Other talk-groups / repair / service shops.
Hi all, Is there anyone out there who knows of a similar talkgroup like the emc-pstc in the RF field and electronic repair field. I'm sure all of you EMC specialists ( or nearly ) repair your own tv, audio equipment and video and must have needed advise on one thing or the other. At the moment I'm repairing my tv set and need a transformer. Does anyone know of radio/tv parts supplier on the internet where one can buy spareparts for these kind of a equipment. The service shop here in Iceland for the tv is out of these transf. at the moment and there are few weeks until I can get a new one from them. Kindly send me an email if you know of some groups and/or internet addr. for service shop's. I have enjoyed reading your emails and comments on the various subjects in the emc field and hope this group will go on well in to the next millennium. It will be interesting to see how many of us can send an email in the morning of 1st of January 2000. Anyway, to finish off I'm including a joke that was emailed to me the other day, if someone is offended please accept my apologies. A Chinaman walked into a pub in New York with his pal. He says to his pal, Hey! That's Steven Spielberg over there! God I wish he'll come over to say hi. Spielberg suddenly walked over and gave the man a heavy punch on the nose. Hey!! What's that for?! You bloody Japanese killed my granddad when you bombed pearl harbour! I'm not Japanese! I'm Chinese! Chinese,Vietnamese, Japanese, you're all the same! Spielberg walks back. The Chinese man calmly walks over and gives Speilberg a really heavy punch on the face. Wha... !?! YOU BLOODY ASSHOLE! YOU SANK THE TITANIC! No,no, an iceberg sank the titanic! Iceberg, Carlsberg, Spielberg,you're all the same! Best regards. Hjalmar Arnason PTA Iceland hjal...@pta.is - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: The meaning of Affixed
Greetings, The need to have the last two digits of the year in which the CE mark was affixed marked on the Declaration of Conformity is simply to make the job of enforcement officers simpler. It is bourne out of the very nature and application of the LVD in that there are many electrical products that have been in serial production since the introduction of the Directive in the early seventies. During my four years as a Notified Body signatory in the UK, I saw many products that also followed a fashion cycle. It is not unusual for items such as lighting products to lie dormant for a number of years e.g.: the Lava Lamp. There is some confusion about the format of the use of the last two digits. my advice has always been to find space in the middle of the page and put 99. Whilst this looks odd it follows, to the letter, the requirement and again it is worth remembering that the intended audience for D of C's are the enforcement folks. The D of C should not be changed from year to year. The only reason for doing this would be if the product was revised, or the source of manufacture was changed to sufficiently need the re-definition of the product. This might be the case for a retailer who was sourcing an item from a new factory each season. I hope that this is of interest. Alan _ Alan Brewster Compliance Certification Services 1366 Bordeaux Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94089-1005 Tel: 408-752-8166 ext. 122 Fax: 408-752-8168 e-mail: abrews...@ccsemc.com http://www.ccsemc.com -Original Message- From: Chuck Seyboldt [SMTP:cbo...@nlis.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 1999 10:54 AM To: EMC-PSTC Discussion Group Subject: The meaning of Affixed The requirements for the contents of a Declaration of Conformity under the Low Voltage Directive were amended by Directive 93/68/EEC. Directive 73/23/EEC is hereby amended as follows: . . . ANNEX III CE CONFORMITY MARKING AND EC DECLARATION OF CONFORMITY . . . B. EC declaration of conformity The EC declaration of conformity must contain the following elements: . . . - the last two digits of the year in which the CE marking was affixed. I recognize that this requirement is a formality but I am interested in understanding how to comply, particularly when the goods are produced substantially unchanged, year after year. One could argue that affixing of the CE mark means affixing the CE mark to the goods, and that a new declaration is to be prepared at least once per year, in order that the proper year is recited on the declaration. But, I have seen DofC's that clearly are not done in this fashion. For example, Allen Bradley keeps a series of DofC's online - and for currently produced goods, the latest year appearing on one DofC is 1995. Obviously, it is easier to NOT revisit the DofC in the case of series production. Naturally, a freshly prepared and dated DofC can be expected when a new model is introduced, or a change in an existing model is made that requires a technical re-evaluation (e.g. a design change that warrants updating the design justification in the Technical File), but is it the intent of the subject 93/68/EEC amendments to create an obligation to create annually dated DofC's for each year that series production is undertaken? It is interesting that the Low Voltage Directive has this requirement, and Directive 93/68/EEC also likewise amended these Directives . . . Directive 87/404/EEC (relating to simple pressure vessels) Directive 89/686/EEC (relating to Personal Protective Equipment) Directive 90/384/EEC (relating to non-automatic weighing instruments) Directive 90/396/EEC (relating to appliances burning gaseous fuels) Directive 92/42/EEC (relating to Boilers) . . . but the recent Pressure Equipment Directive, 97/23/EC, does not have a requirement to include the last two digits of the year in which the CE mark was affixed on the DofC. Does anybody here know the original intended purpose for including the year of affixing requirement? Thanks in advance for your insights - on this decidedly non-technical matter. Regards, Chuck Seyboldt - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com
RE: new legal issues (bar-coding)
Hi Listmembers: For those of you who said Lemelson who? (myself included), here's a good background link: http://www.si.edu/lemelson/lemelson/legacy.html Ed :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-): -):-):-) Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 619-505-2780 (Voice) 619-505-1502 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-): -):-):-):-) - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
National Communication and Information Committee of The Russian F ederation
I have a customer who is requesting certification in Russia by The National Communication and Information Committee of The Russian Federation. I am in the process of obtaining GOST-R certification and they are insistent that this is insufficient. I was hoping that this was for Telecom certs, etc. This particular product does not connect to the PSTN and that would put this issue to rest. Would anyone be able to provide information relating to the function of this organization and the products covered. I could not find anything on the web. Thx, Joe * Joe Finlayson Compliance Engineering Manager NBase-Xyplex 295 Foster Street Littleton, MA 01460 Tel:+1 (978) 952-5887 Fax:+1 (978) 952-5054 Email: jfinlay...@nbase-xyplex.com
MOV's vs Unipolar Suppressors
Compliance Collegues, I have a question on MOV's (bi-polar) vs Transorbs (unipolar) devices for board level transient protection, specifically ESD pulses that are very fast rising. The MOV type devices are inexpensive and come in arrays, so theyr'e pretty easy to use. I have heard arguments against these type of devices because a negative going pulse can drive an IC pin below ground (greater than a diode drop) and cause the IC to be damaged by sourcing a large current. Some engineers prefer a unipolar device for this purpose. I have not however, seen this to occur in the test lab. Has anyone experimented or have opinions on this? Thanks Darrell Locke - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Mercury Switches in Europe
Greetings All. Does anyone know if the EC ban on Mercury applies to (small) sealed Mercury Switches. We have a new product that requires a tilt switch for safety compliance. The RD group has evaluated lots of Logic Level non Mercury tilt switches and found none to be as reliable as a mercury switch. 1. Does anyone remember the EC directive number on mercury ??? 2. Does the Mercury ban extend to tiny sealed Mercury bulbs ??? 2. Is there any way we could get a tiny mercury tilt switch into Europe under the Mercury ban ??? Any ideas will be gratefully received. Regards, Michael Taylor Principal EMC Engineer HACH Company - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: cost effective EMC facility
Ed, I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine the salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry would have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool. The problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps, which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near fault lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools would be shaken, not stirred). : ) On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early pioneers soddie (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at lunch time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?). : ) Scott Lacey -Original Message- From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com] Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM To: 'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' Subject:RE: cost effective EMC facility Arun: I was just struck by what you said about setup a Sea Plane or a salt water based site . Has anyone ever set up an OATS using salt water as the ground plane? Talk about excellent surface smoothness, easy to level and cheap material, plus simple repair! (Uhh, could we say it fixes itself?) Just what conductivity would be enough? Could we get enough conductivity before we reach salt saturation? I suppose the upper limit on surface area would be when we get to the point of the wind causing surface ripples. Or gravitational tides. Turntables might be a lot cheaper, too. Just a thin raft that floats. Seriously, has anyone tried this for an OATS? (I seem to recall the US Navy had a really big ship simulator here in San Diego, where they placed scale models of ships on a sheet-steel sea in order to model HF wire antennas.) Regards, Ed :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-): -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-) Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 619-505-2780 (Voice) 619-505-1502 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-): -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-) - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: The meaning of Affixed
I have a copy of the Guidelines on the Application of the Council Directive 73/23/EEC (the LVD). These guidelines were published by the European Commission Directorate-General in July 1997. It states the following as one of the items that must be included in the DoC: the last two digits of the year in which the CE marking was affixed (for the first time). This document is available at http://www.ce-mark.com/low_voltage_guide.html http://www.ce-mark.com/low_voltage_guide.html . Kurt Andrews Compliance Engineer Tracewell Systems, Inc. 567 Enterprise Dr. Westerville, OH 43081 Ph. 614-846-6175 Fax 614-846-7791 Email: kandr...@tracewell.com -Original Message- From: roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 5:02 AM To: Nick Williams Cc: Chuck Seyboldt; EMC-PSTC Discussion Group Subject:Re: The meaning of Affixed I agree with Nick's interpretation that it means the year when the CE Marking was first affixed to that product type for which the Declaration was produced. We consider that dating the Declaration when produced meets this requirement. If the Declaration has to be amended because new standards have had to be applied or because the product design changed, we consider that a new issuing of the Declaration and the Mark and so the Declaration carries the date of that new issue. Many Directives do not require the year to be marked alongside the CE Mark, but (for example EMC Directive) do not require it to be marked anywhere else on the product. Roger Viles WWG Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk on 03/08/99 22:13:34 Please respond to Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk To: Chuck Seyboldt cbo...@nlis.net, EMC-PSTC Discussion Group emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Roger Viles/PLY/Global) Subject: Re: The meaning of Affixed I take 'affixed' to mean the year in which the 'risk assessment' was done and the product was first placed on the EU market. Without doing a trawl through every directive to check the the point, I would guess that those directives which do not require the year to be given along with the CE logo require that the date of manufacture be marked on the product. This is certainly true for the PED. rgds. Nick. At 13:53 -0400 3/8/99, Chuck Seyboldt wrote: The requirements for the contents of a Declaration of Conformity under the Low Voltage Directive were amended by Directive 93/68/EEC. Directive 73/23/EEC is hereby amended as follows: . . . ANNEX III CE CONFORMITY MARKING AND EC DECLARATION OF CONFORMITY . . . B. EC declaration of conformity The EC declaration of conformity must contain the following elements: . . . - the last two digits of the year in which the CE marking was affixed. I recognize that this requirement is a formality but I am interested in understanding how to comply, particularly when the goods are produced substantially unchanged, year after year. One could argue that affixing of the CE mark means affixing the CE mark to the goods, and that a new declaration is to be prepared at least once per year, in order that the proper year is recited on the declaration. But, I have seen DofC's that clearly are not done in this fashion. For example, Allen Bradley keeps a series of DofC's online - and for currently produced goods, the latest year appearing on one DofC is 1995. Obviously, it is easier to NOT revisit the DofC in the case of series production. Naturally, a freshly prepared and dated DofC can be expected when a new model is introduced, or a change in an existing model is made that requires a technical re-evaluation (e.g. a design change that warrants updating the design justification in the Technical File), but is it the intent of the subject 93/68/EEC amendments to create an obligation to create annually dated DofC's for each year that series production is undertaken? It is interesting that the Low Voltage Directive has this requirement, and Directive 93/68/EEC also likewise amended these Directives . . . Directive 87/404/EEC (relating to simple pressure vessels) Directive 89/686/EEC (relating to Personal Protective Equipment) Directive 90/384/EEC (relating to non-automatic weighing instruments) Directive 90/396/EEC (relating to appliances burning
Re: The meaning of Affixed
Dear Nick and Roger: Thank you for your responses. The protocol that both of you are advocating is the one in common use, and is also what we have been advising our clients. The plain language of the Directive seems to point the other way, however. The language does not say that the DofC is to be identified with the FIRST time the CE mark is affixed and the CE mark is not affixed to the DofC, but rather to the goods. So, if the CE mark is affixed to the goods in 1999 (and the DofC has no CE mark on it), the plain language of the Directive says that the DofC shall contain a 99 as a year identifier. I doubt there would ever be a substantive issue, where a company has design and production records that enable a correct association between any given sample of a product, the date (approximate) it was produced, and the declaration that is intended to apply to it. Just another one of those legal curiosities. Regards, Chuck Seyboldt On Wed, 4 Aug 1999 roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com wrote: I agree with Nick's interpretation that it means the year when the CE Marking was first affixed to that product type for which the Declaration was produced. We consider that dating the Declaration when produced meets this requirement. Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk on 03/08/99 22:13:34 I take 'affixed' to mean the year in which the 'risk assessment' was done and the product was first placed on the EU market. At 13:53 -0400 3/8/99, Chuck Seyboldt wrote: Directive 93/68/EEC. Directive 73/23/EEC is hereby amended as follows: - the last two digits of the year in which the CE marking was affixed. One could argue that affixing of the CE mark means affixing the CE mark to the goods, and that a new declaration is to be prepared at least once per year, in order that the proper year is recited on the declaration. - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: NSA (using acid)
Hi Folks, For what it is worth MURIATIC ACID Synonyms: Hydrochloric acid, Spirits of salt. Safety profile: A corrosive irritant to the skin, eyes, and mucous membranes. Mildly toxic to humans by inhalation, and moderately toxic by ingestion. A concentration of 35 ppm causes irritation of the throat after short exposure. Is it wise to blow the acid off with an airline as suggested in one of the other replies? Regards Tim Haynes - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: The meaning of Affixed
I agree with Nick's interpretation that it means the year when the CE Marking was first affixed to that product type for which the Declaration was produced. We consider that dating the Declaration when produced meets this requirement. If the Declaration has to be amended because new standards have had to be applied or because the product design changed, we consider that a new issuing of the Declaration and the Mark and so the Declaration carries the date of that new issue. Many Directives do not require the year to be marked alongside the CE Mark, but (for example EMC Directive) do not require it to be marked anywhere else on the product. Roger Viles WWG Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk on 03/08/99 22:13:34 Please respond to Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk To: Chuck Seyboldt cbo...@nlis.net, EMC-PSTC Discussion Group emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Roger Viles/PLY/Global) Subject: Re: The meaning of Affixed I take 'affixed' to mean the year in which the 'risk assessment' was done and the product was first placed on the EU market. Without doing a trawl through every directive to check the the point, I would guess that those directives which do not require the year to be given along with the CE logo require that the date of manufacture be marked on the product. This is certainly true for the PED. rgds. Nick. At 13:53 -0400 3/8/99, Chuck Seyboldt wrote: The requirements for the contents of a Declaration of Conformity under the Low Voltage Directive were amended by Directive 93/68/EEC. Directive 73/23/EEC is hereby amended as follows: . . . ANNEX III CE CONFORMITY MARKING AND EC DECLARATION OF CONFORMITY . . . B. EC declaration of conformity The EC declaration of conformity must contain the following elements: . . . - the last two digits of the year in which the CE marking was affixed. I recognize that this requirement is a formality but I am interested in understanding how to comply, particularly when the goods are produced substantially unchanged, year after year. One could argue that affixing of the CE mark means affixing the CE mark to the goods, and that a new declaration is to be prepared at least once per year, in order that the proper year is recited on the declaration. But, I have seen DofC's that clearly are not done in this fashion. For example, Allen Bradley keeps a series of DofC's online - and for currently produced goods, the latest year appearing on one DofC is 1995. Obviously, it is easier to NOT revisit the DofC in the case of series production. Naturally, a freshly prepared and dated DofC can be expected when a new model is introduced, or a change in an existing model is made that requires a technical re-evaluation (e.g. a design change that warrants updating the design justification in the Technical File), but is it the intent of the subject 93/68/EEC amendments to create an obligation to create annually dated DofC's for each year that series production is undertaken? It is interesting that the Low Voltage Directive has this requirement, and Directive 93/68/EEC also likewise amended these Directives . . . Directive 87/404/EEC (relating to simple pressure vessels) Directive 89/686/EEC (relating to Personal Protective Equipment) Directive 90/384/EEC (relating to non-automatic weighing instruments) Directive 90/396/EEC (relating to appliances burning gaseous fuels) Directive 92/42/EEC (relating to Boilers) . . . but the recent Pressure Equipment Directive, 97/23/EC, does not have a requirement to include the last two digits of the year in which the CE mark was affixed on the DofC. Does anybody here know the original intended purpose for including the year of affixing requirement? Thanks in advance for your insights - on this decidedly non-technical matter. Regards, Chuck Seyboldt - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
