I read in !emc-pstc that Leslie Bai <[email protected]> wrote (in <[email protected]>) about 'Performance Criteria A' on Wed, 16 Oct 2002:
> In ETS 300 385 - Criteria A is clearly defined, for radio > transceivers - No BER is allowed, e.g. zero tolorence. This means > the performance is defined (not willingfully by manufacturer) and > limited to be BER and degradation of BER is not allowed. Obviously > manufacturers had no choice but to follow. It is a thoroughly unreasonable requirement, and it is good that it has changed. Effectively, the manufacturer had to design for, and achieve, a lower BER than he was allowed to claim, so as to accommodate the almost inevitable increase in BER during the application of the disturbance. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! ------------------------------------------- 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"
