EMC testing, C Tick, CISPR22 radiated emissions

[Moonshadow]

Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded
bull? Overseas would be OK - China?

 

[Eeyore]

Moonshadow wrote:

Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded
bull? Overseas would be OK - China?

Forgotten the C Tick details exactly. Do you NEED a test house ? You can
self-certify for CE for example. Just employ a tame consultant who has
or can borrow the kit.

Also, here in the UK, groups of smaller manufacturers get togethere to
buy their own, sharing the costs. Ask an industry association.

You don't NEED shielded / anechoic rooms either etc if you can find a
decent open field site.

Graham

 

[Joe G (Home)]

"Moonshadow" <moonshadow@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:4858b7ee@news.comindico.com.au...

Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded bull?
Overseas would be OK - China?

Problem with overseas labs is that if your product fails - it's costly in
terms of freight and time to send another modified unit for test. Where as
it's quicker to run down to the lab and perhaps tweak the product.

Also if it fails how will you know which part of the circuit is the cause?

Joe

 

[Joe G (Home)]

<geoffjunkster@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bbc0305f-c85a-4fb4-8108-fc6a2d2139df@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 5:23 pm, Moonshadow <moonsha...@nospam.org> wrote:

Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded
bull? Overseas would be OK - China?

If you have a spec-an and lisn, do it yourself and do your own report.
ACA do not require a certified lab as far as I can remember (an ACA
uditer told me that), the test houses will try and tell you otherwise.
The report must have traceable technical content though, ie calibrated
instruments. The ACA is just as fussy as Germany and more
beaurocratic. I have been through 3 EMC audits here in Melbourne.

I think $2000 per day is the current approx going rate. Most devices
fail their first attempt, and you may need to re-schedule, especially
Class B.

Law
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrument1.nsf/0/0037BC472B3EF925CA2573E1000FA6AC/$file/RadcomLabellingElectromagCompNotice2008.pdf

What EMC standard depends on device being tested
http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310707

Joe

 

On Jun 18, 5:23 pm, Moonshadow <moonsha...@nospam.org> wrote:

Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded
bull? Overseas would be OK - China?

If you have a spec-an and lisn, do it yourself and do your own report.
ACA do not require a certified lab as far as I can remember (an ACA
uditer told me that), the test houses will try and tell you otherwise.
The report must have traceable technical content though, ie calibrated
instruments. The ACA is just as fussy as Germany and more
beaurocratic. I have been through 3 EMC audits here in Melbourne.

I think $2000 per day is the current approx going rate. Most devices
fail their first attempt, and you may need to re-schedule, especially
Class B.

 

[Eeyore]

"Joe G (Home)" wrote:

"Moonshadow" <moonshadow@nospam.org> wrote

Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded bull?
Overseas would be OK - China?

Problem with overseas labs is that if your product fails - it's costly in
terms of freight and time to send another modified unit for test. Where as
it's quicker to run down to the lab and perhaps tweak the product.

Also if it fails how will you know which part of the circuit is the cause?

You HAVE to attend and monitor the tests. I always have. Their 'expert' may not
even properly understand how the equipment is to be used and misinterpret
readings. Unless you go for the 'pre-compliance' testing route anything else
would be totally insane.

Graham

p.s there's a lowish (by western) cost ETL testing lab in Bombay near SEEPZ.
That's not SO far from you. Some of my products went through perfectly
successfully without at least MY personal attendance but I'm sure the
sub-contractor's man was there.

What do you call expensive ?

For an EMC compliance test in the UK (last one I did was with SEMKO UK) it was ~
Ł2000. 2 days lab with me and one operative and included the official report
IIRC.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

geoffjunkster@gmail.com wrote:

On Jun 18, 5:23 pm, Moonshadow <moonsha...@nospam.org> wrote:
Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded
bull? Overseas would be OK - China?

If you have a spec-an and lisn, do it yourself and do your own report.
ACA do not require a certified lab as far as I can remember (an ACA
uditer told me that), the test houses will try and tell you otherwise.

Right on. I had to look into C Tick at one time and I found there were
some sensible get outs too for products in low voume manufacture as well.
Up to 100 units p.a. IIRC. You just say "it's ok - it's sensibly designed
with regard to EMC - no-one's ever complained" basically. Prove me wrong !
I liked that approach.

The ACA info online I read was GOOD btw. But it will take you time to get
the feel for this little roller-coaster.

The report must have traceable technical content though, ie calibrated
instruments. The ACA is just as fussy as Germany and more
beaurocratic. I have been through 3 EMC audits here in Melbourne.

There's a word for this. It's like 'lab compliance accreditation' but
that's not it. There is a scheme though for labs worldwide to be mutually
accredited.

I think $2000 per day is the current approx going rate.

For high end labs I'd say. They should be giving you advice and fixes for
that too. Plus ensure they 'understand' YOUR kind of kit. Don't take audio
to a lab that specialises in medical gear.

Most devices fail their first attempt, and you may need to re-schedule,
especially
Class B.

That's why asking about a pre-compliance check for obvious drop-offs is
such a good idea.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

"Joe G (Home)" wrote:

What EMC standard depends on device being tested
http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310707

They're all IEC standards (except in the USA - and even that's changing and maybe Canada a bit ) no matter what anyone else tells you. And they can't refuse an
IEC standard AIUI either.

All that happens with the 'national' standard is they put a new cover sheet on it and add a 'national foreword'. LOL !

What's your kit ? I might be able to save you some trouble.

Graham

 

[Den]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:485973D1.1668189C@hotmail.com...

<snipped lots>

Right on. I had to look into C Tick at one time and I found there were
some sensible get outs too for products in low voume manufacture as well.
Up to 100 units p.a. IIRC. You just say "it's ok - it's sensibly designed
with regard to EMC - no-one's ever complained" basically.

^^^^^^^^^^^
I'd love a reference to this part.
den.

 

[Moonshadow]

Eeyore wrote:

Right on. I had to look into C Tick at one time and I found there were
some sensible get outs too for products in low voume manufacture as well.
Up to 100 units p.a. IIRC. You just say "it's ok - it's sensibly designed
with regard to EMC - no-one's ever complained" basically. Prove me wrong !
I liked that approach

Is anyone able to point me to documentary evidence of this low-volume
"sensibleness" please. It seems out of character for our regulatory bodies.

 

[Den]

"Moonshadow" <moonshadow@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:4859ae88$1@news.comindico.com.au...

Eeyore wrote:

Right on. I had to look into C Tick at one time and I found there were
some sensible get outs too for products in low voume manufacture as well.
Up to 100 units p.a. IIRC. You just say "it's ok - it's sensibly designed
with regard to EMC - no-one's ever complained" basically. Prove me wrong
!
I liked that approach


Is anyone able to point me to documentary evidence of this low-volume
"sensibleness" please. It seems out of character for our regulatory
bodies.

I'd love to be proven wrong but I think this is BS.

 

[Den]

I knew the 5 essential elements the auditors look for and included
these. Later, I was told that the ACA did an EMC audit on this comapny
and they found no issues.


And the 5 essential elements are??? : )

 

[Moonshadow]

geoffjunkster@gmail.com wrote:

They did not want to pay the big prices that the 2 major
players EMC Tech. and RFI Ind. charge.

I've used one of these co's on three previous occasions, and while their
service was OK, they charged more per hour than a brain surgeon. Not
reasonable given they were using perhaps $250,000 max worth of equipment
and the technician who did the testing was (to be polite) minimally
qualified.

Do you know of any other companies in the game in AU to whom I could go
for a quote?

 

[Eeyore]

Den wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message

Right on. I had to look into C Tick at one time and I found there were
some sensible get outs too for products in low voume manufacture as well.
Up to 100 units p.a. IIRC. You just say "it's ok - it's sensibly designed
with regard to EMC - no-one's ever complained" basically.


^^^^^^^^^^^
I'd love a reference to this part.

In the archives sorry, bur ACA will still talk to you. Don't be afraid.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Moonshadow wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

Right on. I had to look into C Tick at one time and I found there were
some sensible get outs too for products in low voume manufacture as well.
Up to 100 units p.a. IIRC. You just say "it's ok - it's sensibly designed
with regard to EMC - no-one's ever complained" basically. Prove me wrong !
I liked that approach

Is anyone able to point me to documentary evidence of this low-volume
"sensibleness" please. It seems out of character for our regulatory bodies.

Sure, it knocked me out too. Sorry my readily accesible records don't go back
that far but did it all on the internet.

Maybe they clamped up now but it sure WAS the way.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Den wrote:

"Moonshadow" <moonshadow@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:4859ae88$1@news.comindico.com.au...
Eeyore wrote:

Right on. I had to look into C Tick at one time and I found there were
some sensible get outs too for products in low voume manufacture as well.
Up to 100 units p.a. IIRC. You just say "it's ok - it's sensibly designed
with regard to EMC - no-one's ever complained" basically. Prove me wrong
!
I liked that approach


Is anyone able to point me to documentary evidence of this low-volume
"sensibleness" please. It seems out of character for our regulatory
bodies.

I'd love to be proven wrong but I think this is BS.

It was an ACA document.

 

[Eeyore]

geoffjunkster@gmail.com wrote:

Eeyore

There's a word for this. It's like 'lab compliance accreditation' but
that's not it. There is a scheme though for labs worldwide to be mutually
accredited.

I think that is called a 'mutual recognition agreement' and knowing
about this got us through a sticky situation in Canada where we argued
that since Canada and Europe have an MRA then our product should
comply. MRA's work at the national level but they bought it.

Yuh, getting there. It's like MCB or something. Basically means mutual
accreditation, so work done in one lab will be accepted by another.

Sorry I can't remember the details better.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Den wrote:

I knew the 5 essential elements the auditors look for and included
these. Later, I was told that the ACA did an EMC audit on this comapny
and they found no issues.

And the 5 essential elements are??? : )

Paperwork obviously.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Moonshadow wrote:

and the technician who did the testing was (to be polite) minimally
qualified.

The first 'official' EMC tests I had to conduct were on a marine radar at
the Admiralty Research Establishment Portsmouth.

Having learnt from my tame consultant previously, the first thing I had to
do was to explain to the tech HOW THE FUCK to use his measuring kit
PROPERLY. He hadn't a CLUE. In particular he was interested only in wideband
measurements, whereas for diagnosis you need NARROW BAND analysis.

Says it all really. Jobs for the boys. And take no shit from them. If they
can't provide a useful report, don't pay them and sue them for incompetence
in the courts.

Graham

 

On Jun 18, 5:23 pm, Moonshadow <moonsha...@nospam.org> wrote:

Has anyone found and used a test house for the above (or AU-accepted
overseas standards) which doesn't charge like the proverbial wounded
bull? Overseas would be OK - China?

Here's another personal anecdote. Having bought and made some
equipment we decided to hire it out. Now, we are not a NATA lab but a
manufacturer. An importer approached us to test some plug packs, AC
and DC types. They did not want to pay the big prices that the 2 major
players EMC Tech. and RFI Ind. charge. I did the testing myself and
produced a report. Our company does have ISO9000 though so I was able
to put that on the report, at least insofar as instrument cal goes.
This did not involve an OATS test though since I justified why we
chose not to do this in the test report.

Our company tests to European standards since we export, and I do all
testing here. If a particular susceptibility test is not done, I
justify it in the report. The ACA insists on the declaration being to
an Aus/NZ standard though. I was first audited when the ACMA first
started doing this, and initially they would not accept that I did not
test to the Aus standard, but I argued and negotiated until they saw
the light. So in essence, the test documentation is the technical
evidence and the declaration involves the Australian standards. Be
warned that to apply for a C-Tick you must provide your company
details, so there is a good chance of being audited, unlike the
European system.

I knew the 5 essential elements the auditors look for and included
these. Later, I was told that the ACA did an EMC audit on this comapny
and they found no issues.