In GR-1089-CORE Section 3, R3-3 is a requirement and the wording probably
should say
SHALL instead of SHOULD NOT. In the previous version of GR-1089-CORE, 3-3 was
an objective hence the SHOULD NOT wording. When this changed from a objective
to a requirement on 1/1/96 O3-3 became R3-3. When the standard was reissued
they apparently made the change from O to R without changing the text of the
paragraph from SHOULD NOT to SHALL.
When doing radiated emissions testing to GR-1089-CORE it is an objective (but
not a requirement) to meet the closed door limits (Table 3-1) with the doors
open. It this objective is satisfied then the closed door requirement R3-1 is
considered met. If the EUT does not meet the closed door limits with the doors
open the same data set is then compared to the open door limit (Table 3-2). It
is a requirement that this condition be met. In the case where the closed door
limits have not been met with the doors open, the doors are closed and the test
repeated at the failing frequencies.
This is how the standard is applied by BELLCORE. I perform this testing with
BELLCORE witness on a fairly regular basis.
Tom Donnelly
Lucent Technologies
tdonne...@lucent.com
***********************************************************************************************************
I'm taking an informal poll on standard interpretation in regard to
GR-1089-CORE, Section 3, R3-3, which is the radiated emissions criteria
for cabinet doors open. Comments from RBOCs, NRTLs, and BELLCORE will
be particularly appreciated.
My confusion is this. While the R preceding the 3-3 indicates that this
is a requirement, the verbiage under this requirement states the
following:
"Radiated emissions.....SHOULD NOT exceed the levels.....given
in Table 3-2."
The levels in 3-2 are for a CABINET DOORS OPEN test.
This seems ambiguous to me that there is a REQUIREMENT with the wording
SHOULD instead of SHALL. Does this requirement indicate that the data
must be taken but the LIMITS do not ABSOLUTELY HAVE to be adhered to?
Is failing data acceptable in this instance?
Any help on this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Paul Wooley
Samsung Telecommunications America
pwoo...@telecom.sna.samsung.com
