RE: (Assault and) Batteries (On The Planet) ...

[Dick Grobner]

In the eyes of corporate officers - as long as it doesn't cost us extra $'s
or cuts into the bottom line!
From my experience - if I have a standard or regulation to back up these
types of requirements it does make my job allot easier! In (most of) the
corporate world, the almighty buck carries more weight than an unwritten
regulation or standard. 
I'm not saying that I am in agreement with this, but in most companies today
it is the way it is.
PS - Wearing the additional hat of hazardous waste coordinator, we
(company) do recycle regulated waste following the laws that have been
established within out county / state. In fact we recycle some of our waste
that is not regulated (just don't tell my upper management people!!).  

However - I do personally agree with your thoughts on this matter!


-Original Message-
From: Whitehouse, Terence (Terry) [mailto:twhiteho...@avaya.com]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 8:15 PM
To: 'Mike Murphy'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: (Assault and) Batteries (On The Planet) ...



Mike,
 
You deserve an award*** for your refreshing display of common sense.  I
suggest that we can all learn from your response.
 
As responsible private individuals and regulatory guardians of our corporate
interests, we should all be more willing to volunteer to do what is
appropriate to protect everybody and everything around us from the (human),
mechanical, electrical and toxic hazards so prevalent in our complex
society.
 
Too often, we spend time examining legislation and standards to decide how
to define the bare minimum to be compliant with the production and use of
the items for which we are responsible.  As good citizens, we ought not to
wait for legislation to force us to do the right thing.
 
There is lots of information readily available, which, in conjunction with
the ever louder voice of social conscience, should be more than sufficient
for us to discharge our personal and regulatory responsibilities
appropriately.
 
*** Take a step outside to reward yourself with some deep breaths of fresh
air - while there is still some around to inhale!
 
 
(For the group members in the UK, as Del Boy would say - ... you know it
makes sense )
 
 
Terry Whitehouse 
Avaya Regulatory Milpitas 
(408) 577-7714 
 

-Original Message-
From: Mike Murphy [mailto:mmur...@alesis.com]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 2:14 PM
To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: Batteries ...



Doug, 

From an environmental, not compliance, standpoint, batteries leech nasty
chemicals into the groundwater supply as they age in landfills. Enlightened
communities sponsor 'hazardous waste roundups' periodically. So, my
suggestion is to keep the dead batteries in a sealed container in the home
until they can be handed off to qualified disposal specialists such as at
these roundups.

This is what I do as a matter of course--it's not difficult at all. 

For Our Little Planet, 
Mike Murphy 


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

braided vs served shields

[brent . dewitt]

Does anyone have any references or data on the comparative transfer
impedance between served (spiral) and braided cable shielding at the same
coverage level?

Thanks!

Brent DeWitt


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Re: Clock dithering

[roglesbe]

According to our extensive tests in conjunction with
Philips Consumer Electronics, digital TV (both COFDM
and ATSC) is actually less susceptible to interference
from spread spectrum clocks (ssc) than current analog
TV (both PAL and NTSC).

Philips has stated in a letter to us that they do not
consider spread spectrum clocks to be an interference
threat to digital TV.

One report from the University of Hertfordshire has
stated that digital TV is more susceptible to ssc
than non-modulated clocks, which by itself is true
because of the digital filtering techniques used
in digital TV.  However, this report does not look
at the real world potential for interference.

Philips found that when an interfering ssc signal is
present and the digital TV and analog TV are both at
comparable levels (X dB above their respective
threshold of visibility signal strength) it takes
roughly 16 dB higher amplitude ssc signal to disrupt
the digital TV versus the analog TV.

In addition, through many contacts of both television
manufacturers, television broadcasters, and discrete
clock vendors we have found virtually no evidence of
interference complaints due to spread spectrum clocks.

Since there are no real interference problems with
analog TV, and digital TV is less susceptible, there
is no additional interference risk due to ssc.  We
are in the process formalizing these results for
publication.  Our previously published analog TV
interference study can be found at:

http://www.lexmark.com/sscg

Regards,
Rob Oglesbee
EMC Engineer
Lexmark International, Inc.
rogle...@lexmark.com



John Woodgate jmw%jmwa.demon.co...@interlock.lexmark.com on 06/15/2001
06:09:27 PM

Please respond to John Woodgate jmw%jmwa.demon.co...@interlock.lexmark.com

To:   emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com
cc:(bcc: Rob A Oglesbee/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  Clock dithering




3b2a4fda.8c64c...@mediaone.net, David Heald davehe...@mediaone.net
inimitably wrote:
Con's? None that I can think of, but...I have seen somewhere (maybe
here??) that the EU is considering new regulations for modulated clocks,
but this is in the early stages, so use them now while you can get the
most benefit from them.

That's correct. Digital TV has proved rather badly susceptible to
interference from dithered clocks.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. Phone +44 (0)1268 747839
Fax +44 (0)1268 777124. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Why not call a vertically-
applied manulo-pedally-operated quasi-planar chernozem-penetrating and
excavating implement a SPADE?

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,








---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Re: Lasing LEDs

[Vygovsky, Yury]

Rick:
For  avoiding any potential safety  risks I will suggest to you calculate
AEL ( Accessible Emission Limits ) for LEDs that you going to use in your
Product.

Yury Vygovsky
E D C]

-Original Message-
From: rbus...@es.com rbus...@es.com
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 11:28 AM
Subject: Lasing LEDs



A few months back there was a discussion on this list regarding the
potential for LEDs to laze if overdriven. As I recall the issue pointed to
the IEC 825-1: LED Optical Safety standard and the concern for possible
testing all LEDs. The consensus was that in general LEDs did not pose
much
of a risk. My question is, without testing for luminance (or lasing) can an
approximation be made which correlates to the maximum input current of an
LED and the potential for lasing? I have a unique application where I want
the LEDs as bright as possible but obviously want to avoid potential safety
risks.

Rick Busche.
Evans  Sutherland
Salt Lake City, Utah
rbus...@es.com


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

RE: Typing Shortcuts

[Pettit, Ghery]

Vitaly,

We can accept SWMBO in the U.S., as well, so this would not be limited to
the UK national deviations.  I have seen this used here, as well (and my
wife thinks it's great!).

Ghery Pettit
Intel


-Original Message-
From: Gorodetsky, Vitaly [mailto:vgorodet...@canoga.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 9:38 AM
To: 'cdup...@cs.com'; kazimier_gawrzy...@dell.com; rehel...@mmm.com
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Typing Shortcuts



Thanks, Chris.  This opens another can. The SWMBO is a perfect example of
National (UK) deviations. 
The Compliance Acronym Dictionary, CAD, may soon outnumber OED, Oxford
English Dictionary (about 500,000 entries).

Vitaly  Gorodetsky
Compliance Dept.Direct: (818) 678-3840
Canoga Perkins Corp.Main:   (818) 718-6300
20600 Prairie StreetFAX:(818) 678-3740
Chatsworth, CA 91311-6008   e-mail:
vgorodet...@canoga.com mailto:vgorodet...@canoga.com  

The suitability of this information for making decision is solely with the
reader


-Original Message-
From:   cdup...@cs.com [mailto:cdup...@cs.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, June 13, 2001 9:51 PM
To: kazimier_gawrzy...@dell.com; rehel...@mmm.com
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Re: Typing Shortcuts


Hi Bob et al.

One TLA (FLA) seems to be missing, one which implies such
awesome influence 
and power, the ultimate reason for everything., that is the
SWMBO.

This is the TLA that justifies all manner of actions,
expenditure, or the 
lack thereof...

It stands for  'She Who Must Be Obeyed'.   No further
explanation needed...  
:-)

Chris Dupres
Surrey, UK.

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:
http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web
at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference
Hall,

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

RE: Typing Shortcuts

[Gorodetsky, Vitaly]

Thanks, Chris.  This opens another can. The SWMBO is a perfect example of
National (UK) deviations. 
The Compliance Acronym Dictionary, CAD, may soon outnumber OED, Oxford
English Dictionary (about 500,000 entries).

Vitaly  Gorodetsky
Compliance Dept.Direct: (818) 678-3840
Canoga Perkins Corp.Main:   (818) 718-6300
20600 Prairie StreetFAX:(818) 678-3740
Chatsworth, CA 91311-6008   e-mail:
vgorodet...@canoga.com mailto:vgorodet...@canoga.com  

The suitability of this information for making decision is solely with the
reader


-Original Message-
From:   cdup...@cs.com [mailto:cdup...@cs.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, June 13, 2001 9:51 PM
To: kazimier_gawrzy...@dell.com; rehel...@mmm.com
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Re: Typing Shortcuts


Hi Bob et al.

One TLA (FLA) seems to be missing, one which implies such
awesome influence 
and power, the ultimate reason for everything., that is the
SWMBO.

This is the TLA that justifies all manner of actions,
expenditure, or the 
lack thereof...

It stands for  'She Who Must Be Obeyed'.   No further
explanation needed...  
:-)

Chris Dupres
Surrey, UK.

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:
http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web
at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference
Hall,

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Re: Transformer question

[Ka Wong]

Hi Zohar,

Did you check C of A (Conditions of Acceptablity)
section in UL Test report?

Regards,
Warwick


--- Zohar Zosmanovich zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.com
wrote:
 
 Hello,
 
 I have a unit consist of metal enclosure and open
 frame AC/DC power supply,
 approved to UL/IEC 950. 
 P.S includes PRI/SEC Transformer marked B/130 (Class
 B/130 deg.C).
 During Heating Test, transformer winding temperature
 exceeds class A limits
 (65 deg.C max. temperature rise). There is no
 mention about transformer
 class in UL report (class of insulation system) or 
 in TUV certificate (but
 the power supply manufacture says it is class B). 
 
 What class should I consider this transformer to be?
 
 Thanks
 
 
 
 Zohar Zosmanovich
 Compliance Engineer
 RadWin (The Wireless Alternative) Ltd.
 
 E-mail: zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.com
 RADWIN Ltd. 34 Habarzel St., Tel-Aviv 69710, Israel.
 Tel.: 972-3-7666735Fax.: 972-3-7657535
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---
 This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product
 Safety
 Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
 
 Visit our web site at: 
 http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
 
 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:
  Michael Garretson:   
 pstc_ad...@garretson.org
  Dave Heald   
 davehe...@mediaone.net
 
 For policy questions, send mail to:
  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 
 All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on
 the web at:
 http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual
 Conference Hall,
 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

[Fwd: Amendment of Spanish Channels]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Gaby Abboud.  Please CC: Gaby gabb...@zoom.com with on
any replies.
Regards,
David Heald

 Original Message 
Subject: Amendment of Spanish Channels
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 10:24:43 -0400
From: Gaby Abboud gabb...@zoom.com
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

Hello Group,


Has anyone heard about the Spanish channel limitation if they are going
to
be amended in the near future? 

Presently the channels are:

 N. America has 11 Channels, Japan 14 Channels, Europe (ETSI) 13 Channels,
 Spain 2 Channels, France 4 Channels
 
 
 I do thank you in advance,
 
  
 Gaby F. Abboud
 Senior Compliance Engineer
 
 Zoom Telephonics Inc.
 207 South Street
 Boston, MA 02111
 
 Tel #  617-753-0046 (Direct)
 Main # 617-423-1702 x 3046
 Fax #  617-542-8276
 E-mail gabb...@zoom.com
 


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Re: Laser Safety

[Doug McKean]

Matt Kilkenny mkilke...@opthos.com

 I have a question on lasers for ITE concerning IEC-825 and FDA
requirements.
 According to IEC, class 3b lasers have to have safety doors
(interlocks).
 Can automatic power reduction be used if you are not pumping the
laser to a
 3b class level of power.  In other words, can we not put interlocks
on the
 system if the 3b laser power has been reduced to a 3a or class 1
level
 through microprocessor limitating it?  Or is their single fault
concerns if
 the microprocessor fails?

 Thanks for any help,

Doesn't this then make the microprocessor an interlock device and, as
such, you'd have to go through every single state of the
microprocessor
for single fault analysis?

- Doug McKean



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

[Fwd: Re: Laser Safety]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Bert Planting.

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: Laser Safety
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 06:59:41 +0200
From: Bert Planting bert.plant...@asml.com
Organization: ASML
To: Matt Kilkenny mkilke...@opthos.com
CC: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
References: 0954d2e4fe26d411909100b0d022a345191...@mail.opthos.com

Matt,

Because you are using a microprocessor limitating it this is not seen as
sufficient safe solution for reduction of the output by safety people
(based on my experience with US third parties). 
Reduction should only be done by hardware and not by fault sensitive
microprocessor.

In this case you should use an interlock.

regards,

Bert Planting
Prodct safety ASML




Matt Kilkenny wrote:
 
 I have a question on lasers for ITE concerning IEC-825 and FDA requirements.
 According to IEC, class 3b lasers have to have safety doors (interlocks).
 Can automatic power reduction be used if you are not pumping the laser to a
 3b class level of power.  In other words, can we not put interlocks on the
 system if the 3b laser power has been reduced to a 3a or class 1 level
 through microprocessor limitating it?  Or is their single fault concerns if
 the microprocessor fails?
 
 Thanks for any help,
 
 Matt Kilkenny
 mkilke...@opthos.com

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

RE: Status of Frequency extension of EN 61000-4-3

[Pettit, Ghery]

Sandy,

Whether or not IEC (or EN) 61000-4-3 has its applicable frequency range
extended, there is no effect on EN 55024:1998 or CISPR 24 until such time as
these documents are amended to increase the frequency range for the test.
As a member of CISPR SC G WG3, I can tell you that there is no proposal in
CISPR to increase the frequency range for this test in CISPR 24 at this
time.  Of course, we're meeting in Bristol, England next week and anything
could happen, but I don't expect this to come up.  Given the speed(?) with
which changes work their way through the system, it would be 2 or 3 years
before CISPR 24 could be amended if we started next week, then a 3 year
transition period in the EU, so if a successful effort to increase the
frequency range of this test were to start next week, you'd be looking at 5
to 6 years before it became mandatory in Europe.  Other countries using
CISPR 24 (Korea and Russia, for example) might act faster, but still nothing
could happen until CISPR 24 was amended and I would expect that to take 3
years.

Bottom line - don't start placing purchase orders for new equipment just
yet.

Ghery S. Pettit, NCE
Intel


-Original Message-
From: Sandy Mazzola [mailto:mazzo...@symbol.com]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 8:04 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Status of Frequency extension of EN 61000-4-3


To all,

My question pertains to EN 55024:1998,  Information Technology
Equipment-Immunity Characteristics,  flowing down to EN 61000-4-3 :1997,
Radiated Immunity. 
   I am looking for the status of a frequency extension to EN 6100-4-3
radiated Immunity.  EN 61000-4-3:1997 lists 80 MHz to 1 GHz as the test
frequency range.
Is anyone aware of the Radiated Immunity requirements being extended
to 3 Ghz or  higher sometime in the near future.   If there are any drafts
proposing this can you list the draft number.
 Finally, if no present plans exist could anyone venture a prediction
for when and if the radiated Immunity frequency will be extended.

Thx

Sandy Mazzola

Santo Mazzola
Regulatory Engineer
Symbol Technologies Inc
1 Symbol Plaza
Holtsville, N. Y. 11742-1300
Phone:  (631) 738-5373
Fax:  (631) 738-3318
E-mail: mazzo...@symbol.com




---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

RE: Transformer question

[Gary McInturff]

Unless, you want to get the full insulation description from the
manufacturer and compare it to the transformer standard, you either have to
put your faith in what the manufacturer tells you (not something I would be
too keen about) or you may want to default to the lowest classification.
That could result in getting a new power supply depending on your needs. You
can ask for the conditions of acceptability and the test data, but you will
most likely only get the former. Check that and see if there is a
requirement for airflow over the power supply itself. Occasionally, the
supply manufactures will exceed the test temperatures and then tell the
testing agency to run some airflow over the power supply. That usually helps
them, but then you are required, as stated in the conditions of
acceptability, to run the same, or greater, airflow over the supply, not
just through the final box, but that amount over the supply itself.
Gary


-Original Message-
From: Zohar Zosmanovich [mailto:zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 11:39 PM
To: 'Emc-Pstc (E-mail)
Subject: Transformer question



Hello,

I have a unit consist of metal enclosure and open frame AC/DC power supply,
approved to UL/IEC 950. 
P.S includes PRI/SEC Transformer marked B/130 (Class B/130 deg.C).
During Heating Test, transformer winding temperature exceeds class A limits
(65 deg.C max. temperature rise). There is no mention about transformer
class in UL report (class of insulation system) or  in TUV certificate (but
the power supply manufacture says it is class B). 

What class should I consider this transformer to be?

Thanks



Zohar Zosmanovich
Compliance Engineer
RadWin (The Wireless Alternative) Ltd.

E-mail: zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.com
RADWIN Ltd. 34 Habarzel St., Tel-Aviv 69710, Israel.
Tel.: 972-3-7666735Fax.: 972-3-7657535







---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Re: Transformer question

[Ed Eszlari]

Zohar,
If the power supply was approved by UL, get a copy of the UL descriptive report which should list the transformer temp. rating. You can also check the test report under para 5.1 (heating), the table in 1.5 (components), and Annex C (transformers). 
You may also want to review the installation instructions to verify that you are providing the correct amount of cooling to the supply in your installation and operating at the ambient temperature as described in the agency test report.
Regards,
Ed

From: Zohar Zosmanovich 
Reply-To: Zohar Zosmanovich 
To: 'Emc-Pstc (E-mail) 
Subject: Transformer question 
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 08:38:48 +0200 
 
 
Hello, 
 
I have a unit consist of metal enclosure and open frame AC/DC power supply, 
approved to UL/IEC 950. 
P.S includes PRI/SEC Transformer marked B/130 (Class B/130 deg.C). 
During Heating Test, transformer winding temperature exceeds class A limits 
(65 deg.C max. temperature rise). There is no mention about transformer 
class in UL report (class of insulation system) or in TUV certificate (but 
the power supply manufacture says it is class B). 
 
What class should I consider this transformer to be? 
 
Thanks 
 
 
 
Zohar Zosmanovich 
Compliance Engineer 
RadWin (The Wireless Alternative) Ltd. 
 
E-mail: zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.com 
RADWIN Ltd. 34 Habarzel St., Tel-Aviv 69710, Israel. 
Tel.: 972-3-7666735 Fax.: 972-3-7657535 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
--- 
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety 
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 
 
Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ 
 
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: 
 Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org 
 Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net 
 
For policy questions, send mail to: 
 Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org 
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org 
 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
 http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, 
 
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

RE: Conducted EMI on telecommunication ports

[David_Sterner]

Don,

Since you did not identify your LAN protocol (Ethernet, Fast Ethernet, Token
Ring, ArcNet, etc.) I will give you a general answer.

I know of three approaches to generate traffic:
1) Diagnostics programs 
from NIC vendors e.g. http://www.smc.com/smc/pages_html/homef.html
You can send specific size packets for error checking.  Short packets are
good for EMC because various frequencies occur frequently.  The old diag
program timed out after 2500 packets, 250ms.

2) LanTest software - various web sources
This software continually exchanges files between two or more PCs (one
acting as a server).  Disadvantage is that some frequencies occur
sporadically, making it difficult to interpret results into pass/fail (i.e.
pulses).  It is good for immunity tests because you can log a bit-error rate
to measure degradation.

3) Traffic generator -
Stand-alone boxes that simulate various percents of bandwidth usage are
available to check network switches and routers.  These are not necessarily
real world.  Isolate the output with an EMI-clean hub;  the traffic box may
be Class A.

Bottom line
You probably need 250ms sustained to perform any EMC test, but all these
approaches can be set for over an hour running time.
Any of the above will generate more than 10% utilization.
Some hubs have a LEDs to indicate occupied bandwidth to verify utilization.

David


-Original Message-
From: Don Rhodes [mailto:don.rho...@infocus.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 6:26 AM
To: 'emc-pstc news group'
Subject: Conducted EMI on telecommunication ports



Dear colleagues,
I am looking for a little of your collective understanding and experience on
CISPR 22, 1997-11, Section 9.5.3. Regarding the requirement for 10% LAN
utilization, sustained for 250mS, can you provide any guidance on
development of the EUT software used for this test? Furthermore, our EUT is
used only to receive data (with the exception of LAN protocol comm.),
similar to a printer.
Also, any thoughts on pitfalls and/or success of measurement and compliance
to this portion of the requirements? 

Thanks in advance for your time.
Don Rhodes

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Cable layout per GR1089

[Paolo Roncone]

Hi,

anyone can get me clarifications on the cable layout for radiated immunity 
and emissions testing per GR1089 with overhead cable trays (ref. fig.3-13 ) ?
In fig.3.13 + sections 3.4.6 and 3.5.5 of GR1089 I don't see any specified 
length of the horizontal section projecting out of the EUT boundaries.
Also I don't see any indication thereof in ANSI C63.4 (fig.10), while 
CISPR22/EN55022 (fig.13) specifies MINIMUM 20 cm of horizontal length.



Thanks,

Paolo

Re: Clock dithering

[Paolo Roncone]

Hi Cyril,

I have a very good (EMC-wise) experience with clock dithering.
I started using the Spread Spectrum Clock Generation (SSCG) technique 
(patented by Lexmark) in 1995 when I worked for my previous company.
We made printers and one of our main customers was IBM. They pushed us to 
use an SSCG chip (there was only one licenced vendor at that time) in order 
to get our impact printers pass class B emissions limits (CISPR22 and FCC 
part 15) with the required guardband (IBM is very strict on EMC).
The SSCG worked great on reducing radiated emissions of clock and clock 
related signals (data, control etc.). We gained in the range of 4 to 10+ 
dBs (depending on the frequencies), plus we managed to make a big cost 
reduction by switching from 4-layer to 2-layer motherboards with the 
addition of SSCG and careful PCB layout (also note we had no shielding over 
our electronics).
Before SSCG we were just failing class B by 2-3 dB (with 4-layer boards). 
After the SSCG chip was embedded in our motherboards we were safely belowe 
the limits. Also we passed class B on models with coax/twinax interface 
boards (typically class A products). The clock frequencies running on our 
electronics were in the range 20-35 MHz.


Basically the SSCG slowly modulates the main clock oscillator frequency. 
Slowly means that the modulating periodis  over many (several 
hundreds) clock cycles. The total amount of spread can be varied between a 
few tens of a percent to a few percents of the clock frequency (in our 
application we used +/-2.5% deviation).
The higher the frequency deviation, the higher the amount of spreading and 
the consequent attenuation of peak emission levels because (as you say) 
energy is spread over the spectrum. So the minimum bandwidth of the 
spreaded clock (fundamental frequency) is wider than the standard 120 kHz 
resolution BW of EMI receivers specified for radiated emission tests. Also 
key is the wave shape of the modulating function of the clock signal. 
That's what the Lexmark patent covers. The patented waveshape is the so 
called Herschey kiss or Lexmark shape, that produces a FLAT spectral 
profile. By contrast, any sinusoidal or triangular modulating waveform 
spreads the spectrum of clock fundamental + harmonics but the resulting 
shape has two peaks (at the min/max frequencies of the spread).


PLUS : big EMI reductions can be achieved without compromising system 
performance (clock speed/rise-fall times are unaltered). This does not mean 
that you don't need to control EMI. You just have many more chances to 
pass. Without optimized board layout we would have failed class B even with 
the dithered clock !


CONS: EMC-wise, increased chance of exciting resonant structures 
(associated with cables, PCB's geometries and  other mechanical parts) 
because the emissions cover a wider frequency spectrum. Also the clock 
jitter tolerances must be thoroughly checked in order to adjust the amount 
of deviation allowed. In some applications (ex. clocks driving video 
signals as in scanners or laser printers) even the minimum clock jittering 
is not allowed so clock dithering cannot be used.


As for interference to broadband receivers (like TV equipment) I remember a 
Lexmark study published a few years ago that showed no increased 
interference from modulated clocks vs unmodulated clocks (there was also a 
related discussion in this forum a while ago). I honestly don't know if 
anything new came up recently.


Cheers,

Paolo



At 14:16 15/06/2001 -0400, Binnom, Cyril A wrote:


Resending due to no subject listed in first e-mail.

  -Original Message-
 From: Binnom, Cyril A
 Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 10:14 AM
 To:   'emc-pstc'
 Cc:   McBride, James; Wismer, Sam; Massey, Doug C.; Davis, Brett A.
 Subject:

 Group,

 I am experiencing a EMI failure during testing and it has been isolated to
 the processor board in which the fundamental frequency is 66.6 MHz the 3rd
 harmonic that is our failure frequency is 199.8 MHz. We consulted the
 manufacturer of the board and they have come up with a spectrum
 spreading application for me to try. As I understand it, these type of
 applications work by essentially jittering the clock frequency in order to
 spread the energy over a wider band of frequencies. Thus the level at any
 particular frequency is reduced even though the overall amount of energy
 radiated is the same. The file they are sending me is a test application.
 If it works well enough to get the unit to pass test, they have the
 ability to enable the same application in the BIOS so it is always
 running.

 Does anyone have any experience using this type of application? Any
 opinions on its validity? To those that can attest to its validity, any
 pros or cons to the use of this application?

 Regards,

 Cyril A. Binnom Jr.
 EMI/EMC Approvals Engineer
 LXE, Inc.
 (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3240
 (770) 447-6928 Fax
 binno...@lxe.com



---
This 

Re: Clock dithering

[Paolo Roncone]

Hi Cyril,

I have a very good (EMC-wise) experience with clock dithering.
I started using the Spread Spectrum Clock Generation (SSCG) technique 
(patented by Lexmark) in 1995 when I worked for my previous company.
We made printers and one of our main customers was IBM. They pushed us to 
use an SSCG chip (there was only one licenced vendor at that time) in order 
to get our impact printers pass class B emissions limits (CISPR22 and FCC 
part 15) with the required guardband (IBM is very strict on EMC).
The SSCG worked great on reducing radiated emissions of clock and clock 
related signals (data, control etc.). We gained in the range of 4 to 10+ 
dBs (depending on the frequencies), plus we managed to make a big cost 
reduction by switching from 4-layer to 2-layer motherboards with the 
addition of SSCG and careful PCB layout (also note we had no shielding over 
our electronics).
Before SSCG we were just failing class B by 2-3 dB (with 4-layer boards). 
After the SSCG chip was embedded in our motherboards we were safely belowe 
the limits. Also we passed class B on models with coax/twinax interface 
boards (typically class A products). The clock frequencies running on our 
electronics were in the range 20-35 MHz.


Basically the SSCG slowly modulates the main clock oscillator frequency. 
Slowly means that the modulating periodis  over many (several 
hundreds) clock cycles. The total amount of spread can be varied between a 
few tens of a percent to a few percents of the clock frequency (in our 
application we used +/-2.5% deviation).
The higher the frequency deviation, the higher the amount of spreading and 
the consequent attenuation of peak emission levels because (as you say) 
energy is spread over the spectrum. So the minimum bandwidth of the 
spreaded clock (fundamental frequency) is wider than the standard 120 kHz 
resolution BW of EMI receivers specified for radiated emission tests. Also 
key is the wave shape of the modulating function of the clock signal. 
That's what the Lexmark patent covers. The patented waveshape is the so 
called Herschey kiss or Lexmark shape, that produces a FLAT spectral 
profile. By contrast, any sinusoidal or triangular modulating waveform 
spreads the spectrum of clock fundamental + harmonics but the resulting 
shape has two peaks (at the min/max frequencies of the spread).


PLUS : big EMI reductions can be achieved without compromising system 
performance (clock speed/rise-fall times are unaltered). This does not mean 
that you don't need to control EMI. You just have many more chances to 
pass. Without optimized board layout we would have failed class B even with 
the dithered clock !


CONS: EMC-wise, increased chance of exciting resonant structures 
(associated with cables, PCB's geometries and  other mechanical parts) 
because the emissions cover a wider frequency spectrum. Also the clock 
jitter tolerances must be thoroughly checked in order to adjust the amount 
of deviation allowed. In some applications (ex. clocks driving video 
signals as in scanners or laser printers) even the minimum clock jittering 
is not allowed so clock dithering cannot be used.


As for interference to broadband receivers (like TV equipment) I remember a 
Lexmark study published a few years ago that showed no increased 
interference from modulated clocks vs unmodulated clocks (there was also a 
related discussion in this forum a while ago). I honestly don't know if 
anything new came up recently.


Cheers,

Paolo



At 14:16 15/06/2001 -0400, Binnom, Cyril A wrote:


Resending due to no subject listed in first e-mail.

  -Original Message-
 From: Binnom, Cyril A
 Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 10:14 AM
 To:   'emc-pstc'
 Cc:   McBride, James; Wismer, Sam; Massey, Doug C.; Davis, Brett A.
 Subject:

 Group,

 I am experiencing a EMI failure during testing and it has been isolated to
 the processor board in which the fundamental frequency is 66.6 MHz the 3rd
 harmonic that is our failure frequency is 199.8 MHz. We consulted the
 manufacturer of the board and they have come up with a spectrum
 spreading application for me to try. As I understand it, these type of
 applications work by essentially jittering the clock frequency in order to
 spread the energy over a wider band of frequencies. Thus the level at any
 particular frequency is reduced even though the overall amount of energy
 radiated is the same. The file they are sending me is a test application.
 If it works well enough to get the unit to pass test, they have the
 ability to enable the same application in the BIOS so it is always
 running.

 Does anyone have any experience using this type of application? Any
 opinions on its validity? To those that can attest to its validity, any
 pros or cons to the use of this application?

 Regards,

 Cyril A. Binnom Jr.
 EMI/EMC Approvals Engineer
 LXE, Inc.
 (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3240
 (770) 447-6928 Fax
 binno...@lxe.com



---
This 

Conducted EMI on telecommunication ports

[Don Rhodes]

Dear colleagues,
I am looking for a little of your collective understanding and experience on
CISPR 22, 1997-11, Section 9.5.3. Regarding the requirement for 10% LAN
utilization, sustained for 250mS, can you provide any guidance on
development of the EUT software used for this test? Furthermore, our EUT is
used only to receive data (with the exception of LAN protocol comm.),
similar to a printer.
Also, any thoughts on pitfalls and/or success of measurement and compliance
to this portion of the requirements? 

Thanks in advance for your time.
Don Rhodes

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Re: Laser Safety

[126344 - Yuriy Zygovskiy]

Sorry, simple test.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kilkenny mkilke...@opthos.com
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Friday, June 15, 2001 2:08 PM
Subject: Laser Safety




I have a question on lasers for ITE concerning IEC-825 and FDA
requirements.
According to IEC, class 3b lasers have to have safety doors (interlocks).
Can automatic power reduction be used if you are not pumping the laser to a
3b class level of power.  In other words, can we not put interlocks on the
system if the 3b laser power has been reduced to a 3a or class 1 level
through microprocessor limitating it?  Or is their single fault concerns if
the microprocessor fails?

Thanks for any help,

Matt Kilkenny
mkilke...@opthos.com


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

Transformer question

[Zohar Zosmanovich]

Hello,

I have a unit consist of metal enclosure and open frame AC/DC power supply,
approved to UL/IEC 950. 
P.S includes PRI/SEC Transformer marked B/130 (Class B/130 deg.C).
During Heating Test, transformer winding temperature exceeds class A limits
(65 deg.C max. temperature rise). There is no mention about transformer
class in UL report (class of insulation system) or  in TUV certificate (but
the power supply manufacture says it is class B). 

What class should I consider this transformer to be?

Thanks



Zohar Zosmanovich
Compliance Engineer
RadWin (The Wireless Alternative) Ltd.

E-mail: zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.com
RADWIN Ltd. 34 Habarzel St., Tel-Aviv 69710, Israel.
Tel.: 972-3-7666735Fax.: 972-3-7657535







---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,

RE: Status of Frequency extension of EN 61000-4-3

[ari . honkala]

Sandy,
there have been talks to include the frequency extension
published by Amendment 1 of IEC 61000-4-3 (1.4-2 GHz)
into CISPR 24.
CISPR working group has a meeting last week of June and a proposal may be
done there.
You may follow this from IEC web pages.
regards,
Ari Honkala

 -Original Message-
 From: ext Sandy Mazzola [mailto:mazzo...@symbol.com]
 Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 6:04 PM
 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: Status of Frequency extension of EN 61000-4-3
 
 
 To all,
 
 My question pertains to EN 55024:1998,  Information 
 Technology Equipment-Immunity Characteristics,  flowing down 
 to EN 61000-4-3 :1997,  Radiated Immunity. 
I am looking for the status of a frequency extension 
 to EN 6100-4-3 radiated Immunity.  EN 61000-4-3:1997 lists 80 
 MHz to 1 GHz as the test frequency range.
 Is anyone aware of the Radiated Immunity requirements 
 being extended to 3 Ghz or  higher sometime in the near 
 future.   If there are any drafts proposing this can you list 
 the draft number.
  Finally, if no present plans exist could anyone venture 
 a prediction for when and if the radiated Immunity frequency 
 will be extended.
 
 Thx
 
 Sandy Mazzola
 
 Santo Mazzola
 Regulatory Engineer
 Symbol Technologies Inc
 1 Symbol Plaza
 Holtsville, N. Y. 11742-1300
 Phone:  (631) 738-5373
 Fax:  (631) 738-3318
 E-mail: mazzo...@symbol.com
 
 
 

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on Virtual Conference Hall,