Re:Electrical safety of firearms
Don't forget about the USS Forestal Or as us ex-Navy people refer toher as, The USS Forest Fire). The rocket that was launched on deck, resulting in massive damage to the ship and great loss of life was a result of EMI. tony.fi...@quester.com (Tony Firth) on 07/26/2000 05:59:37 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc:(bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: Re:Electrical safety of firearms Phil, Would be very concerned about EMC. In the past there have been many accidental explosions in the mining/quarrying industries from false fuse triggering from vehicular or hand-held radios. Tony Firth, Elect. Eng., Quester Technology Inc.,Fremont,CA Original Message-- Phil Godfrey wrote: Does anyone have the least inkling of any safety requirements specific to a firearm with an electronic trigger... --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: UL1950/UL2601 Thermals
Fine and dandy, but when do you draw the line. If you have a product that slowly increases at less than the 1 deg C in 15 minutes after say 2 1/2 hours, do you keep on testing it say 5 hrs, or 10 hrs, 15 hrs? This could cause excessively long test times if you are a very zealous person who follows the letter of the standard (because there is no time limit, or temp vs. time limit). Daniel Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. Peter Tarver ptar...@nortelnetworks.com on 06/28/2000 01:15:16 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: RE: UL1950/UL2601 Thermals That's really just a rule of thumb. A working premise that provides reasonable results in a relatively short time. As Kaz mentioned, it's not uncommon for some circuits/parts to exhibit a cycling of temperature, either by cyclical loads presented to them or some form of (generic) limiting circuitry. Even using that rule of thumb, it doesn't account for minor increases in ambient temperature over the relevant time frame. One might find that some circuits/parts continue to increase in temperature, while others in the same product have reached thermal equilibrium (within the somewhat loose definition that applies here). Best answer: use engineering judgment. If you clearly have increasing temperatures that aren't resulting from unintentional outside influences, the test is not completed. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Homologation Engineering Nortel Networks ptar...@nortelnetworks.com -Original Message- From: Dan Mitchell [mailto:dan_mitch...@condordc.com] In UL2601 Clause 42.3.3) Duty Cycle - for Equipment for Continuous operation it lists 2 ways to conclude the test a) temperature of the windings stabilize and do not increase by more than 2 deg. C in 1 hr, or b) 2.5 hr, which ever is shorter. UL1950 only states that; for continuous operation, until steady conditions are established. I haven't been able to establish what is meant by Steady Conditions. I was told once by a rep. of a large safety company that it meant no more than a 1 deg. C rise in 15 minute period. However, since I can't find this written in the standard, I am a bit skeptical. If anybody has a good definition of Steady Conditions and can point it out to me in UL1950 or in the PAGs, I would appreciate it. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. P: (805) 486-4565 x323 F: (805) 483-4307 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Title: RE: UL1950/UL2601 Thermals That's really just a rule of thumb. A working premise that provides reasonable results in a relatively short time. As Kaz mentioned, it's not uncommon for some circuits/parts to exhibit a cycling of temperature, either by cyclical loads presented to them or some form of (generic) limiting circuitry. Even using that rule of thumb, it doesn't account for minor increases in ambient temperature over the relevant time frame. One might find that some circuits/parts continue to increase in temperature, while others in the same product have reached thermal equilibrium (within the somewhat loose definition that applies here). Best answer: use engineering judgment. If you clearly have increasing temperatures that aren't resulting from unintentional outside influences, the test is not completed. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Homologation Engineering Nortel Networks ptar...@nortelnetworks.com -Original Message- From: Dan Mitchell [mailto:dan_mitch...@condordc.com] In UL2601 Clause 42.3.3) Duty Cycle - for Equipment for Continuous operation it lists 2 ways to conclude the test a) temperature of the windings stabilize and do not increase by more than 2 deg. C in 1 hr, or b) 2.5 hr, which ever is shorter. UL1950 only states that; for continuous operation, until steady conditions are established. I haven't been able to establish what is meant by Steady Conditions. I was told once by a rep. of a large safety company that it meant no more than a 1 deg. C rise in 15 minute period. However, since I can't find this written in the standard, I am a bit skeptical. If anybody has a good definition of Steady Conditions and can point it out to me in UL1950 or in the PAGs, I would appreciate it. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. P: (805) 486-4565 x323 F: (805) 483-4307 --- This message is from
UL1950/UL2601 Thermals
In UL2601 Clause 42.3.3) Duty Cycle - for Equipment for Continuous operation it lists 2 ways to conclude the test a) temperature of the windings stabilize and do not increase by more than 2 deg. C in 1 hr, or b) 2.5 hr, which ever is shorter. UL1950 only states that; for continuous operation, until steady conditions are established. I haven't been able to establish what is meant by Steady Conditions. I was told once by a rep. of a large safety company that it meant no more than a 1 deg. C rise in 15 minute period. However, since I can't find this written in the standard, I am a bit skeptical. If anybody has a good definition of Steady Conditions and can point it out to me in UL1950 or in the PAGs, I would appreciate it. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. P: (805) 486-4565 x323 F: (805) 483-4307 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Temperature Meters
Joe, I use a Hewlett Packard HP 34970A Data Acquisition Unit. It is a computer controlled, programable unit that can test temperatures (up to 60 channels) using all the various flavors of thermocouple wire. It can also measure VAC and VDC, Amps AC and DC. It sets itself up with an Excel like spreadsheet. It is extremely easy to use. I pulled it out of the box and had it up and running within a half hour. You can get a 20 channel capability for around $1100 or so. You can buy various modules that will allow you to run relays add more thermal/voltage channels, etc. No lab should be without several. Joe Finlayson jfinlay...@telica.com on 06/22/2000 10:26:06 AM To: 'EMC PSTC' emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: Temperature Meters Hello Group, I'm in the market for a multi-channel (12-15+, the more the better) temperature meter and would appreciate some leads. I found a model MTT-40 on the EDD web site that seems to fit my needs but would like to shop around to see what's out there. Any input regarding features with pro's and cons would be greatly appreciated. Could someone also explain the differences between the options of glass braid and teflon thermocouple wire. The only difference shown on the web site was the max temperature supported. Thx, Joe * ... Joe Finlayson Manager, Compliance Engineering Telica, Inc. 734 Forest Street, Bldg. G, Suite 100 Marlboro, MA 01752 Tel: (508) 480-0909 x212 Fax: (508) 480-0922 Email:jfinlay...@telica.com Web: www.telica.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Network Card Certification
I have a possible project where I will have to get a PC Network Card Safety certified. As it is used in a PC, I would assume that it will fall under UL1950. Since the card does not directly connect to a phone line, (it would go through a server and then to a phone line) I was wondering if Clause 6 Connection to Telecommunication Networks would apply. Additionally, I would like to know what FCC requirements must be met. Any other information would be greatly appreciated. Dan Mitchell Condor DC Power Supplies --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re:Steel Ball For Impact Test
Depends, If you want a Real Test Ball with the hook, you can buy one from Ergonomics, Inc.(800) 862-0102 P/N ITB15 for $140.00. If you don't need the hook, you can get a chrome plated steel ball from McMaster Carr that is 50.8 mm in diameter and weighs 524 grams (within specification) for $16.21. The P/N is 9528K71. Daniel Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com (Jim Bacher) on 03/21/2000 04:29:50 AM To: Jasmine TAN sb...@ctl.creative.com, emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: Re:Steel Ball For Impact Test forwarded for Jasmine TAN.Jim Reply Separator Subject:Steel Ball For Impact Test Author: Jasmine TAN sb...@ctl.creative.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 3/21/00 6:53 PM Hi, Does anyone has any recommended source on Steel ball for Impact testing as listed in UL60950. Thanks for your recommendation. Regards, Jas --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Insulation of energized water (De-Ionized Water)
A long time ago, while I was a member of Uncle Sams Canoe Club, I worked on a radar system that used D.I. Water. The tubes in the liquid cooler were copper and the heat exchanger was CRES. The water was circulated throughout the transmitter group and through a Klystron where it was heated and back to the cooler. Water temp during normal operation was just over 160 degrees F., as I recall. Every three months we had to run a descaler solution through the system. During periods of high operation (transmitter up and running while at sea), we got more green sludge out of the pipes than we got out during periods of in-port operation (transmitter shut off and water temp around 60 degrees F.). Therefore, at least in my experience, Higher temperature operation does impact the use of copper pipes. Other items of note. The liquid cooler also had a micron filter to trap impurities and a conductivity meter to test the conductivity of the water. A glycol solution was also added. Hello group, I have a product that uses cooling water and at one point within the system the water is energized to a high voltage level. There are several mechanisms used to insure that the water is safe before exiting the system. I would like to be able to use De-Ionized or Triple Distilled water for insulation as this would simplify the design. In this design there would be full time monitoring of the quality of the water. One problem is that DI water causes corrosion of copper pipes unless the inner surfaces of the pipes are plated with some other material, or so I have heard . . . Recently there have been some fairly convincing arguments that this is not a problem, for water at lower temperatures (100 deg C). These arguments are based on an ASTM Publication now out of print, Symposium on High-Purity Water Corrosion presented at the annual meeting of the ASTM in 1955. I believe this presentation was mostly concerned with cooling water in nuclear reactors and very high water temperatures. As a result of this, I am now confused as to who is right. Is anyone able to provide some insight into this? -doug = Douglas E. Powell Regulatory Compliance Engineer Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. 1625 Sharp Point Dr. Ft. Collins, Co 80525 mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com http:\\www.advanced-energy.com\ = --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Product Safety Certification School
Last year, sometime, reference was made about the possible creation of a University program to teach Product Safety. I was wondering if anybody has heard anything further about this program? Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. P: (805) 486-4565 x323 F: (805) 483-4307 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Technical Documentation
At a former company, we decided to do this. We found out that if you used a complete verision of Adobe Acrobat Writer, you could create a word document and convert it into a .pdf format that was an order of magnitude smaller than the same file that was scanned in. Consequently, we also had the test houses provide their reports in electronic format and converted them to .pdf file. Daniel Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. Grasso Charles (Chaz) gra...@louisville.stortek.com on 03/03/2000 10:36:03 AM To: 'Bruce Touzel' btou...@acc.com, Scott Douglas s_doug...@ecrm.com cc: emc-p...@ieee.org (bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: RE: Technical Documentation Excellent thought - and one that we are moving to. There are a couple logistical issues that need resolving.. 1) one problem there is that we would have to employ 2 persons fulltime to perform all the necessary library functions 2) the transmittal of the data (the files can attain several megabytes) is non trivial. Webdownlaads can take a L..O..N..G time and email systems typically puke on the file size. -Original Message- From: Bruce Touzel [mailto:btou...@acc.com] Sent: Friday, March 03, 2000 10:37 AM To: Scott Douglas Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Technical Documentation why don't you just scan-in your documents and post them on the internal company server so that anyone can get it if needed ? thx bruce Scott Douglas wrote: I guess I want to toss my 2 cents in here. I am probably going to be found out in left field but here's what I do with all this stuff. I keep a 3 ring binder where I store copies of all of the safety agency certifications and notices of compliance from the EMC test house. I also keep a copy of the Declaration of Conformity in the book. I keep one copy of this binder in our UK office, one copy here in my office and one copy here in Document Control (here being our US factory). In addition to the binders, I keep one file cabinet in Document Control where I store all safety and EMC test records. I am now adding copies of component proofs to this file cabinet. I do not store schematics, fabrication or assembly drawings. Neither do I store user manuals or reference manuals. Tech Pubs and Drafting store all these documents and drawings. Should the need arise, anyone can ask our UK office for a document and that request will be passed on to me. If that request ever comes in, I will go to Document Control and arrange to collect the necessary paperwork. I am certainly not going to create a file of duplicate documents that I have to update on an every day basis. So it would seem that my TCF or whatever else you want to call it is actually scattered all over our factory, each function keeping their own records. About the only thing I did to these other document storage processes was to add the 10 storage requirement to their ISO 9001 procedures. One other thing I did was to insert myself in the ECO process such that I sign off on every change order to a tested and released product. That way, I won't miss anything. So far, it seems to be working with minimal fuss. The few requests I have had were from non-European countries for test records, specifically from South Africa, Australia and Russia. I am sure somebody will tell me I am way out there and really non-compliant. But since I test and certify to product specific (ITE) standards, I do not need to keep TCF's or whatever else at a test house / notified / competent body. Therefore, I will not keep such a file here either. I will deliver whatever documents to whomever requests, it may take a few days, but I will deliver. If that is not in keeping with the spirit and intent, then somebody better lock me up. Scott s_doug...@ecrm.com ECRM Incorporated Tewksbury, MA USA --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Re: CB
The best one I have found is at www.cbscheme.org Daniel Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. pmerguer...@itl.co.il (Peter Merguerian) on 03/02/2000 08:34:28 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc:(bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: CB Dear All, Does anyone know a good sight where I can have a good explanation of the CB Scheme? I checked the CB in safetylink and it does not give a good explanation (advantages, etc.). Anyone knows of any other site on the internet? Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Lead Banned in Europe Japan?
What about car batteries and for that matter, other types of lead/acid storage batteries. As far as I know they haven't come up with a tin battery. I know thay have some rather exotic types out there, but until now, they are cost prohibitive. Dan Mitchell Condor DC Power Supplies LaceyScott sla...@foxboro.com on 01/18/2000 08:44:04 AM To: 'simon_...@emc.com'simon_...@emc.com cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'emc-p...@ieee.org (bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: RE: Lead Banned in Europe Japan? My, how public spirited of them. Scott -Original Message- From: simon_...@emc.com [SMTP:simon_...@emc.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 10:24 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: Lead Banned in Europe Japan? A little research on the Internet showed that the proposal comes from a tin manufacturers association. I cannot give you a direct sourse at the moment, but it was not difficult to find. The association's goal is to replace lead with tin. Leo Simon -Original Message- From: ron_well...@agilent.com [mailto:ron_well...@agilent.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 9:39 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org; mpeder...@midcom-inc.com Subject: RE: Lead Banned in Europe Japan? Mel, It would be interesting to know who your Customer is that is making this request. We have had similar requests for material content, including lead, specifically in the components we manufacture. You have already heard from people concerning the WEEE Directive in Europe. As for Japan, there is no ban on lead but a law regarding disposal of waste into landfills. Some Japanese manufacturers are imposing lead elimination requirements on their suppliers, mostly component suppliers, to comply with this landfill law. Regards, +=+ |Ronald R. Wellman|Voice : 408-345-8229 | |Agilent Technologies |FAX : 408-345-8630 | |5301 Stevens Creek Blvd.,|E-Mail: ron_well...@agilent.com| |Mailstop 51L-SQ |WWW : http://www.agilent.com | |Santa Clara, California 95052 USA| | +=+ | Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age | | eighteen. - Albert Einstein | +=+ -Original Message- From: mpeder...@midcom-inc.com [mailto:mpeder...@midcom-inc.com] Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 3:46 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: FW: Lead Banned in Europe Japan? Hello: I periodically recieve inquiries on the quanitity of various materials (including Lead) in our product. A customer of ours recently claimed that Lead has been banned in electronics in Europe Japan. They are asking what we are doing about this. Is there any basis in truth for this? Thanks Mel Pedersen Midcom, Inc. Homologations Engineer Phone: (605) 882-8535 mpeder...@midcom-inc.com Fax: (605) 882-8633 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: LVD voltage range.
This whole thing was thoroughly discussed last year, I believe. The consensus was that, Yeah, it would be nice, but it won't happen, yet because of a variety of reasons. Chief among them were: 1. All those countries with individual marks don't like the idea of giving up the cash cow, 2. Large, to be nameless, not for profit organizations, don't like the idea of a company in Outer Inner Upper Lower Mongolia issuing a sticker that they would have to accept. The whole idea has merit, because if an agency in Outer Inner Upper Lower Mongolia would provide the same (read equal) service at a lower price, and they issued a World Mark for compliance, acceptable in every country, I might use them. It would save my company money, raise the bottom line and force the Large Nameless One to respond with lower prices, quicker service to keep their customer base or else go the way of the Dodo bird. Daniel Mitchell Condor DC Power Supplies sbarr...@icomply.com on 01/14/2000 01:09:12 PM To: roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com cc: emc-p...@ieee.org (bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: RE: LVD voltage range. If I remember correctly, Rich Pescatore and others advocated the developement and use of a mark that indicated compliance conformity via the third party certification system. It could be used by any accredited Lab (NRTL, IECEE etc.) and demonstrats to all a continued compliance program as well as conformance to an internationally harmonized standard. Scott Barrows KTL Dallas -Original Message- From: roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com] Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 6:25 AM To: geor...@lexmark.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: LVD voltage range. George said: In the ideal world, there will be one global mark to indicate that the product meets all safety, health, EMC, environmental, and other applicable standards. The CE mark is virtually this ideal mark, but is only accepted within the 15 member states of the European Union and a few other countries. The CE Mark is not accepted outside Europe as a guarantee of compliance, nor indeed in Europe is it fully accepted as such, althoutgh that was the intention. Because there is no mandatory third party involvement, unscrupulous companies and especially importers can apply the CE mark even when it is not supported by any evidence. That's why there is currently some pressure for a third-party approval mark. Trouble is, today you need dozens of these - UL, IRAM, VDE, TUV, GS, FI, Chinese marks, etc.. Roger - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Mil-Std-202
Does anyone know a website where I can download a copy of Mil-Std-202. Preferably at no charge. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. P: (805) 486-4565 x323 F: (805) 483-4307 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: safety ground wire
Most household (consumer) appliances are what is called Double or Reinforced Insulated. This means that there are 2 (or more) layers of insulation between the Hazardous voltages and the user. Total reliance is placed on this insulation. These are, in safety parlance, called a Class 2 product. It can usually be idetified by the fact that the input connector has only a Line and Neutral. On the other hand, A Class 1 product has three pins on the connector, Line, Neutral and Ground. The ground is used to tie parts of the assembly to earth. That way, if there is a failure, the path for the fault current is to earth via the ground pin and not the user. Reliance is placed on this ground pin for protection. Testing is performed to assure that this is a reliable connection. However, please note that even though a Class 1 unit has a ground pin for protection, there are usually parts in the product that have Double Insulation (i.e. Transformer). Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies, Inc. Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com on 11/30/99 03:51:52 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org cc:(bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: safety ground wire What determines whether equipment gets a green wire or not? TVs, toasters, handheld hair dryers and just about anything for home use get two wire power cords. Computers and other ITE get three wire cords. Is the distinction commercial vs. residential (class A vs. Class B)? It doesn't seem purely safety related, since a metal toaster would appear to be more prone to dangerous electrical faults than a doubly-isolated all plastic handheld hair dryer. What is the rule here? - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: IEC 60990 Vs IEC 60950
Kevin, You do provide valid points. However, how many times have you shucked out $60 or $80 for a referenced standard, only to receive a 15 page document? I have, a few times, which makes me very reluctent to rush out and buy everything that is referenced. If the standards were reasonably priced, it wouldn't be such a burden to buy all those extra specifications. Daniel Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies. Kevin Richardson k...@compuserve.com on 09/28/99 08:24:11 PM To: Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk cc: [unknown] emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org (bcc: Dan Mitchell/CondorDC) Subject: Re: IEC 60990 Vs IEC 60950 Hi Nick, The frustrations you document below are indeed understandable. If I may point out however, there are some very good reasons why one standard should make reference to another standard rather than include what may be believed to be the complete or appropriate requirement from another standard. Some of the reasons are: 1. any group of people involved in the preparation of an international standard are accepted as reasonably expert in their field. Typically therefore they are not acknowledged as experts in terms of another standard, developed by another group of experts (committee) and as such may unwittingly include the wrong requirements or include the requirement in the wrong context; 2. all standards, particularly standards involving complex requirements, should be read in full regarding their requirements. It is unwise to attempt to isolate one clause or requirement in a standard as other parts of the standard may well impact that clause; 3. if requirements from another standard are included, the moment the other standard changes or modifies that requirement in any way the first standard which has included the requirement is immediately out of date and it too now requires modification to come into line with the modified requirement in the other standard. Unnecessary duplication of effort and expense (expenses which would need to be passed on to the purchaser of the standard anyway). When a standard includes requirements from several other standards it is an impossible and unrealistic task for the committee responsible to keep a watching brief on all requirements in all standards they have included requirements from; and 4. lastly, the IEC have general rule that after a standard has had 4 Amendments a new Edition of the entire standard must be published. This again introduces unnecessary work and costs and would result in a marked decrease in the period for which your standard that you purchased would be current (ie the user would need to purchase the complete standard far more frequently). I am not sure I have included all the reasons however these are the main ones. By the way, the standard you picked (IEC 60950) is one of the more complex standards and as such is an excellent example of point 2 above I believe. Hope this provides some appreciation for some of the reasons most standards no longer include requirements from other standards and instead just make reference to the applicable standard. Best regards, Kevin Very little to do with the topc in the header I'm afraid, but... This post raises a point which has concerned me for some time, and which I'd be interested in opinions from other sources on. It is my impression (and it is only an impression - I have made no attempt to gather objective evidence) that it is increasingly common for new standards to be issued, and existing standards to be modified, with certain tests removed from the standard itself and replaced with a cross reference to another harmonised or IEC standard. This seems to be particularly true of mechanical tests (e.g. vibration, drop test, enclosure access). Standards writers would doubtless argue that this makes good sense because it make updating these specialist requirements easier, and it standardises (!) the requirements between different documents. Personally, it's a practice which annoys me and I think it is bad standard making. I say this on two grounds: 1. Few things annoy me more in relation to standards than spending a shed load of money on an enormous document which is supposed to be a comprehensive set of requirements and then discovering I have to spend a load more money to buy subsidiary standards in order to find out what the requirements of the main standard really are. It's difficult not to conclude that this is profiteering by the standards publishing bodies. 2. When you get a test certificate for an appliance which has been tested to (say) BSEN60950:1992 it would be nice to think you could tell exactly what requirements have been applied to the product. However, if one has to know which version of the subsidiary standards have been applied, the process quickly becomes a nightmare. 60950 may be a bad choce to illustrate this phenomenon - I'm not very familiar with it, although I know
Y Capacitors on 480VAC input power suppply
On a single phase power supply that has 480VAC on the input, what type of Y Cap would be acceptable for use from Line and Neutral to ground? Browsing through several catalogs, I have only seen them rated up to 250VAC. Does anyone know of a Y cap that can be used in this situation, or will I have to series 2 normal 250V caps in order to meet the voltage requirement? Dan Mitchell Product Safety Engineer Condor DC Power Supplies - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: 50 ohm or 75 ohm
Alternately, there are lists that tell you what the impedance is for a specific type of cable. i.e. RG58U is 50 ohms. RG59/U is 75 Ohms, RG63B/U is 125 Ohms and etc. All coax has the type stamped on it's outer insulator every couple of feet for identification purposes. Most engineering books contain such a chart. Makes it easier than having to test, unless you really have nothing better to do with your time. Daniel Mitchell Product Safety Associate Engineer EOS Corp. - Original Message - From: Lacey,Scott sla...@foxboro.com To: emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 1999 11:34 AM Subject: RE: 50 ohm or 75 ohm Leslie, This is fairly simple using an RF signal generator and an oscilloscope terminated at 50 ohms. The RF generator must have an output impedance of 50 ohms. The trick is to first measure the amplitude delivered at the oscilloscope from a known 50 ohm cable at 5 MHz or greater. Then, without changing any settings, connect the unknown cable and observe the amplitude. The 75 ohm cable should exhibit a higher amplitude, and will probably vary with cable length. I once used a method similar to this to determine which end of a cable was shorted due to an improperly installed crimp connector. Before I set this up for him, the unfortunate technician had to cut one connector off and then check with an ohmmeter. This gave him a 50% chance of removing the good connector. By the way, I generally mark cables with colored tape - green for 50 ohm and violet for 75 ohm. Prevents a mix-up when working in a busy lab. Hope this helps. Scott Lacey Leslie Bai wrote: Dear members, Anyone there can share the experience to measure cables' impedance thus to identify whether a BNC is a 50 ohm or 75 ohm cable. Thanks, Leslie - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: CANADIAN REQUIREMENTS
To make it easier and save you money, you can get a joint UL CSA listing called a c-UL for Product Safety. It carries the same weight in Canada as the CSA mark, but saves you from the added expense of getting the unit CSA certified and the expense of CSA coming to your factory for a yearly audits. - Original Message - From: Nezam Najafi nezam.naj...@madge.com To: 'George Waters' gwat...@digiceiver.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 11:15 AM Subject: RE: CANADIAN REQUIREMENTS Hello George: Your FCC part 15 for emission is mutually recognized by Canada. As for Safety, US has UL1950 3rd Ed. while Canada has C22 NO. 950. These safety tests are almost identical with some dela. You need to get the Canadian safety certificate. Good Luck Nezam Najafi MADGE NETWORKS -Original Message- From: George Waters [mailto:gwat...@digiceiver.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 8:29 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: CANADIAN REQUIREMENTS I need some guidance on an indoor satellite receiver we build. Functionally it is similar to a DISH network receiver, but ours is not a consumer product. We worked with test labs to obtain conformance to FCC Part 15, and CE, for which we have a DOC. Now our US customer wants to lease some of the units in Canada. What else do we need to do? George Waters - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
LFM test rig
My company produces AC to DC Power Supplies. I have been directed to make a quick and dirty test rig that will allow me to put a predetermined airflow in LFM over the unit. Does anyone know of a website that describes something like this or have had experience building such a test rig and would be willing to share their expertise. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Associate Engineer EOS Corp. - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
IEC60950 3rd Edition
All, I know that the 3rd edition of EN60950 is currently available and it's effectivity date was the date of issue. However, does anyone know when the date of withdrawl for the 2nd edition will be? Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Associate Engineer EOS Corp. - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: triple insulated wire
Another American source is Virginia Insulated Products in Saltville, Virginia. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Associate Engineer EOS Corp. -- From: robin chan[SMTP:woj...@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 01, 1999 5:45 PM To: gmcintu...@packetengines.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:Re: triple insulated wire Gary, Thanks so much for your information. But we have already placed the trial order to Rubadue 2 weeks ago. Actually you will find Japanese and German sources also. Do you want to have those information? Robin Chan. From: Gary McInturff gmcintu...@packetengines.com Reply-To: Gary McInturff gmcintu...@packetengines.com To: 'emc-pstc list server' emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: triple insulated wire Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 16:19:06 -0800 A while back somebody was asking about triple insulated wire and where to get it. I only remember that it appears to be hard to locate. Serendipitously, I ran across a vendor that I don't remember anyone mentioning. So hoping those that need the information are still watching this listserver and FYI Rubadue Wire Co Inc. Anaheim Hills, Ca 92807 (714) 693 5512 Fax (714) 693 5512 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: AC Adapters
We supply AC Adapters with a IEC320 appliance coupler. We then leave it to the company we supply the adapter to to provide their own ac cord for the country they sell the adapter in. This saves us bucu bucks by not having to keep all the wierd plugs of the world in stock. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Associate Engineer EOS Corp. -- From: WOODS, RICHARD[SMTP:wo...@sensormatic.com] Sent: Thursday, March 18, 1999 9:32 AM To: 'emc-pstc' Subject:AC Adapters To all of you who market equipment worldwide using AC adapters: 1. Is it true that plug adapters similar to those used by tourist are not legal in most countries? 2. How many different adapters are required to be stocked to handle the various requirements for plugs and safety approvals? 3. Would you please identify them by the countries that use them? Or, is there a good on-line source for this information? - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: Awards for Worst EMC/PS qualities
Along the same lines, the old VW Beatles would put out so much noise that you could pick them up on your FM receiver a hundred yards down the road. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety Associate Engineer EOS Corp. -- From: Hans Mellberg[SMTP:emcconsult...@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 1999 11:14 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:Re: Awards for Worst EMC/PS qualities A certain German sports car using a certain German fuel injection system could be made to malfunction in an amuzing way (not to the sports car operator though!) such as backfire, sputter, smoke, flames from exhaust pipe, etc., by tractor-trailer operators with their CB lin-amps when keying on and off. This was a popular thing to do by truckers in the late 70's. This susceptibility problem was addressed and corrected by the sports car manufacturer. Other manufacturers may have had similar problems. At 08:03 AM 3/8/99 PST, bma (Bailin Ma) wrote: Hi Group, We have already seen awards for the most misleading ads, worst attire, worst films, . Why not awards for worst EMC and PS qualities? Barry Ma Morgan Hill, CA 95037 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: ESD Test Plane Material Type
Not to mention, Aluminum is alot cheaper on your budget. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. -- From: Gary McInturff[SMTP:gmcintu...@packetengines.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 7:14 AM To: chris_dup...@compuserve.com; INTERNET:dlo...@advanced-input.com; emc-pstc Subject:RE: ESD Test Plane Material Type Haven't tried copper but have had no problem - that I could detect - from using the aluminum. Its also a little easier to get single large sheets of aluminum. Use fasteners that have some sort of surface penetrating contact. All aluminum oxides starting right after production. (So does copper). Gary -Original Message- From: chris_dup...@compuserve.com [SMTP:chris_dup...@compuserve.com] Sent: Monday, December 07, 1998 11:27 PM To: INTERNET:dlo...@advanced-input.com; emc-pstc Subject:ESD Test Plane Material Type Hi Darrell. You wrote: We are building an ESD Test Station for table-top equipment. IEC 1000-4-2 indicates that either copper or aluminum may be used for the Horizontal Coupling Plane and Ground Reference Plane. I do not see whether it matters much and would prefer aluminum. Has anyone found or heard of any differences between aluminum and copper for the ESD test set-up? The material used for your ESD coupling plane and ground reference is effectively irrelevant. Alumimium is fine. Regards, Chris Dupres Surrey, UK. - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: ANSI C63.4-- OATS construction issues
Ever hear of the Stealth Bomber? Same idea. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. -- From: Robert Bonsen[SMTP:rbon...@orionscientific.com] Sent: Friday, November 13, 1998 8:03 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:Re: ANSI C63.4-- OATS construction issues I think a few sites exist having serrations like that. Typically shaped with a cosine taper or triangular, with a spatial distribution which is optimized to minimize edge reflections. Interesting concept that has been used in a wide variety of applications to eliminate edge reflections caused by an abrupt transition from reflecting surface to free space, like compact ranges and reflector dish antennas. This concept will work particularly well on a roof-top OATS where there is no surrounding dirt to transition the ground plane in to. The reduction in edge reflections will be better for a smaller OATS since these edge reflections become more noticable with smaller ground plane size. Hence the performance improvement for a smaller OATS will be considerably better. There are several papers on this type of edge termination used in compact ranges, reflector antennas, radar targets etc, for reducing edge reflections and side lobe levels. Check AMTA proceedings or IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation. I don't recall a specific paper on using serrations on an OATS ground plane though. Anybody else? -Robert EMC facility design consultant Robert Bonsen Principal Consultant Orion Scientific email: rbon...@orionscientific.com URL: http://www.orionscientific.com phone: (512) 347 7393; FAX: (512) 328 9240 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
One Mark discourse
I am glad to see that there are level heads out there and that someone finally saw what I was getting at when I started this fire storm. I didn't say anything at all about getting rid of all the agencies and replacing them with one huge world agency. Sure, go to your local agency, whether it be UL, SEMKO, VDE, GOST, EZU, CCIB and ad nausium, and have the testing done by them. This should not present much of a problem since most of the world uses some derivitive of IEC 950 or IEC 601 and adheres to some sort of EMC regulation such as CISPR 22 or FCC Class B. This keeps the safety agencies in the game, but it will save the submitting company oodles of money over the long run BECAUSE they only have to get their product tested ONE TIME ONLY. Your safety agency of choice would then issue a Mark that is accepted world wide, along with their own to show who actually did the testing. With this method you would have shorter time to market, which would generate more income for your company and increase profits. You could sell any place in the world, you could not be locked out of a market because you did not jump through all the hoops, dotted all the Is and crossed all the Ts required by some agency. The only down side to this scenerio is that if your country has a low tech base and doesn't consistantly put out new products, your safety agencies may not get much work. In which case your agency was probably started to create cash inflow from more developed countries to put your bumper sticker on their product. Of course, someone says this will put them out of work. No it won't, you just won't have any more headaches from trying to conjole an agency from Outer Minner Middle Mongolia to get on the ball and release the cert. that you have been waiting 2 years for. The large enlightened corporation whose comment follows would have to increase their productivity and throughput, otherwise I could go to another agency in another part of the world and still get a mark that would allow me to sell in my country. As I stated earlier, this in my dream. It probably will not happen in this world, because of agencies like the one mentioned in the last paragraph, but we can always hope. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. -- From: Scott Douglas[SMTP:s_doug...@ecrm.com] Sent: Friday, September 11, 1998 11:59 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Cc: allen...@ul.com Subject:Re: One Mark discourse allen...@ul.com writes: Well, gee lets see. I work forTherefore I want my mark to go away and make everyone who is in this business equal. OK, how about this. Everyone remove their brand name from products. Let's have one mark and generic products only. Thats a free market system right??? Or we just have one lab become world wide dominate and only use their mark. naw. I don't think that this is what we are really asking for. It just dawns on me, anyway, that I don't really care what one single agency mark I use on my products. I am testing to what is essentially the same standards over and over and over and paying over and over and over. This is what I personally object to. It is counter-productive and inefficient. Tell me I have to have a mark, any ONE mark, and OK, I'll do it gladly. I like the third party confirmation that I have read, understood and applied the standards. That will be much better for me should the unthinkable happen and someone chooses to sue me for something my product supposedly did or didn't. Right now Government and Retailers have decided they want some proof of a safe product. In the case of the US, an Independant Corporation took the bull by the horns and created a set of standards to evauate products to. They then created a mark whereby a manufacturer could display showing they underwent this evaluation and complied. Governments, Retailers and Consumers liked this idea and bought into it. Hooray for the progressive Corporation. And a great job the Independent Corporation did, too. Now this Corporation got to big. Others started to complain that they wanted a piece of the market too. The bad word monopoly arose and the Government interviened to put a stop to it. Now these little guy's have the Government backing their existance by law instead of by experience. But isn't this what democracy is all about? The ability for anyone who can muster the resources to enter a market can do so? The government did not end a monopoly, the made the law more generic, fair and uniform. They removed a special treatment for a single entity. And, as always, it's caveat emptor when it comes to choosing your agent. But the big Corporation has too much history and too much acceptance. So the little guy's want to go back to the Government and have the individual marks done away with so the can compete in a market they had nothing to do with developing. I don't think this is what any of us are
Are all these agencies really necessary?
The company I work for routinely requests that I get certifications through the following safety agencies: UL, VDE, SEMKO, DEMKO, NEMKO, FIMKO, EZU, QAS, GOST and ad nausium. My question is this; Are all these agencies necessary? If you get a base safety certification from say, UL, coupled with a CB Report/Cert and a third party EMC/EMI report to FCC ClassB, and EN50022, why is it necessary to get the safety agency for every country you want to sell in? Why can't this industry come up with an all encompassing mark, lets call it the OM (for Overall Mark) that is granted to your product after you get the following: 1. Base safety cert (from your agency of choice) 2. CB Report/Cert 3. FCC/Cispr22 cert THe mark would allow you to sell your product in any country in the world. It makes alot more sense than the way it is done now. I can spend up to 3 months waiting for a certification to come back from China. The cost is outragous also. If we spend $30,000 on the certification process, we count ourself lucky. I believe that alot of these new agencies that have been appearing on the scene over the last couple of years are in it strictly to make a buck. All they have to do is block your product from their market unless you pay their extortion money. I know that this is opening up a can of worms, but I would like to know if there are other disgruntled safety persons out there that feel the same way. This view is strictly my own. Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
RE: Are all these agencies really necessary?
We use the CB Scheme, and it does work to our advantage to a certain extent. I only have to do the testing once and the other CB Scheme countries have to accept the data. However, this is not my point. Once the CB is received, we should be issued a mark that is accepted world wide (or even in the 32 countries that accept the CB scheme); no more having to go to TUV, SEMKO, CCIB, QAS etc. to get their country approval so we can sell in their country. Granted, this would probably go over like a lead balloon, because some of these countries use these fees for their mark as a source of revenue for their governments. And besides which, it would put Government beaurcrats out of a job (something that is almost unheard of in modern society). Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. -- From: mmert...@modicon.com[SMTP:mmert...@modicon.com] Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 6:50 AM To: Dan Mitchell Subject:Re: Are all these agencies really necessary? Actually, there is such a system, of sorts. It's called the CB Scheme. Various countries have banded together and agreed to accept each others' certification marks. Unfortunately, there aren't all that many participants (32, I think), and their Memoranda of Understanding (MOA) only apply to certain product categories. The second consideration is the demands of customers. In my case, our industry and insurance companies are programmed to look for Factory Mutual approval marks. Even though I could get exactly the same approval from UL (and others) much cheaper and a heck of a lot faster, the customers would not be happy. So *sigh* I get FM on everything whether we need it or not. See ya Mike Mertinooke - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
RE: Are all these agencies really necessary?
The OM was just an example for purposes of illustration. A better name for such a hypothetical beast would be World Mark (WM). If you read the earlier thread, you would have read that all the agencies are getting out of hand and that it would be nice to do testing once, then apply for a OM? or WM? and be allowed to sell your product any place in the world Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. -- From: Grasso, Charles (Chaz)[SMTP:gra...@louisville.stortek.com] Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 10:25 AM To: Dan Mitchell; 'Peter E. Perkins' Cc: PSNetwork Subject:RE: Are all these agencies really necessary? Would someone please explain the OM (Overall Mark)? Thank you Charles Grasso (Captain Hook) EMC Engineer StorageTek 2270 Sth 88th Street Louisville CO 80027 MS 4262 gra...@louisville.stortek.com Tel:(303)673-2908 Fax(303)661-7115 -- From: Peter E. Perkins[SMTP:peperk...@compuserve.com] Reply To: Peter E. Perkins Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 1998 11:57 PM To: Dan Mitchell Cc: PSNetwork Subject: Are all these agencies really necessary? PSNet Dan, The OM (Overall Mark) is a good idea that continues to be promoted by industry, especially multinational businesses. Oh that they had control to proscribe it... Remember that the underlying basis for all of this is a political issue in that nations want to control commerce in some manner - and many of the old-time controls have been taken away by treaty (the GATT Treaty). We work in an arena where the high level politicians tug and pull to get their way. We see it in the expansion of the need to have a certification or mark on the products. Developing nations have figured out that they can easily play this game - just adapt the international standards - ISO/IEC/CISPR, etc. - but demand a local mark of approval. The country supports a team of technical and bureauocratic personel thru the tax that you pay to get their bumper sticker. Americans, especially, like free enterprise = no restraints. Big business promoted the use of a manufacturer's based mark for Europe (the CE marking), but were not too happy that there is personal criminal penalty attached to signing the MDoC and applying the mark.Much of the rest of the world isn't ready for the whole potato all at once either. Note the problems that the Japanese and the Koreans are having trying to reform their old-boy networks to open their markets and offer opportunity for growth there... I predict that it will get worse before it gets better... So, look at it as job security, at least you're working (which is better than the alternative)... - - - - - Peter E Perkins Principal Product Safety Consultant Tigard, ORe 97281-3427 +1/503/452-1201 phone/fax p.perk...@ieee.org email visit our website: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/peperkins - - - - - - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
Definition of hold-up time
I have a collegue that would like a definition of Hold-up time as it pertains to a power supply. It is agreed that the time should be measured at 120VAC input and full load on the output. Time starts when the AC input shuts off (preferably at the + or - peak). Here is where the question comes in. Should the hold-up time stop when the output voltage drops out of regulation, or when the output voltage drops to 75% of the regulated output? Personally, I would use 90% of regulated, but 2 of our engineers are disagreeing and both are very adament that they are correct. I hope one of our subscribers may have a verifiable answer. Thanks in advance.\ Daniel W. Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
Triple Insulated Kapton Magnet Wire
I have received several replies for Furukawa and Rubadue. They do not use kapton. I have been informed that the complete name of the company I am looking for is Virginia Insulated Products. However, I was not informed of their address or phone number.
Triple layer Kapton magnet wire
I am trying to find the phone number and address for a company that makes magnet wire with three layers of kapton insulation. There is a company located here in the US called Virginia Products that makes it. Unfortnuately, I have not been able to locate them. If one of the members of this group has their number I would appreciate an E-mail. Send it to me directly, since there is no need to clog the system with this info. Thanks in advance. Daniel Mitchell Product Safety EOS Corp. dmitch...@eoscorp.com
