May the Doors of Perception enlighten all of us attending!!
Tania Grant, [email protected] <[email protected]>
Lucent Technologies, Communications Applications Group
----------
From: Dale Albright [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 1:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: The Doors
No, it is not about the rock group. It is about the doors of GR-1089-CORE.
Over the last couple of days I have enjoyed observing multiple opinions and
supporting evidence of the proper limit to apply to a product that has no
cabinet doors (Table 3-1 Vs Table 3-2). It is clear that at minimum, the
emission levels with cabinet doors open must meet the open door requirement
and with cabinet doors closed must meet the closed door requirement.
Perhaps this is a fine way to limit the shielding effectiveness of the
enclosure so that in real life, when the doors have been removed and tossed,
the threat of interference remains low. And how about "cabinet" doors.
That type of language seams to indicate a large 7ft cabinet in which rack
mount devices are contained. Is the actual housing/chassis of the EUT
considered a "cabinet" ? There does seam to be an indication that another
type of door exists - one that is not intended to be opened during EUT
operation, maintenance, and/or repair. What type of door is this that
remains closed during all of those circumstances. And what is the
un-identified operation mode for which it is opened? And now finally for
equipment that is not intended to be placed in a cabinet - maybe table-top
or open-rack type. Notwithstanding the ultimate decision being driving by
the RBOCs, what do you think? See some of you at the conference next
week.
Regards,
Dale Albright
EMCI
---------
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected]
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], or
[email protected] (the list administrators).
