RE: Acousic Noise from ITE
Rich, There us to be a series of specifications for noise equipment in office environments - not so much what type of equipment but more on the order of a quiet office environment equipment had to be 50 or 55 dBA, I forget which. Lots of nasty things to go along with all of that. Printers had impulse noise to contend with, etc. I don't know if they have, but the trend was to go from sound pressure measurements to sound power measurements. On the one had it made it easier for the manufacturer to make repeatable and accurate measurements, and you didn't need to have a sound anechoic chamber and make parallel piped measurements at various spots around the equipment. Been a while since I made those measurements, but Bruel and Kjaer had lost of papers on the issue. Gary -Original Message- From: Warren Birmingham [mailto:war...@comfortjets.com] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 1:26 PM To: richwo...@tycoint.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Acousic Noise from ITE I went to the Global Engineering Website and http://www.global.ihs.com and found over 300 standards related to the keyword acoustic You can narrow the search. Warren Birmingham Epsilon-Mu Consultants On Monday, Sep 16, 2002, at 08:43 US/Pacific, richwo...@tycoint.com wrote: Are there any EU or national (e.g. GS) normative requirements to comply with any of the following standards or any other acoustic standards for ITE? EN27779 Acoustic measurement of airborn noise emitted by computer and business equipment. EN29295 Acoustic measurement of high frequency noise emitted by computer and business equipment. ISO 9296 Acoustics declared noise emission values of emitted by computer and business equipment. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- 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
Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation
I was not arguing that PEDS should be allowed to operate throughout ascent and descent. I was responding to Woodgate's comment that if PEDS are causing a problem, there must be serious immunity issues with aircraft avionics. I know in detail what the immunity requirements are, and I know that PEDS do not emit anywhere near the immunity levels. PEDS interfere with radio reception. Woodgate quite correctly pointed out that unless the rfi occurred at the radio tuned frequency, it can be considered an antenna port immunity concern, because immunity requirements can and are levied to protect radio receiver out-of-band sensitivity. -- From: Warren Birmingham war...@comfortjets.com To: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Mon, Sep 16, 2002, 4:01 PM Ken, you may be right but it is like trying to convince the FAA that there is no harm in using car gas in airplanes. There are just too many ways for uncontrolled fuel to become contaminated from unknown sources. With respect to the EMC and immunity issues, it is not the technical issues that are of concern, but rather the liability and publicity of even being accused of causing interference, regardless of how it got there. The potential for it exists, and lives are potentially at stake. Who would argue with this? I am also an aviation consultant as well as an engineering one. Most devices are allowed to be used in flight. Cell Phones and 2-way pagers cause too much GROUND interference when used from the air and THAT is the primary reason they are not permitted. They use more resources than intended when used from the air. By the way, I was consulting to a company that did not even test ANY of their equipment to FCC Part 15, and I discovered that they were out of specification for Class A by several db. We had our attorney negotiate with the FCC, who wanted to know if ANY of the over-limit frequencies fell into the aviation bands. They did not, so we had to fix the problems with no other action required other than submission of new compliant verification reports. There is concern for this even originating outside of the aircraft. Warren Birmingham Epsilon-Mu Consultants (510) 793-4806 email: war...@epsilon-mu.com website: http://www.epsilon-mu.com On Monday, Sep 16, 2002, at 09:56 US/Pacific, Ken Javor wrote: Most of what you say below meshes with my experience and does not contradict my basic premise, that PEDs can only interfere through aircraft antennas. I am curious what the resolution of the Boeing installation was. Equipment undergoing EMI qualification must be tested with a representative flight harness. Did your company test with screened cables and then try to force Boeing to use the same? Bad form. Did Boeing try to buy an off-the-shelf system qualified with screened cables and then install the system using unscreened cables? Equally bad form. This must be worked out before design and testing for procured equipment, and if the equipment is off-the-shelf, then the qualification configuration harness must be installed, or the equipment must be requalified using the planned/existing configuration wiring. Another question of interest: Was the system you provided Boeing flight critical? There is one place that what you say could be interpreted to imply that PED emissions get into aircraft wiring: It has been found through surveys carried out on aircraft by ERA and QinetiQ that the interference appears to get into these systems from certain locations within the aircraft where cable run reside under certain seats. Consider the physical parameters. The PED is small and low power and while it may not meet RTCA/DO-160, it does not blanket the entire aircraft with emissions. The intensity falls off rapidly with separation from the source. This is clearly a case where the emitting device is electrically small over almost the entire communications band. Assume the emitted radiation intensity were 100 mV/m, 5-6 orders of magnitude above CISPR limits. The transfer function of coupled current to a cable above ground is 1.5 mA per Volt/meter. I can supply that derivation if you like, but it is inherent in both RTCA/DO-160D and MIL-STD-461D/E. It is different in IEC 61000-4-6, but that is because the ground plane is far away or nonexistent in buildings and the cable-under-test is a more efficient pick-up device in that environment. Anyway, the coupled current would be 150 uA, and that assumes at least one half wavelength of the cable was immersed in a plane wave with precisely the right orientation relative to the wire in order to get that. If the victim circuit contains information represented by low potentials, such as below 0.1 Volt, then I would expect the cable carrying that signal to be shielded, as in a twisted shielded pair. 150 uA riding on a shield
Dwell times for ETS 300 019-2-3 May 1994 table B.6.3 class 3.1E
Have the chart in front of me and still making no sense out of it. Table 3 Test specification T 3.1E calls out some test points and a dwell time along with the reference to IEC 68-2-1, -2, -14 and -56. Under the method column it then says that the method in Annex b can be used. In Annex B there is a Table B.1 that has numerous set points that don't match up well, in my reading, with the first table. Heavy Sigh! Still I can build the profile if I just knew the dwell times at each spot. Can anybody help me out - I don't really want to have to by multiple IEC standards, I'd rather be able to buy food for the week. Final question. They give rate changes when temperature is held constant and when humidity is held constant, but in some instances they change both simultaneously. Usually the change in temperature takes longer than the change in humidity - but what's a poor kid from Spokane suppose to do? First ramp the humidity holding temp the same, and then change the temp while holding the new humidity level constant? Thanks Gary --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
Ken, you may be right but it is like trying to convince the FAA that there is no harm in using car gas in airplanes. There are just too many ways for uncontrolled fuel to become contaminated from unknown sources. With respect to the EMC and immunity issues, it is not the technical issues that are of concern, but rather the liability and publicity of even being accused of causing interference, regardless of how it got there. The potential for it exists, and lives are potentially at stake. Who would argue with this? I am also an aviation consultant as well as an engineering one. Most devices are allowed to be used in flight. Cell Phones and 2-way pagers cause too much GROUND interference when used from the air and THAT is the primary reason they are not permitted. They use more resources than intended when used from the air. By the way, I was consulting to a company that did not even test ANY of their equipment to FCC Part 15, and I discovered that they were out of specification for Class A by several db. We had our attorney negotiate with the FCC, who wanted to know if ANY of the over-limit frequencies fell into the aviation bands. They did not, so we had to fix the problems with no other action required other than submission of new compliant verification reports. There is concern for this even originating outside of the aircraft. Warren Birmingham Epsilon-Mu Consultants (510) 793-4806 email: war...@epsilon-mu.com website: http://www.epsilon-mu.com On Monday, Sep 16, 2002, at 09:56 US/Pacific, Ken Javor wrote: Most of what you say below meshes with my experience and does not contradict my basic premise, that PEDs can only interfere through aircraft antennas. I am curious what the resolution of the Boeing installation was. Equipment undergoing EMI qualification must be tested with a representative flight harness. Did your company test with screened cables and then try to force Boeing to use the same? Bad form. Did Boeing try to buy an off-the-shelf system qualified with screened cables and then install the system using unscreened cables? Equally bad form. This must be worked out before design and testing for procured equipment, and if the equipment is off-the-shelf, then the qualification configuration harness must be installed, or the equipment must be requalified using the planned/existing configuration wiring. Another question of interest: Was the system you provided Boeing flight critical? There is one place that what you say could be interpreted to imply that PED emissions get into aircraft wiring: It has been found through surveys carried out on aircraft by ERA and QinetiQ that the interference appears to get into these systems from certain locations within the aircraft where cable run reside under certain seats. Consider the physical parameters. The PED is small and low power and while it may not meet RTCA/DO-160, it does not blanket the entire aircraft with emissions. The intensity falls off rapidly with separation from the source. This is clearly a case where the emitting device is electrically small over almost the entire communications band. Assume the emitted radiation intensity were 100 mV/m, 5-6 orders of magnitude above CISPR limits. The transfer function of coupled current to a cable above ground is 1.5 mA per Volt/meter. I can supply that derivation if you like, but it is inherent in both RTCA/DO-160D and MIL-STD-461D/E. It is different in IEC 61000-4-6, but that is because the ground plane is far away or nonexistent in buildings and the cable-under-test is a more efficient pick-up device in that environment. Anyway, the coupled current would be 150 uA, and that assumes at least one half wavelength of the cable was immersed in a plane wave with precisely the right orientation relative to the wire in order to get that. If the victim circuit contains information represented by low potentials, such as below 0.1 Volt, then I would expect the cable carrying that signal to be shielded, as in a twisted shielded pair. 150 uA riding on a shield should not cause any problems to any flight critical signal, even with a pigtailed shield termination. For instance, if the pigtail termination yielded a transfer impedance as high as 50 Ohms at some frequency, the resultant common mode coupling to the interior pair would still only be 7.5 mV. Again I contend that Boeing and Airbus would not route a flight critical signal with a threshold of susceptibility that low. And if the circuit is totally unshielded, that implies it is a discrete or other relatively high level signal, where information is carried in such a away that it takes Volts of induced potential to cause an upset. Coupling to an unshielded wire above ground occurs at a transfer function of 75 mV per Volt/meter. [ Cf. IEC 61000-4-6, coupling efficiency of 1 Volt per Volt/meter, open circuit
Re: Flexible cable reliability and testing
UL has 2 standards which pertain to power cables. UL 817 and UL 1072 Warren Birmingham Epsilon-Mu Consultants On Monday, Sep 16, 2002, at 09:32 US/Pacific, rbus...@es.com wrote: I have been tasked with finding a standard and test procedure to validate the reliability of flexible cables over time. I have found a standard, EIA TP-41C (EIS-364-41C), but it focuses primarily on the electrical connectors rather than the cable. Another standard Mil-C-13777G is used by some of the wire and cable manufacturers, but searching the web I found a US Government site that indicated that this standard was inactive for new design. I can find no source for this standard. My application is for signal cables, but I assume other power cables would have some type of standard which they are tested to. Are there other standards applicable to cables in a flex environment? Any help would be appreciated. Rick Busche Evans Sutherland SLC, Utah rbus...@es.com (801) 588-7185 --- 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: Acousic Noise from ITE
I went to the Global Engineering Website and http://www.global.ihs.com and found over 300 standards related to the keyword acoustic You can narrow the search. Warren Birmingham Epsilon-Mu Consultants On Monday, Sep 16, 2002, at 08:43 US/Pacific, richwo...@tycoint.com wrote: Are there any EU or national (e.g. GS) normative requirements to comply with any of the following standards or any other acoustic standards for ITE? EN27779 Acoustic measurement of airborn noise emitted by computer and business equipment. EN29295 Acoustic measurement of high frequency noise emitted by computer and business equipment. ISO 9296 Acoustics declared noise emission values of emitted by computer and business equipment. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
Bob, A good idea, but we are dealing with some older technology in many cases. The VOR (VHF Omni-Range) receivers are based on a pair of pulses from the navigation station. The station puts out a rotating pulse with a sync pulse when the rotating pulse is at 0 degrees (magnetic). Your receiver sees the sync pulse and then times the delay to the second one. 30 RPS for the rotation rate. If an impulsive emission occurs with enough strength your receiver responds to it and you can lose track of what radial you are on, giving a spurious indication on the CDI (course deviation indicator). No error checking in this analog system. Updating it would not be practical given the number of aircraft equipped to use it and the cost of replacing the equipment. The airlines might absorb the cost (by charging higher fares), but your average GA bugsmasher pilot just isn't going to be too hot on spending several thousand dollars on new equipment. It's easier to control PEDs on the plane. BTW, I'm one of those GA bugsmasher pilots. I'm not too hot on my club having to spend the money, either. We'd have to charge members more for the use of the planes. Yuck. Welcome aboard and please keep your laptop computer stowed and turned off for the duration of the flight. Besides, there are more interesting things to look at out the windows than on that screen grin. Ghery Pettit Intel Boring holes in the sky and loving every minute of it! -Original Message- From: Robert Johnson [mailto:john...@itesafety.com] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 11:58 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: New EU regulations - civil aviation One thing that surprises me about avionics is the reports of spurious and misleading readings from instruments due to interference. It seems in these days of error checking and verification that we should be able to make instruments which are either confident of the data received or capable of reporting the reason they cannot display. Bob Johnson ITE Safety --- 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: Add-On Printed Circuit
You don't say to which standard UL has investigated the Product A device or whether is is a listed product or a Recognized Component. The listed product A must conform to the was it was built by the manufacturer. Changes/options to it must be shown in the Followup Services Books, otherwise the product is not covered and UL may force the shipments to be held for conformance or the listing mark removed. RCs are evaluated for use in the end product according to UL's conditions. Warren Birmingham Epsilon-Mu Consultants On Monday, Sep 16, 2002, at 08:25 US/Pacific, John Juhasz wrote: Colleagues, I am seeking your input. Manufacturer A sells a complete, fully approved (CE, FCC Part 15, UL, etc) product (product A) Manufacturer B makes a device (product B) that will plug into a connector in product A (actually inside product A's enclosure - like a 'daughter' module) as a value added feature. There are no external interfaces on product B, and it is not accessible unless product A is totally dismantled. Product B is intended/sold only for use with product A, and is otherwise useless. The two products are sold independent of each other by the manufacturers to 'dealer/installers'. When the dealer/installer sells/installs product A, he can offer product B as an option. What are the regulatory requirements/manufacturer's responsibilities for product B? (est. 2-3 inches square, UL 94V-0 printed circuit board, tens of mA 12V DC, no external interfaces. On-board clock). Thoughts? 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
Re: Add-On Printed Circuit
I read in !emc-pstc that John Juhasz john.juh...@ge-interlogix.com wrote (in 2a1845f4cde8d511b4400090279c703bfb6...@bctexc10.ilx.indsys.ge .com) about 'Add-On Printed Circuit' on Mon, 16 Sep 2002: What are the regulatory requirements/manufacturer's responsibilities for product B? (est. 2-3 inches square, UL 94V-0 printed circuit board, tens of mA 12V DC, no external interfaces. On-board clock). For Europe, the complete product, A+B, must meet the applicable safety and EMC requirements. Since B is not exposed for retail sale, it does not have to be CE marked, but it is not illegal to do so. The Declaration of Conformity for B must (if you want a quite life!) explain what you explained, about it being embodied in A and ONLY in A. -- 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: Earthing through screws.
I read in !emc-pstc that Doug McKean dmck...@corp.auspex.com wrote (in 003e01c25daa$8da4b380$cb3e3...@corp.auspex.com) about 'Earthing through screws.' on Mon, 16 Sep 2002: I wasn't aware that primary grounding securements could be used for another purpose. It depends on the applicable safety standard; some allow it, some don't. -- 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
EMC Chamber Relocation
Hello Group, We are considering relocating our 3 meter EMC chamber. Can you: * Recommend a company that is proficient at this and will work in the Bay Area ( San Jose / San Francisco CA) * Give estimated costs * Share things to watch out for * Things you would do different the next time. * Give your experiences/opinion on Relocating chambers vs. Building a new one Thanks, Jeffrey Collins Sr. HW Engineering Manager EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety CIENA Core Switching Division 10480 Ridgeview Court, Cupertino, CA. 95014 (408) 366-4806, Fax (408) 366-4867 jcoll...@ciena.com http://www.ciena.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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
One thing that surprises me about avionics is the reports of spurious and misleading readings from instruments due to interference. It seems in these days of error checking and verification that we should be able to make instruments which are either confident of the data received or capable of reporting the reason they cannot display. Bob Johnson ITE Safety attachment: Robert Johnson.vcf
RE: Acousic Noise from ITE
Richard, I would contact Steven Kraemer @ TUV Rheinland in the Toronto office. He is very knowledgeable in the area of Noise requirements in the EU. regards, John -Original Message- From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 11:44 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Acousic Noise from ITE Are there any EU or national (e.g. GS) normative requirements to comply with any of the following standards or any other acoustic standards for ITE? EN27779 Acoustic measurement of airborn noise emitted by computer and business equipment. EN29295 Acoustic measurement of high frequency noise emitted by computer and business equipment. ISO 9296 Acoustics declared noise emission values of emitted by computer and business equipment. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- 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: harmonic current on inverters for industrial uses in Japan
Tom, Thank you, your information is very helpful. -doug --- Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. Mail stop: 203024 1626 Sharp Point Drive Ft. Collins, CO 80525 970.407.6410 (phone) 970-407.5410 (fax) mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com --- -Original Message- From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.ne.jp] Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 5:54 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: harmonic current on inverters for industrial uses in Japan On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 08:57:51 -0600, POWELL, DOUG doug.pow...@aei.com wrote: I am searching for an English language version of a report writtne in Japanese, I already have the title translated: Calculation methods of harmonic current on inverters for industrial uses. JEM- TR 201 Can enayone help with location of this report in English? It seems there is no English version of JEM-TR 201 at least at this time. Catalogue of translated JEM/JEM-TR documents is available at http://www.jema-net.or.jp/Japanese/jem/jem_eng.htm, but it seems none of them are available online anyway. You may want to concact JEMA for more information. Only for information - Japanese JEM-TR 201 is available online at: http://www.jema-net.or.jp/Japanese/jem/jem_handou.htm Regards, Tom -- Tomonori Sato vef00...@nifty.ne.jp URL: http://member.nifty.ne.jp/tsato/ ___ This message, including any attachments, may contain information that is confidential and proprietary information of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. The dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this message or any of its attachments is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. --- 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: Earthing through screws.
I wasn't aware that primary grounding securements could be used for another purpose. 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: Heatsinks and EMI
Heatsinks and EMIAny metallic structure capable of carrying circulating currents will radiate. Ungrounded heatsinks can be particularly susceptible to radiation, or carrying crosstalk from one part of a circuit to another part. 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
I've been watching this discussion with interest. It appears you are agreeing with each other - at some length. (grin) The subject of interference to airborne navigation and communications receivers seems never to go away. Since it was the probability of just such interference which lead the FAA to impose its PED regulations, this is perhaps appropriate. I have seen emissions from non-ITE PED's (CD players) that greatly exceeded the FCC class B limit, and it is not unreasonable to expect interference to receivers from many kinds of device. I seem to recall mention in one of the EMC magazines (Conformity?) a couple of years ago about a GSM telephone *in checked baggage* having been identified as causing direct EMI to aircraft systems. This, apparently because GSM amplitude modulation is more conducive to rectified logic upset than a steadily emitting frequency-modulation. And of course the hold is NOT a typical location for customer-carried PED's. There was also mention further back (this may be on the FAA Web site - a useful compendium of reports) of a test in which a handy-talky of some type was, as an experiment, used to transmit inside the cockpit of an airliner, with noticeable upset to instruments at the flight engineer's station. This could be direct interference from a PED, though hardly _likely_ in flight, especially with today's security restrictions on where passengers may go. I personally recall an incident about 7 years ago in which a product of my then-employer, a laptop computer, was reported to have caused an aircraft on a long over-water flight to take a left bank of two degrees, which trim upset went away when the computer was turned off. However we were unable to identify emissions which could have caused this. I do not believe that passenger AC power, MOST likely culprit, was provided at the time, so that seems to be ruled out, and the energy in the LCD backlight inverter was far enough away from wiring that it SHOULD not have done so. 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
EMI from heatsinks
Richard, I have three different articles about this subject. I think I found them on CDs from recent IEEE EMC Symposiums but I don't remember which ones or even if they were all on the same CD. I saved the files so I can e-mail them to you if you wish; as I don't think the files are that big. Regards, Bill Fleury ***Artesyn Communication Products, LLC** Bill Fleury Email: bi...@artesyncp.com Compliance Engineer Phone: 608-826-8375 8310 Excelsior DriveFax: 608-831-8844 Madison, WI 53717 Friends are those people who know the words to the song in your heart and sing them back to you when you have forgotten the words. (unattributed) *** Visit us at www.artesyn.com/cp ** --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
Most of what you say below meshes with my experience and does not contradict my basic premise, that PEDs can only interfere through aircraft antennas. I am curious what the resolution of the Boeing installation was. Equipment undergoing EMI qualification must be tested with a representative flight harness. Did your company test with screened cables and then try to force Boeing to use the same? Bad form. Did Boeing try to buy an off-the-shelf system qualified with screened cables and then install the system using unscreened cables? Equally bad form. This must be worked out before design and testing for procured equipment, and if the equipment is off-the-shelf, then the qualification configuration harness must be installed, or the equipment must be requalified using the planned/existing configuration wiring. Another question of interest: Was the system you provided Boeing flight critical? There is one place that what you say could be interpreted to imply that PED emissions get into aircraft wiring: It has been found through surveys carried out on aircraft by ERA and QinetiQ that the interference appears to get into these systems from certain locations within the aircraft where cable run reside under certain seats. Consider the physical parameters. The PED is small and low power and while it may not meet RTCA/DO-160, it does not blanket the entire aircraft with emissions. The intensity falls off rapidly with separation from the source. This is clearly a case where the emitting device is electrically small over almost the entire communications band. Assume the emitted radiation intensity were 100 mV/m, 5-6 orders of magnitude above CISPR limits. The transfer function of coupled current to a cable above ground is 1.5 mA per Volt/meter. I can supply that derivation if you like, but it is inherent in both RTCA/DO-160D and MIL-STD-461D/E. It is different in IEC 61000-4-6, but that is because the ground plane is far away or nonexistent in buildings and the cable-under-test is a more efficient pick-up device in that environment. Anyway, the coupled current would be 150 uA, and that assumes at least one half wavelength of the cable was immersed in a plane wave with precisely the right orientation relative to the wire in order to get that. If the victim circuit contains information represented by low potentials, such as below 0.1 Volt, then I would expect the cable carrying that signal to be shielded, as in a twisted shielded pair. 150 uA riding on a shield should not cause any problems to any flight critical signal, even with a pigtailed shield termination. For instance, if the pigtail termination yielded a transfer impedance as high as 50 Ohms at some frequency, the resultant common mode coupling to the interior pair would still only be 7.5 mV. Again I contend that Boeing and Airbus would not route a flight critical signal with a threshold of susceptibility that low. And if the circuit is totally unshielded, that implies it is a discrete or other relatively high level signal, where information is carried in such a away that it takes Volts of induced potential to cause an upset. Coupling to an unshielded wire above ground occurs at a transfer function of 75 mV per Volt/meter. [ Cf. IEC 61000-4-6, coupling efficiency of 1 Volt per Volt/meter, open circuit from a 150 Ohm source impedance.] Given the original 100 mV/m assumption, that translates into a coupled common mode potential of 7.5 mV and the conclusion still stands: no possibility of interference. -- From: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Mon, Sep 16, 2002, 8:55 AM Ken During the mid 90s we manufactured equipment that was installed on 747s which was tested to RTCA/DO-160C and all the cables on that aircraft for that system were unscreened. Boeing informed us that they would not permit screened cables due to the increase in weight that would then affect the passenger cargo carrying capability of the aircraft. I know that rf signals are coax and that certain control signals are screened for flight critical systems. It isn't so bad for newer aircraft but some of the older ones that use Omega and the earlier flight nav systems have reported interfernce with these systems and the autopilot. When the passengers have been requested to switch off their equipments the interference has dissappeared. It has been found through surveys carried out on aircraft by ERA and QinetiQ that the interfernce appears to get into these systems from certain locations within the aircraft where cable run reside under certain seats. Incidents of interfernce breakthough on coms have been more difficult to identify. Investigations are still being carried out. If you want more data suggest you get in touch wuth Dr Nigel Carter @ QinetiQ or Eric Stevens @ ERA. Regards Andy Andrew Price Principal Development Engineer (EMC Specialist) BAE
Flexible cable reliability and testing
I have been tasked with finding a standard and test procedure to validate the reliability of flexible cables over time. I have found a standard, EIA TP-41C (EIS-364-41C), but it focuses primarily on the electrical connectors rather than the cable. Another standard Mil-C-13777G is used by some of the wire and cable manufacturers, but searching the web I found a US Government site that indicated that this standard was inactive for new design. I can find no source for this standard. My application is for signal cables, but I assume other power cables would have some type of standard which they are tested to. Are there other standards applicable to cables in a flex environment? Any help would be appreciated. Rick Busche Evans Sutherland SLC, Utah rbus...@es.com (801) 588-7185 --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
Very good point. Obviously the cables could be very long, at least as long as half the aircraft, if the 12 Vdc supply were situated in the exact center of the aircraft. Since the laptops were qualified running of a 50/60 Hz power mains, the measured CSIPR emissions don't apply to this mode. Would it be too much to expect that the adapters for sale for this purpose do meet stringent RE limits? Or do they fall in a a regulation crack - CISPR wouldn't apply and somehow I don't see these devices being qualified to RTCA/DO-160. But while all of this is interesting and food for thought, it STILL doesn't affect my basic premise, that PEDs interfere with aircraft operation via aircraft antennas, not aircraft wires. -- From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Mon, Sep 16, 2002, 1:15 AM I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote (in 0h2i001lcfw...@mtaout04.icomcast.net) about 'New EU regulations - civil aviation' on Sun, 15 Sep 2002: My response is that conducted path is so lossy as to be negligible. But how long are the cables? I think we have more or less agreed that it is *radiation* from consumer devices interfering with aircraft radio reception where the potential problem arises. Hence the threat with the 12 V supplies is *radiation from the cables*, due to conducted emissions form the consumer device. -- 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 --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
Actually the mil-std appendix does exactly what you suggest; the following is excerpted from the discussion for RE102, which controls radiated electric field emissions: The basic intent of the requirement is to protect sensitive receivers from interference coupled through the antennas associated with the receiver. Many tuned receivers have sensitivities on the order of one microvolt and are connected to an intentional aperture (the antenna) which are constructed for efficient reception of energy in the operating range of the receiver. The potential for degradation requires relatively stringent requirements to prevent platform problems. There is no implied relationship between this requirement and RS103 that addresses radiated susceptibility to electric fields. Attempts have been made quite frequently in the past to compare electric field radiated emission and susceptibility type requirements as a justification for deviations and waivers. While RE102 is concerned with potential effects with antenna-connected receivers, RS103 simulates fields resulting from antenna-connected transmitters. -- From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Mon, Sep 16, 2002, 1:17 AM I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote (in 0h2i002t0im...@mtaout03.icomcast.net) about 'New EU regulations - civil aviation' on Sun, 15 Sep 2002: Another way to say this is to paraphrase the appendix of MIL-STD-461D/E, which states categorically that there is no relationship between radiated emissions and radiates susceptibility requirements, they are for different purposes and the magnitudes between the respective limits are not to be considered a design margin. That is true, but it would be more helpful if it went on to explain what the 'different purposes' are. -- 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 --- 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
Acousic Noise from ITE
Are there any EU or national (e.g. GS) normative requirements to comply with any of the following standards or any other acoustic standards for ITE? EN27779 Acoustic measurement of airborn noise emitted by computer and business equipment. EN29295 Acoustic measurement of high frequency noise emitted by computer and business equipment. ISO 9296 Acoustics declared noise emission values of emitted by computer and business equipment. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- 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
Add-On Printed Circuit
Colleagues, I am seeking your input. Manufacturer A sells a complete, fully approved (CE, FCC Part 15, UL, etc) product (product A) Manufacturer B makes a device (product B) that will plug into a connector in product A (actually inside product A's enclosure - like a 'daughter' module) as a value added feature. There are no external interfaces on product B, and it is not accessible unless product A is totally dismantled. Product B is intended/sold only for use with product A, and is otherwise useless. The two products are sold independent of each other by the manufacturers to 'dealer/installers'. When the dealer/installer sells/installs product A, he can offer product B as an option. What are the regulatory requirements/manufacturer's responsibilities for product B? (est. 2-3 inches square, UL 94V-0 printed circuit board, tens of mA 12V DC, no external interfaces. On-board clock). Thoughts? 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
This discussion is touching on several aspects of Personal Electronic Devices (PED's) aboard aircraft. Bruce Donham, of Boeing, has a two-year-old paper with some hard data at: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_10/interfere_story.html Also, here's a cross reference to PED Electronic regulations: http://aviation-safety.net/events/ped/ped-regl.htm And, 106 pages of Aviation Safety Reporting System PED related history, current to May 2002, at: http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/report_sets/ped.pdf This whole subject is about as confusing as EMF's and cancer. 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 -Original Message- From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 6:33 AM To: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation I do realize there is a big difference in the use of cable shielding/screening between general and commercial aviation practices. However the same general aviation aircraft that get by with little or no cable shielding/screening also have no electronic critical flight controls, so it is a wash. Any aircraft with flight controls qualified to RTCA/DO-160A will also have its maximum degree of automation limited to using the autopilot, possibly in conjunction with navigation inputs from aircraft NAV receivers. Both the rf (coax) and the base-band signal inputs into the autopilot would be shielded in my experience. I would definitely NOT expect personal electronics to interfere with such control systems (except for that all-important radio link). I would also expect that as an older aircraft gets avionics upgrades, with avionics qualified to RTA/DO-160D, that the cables connecting to the new avionics must be upgraded if the certification is to maintain validity. Specifically, if a new avionics upgrade were form, fit and function compatible with the old part, but required a shielded harness to meet RTCA/DO-160D, then that cable would have to be retrofitted along with the equipment. Am I being overly idealistic and out of touch here? In any case I reiterate: basic systems engineering practices mandate that a (non-rf) signal that carries flight critical information should be piped through the aircraft such that neither cross-talk nor stray emissions from other electronics cause interference. Along these lines, there are those who mourn the passing of the old term, rfi, because the term evoked the concept of RADIO interference, rather than the general term electromagnetic interference, which is global in its meaning. We need to consciously retain the idea that stray (unintentional) rf emissions from non-antenna connected electronics have the potential to create only rfi. -- From: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Mon, Sep 16, 2002, 1:57 AM Firstly all avionic equipment is qualified to RTCA/DO-160 (European equivalent EUROCAE ED-14). All new equipment is test to DO-160D however there is still equipment installed on aircraft that was originally tested to DO-160A. Overtime the DO-160 has become more stringent with tighter emission levels and high immunity test levels which includes HIRF testing. There is one problem that arises from this as most of the cabling installed on the aircraft is unscreened. This is for weight saving reasons. Therefore with alot of older aircraft having a mixture of new and old equipments installed using cabling that is unscreened it is reasonable to assume that some Passenger Portable devices such as Gameboys, Laptop Computors, Mobile Phones, etc. will if that passenger happens to be sitting above a cable run cause interference with one or more aircraft systems. The UKCAA keeps a log of all reported incidents. Regards Andy Andrew Price Principal Development Engineer (EMC Specialist) BAE SYSTEMS Avionics A125 Christopher Martin Road Basildon, Essex SS14 3EL tel: +44 (0) 1268 883308 email: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.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:
Heatsinks and EMI
Greetings All, I sort of remember reading an article on heatsinks and radiated emissions within the past 12 months. In short, the article indicated that the fins of the heatsink should be considered an antenna regarding radiated emissions. Has anyone else remember seeing such an article? If so, can you send me where I might again find it. I have tried the archives of RF Design, Conformity, Evaluation Engineering and Power Electronics. Search on the web on 'heatsinks + emi did not prove fruitful. Thanks in-advance. Richard Georgerian Compliance Engineer Carrier Access Corporation 5395 Pearl Parkway Boulder, CO 80301 USA Tele: 303-218-5748 Fax: 303-218-5503 mailto:rgeorger...@carrieraccess.com * This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that any disclosure, copying, printing, distribution, or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving them in any manner. Thank you. *
Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation
Ken During the mid 90s we manufactured equipment that was installed on 747s which was tested to RTCA/DO-160C and all the cables on that aircraft for that system were unscreened. Boeing informed us that they would not permit screened cables due to the increase in weight that would then affect the passenger cargo carrying capability of the aircraft. I know that rf signals are coax and that certain control signals are screened for flight critical systems. It isn't so bad for newer aircraft but some of the older ones that use Omega and the earlier flight nav systems have reported interfernce with these systems and the autopilot. When the passengers have been requested to switch off their equipments the interference has dissappeared. It has been found through surveys carried out on aircraft by ERA and QinetiQ that the interfernce appears to get into these systems from certain locations within the aircraft where cable run reside under certain seats. Incidents of interfernce breakthough on coms have been more difficult to identify. Investigations are still being carried out. If you want more data suggest you get in touch wuth Dr Nigel Carter @ QinetiQ or Eric Stevens @ ERA. Regards Andy Andrew Price Principal Development Engineer (EMC Specialist) BAE SYSTEMS Avionics A125 Christopher Martin Road Basildon, Essex SS14 3EL tel: +44 (0) 1268 883308 email: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com *** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. *** --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
I do realize there is a big difference in the use of cable shielding/screening between general and commercial aviation practices. However the same general aviation aircraft that get by with little or no cable shielding/screening also have no electronic critical flight controls, so it is a wash. Any aircraft with flight controls qualified to RTCA/DO-160A will also have its maximum degree of automation limited to using the autopilot, possibly in conjunction with navigation inputs from aircraft NAV receivers. Both the rf (coax) and the base-band signal inputs into the autopilot would be shielded in my experience. I would definitely NOT expect personal electronics to interfere with such control systems (except for that all-important radio link). I would also expect that as an older aircraft gets avionics upgrades, with avionics qualified to RTA/DO-160D, that the cables connecting to the new avionics must be upgraded if the certification is to maintain validity. Specifically, if a new avionics upgrade were form, fit and function compatible with the old part, but required a shielded harness to meet RTCA/DO-160D, then that cable would have to be retrofitted along with the equipment. Am I being overly idealistic and out of touch here? In any case I reiterate: basic systems engineering practices mandate that a (non-rf) signal that carries flight critical information should be piped through the aircraft such that neither cross-talk nor stray emissions from other electronics cause interference. Along these lines, there are those who mourn the passing of the old term, rfi, because the term evoked the concept of RADIO interference, rather than the general term electromagnetic interference, which is global in its meaning. We need to consciously retain the idea that stray (unintentional) rf emissions from non-antenna connected electronics have the potential to create only rfi. -- From: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Mon, Sep 16, 2002, 1:57 AM Firstly all avionic equipment is qualified to RTCA/DO-160 (European equivalent EUROCAE ED-14). All new equipment is test to DO-160D however there is still equipment installed on aircraft that was originally tested to DO-160A. Overtime the DO-160 has become more stringent with tighter emission levels and high immunity test levels which includes HIRF testing. There is one problem that arises from this as most of the cabling installed on the aircraft is unscreened. This is for weight saving reasons. Therefore with alot of older aircraft having a mixture of new and old equipments installed using cabling that is unscreened it is reasonable to assume that some Passenger Portable devices such as Gameboys, Laptop Computors, Mobile Phones, etc. will if that passenger happens to be sitting above a cable run cause interference with one or more aircraft systems. The UKCAA keeps a log of all reported incidents. Regards Andy Andrew Price Principal Development Engineer (EMC Specialist) BAE SYSTEMS Avionics A125 Christopher Martin Road Basildon, Essex SS14 3EL tel: +44 (0) 1268 883308 email: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com *** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. *** --- 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:
Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation
Firstly all avionic equipment is qualified to RTCA/DO-160 (European equivalent EUROCAE ED-14). All new equipment is test to DO-160D however there is still equipment installed on aircraft that was originally tested to DO-160A. Overtime the DO-160 has become more stringent with tighter emission levels and high immunity test levels which includes HIRF testing. There is one problem that arises from this as most of the cabling installed on the aircraft is unscreened. This is for weight saving reasons. Therefore with alot of older aircraft having a mixture of new and old equipments installed using cabling that is unscreened it is reasonable to assume that some Passenger Portable devices such as Gameboys, Laptop Computors, Mobile Phones, etc. will if that passenger happens to be sitting above a cable run cause interference with one or more aircraft systems. The UKCAA keeps a log of all reported incidents. Regards Andy Andrew Price Principal Development Engineer (EMC Specialist) BAE SYSTEMS Avionics A125 Christopher Martin Road Basildon, Essex SS14 3EL tel: +44 (0) 1268 883308 email: andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com *** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. *** --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote (in 0h2i002t0im...@mtaout03.icomcast.net) about 'New EU regulations - civil aviation' on Sun, 15 Sep 2002: Another way to say this is to paraphrase the appendix of MIL-STD-461D/E, which states categorically that there is no relationship between radiated emissions and radiates susceptibility requirements, they are for different purposes and the magnitudes between the respective limits are not to be considered a design margin. That is true, but it would be more helpful if it went on to explain what the 'different purposes' are. -- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote (in 0h2i001lcfw...@mtaout04.icomcast.net) about 'New EU regulations - civil aviation' on Sun, 15 Sep 2002: My response is that conducted path is so lossy as to be negligible. But how long are the cables? I think we have more or less agreed that it is *radiation* from consumer devices interfering with aircraft radio reception where the potential problem arises. Hence the threat with the 12 V supplies is *radiation from the cables*, due to conducted emissions form the consumer device. -- 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
Reminder: Sep Meeting of RMCEMC
To all interested parties: The September meeting of the RMCEMC IEEE Society is: The Mysteries of Grounding on Tuesday, September 17, at the Courtyard by Mariott in Louisville, CO from 7:00pm to 8:00pm. The speaker will be Daryl Gerke of Kimmel Gerke Associates. For more details please go to our website at www.ieee.org/rmcemc Thank you Charles Grasso RMCEMC Vice-Chair --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
I agree that we agree. The reason I responded in so much depth on this thread is that I consider the underlying issue behind the terminology very important, and I was dismayed during an earlier similar thread at some of the responses posted on this forum. The issue I am referring to is that RE are controlled to protect radio receivers, and not electronics in general. Another way to say this is to paraphrase the appendix of MIL-STD-461D/E, which states categorically that there is no relationship between radiated emissions and radiates susceptibility requirements, they are for different purposes and the magnitudes between the respective limits are not to be considered a design margin. -- From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Sun, Sep 15, 2002, 2:29 PM I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote (in 0h2h0068wpv...@mtaout06.icomcast.net) about 'New EU regulations - civil aviation' on Sun, 15 Sep 2002: We are getting off subject, in that the CISPR requirements listed below don't apply to avionics, only to the personal electronics people carry on board. I thought we were discussing your very restricted 'definition' of immunity. However, I don't think we really disagree very much on the actual issues, just a bit on the terminology. -- 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 --- 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: New EU regulations - civil aviation
My response is that conducted path is so lossy as to be negligible. Consider that the 12 Vdc is developed by conversion from either aircraft 28 Vdc, or 400 cycles. In either case, that converter or power supply must meet the conducted emissions requirements of RTCA/DO-160, or its European equivalent. The 12 Vdc loads do not interface directly with aircraft power. Further, aircraft avionics, including radios, must meet stringent conducted susceptibility/immunity requirements on input power ports. Although I am not familiar with the European equivalent, I am sure it is the same way, because it was a British influence that placed similar requirements in RTCA/DO-160 and MIL-STD-461. I refer here mainly to Dr. Nigel Carter of the UK. These conducted susceptibility/immunity requirements simulate the effect of powerful radio transmissions coupling to the aircraft power bus, and are at levels orders of magnitude above the CE limits placed on aircraft avionics. I would say that it is a highly unlikely path for influencing aircraft avionics, although I would also say that if I, as an EMC engineer working for a major air-framer, were procuring a 12 Vdc supply for this use, I would push to characterize its input/output isolation from 0.15 - 400 MHz, for the sake of completeness. By input/output in this case I mean injecting a signal on the 12 Vdc output, and measuring the resultant signal on the aircraft power side. And I would measure this both differential and common mode, as I would expect different performance for different modes. But that would be strictly a CYA file, not a hard requirement. -- From: Warren Birmingham war...@comfortjets.com To: Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EU regulations - civil aviation Date: Sun, Sep 15, 2002, 3:41 PM This is not so. Many aircraft now have personal 12v ports under each seat for personal electronic devices. Warren Birmingham Epsilon-Mu Consultants (510) 793-4806 email: war...@epsilon-mu.com website: http://www.epsilon-mu.com On Sunday, Sep 15, 2002, at 10:28 US/Pacific, Ken Javor wrote: The point is that personal electronics carried on board an aircraft interact with the aircraft ONLY via the radiated emissions route. --- 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
