Re: Fwd: RTTE and E-Mark applicable?
I read in !emc-pstc that w w kro...@yahoo.com wrote (in 2002082118463 5.31998.qm...@web14912.mail.yahoo.com) about 'Fwd: RTTE and E-Mark applicable?' on Wed, 21 Aug 2002: Note: forwarded message attached. OopsQuestion is Is this correct, the scenario I proposed? No, or probably no. See my response to your original post. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: RTTE and E-Mark applicable?
I read in !emc-pstc that w w kro...@yahoo.com wrote (in 2002082118211 9.9182.qm...@web14911.mail.yahoo.com) about 'RTTE and E-Mark applicable?' on Wed, 21 Aug 2002: Hello Group, 1) Assuming I have learned corrrectly from past discussions, devices that can fall under two EU Directives: examples: Laptop's used in vehicle (E-Mark requirements) and non-vehicle (CE-Mark requirements)environments. or Radio devices used in vehicles (E-Mark CE Mark/RTTE) would need to show compliance to both EU Directives...entailing a combined test plan and placing both marks on the device(E CE Mark). That APPEARS to be so, but is clearly not in the least sensible or practicable. It would mean that **all electrical and electronic equipment that might ever be used in a vehicle, even just once** would need to have the E-Mark and be double-tested. For example, I've used in my car: - oscilloscope; - audio signal generator; - sound level meter; - audio spectrum analyser; - digital multimeter; - two laptops. Work is going on to resolve this, without causing more than minimal embarrassment to the perpetrators of the situation, before the Automotive Directive comes into effect. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Emissions quick test
Every person working in the EMC field has their own techniques when dealing will emissions issues. Mostly based on past experiences, product type, what tools they have handy or can afford plus the political atmosphere where they work. I am no exception, part of my list of tools include: EMCO 3142B antenna Fischer Custom Communications current clamp F-130B frequency range 100kHz - 1GHz. EMCO 7405 Probe set And a CASSPER ETS Model 2000 Virtual Chamber Lots of small hand built probes For me the political atmosphere is time to market and then the cost of the fix, so any tool that speeds up troubleshooting and gives more options is easy to justify. The CASSPER system is mostly billed as an ambient cancellation system, which it does fairly well up to 30dB for external outside the building noise. For internal noise in the room/building that you are using it in it has no effect. I vary seldom use this part of the system. Personally I think they are not advertising correctly. The source localization capabilities of the unit are amazing. For reasons unknown the design engineers where I work with like using 4MHz, 12MHz and 24MHz clocks to run the different processors in our systems; talk about stack-up. I think they're punishing me for transgressions in a past life. Our typical test methodology for testing the EUT is to take it to our favorite 10m chamber if it fails, it does happen once and awhile, we take it back to our lab and troubleshoot it. I can go from looking at the signal with the CASSPER with the 3142B antenna on channel 1 and current clamp on channel 2 using the source localization mode and find the radiating element, typically a cable. Then switching the current clamp, now clamped on the radiating element to channel 1 and a near field probe on channel 2 I can find the trace and driver circuit which is the source of the emissions. Total time under 10 minutes usually. Solutions about what to do about it sometimes take a bit longer, but now I know the driver, path and radiating element. I can now choose how to attack the issue to bring product into compliance; driver, path or radiating element. I once built a test bed with dithering clocks operating at 24MHz then mixed them together with one of the clock signals having a 10dB attenuator in line with it. The system used an inductively coupled loop antenna to guarantee that it would radiate. Even with the same percentage of dithering I could tell the dithering clocks apart. Like any other tool it has its quirks and limitations that have to be learned but it does the job. It is not however inexpensive. William Morse NCE -Original Message- From: lisa_cef...@mksinst.com [mailto:lisa_cef...@mksinst.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 1:35 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:Emissions quick test Hi all, Does anyone know of a down- and- dirty , inexpensive method or equipment for sniffing out emissions issues? I've used a Spectrum Analyzer in the past with a series of different probes, but that tends to be costly. Also, Is there a universal probe kit out there? Thank you in advance. Lisa Lisa A. Cefalo, CRE Manager, Reliability and Design Services MKS Instruments 6 Shattuck Road Andover, MA 01810 (978)-975-2350 X 5669 lisa_cef...@mksinst.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings
Hi Folks Just a few points to remember (and provided my memory serves me correctly!) for any one wanting UL Listing of the end-use product in which Printed Wiring Boards are used. [These will be familiar to people who haev UL/CSA experience, but may come as shock to those who do not!] a) The tests and flame ratings may be the same between the UL/CSA and IEC standards, but the associated production quality control requirements are not - UL has a full Component Recognition programme which has to be met if you want to get UL Listing of the product in which the board is fitted. These requirements are aimed at the laminate manufacturer, and relate to the number and types of laminate layers and prepregs (etc). b) Additionally, if you want to use the board in primary or hazardous voltage circuits then there is a further Recognition program with separate sets of tests of additional tests for such things as quality and accuracy of of etching, and the peel strength of the complete manufactured boards. These requirements are aimed at the end-use board manufacturer who is using materials Recognised under a) above to ensure that he uses only the correct materials and processes them in the correct manner. c) For non-PWB plastics there are separate similar UL Recognition programmes for the base moulding materials and for the complete moulded/fabricated parts. d) All UL Recognition Programmes involve both product testing and initial and repetitive inspections of the materials and fabrication plants - and can cost a lot of time and effort! Tread warily, therefore, when equating apparently similar UL/CSA requirements and IEC requirements! Regards John Allen - Original Message - From: Brian McAuliffe i...@mcac.ie To: Emc-Pstc Post emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 10:01 AM Subject: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings Can UL 94 V-1, V-2 etc ratings be regarded as equivalent, more stringent or less stringent than IEC 60707 FV-1, FV-2 etc. ? Brian McAuliffe MCA Compliance Solutions Ltd Unit 2 Lissane Business Park|Clarecastle|Co.Clare|Ireland w: www.mcac.ie e: i...@mcac.ie t: +353 (0)65 6823452 m: +353 (0)87 2352554 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: EMC Directive
I read in !emc-pstc that John Juhasz john.juh...@ge-interlogix.com wrote (in 2A1845F4CDE8D511B4400090279C703BFB6A53@BCTEXC10) about 'EMC Directive' on Wed, 21 Aug 2002: I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? Your understanding is correct. The 'dow' should be the 'docopocotss' - 'date of cessation of presumption of conformity of the superseded standard', but even Brussels jibbed at that. The relevant text is not in the Directive, because it applies generally, not just to EMC. I don't know which publicly-available document explains the meanings of 'doa', 'dop' and 'dow', because I have them only in committee papers. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: EMC Directive
John, Article 7 in the Directive discusses using national standards to meet the protection requirements of the Directive. The Directive does not go into detail on DOW's of the standards. Take a look at the Guide to the implementation of directives based on the New Approach and the Global Approach Section 4.5 discusses revisions to the standards. It states ...the relevant European standard organisation lays down the date of publication at national level of the revised harmonised standard, and the date of withdrawal of the old standard. The transitional period is normally the time period between these two dates. During this transitional period, both harmonised standards give presumption of conformity, provided that the conditions for this are met. After this transitional period, only the revised harmonised standard gives a presumption of conformity. These guidelines can be downloaded from the following site. http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/document/1999_1282_en.pdf Regards Joe Martin John Juhasz John.Juhasz@GE-interloTo: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org gix.com cc: Sent by: Subject: EMC Directive owner-emc-pstc@majordom o.ieee.org 08/21/2002 10:09 AM Please respond to John Juhasz I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee
RE: RTTE and E-Mark applicable?
To kro...@yahoo.com I think one premise of this list server is that folks participating identify themselves.somehow kro...@yahoo.com leaves a bit to be desired. Regards, Kaz Gawrzyjal Dell Computer Corp. -Original Message- From: w w [mailto:kro...@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 1:47 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Fwd: RTTE and E-Mark applicable? Note: forwarded message attached. OopsQuestion is Is this correct, the scenario I proposed? Thx again __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EMC Directive
Partially Wrong. The only reference you will have to use in Europe with the Compliance matters and standards is the published list of Harmonized Standards . Dates (DoW) printed in the standard itself may or may not be the same but are irrelevant in CE Europe. The reason for this is that standards are private documents created by private organisations. The EMC directive is law as well as the list of harmonised standards. This list is available at many sources . The list includes dates on which any standard is superseded by it' successor. The product will have to comply with the new standard regardless of any modification. If you or any client does not agree, the route 10.2 of the technical construction file may be used. A NB will review your design and measures that have been taken to comply with essential requirements. Often this will lead to the same result as using the new standard, especially if new phenomenae are to be tested in the revised standard which were not in the earlier. No escape route though, but may be used if injustice would have been done to your product. The EMC directive directly points to this list of harmonized standards, and that should justify that your opinion is right. Gert Gremmen ce-test, qualified testing -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of John Juhasz Sent: woensdag 21 augustus 2002 19:09 To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: EMC Directive I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Korea and China - Thanks
Hello everyone. I want to thank everybody who sent me information on the list and privately. Fortunately for me this issue went away fast as it came up and I was told I don't need to pursue this any further for now. It looked like I was going to have big headaches - what ever would we do without marketing :-). Thanks again for everyone's help. This is truly a rich forum with a lot of expertise. Patrick --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EMC Directive
John you are correct and your friend is not. You can find the Commission's explaination at the following site. http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/guides/emcguide.ht m Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International -Original Message- From: John Juhasz [mailto:john.juh...@ge-interlogix.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 1:09 PM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: EMC Directive I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Fwd: RTTE and E-Mark applicable?
Note: forwarded message attached. OopsQuestion is Is this correct, the scenario I proposed? Thx again __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com---BeginMessage--- Hello Group, 1) Assuming I have learned corrrectly from past discussions, devices that can fall under two EU Directives: examples: Laptop's used in vehicle (E-Mark requirements) and non-vehicle (CE-Mark requirements)environments. or Radio devices used in vehicles (E-Mark CE Mark/RTTE) would need to show compliance to both EU Directives...entailing a combined test plan and placing both marks on the device(E CE Mark). One does not supercede the other. Thank you in advance. W W __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list---End Message---
Radar Detectors, RTTE standards
Hello again, Forgot to ask, can someone refer me which EN 300/301-XXX would be applicable for radar detecors? Thanks in advance. W W __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RTTE and E-Mark applicable?
Hello Group, 1) Assuming I have learned corrrectly from past discussions, devices that can fall under two EU Directives: examples: Laptop's used in vehicle (E-Mark requirements) and non-vehicle (CE-Mark requirements)environments. or Radio devices used in vehicles (E-Mark CE Mark/RTTE) would need to show compliance to both EU Directives...entailing a combined test plan and placing both marks on the device(E CE Mark). One does not supercede the other. Thank you in advance. W W __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Emissions quick test
Lisa, If you are just interested in sniffing out emissions, Credence Technologies manufactures a probe with a built in low noise amplifier. You can use this probe without a spectrum analyzer to sniff out emissions. However, unless you connect the probe to a spectrum analyzer, you can not determine emission levels. If you are interested, take a look at their website. http://www.credencetech.com/scanem.html Regards Joe Martin lisa_cef...@mksinst.com Sent by: To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org owner-emc-pstc@majordomcc: o.ieee.org Subject: Emissions quick test 08/20/2002 01:34 PM Please respond to Lisa_Cefalo Hi all, Does anyone know of a down- and- dirty , inexpensive method or equipment for sniffing out emissions issues? I've used a Spectrum Analyzer in the past with a series of different probes, but that tends to be costly. Also, Is there a universal probe kit out there? Thank you in advance. Lisa Lisa A. Cefalo, CRE Manager, Reliability and Design Services MKS Instruments 6 Shattuck Road Andover, MA 01810 (978)-975-2350 X 5669 lisa_cef...@mksinst.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings
Hi Constantin, I would also find this information helpful for future reference. Could you fax this over to me also? Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins Sr. HW Engineering Manager EMC/ NEBS/ Safety/ Reliability CIENA Core Switching Division 10480 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino, CA. 95014 (408) 366-4806, Fax (408) 366-4867 jcoll...@ciena.com http://www.ciena.com -Original Message- From: Constantin Bolintineanu [mailto:cbolintine...@dsc.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 4:49 AM To: 'Brian McAuliffe'; Emc-Pstc Post Subject: RE: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings Dear Brian, The Canadian Standard CAN/CSA -C22.2 No.0.17 -92 offers within the Appendix D a so called Flame Tests Equivalency Table that gives the information for which you are looking for. If you want, give me your Fax number and I will fax it to your attention. Respectfully yours, Constantin Constantin Bolintineanu P.Eng. DIGITAL SECURITY CONTROLS LTD. 3301 LANGSTAFF Road, L4K 4L2 CONCORD, ONTARIO, CANADA e-mail: cbolintine...@dsc.com Telephone: 905 760 3000 ext 2568 Fax: 905 760 3020 -Original Message- From: Brian McAuliffe [mailto:i...@mcac.ie] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 5:01 AM To: Emc-Pstc Post Subject: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings Can UL 94 V-1, V-2 etc ratings be regarded as equivalent, more stringent or less stringent than IEC 60707 FV-1, FV-2 etc. ? Brian McAuliffe MCA Compliance Solutions Ltd Unit 2 Lissane Business Park|Clarecastle|Co.Clare|Ireland w: www.mcac.ie e: i...@mcac.ie t: +353 (0)65 6823452 m: +353 (0)87 2352554 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
EMC Directive
I know this has come up before, but I need to quote chapter and verse. In a conversation with an acquaintance of mine, the EMC Directive became a topic with DoW and use of superceded standards for presumption of conformity becoming a contentious area. I maintain the following understanding: A product is evaluated to standard A. At some point standard a can no longer be used for presumption of conformity (DoW) and standard B must be used. Therefore if a product is still being manufactured for sale after the DoW of standard A, then the product must be re-evaluated according to the new standard B. (An exemption being those items returned for repair and not modified/updated/upgraded). If the product was no longer produced and placed on the market after the DoW then there is no issue. My acquaintance notes that if the product was tested to standard A, as long as it has not been 'updated, modified, or changed in anyway' since the initial compliance test, it can still be manufactured and placed on the market after the DoW without re-test. I believe that my understanding is the correct one. I tried to locate it in the EMC Directive itself but I can't seem to find it. Am I incorrect? John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: FCC Part15
Thanks to all who responded to my query. The sections are: 15.107 for Conducted Emissions and 15.109 for Radiated Emissions. John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: John Juhasz Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 2:19 PM To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: FCC Part15 Hi all, I am trying to find the section in FCC Part 15 that allows for the use of alternate testing (such as EN 55022 - Part 15 refers to CISPR 22). I've read it , but I can't seem to find the appropriate section. Do any of you know which section in Part 15 has this? Thanks. John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Taiwan and China approvals?
Patrick Hi! Your subject states Taiwan and China approvals but your message specifies Korea and China approvals. I asume it's Korea and China that you ar4e interested in. TUV Rheinland of North America is very helpful in obtaining approvals in the shotest possible time. Please contact TUV Rheinland of North America Inc at any of the two addresses below. Dan Sullivan Division Manager 12 Commerce Road Newtown, CT 06470 Tel: +1 (203) 426-0888 Ext. 121 Cell: (203) 722-5908 Fax: +1 (203) 426-4009 e-mail: dsulli...@us.tuv.com www.tuv.com OR: Jonathan T. Kotrba International Certification Manager 1945 Techny Road, Unit 4 Northbrook, IL 60062 847 562-9888 x32 847 562-0688 -Fax 847 682 8539 -Mobile Number e-mail: jkot...@us.tuv.com www.tuv.com Based on my experience: Korea: RRL EMC Registration is required. This is mandatory and requires EMI/EMS testing which is almost same as CE-EMC Directive. You must have a local representative, otherwise certification cannot be done. Be prepared to translate the manual (simplified version) to Korean. China: Check to see if you fall under the Compulsary Certification. If so, safety and emc testing must be conducted on Chinese soil. A CB Test report with CB Test Certificate is accepted.. Be prepared to translate the manual (simplified version) to Chinese and your factory(ies) audited by the Chinese authorities. Note: You may find that you are not in the catalogue and get stuck by Chinese customs because they will claim you have not classified the equipment correctly. Best to get a professional look at this and even better is to get a letter from the Chinese authoritries themselves. Again, for worldwide approvals TUV Rheinland would be of most help. Refer to their worldwide approvals website http://www.int-app.tuv.com/. However, a simple telephone call to any of the above persons will lead you a long way. This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender. PETER S. MERGUERIAN Technical Director I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. 26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022 Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019 Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175 http://www.itl.co.il http://www.i-spec.com -Original Message- From: pfitzgib...@attbi.com [mailto:pfitzgib...@attbi.com] Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 4:12 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Taiwan and China approvals? Greetings everybody! My boss just asked me what the procedure and timeframe for getting into Korea and China was. (Imagine my distress ;-). For optical networking type products (no TNV ports) where all of our Safety, NEBS and EU (386, 019, 753, etc...) tesing is complete, does anyone know what to submit (and to whom) and how long this might take for China or Korea? more background - Luckily our CB report is from a Korea certified lab, but our emissions and immunity were from non-global (but EU CAB NRTL status) labs that don't have Korean authorization. I've also done some looking into the new China CCC procedure. We're not specifically addressed in the catalogue. Does this mean we can just import our system? Any help on any of these points would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance, Patrick Fitzgibbon --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click
RE: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings
Brian, First part of UL3101-1, The Standard for Electrical Equipment for Laboratory Use, has the Deviations Section. Paragraph F.4.3. states: Flame ratings of UL94V-0, V-1, V-2 are equivalent to the designations of IEC 707 FV0, FV1, and FV2, respectively. Regards, This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender. PETER S. MERGUERIAN Technical Director I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. 26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022 Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019 Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175 http://www.itl.co.il http://www.i-spec.com -Original Message- From: Brian McAuliffe [mailto:i...@mcac.ie] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 11:01 AM To: Emc-Pstc Post Subject: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings Can UL 94 V-1, V-2 etc ratings be regarded as equivalent, more stringent or less stringent than IEC 60707 FV-1, FV-2 etc. ? Brian McAuliffe MCA Compliance Solutions Ltd Unit 2 Lissane Business Park|Clarecastle|Co.Clare|Ireland w: www.mcac.ie e: i...@mcac.ie t: +353 (0)65 6823452 m: +353 (0)87 2352554 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Emissions quick test
Lisa, At minimum you really should have a spectrum analyzer, but that's my opinion. For a good 'homemade' probe try Doug Smith's web site. http://emcesd.com/ Scroll down the page. Good luck. John A. Juhasz GE Interlogix Fiber Options Div. Bohemia, NY -Original Message- From: lisa_cef...@mksinst.com [mailto:lisa_cef...@mksinst.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 4:35 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Emissions quick test Hi all, Does anyone know of a down- and- dirty , inexpensive method or equipment for sniffing out emissions issues? I've used a Spectrum Analyzer in the past with a series of different probes, but that tends to be costly. Also, Is there a universal probe kit out there? Thank you in advance. Lisa Lisa A. Cefalo, CRE Manager, Reliability and Design Services MKS Instruments 6 Shattuck Road Andover, MA 01810 (978)-975-2350 X 5669 lisa_cef...@mksinst.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings
Dear Brian, The Canadian Standard CAN/CSA -C22.2 No.0.17 -92 offers within the Appendix D a so called Flame Tests Equivalency Table that gives the information for which you are looking for. If you want, give me your Fax number and I will fax it to your attention. Respectfully yours, Constantin Constantin Bolintineanu P.Eng. DIGITAL SECURITY CONTROLS LTD. 3301 LANGSTAFF Road, L4K 4L2 CONCORD, ONTARIO, CANADA e-mail: cbolintine...@dsc.com Telephone: 905 760 3000 ext 2568 Fax: 905 760 3020 -Original Message- From: Brian McAuliffe [mailto:i...@mcac.ie] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 5:01 AM To: Emc-Pstc Post Subject: IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings Can UL 94 V-1, V-2 etc ratings be regarded as equivalent, more stringent or less stringent than IEC 60707 FV-1, FV-2 etc. ? Brian McAuliffe MCA Compliance Solutions Ltd Unit 2 Lissane Business Park|Clarecastle|Co.Clare|Ireland w: www.mcac.ie e: i...@mcac.ie t: +353 (0)65 6823452 m: +353 (0)87 2352554 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
IEC 60707 v UL 94 flammability ratings
Can UL 94 V-1, V-2 etc ratings be regarded as equivalent, more stringent or less stringent than IEC 60707 FV-1, FV-2 etc. ? Brian McAuliffe MCA Compliance Solutions Ltd Unit 2 Lissane Business Park|Clarecastle|Co.Clare|Ireland w: www.mcac.ie e: i...@mcac.ie t: +353 (0)65 6823452 m: +353 (0)87 2352554 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Question on highest frequency used
But do note that the Part 15 revision of July 2002 does add radar detectors as an exception to the 960 MHz limit. Cortland --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Emissions quick test
Try Laplace www.laplace.co.uk Cheers Alan E Hutley EMC Compliance Journal www.compliance-club.com - Original Message - From: lisa_cef...@mksinst.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 9:34 PM Subject: Emissions quick test Hi all, Does anyone know of a down- and- dirty , inexpensive method or equipment for sniffing out emissions issues? I've used a Spectrum Analyzer in the past with a series of different probes, but that tends to be costly. Also, Is there a universal probe kit out there? Thank you in advance. Lisa Lisa A. Cefalo, CRE Manager, Reliability and Design Services MKS Instruments 6 Shattuck Road Andover, MA 01810 (978)-975-2350 X 5669 lisa_cef...@mksinst.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Question on highest frequency used
Some things are not so obivious, take the case of that of VSAT (very small aperture satellite terminals ) receivers and that of radar detectors. That's when an unintentional source should be mixed with the LO and re-radiate out as a spurious response. Radar detectors typically operate in frequencies well above 960 MHz and are, therefore, exempt from current Part 15 emissions limits. However, the new use of swept frequency oscillators by manufacturers of radar detectors has reportedly led to the increasing reports of interference with VSATs. :-) Tim Foo Ken Javor ken.javor@emccomplian To: Grasso, Charles charles.gra...@echostar.com, ce.com 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: (bcc: Wan Juang Foo/ece/staff/npnet) owner-emc-pstc@majordo Subject: Re: Question on highest frequency used mo.ieee.org 08/21/02 07:18 AM Please respond to Ken Javor Putting on my Master of the Obvious hat, I would say that I would expect that a 12 GHz receiver would generate some frequencies in excess of the 50 MHz DSP, for a local oscillator, say. But you shouldn't have to test to multiples of the LO frequency, since it is a clean cw signal. Testing up to the highest LO frequency ought to be sufficient. So I would say you should test up to 5X the clock frequency, and then also at frequencies that the LO can be tuned to. In fact, I believe there are special requirements to make sure LOs don't radiate out of receiver-connected antennas, right? on 8/20/02 11:23 AM, Grasso, Charles at charles.gra...@echostar.com wrote: Hi - and just when I thought I had it all figured out.. I have a question on the FCC requirement to test a product to the highest frequency used. Say a company has an RF receiver that has a DSP processor in it running at 50MHz. Lets also say that said receiver is pointed at a transmitter that has a 12Ghz signal. Should I test the receiver to a) 5X the 50MHz or b) 5x the 12GHz transmitter signal? We have an FCC interpretation - bet you can't guess what it is.. Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Technologies Corporation phone: 303.706.5467 FAX: 303.799.6222 Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Technologies Corporation phone: 303.706.5467 FAX: 303.799.6222 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list -- Ken Javor EMC Compliance Huntsville, Alabama 256/650-5261 --- 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
Re: Question on highest frequency used
Charles: Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't Part 15.101(b) which reads: (b) Only those receivers that operate (tune) within the frequency range of 30-960 MHz and CB receivers are subject to the authorizations shown in paragraph (a) of this section. However, receivers indicated as being subject to Declaration of Conformity that are contained within a transceiver, the transmitter portion of which is subject to certification, shall be authorized under the verification procedure. Receivers operating above 960 MHz or below 30 MHz, except for CB receivers, are exempt from complying with the technical provisions of this part but are subject to ยง15.5. eliminate the RF part of your receiver from testing, since you are above 960 MHz? Regards, Jacob Z. Schanker, P.E. 65 Crandon Way Rochester, NY 14618 Phone: 585 442 3909 Fax: 585 442 2182 j.schan...@ieee.org - Original Message - From: Grasso, Charles charles.gra...@echostar.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 12:23 PM Subject: Question on highest frequency used | | Hi - and just when I thought I had it all | figured out.. | | I have a question on the FCC requirement to test | a product to the highest frequency used. | | Say a company has an RF receiver that has a | DSP processor in it running at 50MHz. Lets | also say that said receiver is pointed at a | transmitter that has a 12Ghz signal. | | Should I test the receiver to | a) 5X the 50MHz or | b) 5x the 12GHz transmitter signal? | | We have an FCC interpretation - bet you | can't guess what it is.. | | Charles Grasso | Senior Compliance Engineer | Echostar Technologies Corporation | phone: 303.706.5467 | FAX: 303.799.6222 | | Charles Grasso | Senior Compliance Engineer | Echostar Technologies Corporation | phone: 303.706.5467 | FAX: 303.799.6222 | | --- | 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: | Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com | Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com | | For policy questions, send mail to: | Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org | Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org | | All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: | http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ | Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list | | --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Emissions quick test
Lisa, Com Power sells complete pre-compliance system with an inexpensive spectrum analyzer, pre-amplifier, and a set of three probes. Regards, Ravinder PCB Development and Design Department IBM Corporation Email: ajm...@us.ibm.com *** Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. Mark Twain lisa_cef...@mksinst.co m To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent by: cc: owner-emc-pstc@majordoSubject: Emissions quick test mo.ieee.org 08/20/2002 01:34 PM Please respond to Lisa_Cefalo Hi all, Does anyone know of a down- and- dirty , inexpensive method or equipment for sniffing out emissions issues? I've used a Spectrum Analyzer in the past with a series of different probes, but that tends to be costly. Also, Is there a universal probe kit out there? Thank you in advance. Lisa Lisa A. Cefalo, CRE Manager, Reliability and Design Services MKS Instruments 6 Shattuck Road Andover, MA 01810 (978)-975-2350 X 5669 lisa_cef...@mksinst.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Emissions quick test
I have used a little portable transistor radio for system sniffing of a system with low level freqs and with already knowing the problem freqs. Regards, 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Emissions quick test
-Original Message- From: lisa_cef...@mksinst.com [mailto:lisa_cef...@mksinst.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 1:35 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Emissions quick test Hi all, Does anyone know of a down- and- dirty , inexpensive method or equipment for sniffing out emissions issues? I've used a Spectrum Analyzer in the past with a series of different probes, but that tends to be costly. Also, Is there a universal probe kit out there? Thank you in advance. Lisa Lisa A. Cefalo, CRE Manager, Reliability and Design Services MKS Instruments 6 Shattuck Road Andover, MA 01810 (978)-975-2350 X 5669 lisa_cef...@mksinst.com Lisa: You can make a fairly universal probe by winding three turns of stiff wire around your little finger. Remove finger and solder the coil to the end of female/female BNC connector. Connect probe to a spectrum analyzer and start probing. You can make another cheap probe by stripping about an inch of the outer conductor off the end of a piece of RG-223 coax. The dielectric will support the small stub of center conductor, and you get a nice, low sensitivity probe that you can drag over ribbon cable wires or board traces. A spectrum analyzer is about the minimum ticket needed for this ride. You could use a cheap AM radio, or a scanner, or a communications receiver, but interpreting the results is time consuming. You could use an analog oscilloscope for some probing, but you could get a low-end spectrum analyzer for the cost of a decent oscilloscope. You can buy an old spectrum analyzer, typically something like an HP-141/8552/8553 for well under $1000; just watch eBay for a couple of weeks. If you are extremely determined to avoid buying a spectrum analyzer, you might be interested in a classic Ham Radio project, called the Poor Man's Spectrum Analyzer. This project allowed you to build a spectrum analyzer using old television tuners, and is a testament to what can be accomplished with unlimited labor applied to analog junk. Regards, Ed Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Emissions quick test
EMCO/ETS makes a probe kit with a preamp for under $1000. Several probes, E- and H-field. Electro-metrics makes the same kind of kit, but without the pre-amp, per my recollection. I think Com-power might also do this kind of thing, and be the low price vendor as well. If the EUT is noisy and you are in very close, you might be able to see something on an oscilloscope, but clearly it will a low-passed time domain waveform which you cannot correlate well with measured OATS data. There are pre-compliance analyzers on the market for well under $5 K these days. on 8/20/02 3:34 PM, lisa_cef...@mksinst.com at lisa_cef...@mksinst.com wrote: Hi all, Does anyone know of a down- and- dirty , inexpensive method or equipment for sniffing out emissions issues? I've used a Spectrum Analyzer in the past with a series of different probes, but that tends to be costly. Also, Is there a universal probe kit out there? Thank you in advance. Lisa Lisa A. Cefalo, CRE Manager, Reliability and Design Services MKS Instruments 6 Shattuck Road Andover, MA 01810 (978)-975-2350 X 5669 lisa_cef...@mksinst.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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list -- Ken Javor EMC Compliance Huntsville, Alabama 256/650-5261 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Question on highest frequency used
Putting on my Master of the Obvious hat, I would say that I would expect that a 12 GHz receiver would generate some frequencies in excess of the 50 MHz DSP, for a local oscillator, say. But you shouldn't have to test to multiples of the LO frequency, since it is a clean cw signal. Testing up to the highest LO frequency ought to be sufficient. So I would say you should test up to 5X the clock frequency, and then also at frequencies that the LO can be tuned to. In fact, I believe there are special requirements to make sure LOs don't radiate out of receiver-connected antennas, right? on 8/20/02 11:23 AM, Grasso, Charles at charles.gra...@echostar.com wrote: Hi - and just when I thought I had it all figured out.. I have a question on the FCC requirement to test a product to the highest frequency used. Say a company has an RF receiver that has a DSP processor in it running at 50MHz. Lets also say that said receiver is pointed at a transmitter that has a 12Ghz signal. Should I test the receiver to a) 5X the 50MHz or b) 5x the 12GHz transmitter signal? We have an FCC interpretation - bet you can't guess what it is.. Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Technologies Corporation phone: 303.706.5467 FAX: 303.799.6222 Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Technologies Corporation phone: 303.706.5467 FAX: 303.799.6222 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list -- Ken Javor EMC Compliance Huntsville, Alabama 256/650-5261 --- 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Radiated Emissions setup
Worse arrangement obtainable within the prescribed set-up. e. g. peripherals 10 cm apart, equipment aligned with the table edge, and excess cable bundled above the ground plane et al as described in C63.4 and CISPR 22 (or 16?). There was a time when it was just plain worse arrangement. In that case you had an X factorial number of combinations to play with. CPU, mouse, printer, modem: cpu, printer, mouse, modem: cpu printer, modem mouse, et all. I'll be darned if I remember what all we had attached but it had 10 peripherals and that was a grand total of over 3 million combinations if one followed the directions literally. There also was the consultant who when called to the FCC test site to explain a test failure found that the FEDS had taken the keyboard cables and wrapped it around the monitor. An operator would have had to stare through the cables to read the screen.Heavy sigh! (Could just be urban legend but it matches a pattern in the beginning of commercial EMC measurements of 1982. Good people but a little overzealous at times. Gary -Original Message- From: michael.sundst...@nokia.com [mailto:michael.sundst...@nokia.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 12:56 PM To: robert.s...@flextronics.com; alex.mcn...@ingenicofortronic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Radiated Emissions setup The cable layout is required to be the 'worst case' attainable, isn't it? Michael Sundstrom NOKIA TCC Dallas / EMC ofc: (972) 374-1462 cell: (817) 917-5021 amateur call: KB5UKT -Original Message- From: ext robert.s...@flextronics.com [mailto:robert.s...@flextronics.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 1:05 PM To: alex.mcn...@ingenicofortronic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Radiated Emissions setup Neil, I would like to see the pictures of your audit board. Without seeing the pictures I have the following comments. 1. I think this is a very good idea from a repeatability standpoint and I would like to consider adopting it. 2. It may be more trouble than simply draping the cables over the table edge, but less than bundling them properly. 3. Some of our customers bring their products in already attached to such a board with their cables all fastened securely in configurations accepted by their customers. This also lessens the setup time and gets them in and out quicker. 4. I believe that Note 1 of Figure 10 in EN 55022 refers to cables which connect one piece of gear on the table to another. If the cables were cut, it would require splicing or installing connectors. If a shorter cable were used, it may not represent actual use. I feel that generally customers having a two meter cable which is longer than needed would either drape it to the floor (which is not normally a metal ground plane), or bundle it neatly to keep it out of the way. On the other hand, since we as testers never know how equipment will be configured, the demand for repeatability requires that a system such as that described in Figure 10 be used. Robert Seay -Original Message- From: Alex McNeil [mailto:alex.mcn...@ingenicofortronic.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 12:00 PM To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' Subject:Radiated Emissions setup Hi Forum, As we all know test setups are absolutely critical to EMC results. I have the good fortune of having a good pre-compliance radiated emissions site (3m OATS, Fully or Semi Anechoic Chamber). From using this site I see all sorts of funnies but still the most annoying is how much you can change the emission results just by changing cable positions. I carry out regular EMC audits and could never quite get the same results as 6 months previous, when that particular product was last tested (I keep the master product and was still getting different results due to setup). I now use an Audit board where I bundle the cables (30-40cm) in a particular figure of 8 fashion via fixed wooden pegs. Thru' time I have convinced myself that this not only gives me worst case emissions but also that much sought after REPEATABILITY! I believe the setup is as per EN55022. I have a photograph* of this Audit board to allow this forum to comment on the good and the bad points of using such a system. Also, is there any reason I cannot take this Audit board to a Test House for Product Compliance testing and at the same time get correlation between a Compliance site and my own site? Photograph details (EUT with 3 X Serial Ports, PSTN and DC SELV power connection) 1. The 1M, 2M and 3M indicate the Horizontal bundling of cables from RS232 ports which would go to a tabletop EUT peripheral (or leave open circuit). The 3 lengths are connected to similar ports. This covers the different lengths issues. 2. The P is the inline power supply O/P cable going to the EUT. This is bundled vertically as it represents the power supply sitting on a customers floor. 3. The
