Hello Glenn,
Two things complicate this question. One is specific
to the U.K. In the UK all domestic and very many commercial and
light industrial use a ring main for all socket outlets and therefore we
do not have spurs with ratings. UK plugs have fuses in them because
the protection on the ring
"Rich Nute" wrote:
>
> Hi Doug:
>
> The issue for me is: What is the safety requirement
> that requires cfm (I presume a minimum cfm)?
The issue is a Hazardous Energy ( > 240va).
The power output that feeds the board is above
the limit.
The fan itself is more of an issue of having a basel
Hi Group
This is a question regarding a plug in PC card that has been stated as FCC compliant which is inserted in a PC that is also stated to be FCC compliant and the emissions are found to actually exceed the FCC limits.
What is the responsibility of the manufacturer who is intending to place
Hi Doug:
> done, the entire safety approval reduced to a simple
> cfm rating fan for a chip both on the secondary
> side of the power supply.
The issue for me is: What is the safety requirement
that requires cfm (I presume a minimum cfm)?
Reading between the lines...
The fan
Does anyone know if it is common practice or otherwise required to de-rate
products in Europe to 80% (or some other %) of the rating of the branch
circuit as is done in the US? Some product standards (such as 61000-3-2)
apply to products rated up to 16A, so it would appear that products can be
r
Dear all,
In bringing a product through safety and having many
issues, it might surprise you that after all was said and
done, the entire safety approval reduced to a simple
cfm rating fan for a chip both on the secondary
side of the power supply.
For some obvious reasons of which I hope y
<83d652574e7af740873674f9fc12dbaa675...@utexh1w2.gnnettest.com>, Chris
Maxwell inimitably wrote:
>The GRP's connection to Earth ground serves two purposes. It is a low
>frequency ground connection to ensure that, over time, the GRP's DC
>potential won't change with respect to Earth ground. The
, John Woodgate
inimitably wrote:
><4.3.2.7.2.20010618143751.00b3d...@box.tin.it>, Paolo Roncone
> inimitably wrote:
>>As for interference to broadband receivers (like TV equipment) I remember a
>>Lexmark study published a few years ago that showed no increased
>>interference from modulated clo
This might not directly answer your question, but
may put some light on why these questions are difficult
to answer in general.
For all cables , the transfer impedance is equal
to the Ohmic resistance of the shield at low frequencies.
At higher frequencies the braiding effect causes due to
the ro
Just one more comment:
You never want a separate ground to a GRP that is different from other
grounds in the building
and more importantly, in the test area. There is a real risk of the GRP
being at a different
potential than other grounds, even if it is connected to a ground rod.
Others have mea
A third reason to tie the GRP to earth is safety. An ungrounded GRP could
be very hazardous around AC mains voltages.
Chris Maxwell @majordomo.ieee.org on 06/19/2001
08:46:30 AM
Please respond to Chris Maxwell
Sent by: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
To: "'Chris Chileshe'" ,
The Curtis-Straus Update is for May, 2001 is now available at:
http://www.conformity-update.com
The headlines are:
THE EU, RTTE AND "TRANSITION RULES."
UPDATE ON THE US/EU MEDICAL DEVICE MRA.
EC STANDS PAT ON FLAME RETARDANTS IN PLASTIC.
BUSH TAKES CONTROL AT THE FCC.
FCC TO AUDIT 25% OF TCB GR
Hi from one Chris to another,
I'm going to address your "ground rod" concerns (Question 3).
In our lab here, we have a new building with new wiring and a reliable third
wire Earth ground, so I simply tie my Ground Reference Plane ("GRP") to the
third wire of one of the AC outlets in the room.
Hi group
For those of you unfamiliar with ISO TR 10605, it is the ESD
test standard for automotive electronics (8kV contact, 25kV
air).
I am trying to perform quick ESD tests on a product which has
bottom entry proprietary cable. Picture if you an upside-down
bottle of coke with push buttons a
,
brent.dew...@us.datex-ohmeda.com inimitably wrote:
>Does anyone have any references or data on the comparative transfer
>impedance between served (spiral) and braided cable shielding at the same
>coverage level?
It's heavily frequency-dependent. At low frequencies, it's the end-to-
end resistan
<200106182001.qaa14...@interlock2.lexmark.com>, rogle...@lexmark.com
inimitably wrote:
>According to our extensive tests in conjunction with
>Philips Consumer Electronics, digital TV (both COFDM
>and ATSC) is actually less susceptible to interference
>from spread spectrum clocks (ssc) than current
<4.3.2.7.2.20010618143751.00b3d...@box.tin.it>, Paolo Roncone
inimitably wrote:
>As for interference to broadband receivers (like TV equipment) I remember a
>Lexmark study published a few years ago that showed no increased
>interference from modulated clocks vs unmodulated clocks (there was als
17 matches
Mail list logo
