The specification is now prEN50147-3
Emission measurements in Fully Anechoic Rooms
The specification has just finished being fully translated and is about to
go to vote by the
CENELEC committee.
MIRA have been involved in the development of this standard for a long time,
this has included
I'm glad to read the kind message from Richard. I think everybody has similar
feeling about this excellent Email discussion group. People usually say make
the world a better place to live. We are all making our efforts to make the
emc-pstc group a better place to live in the INTERNET age that
Group,
I am trying to construct a simple earth leakage test circuit as in Annex D
of EN60950. I am finding it impossible to find a capacitor for Cs (0.22uF) as I
cannot find one that is the required value, tolerence and voltage rating.
Am I missing somthing here? Even if I use a network of
Dear Ron,
I am not familiar with 29CFR Part 1910 Subpart S. I will provide the
following information if these will help in some respect:
In Canada as per the CEC (Canadian Electrical Code) under the Section 2,
2-024 [ Used of Approved Equipment] is specified: Electrical equipment
used in
If the chamber is truly anechoic (six-sided absorber) then you will not meet
the site attenuation requirement, which is based on constructive
interference between direct and ground-bounced rays.
--
From: Colgan, Chris chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com
To: 'ron_cher...@densolabs.com'
Ron,
I have used TILE (Totally Integrated Laboratory Environment) for almost 5
years. It is an outstanding package for automation. I have dealt with just
about every vendor in the EMI business, and Quantum Change (Mike Hart and
Bill Scheer) have exceeded, by far, the best technical and product
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
Hello,
Some months ago, I ask the same question to FCC. Their answer was very clear
!! As there is no standard allowing the use of an anechoic chamber for now,
you cannot use it to perform test for FCC certification.
We use our anechoic chamber to identify the frequencies from the product
under
Hi Ron
I don't know if the FCC will accept measurements taken is an anechoic
chamber but.
If you want to make some meaningful measurements in a chamber you have to
make sure it is truly anechoic, you do not want any reflected waves. You
should have the chamber validated to show that the
Hi Vitaly!
Again, to clarify, no one except CSA can issue a CSA
mark. The CSA mark is the copyrighted property of CSA
that CSA allows a manufacturer to affix to declare the
product has been certified by CSA. The CSA mark is
one example of an authorized CO mark for Canada.
UL also has an
Hello Tac
I am sure that you will get many answers to this
question. The short answer is it's only important if
you wish to sell any!
Any PC manufacturers that you supply who are
attempting to get their end product certified will
require your power supply to be also certified. To
cover all
Hi Vitaly!
The recent agreement between CSA and TUV Rheinland was
not to allow us to issue c- type marks (i posted an
earlier comment on that).
The agreement established a working relationship
allowing CSA to easily offer TUV Rheinland GS
licenses, and TUV Rheinland to easily offer CSA marks
as
Hi all!
I believe that we at TUV Rheinland are in the final
stages of approval to be able to issue Canadian
approvals. My understanding is that the approval
process is complete but we are still getting the our
mark trademarked. We may have this done early next
year.
Frank West
Sr. Engineer
The Canadian mandate for agency approval comes primarily from the
Canadian Electrical Code (CEC) rule 2-024:
Electrical equipment used in electrical installations within the
jurisdiction of the inspection department shall be approved and shall be
of a kind or type and rating approved for the
George,
You would further clear confusion if you would comment on the following.
Let's say, TUVR and MET are both NRTLs. On the other hand, they are
recognized COs (for TUVR status, see ITEM UPDATE 1999, p.9). They both
offer their own NRTL/ marks for ITE compliance with UL1950. My
For these stories and more go to: http://www.tvguide.com
IN THE NEWS:
PHANTOM MENACE RETURNS TO THEATERS: Can't wait for the next Star Wars
prequel? Perhaps the re-release of Episode I - The Phantom Menace will
satisfy your
Hi Barry:
Chaz, Why do they call UL a non-profit organization?
UL, as a corporation, is chartered as a not-for-profit
organization.
This means that it cannot distribute retained earnings
to the owners. Instead, it uses retained earnings to add
to endowment funds for financing future
Tac PSNet,
Altho we've discussed this here at some length before, the
certification and marking of components is intended to simplify the
evaluation and certification of equipment because the component doesn't
have to be evaluated again.
This works well if the test house
Chaz, Why do they call UL a non-profit organization?
Barry
Anritsu Co.
From: Grasso, Charles (Chaz) gra...@louisville.stortek.com, on 11/24/99
1:23 PM:
Forgive a jaded old man but two things jumped out at me when I read the article.
1. In many other countries, standards
I'm afraid I don't understand many of the points in the article. It is a
bit like what we call a seagull (it flies in, dumps a load of shit and
flies away, leaving someone else to deal with the mess).
National Association of State Fire Marshals is considering challenging
UL's tax-exempt status
Hello from San Diego:
Many thanks to Sean for posting the URL for the
Washington Post article on UL.
While I am notorious as a UL-basher, I think
the focus of this article is misplaced.
This article presumes that UL puts the safety
into products. Unfortunately, many manufacturers
also
Forgive a jaded old man but two things jumped out at me
when I read the article.
1.
In many other countries, standards are set or approved by a
government entity
with industry involvement. U.S. safety standards, on the
other hand, are set
primarily
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
This is really a no brainer... To summarize:
The answer to your questions is NO for the following
reasons:
1. You are testing in an anechoic chamber
(Read also K.Javors analysis)
2. The antenna cannot be raised to its
full height requirement.
Thats the bad news. The good news is that the FCC
24 matches
Mail list logo
