Re:GFCI equivalent in Japan
Jim, Almost all Japanese equipment that I have come across has been fitted with Earth Leakage trip Circuit Breakers at the input of sensitivity 30mA. I suspect that this may be a Japanese Industrial requirement but have no proof of this. I have also seen Japanese CBs of earth leakage trip sensitivity of 3mA, presumably for personnel as opposed to industrial equipment protection. Operation is identical to US GFCI or Earth Leakage CBs and would expect comparable compensation for voltage/temp tolerances. All have been fitted with test buttons. Also suspect that the more common usage of Earth Leakage may be the result of the more common use of 3 phase delta connected loads, and, with no Neutral brought into the equipment as a reference, it becomes essential to detect any leakage to ground,(earth). Anyone have any reference to e.g. a JIS Electrical Spec on this? Regards, Tony Firth, Elect.Eng., Quester Technology Inc., Fremont,CA Jim Eichner wrote: Hi everyone: Can anyone tell me what gets used in Japan in the way ofGFCI's? 1. Is the trip criteria the same (line current minus neutral current 5mA = trip)? 2.Are their unique Japanese GFCI's? 3. If so, does this have anything to do with the change from 120Vac to 100Vac (which won't affect item 1 but may affect other parameters, for example the Vcc that the internal circuitry gets fed, tolerance of line voltage as low as 80Vac, design of the test-button circuitry, etc.). --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Yup, but.. I tired pointing out to one of the RBOC's that there reliance on OSHA NRTL was horribly inadequate because most of them - maybe all of them had nothing in the scope of accreditation that indicated the could do any of the EMC tests. The key to any certification is what the scope of your accreditation is. If you go out to the OSHA site and look at the NRTL scopes you will see what I mean. Apparently, getting your name into the OSHA NRTL site qualifies you to do anything and everything, no experience necessary. Some of the OSHA NRTL's that I have seen probably can do a reasonable EMC job, a couple I've seen were woefully adequate. (but doesn't matter because they are NRTL's) As the ol' axiom goes Garbage in Garbage out The RBOC's that ignore Nationally Recognized EMC Test labs, are doing themselves and us a large disservice. They are not only nationally recognized by a US govermental body but any country with a signed Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA), With EMC testing in the scope of accreditation they are internationally recognized. But again, use the EMC lab you want and have your NRTL include the data and wham-o - your done. (its Friday, I'm in a good mood, and no this isn't quite as easy as I just made it sound) Gary -Original Message- From: Grant, Tania (Tania) [mailto:tgr...@lucent.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 2:08 PM To: 'Naftali Shani'; 'Collins, Jeffrey'; 'Gary McInturff' Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject:RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Gary and Company, You have a valid point, but incomplete historical data. The reason OSHA blesses NRTLs is because the whole issue started because the National Electrical Code used to state that the appliances (everything is an appliance in the NEC!) placed into buildings be safety approved by nationally recognized testing laboratories, such as Underwriters Laboratories.The NEC, as you well understand, does not care about radiated emission limits. Some time later an independent east coast safety testing lab sued, or almost sued, OSHA/NEC that the specific mention of the UL name was un-American, etc. As a result, this offending language was removed from the NEC, the National Recognized Testing Laboratory achieved new status and, it seems, other (any) safety labs could now approve appliances.Well now, that did not sit too well with a lot of labs or even OSHA.The upshot was, safety labs were made to submit their expertise to be blessed by OSHA as an NRTL. Now, if that same safety lab also happens to offer EMC testing, it seems that this also falls into the NRTL umbrella. I believe that this is an incorrect premise. Several UL offices also perform EMC testing. The east coast lab also performs safety (which is how they first got NRTL listing) and EMC. Thus, to my knowledge, there are at least two labs that are NRTL and do both safety and EMC.However, I am not aware that any independent, EMC only test lab has gotten OSHA (which is only concerned with safety) NRTL approval. The RBOCs, not realizing this fact, made a sweeping statement that all testing had to be performed by an NRTL lab. This immediately cut out excellent independent EMC only testing labs. This mess is continuing because the RBOCs, very often, don't do their homework, but assume many things.Too bad. To make a long story short, Tania Grant, tgr...@lucent.com mailto:tgr...@lucent.com Lucent Technologies, Communications Applications Group -- From: Gary McInturff [SMTP:gmcintu...@telect.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:57 AM To: 'Naftali Shani'; 'Collins, Jeffrey' Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Still can be done at an independent site. The Lab I use, ACME Testing, here in Washington has accreditation to at least the radiated emissions portions of the GR-, I have to check on the susceptibility, but I think so. Even if that were not true. I believe that if your NRTL accepts the EMC data from the other lab they will include it in the overall report. Now there is the dicey part. Many of the NRTL's have their own EMC labs and may not want to loose the cash, and try
RE: Split or Not to Split?
Just curious here, Obviously, the question was asked, and my people have responded. Is anyone actually counting or even seriously contemplating the breakup. Just because a question was asked doesn't mean any action is going on? Gary -Original Message- From: Mark Hassebrock [mailto:mhass...@qualcomm.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 12:46 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Split or Not to Split? Greetings All, I feel EMC and Safety are joined at the hip so I vote NO Split. Although some companies are fortunate to have dedicated people, I suspect there are many more of us that are required to wear multiple hats. In my humble opinion, the real issue is the shear volume of mailings each day! It's not practical to go through the dozens of postings each day. Unfortunately when I do, I observe many where can I get this standard? or endless threads on Y2K, etc. Let's all commit to doing our homework before posting. My thanks to those who graciously answer questions and provide valuable insights. +++ Mark HassebrockPh. Work: 1-303-247-5005 Regulatory EngineerFax:1-303-247-5116 Qualcomm, Inc.E-mail:mhass...@qualcomm.com Boulder, CO +++ --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Split or Not to Split?
Thought this was over by now;;; but since it continues, my vote is NO split. Mike Hopkins mhopk...@keytek.com -Original Message- From: Mark Hassebrock [SMTP:mhass...@qualcomm.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 3:46 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Split or Not to Split? Greetings All, I feel EMC and Safety are joined at the hip so I vote NO Split. Although some companies are fortunate to have dedicated people, I suspect there are many more of us that are required to wear multiple hats. In my humble opinion, the real issue is the shear volume of mailings each day! It's not practical to go through the dozens of postings each day. Unfortunately when I do, I observe many where can I get this standard? or endless threads on Y2K, etc. Let's all commit to doing our homework before posting. My thanks to those who graciously answer questions and provide valuable insights. +++ Mark HassebrockPh. Work: 1-303-247-5005 Regulatory EngineerFax:1-303-247-5116 Qualcomm, Inc.E-mail:mhass...@qualcomm.com Boulder, CO +++ --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Gary and Company, You have a valid point, but incomplete historical data.The reason OSHA blesses NRTLs is because the whole issue started because the National Electrical Code used to state that the appliances (everything is an appliance in the NEC!) placed into buildings be safety approved by nationally recognized testing laboratories, such as Underwriters Laboratories.The NEC, as you well understand, does not care about radiated emission limits. Some time later an independent east coast safety testing lab sued, or almost sued, OSHA/NEC that the specific mention of the UL name was un-American, etc. As a result, this offending language was removed from the NEC, the National Recognized Testing Laboratory achieved new status and, it seems, other (any) safety labs could now approve appliances.Well now, that did not sit too well with a lot of labs or even OSHA.The upshot was, safety labs were made to submit their expertise to be blessed by OSHA as an NRTL. Now, if that same safety lab also happens to offer EMC testing, it seems that this also falls into the NRTL umbrella. I believe that this is an incorrect premise. Several UL offices also perform EMC testing. The east coast lab also performs safety (which is how they first got NRTL listing) and EMC. Thus, to my knowledge, there are at least two labs that are NRTL and do both safety and EMC.However, I am not aware that any independent, EMC only test lab has gotten OSHA (which is only concerned with safety) NRTL approval. The RBOCs, not realizing this fact, made a sweeping statement that all testing had to be performed by an NRTL lab. This immediately cut out excellent independent EMC only testing labs. This mess is continuing because the RBOCs, very often, don't do their homework, but assume many things.Too bad. To make a long story short, Tania Grant, tgr...@lucent.com mailto:tgr...@lucent.com Lucent Technologies, Communications Applications Group -- From: Gary McInturff [SMTP:gmcintu...@telect.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:57 AM To: 'Naftali Shani'; 'Collins, Jeffrey' Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Still can be done at an independent site. The Lab I use, ACME Testing, here in Washington has accreditation to at least the radiated emissions portions of the GR-, I have to check on the susceptibility, but I think so. Even if that were not true. I believe that if your NRTL accepts the EMC data from the other lab they will include it in the overall report. Now there is the dicey part. Many of the NRTL's have their own EMC labs and may not want to loose the cash, and try reject the independent lab's report. I would find that a really hard sell however, because the NRTL labs undoubtedly carry accreditation through NIST for the EMC portion, making any argument about competency of the independent lab a tough sell. At any rate I've never quite understood the justification for not calling laboratories which are accredited through programs set up by and through the FCC, as NRTLS'. The basic assumption I would make is that the FCC knows a heck of a lot more about this aspect of testing and accreditation than OSHA does. Heavy sigh! Gary -Original Message- From: Naftali Shani [mailto:nsh...@nortelnetworks.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 6:05 AM To: 'Collins, Jeffrey' Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's BM__MailDataJeffrey, the requirement that was for NRTL lab ( Bellcore representative) for each section of GR-63 GR-1089, has been dropped. See section 3.1.2 in the BA-NEBS-R10. However, FCC data/frequency range for radiated emissions is insufficient: You should have data based on GR-1089 requirements objectives (10 kHz to 10 GHz). Regards, Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S45, MS 117/C1/M05 21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2K 2C1 Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.8091 (ESN 393) E-mail: mailto:nsh...@nortelnetworks.com nsh...@nortelnetworks.com or mailto:n...@ieee.org n...@ieee.org -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [SMTP:jcoll...@ciena.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 4:57 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject:RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe
European Ergonomic Standard
I am looking for the appropriate European Ergonomic standard that addresses the issue of manual lifting in the workplace. The US equivalent standards are the NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting , OSHA 1910, MIL-STD-1472 or MIL-HDBK-795. Its my understanding that there are standards available such as British Standard 5827, Health Safety at Work Etc Act, Health Safety at Work Regulations, and Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations, but I assume that these are UK requirements which may or may not be accepted in the European community. I realize that this is not necessarily a Product Safety issue but I am hoping that someone may be familiar with this. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Rick Busche rbus...@es.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Split or Not to Split?
Greetings All, I feel EMC and Safety are joined at the hip so I vote NO Split. Although some companies are fortunate to have dedicated people, I suspect there are many more of us that are required to wear multiple hats. In my humble opinion, the real issue is the shear volume of mailings each day! It's not practical to go through the dozens of postings each day. Unfortunately when I do, I observe many where can I get this standard? or endless threads on Y2K, etc. Let's all commit to doing our homework before posting. My thanks to those who graciously answer questions and provide valuable insights. +++ Mark HassebrockPh. Work: 1-303-247-5005 Regulatory EngineerFax:1-303-247-5116 Qualcomm, Inc.E-mail:mhass...@qualcomm.com Boulder, CO +++
GFCI equivalent in Japan
Hi everyone: Can anyone tell me what gets used in Japan in the way of GFCI's? There are a few aspects to this question: 1. Is the trip criteria the same (line current minus neutral current 5mA = trip)? 2. Are their unique Japanese GFCI's? 3. If so, does this have anything to do with the change from 120Vac to 100Vac (which won't affect item 1 but may affect other parameters, for example the Vcc that the internal circuitry gets fed, tolerance of line voltage as low as 80Vac, design of the test-button circuitry, etc.). Thanks for your input, Regards, Jim Eichner Group Leader - Engineering Services Xantrex Technology Inc. jim.eich...@xantrex.com Any opinions expressed are those of my invisible friend, who really exists. Honest. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE
Scott, Sorry to hear about your experience but we have had great success using Spread Spectrum Clock Generation (SSCG) since 1994 and have shipped many millions of units. Most PC's built over the last 2 to 3 years also use this technology. For back ground information, see http://www.lexmark.com/sscg/ and http://developer.intel.com/ial/scalableplatforms/sdt.htm. Included in this information is what SSCG is and its effects on some other devices. I suggest one read these references as a basis for further discussions. Experimental data has clearly shown is that the QP and Peak readings are exactly the same for SSCG signals (No Fooling). An SSCG output properly designed will create a clock that is frequency modulated at ~30kHz. The output spectrum is a series of stationary harmonics spaced at 30kHz apart. Finally, this method will attenuate the clock and system as compared to the same system with the modulation turned off. All other EMI reduction techniques will also reduce emissions further. Our design philosophy is to bring all good low cost techniques to bare on reducing the emissions and SSCG is just one of them. Keith Hardin Lexmark International For the last time this came up, please see the append on the emc-pstc archives at http://www.rcic.com/ with subject Clock Oscillator Re: Spread spectrum clock oscillator (1) 20-Feb-97 . slacey%foxboro@interlock.lexmark.com on 03/17/2000 11:18:46 AM Please respond to slacey%foxboro@interlock.lexmark.com To: macy%california@interlock.lexmark.com cc: emc-pstc%ieee@interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: Keith Hardin/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: RE: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE Robert, and the group, Although I have only limited experience (1 instance) with dithered clocks, I thought that I might share that experience with the group. I had a product that was failing radiated emissions at one particular frequency with a vertical antenna orientation. I tracked the problem down to a particular cable and circuit card. Use of a near field probe identified the oscillator package as the source of the emissions (the second harmonic). The device was located near the card edge, insufficient decoupling, etc. All the textbook layout errors. A check of the oscillator specifications showed that it was a standard TTL device with a fanout of 10 inputs. I had already found some fixes that would reduce emissions, clamp-on ferrites, additional shielding, etc., but thought it made more sense to reduce the emissions at the source. I suggested to the design engineer that a low-power TTL oscillator, with a fanout of 2 inputs, would reduce currents through the offending etches. Someone else suggested a dithered clock device instead. When we tested the dithered clock, emissions were actually worse. We had simply spread the problem over a wider spectrum. I have heard some success stories for these devices, but results in this case were disappointing. I still think a lot depends on the layout. I strongly suspect that real-world disruption to nearby devices is generally going to be worse, since the idea behind these devices is to fool quasi-peak measurements in order to pass. Caveat Emptor! Scott Lacey -Original Message- From: Robert Macy [SMTP:m...@california.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 9:38 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Fw: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE Of interest, so I forward this to the group: - Robert - Robert A. Macy, PEm...@california.com 408 286 3985 fx 408 297 9121 AJM International Electronics Consultants 619 North First St, San Jose, CA 95112 -Original Message- From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk Newsgroups: sci.engr.electrical.compliance,sci.electronics.design Date: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 11:55 PM Subject: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE About a year ago we had a thread on this subject, concluding that some research was needed to see whether dithered clocks were better or worse in terms of conforming to EMC requirements. I learned very recently that some reliable but as-yet unpublished research has found that digital TV receivers are some 40 dB (!!) more sensitive to dithered clock emissions than to unmodulated carriers. This is likely to lead to changes in EMC limits within maybe as little as three years, since the authorities certainly don't want to be deluged with complaints of interference from people who have just opted for digital TV. So, if you are thinking of using a dithered clock, think again! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. Phone +44 (0)1268 747839 Fax +44 (0)1268 777124. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk I wanted to make a fully-automated nuclear-powered trawler, but it went into spontaneous fishing.
RE: NRTL(Bell Atlantic) Pre-Approval
Well put. This has been our experience. Regards, Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S45, MS 117/C1/M05 21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2K 2C1 Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.8091 (ESN 393) E-mail: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com mailto:nsh...@nortelnetworks.com or n...@ieee.org mailto:n...@ieee.org -Original Message- From: Ed Nakauchi [SMTP:e...@garwoodtestlabs.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 12:42 PM To: emc-pstc Subject:Fw: NRTL(Bell Atlantic) Pre-Approval To All: Posted for Jason Armstrong of Garwood Laboratories, Inc. by Ed Nakauchi e...@garwoodtestlabs.com mailto:e...@garwoodtestlabs.com -Original Message- From: Jason jas...@garwoodtestlabs.com mailto:jas...@garwoodtestlabs.com To: Ed Nakauchi e...@garwoodtestlabs.com mailto:e...@garwoodtestlabs.com Date: Friday, March 17, 2000 9:21 AM Subject: NRTL(Bell Atlantic) Pre-Approval Gentlemen, Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Jason Armstrong. I am the General Manager at Garwood Laboratories, in Placentia Ca. We are an independent test lab that has been gearing up for NEBS testing for the past several months. Between our two facilities we are able to perform the EMC/Surge, safety physical protection all under one company. I have had many conversations with Chuck Graff at Bell Atlantic in regards to the alternate test facilites statement in their latest checklist revision. The word alternate refers more to in-house or the mfg's test facilities and not to an independent test lab. They have that statement in there for equipment that is either too large or not practical to be tested outside of the mfg's plant due to it's deployment configuration. If you read para 3.1.1 of Bells checklist, you'll see that Bell Atlantic does not certify or approve testing facilities. What DLS has obtained is a letter of recognition and not an approval. I know it sounds like a play on words, but Chuck at Bell Atlantic as well as the other RBOC's are very touchy about the wording. This recognition is something that we are currently striving towards as well. I'm not sure how DLS went about obtaining this, but I have been informed by Bell South, Bell Atlantic US West that if we provide a sample of a NEBS test report that meets with their acceptance, and we are accredited by a recognized orginazation, like NAVLAP or A2LA, then we will also be recognized by them to perform the NEBS requirements. I hope this helps. Jason Armstrong General Manager Garwood Laboratories, Inc. jas...@garwoodtestlabs.com mailto:jas...@garwoodtestlabs.com
RE: Dithered clocks and EMC
Theoretical explanation of how variable clock frequency reduces radiated emission levels is given in US Patent 5,430,392 /netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFd=PALLp=1u=/netahtml/srchnum. htmr=1f=Gl=50s1='5,430,392'.WKU.OS=PN/5,430,392RS=PN/5,430,392 Clock system and method for reducing the measured level of unintentional electromagnetic emissions from an electronic device /netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFd=PALLp=1u=/netahtml/srchnum. htmr=1f=Gl=50s1='5,430,392'.WKU.OS=PN/5,430,392RS=PN/5,430,392 from 1993. http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/srchnum.htm http://164.195.100.11/netahtml/srchnum.htm Mirko --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG
Please split the list, EMC should be stand alone. -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Rossi Giuseppe Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 5:17 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: R:EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG absolutely not , please split the list I'm just intersted in EMC. Ing. Giuseppe Rossi, Narte Certified Engineer EMC manager Centro Ricerche Fiat Strada Torino 50 10043 - Orbassano (TO) tel 011 90 83 114 fax 011 90 83 083 e-mail g.ro...@crf.it -- Da: pmerguer...@itl.co.il[SMTP:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] Risposta a: pmerguer...@itl.co.il Inviato: venerdì 17 marzo 2000 10.04 A:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Oggetto: EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG Dear All, DO NOT SPLIT! I AM ALSO IN FAVOR OF MIGRATING TREG AND NEBS GROUPS INTO TO THE EMC/PSTC LIST. ARE YOU ALL IN FAVOR? Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Fw: NRTL(Bell Atlantic) Pre-Approval
To All: Posted for Jason Armstrong of Garwood Laboratories, Inc. by Ed Nakauchi e...@garwoodtestlabs.com -Original Message- From: Jason jas...@garwoodtestlabs.com To: Ed Nakauchi e...@garwoodtestlabs.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Friday, March 17, 2000 9:21 AM Subject: NRTL(Bell Atlantic) Pre-Approval Gentlemen, Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Jason Armstrong. I am the General Manager at Garwood Laboratories, in Placentia Ca. We are an independent test lab that has been gearing up for NEBS testing for the past several months. Between our two facilities we are able to perform the EMC/Surge, safety physical protection all under one company. I have had many conversations with Chuck Graff at Bell Atlantic in regards to the alternate test facilites statement in their latest checklist revision. The word alternate refers more to in-house or the mfg's test facilities and not to an independent test lab. They have that statement in there for equipment that is either too large or not practical to be tested outside of the mfg's plant due to it's deployment configuration. If you read para 3.1.1 of Bells checklist, you'll see that Bell Atlantic does not certify or approve testing facilities. What DLS has obtained is a letter of recognition and not an approval. I know it sounds like a play on words, but Chuck at Bell Atlantic as well as the other RBOC's are very touchy about the wording. This recognition is something that we are currently striving towards as well. I'm not sure how DLS went about obtaining this, but I have been informed by Bell South, Bell Atlantic US West that if we provide a sample of a NEBS test report that meets with their acceptance, and we are accredited by a recognized orginazation, like NAVLAP or A2LA, then we will also be recognized by them to perform the NEBS requirements. I hope this helps. Jason Armstrong General Manager Garwood Laboratories, Inc. jas...@garwoodtestlabs.com
RE: Re[2]: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Hey All, Keep in mind that although Bell Atlantic is often the pickiest, they are not the only RBOC that flip-flops on the NRTL data issue on an annual basis. I believe US West has taken their place on the NRTL Wagon this year. Bell South weighs in on the issue regularly as well. I would not be surprised if it is not one of those things that keeps the larger switch players on top of the short list for new equipment rollouts. Personally, I cannot justify the risk of having official NEBS tests done by a lab that is not a NRTL. Dave Spencer Oresis Communications -Original Message- From: Jay Johansmeier [mailto:jay_johansme...@mw.3com.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 6:24 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Re[2]: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Thanks Eric. If you read on you see that Bell Atlantic must give 'prior' approval for 'alternate' test facilities. Jeffrey was asking for documentation from a lab that has this 'prior' approval and at the moment DLS is the only one, I haven't checked for others, that I know that have a letter of approval. I'm sure there are others. My guess is that Jeffrey could ask the lab(s) in question to contact Bell Atlantic to receive this type of prior approval. Regards, Jay Johansmeier Regulatory Engineer 3Com Corporation jay_johansme...@3com.com Eric Petitpierre eric.petitpie...@pulse.com on 03/17/2000 07:55:00 AM Sent by: Eric Petitpierre eric.petitpie...@pulse.com To: emc-pstc @ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org, Jay Johansmeier/MW/US/3Com cc: Subject: Re[2]: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Jeffey and Jay, Bell Atlantic Specification RNSA-NEB-95-0003, Rev, 10 Issued January 26,2000 has removed the NRTL requirement,( see sections 1.6.1 and 3.1.2) Regards, Eric Petitpierre Pulsecom Herndon,VA eric.petitpierre __ Reply Separator _ Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Author: jay_johansme...@mw.3com.com (Jay Johansmeier) at smtp List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:3/17/00 7:49 AM Jeffrey, DLS, here in Illinois, claims to have a letter from Bell Atlantic stating that their EMC data will be accepted. You can email Steve Grimes at DLS and ask him if they will give you a copy. ( sgri...@dlsemc.com ) Regards, Jay Johansmeier Regulatory Engineer 3Com Corporation jay_johansme...@3com.com Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com on 03/17/2000 03:56:40 AM Please respond to Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com Sent by: Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com To: 'emc-pstc @ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(Jay Johansmeier/MW/US/3Com) Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send
Re: Antenna factors to be used for NSA measurement
Robert, there are a couple of points that came up in your posts that I would like to more fully understand. 1. ...the site under test is verified against the performance of the site on which the antenna factors are calibrated. I honestly don't get this point. The applicable standards (ANSI C63.4 and CISPR22) require that you verify the measured Normalized Site Attenuation (NSA) against a Theoretical Normalized Site Attenuation (ThNSA) of an ideal site (infinite perfectly conductive ground plane), NOT against the site on which the antenna factors are calibrated. Ref. sec.ANSI C63.4-1992 sec.5.4.6.1, CISPR 22 - 1997 (3.ed) sec.10.3.2. This is what the standard says, although its validity has been questioned by a number of EMC experts. 2. ...a dual antenna factor calibration suffices if the same antennas will be used in the NSA measurement, there is no accuracy advantage when using a three-antenna method in this case. In ANSI C63.5-1988 I read (sec.5.2 page12): In practice, two antennas are never identical, and the antenna factor calculated by Eq.8 is the geometric mean of the individual factor for each of the two antennas.. That's the reason why I said that the 3 antenna method is more accurate. Also,your statement: Antenna factors provided by the manufacturer or measured by a cal lab are typically not of sufficient accuracy (with a few exceptions) reinforces my opinion. 3. There are substantial difference in the antenna factors (and site attenuation) values at various range distances. I agree that it's always better to calibrate antennas at the test distance. On the other end, within the range of 3-10 m distance my experience with broadband antennas (biconicals and log-periodic) between 30 and 1000 MHz tells me that the error is well within 1 dB, as long as you are in the far-field at 3 m (which is the case most of the times using biconicals). I have not direct experience but my guess is that you may have non-negligible errors for distances 3m and/or highly directional antennas (horns freq. 1GHz), whereby you can be in the near field even at 3+ meters distance. 4. I know the article you mentioned (Z. Chen and M.Foegelle: Numerical Investigations of Ground Plane Effects on Biconical Antenna Factor) exposes one weakness of the ideal (theoretical) model used for calculating ThNSA (see point 1). The analytically derived model assumes that the antennas used are point dipoles that behave in a different way than the most used broadband antennas. They use a numerical analysis to measure the effects of the ground plane on AFs of biconical antennas (field variations and antenna coupling with the ground plane). Their conclusions are, in their words, that if an ANSI C63.5 standard site calibrated AF is used for ANSI C63.4 (NSA measurements), all the approximations and ground plane effects exactly cancel. My understanding is that if you use the same geometry for the calibration of antennas (3 antenna method) over a ground plane and for the validation of your site (OATS or SAR), the variations of antenna factors associated with the coupling antenna-ground plane are compensated and do not add errors to the NSA measurements. Provided the two ground planes (calibration site and test site to be qualified) have ground planes that behave in the same way ! So under these conditions, for NSA measurements and site validation you can limit the job to horizontal polarization (as required by the standards). The antenna calibration in vertical polarization is useful to improve accuracy of emissions measurements of products (using vertical and horizontal AFs) other than in cases - as mentioned by Don Umbdenstock - where the error introduced by AF variation does not get you over your total budgeted measurement uncertainty. Any further comment would be highly appreciated. Regards, Paolo Roncone --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: standard for lead shot dielectric testing
Barry You can also look at the UL Standard for Vacuum cleaning machines (UL1017). The dielectric test on powered vacuum hoses also employed lead shot. Kelly At 10:03 AM 3/17/00 +0200, Peter Merguerian wrote: Barry, In my old days working for UL, we used lead shot to test the dielectric strength properties of insulated wire connectors. I suggest you take a look at the wire connector standards UL486 Series. At 15:26 16/03/2000 -0600, barrym wrote: I'm looking for reference to any standard which may provide specifics for using lead shot for dielectric strength testing. I know this done for insulation system qualifications, just have not identified a standard for the test set up. Thanks, Barry Marks --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Kelly Tsudama Cisco Systems ktsud...@cisco.com 408-527-0216 408-525-9150 fax 408-322-9024 pager --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Still can be done at an independent site. The Lab I use, ACME Testing, here in Washington has accreditation to at least the radiated emissions portions of the GR-, I have to check on the susceptibility, but I think so. Even if that were not true. I believe that if your NRTL accepts the EMC data from the other lab they will include it in the overall report. Now there is the dicey part. Many of the NRTL's have their own EMC labs and may not want to loose the cash, and try reject the independent lab's report. I would find that a really hard sell however, because the NRTL labs undoubtedly carry accreditation through NIST for the EMC portion, making any argument about competency of the independent lab a tough sell. At any rate I've never quite understood the justification for not calling laboratories which are accredited through programs set up by and through the FCC, as NRTLS'. The basic assumption I would make is that the FCC knows a heck of a lot more about this aspect of testing and accreditation than OSHA does. Heavy sigh! Gary -Original Message- From: Naftali Shani [mailto:nsh...@nortelnetworks.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 6:05 AM To: 'Collins, Jeffrey' Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's BM__MailDataJeffrey, the requirement that was for NRTL lab ( Bellcore representative) for each section of GR-63 GR-1089, has been dropped. See section 3.1.2 in the BA-NEBS-R10. However, FCC data/frequency range for radiated emissions is insufficient: You should have data based on GR-1089 requirements objectives (10 kHz to 10 GHz). Regards, Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S45, MS 117/C1/M05 21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2K 2C1 Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.8091 (ESN 393) E-mail: mailto:nsh...@nortelnetworks.com nsh...@nortelnetworks.com or mailto:n...@ieee.org n...@ieee.org -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [SMTP:jcoll...@ciena.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 4:57 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject:RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: SAF: Insulation resistance and hipot tests
EN60601-1 (Medical Safety) Appendix C provides a list entitled Sequence of Testing. This list is used during the course of the safety investigation on the device. It follows as: C24: Cont. leakage currents and patient auxiliary currents at operating temp C25: Dielectric strength at operating temp C26: Humidity preconditioning treatment C27: Dielectric strength test (cold condition after humidity conditioning) C28: Leakage current test after humidity preconditioning treatment In our production testing we perform a high potential dielectric strength test first followed by a leakage current test. Our high potential tester has a ground continuity circuit and will warn the operator if the safety ground circuit is not in place (open). -Original Message- From: mark.dagost...@vsea.com [mailto:mark.dagost...@vsea.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 7:37 AM To: Bruce Touzel; Art Michael Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; Martin Rowe (TMW) Subject: Re: SAF: Insulation resistance and hipot tests Folks: EN 60204-1 also specifies an insulation resistance test. Depending on the standard, they tell you the sequence of the various safety tests. For example, in EN 60204-1, clause 19.1 (the test clause) states: When these test are performed, it is recommended that they follow the sequence listed. For EN 60204-1, it is Ground continuity, then Insulation resistance, then Hipot, then cap discharge. I hope this helps. At 01:21 PM 3/16/00 -0800, Bruce Touzel wrote: Insulation resistance tests would apply only to IEC 950 I believe, so this may not apply for you ? Art Michael wrote: Hello Martin, I don't have the answer to your question, but do caution that the First Test to be run (if the DUT is grounded) is the Ground Continuity Test (for test-operator protection). Regards, Art Michael * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * International Product Safety Bookshop * * Check out our current offerings! * * http://www.safetylink.com/bookshop.html * * * * Now offering BSI's Books Reports* * including, World Electricity Supplies * * * * Another service of the Safety Link* * www.safetylink.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Martin Rowe (TMW) wrote: Group, A reader asked about the order of performing safety tests. Should he perform insulation resistance tests before or after hipot tests? The reader didn't say what type of product he's testing, but I can ask. Thanks, /\ | Martin Rowe | / \ | Senior Technical Editor | /\ /\ | Test Measurement World | / \/ \/\ | voice 617-558-4426 |/\ /\ / \/ | fax 617-928-4426 | \/ \/ | e-mail m.r...@ieee.org | \ / | http://www.tmworld.com |\/ --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Mark A. D'Agostino Sr. Product Safety Engineer 978 282 7520 978 281 3162 (fax) --- This
RE: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE
Robert, and the group, Although I have only limited experience (1 instance) with dithered clocks, I thought that I might share that experience with the group. I had a product that was failing radiated emissions at one particular frequency with a vertical antenna orientation. I tracked the problem down to a particular cable and circuit card. Use of a near field probe identified the oscillator package as the source of the emissions (the second harmonic). The device was located near the card edge, insufficient decoupling, etc. All the textbook layout errors. A check of the oscillator specifications showed that it was a standard TTL device with a fanout of 10 inputs. I had already found some fixes that would reduce emissions, clamp-on ferrites, additional shielding, etc., but thought it made more sense to reduce the emissions at the source. I suggested to the design engineer that a low-power TTL oscillator, with a fanout of 2 inputs, would reduce currents through the offending etches. Someone else suggested a dithered clock device instead. When we tested the dithered clock, emissions were actually worse. We had simply spread the problem over a wider spectrum. I have heard some success stories for these devices, but results in this case were disappointing. I still think a lot depends on the layout. I strongly suspect that real-world disruption to nearby devices is generally going to be worse, since the idea behind these devices is to fool quasi-peak measurements in order to pass. Caveat Emptor! Scott Lacey -Original Message- From: Robert Macy [SMTP:m...@california.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 9:38 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:Fw: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE Of interest, so I forward this to the group: - Robert - Robert A. Macy, PEm...@california.com 408 286 3985 fx 408 297 9121 AJM International Electronics Consultants 619 North First St, San Jose, CA 95112 -Original Message- From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk Newsgroups: sci.engr.electrical.compliance,sci.electronics.design Date: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 11:55 PM Subject: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE About a year ago we had a thread on this subject, concluding that some research was needed to see whether dithered clocks were better or worse in terms of conforming to EMC requirements. I learned very recently that some reliable but as-yet unpublished research has found that digital TV receivers are some 40 dB (!!) more sensitive to dithered clock emissions than to unmodulated carriers. This is likely to lead to changes in EMC limits within maybe as little as three years, since the authorities certainly don't want to be deluged with complaints of interference from people who have just opted for digital TV. So, if you are thinking of using a dithered clock, think again! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. Phone +44 (0)1268 747839 Fax +44 (0)1268 777124. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk I wanted to make a fully-automated nuclear-powered trawler, but it went into spontaneous fishing. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
European EPA
Hello All, Does anyone know the equivalent of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Europe? Thanks Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG
Peter Merguerian wrote: Dear All, DO NOT SPLIT! I AM ALSO IN FAVOR OF MIGRATING TREG AND NEBS GROUPS INTO TO THE EMC/PSTC LIST. ARE YOU ALL IN FAVOR? Absolutely not. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
John- Actually, GR-1089 starts at 60 Hz (magnetic field) and 10 kHz (electric field and conducted tests). Penny Robbins Telcordia Technologies John Juhasz jjuh...@fiberoptions.com on 03/17/2000 08:23:25 AM Please respond to John Juhasz jjuh...@fiberoptions.com To: 'Collins, Jeffrey' jcoll...@ciena.com, 'emc-p...@ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Penny D. Robbins/Telcordia) Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's You have to be careful here Jeff. The frequency range for evaluation to GR-1089 starts at 150kHz and goes up to 10 GHz. The FCC Part 15 testing range is from 30MHz-1.0GHz. The GR-1089 spec also contains Immunity requirements. Further, the objective is to meet the spec with all covers, panels, doors off/open which is not typically done during FCC testing. Additionally, look at it from this perspective: If an RBOC is going to be reviewing proposals, if there are two similar products competing, they will choose the one that meets the details of the NEBS spec, than the one that took steps to 'look like' they meet NEBS, even if the product costs more. The RBOCs are a different breed than the usual commercial customer. John Juhasz Fiber Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 4:57 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Title: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's You have to be careful here Jeff. The frequency range for evaluation to GR-1089 starts at 150kHz and goes up to 10 GHz. The FCC Part 15 testing range is from 30MHz-1.0GHz. The GR-1089 spec also contains Immunity requirements. Further, the objective is to meet the spec with all covers, panels, doors off/open which is not typically done during FCC testing. Additionally, look at it from this perspective: If an RBOC is going to be reviewing proposals, if there are two similar products competing, they will choose the one that meets the details of the NEBS spec, than the one that took steps to 'look like' they meet NEBS, even if the product costs more. The RBOCs are a different breed than the usual commercial customer. John Juhasz Fiber Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 4:57 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Fwd:Isolations on inner layers
Hello Jim and Mihai, According to IEC 60950 3rd. edition, Clause 2.10.5.3, the distance between two adjacent tracks on the same inner layer of a printed circuit board is treated as distance through insulation, and therefore 0,4 mm apply for supplementary or reinforced insulation. Your question regarding air bubbles or other defects is should be covered by the applied electric strength test. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-642-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com (Jim Bacher) on 17.03.2000 13:50:53 Please respond to jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com (Jim Bacher) To: emc-p...@ieee.org cc: mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro (bcc: Volker Gasse/Germany/IBM) Subject: Fwd:Isolations on inner layers forwarding for mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro ... Jim Forward Header_ Subject:Isolations on inner layers Author: Mihai Vintila mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 3/16/00 7:34 PM Hello, I have a question concerning isolations for hazardous voltages on inner layers of a multilayer PCB. The material is standard FR4. I have read the EN60950 spec and it seems like for copper on different inner layers an isolation of 0.4mm would be good enough. Now what I could not figure is about traces on the same inner layer. In this case an isolation of 0.4 mm is as good as it is between different layers, or should I take into consideration the manufacturing errors (impurities, air bubbles, a.s.o.) and make a bigger isolation, but how much bigger? The voltages I am working with are some of them TNV1 and others 220VAC (mains). Many thanks, Mihai --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
R:EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG
absolutely not , please split the list I'm just intersted in EMC. Ing. Giuseppe Rossi, Narte Certified Engineer EMC manager Centro Ricerche Fiat Strada Torino 50 10043 - Orbassano (TO) tel 011 90 83 114 fax 011 90 83 083 e-mail g.ro...@crf.it -- Da: pmerguer...@itl.co.il[SMTP:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] Risposta a: pmerguer...@itl.co.il Inviato: venerdì 17 marzo 2000 10.04 A:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Oggetto: EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG Dear All, DO NOT SPLIT! I AM ALSO IN FAVOR OF MIGRATING TREG AND NEBS GROUPS INTO TO THE EMC/PSTC LIST. ARE YOU ALL IN FAVOR? Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
FW: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
I stand corrected regarding my response to Jeff Collins. The frequency range starts at 10kHz. Sorry if I misled anyone. John Juhasz Fiber Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: e...@itsqs.com [mailto:e...@itsqs.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 9:23 AM To: jjuh...@fiberoptions.com Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Hi John, Actually the frequency range starts at 10kHz for both Emissions and Immunity. Eddie O'Toole ITS, Boxboro, MA -Original Message- From: John Juhasz [mailto:jjuh...@fiberoptions.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 8:23 AM To: 'Collins, Jeffrey'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's You have to be careful here Jeff. The frequency range for evaluation to GR-1089 starts at 150kHz and goes up to 10 GHz. The FCC Part 15 testing range is from 30MHz-1.0GHz. The GR-1089 spec also contains Immunity requirements. Further, the objective is to meet the spec with all covers, panels, doors off/open which is not typically done during FCC testing. Additionally, look at it from this perspective: If an RBOC is going to be reviewing proposals, if there are two similar products competing, they will choose the one that meets the details of the NEBS spec, than the one that took steps to 'look like' they meet NEBS, even if the product costs more. The RBOCs are a different breed than the usual commercial customer. John Juhasz Fiber Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [ mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com ] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 4:57 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Fw: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE
Of interest, so I forward this to the group: - Robert - Robert A. Macy, PEm...@california.com 408 286 3985 fx 408 297 9121 AJM International Electronics Consultants 619 North First St, San Jose, CA 95112 -Original Message- From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk Newsgroups: sci.engr.electrical.compliance,sci.electronics.design List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 11:55 PM Subject: Dithered clocks and EMC - BEWARE About a year ago we had a thread on this subject, concluding that some research was needed to see whether dithered clocks were better or worse in terms of conforming to EMC requirements. I learned very recently that some reliable but as-yet unpublished research has found that digital TV receivers are some 40 dB (!!) more sensitive to dithered clock emissions than to unmodulated carriers. This is likely to lead to changes in EMC limits within maybe as little as three years, since the authorities certainly don't want to be deluged with complaints of interference from people who have just opted for digital TV. So, if you are thinking of using a dithered clock, think again! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. Phone +44 (0)1268 747839 Fax +44 (0)1268 777124. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk I wanted to make a fully-automated nuclear-powered trawler, but it went into spontaneous fishing. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Safety Std. for CCTV
I have some additional information to add to the recent thread concerning if EN60065 or EN60950 apply to CCTV equipment for security use. As I reported, EN 50132-2-1, the performance standard for black and white CCTV cameras for security use, has been published in the OJ under the LVD. I should have read the standard in detail because the answer is there. Clause 4.14 says, The camera shall comply with the EN60065 or EN60950 safety requirements. Richard Woods --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Re[2]: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Thanks Eric. If you read on you see that Bell Atlantic must give 'prior' approval for 'alternate' test facilities. Jeffrey was asking for documentation from a lab that has this 'prior' approval and at the moment DLS is the only one, I haven't checked for others, that I know that have a letter of approval. I'm sure there are others. My guess is that Jeffrey could ask the lab(s) in question to contact Bell Atlantic to receive this type of prior approval. Regards, Jay Johansmeier Regulatory Engineer 3Com Corporation jay_johansme...@3com.com Eric Petitpierre eric.petitpie...@pulse.com on 03/17/2000 07:55:00 AM Sent by: Eric Petitpierre eric.petitpie...@pulse.com To: emc-pstc @ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org, Jay Johansmeier/MW/US/3Com cc: Subject: Re[2]: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Jeffey and Jay, Bell Atlantic Specification RNSA-NEB-95-0003, Rev, 10 Issued January 26,2000 has removed the NRTL requirement,( see sections 1.6.1 and 3.1.2) Regards, Eric Petitpierre Pulsecom Herndon,VA eric.petitpierre __ Reply Separator _ Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Author: jay_johansme...@mw.3com.com (Jay Johansmeier) at smtp List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:3/17/00 7:49 AM Jeffrey, DLS, here in Illinois, claims to have a letter from Bell Atlantic stating that their EMC data will be accepted. You can email Steve Grimes at DLS and ask him if they will give you a copy. ( sgri...@dlsemc.com ) Regards, Jay Johansmeier Regulatory Engineer 3Com Corporation jay_johansme...@3com.com Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com on 03/17/2000 03:56:40 AM Please respond to Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com Sent by: Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com To: 'emc-pstc @ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(Jay Johansmeier/MW/US/3Com) Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Component Supplier's Exhibition
Try the europe wide exhibition, Electronica 2000 in Munich. 21-24 Nov. http://www.electronica.de/englisch/index.html Alan -Original Message- From: Peter Merguerian pmerguer...@itl.co.il To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 17 March 2000 10:59 Subject: Component Supplier's Exhibition Hello Group, Could someone lead me into the largest worldwide exhibitions for Component Suppliers Exhibitions for Electrical and Electronic Equipment. Thanks in Advance Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Fwd:Isolations on inner layers
Mihai, In the past I have worked with many multilayer boards and have applied the following criteria: 1) Most PC boards are made up of multiple layers (prepreg). This has to be taken into consideration for traces on opposite layers of the board. In this case you cannot use the 0.4mm thickness requirement because it is not 1 solid layer. I would suggest you contact the board vendor and request information on the build. You will usually receive a cut-away drawing of the board stating each material used and the thickness of the layers. You can use this information when referring to clause 2.9.4.3 in EN60950 in order to determine if it meets the requirements. 2) As for traces on inner layers of the board, I would consider it pollution degree 1 (sealed against moisture and dust) which will reduce the normal required spacing. Also, you may be able to reduce the spacing further if the board meets the requirements of clause 2.9.5. Good luck Edward Eszlari Bose Corporation From: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com (Jim Bacher) Reply-To: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com (Jim Bacher) To: emc-p...@ieee.org CC: mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro Subject: Fwd:Isolations on inner layers Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 07:50:53 -0500 forwarding for mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro ... Jim Forward Header_ Subject:Isolations on inner layers Author: Mihai Vintila mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro Date: 3/16/00 7:34 PM Hello, I have a question concerning isolations for hazardous voltages on inner layers of a multilayer PCB. The material is standard FR4. I have read the EN60950 spec and it seems like for copper on different inner layers an isolation of 0.4mm would be good enough. Now what I could not figure is about traces on the same inner layer. In this case an isolation of 0.4 mm is as good as it is between different layers, or should I take into consideration the manufacturing errors (impurities, air bubbles, a.s.o.) and make a bigger isolation, but how much bigger? The voltages I am working with are some of them TNV1 and others 220VAC (mains). Many thanks, Mihai --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Jeffrey, the requirement that was for NRTL lab ( Bellcore representative) for each section of GR-63 GR-1089, has been dropped. See section 3.1.2 in the BA-NEBS-R10. However, FCC data/frequency range for radiated emissions is insufficient: You should have data based on GR-1089 requirements objectives (10 kHz to 10 GHz). Regards, Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S45, MS 117/C1/M05 21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2K 2C1 Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.8091 (ESN 393) E-mail: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com mailto:nsh...@nortelnetworks.com or n...@ieee.org mailto:n...@ieee.org -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [SMTP:jcoll...@ciena.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 4:57 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject:RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re[2]: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Jeffey and Jay, Bell Atlantic Specification RNSA-NEB-95-0003, Rev, 10 Issued January 26,2000 has removed the NRTL requirement,( see sections 1.6.1 and 3.1.2) Regards, Eric Petitpierre Pulsecom Herndon,VA eric.petitpierre __ Reply Separator _ Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Author: jay_johansme...@mw.3com.com (Jay Johansmeier) at smtp List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:3/17/00 7:49 AM Jeffrey, DLS, here in Illinois, claims to have a letter from Bell Atlantic stating that their EMC data will be accepted. You can email Steve Grimes at DLS and ask him if they will give you a copy. ( sgri...@dlsemc.com ) Regards, Jay Johansmeier Regulatory Engineer 3Com Corporation jay_johansme...@3com.com Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com on 03/17/2000 03:56:40 AM Please respond to Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com Sent by: Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com To: 'emc-pstc @ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(Jay Johansmeier/MW/US/3Com) Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re[2]: Spanish analog interface
All, ..and is this where all the problems are going to start! Regards Tony Reynolds Pitney Bowes Ltd NB This is not intended as a criticism of David Gelfand and/or his company but just a comment on the implications of the RTTE Directive. __ Reply Separator _ Subject: Re: Spanish analog interface Author: David Gelfand gelf...@memotec.com at smtpgwy List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:16/03/00 14:13 This is VERY interesting. Am I naive, but does the RTTE directive mean that after April 8, 2000 we can export analog ITE equipment to Europe just based on safety, emc emissions and immunity testing alone? Does this apply to CTR 2 and CTR12 as well? Thank you, David. - Original Message - From: Corinne SALINGRE corinne.salin...@cstelecom.com Subject: Re: Spanish analog interface After april, 8th 2000 : analog telephone can access to EU market under RTTE Directive, which prescribes, for that equipment compliance against LVD and EMC directives only. Interworking with network is no longer essential requirement. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: SAF: Insulation resistance and hipot tests
Folks: EN 60204-1 also specifies an insulation resistance test. Depending on the standard, they tell you the sequence of the various safety tests. For example, in EN 60204-1, clause 19.1 (the test clause) states: When these test are performed, it is recommended that they follow the sequence listed. For EN 60204-1, it is Ground continuity, then Insulation resistance, then Hipot, then cap discharge. I hope this helps. At 01:21 PM 3/16/00 -0800, Bruce Touzel wrote: Insulation resistance tests would apply only to IEC 950 I believe, so this may not apply for you ? Art Michael wrote: Hello Martin, I don't have the answer to your question, but do caution that the First Test to be run (if the DUT is grounded) is the Ground Continuity Test (for test-operator protection). Regards, Art Michael * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * International Product Safety Bookshop * * Check out our current offerings! * * http://www.safetylink.com/bookshop.html * * * * Now offering BSI's Books Reports* * including, World Electricity Supplies * * * * Another service of the Safety Link* * www.safetylink.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Martin Rowe (TMW) wrote: Group, A reader asked about the order of performing safety tests. Should he perform insulation resistance tests before or after hipot tests? The reader didn't say what type of product he's testing, but I can ask. Thanks, /\ | Martin Rowe | / \ | Senior Technical Editor | /\ /\ | Test Measurement World | / \/ \/\ | voice 617-558-4426 |/\ /\ / \/ | fax 617-928-4426 | \/ \/ | e-mail m.r...@ieee.org | \ / | http://www.tmworld.com |\/ --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Mark A. D'Agostino Sr. Product Safety Engineer 978 282 7520 978 281 3162 (fax) --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
What is Margin Testing
Hi All, This may not be the right forum so if not, please point me in another direction. Question: can anyone tell me what is Margin Testing as it is applied to ATM, Frame Relay, Internet backbone type of equipment? I do not have any more than that to go on right now. I do know some tiny bit about the equipment but not about the question. Not sure if this is testing of equipment at high and low line voltages/frequencies/environments or if this has to do with % of capacity a given piece of equipment can handle without errors or something entirely different. Replies to me directly will avoid channel clutter and are much appreciated. Scott s_doug...@ecrm.com ECRM Incorporated Tewksbury, MA USA --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
You have to be careful here Jeff. The frequency range for evaluation to GR-1089 starts at 150kHz and goes up to 10 GHz. The FCC Part 15 testing range is from 30MHz-1.0GHz. The GR-1089 spec also contains Immunity requirements. Further, the objective is to meet the spec with all covers, panels, doors off/open which is not typically done during FCC testing. Additionally, look at it from this perspective: If an RBOC is going to be reviewing proposals, if there are two similar products competing, they will choose the one that meets the details of the NEBS spec, than the one that took steps to 'look like' they meet NEBS, even if the product costs more. The RBOCs are a different breed than the usual commercial customer. John Juhasz Fiber Options Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: Collins, Jeffrey [mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 4:57 AM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Fwd:Isolations on inner layers
forwarding for mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro ... Jim Forward Header_ Subject:Isolations on inner layers Author: Mihai Vintila mih...@trenew.pcnet.ro List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 3/16/00 7:34 PM Hello, I have a question concerning isolations for hazardous voltages on inner layers of a multilayer PCB. The material is standard FR4. I have read the EN60950 spec and it seems like for copper on different inner layers an isolation of 0.4mm would be good enough. Now what I could not figure is about traces on the same inner layer. In this case an isolation of 0.4 mm is as good as it is between different layers, or should I take into consideration the manufacturing errors (impurities, air bubbles, a.s.o.) and make a bigger isolation, but how much bigger? The voltages I am working with are some of them TNV1 and others 220VAC (mains). Many thanks, Mihai --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Jeffrey, DLS, here in Illinois, claims to have a letter from Bell Atlantic stating that their EMC data will be accepted. You can email Steve Grimes at DLS and ask him if they will give you a copy. ( sgri...@dlsemc.com ) Regards, Jay Johansmeier Regulatory Engineer 3Com Corporation jay_johansme...@3com.com Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com on 03/17/2000 03:56:40 AM Please respond to Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com Sent by: Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com To: 'emc-pstc @ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(Jay Johansmeier/MW/US/3Com) Subject: RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Fwd:Re: Mexico Regulatory Requirements
forwarded for Doug ... Jim Forward Header_ Subject:Re: Mexico Regulatory Requirements Author: Doug McKean dmck...@corp.auspex.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 3/16/00 5:27 PM Last I heard: 1. You must get the testing completed in Mexico. 2. And you must get someone with a Mexican tax ID to sign for your product. I.e. distributor, sales rep. 3. Translate everything into Mexican Spanish. Not Castilian Spanish. 4. Only one place that I knew of at the time for the testing and approval was in Mexico City. Little dated on this info. Verify with 2nd source. Regards, Doug McKean Lubeski, Paul wrote: Dear List members: Can anyone provide the Product Safety and Industry/Regulatory Network requirements and approval authority contact(s) for Mexico? Thank you. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Component Supplier's Exhibition
Nepcon UK 4-6 April, NEC Birmingham, UK www.nepcon.co.uk -Original Message- From: pmerguer...@itl.co.il [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 9:20 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Component Supplier's Exhibition Hello Group, Could someone lead me into the largest worldwide exhibitions for Component Suppliers Exhibitions for Electrical and Electronic Equipment. Thanks in Advance Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG
If you put TREG into it I'm off. Jerry Roberton NET Europe Ltd Peter Merguerian wrote: Dear All, DO NOT SPLIT! I AM ALSO IN FAVOR OF MIGRATING TREG AND NEBS GROUPS INTO TO THE EMC/PSTC LIST. ARE YOU ALL IN FAVOR? Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EMC, NEBS NRTL's
Group, Can anyone confirm that the RBOC's, particularly Bell Atlantic has agreed to accept EMC FCC data from non NRTL's? If this is true please provide any documentation to support this. (You know a customer is going to want to see it) Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins MTS, Principal Compliance Engineer Ciena Core Switching Division jcoll...@ciena.com www.ciena.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Component Supplier's Exhibition
Hello Group, Could someone lead me into the largest worldwide exhibitions for Component Suppliers Exhibitions for Electrical and Electronic Equipment. Thanks in Advance Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
EMC/PSTC/NEBS/TREG
Dear All, DO NOT SPLIT! I AM ALSO IN FAVOR OF MIGRATING TREG AND NEBS GROUPS INTO TO THE EMC/PSTC LIST. ARE YOU ALL IN FAVOR? Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: standard for lead shot dielectric testing
Hello Barry, you might check IEC 60851-5 (Test methods for winding wires) where Clause 4, (Test 13) uses the metal shot when determining breakdown voltages of a twisted winding wire. This test is also referenced in IEC 60950 Annex U.2.1. mit freundlichen Gruessen/ best regards Volker Gasse IBM Germany, Technical Relations/Product Safety, Tel: +49-7031-642-6796, Fax: -6916, e-mail: volker.ga...@de.ibm.com Mail: D3114/7103-91, D-70548 Stuttgart, Germany barrym bar...@spaceship.com on 16.03.2000 22:26:37 Please respond to barrym bar...@spaceship.com I'm looking for reference to any standard which may provide specifics for using lead shot for dielectric strength testing. I know this done for insulation system qualifications, just have not identified a standard for the test set up. Thanks, Barry Marks --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: standard for lead shot dielectric testing
Barry, In my old days working for UL, we used lead shot to test the dielectric strength properties of insulated wire connectors. I suggest you take a look at the wire connector standards UL486 Series. At 15:26 16/03/2000 -0600, barrym wrote: I'm looking for reference to any standard which may provide specifics for using lead shot for dielectric strength testing. I know this done for insulation system qualifications, just have not identified a standard for the test set up. Thanks, Barry Marks --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Agilent Technologies Safety position (medical)
Agilent Technologies Health Care Solutions Group has an opening for a Regulatory Engineer to work in our safety test lab. For a keen position as a Senior Quality Engineer, Regulatory Engineering, Medical Product Safety Access the URL: http://www.agilent.com/ Select Jobs Select Search Select Job Search In the Keywords or Job Number field, enter: 666593 Select Submit Search, and the job posting should appear --- Additionally, here is a summary of the position: Job Description The Regulatory Engineer works in the Andover Safety Test Lab. Based on knowledge of device safety standards and experience with related testing, the Regulatory Engineer works independently, but within the general oversight of the Safety Test Lab Team Leader. The Engineer meets with product development teams, advises on product requirements and designs, plans and schedules tests, performs tests, documents results, and works with external agencies to obtain timely compliance reports and certifications. From time to time, the Regulatory Engineer works with Manufacturing Engineering to ensure products continue to be manufactured in compliance with the standards. The primary safety standards are the IEC 60601 medical device family and the IEC 950 information technology safety standard. The Regulatory Engineer also works as the Medical Device Safety Topic Expert. This individual represents Agilent Technologies as a member of one or more international safety committees. If you have additional questions, let me know. Best regards, Dave Osborn Chairman, Boston Section, IEEE +1 781 862 7116 dosb...@agilent.com Agilent Technologies --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Mexico Regulatory Requirements
Last I heard: 1. You must get the testing completed in Mexico. 2. And you must get someone with a Mexican tax ID to sign for your product. I.e. distributor, sales rep. 3. Translate everything into Mexican Spanish. Not Castilian Spanish. 4. Only one place that I knew of at the time for the testing and approval was in Mexico City. Little dated on this info. Verify with 2nd source. Regards, Doug McKean Lubeski, Paul wrote: Dear List members: Can anyone provide the Product Safety and Industry/Regulatory Network requirements and approval authority contact(s) for Mexico? Thank you.
