A test house explained to me that the FCC allows either CISPR or FCC
limits/procedures providing that one can determine "worst case".
Consequently, you have to test both ways (120 V 60Hz or 230V 50Hz) to
determine which way you should have tested. So, where are the time/money
savings?
As a personal note, it seems to me that there will always be slight
differences whether it be, test sites, cables, input power, placement,
whatever. The objective should be to reduce levels to reasonable,
repeatable limits. Defining an acceptable standard or test procedure
should be adequate. We should not have to incur unnecessary testing just
to address a few dB one way or the other.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: hmellb...@aol.com [SMTP:hmellb...@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, July 06, 1998 12:16 PM
To: dwight.hunnic...@vina-tech.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Cc: eric.lif...@natinst.com
Subject: Re: Ce versus FCC
I have encountered certain European agencies requesting that not
only are the
conducted emissions required to be performed at 230V 50Hz but
radiated
emissions as well. I agree that for conducted emissions it may
make a
difference but I have not seen radiated emissions change when
the power source
is changed from 60 to 50 Hz (while keeping Voltage the same). I
did, however,
see recently a product change emissions when the voltage was
changed from 120
to 230 V. And, it did not matter if it was 50 or 60 Hz, only the
voltage was
significant. Go figure!
Hans
