[PSES] Sr. EMC/EMI Test Technician Job at Broadcom in Irvine, CA
Broadcom in Irvine has an opening for a Senior Engineering Technician in the EMC lab: http://jobs.broadcom.com/job/Irvine-Senior-Engineering-Technician-EMC-EMI-Test-CA-92602/37641900/ Please do NOT reply to this email, use the link above or send me a mail to npischlatbroadcomdotcom. Thanks, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal?
Hello Jim, Thank you for the explanation. It appears to me that while there seems to be no formal requirement for the equipment rack/frame to be metal (unless anyone corrects me and knows where to find it), it is implied by the requirements put on it - as you listed below - that it is metal. I appreciate the comments you provided with the resoning for metal. Thanks, Neven - Original Message - From: JIM WIESE jim.wi...@adtran.com To: neve...@comcast.net, EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:04:22 AM Subject: RE: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal? Hello, You wouldn’t find the frame requirements in GR-1089. Those would be found in GR-63 and other GR’s. It is also found in an ATIS standard about Universal frameworks that GR-63 is based on. The ATIS standard was written essentially by Larry Wong, formerly of ATT and was their earthquake expert. It’s concepts align very closely with GR-63 and ETSI. There are basically 4 reasons metal frames are standard in the telecom industry and especially in the Telcordia world, and why plastic ones are not used: 1.) Grounding 2.) Resistance to fire – A non metal material that has flame retardants would be fairly brittle and per ATIS 00600307 and GR-63 would have to be UL 945V which would really make it brittle due to all the flame retardants and antioxidants needed for the flame test 3.) Robustness to earthquake and stripping out of screw holes. I seriously doubt a non-metal frame would survive the earthquake requirements in GR-63 and ATIS 0600329 4.) Plastics degrade over time as the anti-oxidants leave the material, and as such would not meet the life expectancies that service providers require. As C.O.’s get hotter, the rate of degradation of plastic frames increases. Jim Jim Wiese Senior Compliance Engineer ADTRAN, Inc. 901 Explorer Blvd. Huntsville , AL 35806 256-963-8431 256-714-5882 (cell) 256-963-6218 (fax) jim.wi...@adtran.com From: Neven Pischl [mailto:neve...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:07 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal? Hello All, Is there a formal requirement, by either Telcordia/NEBS or by the major telecom carriers that the equipment rack (i.e. not the cable rack) be metal, when testing radiated immunity per the GR1089? I understand it is the usual practice - I have only seen such tests with a metal rack - but I am asking if there is such a requirement spelled out anywhere. I can't find it in GR1089. If any on this list knows of it, please can you forward the document, at least maybe a snapshot of the relevant paragraph along with the reference if the document can't be forwarded. Thank you, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal?
Hello All, Is there a formal requirement, by either Telcordia/NEBS or by the major telecom carriers that the equipment rack (i.e. not the cable rack) be metal, when testing radiated immunity per the GR1089? I understand it is the usual practice - I have only seen such tests with a metal rack - but I am asking if there is such a requirement spelled out anywhere. I can't find it in GR1089. If any on this list knows of it, please can you forward the document, at least maybe a snapshot of the relevant paragraph along with the reference if the document can't be forwarded. Thank you, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal?
Thanks Mike. I checked by searching the document for the words: metal, rack, frame, shelf - each separately - and can't find in the Verizon document any specification or requirement that the rack must be made out of metal (or not). ANy idea where it might be? Neven - Original Message - From: Mike Cantwell mike.cantw...@outlook.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 5:52:21 PM Subject: Re: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal? Hi Nevin, The rack requirement is not in GR-1089. It is a supplemental Verizon document http://www.verizonnebs.com/TPRs/VZ-TPR-9305.pdf Regards, Mike From: Neven Pischl [mailto:neve...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:07 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal? Hello All, Is there a formal requirement, by either Telcordia/NEBS or by the major telecom carriers that the equipment rack (i.e. not the cable rack) be metal, when testing radiated immunity per the GR1089? I understand it is the usual practice - I have only seen such tests with a metal rack - but I am asking if there is such a requirement spelled out anywhere. I can't find it in GR1089. If any on this list knows of it, please can you forward the document, at least maybe a snapshot of the relevant paragraph along with the reference if the document can't be forwarded. Thank you, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to LT; emc-p...@ieee.org GT; All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas LT; emcp...@radiusnorth.net GT; Mike Cantwell LT; mcantw...@ieee.org GT; For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher LT; j.bac...@ieee.org GT; David Heald LT; dhe...@gmail.com GT; - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Cat5e or Cat6 in emissions test
Gbit ethernet is requir ed to work over CAT5e so for formal EMC compliance you generally have to test with CAT5e. CAT6 are better cables, if you care for per formance and if you have a special use, but not for compliance testing Ethernet products (unless for some reaosn you limit a produ ct specification and require using them). Neven - Original Message - From: Chuck McDowell chu...@meyersound.com To: EMC PSTC emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 4:19:16 PM Subject: Cat5e or Cat6 in emissions test Greetings from Berkeley, I’m gearing-up for another fun year of testing Radiated Emissions 30MHz-2GHz. Does anyone have opinions on using Cat5e, Cat5e Shielded, or Cat6 for Ethernet ports for audio streaming, monitoring via proprietary control software. Thank you, Chuck McDowell NOTICE: This email may contain confidential information. Please see http://www.meyersound.com/confidential/ for our complete policy. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to LT; emc-p...@ieee.org GT; All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas LT; emcp...@radiusnorth.net GT; Mike Cantwell LT; mcantw...@ieee.org GT; For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher LT; j.bac...@ieee.org GT; David Heald LT; dhe...@gmail.com GT; - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Troubleshooting Kit (Part 1) Published
A common-mode voltage probe is an invaluable tool I have used for years to fix emission coming out of telecom-type ports, especially ethernet. I published an article in the Trans. of the IEEE EMC Symp. in Seattle, 1999 . I have mofdified it since (the old one was for 10/100 ethernet and token-ring only), but the basic idea is there, published. No cable is needed, and no radiation-type measurement is involved. Y ou just plug it into the port and measure the CM voltage of the li ne s (e.g. differential p airs in this case). If the ethernet traffic is needed for the em ission to fial, you need to force the transmitter to send idles into the CMV probe. The idesa can be eaily expanded to various types of ports, and in my opinion is much better than measuring CM currents with current probes, although in many cases one still needs to resort to using them . Cheers, Neven - Original Message - From: Ken Wyatt k...@emc-seminars.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG, si-l...@freelists.org Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 8:33:41 PM Subject: Troubleshooting Kit (Part 1) Published Hi All, I just published a few details on an EMC troubleshooting kit I use. Part 1 provides some detail on the emission tools I use. Part 2 (to be published later) will describe a few immunity tools. I'd appreciate any other thoughts or ideas you might have on tools you might use for troubleshooting. Please check it out and reply with your ideas on the Test Measurement World blog site here ... Cheers and have a great weekend! Ken ___ Kenneth Wyatt Wyatt Technical Services LLC Woodland Park, CO Email Me! | Web Site | Blog Subscribe to Newsletter Connect with me on LinkedIn - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to LT; emc-p...@ieee.org GT; All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas LT; emcp...@radiusnorth.net GT; Mike Cantwell LT; mcantw...@ieee.org GT; For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher LT; j.bac...@ieee.org GT; David Heald LT; dhe...@gmail.com GT; - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Spread-Spectrum Clock Question
I would like to thank sincerely to all who responded, I appreciate it. I am not going to react to any discussions on whether it is cheating or not :), it was not anywhere in my mind when I posted the question and I hope this topic does not degrade :). But, I'd like to summarize a little: 1. I do care about the Pk measurements, not only about QP and Avg, because that is in the specs I am dealing with (some automotive emission requirements) 2. I found out, as I suspected and was confirmed in some replies, that if I change the modulating frequency up to over 20 kHz, then I see reduction with 100/120kHz RBW also, not only with 1kHz RBW . Hence, there is an effect of the modulating frequency and the RBW combination on the measured Pk results. 3. SSC by using frequency modulation of the clock actually does reduce the peak value. I have seen some replies saying it does not, and over many years I have come across people who said the same. However, if you look in any textbook on FM, you can see that - in the frequency domain - FM causes the power of the carrier to be distributed into the side-bands, with the total power the same with or without the modulation. Therefore, because the power power stays the same, it must be that each of the components in the spectrum, i.e. the carrier and the two side-lobes, must have a lower amplitude than the unmodulated carrier. Please, do not confuse the individual amplitudes of individual spectral components with the amplitude of the signal in the time-domain, which indeed stays the same. In case of a digital pulses, the carrier is the fundamental as well as each of the harmonics. Because of the above, and if you look with the infinitely small RBW (i.e. do the math), SSC does indeed reduce the peak value of each harmonic (and fundamental). BTW, the speed or modulating freqeuncy does not have a bearing on the level of reduction of the peak values, in such an ideal case. Only the modulatioin index (similar to depth) is important, as it defines how much power of the carrier is put into the side-lobes. The issue I was facing was that under the test conditions of the EMC specification I have to use a specified wide RBW . Under that condition, the modulating frequency is important too - as I found out. Best regards to all, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
[PSES] Spread-Spectrum Clock Question
Hello, I wonder if anyone can help with a question I have on spread spectrum clock (SSC). I am trying to validate the effectiveness of a SSC chip to reduce emission. I measure with the peak detector. With the SSC enabled (up to 2.5% down-spread) I expect the level measured with a spectrum analyzer to go down at the fundamental and even more at the harmonics, when compared with the peak levels without the SSC enabled. The problem is that I only see that the frequency gets spread but the peak value stays exactly the same with and without the modulation, using 100kHz or 120kHz RBW of the analyzer. This happens at the fundamental as well as at the harmonics, so there is absolutely no reduction in the measured peak amplitude, it just looks wider. What is interesting is that if I reduce the RBW on the analyzer down to 1-3kHz, I see the expected result on the analyzer. The frequency is spread and the peak level with the spread is lower when compared with the peak level measured without the SSC enabled, the same difference as one can see in various papers and material on SSC, and which I also measured many times in the past. However, that is not the required RBW that I must use between 30MHz and 1GHzs, so we have a problem. I believe there is something in the modulation scheme of the particular IC that must be changed to make it work when measured with 120 MHz RBW but I am not sure what. Some of the modulation parameters: Triangular waveform, quasi-linear ramp up and linear ramp down. Linear is actually represented with “small” discrete steps. Frequency range of the modulating waveform is very low, it can be adjusted roughly between 3Hz and about 100 Hz. T he SSC devices on the market normally use about 30-40 kHz for the modulating waveform I wonder if the modulating frequency has something to do with the observed lack of amplitude reduction. The equations that describe the emi-reduction do not contain the modulating frequency as a factor so it should not be a facotr - BUT - maybe I am not taking into account the relation with the measurement settings and non-ideal world. Any sugetions or comments, links to reference article, App Notes, etc?? Regards, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Shielding Effectivness Question
I thank all off you who answered my question. Neven -Original Message- From: Neven Pischl [mailto:npis...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 12:16 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; si-l...@silab.eng.sun.com Subject: Shielding Effectivness Question I would appreciate if anyone could let me know if there are any references (books, application notes, anythig ..) that deal with shielding efectivness in cases when a source is close to an (electrically small) opening in a shield (enclosure). In such a situation, the field will penetrate through the hole and leak even if the size is much smaller than the wavelength. I am particularly interested in situation when high-frequency source, such as a PCB edge or a component operating at (say) 1 GHz and above is in proximity of the venting holes, small gaps in the chassis etc. All references that I have deal with uniform plane wave propagating incident to a metal plane with a slot or hole, in which case it is enought o have electrically small size of the opening (e.g. lambda/10) to efficiently block any field propagation through the barrier. I can't find any useful reference that deals in any analytical way with the situation I am intersted in. I believe I might get some answers using some of the simulation programs, but at the moment I am more intersted in the analysis of the problem than in simulating it. Thank you, Neven Pischl --- 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,
Shielding Effectivness Question
RE: Product Safety: A Matter of Law or Litigation?I would appreciate if anyone could let me know if there are any references (books, application notes, anythig ..) that deal with shielding efectivness in cases when a source is close to an (electrically small) opening in a shield (enclosure). In such a situation, the field will penetrate through the hole and leak even if the size is much smaller than the wavelength. I am particularly interested in situation when high-frequency source, such as a PCB edge or a component operating at (say) 1 GHz and above is in proximity of the venting holes, small gaps in the chassis etc. All references that I have deal with uniform plane wave propagating incident to a metal plane with a slot or hole, in which case it is enought o have electrically small size of the opening (e.g. lambda/10) to efficiently block any field propagation through the barrier. I can't find any useful reference that deals in any analytical way with the situation I am intersted in. I believe I might get some answers using some of the simulation programs, but at the moment I am more intersted in the analysis of the problem than in simulating it. Thank you, Neven Pischl
Re: Good book for SMPS EMC ???
I bought my book from IEEE, about five years ago. Neven Original Message - From: Aschenberg, Mat matt.aschenb...@echostar.com To: 'Neven Pischl' npis...@cisco.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 6:31 AM Subject: RE: Good book for SMPS EMC ??? Where is a good place to purchase this? -Original Message- From: Neven Pischl [SMTP:npis...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 5:08 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Good book for SMPS EMC ??? ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY IN POWER ELECTRONICS By Laszlo Tihany IEEE Press ISBN 0-7506-2379-9 Regards, Neven --- 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: Good book for SMPS EMC ???
ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY IN POWER ELECTRONICS By Laszlo Tihany IEEE Press ISBN 0-7506-2379-9 Regards, Neven At 10:51 PM 5/8/01 +, Paul Slavens wrote: Greetings All, Could anyone recommend a good book on EMC design for Switch Mode Power Supplies ? Thanks in Advance Paul _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com --- 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,
REMINDER: SCValley IEEE EMC Society Meeting - TODAY
REMINDER: Santa Clara Valley IEEE EMC Society Meeting TODAY !!! Tuesday, May 8, 2001 Parallel Traces are Just the Beginning: A Primer on Four Printed Circuit Board Mechanisms Speakers: Zorica Pantic-Tanner and Franz Gisin The May meeting of the Santa Clara Valley EMC Society will be held at SGI in Mountain View, 1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy., building 40, in the Presentation Center above the lobby. The social gathering will start at 5:30 PM, and food and drinks will be available. The technical presentation will start at 7:00 PM. You can visit us at: www.scvemc.org Regards, Neven Pischl
Santa Clara Valley IEEE EMC Society Meeting Announcement
SCV EMC Society Meeting Tuesday, April 10, 2001 RADIATED EMISSIONS MEASUREMENTS ABOVE 1 GHz Speaker: Tom Cokenias The April meeting of the Santa Clara Valley EMC Society will be held at SGI in Mountain View, 1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy., building 40, in the Presentation Center above the lobby. The social gathering will start at 5:30 PM, and food and drinks will be available. The technical presentation will start at 7:00 PM. The Chapter's newsletter is attached. You can download a copy of Spectral Lines with meeting details from: www.scvemc.org Regards, Neven Pischl
Re: Site Correlation
Allen, the main problem you will have is not whether to use signal generator or a comb generator, but the difference in the radiation characteristic of your source for correlation and the DUTs that you will later put in the chamber. You will measure a lots of near-field in you 3m or smaller chamber. The field pattern at 10 m will be very different. Correlation from near-field to far-field obtained with source of one (near-field) radiation characteristics can not be used to predict 10 m radiation of a source with very different (near-field) radiation characteristics. To answer your question directly first, the best would be if you could use a network analyzer or a spectrum analyzer with a tracking generator, so that you can do swept measurement. However, the way you generate your test field will make huge difference to the test results. If you use a certain transmit antenna for your test (correlation), you will get the correlation for that antenna, but not for a DUT that you might want to test (and use the correlation) later. I suggest you take your typical product, physically configure it as in your typical test setup, it may but does not have be powered. Then couple your signal source (whatever you choose to use) to the DUT PCB and wiring (here you have to be a little creative) and do the measurement. Then you can repeat the same at 10 m site. By doing that you will be ale to get correlation for that particular kind of DUT. However, if you obtain your correlation with a DSL modem (e.g. a small box with one power, one DSL, and one UTP cable) on a wooden 80 cm high turntable, you can not use it to predict 10 m radiation of a rack-mount multi-port Ethernet switch or any other DUT that is physically much different. If you do it like that, and run your test a few times, you will soon gain experience (some will be from the obtain correlation and some will be your developed feeling) that you can use to correlate your product measured in your precompliance chamber to 10 m. I suggest you plot your predicted data (obtained from the correlation measurement) versus measured over each other every time you do it (at least for the first 5-10 tests), and it will show you the spread (uncertainty) of your correlation. Hope this will help you, Neven - Original Message - From: Tudor, Allen allen_tu...@adc.com To: EMC-PCST (E-mail) emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 5:58 AM Subject: Site Correlation Greetings: What's the best way to correlate a pre-compliance chamber (smaller than a 3m chamber) to a 10m anechoic chamber? Should I use a signal generator and antenna or should I use a comb generator? Would the answer be different if I were correlating the pre-compliance chamber to an OATS? Thanks in advance. Allen Tudor, Compliance Engineer ADC DSL Systems Inc. 6531 Meridien Dr. Raleigh, NC 27616 phone: 919.875.3382 email: allen_tu...@adc.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
SCV EMC Society January 2001 Meeting Announcement
Meeting Announcement: Santa Clara Valley Chapter of IEEE EMC Society Meeting Scott Bennett: The Physics of Electromagnetics Without Abstract Mathematics Tuesday, January 9, 2001 The January meeting of the Santa Clara Valley EMC Society will be held at SGI in Mountain View, 1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy., building 40, in the Presentation Center above the lobby. The social gathering will start at 5:30 PM, and food and drinks will be available. The technical presentation will start at 7:30 PM. A map with the location of the SGI campus is available at the Santa Clara Valley web site www.scvemc.org . Abstract : The basic point source of electromagnetic fields -- the charge element -- is derived and described with basic physics and high-school mathematics. The charge element is a simpler point source than the current element -- it has five field components, whereas the current element has seven -- yet these two basic field sources are shown to be equivalent. The physical causes of the two H-field and three E-field components of the charge element are easily explained, and they are kept obvious with the descriptions derived for those components. Simple examples are then given to show how to use charge elements to better understand the fields of full-size currents, and the physical origins of those fields. Regards, Neven Pischl
December Meeting of SCV Chapter of the EMC Society
This month's meeting of Santa Clara Valley Chapter of the IEEE EMC Society will be held at SGI in Mountain View on Tuesday 12 December at 7:00 PM. The Chapter's newsletter Spectral Lines is attached to this email, together with a map with the location of the meeting place. The speaker at the December meeting will be Richard Nute, who will give us a presentation on equipotentiality and grounding. Free food will be available. You are invited to come in a large number. The Chapter's newsletter Spectral Lines with more details and the map are available from our web page at http://www.scvemc.org/ Neven Pischl --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
SCV EMC Society Meeting - Tuesday, October 10, 2000
Invitation to: SCV EMC Society Meeting BLUETOOTH - A Viking King Tuesday, October 10, 2000 The October Santa Clara Valley EMC Society meeting will be held at SGI in Mountain View, 1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy., building 40, in the Presentation Center above the lobby. Dinner will start at 5:30, and the beginning of the presentation is at 7:30. A map with the location of the SGI campus is available in the newsletter Spectral Lines, which can be downloaded from http://www.scvemc.org/ . The topic of this months presentation is Bluetooth, a new 2.4 GHz wireless standard for communication between devices, named after a 10-th century king of Denmark. More information can be found at www.bluetooth.com.
Re: Near field measurements
You may try NIST at Boulder, CO. Neven Pischl - Original Message - From: wo...@sensormatic.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 10:15 AM Subject: Near field measurements We need to make human exposure measurements for our FCC Part 15 submission since parts of the body may be closer than 20 cm. 1. Can you recommend a US-based test lab capable of making near field (5-20 cm) E-field measurements at 2.45 GHz from a small (2 inches square) patch antenna? 2. What near field probe would you recommend if we make the measurements ourselves? The probe can be single axis, but a three axis probe is best. 3. Do you know who may lease such a probe on a monthly basis? Richard Woods --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
[SI-LIST] : Job Opening at Cisco in San Jose, CA - EMC Design Engineer
Were looking for a senior EMC design engineer who can provide design support for low-cost, high-volume business unit. Requires BSEE or equivalent plus 5 years experience. Experience in designing and testing telecom and/or networking equipment to international EMC standards required. Good communication skills essential. Must be able to work effectively with development project teams providing pro-active EMC design support at the PCB and system level. Understanding, analyzing, and communicating cost-effective EMC design techniques with emphasis on the PCB layout is essential. Must be able to troubleshoot, preferably using bench top methods. Thorough knowledge of EN55022, FCC part 15, EN55024, and associated IEC1000 series immunity standards is required. Able to provide clear direction to EMC test engineers in performing system configuration and qualification testing. If you are interested, please contact me at npis...@cisco.com (408) 527 7874 Or you can contact Tom Lindeland (hiring manager) tlind...@cisco.com (408) 526 4976 Neven Pischl To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to majord...@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list or UNSUBSCRIBE si-list-digest, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
Re: LVD Essential Requirement for Radiation Protection
Ionizing radiation's MAIN effect is ionization of material it interacts with, i.e. it breaks molecular bonds, whereas nonionizing is any other kind of radiation. The classification is not physiological, does not refer to the human tissue, but matter in general. Some non-ionizing radiation can cause ionization, but only at very high intensities, and not as its prime effect. UV, RF, MW, ELF.. is hence non-ionizing radiation Neven Pischl - Original Message - From: Tony Firth tony.fi...@quester.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2000 4:12 PM Subject: re: LVD Essential Requirement for Radiation Protection Patrick, In general terms Non-Ionizing refers to emissions that do not cause damage to human tissue, (RF, Visible Light, ESD Ionization Generators, Etc.), whereas Ionizing covers emissions capable of causing damage to human tissue, presumably from gene damage, (X-Rays, High Level Beta, Gamma Radiation, Hi intensity UV, Etc.) I do not know at what level e.g. a Microwave Generator would transit from being Non-Ionizing to Ionizing, although my understanding is that it is still classified as being Non-Ionizing. And, of course, corona discharge Ionizing Generators, (that ionize the air around them by design), are classified as Non-Ionizing! Unfortunately do not have a precise physiological definition. Hope this helps. Tony Tony Firth, Elect.Eng., Quester Technology Inc., Fremont,CA 94539-7474 Patrick Lawler wrote: What does 'non-ioniozing emissions' cover? Is it in the category of personnel safety and low-frequency EMF, or does it encompass simple product emissions like those specified in CISPR 11? - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: Cell Phone Hazards?
Same as Charles, I have also seen near field measurements at a couple of centimeters from the phone antenna, with fields up to about 700 V/m. The measurements were taken on a GSM phone, with small EMCO isotropic field probe (the one based on Kanda's design, with resistive dipoles about 7 mm long). Neven Pischl - Original Message - From: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com To: Grasso, Charles (Chaz) gra...@louisville.stortek.com; 'Pettit, Ghery' ghery.pet...@intel.com; mkel...@es.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 6:38 PM Subject: Re: Cell Phone Hazards? If you solve the radar eqn for the field intensity at 1 cm from the antenna, using Ghery's Ptmax = 600 mW, you get 600 V/m. This is a completely erronoeus calculation however, because it relies on far field gain and this is very near field. If you assume the antenna is a 50 Ohm load, the 600 mW eak power is 5.5 Volts at the antenna. if the antenna is a quarter wave stub at 850 MHz, the potential gradient near the stub will be (potential divided by stub length) near 70 V/m. -- From: Grasso, Charles (Chaz) gra...@louisville.stortek.com To: 'Pettit, Ghery' ghery.pet...@intel.com, 'mkel...@es.com' mkel...@es.com, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards? Date: Thu, Dec 9, 1999, 4:34 PM Hi Ghery - I seem to recall that NIST here in Boulder performed some experiments that measured the field from a cell phone at a typical usage distance at 700V/m!! -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [mailto:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 9:49 AM To: 'mkel...@es.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards? The maximum power that a hand held cell phone can use is 600 milliwatts. Normally, the cell site drops them to a lower level, but 600 milliwatts is the maximum. Ghery Pettit Intel -Original Message- From: mkel...@es.com [mailto:mkel...@es.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 7:42 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards? Is 100 milliwatts a good typical figure to use, then for cell phones? Just on a knee-jerk basis, it seems a little low. Anyway know the power output on cordless phones? Thanks, Max Max Kelson Peripherals Engineer Evans Sutherland 600 Komas Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84158 http://www.es.com/ http://www.es.com/ Telephone: 801-588-7196 / Fax: 801-588-4531 mailto:mkel...@es.com mailto:mkel...@es.com -Original Message- From: Patrick, Al [mailto:al.patr...@sciatl.com] Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 9:55 AM To: 'Gorodetsky, Vitaly' Cc: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards? No, What I was saying was that as a microwave engineer, one of my red flags was the eyes. The eyes are the most sensitive to microwave radiation. Now, to apply my statement to cell phone use is not correct. The typical levels and frequencies of microwave radiation are much greater than cell phones. I knew an engineer who worked with big dish antennas. He was responsible designing and testing the antennas, so he was in strong fields for years. These antennas had 26 dB gain with a narrow beam, far stronger that a cell phone. He worked over 20 years with this exposure on a daily basic. At age 43 he had cataracts, about 25 years sooner than general population. Now he is fine today, retired a few years back. What I am saying is that at that level of exposure it took over 20 years to damage the most sensitive part to the body. Were talking about 5 watts of power at 6000 MHz. which is far worst than a 100 mill-watts at 800 MHz. In summary: I think a lot of Bad Science has been applied. The levels and frequencies are too low to cause the kinds of brain damage being reported. P.S. I'm an old microware engineer of 51 who used to work with 3.5 Kilowatt microwave transmitters for years and I don't have cataracts. Al Patrick -Original Message- From: Gorodetsky, Vitaly [mailto:vgorodet...@canoga.com] Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 8:28 PM To: 'Patrick, Al' Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards? Al, You've posted a very intriguing statement. Why the eyes go first? (In the past, I got watery eyes and a headache while doing immunity tests). microwave engineers understand the risks - than what the fuss is all about? Or are you saying that since one has not got cataract, he/she is safe? Regards -Original Message- From: Patrick, Al [SMTP:al.patr...@sciatl.com] Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 2:30 PM To: 'Martin Green'; Patrick, Al; 'mkel...@es.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards? Yes Martin, Lets
Re: Near field magnetic probes
Antonio, I've seen problems the other way around, i.e. the probes that have been calibrated in far-field conditions, with the probe, the leads, and the readout unit exposed to far field measuring erroneously in near-field. Measurements obtained by a probe calibrated in far-field conditions or in a TEM-cell, when taken in a near field of a source can have huge errors, depending on the combination of the following: type of the EM field (E or H) type of the field probe (E or H) orientation of the probe with its leads and readout unit (interaction of the whole measuring unit with the field). I have also seen large differences in probe's responses to calibration (and measurement errors connected to it) when only the probe tip was exposed to the field, as opposed to the whole body. That would be a typical case of calibration using small TEM-cells or similar striplines vs. calibration in a chamber using transmitting antennas. In your case (depending on the design of the probe), you will probably be okay. I would suggest you to calibrate it in front of a horn antenna, at some distance, so that you are in far field and the leads are exposed. If you have enough distance from the reflecting objects, calculate how much free-space attenuation the reflections will go through, and make your judgment if they matter. You can check the influence of the cable by trying to orient the leads (cable) parallel to the E, H, and Pd field vectors. You may also shield the probe only and see of there is any pickup from the leads. One concern I have is the sensitivity of your probe, and if you will pick enough signal to measure at 5m-100 away from the source. There are many issues, but I hope this may give you some directions. Cheers, Neven PS Pozdrav ekipi s 12-og kata, posebno Juri. - Original Message - From: Antonio Sarolic antonio.saro...@fer.hr To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Cc: Antonio antonio.saro...@fer.hr Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 1999 3:07 AM Subject: Near field magnetic probes Hello group This discussion list is worth reading and very helpful. I thought I might put a question that's been bothering me. I want to measure EM field (H field) originating from GSM base station antenna (distances 5m-100m), using near field probes for magnetic field. They are commonly used for locating EM radiation sources on PCBs or leakage sources. I see a few problems concerning this measurement. 1. These probes are constructed for sources (PCB, enclosure leakage) that are very close to the probe tip. Power density of the source falls rapidly with distance, so the rest of the probe, including connection cable, is placed in the field that is much lower than close to the probe tip. That is not the case in the far field. Is the calibration still valid for the measurements in far field? 2. Also, measurements should be done outside and inside a room. That means lot of reflections. There must be some cable pick-up. Does this usually add more field or not? After all, I think the measurement will not be too accurate, but can provide the order of magnitude at least. I know I would be better off with the isotropic probe with optic link, but right now I am interested in near field probe. I would like some opinions please. Am I right or am I wrong? Am I missing something? Thanks a lot. Antonio Antonio Sarolic Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing Dept. of Radiocommunications and Microwave Engineering Unska 3, HR-1 Zagreb CROATIA tel. +385 1 61 29 789, fax. +385 1 61 29 717 E-mail: antonio.saro...@fer.hr - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: Awards for Worst EMC/PS qualities
Some time ago, in a far-away land, I saw a product that was on the lab bench for some initial functionality testing (1-st rev. of the device). A radio was close by, plugged to the same power circuit. The test engineer could not listen to the radio due to the interference with the noise coming from the device. He switched the radio off and, in that moment - the device reset. Neven Disclaimer: I was not involved (of course) in that design :) At 08:03 AM 3/8/99 PST, bma (Bailin Ma) wrote: Hi Group, We have already seen awards for the most misleading ads, worst attire, worst films, . Why not awards for worst EMC and PS qualities? Barry Ma Morgan Hill, CA 95037 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: Awards for Worst EMC/PS qualities
Some time ago, in a far-away land, I saw a product that was on the lab bench for some initial functionality testing (1-st rev. of the device). A radio was close by, plugged to the same power circuit. The test engineer could not listen to the radio due to the interference with the noise coming from the device. He switched the radio off and, in that moment - the device reset. Neven Disclaimer: I was not involved (of course) in that design :) At 08:03 AM 3/8/99 PST, bma (Bailin Ma) wrote: Hi Group, We have already seen awards for the most misleading ads, worst attire, worst films, . Why not awards for worst EMC and PS qualities? Barry Ma Morgan Hill, CA 95037 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
