RE: EN 55022 limits
You may be right that this is not the intent of the rules. Others replying to this thread have mentioned many engineering reasons why testing at 10 meters is preferred over 3 meter testing. I can only speculate why Cispr would allow measurements at both distance. My first guess is in an attempt to harmonize with FCC and ANSI C63.4:1992. Cispr 22 Edition 3 conforms to much of the setup criteria specified in C63.4. Since FCC Class B equipment is specified to be tested at 3 meters, it seems reasonable to allow testing at both distances. Justification is in the hands of the manufacturer and the test lab. My original email was not attempting to justify 3 meter testing, only to point out that it is allowed. Michael Peters -Original Message- From: Cook, Jack To: Peters, Michael; 'Stuart Lopata ' Cc: 'emc ' Sent: 10/31/01 2:36 PM Subject: RE: EN 55022 limits Yes, but ... EN55022:1998 (10.2.1) says measurements at other distances can be made with Class B ITE ... measurement at 10 m cannot be made because of high ambient noise levels, or for other reasons, Are you interpreting the other reasons as meaning if one doesn't have a 10 m facility, then it's ok to test at 3 m? I'm a tiny bit skeptical that this was the intent. Or has this practice been accepted? Regards, Jack Cook, Xerox EMC Engineering -Original Message- From: Peters, Michael [mailto:mpet...@analogic.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 7:22 PM To: 'Stuart Lopata '; 'emc ' Subject: RE: EN 55022 limits Stuart, Cispr 22:1997 clause 10.2.1 answers your question. The earlier version of Cispr 22 has similar wording. For Class B equipment you may use a 20 dB/decade extrapolation to correct measured data, to compare to the limits, at closer distances. The rules do not say that the same is allowed for Class A equipment. Going from 3 to 10 meters: You would subtract 10.5 dB from your measurements (the formula is given in clause 10.6). Michael Peters -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata To: emc Sent: 10/30/01 10:06 AM Subject: EN 55022 limits The radiated limits are stated for 10 meters but our measurements are at 3 meters. Is it ok to use 3 meter data and what should the new limits be (may be 10 dB higher)? Thanks, Stuart Lopata --- 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. --- 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
RE: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query
Ron, I did not mean to suggest that CISPR 24 provides an adequate level of test for all environments. Heck, my 5 watt 2 m / 70 cm amateur radio handheld hits my PC with a lot more than 3 V/m when I'm sitting at my computer talking to someone. I once measured it at 10 meters (on an 80 cm high non-conducting table) and found the field strength was 1 V/m at that distance. The standard does, however, provide a reasonable level of test for products in most environments. Keep in mind that EN 55024 is a legal requirement. If you feel that a more stringent standard is applicable for a particular installation, you are free to specify that your vendor meet that requirement. EN 55024 just provides a legal minimum level of immunity. CISPR SC I WG4 could investigate a different set of requirements in CISPR 24 for a heavy industrial environment. Nobody has proposed that it do so. Therefore, nothing is being done. As WG4 is just being formed due to the merger of CISPR SC E and SC G in Bristol this past June and will not meet until late September of next year, I wouldn't expect to see any movement in the near future. As one of the people being named to WG4 by the USNC to the IEC, I will see any such moves when they occur. Even then, changes in CISPR documents occur at glacial speed. This isn't always a bad thing, either. Ghery Pettit -Original Message- From: Ron Pickard [mailto:rpick...@hypercom.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 3:03 PM To: ghery.pet...@intel.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query Hi Ghery, CISPR 24 / EN 55024:1998 is the ITE specific immunity standard. It applies to ITE, regardless of the installation location. So, an ITE would then be designed for all intended environments when testing to the single set of limits of CISPR 24 /EN55024? There are no proposals in CISPR SC I at this time to create a new version of CISPR 24 for an industrial location. Why not? There should be. IMHO, this appears to be a gaping hole in the ITE immunity requirement scenario. EN 50082-2 does NOT apply as once a product specific standard (in this case, EN 55024:1998) is published, the generic standard no longer applies to that product family. This is all fine and good, but what do you do when your ITE is to be installed into an industrial-type environment? What requirements would you then use for ITE for an industrial-type environment? Also, my reference to EN50082-2 was in error. The reference should've been EN61000-6-2. Keep in mind that the definitions of class A and B in CISPR 22 are based on the limits met by the product. B is intended for residential environments and the like, but there is a note in CISPR 22 (and EN 55022) that states that class A products should not be limited in where they can be marketed, just that a warning label should be added to them about potential interference in a residential environment. I was just noting that CISPR 22 delineates two intended ITE emissions environments. So then (which brings us back to the point I was trying to make), why can't CISPR 24 define/delineate different immunity environments, as well? Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: PCB Design Books
You have quite the library! Bill Fleury -Original Message- From: wojciech_ba...@nmss.com [mailto:wojciech_ba...@nmss.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 1:20 PM To: Dan Kwok Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; marti...@appliedbiosystems.com; owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: PCB Design Books Here are my favorite: All of them are good in many areas of PCB design (use many point from all of them in my designs): EMC and Signal Integrity Books: Analysis of Multiconductor Transmission Lines Clayton R. Paul, John Wiley Sons, 1994. ISBN 0-471-02080-X Architectural Electromagnetic Shielding Handbook, A Design and Specification Guide Hemming, L.H., IEEE Press, 1992. ISBN 0-87942-287-4 Cable Shielding for Electromagnetic Compatibility Anatoly Tsaliovich, John Wiley and Sons, 1995. Capacitance, Inductance and Crosstalk Analysis Charles S. Walker, Artech House, 1990. Computer Circuits Electrical Design Ron K. Poon, Prentice Hall, 1995. Control and Measurement of Unintentional Electromagnetic Radiation W. Scott Bennett, John Wiley and Sons, 1997. Controlling Conducted Emissions by Design J.C. Fluke, John Wiley and Sons, 1991. Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design Michel Mardiguian, John Wiley and Sons, 1992. Coupling of External Electromagnetic Fields to Transmission Lines A.A. Smith, Jr., John Wiley Sons, 1977. Coupling to Shielded Cables E.F. Vance, John Wiley Sons, 1978. Decoupling and Layout of Digital Printed Circuits K.R. Keenan, The Keenan Corp., 1985. Design of Shielded Enclosures: Cost-Effective Methods to Prevent EMI Louis T. Gnecco, Newnes, 2000. Digital Design for Interference Specifications, 2nd Edition, 'A Practical Handbook for EMI Control' D.L. Terrell and R. K. Keenan, The Keenan Corp., 1997. Digital Signal Integrity: Modeling and Simulation with Interconnects and Packages Brian Young, Prentice Hall, 2001. Digital Signal Transmission C. Bissell and D. Chapman, Cambridge University Press, 1992. Digital Systems Engineering William J. Dally and John W. Poulton, Cambridge University Press, 1998. Electromagnetic Compatibility J.J. Goedbloed, Prentice Hall, 1992. Electromagnetic Compatibility: Principles and Applications D. A. Weston, Marcel Dekker, 1991. Electromagnetic Compatibility Design Guide E.R. Freeman and M. Sachs, Artech House, 1982. Electromagnetic Compatibility Handbook N. Violette, D.R.J. White, and M. Violette, John Wiley and Sons, 1987. Electromagnetic Compatibility in Medicl Equipment W. Kimmel and D. Gerke, IEEE Press, 1995. ISBN 0-7803-1160-4 Electromagnetic Compatibility in Power Electronics Tihanyi, L., J.K. Eckert IEEE Press, 1995. ISBN 0-7803-0416-0 Electromagnetic Interference Reduction in Electronic Systems Jeffrey P. Mills, Prentice Hall, 1993. Electromagnetic Shielding Handbook for Wired and Wireless EMC Applications Anatoly Tsaliovich, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. Electronic Packaging of High-Speed Circuitry S. Kronsowski and A. Helland, McGraw Hill, 1997. Electronic System Design: Interference and Noise Control Techniques J.R. Barnesi, Prentice-Hall, 1987. Electrostatic Discharge and Electronic Equipment: A Practical Guide for Designing to Prevent ESD Problems Warren Boxleitner, IEEE Press, 1989. Elektromagnetische Verträglichkeit(in German) A.J. Schwab, Springer, 1996. EMC Analysis Methods and Computational Models Frederick M. Tesche, Michel Ianoz, and Torbjörn Karlsson, John Wiley Sons, 1997. EMC and the Printed Circuit Board - Design, Theory and Layout Made Simple Mark Montrose, IEEE Press, 1999. EMC: Electromagnetic Theory to Practical Design P.A. Chatterton and M.M. Houlden, John Wiley Sons, 1991. EMC for Product Designers, 2nd Ed. Tim Williams, Oxford, Boston, 1996. EMC for Systems and Installations Tim Williams Keith Armstrong, Newnes, 2000, ISBN 0 7506 4167 3 EMI/EMC Computational Modeling Handbook Bruce Archambeault, Omar Ramahi, Colin Brench , Kluwer Academic Pub, 1998. EMI/EMC: Selected Readings V. Prasad Kodali (Editor), Motohisa Kanda (Editor),IEEE Press, 1996. Engineering Electromagnetic Compatibility V. Prasad Kodali, IEEE Press, 1996. ESD in Silicon Integrated Circuits Ajith Amerasekera and Charvaka Duvvury, John Wiley and Sons, 1996. Grounding and Shielding in Facilities R. Morrison and W.H. Lewis, John Wiley and Sons, 1990. Grounding and Shielding Techniques in Instrumentation R. Morrison, Third Edition, John Wiley and Sons, 1986. The Guide to the EMC Directive 89/336/EEC (2nd Edition) C. Marshman, EPA Press, 1995. A Handbook for EMC Testing and Measurement David Morgan and Peter Peregrinus, IEE, 1995. Handbook of Electromagnetic Compatibility Reinaldo Perez, ed.,Academic Press, 1995. ISBN 0-12-550710-0 Handbook of Electromagnetic Materials P. S. Neelakanta, CRC Press, 1995. High-Frequency Characterization of Electronic Packaging L. Martens, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.
PCB Design Books
When I managed EMC during the 1980's, we were fortunate enough to hire Dr. Paul as a consultant during the summers for a few years. He taught EMC courses at the local University of Kentucky. We learned a good deal more about theory from him, while he learned a good deal more about EMI from real world controller PCBs etc. He was an excellent example of one who could apply the theory to real world hardware problems. George Alspaugh wojciech_babij%nmss@interlock.lexmark.com on 10/31/2001 02:19:44 PM Please respond to wojciech_babij%nmss@interlock.lexmark.com To: Dan Kwok dkwok%intetron@interlock.lexmark.com cc: emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com, martinjp%appliedbiosystems@interlock.lexmark.com, owner-emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: Re: PCB Design Books Here are my favorite: All of them are good in many areas of PCB design (use many point from all of them in my designs): EMC and Signal Integrity Books: Analysis of Multiconductor Transmission Lines Clayton R. Paul, John Wiley Sons, 1994. ISBN 0-471-02080-X Architectural Electromagnetic Shielding Handbook, A Design and Specification Guide Hemming, L.H., IEEE Press, 1992. ISBN 0-87942-287-4 Cable Shielding for Electromagnetic Compatibility Anatoly Tsaliovich, John Wiley and Sons, 1995. Capacitance, Inductance and Crosstalk Analysis Charles S. Walker, Artech House, 1990. Computer Circuits Electrical Design Ron K. Poon, Prentice Hall, 1995. Control and Measurement of Unintentional Electromagnetic Radiation W. Scott Bennett, John Wiley and Sons, 1997. Controlling Conducted Emissions by Design J.C. Fluke, John Wiley and Sons, 1991. Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design Michel Mardiguian, John Wiley and Sons, 1992. Coupling of External Electromagnetic Fields to Transmission Lines A.A. Smith, Jr., John Wiley Sons, 1977. Coupling to Shielded Cables E.F. Vance, John Wiley Sons, 1978. Decoupling and Layout of Digital Printed Circuits K.R. Keenan, The Keenan Corp., 1985. Design of Shielded Enclosures: Cost-Effective Methods to Prevent EMI Louis T. Gnecco, Newnes, 2000. Digital Design for Interference Specifications, 2nd Edition, 'A Practical Handbook for EMI Control' D.L. Terrell and R. K. Keenan, The Keenan Corp., 1997. Digital Signal Integrity: Modeling and Simulation with Interconnects and Packages Brian Young, Prentice Hall, 2001. Digital Signal Transmission C. Bissell and D. Chapman, Cambridge University Press, 1992. Digital Systems Engineering William J. Dally and John W. Poulton, Cambridge University Press, 1998.. Electromagnetic Compatibility J.J. Goedbloed, Prentice Hall, 1992. Electromagnetic Compatibility: Principles and Applications D. A. Weston, Marcel Dekker, 1991. Electromagnetic Compatibility Design Guide E.R. Freeman and M. Sachs, Artech House, 1982. Electromagnetic Compatibility Handbook N. Violette, D.R.J. White, and M. Violette, John Wiley and Sons, 1987. Electromagnetic Compatibility in Medicl Equipment W. Kimmel and D. Gerke, IEEE Press, 1995. ISBN 0-7803-1160-4 Electromagnetic Compatibility in Power Electronics Tihanyi, L., J.K. Eckert IEEE Press, 1995. ISBN 0-7803-0416-0 Electromagnetic Interference Reduction in Electronic Systems Jeffrey P. Mills, Prentice Hall, 1993. Electromagnetic Shielding Handbook for Wired and Wireless EMC Applications Anatoly Tsaliovich, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. Electronic Packaging of High-Speed Circuitry S. Kronsowski and A. Helland, McGraw Hill, 1997. Electronic System Design: Interference and Noise Control Techniques J.R. Barnesi, Prentice-Hall, 1987. Electrostatic Discharge and Electronic Equipment: A Practical Guide for Designing to Prevent ESD Problems Warren Boxleitner, IEEE Press, 1989. Elektromagnetische Verträglichkeit(in German) A.J. Schwab, Springer, 1996. EMC Analysis Methods and Computational Models Frederick M. Tesche, Michel Ianoz, and Torbjörn Karlsson, John Wiley Sons, 1997. EMC and the Printed Circuit Board - Design, Theory and Layout Made Simple Mark Montrose, IEEE Press, 1999. EMC: Electromagnetic Theory to Practical Design P.A. Chatterton and M.M. Houlden, John Wiley Sons, 1991. EMC for Product Designers, 2nd Ed. Tim Williams, Oxford, Boston, 1996. EMC for Systems and Installations Tim Williams Keith Armstrong, Newnes, 2000, ISBN 0 7506 4167 3 EMI/EMC Computational Modeling Handbook Bruce Archambeault, Omar Ramahi, Colin Brench , Kluwer Academic Pub, 1998. EMI/EMC: Selected Readings V. Prasad Kodali (Editor), Motohisa Kanda (Editor),IEEE Press, 1996. Engineering Electromagnetic Compatibility V. Prasad Kodali, IEEE Press, 1996. ESD in Silicon Integrated Circuits Ajith Amerasekera and Charvaka Duvvury, John Wiley and Sons, 1996. Grounding and Shielding in Facilities R. Morrison and W.H. Lewis, John Wiley and Sons, 1990. Grounding and
RE: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query
My point about class A and B in CISPR 22 is NOT irrelevant. If a regulatory body wishes to override the loose definition in CISPR 22 (as Taiwan has done, for example), they are free to do so. What I stated about CISPR 22 (and EN 55022) is true and still stands. The FCC Rules are specific about when a product is class A or B. To bring them into a discussion about CISPR 22 is irrelevant. Ghery Pettit -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 12:00 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote (in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B51B@ORSMSX108) about 'New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query', on Wed, 31 Oct 2001: CISPR 24 / EN 55024:1998 is the ITE specific immunity standard. It applies to ITE, regardless of the installation location. There are no proposals in CISPR SC I at this time to create a new version of CISPR 24 for an industrial location. Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that there should not be. If not, sooner or later, an industrial computer will crash due to lack of immunity and result in a megabuck loss. EN 50082-2 does NOT apply as once a product specific standard (in this case, EN 55024:1998) is published, the generic standard no longer applies to that product family. That is the position according to the rules, but I wouldn't buy an industrial computer that only met CISPR24 for installation in a heavy industrial site. Keep in mind that the definitions of class A and B in CISPR 22 are based on the limits met by the product. B is intended for residential environments and the like, but there is a note in CISPR 22 (and EN 55022) that states that class A products should not be limited in where they can be marketed, just that a warning label should be added to them about potential interference in a residential environment. This is irrelevant, and, as you well know, out of step with other EMC standards, including FCC. -- 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.
Radiated Emissions EUT Config
Hello Group, I am in search of opinions regarding the acceptable EUT configuration for radiated emissions testing. If a system is comprised of one or more independent shelf-level products (e.g. one shelf in a rack or several racks full), at what level is it acceptable to test? Assume that the system can be sold as one independent fully functional shelf or as numerous interconnected shelves (interconnection just increasing system capacity). For example, one shelf could be sold and deployed, then 6 months later another shelf added (cabled up to the first), and so on, etc. 1. Would it be acceptable to test at the shelf level? 2. If not, where is the line drawn? Two? Ten? In a typical CO you may see racks and racks of the same equipment shelves/chassis - chances are, they were not all tested together - where is it reasonable to stop? FCC (ref. ANSI C63.4)/EN300386/GR1089 have some guidance, differing slightly, but not clear. Any and all opinions/experiences from the group are welcome. Thanks and Regards, Scott Lemon Caspian Networks --- 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: CENELEC Ammendments
Hi Richard, You might want to try the following. Global Engineering Documents: http://global.ihs.com/ ANSI: http://web.ansi.org/ Pro's 7 Con's. ANSI is more likely to have separate amendments, documents that are generally less expensive, and have more documents in electronic format. Global will have the document that you're looking for most of the time, but will likely be only in paper format (hardcopy). Both have document search facilities. Good luck in your search. Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com wo...@sensormatic.com Sent by: To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org owner-emc-pstc@majordomcc: o.ieee.org Subject: CENELEC Ammendments 10/31/01 12:16 PM Please respond to WOODS Where can I obtain an amendment to a CENELEC standard? I am spending a small fortune having to buy the complete amended standard from BSI every time it is revised. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics --- 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: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query
I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote (in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B51B@ORSMSX108) about 'New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query', on Wed, 31 Oct 2001: CISPR 24 / EN 55024:1998 is the ITE specific immunity standard. It applies to ITE, regardless of the installation location. There are no proposals in CISPR SC I at this time to create a new version of CISPR 24 for an industrial location. Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that there should not be. If not, sooner or later, an industrial computer will crash due to lack of immunity and result in a megabuck loss. EN 50082-2 does NOT apply as once a product specific standard (in this case, EN 55024:1998) is published, the generic standard no longer applies to that product family. That is the position according to the rules, but I wouldn't buy an industrial computer that only met CISPR24 for installation in a heavy industrial site. Keep in mind that the definitions of class A and B in CISPR 22 are based on the limits met by the product. B is intended for residential environments and the like, but there is a note in CISPR 22 (and EN 55022) that states that class A products should not be limited in where they can be marketed, just that a warning label should be added to them about potential interference in a residential environment. This is irrelevant, and, as you well know, out of step with other EMC standards, including FCC. -- 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.
Looking for Accredited Lab
Hello, I am looking for an NVLAP or A2LA accredited lab which can perform the IEC 60068 series of tests for vibration and environmental (Cold, Dry Heat, Damp Heat Cyclic). It would be nice if this lab or labs was located on the West Cost. Please let me know if you know of any. Regards, Don -- This e-mail may contain SEL confidential information. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of SEL. Any unauthorized disclosure, distribution or other use is prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, permanently delete it, and destroy any printout. Thank you. --- 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: EN 55022 limits
Yes, but ... EN55022:1998 (10.2.1) says measurements at other distances can be made with Class B ITE ... measurement at 10 m cannot be made because of high ambient noise levels, or for other reasons, Are you interpreting the other reasons as meaning if one doesn't have a 10 m facility, then it's ok to test at 3 m? I'm a tiny bit skeptical that this was the intent. Or has this practice been accepted? Regards, Jack Cook, Xerox EMC Engineering -Original Message- From: Peters, Michael [mailto:mpet...@analogic.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 7:22 PM To: 'Stuart Lopata '; 'emc ' Subject: RE: EN 55022 limits Stuart, Cispr 22:1997 clause 10.2.1 answers your question. The earlier version of Cispr 22 has similar wording. For Class B equipment you may use a 20 dB/decade extrapolation to correct measured data, to compare to the limits, at closer distances. The rules do not say that the same is allowed for Class A equipment. Going from 3 to 10 meters: You would subtract 10.5 dB from your measurements (the formula is given in clause 10.6). Michael Peters -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata To: emc Sent: 10/30/01 10:06 AM Subject: EN 55022 limits The radiated limits are stated for 10 meters but our measurements are at 3 meters. Is it ok to use 3 meter data and what should the new limits be (may be 10 dB higher)? Thanks, Stuart Lopata --- 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. --- 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: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query
I read in !emc-pstc that Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com wrote (in of487037df.8731060e-on07256af6.0058b...@hypercom.com) about 'New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query', on Wed, 31 Oct 2001: Is the CISPR/G committee working on such a revision? Or will they? No, because CISPR/G and CISPR/E have merged to form CISPR/I. But your point is well made. For the industrial environment, in the absence of any limits in CISPR 24, you should apply the Generic IEC/EN61000-6-2 for new designs. -- 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: PCB Design Books
Here are my favorite: All of them are good in many areas of PCB design (use many point from all of them in my designs): EMC and Signal Integrity Books: Analysis of Multiconductor Transmission Lines Clayton R. Paul, John Wiley Sons, 1994. ISBN 0-471-02080-X Architectural Electromagnetic Shielding Handbook, A Design and Specification Guide Hemming, L.H., IEEE Press, 1992. ISBN 0-87942-287-4 Cable Shielding for Electromagnetic Compatibility Anatoly Tsaliovich, John Wiley and Sons, 1995. Capacitance, Inductance and Crosstalk Analysis Charles S. Walker, Artech House, 1990. Computer Circuits Electrical Design Ron K. Poon, Prentice Hall, 1995. Control and Measurement of Unintentional Electromagnetic Radiation W. Scott Bennett, John Wiley and Sons, 1997. Controlling Conducted Emissions by Design J.C. Fluke, John Wiley and Sons, 1991. Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design Michel Mardiguian, John Wiley and Sons, 1992. Coupling of External Electromagnetic Fields to Transmission Lines A.A. Smith, Jr., John Wiley Sons, 1977. Coupling to Shielded Cables E.F. Vance, John Wiley Sons, 1978. Decoupling and Layout of Digital Printed Circuits K.R. Keenan, The Keenan Corp., 1985. Design of Shielded Enclosures: Cost-Effective Methods to Prevent EMI Louis T. Gnecco, Newnes, 2000. Digital Design for Interference Specifications, 2nd Edition, 'A Practical Handbook for EMI Control' D.L. Terrell and R. K. Keenan, The Keenan Corp., 1997. Digital Signal Integrity: Modeling and Simulation with Interconnects and Packages Brian Young, Prentice Hall, 2001. Digital Signal Transmission C. Bissell and D. Chapman, Cambridge University Press, 1992. Digital Systems Engineering William J. Dally and John W. Poulton, Cambridge University Press, 1998. Electromagnetic Compatibility J.J. Goedbloed, Prentice Hall, 1992. Electromagnetic Compatibility: Principles and Applications D. A. Weston, Marcel Dekker, 1991. Electromagnetic Compatibility Design Guide E.R. Freeman and M. Sachs, Artech House, 1982. Electromagnetic Compatibility Handbook N. Violette, D.R.J. White, and M. Violette, John Wiley and Sons, 1987. Electromagnetic Compatibility in Medicl Equipment W. Kimmel and D. Gerke, IEEE Press, 1995. ISBN 0-7803-1160-4 Electromagnetic Compatibility in Power Electronics Tihanyi, L., J.K. Eckert IEEE Press, 1995. ISBN 0-7803-0416-0 Electromagnetic Interference Reduction in Electronic Systems Jeffrey P. Mills, Prentice Hall, 1993. Electromagnetic Shielding Handbook for Wired and Wireless EMC Applications Anatoly Tsaliovich, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. Electronic Packaging of High-Speed Circuitry S. Kronsowski and A. Helland, McGraw Hill, 1997. Electronic System Design: Interference and Noise Control Techniques J.R. Barnesi, Prentice-Hall, 1987. Electrostatic Discharge and Electronic Equipment: A Practical Guide for Designing to Prevent ESD Problems Warren Boxleitner, IEEE Press, 1989. Elektromagnetische Verträglichkeit(in German) A.J. Schwab, Springer, 1996. EMC Analysis Methods and Computational Models Frederick M. Tesche, Michel Ianoz, and Torbjörn Karlsson, John Wiley Sons, 1997. EMC and the Printed Circuit Board - Design, Theory and Layout Made Simple Mark Montrose, IEEE Press, 1999. EMC: Electromagnetic Theory to Practical Design P.A. Chatterton and M.M. Houlden, John Wiley Sons, 1991. EMC for Product Designers, 2nd Ed. Tim Williams, Oxford, Boston, 1996. EMC for Systems and Installations Tim Williams Keith Armstrong, Newnes, 2000, ISBN 0 7506 4167 3 EMI/EMC Computational Modeling Handbook Bruce Archambeault, Omar Ramahi, Colin Brench , Kluwer Academic Pub, 1998. EMI/EMC: Selected Readings V. Prasad Kodali (Editor), Motohisa Kanda (Editor),IEEE Press, 1996. Engineering Electromagnetic Compatibility V. Prasad Kodali, IEEE Press, 1996. ESD in Silicon Integrated Circuits Ajith Amerasekera and Charvaka Duvvury, John Wiley and Sons, 1996. Grounding and Shielding in Facilities R. Morrison and W.H. Lewis, John Wiley and Sons, 1990. Grounding and Shielding Techniques in Instrumentation R. Morrison, Third Edition, John Wiley and Sons, 1986. The Guide to the EMC Directive 89/336/EEC (2nd Edition) C. Marshman, EPA Press, 1995. A Handbook for EMC Testing and Measurement David Morgan and Peter Peregrinus, IEE, 1995. Handbook of Electromagnetic Compatibility Reinaldo Perez, ed.,Academic Press, 1995. ISBN 0-12-550710-0 Handbook of Electromagnetic Materials P. S. Neelakanta, CRC Press, 1995. High-Frequency Characterization of Electronic Packaging L. Martens, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998. High-Frequency Measurements and Noise in Electronic Circuits Douglas C. Smith, John Wiley and Sons, 1993. High Performance Printed Circuit Boards Charles Harper, McGraw Hill, 2000. High-Speed Digital Design: A Handbook of Black Magic Howard W. Johnson and Martin Graham, Prentice-Hall, 1993. High-Speed Digital System
CENELEC Ammendments
Where can I obtain an amendment to a CENELEC standard? I am spending a small fortune having to buy the complete amended standard from BSI every time it is revised. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics --- 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: PCB Design Books
There are probably many good books out there but here are my favorites: Johnson Graham High-Speed Digital Design A Handbook of Black Magic Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-395724-1 Clayton Paul Introduction to Electromagnetic Compatibility Wiley Interscience publication ISBN 0-471-54927-4 Johnson Graham is very well written and presents ideas from a practical perspective. The book contains lots of good illustrations and examples. The reader will find a common sense approach to topics like measurements techniques, transmission lines, crosstalk, terminations, vias, power distribution, connectors, cables and clocks, all with a strong emphasis on printed circuit board design. Very easy reading. Clayton Paul's book is an excellent reference for basic EMC theory. The treatment of many topics are augmented by strong theoretical content based on the author's many years of research. This book is intended for an audience with undergraduate training in electrical engineering or those who wish to pursue advanced knowledge in EMC. -- Daniel Kwok, P.Eng. Principal EMC Engineer Intetron Consulting, Inc. Vancouver, Canada Phone (604) 432-9874 Email dk...@intetron.com Web http://www.intetron.com marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote: To all, What book would you recommend for designing printed circuit boards for EMI suppression? Why? Regards Joe Martin --- 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: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query
Ron, CISPR 24 / EN 55024:1998 is the ITE specific immunity standard. It applies to ITE, regardless of the installation location. There are no proposals in CISPR SC I at this time to create a new version of CISPR 24 for an industrial location. EN 50082-2 does NOT apply as once a product specific standard (in this case, EN 55024:1998) is published, the generic standard no longer applies to that product family. Keep in mind that the definitions of class A and B in CISPR 22 are based on the limits met by the product. B is intended for residential environments and the like, but there is a note in CISPR 22 (and EN 55022) that states that class A products should not be limited in where they can be marketed, just that a warning label should be added to them about potential interference in a residential environment. Ghery Pettit Intel Corporation -Original Message- From: Ron Pickard [mailto:rpick...@hypercom.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 9:10 AM To: nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query Hi Nick et al, Your email on these standards has poked into the recesses and brought out a question that I've been meaning to ask relating to ITE immunity environment applicability. In the scope of CISPR 24/EN55024, ITE is defined in CISPR 22, which breaks down ITE into 2 classes (A B). Unfortunately, CISPR24/EN 55024 make no such delineation. Also in the scope of CISPR 24/EN55024, it states The object of this publication is to establish requirements which will provide an adequate level of intrinsic immunity so that the equipment will operate as intended in its environment (in the scope of EN55024, a reference is made to ETSI harmonized standards for TNE taking precedence). Unfortunately, only a single test limit set is provided in these standards with no clear definition/description of the environment that the provided test limits are intended to emulate. Given this, does anyone know why only a single immunity test set is required and what environment the provided limits pertain to? Why weren't at least two environments (residential industrial) and their related test limits/conditions provided? If I was to assume (ugh), I would say the test limits found in CISPR 24/EN55024 are residential, commercial light industrial as they are essentially identical to those of EN50082-1. Will CISPR 24 and/or EN55024 be revised to provide an industrial focus? Or, is there or will there be an new industrial version of CISPR 24/EN55024 in the works? Or, does EN50082-2 simply apply in lieu of this deficiency? Is the CISPR/G committee working on such a revision? Or will they? Comments are welcome? Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com nick.williams@conforman ce.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: New EMC standards o.ieee.org 10/30/01 04:00 PM Please respond to nick.williams Copies of BS EN 61000-6-1, -6-2, -6-3 and -6-4:2001 dropped through my letter box today. I am not, and have never claimed to be, an EMC specialist. I can read and understand much of the new standards but I don't have the level of familiarity required to quickly understand how they change the landscape in detail. Would someone closer to the matter care to provide a brief primer as to the relationship between these standards and their predecessors, whether there are any significant changes and when we have to start paying close attention? If this has been posted elsewhere already, a pointer to the resource would be helpful, although this seems to be an appropriate forum for such a description to appear as well. Regards Nick. --- 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:
Re: New EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query
Hi Nick et al, Your email on these standards has poked into the recesses and brought out a question that I've been meaning to ask relating to ITE immunity environment applicability. In the scope of CISPR 24/EN55024, ITE is defined in CISPR 22, which breaks down ITE into 2 classes (A B). Unfortunately, CISPR24/EN 55024 make no such delineation. Also in the scope of CISPR 24/EN55024, it states The object of this publication is to establish requirements which will provide an adequate level of intrinsic immunity so that the equipment will operate as intended in its environment (in the scope of EN55024, a reference is made to ETSI harmonized standards for TNE taking precedence). Unfortunately, only a single test limit set is provided in these standards with no clear definition/description of the environment that the provided test limits are intended to emulate. Given this, does anyone know why only a single immunity test set is required and what environment the provided limits pertain to? Why weren't at least two environments (residential industrial) and their related test limits/conditions provided? If I was to assume (ugh), I would say the test limits found in CISPR 24/EN55024 are residential, commercial light industrial as they are essentially identical to those of EN50082-1. Will CISPR 24 and/or EN55024 be revised to provide an industrial focus? Or, is there or will there be an new industrial version of CISPR 24/EN55024 in the works? Or, does EN50082-2 simply apply in lieu of this deficiency? Is the CISPR/G committee working on such a revision? Or will they? Comments are welcome? Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com nick.williams@conforman ce.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: New EMC standards o.ieee.org 10/30/01 04:00 PM Please respond to nick.williams Copies of BS EN 61000-6-1, -6-2, -6-3 and -6-4:2001 dropped through my letter box today. I am not, and have never claimed to be, an EMC specialist. I can read and understand much of the new standards but I don't have the level of familiarity required to quickly understand how they change the landscape in detail. Would someone closer to the matter care to provide a brief primer as to the relationship between these standards and their predecessors, whether there are any significant changes and when we have to start paying close attention? If this has been posted elsewhere already, a pointer to the resource would be helpful, although this seems to be an appropriate forum for such a description to appear as well. Regards Nick. --- 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
RE: Definition for Safety Critical Component
Dear Colleagues, One year ago I put together some information regarding this subject; (I have as well the Bibliography for it). In my opinion, all the participants at this discussion, made very useful observations. Respectfully yours, Constantin Constantin Bolintineanu P.Eng. DIGITAL SECURITY CONTROLS LTD. 3301 LANGSTAFF Road, L4K 4L2 CONCORD, ONTARIO, CANADA e-mail: bolin...@dscltd.com telephone: 905 760 3000 ext 2568 Visit our web site at www.dscgrp.com -Original Message- From: lcr...@tuvam.com [mailto:lcr...@tuvam.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 12:27 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Definition for Safety Critical Component All, Does anyone have a concise definition of Safety Critical Component? I understand that the definition of this term is highly dependent on context, so let me frame it a bit I am interested in the components that may be in high-tech industrial equipment such as those used in the semiconductor manufacturing industry. And as for regulatory space I am considering the typical application of electrical design standards such as EN 60204, NFPA 79, ULK 508, EN 61010 as well as similar standards that may address the design of pneumatic, mechanical and process chemical delivery systems. I am also considering three potential populations. Operators - who interact with the tool only to get it to perform its intended function (this group can also include 'passers by' Maintenance personnel - who work with the tool to perform prescribed, well document procedures intended to keep the tool in good working order. Service personnel - who do anything necessary to get a broken tool back into operating condition. Thanks for any ideas. -Lauren Crane TUV America / TUV Product Service CRITICAL COMPONENTS_DEFEX.doc Description: MS-Word document
RE: EN 55022 limits
Stuart, It depends on the regulatory body you are dealing with and whether this is a class B product or not. The note in CISPR 22 that allows testing at alternate distances applies only to class B products. BSMI in Taiwan is adamant about wanting 10 meter data. The limits would be about 10 dB higher (1/R) at 3 meters. Keep in mind that 1/R doesn't work well between 3 and 10 meters with most products and that a product that passes at 3 meters may very well fail at 10 meters. There is a risk associated with testing at the closer distance. Ghery Pettit Intel Corporation -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata [mailto:stu...@timcoengr.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 7:07 AM To: emc Subject: EN 55022 limits The radiated limits are stated for 10 meters but our measurements are at 3 meters. Is it ok to use 3 meter data and what should the new limits be (may be 10 dB higher)? Thanks, Stuart Lopata --- 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: Definition for Safety Critical Component
From: Douglas Beckwith@MITEL on 10/31/2001 12:00 PM I agree with everthing that has been said so far. The trouble comes with what the agency deems to be critical. My experience with approvals agencies has been that their definition of Safety Critical is somewhat unscientific. I have often found that they tend to arbitrarily define a component as safety critical because they don't understand the function of circuit and what the component does in the application. The application of the compnent is best understood by the designer, not the approvals agency. I have spent many hours arguing with a well known Canadian safety agency on this question. I spent a number of years in the defence industry doing fault tree analysis and failure modes, effects and criticality analysis of components and circuits, and this to me seems like a more scientific way to approach the definition of what components ae safety critical. I tend to follow this process in definining the critical components, by looking at their failure modes and contribution to the overall flammability of the circuit, and I do not allow the safety approval agency to define them, primarily for the reason above. In fairness to the agencies, most of the time I come up with the same list as they come up with, but at least I have a technical reason behind the decision. I also only specify the critical parameters in the safety report, e.g. rating only, not manufacturer where it is not critical. Doug Beckwith geor...@lexmark.com on 10/31/2001 08:40:17 AM Please respond to geor...@lexmark.com To: emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Douglas Beckwith/Kan/Mitel) Subject: Re: Definition for Safety Critical Component There are at least two possible definitions of this term. Under the 60950 standards, these would be the components listed by an approving agency deemed to be safety critical. The other is any part, listed or not, that contributes to the overall safety of the device. For example, a metal housing will not show up on a critical parts list, but can have sharp edges. As pointed out earlier, even a caution label could be considered such a part. Based on the single fault theory on which the standards are based, the failure of a single safety critical component should NOT introduce a hazard. For example, if the insulation between primary and exposed metal parts fails in a Class I design, the fault current will go to ground via the earthing path, and blow the fuse. At no time should the exposed metal carry hazardous voltages. The failure of two safety critical components can result in a hazard. If in the example given the ground path does not exist (a second fault), the bare metal may bear hazardous voltages. George Alspaugh --- 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: The Trouble with Convention, The Final Chapter
H, interesting. Sounds to me like I have a competitive advantage with the blessing of the FCC. This appears to be a business opportunity . . . think I will open a test lab and offer approvals for less costly designs considering the apparent relaxation.:-) -- From: Ken Javor[SMTP:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 6:20 PM To: umbdenst...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; dmck...@corp.auspex.com Subject: Re: The Trouble with Convention, The Final Chapter Following your logic, I was just following orders, means that those who use an average detector on an EMI receiver or who properly use a spectrum analyzer to average as I demonstrated are at a competitive disadvantage to those who use bad math and give themselves twice the dB relaxation warranted. The proper response is to do the job right and so notify the customer so that he imposes the correct requirements even handedly. -- From: umbdenst...@sensormatic.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org, dmck...@corp.auspex.com, ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Subject: RE: The Trouble with Convention, The Final Chapter Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2001, 4:13 PM The point! We have all missed the point! :-) I do not dispute the science. The question was not what is the correct science, rather, what is expected by the FCC (or any other spectrum authority) for successful processing of the submittal. It became apparent that the science did not match the requirements. Is the requirement scientifically pure and correct? -- no. Is the requirement specified? -- yes. I noticed no one commented on the impedance of free space in the far field specified for use in the reactive near field given as another example of convention. Again is the convention correct? -- no. Specified? -- yes. Submittal convention is not about correct application of science; it's about following specified rules, for whatever the reasons. The reasons usually have to do with simplifying the submittal process while providing repeatable results, this being more important than totally correct science. Allowances have been made for the lack of perfect science. As a partial explanation of the origin of the current instruction being debated, the following is an excerpt from another response regarding duty cycle reporting for a Part 15.209 device: the FCC reviewer had explained to me that he had problems in the past with the interpretation by applicants for using averaging detectors so he preferred to mathematically arrive at the average voltage. He asked for the peak detector output in units of uV to be multiplied by the duty cycle to provide the mathematical equivalent of the average detector in his words. I have been doing this ever since for various reviewers and no submissions have come back. 2.38 mV pk detector, 0.5 duty cycle on an average detector = 1.66 mV per vbw averaging per the experiment in this thread below. 2.38 mV x 0.5 (duty cycle) = 1.19 mV per the mathematical process specified. The 2 methods are clearly not equivalent. But FCC convention requires me to submit 1.19 mV data, which is also arrived at by the 20 log() operation (hence the confusion about the sanity check earlier). I don't create the convention; I just follow the submittal instructions (requirements). It is always good to have the correct science at your fingertips, but in the end providing what is requested is what counts. For those still in the dark about 20 log () or 10 log (), my suggestion is to go straight to the source -- ask the FCC what they specify for your situation. Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic -- From: Ken Javor[SMTP:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 2:41 PM To: umbdenst...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; dmck...@corp.auspex.com Subject: The Trouble with Convention, The Final Chapter In the face of all the responses I and others gave last week showing the MATHEMATICAL RULES for calculating logarithms and average and peak power, and the rationale and math behind pulse desensitization calculations, apparently it is still not clear that power is averaged, not potential. In the interest of stopping the flow of incorrect test reports to the FCC and their apparent approval, I submit the following, A single test is worth a thousand expert opinions. For those who are confused and don't know what to believe, here is the simple test. I have run it and have pix of the spectrum analyzer display I can send to those who are interested (no attachments allowed on general mailings). Tune an rf source and your spectrum analyzer to a common frequency, say 10 MHz. Set up a baseline rf output, say -40 dBm. Use linear mode on your analyzer with a reference level of -37 dBm. Measure in
RE: Definition for Safety Critical Component
George friends As I actually said in one of my earlier messages, the metal enclosure/housing CAN be a safety critical part AND can also be a compliance critical part, so I think it SHOULD show up on the critical parts list. John Allen -Original Message- From: geor...@lexmark.com [mailto:geor...@lexmark.com] Sent: 31 October 2001 13:40 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Definition for Safety Critical Component There are at least two possible definitions of this term. Under the 60950 standards, these would be the components listed by an approving agency deemed to be safety critical. The other is any part, listed or not, that contributes to the overall safety of the device. For example, a metal housing will not show up on a critical parts list, but can have sharp edges. As pointed out earlier, even a caution label could be considered such a part. Based on the single fault theory on which the standards are based, the failure of a single safety critical component should NOT introduce a hazard. For example, if the insulation between primary and exposed metal parts fails in a Class I design, the fault current will go to ground via the earthing path, and blow the fuse. At no time should the exposed metal carry hazardous voltages. The failure of two safety critical components can result in a hazard. If in the example given the ground path does not exist (a second fault), the bare metal may bear hazardous voltages. George Alspaugh --- 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: Definition for Safety Critical Component
Hi Folks I agree strongly with Oscar's comments and previous approach - Compliance critical is a far better term. It also means that you can have EN60950 compliance critical, EMC compliance critical etc, as you like without confusion. However the widespread existing use of safety critical component among the test and certification authorities, will still result in confusion for a long time - maybe we need an education programme for everybody? How about it: UL/VDE/BSI/etc., etc? Regards John Allen Thales Defence Communications Division Bracknell, UK -Original Message- From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com] Sent: 31 October 2001 12:43 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Definition for Safety Critical Component Gregg brings up a good point. I haven't followed all of this thread and I hope I'm not repeating someone else; but, just in case: Some of the things necessary to comply with the standards have less to do with safety than they do with compliance to the standard. Or in some cases the safety implications are less obvious. At a previous place of employment, in these cases we called them Compliance Critical Components. Unfortunately this was often easier to get through the management gauntlet that a Safety Critical Component. If management could not see the safety implications (or didn't buy into the rationale) they would not buy into the term Safety Critical. When we told them that third party approval would not be obtained unless this requirement was met, they basically had to acquiesce and accept it. It was from this understanding that we coined the term Compliance Critical Component It was a cop-out but it got the job done. You just have to be careful and not overuse the term. Oscar Please note that this case in not representative of my current employer/management. These opinions are mine and are in no way to be construed to represent those of my employer. Gregg Kervill gkervill%eu-link@interlock.lexmark.com on 10/30/2001 11:25:48 PM Please respond to Gregg Kervill gkervill%eu-link@interlock.lexmark.com To: 'Doug McKean' dmckean%corp.auspex@interlock.lexmark.com, emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com cc:(bcc: Oscar Overton/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: RE: Definition for Safety Critical Component Sorry the change to HTML was necessary to format the table. Critical Components will including Paint (colour of the product), Labels and Instructions. There can be no definitive answer - hazards are in the eye of the beholder. The following is a good starting point - use the similarity rule to identify pneumatic and other products that store or control energy - electrical connectors - securing clips for hoses REMEMBER that safety devices that OPEN pneumatic pressure can create worse hazards that they prevent. G IEC or European Component Standard UL94 Flammability Standard Component Possible Operator-Service warning 94-V2 Air Filter Y Mains Capacitors Stored Charge Y CRT's Stored Charge Y Circuit Breakers Y Conductive Coatings Y Connectors Y Transformers and PSU Y UL Recognised Fans above 30 V UL Recognised low power fans 94 VW1 Fibre optic cable Eye Damage Y Fuses and Fuse holders Replacement Y Safety Switches Y Line filters Lithium Batteries Replacement - disposal instructions Y Mains connectors UL94-various ALL Plastic Parts Y Power cords and Mains Cables Y Mains voltage motors UL94-V1 Printed Circuit boards Y Relays in safety applications or switching hazardous voltages Y Products using primary power Y Switches in safety applications or switching hazardous voltages Isolate before removing cover Y Transient voltage surge suppressers Y Thermal controls Min - Maximum Y External cables UL94-VW1 Internal equipment wiring Eurolink Ltd. -One Link-199 Countries P.O. Box 310 Reedville, Virginia 22539 Phone: (804) 453-3141 Fax: (804) 453-9039 Web:www.eu-link.com -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Doug McKean Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 6:43 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Definition for Safety Critical Component Definition for Safety Critical ComponentI'll add to Richard's definition by saying a Safety Critical Component is a component necessary for the safety approval of the product. It's a component that prevents a person (end user or service person) from being exposed to a hazardous condition either during normal operation or from a fault. - Doug McKean
RE: PCB Design Books
I would also recommend Printed Circuit Board Design Techniques For EMC Compliance, 2nd Edition, by Mark Montrose. Well written, easy to follow and many good illustrations. Regards, Bill Fleury -Original Message- From: John Howard [mailto:jhow...@emcguru.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 11:13 PM To: marti...@appliedbiosystems.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: PCB Design Books Hi Joe, and All I would suggest several excellent texts which will contribute to the subject. I use these in the EMC courses which I teach on PCB design. Control and Measurement of Unintentional Electromagnetic Radiation W. Scott Bennett --- John Wiley Sons, New York, 1997 High-Speed Digital Design H. W. Johnson M. Graham --- PTR Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1993 High-Speed Digital System Design S. H. Hall, G. W. Hall, J. A. McCall --- John Wiley Sons, NY 2000 Controlling Radiated Emissions By Design. Second Edition Michel Mardiguian --- Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2001 Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems, Second Edition Henry W. Ott --- John Wiley Sons, NY, 1988 Introduction to Electromagnetic Compatibility Clayton R. Paul --- John Wiley Sons, NY, 1992 Best Regards John marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote: To all, What book would you recommend for designing printed circuit boards for EMI suppression? Why? Regards Joe Martin --- 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. --- 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: SV: PCB Design Books
Hi Joe, I would also recommend another book by Mark Montrose: Printed Circuit Board Design Techniques for EMC Compliance, 2nd Ed., ISBN 0-7803-5376-5. IEEE Press Also, Mark posts errata information for his books on his website. Good luck in your search. Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com amund@westin-emission.n o To: marti...@appliedbiosystems.com, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordomSubject: SV: PCB Design Books o.ieee.org 10/31/01 01:27 AM Please respond to amund Joe, I propose Mark I. Montrose: EMC and the Printed Circuit Board, Design Theory and Layout Made Simple, ISBN 0-7803-4703-X. Good luck! Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]Pa vegne av marti...@appliedbiosystems.com Sendt: 31. oktober 2001 00:47 Til: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Emne: PCB Design Books To all, What book would you recommend for designing printed circuit boards for EMI suppression? Why? Regards Joe Martin --- 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. --- 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: PCB Design Books
I like John's recommendations Of all the books he lists my favorites are Paul, Ott, and Johnson. I have not finished Hall, Hall, and McCall yet. Early on Mardiguian wrote about some good troubleshooting ideas and techniques that Scott Roleson had also published (I'm not sure who was first). John, I found Bennett's book a little tough to teach from and not very accessible for those that do not eat, sleep, and drink EMC. But I am willing to take another look. Some other books that I find people recommending are Keenan's Digital Design for Interference Specification 2nd Edition ISBN 0-945049-02-1 and Williams's EMC For Product Designers 2nd Edition ISB N0-75062466-3 I don't think they are as good as the first three, but they do have some good explanations of a few topics. I have found several other books on the topic that are either a 1) rehash of electromagnetic theory without pertinent applications, 2) vague in their recommendations, or worst yet 3) so empty of mathematical justification that some ideas seem to be made up. One way to judge the quality of a book and the knowledge of the author on the topic of PCBs and EMC is to carefully look at how the author talks about inductance and grounding. These topics are treated very well in Paul's and Johnson's book in particular. Other books on the topic do the usually bad job, talking about the inductance of pieces of etch or wire, or present a dogmatic approach to something like multipoint grounding or single point grounding, often without any illustration or practical examples with real numbers and math. Best Regards Lee Lee Hill Founding Partner Silent Solutions LLC EMC Consulting and Training 10 Northern Blvd., Suite 1 Northwood Executive Park Amherst, NH 03031 (603) 578-1842 x203 (V) (603) 578-1843 (F) lh...@silent-solutions.com www.silent-solutions.com In a message dated 10/31/2001 12:23:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, jhow...@emcguru.com writes: Subj: Re: PCB Design Books Date: 10/31/2001 12:23:23 AM Eastern Standard Time From:jhow...@emcguru.com (John Howard) Sender:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Reply-to:jhow...@emcguru.com (John Howard) To:marti...@appliedbiosystems.com CC:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Hi Joe, and All I would suggest several excellent texts which will contribute to the subject. I use these in the EMC courses which I teach on PCB design. Control and Measurement of Unintentional Electromagnetic Radiation W. Scott Bennett --- John Wiley Sons, New York, 1997 High-Speed Digital Design H. W. Johnson M. Graham --- PTR Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1993 High-Speed Digital System Design S. H. Hall, G. W. Hall, J. A. McCall --- John Wiley Sons, NY 2000 Controlling Radiated Emissions By Design. Second Edition Michel Mardiguian --- Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2001 Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems, Second Edition Henry W. Ott --- John Wiley Sons, NY, 1988 Introduction to Electromagnetic Compatibility Clayton R. Paul --- John Wiley Sons, NY, 1992 Best Regards John marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote: To all, What book would you recommend for designing printed circuit boards for EMI suppression? Why? Regards Joe Martin --- 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
Re: Definition for Safety Critical Component
There are at least two possible definitions of this term. Under the 60950 standards, these would be the components listed by an approving agency deemed to be safety critical. The other is any part, listed or not, that contributes to the overall safety of the device. For example, a metal housing will not show up on a critical parts list, but can have sharp edges. As pointed out earlier, even a caution label could be considered such a part. Based on the single fault theory on which the standards are based, the failure of a single safety critical component should NOT introduce a hazard. For example, if the insulation between primary and exposed metal parts fails in a Class I design, the fault current will go to ground via the earthing path, and blow the fuse. At no time should the exposed metal carry hazardous voltages. The failure of two safety critical components can result in a hazard. If in the example given the ground path does not exist (a second fault), the bare metal may bear hazardous voltages. George Alspaugh --- 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: one more thing about duty cycle...
I agree. The comment was meant to imply the requirement to comply with whatever instructions that the FCC provided, not that the TCB was free to interpret. If all instructions were followed, then, as an extension of the FCC, any testing and approval within the scope of the TCB program is valid. Best regards, Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic -- From: John Shinn[SMTP:john.sh...@sanmina.com] Reply To: john.sh...@sanmina.com Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 8:19 PM To: umbdenst...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; stu...@timcoengr.com Subject: RE: one more thing about duty cycle... Do not assume that a TCB is an extension of the FCC. Think of a TCB as a outsourced subcontractor reviewing reports. They are not allowed to interpret the Rules. If there is a question regarding interpretation, they, the TCB, will have recourse to the FCC. End of Story. John Shinn, P.E. Manager, Laboratory Operations Sanmina Homologation Services -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of umbdenst...@sensormatic.com Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 2:08 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; stu...@timcoengr.com Subject: RE: one more thing about duty cycle... Who is the final authority? It would seem to me that this would be the one who wrote the rules -- the FCC. So if you are audited and questioned about the correct handling of factors, you merely produce the FCC generated instructions and show that you comply with the instructions. End of issue. After all, a TCB is an extension of the FCC. Best regards, Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic -- From: Stuart Lopata[SMTP:stu...@timcoengr.com] Reply To: Stuart Lopata Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 10:27 AM To: emc Subject:one more thing about duty cycle... I found the reference that used 20log() for the correction factors. TCB Training Unlicensed Devices Part I Richard Fabina This was given to us by the FCC for training our TCB people and part of a TCB training course at NIST. I agree that the correction factor should be 10log(), but would like to see a confirmation from the actual certifiers. So who is the final authority? Sincerely, Stuart Lopata --- 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. --- 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: Definition for Safety Critical Component
Gregg brings up a good point. I haven't followed all of this thread and I hope I'm not repeating someone else; but, just in case: Some of the things necessary to comply with the standards have less to do with safety than they do with compliance to the standard. Or in some cases the safety implications are less obvious. At a previous place of employment, in these cases we called them Compliance Critical Components. Unfortunately this was often easier to get through the management gauntlet that a Safety Critical Component. If management could not see the safety implications (or didn't buy into the rationale) they would not buy into the term Safety Critical. When we told them that third party approval would not be obtained unless this requirement was met, they basically had to acquiesce and accept it. It was from this understanding that we coined the term Compliance Critical Component It was a cop-out but it got the job done. You just have to be careful and not overuse the term. Oscar Please note that this case in not representative of my current employer/management. These opinions are mine and are in no way to be construed to represent those of my employer. Gregg Kervill gkervill%eu-link@interlock.lexmark.com on 10/30/2001 11:25:48 PM Please respond to Gregg Kervill gkervill%eu-link@interlock.lexmark.com To: 'Doug McKean' dmckean%corp.auspex@interlock.lexmark.com, emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com cc:(bcc: Oscar Overton/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: RE: Definition for Safety Critical Component Sorry the change to HTML was necessary to format the table. Critical Components will including Paint (colour of the product), Labels and Instructions. There can be no definitive answer - hazards are in the eye of the beholder. The following is a good starting point - use the similarity rule to identify pneumatic and other products that store or control energy - electrical connectors - securing clips for hoses REMEMBER that safety devices that OPEN pneumatic pressure can create worse hazards that they prevent. G IEC or European Component Standard UL94 Flammability Standard Component Possible Operator-Service warning 94-V2 Air Filter Y Mains Capacitors Stored Charge Y CRT's Stored Charge Y Circuit Breakers Y Conductive Coatings Y Connectors Y Transformers and PSU Y UL Recognised Fans above 30 V UL Recognised low power fans 94 VW1 Fibre optic cable Eye Damage Y Fuses and Fuse holders Replacement Y Safety Switches Y Line filters Lithium Batteries Replacement - disposal instructions Y Mains connectors UL94-various ALL Plastic Parts Y Power cords and Mains Cables Y Mains voltage motors UL94-V1 Printed Circuit boards Y Relays in safety applications or switching hazardous voltages Y Products using primary power Y Switches in safety applications or switching hazardous voltages Isolate before removing cover Y Transient voltage surge suppressers Y Thermal controls Min - Maximum Y External cables UL94-VW1 Internal equipment wiring Eurolink Ltd. -One Link-199 Countries P.O. Box 310 Reedville, Virginia 22539 Phone: (804) 453-3141 Fax: (804) 453-9039 Web:www.eu-link.com -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Doug McKean Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 6:43 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Definition for Safety Critical Component Definition for Safety Critical ComponentI'll add to Richard's definition by saying a Safety Critical Component is a component necessary for the safety approval of the product. It's a component that prevents a person (end user or service person) from being exposed to a hazardous condition either during normal operation or from a fault. - 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into
RE: skinny power cords.
Effective January 1, 2002. Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupter (AFCI) protection devices will be required for all 125-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere receptacle outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms (1999 NEC). The 2002 NEC requires AFCI protection for all 125-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere outlets (not just receptacle outlets) in dwelling unit bedrooms. For more information: http://www.mikeholt.com/Newsletters/AFCIs.htm http://www.ul.com/regulators/afci/index.html http://www.ch.cutler-hammer.com/ and search for AFCI http://www.arcfault.com/default.htm http://www.geindustrial.com/industrialsystems/loadcenters/notes/moreafci ..htm http://www.geindustrial.com/industrialsystems/loadcenters/notes/afci_pap er.htm Sincerely, Mark E. Bushnell, Senior Electromagnetic Effects Engineer Raytheon, Greenville, TX http://www.raytheon.com/ais/aisproducts/ais_mstf/emeffects.html This message is printed on 100% recycled electrons. -- Yes, This the reason that the arc fault interrupter was invented. New codes require it on bedroom circuits I understand. snip --- 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: Definition for Safety Critical Component - Safety Critical Fe atures
Hi Folks This is sent separately to my reply regarding IEC 61508 etc., as it addresses an entirely different issue. The decision as to what should be classified as a safety critical component (SCC) in the context of 60950 (etc.) should take into account the overall construction and use of the equipment, and so we always devise another list - that of the safety critical features (SCF). The attached file gives examples of the features I would consider critical for a large cabinet (for example). This cabinet has to comply with EN60950, and also with the requirements of its specific intended application (which means that it has to be transported from time to time). However, for your own equipments and applications you might to delete some features and add other. Then, AFTER you have defined the SCF list, you can begin to list out the list of safety critical components - which are the components which are critical to ensuring compliance with the SCF list. When you look at the latter you may have a few surprises - for example, how many people realise the components forming the equipment enclosure are safety critical components? They most definitely are, and not just for flammability etc. - the enclosure openings and fixings can also be critical. The combination of the SCF and SCC lists then provides a valuable aid-memoire to the equipment designer at the time of product certification and then - later - when SOMEONE ELSE is detailed to review, modify or update that equipment, to avoid the latter operations taking the equipment out of compliance with the appropriate safety standard(s) and related requirements Regards John Allen Thales Defence Communications Division. -Original Message- From: lcr...@tuvam.com [mailto:lcr...@tuvam.com] Sent: 30 October 2001 17:27 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Definition for Safety Critical Component All, Does anyone have a concise definition of Safety Critical Component? I understand that the definition of this term is highly dependent on context, so let me frame it a bit I am interested in the components that may be in high-tech industrial equipment such as those used in the semiconductor manufacturing industry. And as for regulatory space I am considering the typical application of electrical design standards such as EN 60204, NFPA 79, ULK 508, EN 61010 as well as similar standards that may address the design of pneumatic, mechanical and process chemical delivery systems. I am also considering three potential populations. Operators - who interact with the tool only to get it to perform its intended function (this group can also include 'passers by' Maintenance personnel - who work with the tool to perform prescribed, well document procedures intended to keep the tool in good working order. Service personnel - who do anything necessary to get a broken tool back into operating condition. Thanks for any ideas. -Lauren Crane TUV America / TUV Product Service SAFETY FEATURES LIST.doc Description: MS-Word document
RE: Definition for Safety Critical Component
Hi Folks A few words of warning on the context of the above Most of the definitions or descriptions for safety critical component given so far are reasonably accurate and straightforward in the context of strict compliance with IEC/EN/UL EQUIPMENT safety standards such as 60335, 60950 61010 etc. HOWEVER, the term takes on an entirely different meaning in the context of RISK ASSESSMENT standards such are IEC 61508 and DEF Stan 00-56. Under these standards, a safety critical component may be a small component in an equipment which may affect the overall safety of the system, in which that equipment is incorporated - nevertheless the failure of that component may not result in a fire/shock/mechanical hazard in the the context of 60950! In other words, the equipment might fail safe but the system could fail to an overall dangerous condition. This won't affect most of you but you should be aware that you might meet the term in this context - and that may become common as more large projects are subject to formal risk assessments to 61508, DEF 00-56 or MIL STD 882. Regards John Allen Thales Defence Communications Division Bracknell UK -Original Message- From: lcr...@tuvam.com [mailto:lcr...@tuvam.com] Sent: 30 October 2001 17:27 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Definition for Safety Critical Component All, Does anyone have a concise definition of Safety Critical Component? I understand that the definition of this term is highly dependent on context, so let me frame it a bit I am interested in the components that may be in high-tech industrial equipment such as those used in the semiconductor manufacturing industry. And as for regulatory space I am considering the typical application of electrical design standards such as EN 60204, NFPA 79, ULK 508, EN 61010 as well as similar standards that may address the design of pneumatic, mechanical and process chemical delivery systems. I am also considering three potential populations. Operators - who interact with the tool only to get it to perform its intended function (this group can also include 'passers by' Maintenance personnel - who work with the tool to perform prescribed, well document procedures intended to keep the tool in good working order. Service personnel - who do anything necessary to get a broken tool back into operating condition. Thanks for any ideas. -Lauren Crane TUV America / TUV Product Service --- 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.
SV: PCB Design Books
Joe, I propose Mark I. Montrose: EMC and the Printed Circuit Board, Design Theory and Layout Made Simple, ISBN 0-7803-4703-X. Good luck! Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]Pa vegne av marti...@appliedbiosystems.com Sendt: 31. oktober 2001 00:47 Til: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Emne: PCB Design Books To all, What book would you recommend for designing printed circuit boards for EMI suppression? Why? Regards Joe Martin --- 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: EN 55022 limits
Stuart, Cispr 22:1997 clause 10.2.1 answers your question. The earlier version of Cispr 22 has similar wording. For Class B equipment you may use a 20 dB/decade extrapolation to correct measured data, to compare to the limits, at closer distances. The rules do not say that the same is allowed for Class A equipment. Going from 3 to 10 meters: You would subtract 10.5 dB from your measurements (the formula is given in clause 10.6). Michael Peters -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata To: emc Sent: 10/30/01 10:06 AM Subject: EN 55022 limits The radiated limits are stated for 10 meters but our measurements are at 3 meters. Is it ok to use 3 meter data and what should the new limits be (may be 10 dB higher)? Thanks, Stuart Lopata --- 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: SAC up to 18GHz emission measurement
I would think that the NSA would just be a linear extension (same slope) as below 1 GHz. -- From: KC CHAN [PDD] kcc...@hkpc.org To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: SAC up to 18GHz emission measurement Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2001, 6:55 PM Hi all Recently I heard that one of the test houses in UK has upgraded the SAC to 18 GHz(emission measurement). But since the NSA is only for below 1 GHz so far, what is the criteria that it would be to prove that it can be used for up to 18 GHz. Thank You KC --- 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: one more thing about duty cycle...
Do not assume that a TCB is an extension of the FCC. Think of a TCB as a outsourced subcontractor reviewing reports. They are not allowed to interpret the Rules. If there is a question regarding interpretation, they, the TCB, will have recourse to the FCC. End of Story. John Shinn, P.E. Manager, Laboratory Operations Sanmina Homologation Services -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of umbdenst...@sensormatic.com Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 2:08 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; stu...@timcoengr.com Subject: RE: one more thing about duty cycle... Who is the final authority? It would seem to me that this would be the one who wrote the rules -- the FCC. So if you are audited and questioned about the correct handling of factors, you merely produce the FCC generated instructions and show that you comply with the instructions. End of issue. After all, a TCB is an extension of the FCC. Best regards, Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic -- From: Stuart Lopata[SMTP:stu...@timcoengr.com] Reply To: Stuart Lopata Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 10:27 AM To: emc Subject: one more thing about duty cycle... I found the reference that used 20log() for the correction factors. TCB Training Unlicensed Devices Part I Richard Fabina This was given to us by the FCC for training our TCB people and part of a TCB training course at NIST. I agree that the correction factor should be 10log(), but would like to see a confirmation from the actual certifiers. So who is the final authority? Sincerely, Stuart Lopata --- 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. --- 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: EN 55022 limits
Hi, As I believe, class B (domestic appliances) are allowed for the 3 M method whereas Class A may not. Regards Patrick Wong EED HKSTC - Original Message - From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 4:23 AM Subject: Re: EN 55022 limits I read in !emc-pstc that Stuart Lopata stu...@timcoengr.com wrote (in nfbbieghilgeclalhjnaeeifcaaa.stu...@timcoengr.com) about 'EN 55022 limits', on Tue, 30 Oct 2001: The radiated limits are stated for 10 meters but our measurements are at 3 meters. Is it ok to use 3 meter data and what should the new limits be (may be 10 dB higher)? You need to look in the standard to see if that is allowed. If it is allowed, the 10 dB factor is to be used, but measurements at 10 m are definitive. -- 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: Definition for Safety Critical Component
Definition for Safety Critical ComponentI'll add to Richard's definition by saying a Safety Critical Component is a component necessary for the safety approval of the product. It's a component that prevents a person (end user or service person) from being exposed to a hazardous condition either during normal operation or from a fault. - 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: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
New EMC standards
Copies of BS EN 61000-6-1, -6-2, -6-3 and -6-4:2001 dropped through my letter box today. I am not, and have never claimed to be, an EMC specialist. I can read and understand much of the new standards but I don't have the level of familiarity required to quickly understand how they change the landscape in detail. Would someone closer to the matter care to provide a brief primer as to the relationship between these standards and their predecessors, whether there are any significant changes and when we have to start paying close attention? If this has been posted elsewhere already, a pointer to the resource would be helpful, although this seems to be an appropriate forum for such a description to appear as well. Regards Nick. --- 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.
