TTE Directives as the harmonized EMC standard EN 55032.

What is the relationship between CISPR 32 and CISPR 22 and CISPR 13?

CISPR 32 now covers equipment that is currently within the scope of two separate specifications: CISPR 22 for Information Technology Equipment and CISPR 13 for Sound and Television Broadcast

What are the tests?

The tests include conducted emissions and radiated emissions.

The conducted measurements that are performed:

• on the AC Mains port
• on the DC Mains port
• on the network port such as on an Ethernet connection
• on the receiver port for devices with detachable antenna ports

How do the limits compare?

The AC Mains, DC Mains, Network Port, and Antenna Port conducted emissions limits in CISPR 32 are the same as compared to those currently in CISPR 22 and CISPR 13

The radiated emissions measurements and limits in CISPR 32 are the same as compared to those in CISPR 22 and CISPR 13.

CISPR 32 provides more detailed information on the specific emissions limits for various ports on the DUT, including emissions on the shields of optical fiber ports.

When will CISPR 32 become mandatory?

CISPR 32 is harmonized now in the Official Journal (OJ) for the EMC Directive and R&TTE Directive.  CISPR 22 and CISPR 13 remain in force until March 5, 2017, and products that fall under the scope of EN 55022 and EN 55013 can continue to be sold into the EU with the CISPR 22 and 13 compliance reports.

However, after March 2017 only CISPR 32 (EN55022) will provide the presumption of conformity for ITE and broadcast receiver systems.

What about the Immunity Standards for ITE and Broadcast Receivers?

The immunity standards for broadcast receivers (CISPR 20) and for ITE (CISPR 24) will remain in place for now.  However, CISPR 35 which is not currently published in the OJ will take the place of CISPR 20 and CISPR 24. There is not currently a published date for this transition, so CISPR 20 and 24 should still be applied in parallel depending on the MME functionality.

Labels:

• CISPR 22
• CISPR
• CISPR 32

Join Elite’s monthly newsletter for the latest on standards, test procedures, fascinating facts, profiles of Elite engineers, and more. Fill out the form below to become part of our global community!

Elite Celebrates 60 Years of Service

We recently found Jim Klouda’s engineer log book from September 1954.  In it, we can see his handwritten notes, data, calculations, sketches, and simple wiring schematics. It describes the early days of Elite as he was making measurements and solving interference problems for customers in ways that are remarkably similar to what we do today. 

Much has changed since 1954. Measurements that used to be recorded manually now rely on software and automation to process data efficiently and accurately. We have sophisticated instruments and unique facilities to work with today’s complex electronics and communications equipment. These are the tools necessary to test and solve technical problems in 2014.

Very little immunity testing was performed by Elite in 1954. Now we provide a wide range of RF and transient immunity tests. The ubiquitous microprocessor and modern electronics we have today require it.

Electrical circuitry and RF filter designs engineered by Jim in 1954 were massive compared to those we see in our lab now. RF filters today rely on the same basic engineering principles as in the past but physically implementing a filter circuit on a small surface mount PCB requires the use of soldering skills resembling that of a micro-surgeon.  

What has not changed between then and now is the personal aspect of providing a professional service and the need for technical expertise. We know that Jim was skilled at his craft. His customers recognized it and they could trust his technical expertise to solve their problems.  Jim treated his customers well and they in turn respected him and appreciated his work.

Today, our customers tell us (in person and by our surveys) that they still consider technical expertise as their primary need when it comes to testing services. They want skilled EMC (and environmental) test engineers and they want accuracy and efficient work.  They want knowledgeable experts in the standards and regulations; they want skilled test practitioners familiar with the fine details; they recognize the value in having confidence in our results.   

Our customers also tell us they want ready access to our lab on their timetable, and sometimes that means access on short notice. To provide schedule flexibility we have to continually invest in new personnel, facilities, and equipment so that we have a reasonably short backlog, but not to the extent that we have costly excess capacity.   

As we celebrate Elite’s 60^th year in business we reflect back on Jim Klouda’s early days and see that his approach to business remains very much the same for us today—We need to be experts in our craft and we need to solve customer problems, be they technical, schedule, or other.  

As stewards of Jim Klouda’s legacy, we are more focused than ever on ensuring that the Elite brand is defined as having the most qualified and knowledgeable test engineers and support staff in the industry, and for having the testing resources in place to be responsive to our customers’ needs. These fundamentals are the core of our business and are indeed the Elite Mission Statement and Brand Promise. 

From the ownership team at Elite, we sincerely appreciate the trust that our customers have placed in Elite. We look forward to helping clients be successful in their business and want to do our part to keep each and every one of our customers the leaders in their industries.

Thank you for being an Elite customer. We’re here to serve you.  

Sincerely,

Raymond Klouda, President
Thomas Klouda, Vice-President
Joseph Klouda, Vice-President

Labels: 60 Years of Testing; EMC Experience

Every one of us is more than just our work and the services we provide. We have families, hobbies, and other passions that fulfill our lives and make us better at what we do each day. After working in this industry for a few years, I’ve gotten to know many of the people that make up the EMC community at large and at Elite. Here is a brief look into what makes our Elite family so unique and diverse…

Like most of us, Adam Grant is more than just a focused test engineer helping customers get through a job. While a dedicated member of our Military and Commercial Aviation Department, he is also a 2^nd degree Black Belt and trains others in Tae Kwon Do.  Adam got into martial arts at the beginning of high school, initially as a way to get active. What really hooked him was the drive for self-improvement and it broke the shy teen out of his shell. At work every day, he utilizes the concentration and self-control honed by Tae Kwon Do to test efficiently and solve problems when difficulties arise.  He now teaches martial arts and self-defense through “Adam’s Fit Tae Kwon Do” in his spare time (which is limited to a new addition to his family on top of work). Commitment to the success of our employees and customers—within our walls or without—continues to make Elite what we are today.

Quick Team Member Facts:

• Year he started at Elite: 2003
• Areas of expertise: Military, Commercial Aviation, and Aerospace EMC Testing; Performs full spectrum of qualification tests
• Education: B.S.E.E.T. DeVry (2001)
• Certifications: iNarte Test Engineer
• Favorite thing about Elite: We’re family-owned and employees and customers alike are treated like family
• Most rewarding aspect of working in Mil/Aero EMC:  Making sure the products he tests are reliable for the troops protecting our country.

Uncertainty budgets…why? I hear a lot of people in the EMC industry complain that uncertain budgets are painful and not necessarily worth the time expended. That is a little bit understandable since we go through all the work to generate uncertainty budgets but don’t generally use them during everyday measurements. However, uncertainty budgets are necessary and can be pretty good tools for the laboratory.

CISPR 16 Compliant Measurements – Uncertainty budgets must be done for CISPR 16 compliant measurements. If the uncertainty budget of the laboratory meets the U_cispr values shown in Table 1 of CISPR 16-4-2, then no correction of the data is needed to determine EUT compliance. If the uncertainty budget of the laboratory does not meet the U_CISPR values shown in Table 1 of CISPR 16-4-2, then the measurement must be adjusted by the difference (U_lab – U_cispr) to determine if a EUT complies with the standard.

EMC Lab Personnel Training – Uncertainty budgets make the laboratory realize how good (or not so good) their measurements really are. We all need to have a good understanding of how the various parts of the test system contribute to uncertainty. We also need to know how measurement uncertainty can be reduced by purchasing higher quality (lower uncertainty) equipment. If the lab management and personnel understand the contributing factors, then the lab can do a better job at reducing measurement uncertainty (providing a better service to their customers).

Customer Education and/or Lab Differentiation – Many years ago a customer told me that he wanted a 200V/m radiated immunity test “no more no less” says the customer. The young electrical engineer did not realize that a radiated immunity test is not accurate to within 0.1 V/m (although the measurement instrument tells us so). Customers also wonder why a radiated emissions measurement made in one chamber is slightly different (a couple of dB) from a measurement made in another chamber. The people who make EMC measurements every day (and understand measurement uncertainty) know that this is pretty good chamber-to-chamber or lab-to-lab repeatability. When you can show a customer how the accuracy of all parts of the system contributes to measurement uncertainty and that your uncertainty is better than the “standard” (or another lab), then that helps to educate the customer and differentiate your laboratory from the competition.

So the next time you have to work on uncertainty budgets, don’t think about how painful they are. Think about how they can be beneficial to your lab, personnel, and business. This will make the time (and money) expended more palatable.

Do you have any questions about EMC Lab Management EMC Standard Changes or other related topics? Please share your comments or questions below and this week’s expert, Craig Fanning, will get back to you as soon as possible. 

Labels:

• CISPR
• EMC Standards
• EMC Test Equipment
• Fanning

Okay let’s be honest, we all find ourselves drawn to web resources like Wikipedia and YouTube because it’s just so easy to find what you need. No doubt, these and other websites help us be more productive at our jobs with quick answers and explanations to basic technical questions and interests.  But what if you need more detailed and trustworthy information?

Here at Elite, we regularly connect with several government and private websites and want to make sure our customers have access to the best ones. On the Elite website, we’ve posted several helpful links to build your knowledge database and be confident in the information you use.

Three of our favorite sites include:

• “Quick Assist” website- Provides military standards and handbook
• “FCC OET” website- Connects you with the FCC OET Knowledge Database
• “Europa” website- Supplies European Union CE Marking information

Labels:

• CE Marketing
• EMC Resources
• EMC Standards
• EMC Test Lab
• FCC OET

C63.10-2013 was released back in September and has received quite a bit of praise – but it has caused some controversy as well.

The purpose of C63.10 was to put all the test methods for unlicensed transmitters into one document. The first version of the standard was released in 2009 and included what was considered to be “non-confrontational” test methods. The standard was adopted by the FCC and Industry Canada for the testing of unlicensed transmitters. Four years later, version two has been released and includes the so-called “confrontational” test methods.

The standard covers every type of transmitter that fall into the unlicensed category. The test methods have been gathered from a multitude of resources including the FCC, Industry Canada, manufacturers, test laboratories, and certification bodies from around the world.  Very detailed instructions have been provided for some very complicated transmitters including digital transmission systems that include transmitter power control and dynamic frequency selection. These procedures were only published in various FCC knowledge database documents that were sometimes tedious to dig up.

Another useful tool is a reference table included in Annex A. The table steps through the FCC Part 15 rules one by one and cross-references sub-clauses in the standard to point out specific tests that pertain to the specific rule part.

This standard along with C63.4 can be used as a test method for almost every unlicensed transmitter.

As a test laboratory, you should look out for procedures that have not been adopted by the regulating bodies. One that stands out in my eyes is the formula for the distance correction factor for frequencies below 30MHz.

Overall, C63.10-2013 is a huge improvement over any previous document or documents for test procedures for unlicensed transmitters.

Labels:

• C63.10-2013
• Dan Crowder
• EMC Test Lab
• TCB certification

Sometimes, I have the fortunate opportunity to step outside of the EMC lab and investigate real-world EMI problems.  Several years ago, I received a call from a desperate general contractor who had an EMI situation in a new state-of-the-art audio clinic.  The facilities included an MRI suite in the lower levels.  The doctors complained about issues of networking errors with their new computer system, electronic noise problems in their audio lab, and incorrect results from their blood analyzers.  They were threatening to withhold payments until the issues were resolved. 

The GC’s first thoughts were that the MRI equipment was the culprit.  He called us in the survey the site to determine if the MRI was indeed causing these interference problems.  We arrived at the site and set up a spectrum analyzer with various antennas and current probes in order to monitor the field intensity levels.  We started by taking measurements in the MRI suite and then moved on to the audio labs where the equipment problems had occurred.

In a short time, we were able to diagnose the problem.  The interference was due to a broadband source.  We could see significant broadband switching noise throughout the high-frequency (HF) spectrum.  These voltage spikes were both radiating from the power lines, as well as, conducting into the power lines.  We could not attribute any significant RF interference as generated by the MRI equipment.  We proceeded to walk into the waiting area of the office where the levels intensified.  This waiting room was state-of-the-art and included high-tech lighting that dimmed to create a soothing and relaxing atmosphere.

Can you deduce what else the light system created?

At an opportune time, we turned off the lights in the waiting room.  We immediately noticed a significant drop in the HF noise level and the spikes all but disappeared.  The contractor was beside himself to think that such a low-tech device as a dimmer switch could wreak such havoc upon the doctors’ offices.  We recommended that the dimmers be replaced with dimming technology that does not produce noise.  The problem was solved and everyone was happy.

Below are some questions for further thought and discussion on real-world interference applications:

1. What lighting technologies are significant sources of EMI?
2. What are some ways to reduce this interference?
3. Will interference problems increase as more high-tech lighting is installed to reduce energy consumption?
4. What regulations are in place to control the level of interference from these sources?

Do you have answers to the above or any questions about Interference Issues, EMC Testing, or other related topics? Please share your comments or questions below and this week’s expert, Ray Klouda, will get back to you as soon as possible.  

Labels:

• EMC Sleuth
• EMC Test Lab
• Interference Issues
• Medical EMI

Being on several standards committees, I get a lot of questions about how to interpret the information provided in standards and specifications. Sometimes this is from a colleague who is thoroughly reviewing a specification in preparation for a quality audit. As a result of the thorough standard review and the possibility of being assessed as a “deficiency” during the audit, they become overly concerned about all parts of the standard. Other times, the person has already been audited and overlooked a requirement. This resulted in a “deficiency” during the audit. The standards committees have content rules (what is and is not a requirement and how is that defined in the standard) that must be followed when a standard is being developed or revised. In addition, quality auditors are only supposed to audit against the requirements of a standard.

A Brief Summary of What is Required in a Standard:

1. Main Body of the Standard: In general, the information provided in the main body of the standard and prefaced with the word “shall” is a requirement. Dimensions and values are also a requirement. If no tolerances are provided in the standard, then general tolerance rules apply (or the tolerances specified in the base standard of a series of standards would apply). Any information prefaced with a should, could, may, etc. (anything other than a shall) could be considered informational and not a requirement.
2. Notes: Notes in a standard are for information purposes only. You will notice that notes within a standard do not contain the word “shall”. Do not confuse “Notes” with “Footnotes”. Notes will always be prefaced with the word “Note:” Footnotes are used many times in tables and can contain very important information. So pay close attention to footnotes (especially in tables).
3. Annex (Normative or Informative): At the beginning of each Annex (sometimes referred to as Appendix in some standards), the word “Normative” or “Informative” will appear. If the Annex is “Normative”, then the information in the annex is a requirement (again keeping in mind the preface word of “shall”). If the Annex is “Informative”, then the annex is for information purposes and is not a requirement.
4. Interpretations: Although the standards committees try to make the information provided within a standard as clear as possible, something always seems to get into the published standard which may need interpretation or clarification. In these instances, the reader will have to use good engineering judgment. When this happens, it is a good idea to ask others in the industry (especially persons on the standards committee responsible for the standard generation) how they interpret the information provided in the standard. They most likely have had the same question and have addressed the issue.

I realize that this is a “crash course” in standards interpretation, but it should provide someone with the basics for interpreting standards. Knowing the basics and what to look for in a standard (also what can and cannot be audited) can really be helpful during a quality audit.

Do you have any questions about EMC Standard Interpretation, EMC Testing, or other related topics? Please share your comments or questions below and this week’s expert, Craig Fanning, will get back to you as soon as possible. 

Labels:

• EMC Design
• EMC Standards
• EMC Test Lab

Reverberation chambers, Mode-Stirred and Mode-Tuned Testing, and Resonant Cavities are common terms we hear in the EMC community.  But what’s behind this technology–Is it really that new? And why is it important for EMC testing?

The physics of resonance has been studied and applied for years. We recognize its importance in acoustics for musical instruments and concert halls, and also with mechanical vibrations in buildings, bridges, and machinery.  More recently, nuclear magnetic resonance and optical resonance in lasers have brought new understanding and great benefits to our everyday lives. 

Here at Elite, resonance and reverberation chamber technology are used for testing digital electronics for RF susceptibility. Mode-Tuned testing in our reverberation chambers provides a very robust evaluation of RF susceptibility because of the characteristic “isotropy, random polarization, and uniformity” of this method. 

To help explain this very interesting convergence of electromagnetics and statistics, Elite will host an IEEE technical presentation on reverberation chamber testing for EMC.  Don’t miss this great opportunity to learn about this topic and why concepts like isotropy and random polarization make a difference in your EMC tests…And it’s Oktoberfest-themed!

Labels:

• IEEE EMC Chicago
• IEEE Rock River Valley
• Reverberation
• RF Susceptibility