Hi Grace,
Thanks for the speedy reply. Since BSMI was confirmed to allow 3m data per CNS13439, I had to ask about CNS13438 even though I expected they wouldn’t. Sometimes, surprises can be discovered in places you will least expect and I was somehow trolling for such a surprise, but alas…. Also, I have appreciated your contributions to this list and hope you continue to do so. Best regards, Ron Pickard ron.pick...@intermec.com <mailto:ron.pick...@intermec.com> ________________________________ From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 11:09 AM To: Pickard, Ron Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: 5 Meter Chamber For EMI Qualification Testing BSMI confirms test data taken at 3m per CNS13438 is NOT acceptable. - Grace On 1/9/09, Pickard, Ron <ron.pick...@intermec.com> wrote: Hi Grace, Then for the sake of consistency, does the BSMI also confirm 3m distance is acceptable per CNS13438, or not? Just curious. I look forward to your reply. Best regards, Ron Pickard ron.pick...@intermec.com <mailto:ron.pick...@intermec.com> ________________________________ From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 8:45 AM To: Grasso, Charles Cc: emcp...@aol.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: 5 Meter Chamber For EMI Qualification Testing Hi Charles and others, BSMI confirms data taken at 3m per CNS13439 requirements is acceptable. Regards, Grace Lin On 1/8/09, Grasso, Charles <charles.gra...@echostar.com> wrote: Hi Grace – CNS13439 requires a 3m test to prove compliance. Do you know if this will be an issue for the BSMI? ________________________________ From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 9:40 AM To: emcp...@aol.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: 5 Meter Chamber For EMI Qualification Testing David, Tim, and Others: It is still an issue in Taiwan. BSMI do not feel comfortable to accept 3m data due to the near field concern. If CISPR 22 (or its replacement) committee explicitly accepts 3m data, BSMI will accept 3m data. Regards, Grace On 1/6/09, Heald, David <david.he...@garmin.com> wrote: Tim, I know that this has been an issue in Taiwan in the past - I had a submission rejected a few years ago for this reason. I'll defer to someone with more recent experience with Korea since the regulating agencies just changed there - the last approval I completed there was at my last job just before the change occurred (now I'm realizing that I haven't sought approval for a non radio device for a long time in Korea so there's another reason to defer to someone else). As for 1-4, for most devices, you're dealing with self-declaration or its equivalent. This is up to you to determine if your results indicate compliance in a 10m chamber since a 10m chamber is the common reference indicated in most emissions standards. Taking the assumption you state into account, you should be in good condition. It would be a good idea to obtain some correllational data to a 10m chamber to confirm you're getting similar results (and use some engineering judgement in the near field). This is a short response to a complex issue, but I hope it was somewhat helpful. Best Regards, -Dave ________________________________ From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of emcp...@aol.com Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 5:39 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: 5 Meter Chamber For EMI Qualification Testing Hello Group, I would like to know if radiated emission test data taken at a 3 meter distance in a 5 meter semi-anechoic chamber is valid for qualification testing for the following: Please assume that the chamber is fully validated with volumetric NSA. 1. FCC/Industry Canada 2. VCCI (Japan) 3. Australia/New Zealand 4. Europe 5. Taiwan 6. Korea I ask this question because I have been hearing that some countries do not accept 3 meter chamber data. Thanks for your help. Tim Pierce ________________________________ New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines <http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026> . - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com> - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com>
