In message <4bea4e50d3d4344da9d84367ae317064078cf...@dcexvs02.tennant.tco.corp>, dated Sun, 23 Aug 2009, "Bender, Curtis" <[email protected]> writes:
>Skeptical I looked into it further and found a more recent post: >http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/nyregion/23about.html > >Seems legitimate although I am still a little skeptical - Back in "the >day" I used to work for a company that designed such controls. It seems >unreasonable but I'll certainly check with some of my old colleagues... I don't find it a great surprise. The cell phone responds to the incoming call by transmitting, and since it's indoors, it probably transmits at quite high power. The cooker control electronics simply isn't sufficiently immune to this at a distance of 60 cm or so. Are there in fact any immunity requirements for cookers in the cell phone bands in USA? In Europe, CISPR 14-2/EN 55014-2 applies: 3 V/m (before modulation) modulated 80% at 1 kHz, 80 MHz to 1 GHz. But the field strength from the phone might exceed that, in that environment and at that distance. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Things can always get better. But that's not the only option. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> David Heald: <[email protected]>
