Immunity testing alarm equipment
Dear all, I have observed that there are different interpretations about testing radiated immunity (for example with 10 V/m, up to 2 GHz) for alarm equipment. Applicable standards are for Europe EN 50130-4 and EN 50136. The main difference in the interpretations is with regard to the functionality of the alarm equipment, especially when an (intruder) alarm is generated and the equipment is designed to transfer this information to an Alarm Receiving Center (e.g. By dialling a telephone number) and this should (?) work as well during conducted and or radiated immunity stress. Interpretations: 1. During the immunity stress testing, some malfunction can be accepted (depending upon equipment class), but afterwards it should work properly. It is not realistic to consider 2 phenomena (radiation stress 10 V/m at critical frequencies and an intruder alarm) at the same time. 2. It is essential that during these circumstances the equipment shall continue to work reliably and is capable to transfer the alarm message. Every intruder who knows the trick, can deal wit the situation with a portable radiator, something we should avoid. 3. Formally speaking: telecom equipment responsible for message transfer is not part of the alarm equipment and should be considered / tested separately. I would appreciate your comments on these interpretations. With kind regards Theo Hildering Consultant E-mail: theo.hilder...@planet.nl __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Energy Efficiency for Europe
In message b11802460b4f4b4e963b51adf2fae08b04c4a...@usmafrexmb02.bose.com, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Tyra, John john_t...@bose.com writes: Thanks John I did do a Google before I e-mailed the group but thought people like yourself and others who are involved in the committees could save me the time of sifting through chaff to get to the good stuff. Well, the first page of my search showed many of the 'good stuff' sites. And what you regard as 'good stuff' depends on what you are really looking for, in detail. One major difficulty, in my opinion, is the EC practice of assigning totally non-intuitive URLs, mostly over 100 characters long, to almost every web page. They are difficult to copy and even more difficult to transmit intact to others. In practice, you really need to go through the 'Tiny URL' process, but you might well have to do that for five or six addresses that are, in fact, of no interest to the enquirer. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
RE: Energy Efficiency for Europe
Thanks John I did do a Google before I e-mailed the group but thought people like yourself and others who are involved in the committees could save me the time of sifting through chaff to get to the good stuff. Thanks to those who took the time to send me excellent leads helping me to find the good stuff From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John Woodgate Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 5:24 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Energy Efficiency for Europe In message b11802460b4f4b4e963b51adf2fae08b04c4a...@usmafrexmb02.bose.com, dated Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Tyra, John john_t...@bose.com writes: With the current requirements in place for California and phased regulations coming into affect in Australia can anyone tell me or point to a website which tracks the European Union efforts in Energy Efficiency regulations?? Any information is appreciated A Google search for 'energy efficiency Europe' provided a very large amount of information. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: Radiated Emissions pre-scans for Aerospace / Military / Autom otive Standards.
In message e6acec5be8405b4e936c9e9bccac10241b6...@bb-corp-be1.corp.cubic.cub, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Price, Ed ed.pr...@cubic.com writes: I am biased toward finding out all I can about the EUT. I agree; it's much more sensible to find out, with mind fully engaged and insight operating at 20/20, that slavishly carry out a procedure that is not required by the relevant standard. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: Radiated Emissions pre-scans for Aerospace / Military / Automotive Standards.
In message 460145b502518...@shirley-uk-ms8.shrluk.trw.com, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Luke Turnbull luke.turnb...@trw.com writes: 1. Do people believe the standard requires such a pre-scan? If it doesn't say so in the standard, or in any **official** interpretation... 2. Are test labs worldwide actually performing such a pre-scan? Maybe some are; it can be difficult to control zeal, especially when it increases cash flow... -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: UL 94 class fire retardant materials
In message 000501c76b18$f109d8d0$d600a...@tamuracorp.com, dated Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Brian O'Connell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes: At one time, CSA had published an equivalency table for flame ratings. 'At one time' suggests that it's a table of old flame ratings. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Radiated Emissions pre-scans for Aerospace / Military / Automotive Standards.
Hello emc-pstc'ers, I have an EMC question about military / aerospace / automotive emissions standards. I hope I can get a wide / global answer to how standards 1. should be interpreted and 2. are interpreted when performing a test. It has been suggested that we as a test lab should perform pre-scans when making emissions measurements of a product. The purpose is to ensure that any intermittent emissions will be captured and that it should involve the use of max hold on a spectrum analyser with fast sweeps to ensure all frequencies are revisited many times a second for at least 20 seconds in each span. For each of: DO-160, MIL STD 461, CISPR 25 1. Do people believe the standard requires such a pre-scan? 2. Are test labs worldwide actually performing such a pre-scan? Thanks for your help, Luke Turnbull __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: UL 94 class fire retardant materials
Brian, Thanks for your information. Do you have the name or the number of said document? Ragards, Scott From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Brian O'Connell Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 1:55 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: UL 94 class fire retardant materials Perhaps you meant Yarruup ?? At one time, CSA had published an equivalency table for flame ratings. luck, Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of John Woodgate Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 9:32 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: UL 94 class fire retardant materials In message 460005e6.07b861c6.4e23.3...@mx.google.com, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Scott Xe scott...@gmail.com writes: In the market, lots of UL 94 approved materials are readily available. Is there any way to find out if they meet the requirements of EN 60065/60950/60335 with such components? Ask the manufacturers? But my experience is that once they have UL94, they often don't bother about Yoorup. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
RE: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
Hi Mark, If you ship the adapter (deemed active or not) with your device then the accountability of shipping a compliant device is your responsibility and will require you to test at system level to meet the requirements of 89/336. It goes back to the ole CE + CE = ??? Regards, Mark Schmidt _ From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Mark Gandler Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:45 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter Group, I am not sure how I ended up caring so much for power adapters recently, but they just will not go away. Would you consider linear power adapter : 240V to 12V/1.5A consists of the transformer, bridge rectifier and capacitor to be EM active device? If it is not active, will it be safe to assume what it will be excluded from 89/336 directive based on EU guidelines? See http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/guides/chapfive.htm Thanks, Mark Gandler _ Watch http://g.msn.com/8HMBENUS/2746??PS=47575 free concerts with Pink, Rod Stewart, Oasis and more. Visit MSN Presents today. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: IP testing per EN60529
In message p06240812c226d8d0cad0@[192.168.1.60], dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Nick Williams nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk writes: It is wrong to think of the results of testing to EN 60529 in terms of 'pass' or 'fail'. It is there to assign a code number to a given enclosure and whether this is adequate for the intended application is (in most cases) the subject of other standards. Indeed. Part of the confusion is down to the European Commission, in notifying EN 60529 under the LVD as if it were a safety standard. It isn't: it's a classification standard. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: IP testing per EN60529
I agree with Ted that you are correct, Jim. The IP code is widely misunderstood as being the same as a pass/fail requirement in one of the product safety standards. In fact it is not, it is standardised method of making measurements of the performance of a product with regard to ingress protection, and whether or not a product is acceptable for any given application is not the purpose of the code. It is wrong to think of the results of testing to EN 60529 in terms of 'pass' or 'fail'. It is there to assign a code number to a given enclosure and whether this is adequate for the intended application is (in most cases) the subject of other standards. Nick. At 07:24 -0500 21/3/07, ted.eck...@apcc.com wrote: Your understanding is correct. It doesn't matter whether the probe reaches the stop before hitting anything. If the probe tip enters the enclosure, the enclosure fails the test. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: IP testing per EN60529
Your understanding is correct. It doesn't matter whether the probe reaches the stop before hitting anything. If the probe tip enters the enclosure, the enclosure fails the test. IEC 529 IP ratings, and NEMA enclosure ratings, are intended determine the level of protection from environmental contamination. The pass/fail criteria for IP2X, 3X and 4X are whether the probe can enter any distance into the enclosure. The test is to determine is environmental contaminants can enter the enclosure, get into the electronics or mechanics and cause the product to fail. It is not necessarily related to human safety. For example, if the equipment has a rating of IP32, no object greater than 2.5 mm can enter the enclosure. It doesn't matter if the electronics are two meters from a grill with 3 mm holes. That would still fail the IP32 requirement. Contaminants between 2.5 mm and 3 mm could enter the enclosure and work their way to the sensitive parts, causing a failure. As a side note, even I get a little careless with the nomenclature. There is a NEMA enclosure rating of 4X which roughly correlates to an IEC 529 rating of IP66 - IP68. There is a rough correlation between NEMA/UL enclosure ratings and the IEC classification, but it is not exact. The test criteria are different. Ted Eckert American Power Conversion/MGE http://www.apc.com/ The items contained in this e-mail reflect the personal opinions of the writer and are only provided for the assistance of the reader. The writer is not speaking in an official capacity for APC, MGE or Schneider Electric. The speaker does not represent APC's, MGE's or Schneider Electric's official position on any matter. Jim Eichner Jim.eichner@Xant rex.com To Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject 03/20/2007 07:07 IP testing per EN60529 PM This has to do with the IP 3X, and 4X ratings and tests. The testing is by way of 2.5mm rod or 1.0mm wire probes, which seems quite straight forward at first. But the probes are not meant to be used the way I'm used to. It's not about whether they can touch anything, it's about whether they can enter at all. This is pretty clear in the text and tables giving pass pass/fail criteria, and is made really obvious if you read the note under 13.3. That note says that for IP3X and 4X the requirements are meant to prevent spherical objects of 2.5mm or 1.0mm diameter that are capable of motion from entering the enclosure. So basically an indirect or tortuous entry path doesn't do the job and you have to limit the size of an opening somewhere along the path to less than the diameter of the probe. It's easy to get misled on that point, for a variety of reasons: - the probes have a defined length and a stop, neither of which comes into play with the shall not enter criteria, but their presence suggest the more typical ok to enter but not to touch hazardous parts criteria - some of the examples in Annex A can easily be misinterpreted - safety compliance people are used to criteria that allows the probe to enter but not touch things - the standard touches on pass/fail in several places and the additional letters and first numeral have requirements that overlap but are different I have seen products on the market and results from certification bodies that make it clear this is being misinterpreted. People are assuming it's ok for the probe to enter as long as adequate clearance is maintained to live parts, whirling blades, etc, when in fact it is not acceptable for the IP3X and 4X probes to enter the enclosure. So given what I am seeing as widespread mis-interpretation my question is, am I wrong? Are the labs and other products on the market right, and I'm misinterpreting the requirements? Thanks, Jim Eichner, P.Eng. Manager - Compliance Engineering Xantrex Technology Inc. e-mail: jim.eich...@xantrex.com web: www.xantrex.com Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended
Re: Reference bandwidth and measurement bandwidth.
In message 860315.37819...@web36112.mail.mud.yahoo.com, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Daniel Liang daniel_liang_...@yahoo.com writes: Does anyone know about the what is the difference between reference bandwidth and measurement bandwidth for a transmitter spectrum mask measurement by a spectrum analyzer ? I read the standard which mentioned the reference bandwidth referred to CISPR 16-1 but I cannot find it. CISPR 16-1 has been split up into sections. The definition is there somewhere. For broadband emissions, it's obvious that any limit value has to be associated with a specified bandwidth, because the measured level increases as the bandwidth increases. So 'reference bandwidths' (for different frequency ranges) are specified in CISPR 16-1-1: 9kHz to 150 kHz - 200Hz 150 kHz to 30 MHz - 9 kHz 30 MHz to 1 GHz - 120 kHz Above 1 GHz - 1 MHz The 'measurement bandwidth' is the bandwidth you actually use for the measurement. Usually, it's the same as the reference bandwidth, but in the case you cite, and some others, you have to use a different bandwidth to get a meaningful result. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Reference bandwidth and measurement bandwidth.
Dear all experts, Does anyone know about the what is the difference between reference bandwidth and measurement bandwidth for a transmitter spectrum mask measurement by a spectrum analyzer ? I read the standard which mentioned the reference bandwidth referred to CISPR 16-1 but I cannot find it. Below is the description from the standard. Regards, Daniel Liang Annex C (informative): Determination and use of the measurement bandwidth CISPR 16-1 [3] specifies a reference bandwidth for the measurement of unwanted emissions by measurement receivers and spectrum analysers. The reference bandwidth (BWREFERENCE) cannot always be used as the measurement bandwidth (BWMEASUREMENT). This is particularly the case if the measurement is to be made for example on the slope of a spectrum mask or a receiver selectivity curve. In such situations the measurement shall be made with a sufficiently low bandwidth in order not to distort the reading. The actual measured value, A, shall be referred back to the reference bandwidth by either: Correcting the measured value, A, for any signal having a flat level spectrum with the following formula: B= A + 10* log ( REFERENCE BW / MEASURED BW) Where: - B is the measured level, A, transferred to the reference bandwidth; or - Use the measured value, A, directly if the measured spectrum is a discrete spectral line. A discrete spectrum line is defined as a narrow peak with a level of at least 6 dB above the average level inside the measurement bandwidth. http://cn.mail.yahoo.com/?id=77072 _ Do You Yahoo!? 捇誥轎煤G蚘眊ㄜ笢弊菴珨橈拸嶼僵蚘璃玊閉湮蚘眊 http://cn.mail.yahoo.com/?id=77071 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
Re: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
In message 90511c6e9d0a89419745854eace4c7a8036b5...@whl46.e2v.com, dated Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Barker, Neil neil.bar...@e2v.com writes: As a technicality, forget 89/336/EC. It was repealed and replaced by 2004/108/EC. Not yet, but on 20 July 2007 (for some purposes) and 20 July 2009 (for everything else). -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
RE: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
Mark, The switching spikes of a full wave bridge / capacitor arrangement can be found to extend above 1GHz if the design is poor. In no way is it a passive device! Regards Tim 6239 desk A1S77 P Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Mark Gandler Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 12:45 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter *** WARNING *** This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems Limited Registered Office: Sigma House, Christopher Martin Road, Basildon, Essex SS14 3EL A company registered in England Wales. Company no. 02426132 This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
RE: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
Mark, I would say not. Your adapter includes diodes, which are a form of switching device and will cause interference of some description to an extent that depends on the speed of the diodes. An EM passive device would be something like a filament lamp or an electric heater (providing it doesn't have a thermostat); i.e. items that draw a constant current at supply frequency. You are fortunate that you are considering a low power device, otherwise you would definitely be having to consider harmonic emissions; a simple rectifier/capacitor configuration generates those very well. As a technicality, forget 89/336/EC. It was repealed and replaced by 2004/108/EC. Best regards Neil R. Barker CEng MIET FSEE MIEEE Manager Quality Engineering e2v technologies (uk) ltd 106 Waterhouse Lane Chelmsford Essex CM1 2QU UK Tel: (+44) 1245 453616 Fax: (+44) 1245 453571 Mob: (+44) 7801 723735 P Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Mark Gandler [mailto:markgand...@hotmail.com] Sent: 21 March 2007 00:45 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter Group, I am not sure how I ended up caring so much for power adapters recently, but they just will not go away. Would you consider linear power adapter : 240V to 12V/1.5A consists of the transformer, bridge rectifier and capacitor to be EM active device? If it is not active, will it be safe to assume what it will be excluded from 89/336 directive based on EU guidelines? See http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/guides/chapfive.htm Thanks, Mark Gandler __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ Sent by E2V TECHNOLOGIES PLC or a member of the E2V group of companies. A company registered in England and Wales. Company number: 04439718. Registered address: 106 Waterhouse Lane, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 2QU, UK. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EMC Directive requirements for LINEAR power adapter
In message bay142-f29fcc5f0e9f0e511886e27ad...@phx.gbl, dated Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Mark Gandler markgand...@hotmail.com writes: Would you consider linear power adapter : 240V to 12V/1.5A consists of the transformer, bridge rectifier and capacitor to be EM active device? If it is not active, will it be safe to assume what it will be excluded from 89/336 directive based on EU guidelines? No, because it emits mains harmonic currents and, depending on the type of diode in the rectifier, perhaps emits conducted noise above 150 kHz. However, it's certain that its mains harmonic emissions are subject to no limits according to IEC/EN 61000-3-2 (lower bound for the application of limits is 75 W active input power), and 99.99% certain that it meets the limits for conducted emissions above 150 kHz. So, although it's not *excluded*, it can safely be claimed to meet the essential requirements of the EMC Directive without testing. Note that 89/336 is the old Directive, to be superseded for some purposes on 20 July this year and wholly on 20 July 2009 by the new Directive. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
