Thank you for posting what I excerpted below. At the risk of this thread flaring up again, I have to state that just because a cable assembly or loom does not have an over-braid shield or screen does not qualify it as being "unshielded" or "unscreened". The ONLY excuse for an over-braid is extremely high radiated immunity threats, either swept frequency or time domain (intentional transmissions or EMP), or lightning protection, either direct or indirect. It IS common practice to individually shield signals which require it, either to contain emissions and/or protect it from cross-talk or intentional transmissions. As I pointed out with a numerical example in an earlier response, an individual shield provides more than adequate protection to even the smallest signal likely to be carried on such a wire (usually a twisted, shielded pair) if the function of that signal is flight critical.
---------- >From: [email protected] >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation >Date: Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 1:56 AM > By unscreened I mean the cables have no overall screen as used by military cableforms. ------------------------------------------- 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: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
