Re: UL requirement for driver
[quote]Hi, I am basically an EMC guy and do not know much about UL requirements. I would like to know if there are any UL requirements for a driver with output voltage swing of +/- 30V peak-to-peak. The RMS voltage will be much smaller, and the power will be less than 0.5 watt. The driver is to be used to activate an off-card electromagnetic coil, and a flex cable will be used as interconnect. I will appreciate your replies. Regards, Ravinder PCB Development and Design Department IBM Corporation Email: ajm...@us.ibm.com *** Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. . Mark Twain [/quote] Hi Ravinder: I am assuming that the 30 V peak-to-peak will be accessible to the user. There are two UL issues regarding your 30 V peak-to-peak voltage: 1. Isolation of the voltage from hazardous voltages, e.g. mains voltage. The isolation must be comprised of two safeguards: -basic insulation plus a grounded barrier; -basic insulation plus supplementary insulation; -reinforced insulation (a single insulation equivalent to double insulation. Each insulation must be a UL-Recognized insulation or plastic. The grounded barrier must be constructed in accordance with the multitude of requirements specified in the applicable standard. 2. The voltage must not exceed: -30 volts rms; -42.4 volts peak; -60 volts dc. Assuming the waveform is symmetrical, 30 volts peak-to-peak is less than 42 volts peak. So, your voltage meets the requirements. If the 30 volts peak-to-peak is not isolated from the mains as described above, then the insulation of the 30 volts peak-to-peak must not be accessible and the insulation interposed between the operator and the 30 volts p-p must be at least basic insulation, and *may* need to be the same insulation as mains insulation (listed above). The answer to your question is well beyond what we can do via e-mail. I've only touched on the basic construction; there are many more applicable requirements. Best regards, Rich --- 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
UL requirement for driver
Hi, I am basically an EMC guy and do not know much about UL requirements. I would like to know if there are any UL requirements for a driver with output voltage swing of +/- 30V peak-to-peak. The RMS voltage will be much smaller, and the power will be less than 0.5 watt. The driver is to be used to activate an off-card electromagnetic coil, and a flex cable will be used as interconnect. I will appreciate your replies. Regards, Ravinder PCB Development and Design Department IBM Corporation Email: ajm...@us.ibm.com *** Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. . Mark Twain --- 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: Limited Current
Hi Rick: > I am working on a project that delivers 8 KV to 1" CRTs mounted on a > helmet mounted display. The output of the high voltage supply is limited > to 100uA and assuming that the supply complies with paragraph 2.4 (2.4.4 > in particular) Paragraph 2.4.1 states that: Note that the output must not exceed 2 mA dc in both normal condition and single-fault condition in the source. You're okay for normal condition, but what is the output with the worst-case single fault in the supply? I would guess that the supply is quite simple, and any fault will result in zero output. > > "Except as permitted in 2.4.6, segregation of parts of LIMITED > CURRENT CIRCUITS from other circuits shall be as > described in 2.3 for SELV Circuits" > > So what this tells me is if the stored charge is less than 45 uC > (2.4.6), it is considered safe with only basic insulation? If over the > stored charge limit, it must be treated as an SELV circuit and isolated > accordingly. No. The circuit is either a Limited Current Circuit or it is not. If yes, then it can be accessible. If not, then it must be treated as a hazardous voltage circuit. There are two sets of insulation which you must consider: 1. The insulation between the energy source and the 8 kV source. I would guess that the energy source is an oscillator operating from SELV. I would guess that the 8 kV is from a transformer and possibly a voltage multiplier. So, the insulation between the energy source (SELV) and the 8 kV is that of the transformer. If the supply is SELV and the output is Limited Current, then no safety insulation is required between the two circuits. If the supply is not SELV, then the insulation between the source and the 8 kV must be the same as for the insulation between the source and SELV, except that the voltage rating must be the sum of the 8 kV and the supply source voltage. 2. The insulation between the body and the 8 kV. If the circuit is a Limited Current Circuit, then it is treated just as a SELV circuit, i.e., no insulation is necessary between the body and the 8 kV. A Limited Current Circuit can be accessible; it is the current- limited image of the voltage-limited SELV. > My application mandates that the anode wire be as small as possible, as > it is bundled inside a larger cable grouping and is limited by the > design of the helmet mount. In lieu of a standard HV anode wire I have > found that a coax cable provides excellent performance when tested for > dielectric strength. Upwards of 2 KV is possible without breakdown. I am > considering grounding the shield to prevent static buildup and the > possibility of an potential breakdown in the coax. So if this is in fact > LIMITED CURRENT it seems to me the application is valid. This is a different issue. You are asking whether or not an insulation rated less than 8 kV can be used in this application. For the purposes of safety, no insulation is required. However, for reliability, it would be unwise to use an insulation rated less than 8 kV as the insulation would be subject to early failure. Furthermore, despite the fact that the standard does not require insulation for safety purposes, UL and most other certification houses would require suitably rated insulation. > My questions now are: > 1. If this in fact LIMITED CURRENT, is basic insulation such as the coax > adequate? See above. > 2. If the requirement is SELV, is it reasonable that the insulation > between the center conductor and shield may meet the requirement for > reinforced insulation?l Yes and no. For safety purposes, a Limited Current Circuit is equivalent to a SELV circuit; no insulation is required. A Limited Current Circuit can be accessible. However, for reliability -- especially with such high voltage -- the insulation should be rated 8 kV minimum. (The long-term effects of partial discharge will eventually destroy the insulation.) > 3. To add additional safety should the coax shield be tied to chassis > ground or should the shield be tied to the anode return? If the coax is rated 8 kV or more center-to-shield, then the shield can be tied to ground (anode return). If the coax is not rated 8 kV, then don't use it (per above remark). > I am especially concerned because this cable routes against the body > between the helmet and supply, and is in close approximation to the > head. Any thoughts or comments you may have would be appreciated. I would guess that the head might be especially sensitive to partial discharges that might occur in the air between the 8 kV and the skin. I would certainly apply 8 kV insulation between the body and the 8 kV. Even that may not be acceptable because of the capacitive divider that can exist. The best solution is a grounded barrier (e.g., coax) between the 8 kV and the body. Best re
Re: WTC - voice alarm system?
I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor wrote (in <20010917141507.LMHT9391.femail30.sdc1.sfba.home.com@[65.11.150.27]> ) about 'WTC - voice alarm system?', on Mon, 17 Sep 2001: >I'm not certain (I wasn't there) but I heard that there were announcements >in the 2nd tower that was hit after the first tower was hit to sit tight and >not evacuate because at that point they still thought it was an accident and >they didn't need a whole bunch of people evacuating the 2nd tower and then >getting in the way of rescue operations on the street below. Thanks to you and others who replied to my post. The point about voice alarm with central control is that instructions can be quickly changed and everyone gets informed simultaneously. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Limited Current
I am working on a project that delivers 8 KV to 1" CRTs mounted on a helmet mounted display. The output of the high voltage supply is limited to 100uA and assuming that the supply complies with paragraph 2.4 (2.4.4 in particular) Paragraph 2.4.1 states that: "Except as permitted in 2.4.6, segregation of parts of LIMITED CURRENT CIRCUITS from other circuits shall be as described in 2.3 for SELV Circuits" So what this tells me is if the stored charge is less than 45 uC (2.4.6), it is considered safe with only basic insulation? If over the stored charge limit, it must be treated as an SELV circuit and isolated accordingly. My application mandates that the anode wire be as small as possible, as it is bundled inside a larger cable grouping and is limited by the design of the helmet mount. In lieu of a standard HV anode wire I have found that a coax cable provides excellent performance when tested for dielectric strength. Upwards of 2 KV is possible without breakdown. I am considering grounding the shield to prevent static buildup and the possibility of an potential breakdown in the coax. So if this is in fact LIMITED CURRENT it seems to me the application is valid. My questions now are: 1. If this in fact LIMITED CURRENT, is basic insulation such as the coax adequate? 2. If the requirement is SELV, is it reasonable that the insulation between the center conductor and shield may meet the requirement for reinforced insulation?l 3. To add additional safety should the coax shield be tied to chassis ground or should the shield be tied to the anode return? I am especially concerned because this cable routes against the body between the helmet and supply, and is in close approximation to the head. Any thoughts or comments you may have would be appreciated. Rick Busche Evans & Sutherland rbus...@es.com
Re: WTC - voice alarm system?
I read in !emc-pstc that John Woodgate wrote (in ) about 'WTC - voice alarm system?', on Mon, 17 Sep 2001: >Does anyone know **for certain** whether the WTC had a voice-alarm >system for emergency control, evacuation, etc.? Someone has told me by e-mail that he finds that message offensive. I regret any distress caused, but I have a specific reason for asking, connected with the international, European and British standards covering such systems, which are currently under consideration for revision and extension. I want to know whether we can learn anything from this appalling incident that may be of use if, Heaven forfend, there is ever a similar incident in future. As a matter of fact, I heard on British TV this morning, from a British survivor from the South Tower, that there was such a system. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: European Economic Area
Try: http://www.bakom.ch Regards, Tom Smith Manager, Homologation and Safety Sanmina Canada ULC Phone (403) 295-5156 Cell Phone (403) 875-1291 FAX (403) 295-8862 Email: tom.sm...@sanmina.com -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of am...@westin.org Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 2:11 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: European Economic Area Thanks Brian for giving us an updating on the status in Switzerland. Does it exist any web-site describing the Swiss EMC, telecom and safety requirements ? Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 15:35:23 +0100 "Brian Jones" wrote: > >Richard and everyone > >The directives do not apply in Switzerland and therefore the CE marking has >no legal significance. As far as EMC is concerned, Switzerland has its own >laws including the Law of Electricity 1902, The Law of Telecommunications >1991, the Law of Broadcasting 1991, and Ordinance SR 734, Article 4 of which >contains EMC provisions. This was the position when I last checked in >detail a couple of years ago. I am not aware of any changes, but perhaps >one of the list members from Switzerland could update us if anything has >changed recently, and on other provisions such as safety. > >Best wishes > >Brian > >Brian Jones >EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory > >Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter >e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format > > > >- Original Message - >From: >To: >Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 2:29 PM >Subject: RE: European Economic Area > > >> >> Thanks for the clarification, Brian. What is the legal state of the >> Directives and CE marking in Switzerland? If they don't apply, what does? >> >> Richard Woods >> >> -- >> From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:56 AM >> To: wo...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >> Subject: European Economic Area >> >> Richard and everyone >> >> The three EFTA countries which are parties to the European Economic >> Area >> agreement are Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein. They apply the >> directives >> as if they were members of the EU. Although Switzerland is an EFTA >> member, >> it did not join the others in EEA membership. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Brian Jones >> EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory >> >> Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter >> e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: >> To: >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:17 PM >> Subject: RE: CE Mark and GOST >> >> >> > >> > One slight correction. The Directives and CE marking also legally >> apply in >> > the EFTA member states: Norway, Iceland and Switzerland and >> perhaps a >> couple >> > more that I don't recall at the moment. >> > >> > Richard Woods >> > >> >> >> --- >> 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: >> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old >messages are imported into the new server. >> >> > > >--- >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: >No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. > -- Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su --- 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 t
paper posted
Hi All, I have posted the paper I just delivered at the EOS/ESD Symposium in Portland, OR titled "The EMI/ESD Environment of Large Server Installations." If you work a server company, supplier to such, or in an organization that maintains servers, you may be interested in this paper. It is posted in pdf format on my site at: http://www.dsmith.org The link is in the blue tint area near the top of the page where news items are located and in the list of papers further down the page. Doug -- --- ___ _ Doug Smith \ / ) P.O. Box 1457 = Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457 _ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799 / /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528 | q-( ) | o |Email: d...@dsmith.org \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org --- --- 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: CFR requirements for the workplace
Thanks, Oscar for sharing your work with us. This is a very concise and accurate document I am sure many will have value for. Regards, Fabian Spadaccini Compliance Specialist TA Instruments-Waters LLC (p) 302-427-4189 (f) 302-427-4081 fspadacc...@tainst.com www.tainst.com -Original Message- From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 2:36 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Cc: Patricia Knudsen (EWU) Subject: Re: CFR requirements for the workplace Patty, Here is a little something that I put together previously to give to some of our folks when they asked the same question. I found it has saved a lot of time in having to present it every time I'm asked the question. (See attached file: Why NRTL Required - Generic.doc) Oscar (The usual disclaimer as related to my opinions and my employer.) "Patricia Knudsen (EWU)" on 09/14/2001 11:37:56 AM Please respond to "Patricia Knudsen (EWU)" To: emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com cc:(bcc: Oscar Overton/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: CFR requirements for the workplace Does anyone know the specific section of the CFR that refers to equipment at the workplace (specifically computer or test equipment) being Listed by a NRTL? Patty Knudsen Sr. Regulatory Engineer Ericsson Wireless Communications (858) 332-5014 patricia.knud...@ericsson.com
Re: WTC - voice alarm system?
I'm not certain (I wasn't there) but I heard that there were announcements in the 2nd tower that was hit after the first tower was hit to sit tight and not evacuate because at that point they still thought it was an accident and they didn't need a whole bunch of people evacuating the 2nd tower and then getting in the way of rescue operations on the street below. -- >From: John Woodgate >To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >Subject: WTC - voice alarm system? >Date: Mon, Sep 17, 2001, 2:14 AM > > > Does anyone know **for certain** whether the WTC had a voice-alarm > system for emergency control, evacuation, etc.? > -- > Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk > Eat mink and be dreary! > > --- > 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: > No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old > messages are imported into the new server. > --- 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: Swiss Web Site
Thank you, Pierre-Marie. The site is nicely organized. I perused the subject of RTTE on the referenced site. It appears that this particular directive has been adopted by Switzerland. This site did not address the EMC Directive. Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic > -- > From: Andre, Pierre-Marie[SMTP:pierre-marie.an...@intel.com] > Reply To: Andre, Pierre-Marie > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 8:43 AM > To: 'am...@westin.org'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' > Subject: RE: Swiss Web Site > > > hi there, > > may be you can look at : http://www.bakom.ch/eng/subpage/?category_51.html > > > Pierre-Marie Andre > Intel Sophia Senior Approval Engineer > Tel : +33 (0) 4 93 00 14 13 Fax : +33 (0) 4 93 00 14 01 > > http://www.intel.com > > > -Original Message- > From: am...@westin.org [mailto:am...@westin.org] > Sent: lundi 17 septembre 2001 10:11 > To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Re: European Economic Area > > > > Thanks Brian for giving us an updating on the status in Switzerland. > > Does it exist any web-site describing the Swiss EMC, telecom and safety > requirements ? > > Best regards > Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway > > > On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 15:35:23 +0100 "Brian Jones" > wrote: > > > >Richard and everyone > > > >The directives do not apply in Switzerland and therefore the CE marking > has > >no legal significance. As far as EMC is concerned, Switzerland has its > own > >laws including the Law of Electricity 1902, The Law of Telecommunications > >1991, the Law of Broadcasting 1991, and Ordinance SR 734, Article 4 of > which > >contains EMC provisions. This was the position when I last checked in > >detail a couple of years ago. I am not aware of any changes, but perhaps > >one of the list members from Switzerland could update us if anything has > >changed recently, and on other provisions such as safety. > > > >Best wishes > > > >Brian > > > >Brian Jones > >EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory > > > >Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter > >e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format > > > > > > > >- Original Message - > >From: > >To: > >Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 2:29 PM > >Subject: RE: European Economic Area > > > > > >> > >> Thanks for the clarification, Brian. What is the legal state of the > >> Directives and CE marking in Switzerland? If they don't apply, what > does? > >> > >> Richard Woods > >> > >> -- > >> From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] > >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:56 AM > >> To: wo...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > >> Subject: European Economic Area > >> > >> Richard and everyone > >> > >> The three EFTA countries which are parties to the European Economic > >> Area > >> agreement are Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein. They apply the > >> directives > >> as if they were members of the EU. Although Switzerland is an EFTA > >> member, > >> it did not join the others in EEA membership. > >> > >> Best wishes > >> > >> Brian Jones > >> EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory > >> > >> Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter > >> e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format > >> > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: > >> To: > >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:17 PM > >> Subject: RE: CE Mark and GOST > >> > >> > >> > > >> > One slight correction. The Directives and CE marking also legally > >> apply in > >> > the EFTA member states: Norway, Iceland and Switzerland and > >> perhaps a > >> couple > >> > more that I don't recall at the moment. > >> > > >> > Richard Woods > >> > > >> > >> > >> --- > >> 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: > >> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old > >messages are imported into the new server. > >> > >> > > > > > >--- > >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 mai
RE: Swiss Web Site
hi there, may be you can look at : http://www.bakom.ch/eng/subpage/?category_51.html Pierre-Marie Andre Intel Sophia Senior Approval Engineer Tel : +33 (0) 4 93 00 14 13 Fax : +33 (0) 4 93 00 14 01 > http://www.intel.com -Original Message- From: am...@westin.org [mailto:am...@westin.org] Sent: lundi 17 septembre 2001 10:11 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: European Economic Area Thanks Brian for giving us an updating on the status in Switzerland. Does it exist any web-site describing the Swiss EMC, telecom and safety requirements ? Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 15:35:23 +0100 "Brian Jones" wrote: > >Richard and everyone > >The directives do not apply in Switzerland and therefore the CE marking has >no legal significance. As far as EMC is concerned, Switzerland has its own >laws including the Law of Electricity 1902, The Law of Telecommunications >1991, the Law of Broadcasting 1991, and Ordinance SR 734, Article 4 of which >contains EMC provisions. This was the position when I last checked in >detail a couple of years ago. I am not aware of any changes, but perhaps >one of the list members from Switzerland could update us if anything has >changed recently, and on other provisions such as safety. > >Best wishes > >Brian > >Brian Jones >EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory > >Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter >e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format > > > >- Original Message - >From: >To: >Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 2:29 PM >Subject: RE: European Economic Area > > >> >> Thanks for the clarification, Brian. What is the legal state of the >> Directives and CE marking in Switzerland? If they don't apply, what does? >> >> Richard Woods >> >> -- >> From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:56 AM >> To: wo...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >> Subject: European Economic Area >> >> Richard and everyone >> >> The three EFTA countries which are parties to the European Economic >> Area >> agreement are Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein. They apply the >> directives >> as if they were members of the EU. Although Switzerland is an EFTA >> member, >> it did not join the others in EEA membership. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Brian Jones >> EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory >> >> Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter >> e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: >> To: >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:17 PM >> Subject: RE: CE Mark and GOST >> >> >> > >> > One slight correction. The Directives and CE marking also legally >> apply in >> > the EFTA member states: Norway, Iceland and Switzerland and >> perhaps a >> couple >> > more that I don't recall at the moment. >> > >> > Richard Woods >> > >> >> >> --- >> 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: >> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old >messages are imported into the new server. >> >> > > >--- >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: >No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. > -- Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su --- 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:
Re: UL vs CSA (IT product)
No extra cost in testing, you ask UL to evaluate to UL60950 and CSA22.2 60950 at the same time. No extra label cost either as you can now use the single cUL mark. You still have the product in one volume of the file, so you pay the same tri monthly inspection fees. am...@westin.org wrote: > So, if we choose UL for approvals in North America (US & Canada) we have to > mark the products with the UL and cUL labels ? > I guess that there will be no addition testing (only use UL1950), but there > might be some additional costs for using both labels right ? > > Best regards > Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway > > On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 23:28:18 -0700 Graham Rae Dulmage > wrote: > >Ralph, > > > >some comments on your points. > > > >First I would suggest a lot of information on this question can be found at > >"www.scc.ca". > > > >Secondly and very briefly as Art Michaels stated ULC stands for Underwriters > Laboratories > of Canada. ULC is a > >certification body accredited as is CSA and 14 others by the Standards > >Council > of Canada. Again > a great deal of > >information can be > >found at the SCC site. > > > >Hope this helps. > > > >Yours truly, > > > >G. Rae Dulmage > >Manager > >Standards Programs > >Standards Council of Canada > > > >Ralph Cameron wrote: > > > >> CSA accepts approval by ULC. The C is indicative of Canadian UL. UL is > >> normally not accpetable by itself in Canada > >> > >> Ralph Cameron > >> EMC Consulting and Suppresion of Consumer Electronics > >> (after sale) > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "Horst Haug" > >> To: "Peter Merguerian" ; ; > >> > >> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 5:24 AM > >> Subject: AW: UL vs CSA (IT product) > >> > >> > > >> > Amund, > >> > > >> > UL accept components approved by CSA and CSA accepts components approved > >> by > >> > UL. A CSA approved Power Supply within an end product with UL approval > >> > is > >> > no problem any more (that is my experience). > >> > The UL PAG "practical application guide" about is 1.5.002. I send it to > >> you > >> > in a separate EMAIL. > >> > > >> > With best regards > >> > Horst Haug > >> > > >> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > >> > Von: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > >> > [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]Im Auftrag von Peter Merguerian > >> > Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2001 09:44 > >> > An: 'am...@westin.org'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > >> > Betreff: RE: UL vs CSA (IT product) > >> > > >> > > >> > Amend, > >> > > >> > See my answers in body of your message. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > UL and/or CSA certification are mandatory within the electrical safety > >> area, > >> > to > >> > have access to the US and Canadian marked. Right ? > >> > > >> > I know there are some differences between them, the certification fee, > >> > the > >> > certification-handling period and the number of audit/year. > >> > > >> > My questions are: > >> > 1.Do they have the same status? > >> > > >> > Peter: Yes, to a certain extent. You must check the scope of their > >> > acceditations in OSHA's and Standard Council of Canada's websites. > >> > > >> > > >> > 2.What requirements do the end users/ buyers have, do most of them prefer > >> > one > >> > of the approvals? > >> > > >> > Peter: Depends on the categories. But most end-users are not aware that > >> > other NRTLs are capable of giving the same Listing service. > >> > You must educate them. > >> > > >> > 3.Do we have to go for both of them? > >> > > >> > Peter: One is enough, but as I said above, you must educate end-users to > >> > accept and also check if the test house is accredited for the particular > >> > standards. > >> > > >> > Best regards > >> > Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su > >> > > >> > --- > >> > 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: > >> > No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old > >> > messages are imported into the new server. > >> > > >> > --- > >> > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > >> > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > >> > > > > >> > Visit our web
RE: UL vs CSA (IT product)
Amund Not quite To enable you to apply the UL/cUL labels, UL will test your product to UL1950 for the USA and CSA22.2 No 60950 for Canada. The extra cost for testing to CSA22.2 No 60950 will depend on how much the Canadian deviations differ from the US Deviations of IEC60950. My experience is with IEC60065 and the US and Canadian deviations are considerably different. Regards Chris Colgan Compliance Engineer TAG McLaren Audio Ltd The Summit, Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU *Tel: +44 (0)1480 415 627 *Fax: +44 (0)1480 52159 * Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclaren.com * http://www.tagmclaren.com > -Original Message- > From: am...@westin.org [SMTP:am...@westin.org] > Sent: 17 September 2001 09:27 > To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Re: UL vs CSA (IT product) > > > So, if we choose UL for approvals in North America (US & Canada) we have > to > mark the products with the UL and cUL labels ? > I guess that there will be no addition testing (only use UL1950), but > there > might be some additional costs for using both labels right ? > > Best regards > Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway > > > On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 23:28:18 -0700 Graham Rae Dulmage > > wrote: > >Ralph, > > > >some comments on your points. > > > >First I would suggest a lot of information on this question can be found > at > >"www.scc.ca". > > > >Secondly and very briefly as Art Michaels stated ULC stands for > Underwriters > Laboratories > of Canada. ULC is a > >certification body accredited as is CSA and 14 others by the Standards > Council > of Canada. Again > a great deal of > >information can be > >found at the SCC site. > > > >Hope this helps. > > > >Yours truly, > > > >G. Rae Dulmage > >Manager > >Standards Programs > >Standards Council of Canada > > > >Ralph Cameron wrote: > > > >> CSA accepts approval by ULC. The C is indicative of Canadian UL. UL > is > >> normally not accpetable by itself in Canada > >> > >> Ralph Cameron > >> EMC Consulting and Suppresion of Consumer Electronics > >> (after sale) > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> From: "Horst Haug" > >> To: "Peter Merguerian" ; ; > >> > >> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 5:24 AM > >> Subject: AW: UL vs CSA (IT product) > >> > >> > > >> > Amund, > >> > > >> > UL accept components approved by CSA and CSA accepts components > approved > >> by > >> > UL. A CSA approved Power Supply within an end product with UL > approval is > >> > no problem any more (that is my experience). > >> > The UL PAG "practical application guide" about is 1.5.002. I send it > to > >> you > >> > in a separate EMAIL. > >> > > >> > With best regards > >> > Horst Haug > >> > > >> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > >> > Von: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > >> > [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]Im Auftrag von Peter > Merguerian > >> > Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2001 09:44 > >> > An: 'am...@westin.org'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > >> > Betreff: RE: UL vs CSA (IT product) > >> > > >> > > >> > Amend, > >> > > >> > See my answers in body of your message. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > UL and/or CSA certification are mandatory within the electrical > safety > >> area, > >> > to > >> > have access to the US and Canadian marked. Right ? > >> > > >> > I know there are some differences between them, the certification > fee, the > >> > certification-handling period and the number of audit/year. > >> > > >> > My questions are: > >> > 1.Do they have the same status? > >> > > >> > Peter: Yes, to a certain extent. You must check the scope of their > >> > acceditations in OSHA's and Standard Council of Canada's websites. > >> > > >> > > >> > 2.What requirements do the end users/ buyers have, do most of them > prefer > >> > one > >> > of the approvals? > >> > > >> > Peter: Depends on the categories. But most end-users are not aware > that > >> > other NRTLs are capable of giving the same Listing service. > >> > You must educate them. > >> > > >> > 3.Do we have to go for both of them? > >> > > >> > Peter: One is enough, but as I said above, you must educate end-users > to > >> > accept and also check if the test house is accredited for the > particular > >> > standards. > >> > > >> > Best regards > >> > Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at > http://Nameplanet.com/?su > >> > > >> > --- > >> > 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 que
WTC - voice alarm system?
Does anyone know **for certain** whether the WTC had a voice-alarm system for emergency control, evacuation, etc.? -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Eat mink and be dreary! --- 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: UL vs CSA (IT product)
So, if we choose UL for approvals in North America (US & Canada) we have to mark the products with the UL and cUL labels ? I guess that there will be no addition testing (only use UL1950), but there might be some additional costs for using both labels right ? Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 23:28:18 -0700 Graham Rae Dulmage wrote: >Ralph, > >some comments on your points. > >First I would suggest a lot of information on this question can be found at >"www.scc.ca". > >Secondly and very briefly as Art Michaels stated ULC stands for Underwriters Laboratories of Canada. ULC is a >certification body accredited as is CSA and 14 others by the Standards Council of Canada. Again a great deal of >information can be >found at the SCC site. > >Hope this helps. > >Yours truly, > >G. Rae Dulmage >Manager >Standards Programs >Standards Council of Canada > >Ralph Cameron wrote: > >> CSA accepts approval by ULC. The C is indicative of Canadian UL. UL is >> normally not accpetable by itself in Canada >> >> Ralph Cameron >> EMC Consulting and Suppresion of Consumer Electronics >> (after sale) >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Horst Haug" >> To: "Peter Merguerian" ; ; >> >> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 5:24 AM >> Subject: AW: UL vs CSA (IT product) >> >> > >> > Amund, >> > >> > UL accept components approved by CSA and CSA accepts components approved >> by >> > UL. A CSA approved Power Supply within an end product with UL approval is >> > no problem any more (that is my experience). >> > The UL PAG "practical application guide" about is 1.5.002. I send it to >> you >> > in a separate EMAIL. >> > >> > With best regards >> > Horst Haug >> > >> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- >> > Von: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >> > [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]Im Auftrag von Peter Merguerian >> > Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2001 09:44 >> > An: 'am...@westin.org'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >> > Betreff: RE: UL vs CSA (IT product) >> > >> > >> > Amend, >> > >> > See my answers in body of your message. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > UL and/or CSA certification are mandatory within the electrical safety >> area, >> > to >> > have access to the US and Canadian marked. Right ? >> > >> > I know there are some differences between them, the certification fee, the >> > certification-handling period and the number of audit/year. >> > >> > My questions are: >> > 1.Do they have the same status? >> > >> > Peter: Yes, to a certain extent. You must check the scope of their >> > acceditations in OSHA's and Standard Council of Canada's websites. >> > >> > >> > 2.What requirements do the end users/ buyers have, do most of them prefer >> > one >> > of the approvals? >> > >> > Peter: Depends on the categories. But most end-users are not aware that >> > other NRTLs are capable of giving the same Listing service. >> > You must educate them. >> > >> > 3.Do we have to go for both of them? >> > >> > Peter: One is enough, but as I said above, you must educate end-users to >> > accept and also check if the test house is accredited for the particular >> > standards. >> > >> > Best regards >> > Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su >> > >> > --- >> > 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: >> > No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old >> > messages are imported into the new server. >> > >> > --- >> > 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: >> > N
Re: European Economic Area
Thanks Brian for giving us an updating on the status in Switzerland. Does it exist any web-site describing the Swiss EMC, telecom and safety requirements ? Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 15:35:23 +0100 "Brian Jones" wrote: > >Richard and everyone > >The directives do not apply in Switzerland and therefore the CE marking has >no legal significance. As far as EMC is concerned, Switzerland has its own >laws including the Law of Electricity 1902, The Law of Telecommunications >1991, the Law of Broadcasting 1991, and Ordinance SR 734, Article 4 of which >contains EMC provisions. This was the position when I last checked in >detail a couple of years ago. I am not aware of any changes, but perhaps >one of the list members from Switzerland could update us if anything has >changed recently, and on other provisions such as safety. > >Best wishes > >Brian > >Brian Jones >EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory > >Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter >e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format > > > >- Original Message - >From: >To: >Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 2:29 PM >Subject: RE: European Economic Area > > >> >> Thanks for the clarification, Brian. What is the legal state of the >> Directives and CE marking in Switzerland? If they don't apply, what does? >> >> Richard Woods >> >> -- >> From: Brian Jones [SMTP:e...@brianjones.co.uk] >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:56 AM >> To: wo...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >> Subject: European Economic Area >> >> Richard and everyone >> >> The three EFTA countries which are parties to the European Economic >> Area >> agreement are Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein. They apply the >> directives >> as if they were members of the EU. Although Switzerland is an EFTA >> member, >> it did not join the others in EEA membership. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Brian Jones >> EMC Consultant and Competent Body Signatory >> >> Keep up to date with EMC Matters newsletter >> e-mail newslet...@brianjones.co.uk for a free sample in .pdf format >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: >> To: >> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:17 PM >> Subject: RE: CE Mark and GOST >> >> >> > >> > One slight correction. The Directives and CE marking also legally >> apply in >> > the EFTA member states: Norway, Iceland and Switzerland and >> perhaps a >> couple >> > more that I don't recall at the moment. >> > >> > Richard Woods >> > >> >> >> --- >> 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: >> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old >messages are imported into the new server. >> >> > > >--- >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: >No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. > -- Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su --- 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: No longer online until our new server is broug
