RE: Performance Criterion
I'll bet a lawyer could define and write a decent performance criterion. :^) While I admit, there is a large range of instruments and equipment out there, the various types can all be classified into one of just a few categories. I mention again that a clear distinction between functionality and performance should be made in the criteria. For example, in a power supply, loss of performance would include a loss of voltage regulation. A loss of functionality would include loss of remote communication or loss of front-panel control. The criterion B also mentions loss of data or change of mode. Change of mode in a power supply would include an unintended change from remote to local control. If the standards nail down the test procedure and the precise setup, then I think they should show the same diligence in defining the pass/fail criteria. Otherwise, it's all a bit too vague to be informative. They might just as well say, It is the manufacturer's responsibility for defining an acceptable level of performance and functionality for the equipment, both during and after the disturbance. This information must be included in the technical manual or other user documentation which accompanies the equipment. (no more Criteria A,B or C) Ralph McDiarmid, AScT Compliance Engineering Group Xantrex Technology Inc. From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: April 25, 2003 2:19 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Performance Criterion I read in !emc-pstc that Ralph McDiarmid ralph.mcdiar...@xantrex.com wrote (in 67C475A5ECE7D4118AEC0002B325CAB602D2F9D2@BCMAIL1) about 'Performance Criterion' on Fri, 25 Apr 2003: Why would these standards call up specific levels of disturbances, voltage, frequency and so on, and then leave the performance criteria up to the manufacturer's interpretation? Because of the huge range of equipment covered AND the huge range of applications of many individual products (leading to different requirements for tolerable amounts of degradation), together with the enormous variety of symptoms of interference that can occur. I would say that the evaluation of the test is as crucial as the test setup and procedure and it should be carefully defined. But in general it's an immense task to do that. You can see that even in the relatively restricted scope of CISPR 24, the large amount of text that is devoted to the immunity issue. -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Check list for PCB Layout
I would like to create a check list in order to help designers and PCB routers of my company to improve their design / EMI and SI. This is one of the things we get paid to do, assuming anyone is paying us at all. For this and other reasons given by those who've already answered your request, it is something you will usually have to come up with on your own, or pay someone to give you. This last can often be done by paying them to give your board designers a seminar on signal integrity; the printed materials supplied with the course almost always have some kind of check list included, or at least, rules you can make into one. Luckily, it's not hard to come up with a check list that will make a difference in your boards. In its simplest form, it can be nothing more than a list of everything done _wrong_ over the past few years, with Do not ... in front of it. For example, Do not interrupt ground planes. delete return traces. leave out ground vias when changing layers. run high speed clocks on board edges. share ground traces and connector pins between critical signals. and so on. The physics is fairly direct. Getting your check list implemented, that can be difficult, and I've often thought a seminar on the politics of EMC would be as valuable as one on its physics. Good luck! 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Performance Criterion
I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote (in d9223eb959a5d511a98f00508b68c20c12516...@orsmsx108.jf.intel.com) about 'Performance Criterion' on Fri, 25 Apr 2003: Sure glad these standards are crystal clear, aren't you? The standard is crystal-clear; it's real life that's grey and fuzzy. (;-) -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Performance Criterion
I read in !emc-pstc that Ralph McDiarmid ralph.mcdiar...@xantrex.com wrote (in 67C475A5ECE7D4118AEC0002B325CAB602D2F9D2@BCMAIL1) about 'Performance Criterion' on Fri, 25 Apr 2003: Why would these standards call up specific levels of disturbances, voltage, frequency and so on, and then leave the performance criteria up to the manufacturer's interpretation? Because of the huge range of equipment covered AND the huge range of applications of many individual products (leading to different requirements for tolerable amounts of degradation), together with the enormous variety of symptoms of interference that can occur. I would say that the evaluation of the test is as crucial as the test setup and procedure and it should be carefully defined. But in general it's an immense task to do that. You can see that even in the relatively restricted scope of CISPR 24, the large amount of text that is devoted to the immunity issue. -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: DERIVATION OF CREEPAGE AND CLEARANCES
I read in !emc-pstc that Gordon,Ian ian.gor...@bocedwards.com wrote (in E1BA0362B28ED211A1E80008C71EA3060206FBB9@EXC_EAS01) about 'DERIVATION OF CREEPAGE AND CLEARANCES' on Fri, 25 Apr 2003: Does anyone know from where the values for creepage and clearances given in EN61010-1 (safety requirements for electrical equipment for measurement, control and laboratory use - part 1 general requirements) are derived i.e. are there other standards below 61010 in this respect? Look at IEC 60664 (multi-part). -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Check list for PCB Layout
I agree in all regards. From: Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com Reply-To: Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:03:32 -0700 To: tkrze...@genius.org.br Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Check list for PCB Layout Hi Thomas, CHECKLIST A checklist that you are requesting may be difficult to come by. I say this because most, if not all, people who create these types of documents do so from a base of personal experience and knowledge whereby they are unwilling to share. There is also the probably that these documents may be proprietary to the creator's employer. And, as I do not know your level of expertise in this area, basic PWB layout rules knowledge regarding EMC and SI may be learned from the many very good books and seminars on this subject as another member has already pointed out. So, I personally suggest that you either create your own checklist that would be tailored to your, and your employer's, needs and requirements or hire a consultant that's knowledgeable in this area to assist you. CLOSE-FIELD PROBES Unfortunately, there's no predictable correlation of near-field measurement results to the far-field measurement results that would be obtained from an OATS where verification is formalized. Although close-field probes are useful for tracking down emission sources, they cannot and should not be used for any kind of qualitative verification. I hope this helps. Comments anyone? Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com -Original Message- From: tkrze...@genius.org.br [mailto:tkrze...@genius.org.br] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 6:21 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Check list for PCB Layout Hi everybody, I would like to create a check list in order to help designers and PCB routers of my company to improve their design / EMI and SI. Where can I find documentations (PDF, links...) with basics PCB rules regarding EMI and SI ?? Witch kind of tests can I set up to verify radiations only with two close field probes ? Is there some referencies (standards, norms...) for close fields levels ? Can I measure them?? Thanks. Thomas K. Genius Institute --- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Thermocouple glue
To all, I'm not sure if this message was received and/or distributed by the listerver, but here it is again. Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com Ron Pickard To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 04/25/2003 10:19 cc: AM Subject: Re: Thermocouple glue(Document link: Ron Pickard) To all, I'm surprised that no one hasn't mentioned this yet. In the past for this application, the securement that I was introduced to was fiberglass tape and that white thermal grease. The tape exhibited high thermal stability and was used to secure the thermocouples, but left adhesive residue when removed after a temperature test. The thermocouple was inserted into the grease which offered excellent thermal conduction from the measurement point to the thermocouple. The downside to this grease, as anyone who's used this grease would say, is that the grease is messy to the extreme and it generally could not be completely removed from any surface that it came in contact with. And, it always found a way to get onto unintended surfaces including clothing. But, as a plus, the thermal grease would stay put physically over a very wide temperature range. I'm sure that someone has fond memories of that stuff. Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com pauljsmi...@cs.com Sent by: To: peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org owner-emc-pstc@majordocc: mo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Thermocouple glue 04/25/2003 08:53 AM Please respond to PaulJSmith1 In a message dated 4/23/03 5:37:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com writes: Bill - If you're referring to what I think you are, it's fuller's earth and waterglass, which is a clay-like mineral and sodium silicate solution. A former agency engineer I worked with also used this waterglass adhesive for thermocouples. It worked great and was usually easy to remove thermocouples without damaging. Paul J Smith, Senior Compliance Engineer 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:
RE: Check list for PCB Layout
Hi Tom, Our biggest problem was maintaining trace impedances and printed wiring board thickness during layout. We would start out with the best of intentions, but as things were being routed, compromises of trace widths and layer thicknesses to meet other board restrictions and to work around components. Invariable, they would come back to ask, can the trace width change or the layers decrease/increase, and what would be the impact on trace impedances? To make a long story short, I had to create a spreadsheet that would calculate the trace impedances and automatically update the values if layer thicknesses changed and trace widths changed. Even though there may be great pwb stackup programs out there, we were not going to spend the money. In the end, the pwb vendor provided the impedances based on our layout, and that told us how close we were using our spreadsheet impedance model. As a side benefit, using the spreadsheet documented the changes or we could do a lot of what-if's in minutes. Hopes this helps. 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 -Original Message- From: tkrze...@genius.org.br [ mailto:tkrze...@genius.org.br] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 7:21 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Check list for PCB Layout Hi everybody, I would like to create a check list in order to help designers and PCB routers of my company to improve their design / EMI and SI. Where can I find documentations (PDF, links...) with basics PCB rules regarding EMI and SI ?? Witch kind of tests can I set up to verify radiations only with two close field probes ? Is there some referencies (standards, norms...) for close fields levels ? Can I measure them?? Thanks. Thomas K. Genius Institute --- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc * 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: Check list for PCB Layout
And GOOGLE says right !!! I don't know why it's just makes you laugh... but I'm a french engineer of 25 that's works in Brasil since 2 years and I would like to develop an EMC area at Genius Instituto de Tecnología, as in Brasil nobody really cares with EMC... Genius stays in Manaus, in the middle of the Amazon forest, that's why it isn't possible to get some courses neither good informations... I'd like to thank you Mr Grasso for your usefull information... and for the others... I didn't choose my Company's name ! Thanks All... Thomas Krzesaj Genius Instituto de Tecnología Av. Açaí, 875 Bloco E 69075-904 Distrito Industrial Manaus - Amazonas Brasil http://www.thomask.fr.st http://www.genius.org.br Grasso, Charles Charles.Grasso@ecTo: 'Price, Ed' ed.pr...@cubic.com, 'james.free...@infineon.com' hostar.comjames.free...@infineon.com, tkrze...@genius.org.br, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc: 25/04/2003 14:37 Subject: RE: Check list for PCB Layout Google says it's a brazilian technology institute. Best Regards Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Communications Corp. Tel: 303-706-5467 Fax: 303-799-6222 Cell: 303-204-2974 Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com; Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org From: Price, Ed [mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 12:15 PM To: 'james.free...@infineon.com'; tkrze...@genius.org.br; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Check list for PCB Layout -Original Message- From: james.free...@infineon.com [mailto:james.free...@infineon.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 10:00 AM To: tkrze...@genius.org.br; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Check list for PCB Layout Is this for real? is there actually in institute for geniuses? This would explain why we are all really in the dark. No geniuses to lead us. I dream of genii... Ed Price (TD, Janitor, College of Complexes) ed.pr...@cubic.com NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Technician Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Check list for PCB Layout
Google says it's a brazilian technology institute. Best Regards Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Communications Corp. Tel: 303-706-5467 Fax: 303-799-6222 Cell: 303-204-2974 Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com; Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org From: Price, Ed [mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 12:15 PM To: 'james.free...@infineon.com'; tkrze...@genius.org.br; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Check list for PCB Layout -Original Message- From: james.free...@infineon.com [mailto:james.free...@infineon.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 10:00 AM To: tkrze...@genius.org.br; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Check list for PCB Layout Is this for real? is there actually in institute for geniuses? This would explain why we are all really in the dark. No geniuses to lead us. I dream of genii... Ed Price (TD, Janitor, College of Complexes) ed.pr...@cubic.com NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Technician Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Thermocouple glue
In part, because I must exercise test the discipline required to maintain my ISO 17025 accrediation, and mostly because I tend to use T/C wire 30 ga or smaller, I do not attempt to retain T/C wire within 1 to 2 cm of the component being tested. I then re-weld the T/C prior to each use for product safety testing. But for general engineering lab measurements, T/C wire that has fully cured cyanoacrylate adhesive can be re-used. I use a pair of needle nose wire to pinch the adhesive bead (very brittle) and shatter the connection point. good luck, Brian -Original Message- From: John Allen [ mailto:john.al...@era.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 9:29 AM To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue Hi Folks Most of the replies so far seem to indicate the use of permanent adhesives - which means the thermocouples could be difficult to remove and re-use. Therefore, since these items tend to be too expensive to be considered as throw-away items, does any one have suggestions for adhesives which wil stick reasonably well but will then allow the thermocouples to be removed fairly easily and without damage?
RE: Performance Criterion
The answer Ralph is that the CE mark is really a QUALITY system with the onus left to the manufacturer to the level of quality that it will accept. Best Regards Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Communications Corp. Tel: 303-706-5467 Fax: 303-799-6222 Cell: 303-204-2974 Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com; mailto:charles.gra...@echostar.com; Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org From: Ralph McDiarmid [mailto:ralph.mcdiar...@xantrex.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 11:06 AM To: 'Frazee, Douglas (Douglas)'; 'Pettit, Ghery'; Ralph McDiarmid; 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: RE: Performance Criterion Thanks Douglas, I think the technical sub-committees should be tasked with re-writing the definitions of the performance criteria so as to minimize the use of interpretations and eliminate phrases like what the user may reasonably expect. The use of an English major and a good editor might be helpful in that work. Why would these standards call up specific levels of disturbances, voltage, frequency and so on, and then leave the performance criteria up to the manufacturer's interpretation? I would say that the evaluation of the test is as crucial as the test setup and procedure and it should be carefully defined. Thanks also to all you have responded so far. I encourage the discussion to continue. Ralph McDiarmid, AScT Compliance Engineering Group Xantrex Technology Inc. www.xantrex.com tel: (604) 422 2622 fax: (604) 420 1591 From: Frazee, Douglas (Douglas) [mailto:dfra...@lucent.com] Sent: April 25, 2003 9:43 AM To: 'Pettit, Ghery'; Frazee, Douglas (Douglas); 'Ralph McDiarmid'; 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: RE: Performance Criterion Ghery, I was hoping my response would get a discussion going and am pleased that you responded. Please be aware, however that the basic message I wanted to get across is that while there are clear passes (#1) and clear failures (#9); there are also gray areas. In these gray areas, whether the EUT is found compliant or not depends on a number of factors and is subject to interpretation. If the manufacturer wishes to use a permissible loss of performance, it is best to have this information submitted before the test is performed to avoid the appearance of changing the rules after the game has started in order to come out a winner! There are also subtle differences in the criteria B definition from standard to standard, and even in the same standard, depending on the equipment type. Our products are certified both to 55024 EN 300 386 V 1.3.1. I was not familiar with the 61000-6-2 standard that Ralph inquired about but I reviewed the definition of criteria B in that standard before I responded. In each standard criteria B is applicable for transient phenomena such as ESD and allows for some degradation. However, the wording differs in each standard, which can affect compliance for gray area type test results. Even in CISPR 24, if you are required to use specific criteria for TTE included in Annex. A, the criteria is different and may possibly affect compliance. 61000-6-2 Criteria B: The apparatus shall continue to operate as intended after the test. No degradation of performance or loss of function is allowed below a performance level specified by the manufacturer, when the product is used as intended. The performance level may be replaced by a permissible loss of performance. During the test, degradation of performance is however allowed. No change of actual operating state or stored data is allowed. If the minimum performance level or permissible performance loss is not specified by the manufacturer, either of these may be derived from what the user may reasonably expect from the apparatus if used as intended. Note that the above wording does not allow changes in operating state or stored data either during or after the test. In this regard the 61000-6-2 criteria is more severe than the general CISPR 24 criteria. Thus, I stand by my initial e-mail's #5. Under 61000-6-2 Criteria B, if the EUTs stored data or operating state changes as a result of the transient test, the EUT is non-compliant. For telecommunication network (switching) equipment under 300 386 v 1.3.1 paragraph 11.3.1.2; it is permissible for data errors to occur as a result of transient phenomena, however except for a specific exception for surge testing, established connections must be maintained throughout the testing. Thus the result Ralph described is: 1. Compliant under the general CISPR 24 criteria B 2. Non-compliant under CISPR 24 Annex A criteria B (TTE w/digital interface, TTE w/analog interfaces, FAX) 3. Compliant under CISPR 24 Annex B criteria B (data processing equipment) 4. In a gray area under 61000-6-2 5. Non-compliant under 300 386 V 1.3.1 for telecom. switching equipment The above list is partial, but I think my point is clear. Note that CISPR 24 has 7 Annexes for specific categories of ITE with operating criteria for
RE: Check list for PCB Layout
-Original Message- From: james.free...@infineon.com [mailto:james.free...@infineon.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 10:00 AM To: tkrze...@genius.org.br; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Check list for PCB Layout Is this for real? is there actually in institute for geniuses? This would explain why we are all really in the dark. No geniuses to lead us. I dream of genii... Ed Price (TD, Janitor, College of Complexes) ed.pr...@cubic.com NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Technician Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Check list for PCB Layout
Hi Thomas, CHECKLIST A checklist that you are requesting may be difficult to come by. I say this because most, if not all, people who create these types of documents do so from a base of personal experience and knowledge whereby they are unwilling to share. There is also the probably that these documents may be proprietary to the creator's employer. And, as I do not know your level of expertise in this area, basic PWB layout rules knowledge regarding EMC and SI may be learned from the many very good books and seminars on this subject as another member has already pointed out. So, I personally suggest that you either create your own checklist that would be tailored to your, and your employer's, needs and requirements or hire a consultant that's knowledgeable in this area to assist you. CLOSE-FIELD PROBES Unfortunately, there's no predictable correlation of near-field measurement results to the far-field measurement results that would be obtained from an OATS where verification is formalized. Although close-field probes are useful for tracking down emission sources, they cannot and should not be used for any kind of qualitative verification. I hope this helps. Comments anyone? Best regards, Ron Pickard rpick...@hypercom.com From: tkrze...@genius.org.br [mailto:tkrze...@genius.org.br] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 6:21 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Check list for PCB Layout Hi everybody, I would like to create a check list in order to help designers and PCB routers of my company to improve their design / EMI and SI. Where can I find documentations (PDF, links...) with basics PCB rules regarding EMI and SI ?? Witch kind of tests can I set up to verify radiations only with two close field probes ? Is there some referencies (standards, norms...) for close fields levels ? Can I measure them?? Thanks. Thomas K. Genius Institute 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Performance Criterion
Doug, While the criteria in CISPR 24 and IEC 61000-4-2 (not 6-2) may vary, that is of academic interest. CISPR 24 is the product specific standard and takes precedence over IEC 61000-4-2 where they differ. Now, as to the applicability of Annex A of CISPR 24. Ralph has not specified what type of network we are discussing. If we are talking TTE and it is a TTE type network, then I agree that a failure has occurred. Calls must not be dropped. However, if the network is a LAN, then we can argue as to whether this is a TTE type network or not. If we agree that it is, the product failed. If we agree that a LAN is not a TTE network (and if it is, then every computer with an Ethernet port is TTE, not ITE and I don't believe that to be the case) then Annex B applies and we can say the product passes (although 1 minute is an awfully long time for a LAN port to recover). Bottom line - we need more information about the EUT to make a Pass/Fail determination. Sure glad these standards are crystal clear, aren't you? Ghery S. Pettit Corporate EMC Engineer Corporate Product Regulations Intel Corporation From: Frazee, Douglas (Douglas) [mailto:dfra...@lucent.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 9:43 AM To: 'Pettit, Ghery'; Frazee, Douglas (Douglas); 'Ralph McDiarmid'; 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: RE: Performance Criterion Ghery, I was hoping my response would get a discussion going and am pleased that you responded. Please be aware, however that the basic message I wanted to get across is that while there are clear passes (#1) and clear failures (#9); there are also gray areas. In these gray areas, whether the EUT is found compliant or not depends on a number of factors and is subject to interpretation. If the manufacturer wishes to use a permissible loss of performance, it is best to have this information submitted before the test is performed to avoid the appearance of changing the rules after the game has started in order to come out a winner! There are also subtle differences in the criteria B definition from standard to standard, and even in the same standard, depending on the equipment type. Our products are certified both to 55024 EN 300 386 V 1.3.1. I was not familiar with the 61000-6-2 standard that Ralph inquired about but I reviewed the definition of criteria B in that standard before I responded. In each standard criteria B is applicable for transient phenomena such as ESD and allows for some degradation. However, the wording differs in each standard, which can affect compliance for gray area type test results. Even in CISPR 24, if you are required to use specific criteria for TTE included in Annex. A, the criteria is different and may possibly affect compliance. 61000-6-2 Criteria B: The apparatus shall continue to operate as intended after the test. No degradation of performance or loss of function is allowed below a performance level specified by the manufacturer, when the product is used as intended. The performance level may be replaced by a permissible loss of performance. During the test, degradation of performance is however allowed. No change of actual operating state or stored data is allowed. If the minimum performance level or permissible performance loss is not specified by the manufacturer, either of these may be derived from what the user may reasonably expect from the apparatus if used as intended. Note that the above wording does not allow changes in operating state or stored data either during or after the test. In this regard the 61000-6-2 criteria is more severe than the general CISPR 24 criteria. Thus, I stand by my initial e-mail's #5. Under 61000-6-2 Criteria B, if the EUTs stored data or operating state changes as a result of the transient test, the EUT is non-compliant. For telecommunication network (switching) equipment under 300 386 v 1.3.1 paragraph 11.3.1.2; it is permissible for data errors to occur as a result of transient phenomena, however except for a specific exception for surge testing, established connections must be maintained throughout the testing. Thus the result Ralph described is: 1. Compliant under the general CISPR 24 criteria B 2. Non-compliant under CISPR 24 Annex A criteria B (TTE w/digital interface, TTE w/analog interfaces, FAX) 3. Compliant under CISPR 24 Annex B criteria B (data processing equipment) 4. In a gray area under 61000-6-2 5. Non-compliant under 300 386 V 1.3.1 for telecom. switching equipment The above list is partial, but I think my point is clear. Note that CISPR 24 has 7 Annexes for specific categories of ITE with operating criteria for immunity testing specifically tailored for each equipment type. Thanks to Ralph for presenting such an interesting test result example! Douglas G. Frazee Regulatory Compliance Manager Lucent Technologies PSAX Division dfra...@lucent.com From: Pettit, Ghery [mailto:ghery.pet...@intel.com]
RE: Performance Criterion
Thanks Douglas, I think the technical sub-committees should be tasked with re-writing the definitions of the performance criteria so as to minimize the use of interpretations and eliminate phrases like what the user may reasonably expect. The use of an English major and a good editor might be helpful in that work. Why would these standards call up specific levels of disturbances, voltage, frequency and so on, and then leave the performance criteria up to the manufacturer's interpretation? I would say that the evaluation of the test is as crucial as the test setup and procedure and it should be carefully defined. Thanks also to all you have responded so far. I encourage the discussion to continue. Ralph McDiarmid, AScT Compliance Engineering Group Xantrex Technology Inc. www.xantrex.com tel: (604) 422 2622 fax: (604) 420 1591 From: Frazee, Douglas (Douglas) [mailto:dfra...@lucent.com] Sent: April 25, 2003 9:43 AM To: 'Pettit, Ghery'; Frazee, Douglas (Douglas); 'Ralph McDiarmid'; 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: RE: Performance Criterion Ghery, I was hoping my response would get a discussion going and am pleased that you responded. Please be aware, however that the basic message I wanted to get across is that while there are clear passes (#1) and clear failures (#9); there are also gray areas. In these gray areas, whether the EUT is found compliant or not depends on a number of factors and is subject to interpretation. If the manufacturer wishes to use a permissible loss of performance, it is best to have this information submitted before the test is performed to avoid the appearance of changing the rules after the game has started in order to come out a winner! There are also subtle differences in the criteria B definition from standard to standard, and even in the same standard, depending on the equipment type. Our products are certified both to 55024 EN 300 386 V 1.3.1. I was not familiar with the 61000-6-2 standard that Ralph inquired about but I reviewed the definition of criteria B in that standard before I responded. In each standard criteria B is applicable for transient phenomena such as ESD and allows for some degradation. However, the wording differs in each standard, which can affect compliance for gray area type test results. Even in CISPR 24, if you are required to use specific criteria for TTE included in Annex. A, the criteria is different and may possibly affect compliance. 61000-6-2 Criteria B: The apparatus shall continue to operate as intended after the test. No degradation of performance or loss of function is allowed below a performance level specified by the manufacturer, when the product is used as intended. The performance level may be replaced by a permissible loss of performance. During the test, degradation of performance is however allowed. No change of actual operating state or stored data is allowed. If the minimum performance level or permissible performance loss is not specified by the manufacturer, either of these may be derived from what the user may reasonably expect from the apparatus if used as intended. Note that the above wording does not allow changes in operating state or stored data either during or after the test. In this regard the 61000-6-2 criteria is more severe than the general CISPR 24 criteria. Thus, I stand by my initial e-mail's #5. Under 61000-6-2 Criteria B, if the EUTs stored data or operating state changes as a result of the transient test, the EUT is non-compliant. For telecommunication network (switching) equipment under 300 386 v 1.3.1 paragraph 11.3.1.2; it is permissible for data errors to occur as a result of transient phenomena, however except for a specific exception for surge testing, established connections must be maintained throughout the testing. Thus the result Ralph described is: 1. Compliant under the general CISPR 24 criteria B 2. Non-compliant under CISPR 24 Annex A criteria B (TTE w/digital interface, TTE w/analog interfaces, FAX) 3. Compliant under CISPR 24 Annex B criteria B (data processing equipment) 4. In a gray area under 61000-6-2 5. Non-compliant under 300 386 V 1.3.1 for telecom. switching equipment The above list is partial, but I think my point is clear. Note that CISPR 24 has 7 Annexes for specific categories of ITE with operating criteria for immunity testing specifically tailored for each equipment type. Thanks to Ralph for presenting such an interesting test result example! Douglas G. Frazee Regulatory Compliance Manager Lucent Technologies PSAX Division dfra...@lucent.com From: Pettit, Ghery [mailto:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 4:51 PM To: 'Frazee, Douglas (Douglas)'; Pettit, Ghery; 'Ralph McDiarmid'; 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: RE: Performance Criterion I'm going to contest this, but only slightly. CISPR 24 defines Performance criterion B as: After the test, the equipment shall continue to operate as intended without
Re: Performance Criterion
I read in !emc-pstc that Wagner, John P (John) johnwag...@avaya.com wrote (in 4203D61676D0AE468AA5CEA90A891C130288F00D@cof110avexu4.global. avaya.com) about 'Performance Criterion' on Fri, 25 Apr 2003: Nonsense! Both the basic standard and the CISPR standard have words to the effect that performance degradation is defined by the manufacturer. It's far from nonsense. The texts you refer to admit the possibility that the manufacturer does not define the permissible performance degradation. -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14 - validation
I read in !emc-pstc that Rich Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com wrote (in 200304251532.iaa00...@epgc264.sdd.hp.com) about 'Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14 - validation' on Fri, 25 Apr 2003: I take this to mean that the group is given the definition and then asked to identify the symbol that matches the definition. Isn't this backwards? Shouldn't a symbol be validated by showing the group the symbol and then asking for the meaning? No, because they get too many wrong answers that way! -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Check list for PCB Layout
Is this for real? is there actually in institute for geniuses? This would explain why we are all really in the dark. No geniuses to lead us. Thanks Jim Freeman From: tkrze...@genius.org.br [mailto:tkrze...@genius.org.br] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 6:21 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Check list for PCB Layout Hi everybody, I would like to create a check list in order to help designers and PCB routers of my company to improve their design / EMI and SI. Where can I find documentations (PDF, links...) with basics PCB rules regarding EMI and SI ?? Witch kind of tests can I set up to verify radiations only with two close field probes ? Is there some referencies (standards, norms...) for close fields levels ? Can I measure them?? Thanks. Thomas K. Genius Institute 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Thermocouple glue
3M used to make a good high temperature tape that held the thermocouples nicely. To keep the tape from no allowing the part to radiate the heat appropriately I used on a small spot of tape over the thermocouple and then a strong adhesive along the line of the thermocouple leads to strain relieve the thermocouple attachment. Given the general accuracy of type T etc thermocouples I never ran into a problem. Sure was easier than trying to mix Fuller's earth and Glassine and was easier on the eyes than rubbing that stuff into them. Gary From: John Allen [mailto:john.al...@era.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 9:29 AM To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue Hi Folks Most of the replies so far seem to indicate the use of permanent adhesives - which means the thermocouples could be difficult to remove and re-use. Therefore, since these items tend to be too expensive to be considered as throw-away items, does any one have suggestions for adhesives which wil stick reasonably well but will then allow the thermocouples to be removed fairly easily and without damage? Regards John Allen ERA Technology Ltd From: Constantin Bolintineanu [mailto:cbolintine...@dsc.com] Sent: 22 April 2003 15:22 To: 'Ned Devine'; IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue I am using LOCTITE 416 - Net wt. 1 OZ.(Part No. 41650) along with the LOCTITE ACCELERATOR 7452 (Part No. 18637) net. WT.0.70 OZ and works well for Thermocouples AWG 30. (5-8 seconds) 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 DISCLAIMER: 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 the message and its attachments to the sender, and then please delete from your system without copying or forwarding it or call DSC at 905 760 3000 extension 2568 so that the sender's address records can be corrected. From: Ned Devine [mailto:ndev...@entela.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 9:11 AM To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: Thermocouple glue Hi, In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples. I just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued. Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement? Thanks Ned Devine Entela, Inc. 3033 Madison Ave. SE Grand Rapids, MI 49548 Phone: 616 248 9671 Fax: 616 574 9752 e-mail: ndev...@entela.com www.entela.com Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.com * Copyright ERA Technology Ltd. 2003. (www.era.co.uk). All rights reserved. The information supplied in this Commercial Communication should be treated in confidence. No liability whatsoever is accepted for any loss or damage suffered as a result of accessing this message or any attachments.
Re: Thermocouple glue
In a message dated 4/23/03 5:37:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com writes: Bill - If you're referring to what I think you are, it's fuller's earth and waterglass, which is a clay-like mineral and sodium silicate solution. A former agency engineer I worked with also used this waterglass adhesive for thermocouples. It worked great and was usually easy to remove thermocouples without damaging. Paul J Smith, Senior Compliance Engineer
Re: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14 - validation
Hi Pete: This usually means developing a focus group and getting them to pick it out of a group of symbols when asked to identify the symbol for 'XXX'. I take this to mean that the group is given the definition and then asked to identify the symbol that matches the definition. Isn't this backwards? Shouldn't a symbol be validated by showing the group the symbol and then asking for the meaning? Best regards, Rich This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Thermocouple glue
John, As I have already replied (but maybe got lost in some of the hit-and-miss mail deliveries that others are complaining of) Blu-Tak is reported to work well (it sticks, it comes off, it doesn't mark the product, it survives a wide range of temperatures). It is used simply to hold the thermocouple in close contact with the surface, and has the added advantage of insulating the thermocouple from the ambient air such that it reads DUT temperature rather than air temperature. Hope you find this useful. Best regards, Neil R. Barker Compliance Engineering Manager e2v technologies ltd Waterhouse Lane Chelmsford Essex CM1 2QU U.K. Tel: +44 (01245) 453616 Fax: +44 (01245) 453410 E-mail: neil.bar...@e2vtechnologies.com -Original Message- From: John Allen [mailto:john.al...@era.co.uk] Sent: 23 April 2003 17:29 To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue Hi Folks Most of the replies so far seem to indicate the use of permanent adhesives - which means the thermocouples could be difficult to remove and re-use. Therefore, since these items tend to be too expensive to be considered as throw-away items, does any one have suggestions for adhesives which wil stick reasonably well but will then allow the thermocouples to be removed fairly easily and without damage? Regards John Allen ERA Technology Ltd -Original Message- From: Constantin Bolintineanu [mailto:cbolintine...@dsc.com] Sent: 22 April 2003 15:22 To: 'Ned Devine'; IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue I am using LOCTITE 416 - Net wt. 1 OZ.(Part No. 41650) along with the LOCTITE ACCELERATOR 7452 (Part No. 18637) net. WT.0.70 OZ and works well for Thermocouples AWG 30. (5-8 seconds) 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 DISCLAIMER: 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 the message and its attachments to the sender, and then please delete from your system without copying or forwarding it or call DSC at 905 760 3000 extension 2568 so that the sender's address records can be corrected. -Original Message- From: Ned Devine [mailto:ndev...@entela.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 9:11 AM To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: Thermocouple glue Hi, In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples. I just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued. Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement? Thanks Ned Devine Entela, Inc. 3033 Madison Ave. SE Grand Rapids, MI 49548 Phone: 616 248 9671 Fax: 616 574 9752 e-mail: ndev...@entela.com www.entela.com Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business --- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc --- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed
RE: Thermocouple glue
I sometimes use a small piece of Kapton tape to hold a thermocouple. Dave Cuthbert Micron Technology From: John Allen [mailto:john.al...@era.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 10:29 AM To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue Hi Folks Most of the replies so far seem to indicate the use of permanent adhesives - which means the thermocouples could be difficult to remove and re-use. Therefore, since these items tend to be too expensive to be considered as throw-away items, does any one have suggestions for adhesives which wil stick reasonably well but will then allow the thermocouples to be removed fairly easily and without damage? Regards John Allen ERA Technology Ltd From: Constantin Bolintineanu [mailto:cbolintine...@dsc.com] Sent: 22 April 2003 15:22 To: 'Ned Devine'; IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue I am using LOCTITE 416 - Net wt. 1 OZ.(Part No. 41650) along with the LOCTITE ACCELERATOR 7452 (Part No. 18637) net. WT.0.70 OZ and works well for Thermocouples AWG 30. (5-8 seconds) 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 DISCLAIMER: 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 the message and its attachments to the sender, and then please delete from your system without copying or forwarding it or call DSC at 905 760 3000 extension 2568 so that the sender's address records can be corrected. From: Ned Devine [mailto:ndev...@entela.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 9:11 AM To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: Thermocouple glue Hi, In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples. I just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued. Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement? Thanks Ned Devine Entela, Inc. 3033 Madison Ave. SE Grand Rapids, MI 49548 Phone: 616 248 9671 Fax: 616 574 9752 e-mail: ndev...@entela.com www.entela.com Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.com * Copyright ERA Technology Ltd. 2003. (www.era.co.uk). All rights reserved. The information supplied in this Commercial Communication should be treated in confidence. No liability whatsoever is accepted for any loss or damage suffered as a result of accessing this message or any attachments. _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.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:
Re: Charge level of rechargeable batteries
Hi All, Is there a safety/regulatory requirement to ship batteries in an uncharged state? I looked in 60950-1 and I can't find anything like that. Regards Doug Beckwith Mitel Networks Ottawa, ON. don_borow...@selinc.com Sent by: To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org owner-emc-pstc@majordom cc: o.ieee.org Subject: Re: Charge level of rechargeable batteries 04/23/03 10:28 AM Please respond to Don_Borowski I don't know about any regulatory or safety aspects, but it would be difficult to have all batteries leave the factory uncharged. Specifically, lead-acid and lithium cells need to have at least a minimum level of charge or they will be damaged. NiCd and NiMH cells are OK with no charge. Donald Borowski Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, WA raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk@majordomo.ieee.org on 04/15/2003 07:59:39 AM Please respond to raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk Sent by:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc: Subject:Charge level of rechargeable batteries Dear All, In the past, the rechargeable batteries accompanying with product must not be charged before leaving manufactory for certain safety regulation. Recently, I notice that the accompanying rechargeable batteries are charged to certain level. At least, it can be used to check the product before they pay for the product. Can someone tell the safety requirements about this and any changes recently. Thanks, Raymond Li Omni Source Asia Ltd. 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Check list for PCB Layout
I can suggest the following links http://www.sigcon.com http://www.systemsemc.com/ http://dsmith.org All three will get you off the ground Best Regards Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Communications Corp. Tel: 303-706-5467 Fax: 303-799-6222 Cell: 303-204-2974 Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com; Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org From: tkrze...@genius.org.br [mailto:tkrze...@genius.org.br] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 7:21 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Check list for PCB Layout Hi everybody, I would like to create a check list in order to help designers and PCB routers of my company to improve their design / EMI and SI. Where can I find documentations (PDF, links...) with basics PCB rules regarding EMI and SI ?? Witch kind of tests can I set up to verify radiations only with two close field probes ? Is there some referencies (standards, norms...) for close fields levels ? Can I measure them?? Thanks. Thomas K. Genius Institute 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Step by Step procedure for calculating and performing Data Co rrel ation
Hi Reginald, I have been using a GTEM now for about a year and have some comments for you. 1. The step by step procedure you are looking for calculating the OATS response based on GTEM testing should be in the software that comes with the GTEM. 2. Correlation is very much more problematical. Unless the GTEM dimensions accommodate the product type that you are testing then correlation point for point will be next to impossible. This is especially true for products with cables as the dimensions (electrically) become very large. 3. There are some test disadvantages to the GTEM. If the test data indicates that you're failing you have no information to help you isolate the problem. There is no information for example on azimuth or polarity. Having said that completing a scan typically takes abot 0.5 hours!! Best Regards Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Communications Corp. Tel: 303-706-5467 Fax: 303-799-6222 Cell: 303-204-2974 Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com; Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org From: Reginald Henry [mailto:rhe...@vicon-cctv.com] Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 7:56 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Step by Step procedure for calculating and performing Data Correl ation All, I am working with a GTEM Cell and wish to perform self verification of our Class A products. We have going to an outside testing house for FCC verification and wish now to do our own verification. * WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR IS THE Step by Step procedure for calculating and performing Data Correlation between a GTEM Cell and OATS ! ** In researching what has to be done to accomplish this task, I have gathered the following information... 1)I Do NOT have to submit the correlated data to the FCC 2) The test does require that we do three ( 3 ) separate setups and break down when we start to collect data. 3) The correlation between a GTEM and an OATS must be performed with a device of the type for which you wish to qualify the GTEM. The OATS must comply with the requirements of ANSI C63.4 and the correlation measurements must be performed per C63.4. The same measuring instruments should ( but is not necessary )be used at both test locations. If anyone has done the math and the setups for such testing , would you pls contact me or point me in the direction where I could possibly educate myself. Regards, Reg Henry Reginald Henry (E-mail 2).vcf 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
re: Surface Temperature Limits
Brian, I will concentrate on replying in connection to EN 60950-1 and let others confirm, or otherwise, applicability to EN 601010-1. I would suggest first of all that you look at the first edition of EN 60950-1 rather than the third edition of EN 60950, unless you have a good reason to use to older standard. If you're starting out on a new product development then using the latest standard will provide you with the longest time period before you need to re-evaluate your product against the superseded standard. Temperature limits are now given in section 4.5 and you will see that the standard has changed from specifying temperatures rises to absolute maximum temperature. IEC/EN 60950 have never assumed a normal ambient of 40 degC, previously it was 25 degC (see 1.4.12 in the 3rd edition) [the 40 degC requirement comes from 1.4 of 1010-1]. Getting back to the first edition of EN 60950-1 and you will see (1.4.12.1) that temperature measurements are made (or converted) to the manufacturer's maximum operating temperature - with a minimum operating temperature of 25 degC (i.e. if you say that your equipment is designed only for use outside in the Artic then the tests will still be run at + 25 degC and not -.40 degC/F, even if your spec does specify a max ambient of -40 degC). EN 60950-1 addresses itself primarily to faults within the equipment rather than to external faults. It is therefore my view that it would be incorrect to apply any fault condition limits the instant that the ambient temperature exceeds the specified maximum. Following such an approach in the extreme would mean that the moment your ambient temperature rose from 30 degC to 30.001 degC that you would apply the fault condition limits (I did say the example was in the extreme, to make the point). Of course this is ridiculous, but I use it to illustrate the point that standards should be an aid to common sense, not a replacement. Irrespective of the foregoing, there are no temperature limits for accessible parts under fault conditions specified in EN 60950-1, there are only temperature limits applicable for windings: this is an omission presently being looked at for future amendments to this standard. Compliance with standards should also only be a first (and generally very necessary) step. There is also potential customer satisfaction to consider. I suggest to you that many, and probably the vast majority, of people would expect equipment to run warmer in the event that the air conditioning fails but they would not expect equipment to get so hot that it became a burn hazard. Although not a safety matter, many/most customers would probably expect your equipment to turn itself off in such obviously foreseeable conditions rather than burn itself out (even if it did so without becoming overly hot). By pointing to the spec. and saying 'there, it says that the max temp must not exceed 30 degC and your room got to 30.1 degC so the warrantee is no longer valid' may get you off the contractual hook, but it isn't likely to get you repeat orders! Hope the above helps. Richard Hughes Safety Answers Ltd (but expressing own views only) From: brian_ku...@leco.com [mailto:brian_ku...@leco.com] Sent: 24 April 2003 15:16 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Surface Temperature Limits Greetings to all, In EN61010-1 section 10 and EN60950 safety standards, there are surface temperature limits specification for Normal Condition based on an Ambient Temperature of 40C. Our company makes analytical instrumentation and a new product we are working on is functionally very susceptible to room temperatures. So, the operational specification in our manual says it must be in a room no warmer than 30C. Question is, is it proper to consider surface temperatures for safety based on a 30C ambient which would give us 10 more range to work with? Someone told me you could do this but it doesn't seem right to me. You are relying on the building's air conditioning as a level of protection. Then I was told that if the AC broke down it would be considered a Fault and then the 105C limit would be applied. Is this correct thinking? Knowing the correct way to apply these requirements effect the design of our instruments so it is important for me to know. Thanks to all in advance. Brian Kunde LECO Corp. 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All
Step by Step procedure for calculating and performing Data Corre lation
All, ++ Sorry I forgot to include that my current tests using the GTEM is under software control by a company called TILE. So collecting the data ( Radiated Emission for Class A FCC ) at my end is not a problem. ++ I am working with a GTEM Cell and wish to perform self verification of our Class A products. We have going to an outside testing house for FCC verification and wish now to do our own verification. * WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR IS THE Step by Step procedure for calculating and performing Data Correlation between a GTEM Cell and OATS ! ** In researching what has to be done to accomplish this task, I have gathered the following information... 1)I Do NOT have to submit the correlated data to the FCC 2) The test does require that we do three ( 3 ) separate setups and break down when we start to collect data. 3) The correlation between a GTEM and an OATS must be performed with a device of the type for which you wish to qualify the GTEM. The OATS must comply with the requirements of ANSI C63.4 and the correlation measurements must be performed per C63.4. The same measuring instruments should ( but is not necessary )be used at both test locations. If anyone has done the math and the setups for such testing , would you pls contact me or point me in the direction where I could possibly educate myself. Regards, Reg Henry 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Performance Criterion
Ralph, If a product self-recovers without operator intervention, then you can say it meets criterion B. The manufacturer has the ability within these criteria to define the acceptable loss of function, as well. If 1 minute is an acceptable time for the self-recovery, the product passes. If operator intervention was required, then a clear failure of criterion B would exist. Ghery Pettit From: Ralph McDiarmid [mailto:ralph.mcdiar...@xantrex.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 5:01 PM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Performance Criterion I have a question about Performance Criterion B as described in EN61000-6-2. Scenario: A product temporary looses communication over a network connection during an EMC disturbance like an ESD event. It self-recovers and resumes communication after about a minute. Question: Is the above event considered an acceptable loss of performance or a loss of functionality? If it is a loss of functionality, even a temporary one, then I would say that is fails Criterion B, but meets Criterion C. I don't think it a question of loss of performance in this example. Is this a correct interpretation? Thanks, Ralph McDiarmid, AScT Compliance Engineering Group Xantrex Technology Inc.
RE: DERIVATION OF CREEPAGE AND CLEARANCES
Creepage Clearance distances in many IEC/EN standards including IEC61010-1 and thereby EN61010-1 are drawn from IEC60664-1: Insulation coordination for equipment within low-voltage systems - Part 1: Principles, requirements and tests. Bill Bisenius EDD bi...@productsafet.com www.productsafeT.com -Original Message- From: Gordon,Ian [mailto:ian.gor...@bocedwards.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 5:11 AM To: 'IEEE EMC-PSTC GROUP' Subject:DERIVATION OF CREEPAGE AND CLEARANCES All Does anyone know from where the values for creepage and clearances given in EN61010-1 (safety requirements for electrical equipment for measurement, control and laboratory use - part 1 general requirements) are derived i.e. are there other standards below 61010 in this respect? Thanks Ian Gordon _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Performance Criterion
I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote (in d9223eb959a5d511a98f00508b68c20c12516...@orsmsx108.jf.intel.com) about 'Performance Criterion' on Thu, 24 Apr 2003: During the test, degradation of performance is allowed. However, no change of operating state or stored data is allowed to persist after the test. Yes, well, as is unfortunately far too common, a CISPR text has been written and accepted with mind not engaged. A product could be failed under that provision if recovery was delayed by 1 NANOSECOND! In other words, what time period is implied by the word 'persist'? We have to guess. -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Thermocouple glue
Hi Folks Most of the replies so far seem to indicate the use of permanent adhesives - which means the thermocouples could be difficult to remove and re-use. Therefore, since these items tend to be too expensive to be considered as throw-away items, does any one have suggestions for adhesives which wil stick reasonably well but will then allow the thermocouples to be removed fairly easily and without damage? Regards John Allen ERA Technology Ltd From: Constantin Bolintineanu [mailto:cbolintine...@dsc.com] Sent: 22 April 2003 15:22 To: 'Ned Devine'; IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: RE: Thermocouple glue I am using LOCTITE 416 - Net wt. 1 OZ.(Part No. 41650) along with the LOCTITE ACCELERATOR 7452 (Part No. 18637) net. WT.0.70 OZ and works well for Thermocouples AWG 30. (5-8 seconds) 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 DISCLAIMER: 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 the message and its attachments to the sender, and then please delete from your system without copying or forwarding it or call DSC at 905 760 3000 extension 2568 so that the sender's address records can be corrected. From: Ned Devine [mailto:ndev...@entela.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 9:11 AM To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety) Subject: Thermocouple glue Hi, In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples. I just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued. Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement? Thanks Ned Devine Entela, Inc. 3033 Madison Ave. SE Grand Rapids, MI 49548 Phone: 616 248 9671 Fax: 616 574 9752 e-mail: ndev...@entela.com www.entela.com Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.com * Copyright ERA Technology Ltd. 2003. (www.era.co.uk). All rights reserved. The information supplied in this Commercial Communication should be treated in confidence. No liability whatsoever is accepted for any loss or damage suffered as a result of accessing this message or any attachments. _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.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:
Check list for PCB Layout
Hi everybody, I would like to create a check list in order to help designers and PCB routers of my company to improve their design / EMI and SI. Where can I find documentations (PDF, links...) with basics PCB rules regarding EMI and SI ?? Witch kind of tests can I set up to verify radiations only with two close field probes ? Is there some referencies (standards, norms...) for close fields levels ? Can I measure them?? Thanks. Thomas K. Genius Institute 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14 - validation
Ok gang, Lots of chatter on this subject, but... We don't randomly pick symbols to represent a message... The US standard, ANSI Z535, allows folks to generate a new symbol, but it must be properly evaluated and verified by use of technical means. This usually means developing a focus group and getting them to pick it out of a group of symbols when asked to identify the symbol for 'XXX'. Without this validation the symbol is not defendable in a product liability suit in the US. I'd like to see the validation evaluation for each of the symbols in IEC 60417. Who can supply that? br, Pete Peter E Perkins, PE Principal Product Safety Consultant Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 503/452-1201 fone/fax p.perk...@ieee.org This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Surface Temperature Limits
Greetings to all, In EN61010-1 section 10 and EN60950 safety standards, there are surface temperature limits specification for Normal Condition based on an Ambient Temperature of 40ºC. Our company makes analytical instrumentation and a new product we are working on is functionally very susceptible to room temperatures. So, the operational specification in our manual says it must be in a room no warmer than 30ºC. Question is, is it proper to consider surface temperatures for safety based on a 30ºC ambient which would give us 10º more range to work with? Someone told me you could do this but it doesn't seem right to me. You are relying on the building's air conditioning as a level of protection. Then I was told that if the AC broke down it would be considered a Fault and then the 105ºC limit would be applied. Is this correct thinking? Knowing the correct way to apply these requirements effect the design of our instruments so it is important for me to know. Thanks to all in advance. Brian Kunde LECO Corp. 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Repeat and late messages?
Yes I'm seeing some strange posts also. Michael Sundstrom NOKIA TCC Dallas / EMC of: (972) 374-1462 cell: (817) 917-5021 amateur call: KB5UKT From: ext k.macl...@aprel.com [mailto:k.macl...@aprel.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 1:28 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Repeat and late messages? Folks - Is it just me, or have others noticed large (days) delays in the appearance of some posts, as well as random duplications? Cheers, Kate Kathy M. MacLean President, APREL Laboratories -EMC-RF Safety-Antenna Design/Test-SAR/Near-Field Tools-Acoustics-Wireless-SAR/MPE 51 Spectrum Way, Nepean, Ontario K2R 1E6 (613) 820-2730 fax (613) 820-4161 cell (613) 791-3777 Web site: http://www.aprel.com - watch for our new web site coming soon! 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Fiber and AC mains wire runs
Hi Folks I second Richard Hughes' comments, but would also add the following: - The IEC 60634/HD 384/ BS7671 etc documents are aimed at wiring installation designers - and they certainly differ from country to country in many respects, notably in the sections on special locations, and in some of the national wiring requirements (e.g. local cables, sockets, plugs and over-current protection requirements). - In addition, each country has its own sets of national and /or electrical contractors installation and verification guides which give the local interpretations. However, most of the guides are only available in the national language! (Done a bit of that over the years!) Therefore, you would have to identify one or more sample countries and put in some considerable work to investigate those in detail to get the flavours being sought. John Allen ERA Technology Ltd From: richhug...@aol.com [mailto:richhug...@aol.com] Sent: 22 April 2003 15:29 To: richwo...@tycoint.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: re: Fiber and AC mains wire runs Richard, As I mentioned in my original reply, the building wiring rules vary from one country within the EU to another. While it is true that the UK Wiring Regulations (BSI 7671) are based on the CENELEC Harmonised Document HD384, which is itself based on the IEC 60364 series of standards, it would be wrong of someone to think that if they purchased a copy of BS 7671 and then based their whole European installation strategy on this UK document that they would be certain not to have difficulties elsewhere in Europe. Of course, if someone wanted to know what the requirements are in the UK and thereby get a 'flavour' of the requirements elsewhere, then that would be a different matter and BS 7671 (also known as the IEE Wiring Regulations) would be a good place to start. They may also wish to look at the IEE web site (www.iee.org) for books that provide aditional guidance when applying the IEE Wiring Regulations. Regards, Richard Hughes. From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: 22 April 2003 13:57 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Fiber and AC mains wire runs The EU wiring rules are based upon HD384 which is based upon IEC 60364. You can purchase a single part copy as BSI 7671. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 5:26 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Fiber and AC mains wire runs I read in !emc-pstc that Cereceres, David dcerece...@pelco.com wrote (in b2cc0e0f2c10d511b86600b0d06898420541f...@localhost.pelco.dns) about 'Fiber and AC mains wire runs' on Wed, 16 Apr 2003: Is there a European equivalent of the NEC that I could possibly reference? An *international* standard, IEC 60364, a huge multi-part standard. -- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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:
RE: Charge level of rechargeable batteries
Is the discharge requirement so that the unit cannot power up (burn up in shipping)? I have purchased a couple of items that had plastic tape inserted between the battery contacts and the battery connector. Is this acceptable? Dave Cuthbert Micron Technology From: don_borow...@selinc.com [mailto:don_borow...@selinc.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 8:29 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Charge level of rechargeable batteries I don't know about any regulatory or safety aspects, but it would be difficult to have all batteries leave the factory uncharged. Specifically, lead-acid and lithium cells need to have at least a minimum level of charge or they will be damaged. NiCd and NiMH cells are OK with no charge. Donald Borowski Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, WA raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk@majordomo.ieee.org on 04/15/2003 07:59:39 AM Please respond to raymond...@omnisourceasia.com.hk Sent by:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc: Subject:Charge level of rechargeable batteries Dear All, In the past, the rechargeable batteries accompanying with product must not be charged before leaving manufactory for certain safety regulation. Recently, I notice that the accompanying rechargeable batteries are charged to certain level. At least, it can be used to check the product before they pay for the product. Can someone tell the safety requirements about this and any changes recently. Thanks, Raymond Li Omni Source Asia Ltd. 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: Thermocouple glue
I also use a tak-pak: a cyanoacrylate and an accelerant. I've found that using the smallest amount of adhesive to do the job works best (limits thermal mass of adhesive) making consideration of the adhesive's thermal transparency moot. The problem with any thermal insulator is that you trap heat that would otherwise convect or radiate away from the point of interest, possibly creating undesirable thermal gradients that may degrade a component's performance or even crack an encapsulant or case. Though not always possible, careful placement of the thermocouple can quite often mitigate air flow over the bead effecting the sensed temperature. Momentary removal of air flow can serve as a cross-check, if there is a concern; the interruption would have to be very short term, to avoid building up of heat in the sensed part. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Product Safety Manager Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services San Jose, CA peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com -Original Message- From: Barker, Neil Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 1:17 AM I am told that Blu-Tak (you know, that non-sticky sticky stuff used to stick up posters etc) works very well over a fairly wide range of temperatures without marking the product. It is also quite a good thermal insulator, which makes sure that the thermocouple sees the test item rather than the air temperature. Best regards, Neil R. Barker 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EN55022:1998 + Amendment A1:2000
John, Amendment A1:2000 to EN55022:1998 changes subclause 10.4, Equipment set-up, for tabletop units. Their linecords are now to come straight down from the tabletop, then go through ferrite clamps or ferrite tubes before they plug into the AC power outlet. According to the latest listing of harmonized standards for the EMC Directive, in the March 26, 2003 Official Journal of the European Union (C74 Volume 46 pages 1-18, which you can download from http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/dat/2003/c_074/ c_07420030326en00010017.pdf) EN 55022:1998+A1:2000 is still scheduled to take effect August 1. We've had some extended discussions on the EMC-PSTC mailing list in the last few months about: * These clamps. * Whether you can make your own versus buying them. * The reasons for this amendment. I have been recommending to our clients for the last six months that if they have older products with internal AC power supplies, or that use brick external power supplies, that: * We need to run (rerun) the Radiated Emissions test to A1:2000 if they want to import the products into Europe after August 1. OR * They need to obsolete, or get any remaining units imported into Europe, before August 1. John Barnes Ks4GL, PE, NCE, ESDC Eng, SM IEEE dBi Corporation http://www.dbicorporation.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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Performance Criterion
I have a question about Performance Criterion B as described in EN61000-6-2. Scenario: A product temporary looses communication over a network connection during an EMC disturbance like an ESD event. It self-recovers and resumes communication after about a minute. Question: Is the above event considered an acceptable loss of performance or a loss of functionality? If it is a loss of functionality, even a temporary one, then I would say that is fails Criterion B, but meets Criterion C. I don't think it a question of loss of performance in this example. Is this a correct interpretation? Thanks, Ralph McDiarmid, AScT Compliance Engineering Group Xantrex Technology Inc.
DERIVATION OF CREEPAGE AND CLEARANCES
All Does anyone know from where the values for creepage and clearances given in EN61010-1 (safety requirements for electrical equipment for measurement, control and laboratory use - part 1 general requirements) are derived i.e. are there other standards below 61010 in this respect? Thanks Ian Gordon _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
