Re: Korean EMC Standards - where can I purchase?
Jim, From practical experience, if you meet the EU standards, you should meet the Korean standards. We found that if we made it through our EU testing, we'd almost always make it through the Korean tests. I do remember looking into the actual standards at least once, and the content was very similar to the EU standards (the international alignment here is great). The one difference that is worth noting is that the Korean labs were often much more dilligent in ensuring that products were fully exercised. I remember that once or twice in the last few years we had some issues stemming from this (though they were quickly resolved). Of course, it never hurts to be sure, particularly if your products don't fall in one of the more generic product categories. Best Regards, -Dave On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Umbdenstock, Don djumbdenst...@tycoint.com wrote: The site referenced below has various links that will take one to different regulations and decrees; I am not sure about standards (haven't looked recently). A caution, those documents that are offered in English are usually 1-2 revisions behind what is available in Korean. The site is useful but has limitations. Don 561 912 6440 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Bill Stumpf Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 9:53 AM To: Knighten, Jim L; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: Korean EMC Standards - where can I purchase? Standards can be obtained at the following link: http://www.rrl.go.kr/ English translations are not available that I am aware. Bill Stumpf From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Knighten, Jim L Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 4:30 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Korean EMC Standards - where can I purchase? Will someone kindly point me to a source where I can obtain the EMC standards (KN ) for South Korea? English is preferable, although I understand that some standards may not have an official English translation. Thanks, Jim __ James L. Knighten, Ph.D. EMC Engineer Teradata Corporation 17095 Via Del Campo San Diego, CA 92127 858-485-2537 – phone 213-337-5432 – fax - 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 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
Regulatory Engineer seeking employment.
Greetings all, After five years and a few months of hectic but rewarding work, I again find myself seeking new employment. Fortunately for anyone who is seeking a senior level Regulatory Engineer or Regulatory Team Leader, I have some great qualifications. For the last five years, I've spent my time in two pursuits: 1) Developing my ability to manage global approvals projects (often 90+ countries) for converged mobile devices. These products were as complex as co-located handheld and body-worn GSM / Wi-Fi / Bluetooth / GPS products, and as simple as the radio modules inside them or the power supplies and cradles that kept them operating. This experience is spread between internal projects and fully outsourced projects through Asia-Pacific ODMs, with total global regulatory project budgets spanning the range between $5k to $1M+ USD. 2) Obtaining my MBA, which I have already started using via major process redesigns (for those of you who use them or know what they are, I conceived the idea for and led the design implementation of an Agile PLM SAP based process to automate sales availability based on Regulatory approvals status with the added bonus of country - based and revision controlled approvals documentation and certificate storage). I got my start as an EMC engineer, but over my career I've also built competencies serving as a Subject Matter Expert for Bluetooth SIG listings, NEBS, PCI (Secure PIN entry for payment devices), and for a short time Reliability Availability. Also, despite not being an official SME, I've developed a working familiarity with global RF, EMC, and Safety approvals requirements, including the following: HAC, DFS/TPC, SAR, PTCRB/CTIA, IEEE1725, GCF, RFID, China CCC / SRRC / MII NAL, Korea MIC / RRL, Taiwan BSMI / DGT, Japan VCCI / MIC, Brazil ITE Mobile Phone approvals requirements, and much more... I think I'll cut it there to keep in compliance with the list rules that I remember having to enforce from time to time. If anyone knows of an opening or is interested in talking with me, I would be very happy to hear from you. I can be reached at: Tel: 631.513.3015 or via email by replying here. (please be sure to reply only to me, not to the entire group!) I am presently located on Long Island, NY, but the culture here is not for me so I will gladly consider relocation (including opportunities outside the USA, if the opportunity seems right). Thanks and Best Regards, -David Heald - 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
Fwd: avaliable EMC position in Southern California
Forwarded for Paul Mohr. Please reply only to Paul Mohr as described below. Best Regards, Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin GREETINGS TO ALL! An EMC lab in San Diego County is looking for a self motivated engineer (B. S. degree required) with at least 3 years experience to specific EMC regulations. Must have experience in low and high power radio testing. Some examples of required test experience: FCC, Part 2, 15, 22, 24, 90 95 and Industry Canada. FCC requirements for wireless, cell phones and all report writing skills. Familiarity with measurement uncertainty. Must have proven skills operating test equipment utilized to obtain worldwide EMC regulatory certifications. Interested parties should contact me at 760-436-3351, FAX at 760-753-7367, email at paul.m...@att.net Best regards, Paul Mohr This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
802.11a/h/i : 5GHz RLAN Re:
Jan, 802.11h is in the works which will share some of the 5GHz band with military radar and be a somewhat worldwide standard. I believe that 802.11i will shortly follow with added security enhancements. I have a presentation on this somewhere but can't locate it for more details at the moment I don't know if this answers your question but it could provide you with a way to refine your search. -Dave Jan Heffken jheff...@core.com 09/23/03 12:23PM Does anyone know if there are any RTTE Harmonized Standards for a 5 GHz RLAN product? Thanks, Jan Heffken -- CoreComm Webmail. http://home.core.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: GR1089 4.5.9 Intrabuilding Lightning Strike Telecom Ports
Jeff, I think the difference may be in the distributed ground arrangement in the CBN. In a surge event, the CBN would distribute the energy from a lightning event and common mode voltage differences within the CBN would minimal (hence the exemption). In an IBN (shielded w/isolated ground), the differences in ground potentials could be severe and the test would be necessary. Unshielded cables could obtain coupled energy from the building (the classic intrabuilding example) and also make the test necessary. Since most if not all North American telecom providers (those that use the NEBS standards) do NOT want to install IBN equipment, you should be able to stick with your shielded cable exemption if you want to. If EMI considerations aren't an issue and you want to test for the unshielded intrabuilding, I'd go for it because I have always had the impression that carriers don't like to run STP (cost labor objections if nothing else). BTW, about a year ago I looked into the floating one end of the shield thing (well, for coaxial DS3/E3 anyway) and found out that no one requires isolation any more. There were a few countries that held out longer than others but the isolation is no longer required anywhere in the world (I think the EMC issues outweighed the ground loop problem). Anyone out there feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I spent quite a bit of time researching this. Best Regards, Dave Heald Collins, Jeffrey jcoll...@ciena.com 06/13/03 08:07AM All, We have taken the waiver to this requirement by using shielded cables that were grounded on both ends. Since it is common for carriers to float one end of their grounds we are planning to perform this test on our telecom ports. Looking at the levels of the surge in table 4-4, I'm not confident that a grounded shielded telcom cable would make the difference in passing this test. ( Surges are at 800V and 1500V) ( Ports / Cables are T1, E1, Ethernet, and RS232) My plan is to run this test with both unshielded ungrounded cables and shielded grounded cables. Does anyone have any experience in passing this test where the shielded/grounded cable made the difference? Anyone have a theoretical opinion/prediction on this? Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Collins Sr. HW Engineering Manager EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety CIENA Corporation 5965 Silver Creek Valley Rd. San Jose, CA. 95138 (408) 571-3002, Fax (408) 965-2705 jcoll...@ciena.com http://www.ciena.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: FDA registration of laser
Kim, You DO need to register. Testing may not be required, but is strongly encouraged regardless (technically you can refer to the laser component manufacturer's results). Note: This is assuming that you aren't just putting an off the shelf enclosed CD/DVD ROM drive in a system, which shouldn't require any testing or submission. Best Regards, Dave Heald Kim Boll Jensen k...@bolls.dk 06/11/03 04:54AM Hi all good people Just a simple question. When using a CD or DVD driver in a product (PC or audio product) and the driver is FDA registered, do I need to register the final product at FDA too. I can't find a paragraph in 21 CFR which tells me when not to register. (The drives are Class I but includes a higher laser internally as fare as I know) Best regards, Kim Boll Jensen Bolls Raadgivning Denmark This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Surge Suppressors on a UPS
Most UPS's use a stepped approximation of a sine wave when in battery mode. While most switching supplies don't care (and are the intended loads for these UPS's), surge suppressors can cause real issues - It has something to do with capacitive overload of the output circuits. And for the second question - there are huge variances in the output wave quality. The brand I am familiar with has both stepped approximation and true sine wave output models - the sine models being the expensive ones. The stepped approximation models are ideal for switching supplies, while the sine output models can handle all kinds of loads including motors (but a quick check says that they still can't use surge supressors - this one has me puzzled!) The UPS EMC standard is 50091-2 (or was it 92-1?), but I'm not sure how much help it may offer. Best Regards, Dave Heald Price, Ed ed.pr...@cubic.com 06/02/03 11:18AM Hi Group! Last Friday, I got ambushed in a meeting. I hate it when that happens! A question was asked about whether it's OK to put a surge suppressor on the output of a UPS that is supplying power to some expensive equipment. I opined that I didn't think it should be necessary, but that it also shouldn't hurt anything either. So then somebody asks me why all the UPS manufacturer's sites say not to use a surge suppressor. I expertly reply that gosh, I don't know, but I'll take a look. The next question nails me again. Are there any standards for UPS output power quality? Uh, well, I'll look into that too. Now, the market is light industrial, USA, but are there any applicable EN standards also? Just for some background, here's a typical entry from Tripp-Lite's FAQ list for UPS's (not to pick on Tripp-Lite; they just said it most succinctly of several sites I looked at): http://www.tripplite.com/support/faq/tech_ups.cfm Can I plug a surge suppressor or extension cord into my UPS? No. Using an extension cord will void your equipment coverage warranty, as all equipment must be plugged directly into the UPS. Tripp Lite does not recommend plugging a surge protector into a battery backup outlet of a UPS either as this can overload it. Also, when some UPS systems switch to battery power they will output a waveform that a surge suppressor may see as a surge and short-circuit the UPS. Again, this setup will void the equipment coverage warranty. Now this is getting to be a big can of worms! What do they mean by some UPS? Is there one kind that does, and another kind that doesn't; and how do you know which is which? And if some UPS will create a voltage transient (is that what they mean?) sufficient to trigger a surge suppressor, then why is it OK to let the UPS apply that transient to my protected equipment? All this talk about uninterrupted power isn't worth anything if the UPS kills my equipment when it switches to battery power mode. And who's fault is this? I mean, a surge suppressor is pretty dumb; it just sits there waiting for the voltage to go over a certain level and then it conducts. What's this about the surge suppressor may see something as a surge? That's saying the surge suppressor could mis-interpret the waveform it sees. If the surge suppressor is conducting, then I think the UPS has just done something very naughty. I also don't understand the prohibition of an extension cord. Maybe this is a legal issue, as I can't see any valid safety or regulation issues here. We regularly put a UPS in the bottom of a rack system, and then wire a stripline outlet set for the height of the rack. Isn't that the electrical equivalent of an extension cord? What am I missing? Thanks in advance! Ed Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Technician Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 (Voice) 858-505-1583 (Fax) Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This email has been scanned for computer viruses. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EMC standards for UPS supplies
Try 50091-2. That's the Euro one and it includes EMI immunity and covers the different operating modes. For domestic products (assuming you're in the US, that is) the normal FCC rules apply - just be sure to test all the operating modes (to cover all the bases, 0%, 50%, and 100% load in both AC and battery operation should be a good place to start - and will probably suffice for the report). A hint from experience - any narrowband emissions will probably stay the same between modes - it is the broadband switching noise (for radiated, probably 30-250 MHz or so) that will vary between modes. This should help during the 100% load battery scans that need to be completed in a matter of minutes - just be sure to test to make sure that this is indeed the case. One other comment - in the case of 3 phase systems, you may want to check to see if the manufacturer has 50091-2 approvals for the EU version. 3 phase systems vary here and in the EU and I know of at least one manufacturer who specialized the compliance tests to reflect the countries in which the product could be installed. In other words, their US version of the product was only labeled for the FCC, while their EU version was tested to 50091-2 (and maybe FCC as well??). A domestic sample would most likely have been the FCC only type, but an EU version may well be already approved. Best Regards, Dave Heald Garnier, David S (MED) wrote: Gentlemen, I need to bone up EMC standards applicable to UPS supplies, (3 phase - 10 to 20 kVa is the range I am looking at.) We have a vendor that has labeled his product stating that it complies with FCC rules for a Class A computing device standards, (I think it's a little more complicated than that...) Could someone please suggest a couple standards that I could look up? Thanks! dave garnier David Garnier e GE Medical Systems ___ David S. Garnier Senior Technician PET Engineering 3000 N. Grandview Ave - M/S W-1250 Waukesha, Wi. 53188 Tel: 262.312.7246 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: C.O. Battery Voltages - EVERYWHERE
I believe that DT is the only carrier that uses -60Vdc CO's, but I think that it is only present in their older CO's. It's not that hard to meet the requirements though - just maintain 1mm (40th) creepage clearance between TNV-2 and SELV, GND, etc (up to your DC/DC's/opto-isolators/bridging caps) and make sure any bridging capacitors are physically large enough to have 1mm between the pads (Y rating is not required but anything smaller than a 1206 SMT cap is too small to maintain spacings). Voltage rating on the caps is important too, I guess - pick according to proper NEBS reliability derating. -And you may have to ensure that your DC/DC's are rated properly. Best Regards, Dave Heald - Original Message - From: Joe Finlayson jfinlay...@telica.com To: 'EMC PSTC' emc-p...@ieee.org; 'NEBS Newsgroup' n...@world.std.com Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 2:39 PM Subject: C.O. Battery Voltages - EVERYWHERE I'm interested in obtaining information on the percentage of C.O.'s worldwide that are utilizing -60VDC as their battery voltage. It is my understanding that a majority use -48VDC although some still use -60VDC. Any and all information/references would be helpful. If there are references that are country specific or carrier specific, that would be valuable information as well. Any charts/spreadsheets out there similar to the mains supply charts I've seen would be excellent. Thx, Joe * Joe Finlayson Manager, Compliance Engineering Telica, Inc. 734 Forest Street, Bldg. G, Suite 100 Marlboro, MA 01752 Tel: (508) 804-8212 Fax: (508) 480-0922 Email: jfinlay...@telica.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: CCC - is this a current description of IT equipment
Gary, All, Office networking equipment (ethernet/network hubs, switches, Ethernet PCI Cards, etc) are included in the definition. I attended a US Dept. of Commerce seminar with a delegation from the CNCA and that was one of the questions raised and answered - so it's strainght out of the horses mouth, so to speak. On the other hand, Central Office type equipment does not need approval under the CCC - but it does need a Network License so you still have to go through all the testing anyway, just with a different agency. Best Regards, Dave Heald Gary McInturff wrote: Information Technology Equipment (IT) (12 categories) Personal computers (PC), Portable personal computers, Display units connected with computer, Printers connected with computer, Multiplying printer coping machines, Scanners, Switching power supply units for computer and adapters, Chargers, Computer game players, Learning machine, Duplicators, Servers, Finance and trade settlement equipment. And if inappropriately listed under Telecommunications Equipment Data Terminal: Storing/Transmitting Fax/Voice card, POS terminal, Interface Transformer, Network Hub, Other Data Terminal. I don't necessarily see LAN equipment under either - although Network Hub could be, depending on the full definition. Is Ethernet/LAN equipment required under the current CCC list to be evaluated? Thanks Gary This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: CCC mark China
Jan, I can answer the first part of your question. In October 2002, I attended a presentation given by representatives of China's CNCA. At that time, plans existed to eventually certify labs outside of China, but it was not expected to occur in the foreseeable future. Note that this was an official government delegation so the answer was straight from the horse's mouth. Having said that, there are many agencies outside of China who will escort your product through the process (in China) and can apparently do so fairly quickly. Best Regards, Dave Heald PS - ADMIN NOTE - replies offering services of this nature should be sent to the intended recipient only and should not be copied to the list. Jan Vercammen wrote: Hello, I have some questions concerning the CCC mark in China with respect to EMC and radio spectrum matters. -1- I receive contradicting information about EMC compliance in China. On one hand I have information which asserts that China recognizes EMC laboratories outside China. For Belgium these are CEBEC recognised laboratories. On the other hand I also have information that this is not correct and that products need to be retested by CCC recognised lab's, which are located in the Asian area (China region - I have a list of lab's). What is correct? -2- I have checked the CCC classification. It does not look complete (yet). It could be that our product does not fit the classification list (yet). -3- We have a product tested according to IEC 60601-1-1 (safety) and IEC 60601-1-2 (EMC). Can anyone explain what one should do to obtain the CCC mark in simple terms. -4- The product also includes a short range device (SRD) operating at 13.56MHz. It has been tested according to ETSI 300330 (radio parameters) and ETSI 301 489-3 (radio EMC) and FCC part 15. The same question as in -3-, what one should do to obtain the CCC mark. It does not get easier! Kind regards, Jan Vercammen Agfa-Gevaert NV, Belgium --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: IEC 61010 requirements
I think the spurious emissions would be a big problem. You would be amazed at the levels of EMI emitted by phones when they are in certain modes. While looking at some dual tri-mode digital phones from 3 different manufacturers (while placing digital calls in the 1800± MHz range?? or maybe the upper 800's range - I forget), I have seen emissions that were regularly 20-30+ dB above Class A from 40MHz all the way up to 1GHz (narrowband spurious, but distributed seemingly randomly all over the place). These emissions were from the phone itself on a turntable - no cables, just the phone taped to a cardboard box. Anecdotally, think of your PC speakers - I know a lot of people who know that a TDMA call is coming in when their speakers click. I must admit I haven't looked, but maybe the mall stores sell sterile faceplates? :) Best Regards, Dave Heald John Shinn wrote: If he had a LOW EMI Phone, how was he able to transmit out of the OR? It is not the incidental radiation that is the problem, it is the transmitter. Also, how was he able to answer the phone and maintain sterilization? John Shinn -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of drcuthbert Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:32 PM To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: IEC 61010 requirements Maybe he had a special low EMI cell phone? But seriously, a useful product would be a cell phone detector with an audible alarm, or a silent alarm to alert security. Dave Cuthbert -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 1:05 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: IEC 61010 requirements I read in !emc-pstc that peter merguerian pmerguerian2...@yahoo.com wrote (in 20030221231714.74613.qm...@web14806.mail.yahoo.com) about 'IEC 61010 requirements' on Fri, 21 Feb 2003: The other day, I called a surgeon and he happened to be in the operating room with his cellphone performing an operation. Does that make his cellular comply with IEC 601-1? Maybe not, but there are VERY serious EMC issues. No cell-phone should be switched on in an OR. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical
Re: best screw/washer choices for attaching PCB to Chassis?
Kim, Here's how I would do it. Note that I'm assuming that we're dealing with SELV circuits here and your concern is SI/EMC on circuit packs for a shelf system. Safety grounding is another issue entirely. First screws: I'd use split washers with flat beneath (if lock washers at all) to protect your surface. Screw/washer materials selection should be anti-corrosive and compatible with the surface finish of your PCB. Loctite or equivalent should be available applied to the screw tips from the screw supplier - this will ensure you don't get loctite on any of your contact surfaces. Now the hard to explain part - pads I would recommend flexibility on the pad end. In my earlier days at a test lab, I saw way too many products fail when either *all of the standoffs* or *one/none/few of the standoffs* (take your pick) were connected to digital ground. When we cut traces/removed mounting screws/made ground connections to nearby caps/etc..., the EMC problems would often go away. BUT then a respin was in order - and then manufacturing test - and then DVT - and then a compliance retest - and what if it made something else worse? At any rate, you're a month off schedule (minimum). Instead I would recommend surface layer pads and unplated holes for your standoffs with one or more DNI (or installed if that's your thing) components bridging the pads to digital ground. Pad size should be slightly larger than the mating surface diameter. This is a common practice these days in the telecom arena and will allow flexibility without respinning your board. If a problem is found in the lab that can be attributed to a grounding issue, it is simple to change the population of the DNI components to achieve a passing result that also has acceptable signal integrity (hopefully you're using differential signalling anyway for anything really fast). The best part about this method is that it is easy to convince your designers (who will undoubtedly be devoted to a certain grounding practice) to take this approach since the default population can reflect their current grounding ideology. For implementation of the above, I would stick with fairly wide SMT resistors - I found that 1812 zero ohm resistors and low value capacitors (220-2000pF range) are readily available. Remember to use VERY SHORT and relatively wide (3W rule) traces on the pad/component trace. For the digital ground end of the component, I would have more than one via (to dgnd) attached to the pad to minimize inductance to ground. Get creative to address card insertion ESD drain. And here is what it all comes down to: The worst thing that could happen is that manufacturing would have to change the component population for new production and retrofit the existing products. This gets particularly rewarding when a whole bunch of product is already made and you can just change components instead of scrapping the whole lot. (OK, it's not the worst thing) I think I explained this clearly (?) If you have questions, feel free to ask. Keep in mind this is just my view on a topic where opinions and practices vary wildly (and are often accompanied by good results from all sides) Best Regards, Dave Heald (currently an unemployed victim of the telecom market but looking) This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Apology to Agilent Technologies and Hewlett-Packard
To: Agilent Technologies and Hewlett-Packard: The administrators of the IEEE emc-pstc listserver apologize to Agilent Technologies and Hewlett-Packard for the derogatory remarks recently posted to this listserver. We take every effort to maintain a high level of professionalism in postings. Because of our high- level expectations, we do not moderate the postings. Occasionally, some inappropriate content is posted, and we immediately notify our subscribers and seek to quench any further inappropriate content. We did notify our subscribers. Unfortunately, a number of inappropriate remarks were posted before our notice was fully distributed. On this occasion, as in other similar occastions, some of our subscribers send us private responses supporting our action. While we wish these actions were not necessary, we do find that these actions generally help to improve the level of professionalism. We believe the remarks were personal opinions and did not represent employers' views. We will amend our rules, sent to each new subscriber, to clarify that such remarks are out of order. If any subscriber wishes to discuss this matter further, please do so via private e-mail to the administrators. On behalf of all administrators, Dave Heald co-Administrator, IEEE emc-pstc listserver This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Admin Comment: Agilent 8482 Thread
Greetings all, Rich, Jim, Ron and I ask that this thread be closed. We do not feel that this forum is the place for your complaints to be voiced as this is technically off-topic and appears as noise to many of the subscribers. Also, bashing a company is really no different than bashing an individual insofar as the listserver is concerned. If individuals wish to continue this commiseration, we ask that it be done off-list. Best Regards, Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Labelling requirements components
Andre, I think that in section 1.7.12 (the section you referenced in the 60950 family) there is also a provision that for service personnel, the language on safety related info can be English. (except in Germany, where it must also be in German). I would take this to mean that component safety information can be in a different language (English or German) than would normally be present on the outside of the product. This seems to follow common sense as well (not that that gets you very far when evaluating to safety standards :). Also look in 1.7.14 to see if this applies in your case. (Replacement of the differently labeled/sourced/revision component can't cause the removal or alteration of product level safety labeling.) I'd check this to make sure that what I remember is up to date but I don't think you need to worry about the labeling language on the component (so long as it is approved for its end use and you meet 1.7.14). Best Regards, Dave Heald Andre Boons wrote: Hi, If a manufacturer is required to put information on the label of his product, it must be in a language that is acceptable for the user in the country where the product is put on the market. If the above product consists of a certain part that can be replaced during service operations locally and there are special precautions to be taken care of when replacements takes place, should the label on that part also be in the language of the country where the final product is marketed. An example could be a CRT of a VDU that needs replacement by exactly the same type. Regards, Andre _ --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Admin Comment - Virus discussions
All, Please remember that postings about viruses (no matter how well meaning - and even about those that appear on the listserver) are strongly discouraged on this forum. Such postings add to the noise on the forum and can greatly slow email access times for those with dial-up connections. Please reference the last section of paragraph 5 in the Charter and Guidelines that was sent to every one of you when you joined the list. If you do not still have this message, the guidelines can be obtained by sending a message to majord...@majordomo.ieee.org with no subject and the two folloing lines in the body of the message info emc-pstc end If you have virus concerns that directly effect the list, please address them to the list admins directly. (our email addresses are at the bottom of every post). Best Regards, Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Laser safety questions
Well, In response to question 1, you may want to try for Class 1M. The new measurement geometries allow many class 3B lasers to be reclassified as 1M. I would assume (although I have no direct experience here) that the visible spectrum lasers would also benefit from the new geometries (BTW, the Class 1M spectrum is 302.5 to 4000nm). Wouldn't it be wonderful to have all Class 1(M) lasers?!! Best Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: Gandler, Mark [mailto:mgand...@ciena.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 1:47 PM To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' Subject: Laser safety questions Hello Group, According to the new revision of IEC 60825-1 (2001-08) , there are following laser products classes: 1, 1M, 2, 2M , 3R , 3B and 4, instead of 1, 2 , 3A, 3B and 4 per previous revision. Question # 1 : should we change the labeling, let's say from 3A to 3R? Is it any timetable for implementation? The latest revision that I have for IEC 60825-2 is 2000-05 and classification there still 1,2,3A ,k 3A, 3B and 4. Question # 2 : is it any newer version of 60825-2 available? and if yes, what are the classes in it? Is it correct to assume that if somebody asking for laser power density , so I need to look for maximum permissible exposure (MPE)? If not , what it could be? If yes, what is the easiest (or only) way to calculate it? Let say the wavelength is 1550 nm, located on PCB , than after 10 mm or so is a connector, exposure is 100s. Any ideas? The MPE in the IEC table is 1000W/m2. Thank you in advance, Mark Gandler Ciena --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Circuit pack ESD drain
All, Does anyone know of a sample waveform or general characteristics for worst case VI on an ESD drain pin when a circuit pack is inserted into an equipment shelf? This is an odd question I know, but my management asked for the info and I really have no idea (and it shouldn't happen anyway ;o) I guess even a typical maximum charge that can be expected to be on a circuit pack would be sufficient information. Thanks in advance! Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EN61000-3-3 -3-11 off topic a bit!
But when was the last time you saw a plug rated (just a random example) 250V 3(phase)Y 75A when it means 25A per phase? the 75A rating is definately 'per phase'. -Original Message- From: Spencer, David H [mailto:david.spen...@usa.xerox.com] Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 8:16 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN61000-3-3 -3-11 off topic a bit! I've just looked at all the draft copies of this standard(that I have), and the older version TR IEC 1000-3-5. Still only says 75amps. Again no per phase. I would have to say if TC77A wanted it to say 75A per phase, it would be in there. Regards Dave Spencer -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 3:07 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EN61000-3-3 -3-11 off topic a bit! I read in !emc-pstc that Spencer, David H david.spen...@usa.xerox.com wrote (in 052106A55179D611B34300096BB02E3F8B93@USAMCMS4) about 'EN61000-3-3 -3-11 off topic a bit!' on Wed, 30 Oct 2002: Having looked into EN61000-3-11, there is a big difference from EN61000-3-3. The scope of 3-3 refers to products rated 16 amps or less per phase. There is no per phase specification in EN61000-3-11. Only this in the title: equipment with rated current 75 A. Further, the scope does not specify that as a per phase rating. I would say that the standard does not apply to any product with a total rating 75A. That would allow 3 phase products rated greater than 25A per phase to fall outside the scope of EN61000-3-11! That certainly needs to be clarified. I'll set the wheels in motion immediately. It SHOULD say 'per phase'. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: China Switch Approval
John, I recently attended a workshop with CNCA delegates and found out that central office equipment is exempt from the CCC. However, central office equipment is still required to obtain a Network Access License from the MII (Ministry of Information Industry) which includes Safety, EMC, and Interoperability tests. For everyone else (non CO equipment makers), the CCC mark is targeted at consumer products or products that normal people could have contact with. MII approval is only (I think?) required for equipment that performs telecommunications functions, and if you have an end-user telecommunications product, you could end up being required to meet both the CCC and MII requirements. The good news is that any tests that are required for both the CCC and the MII must only be performed once - not multiple times like in the old system. Best Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: John Smith [mailto:regulatoryrequireme...@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:28 AM To: PSTC Subject: China Switch Approval I am new to the group. I am consulting with a company that is making a CO switch. They are planning to market the product in China. As I understand the process, I have to get MII and CNCA approvals. Is there anything else that I need to do for China? About how long does it take to get these approvals? Thank You, J. Smith = Best Regards, John Smith Regulatory Consulting __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: NEBS questions
Rich, I believe that the reason CO's are exempted from many of the building codes is the amount of work we put in to ensure that the products are safe and reliable. The sprinkler exemption comes from the fire spread requirement in GR-63. Basically, if the fire has been demonstrated to be completely contained by the individual systems, there is no need for building fire protection devices. The use of 48V systems has the benefit of being SELV (in addition to the ability to have battery backups), so licensed electricians are not required (or something to that extent). And so on and so forth... It basically all stems from the fact that the NEBS requirements greatly exceed normal building and safety requirements - thus allowing the exemptions from many building codes. Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: richard.pa...@exgate.tek.com [mailto:richard.pa...@exgate.tek.com] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:29 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: NEBS questions Hello Group: I am glad to see the recent NEBS related discussions. I find them interesting and relevant. So while I am thinking about NEBS, I thought I'd ask a couple of questions. I would like to understand more clearly the relationship between Central Offices and local building codes. I understand that the NEC basically exempts CO's. And that would mean that any local AHJ adopting the NEC unchanged would have the same exemption. But I am wondering how the CO's themselves view the local building codes. Maybe they just ignore them, but perhaps they voluntarily try to meet them ? Of course there's a lot of the actual requirements that are covered by the NEBS requirements, but it would seem like some things (mains service entrance ?) may not be covered. Also, where exactly is the line that divides the exempt CO area from where the local codes are applicable ? As I think about it now, I don't recall the specific wording of the NEC's exemption, but It would seem that it would include any requirement for using Listed equipment or components. Although GR1089 does seem to require Listing for AC mains connected equipment, do some companies require Listing for equipment connected to the CO DC supply ? The benefit of your experience and thoughtful comments will be appreciated. Thanks Richard Payne Tektronix, Inc. Product Safety Engineering Tel: 503 627-1820 Fax: 503 627-3838 email: richard.pa...@tektronix.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: 48/60 Vdc Centralized Office Equipment
Peter, As someone who rates their products the same (well, without the label/manual discrepancy), I can say with confidence that the product is TNV-2 due to input supply deviations (60V ± a few). This isn't really as bad as it sounds, though, as the only real issue you will have is maintaining 1mm spacing around the TNV-2 circuits. Bridging components must also be of sufficient (Basic, I think, but I didn't check just now) insulation ratings, but even if they fail, the only requirement is that no more than TNV-2 voltages be present on secondary circuits or ground. Best Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 11:22 AM To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail) Subject: 48/60 Vdc Centralized Office Equipment Dear All, I have a client who insists on a 48/60 Vdc (slash) rating and wishes to consider the input to be SELV. He states in the manual the operating voltage tolerance 36-60 Vdc. In this case that the manufacturer specifies the tolerance in their manual, will the CO operators consider the 48/60 Vdc rating a SELV input; or a TNV-2 input because the float voltages on the nominal 60 Vdc supply can reach 72 Vdc - ie disregarding the specs in the manual? This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender. PETER S. MERGUERIAN Technical Director I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. 26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022 Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019 Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175 http://www.itl.co.il http://www.i-spec.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
grounding schemes EMI
All, I'm trying to convince a few people here that completely separating the digital and chassis grounding on our product is not always the best way to go. Unfortunately, a lot of the people I'm dealing with are ex Bellcore engineers who worked a lot with isolated grounds and are convinced that isolated grounds are the only way to go. Now we're dealing with optical interfaces and speeds well in excess of 100MHz, so I really want to see the grounds tied together as much as possible. While I know that combining the digital and chassis grounds is for the most part better once you get above a few hundred MHz, putting together concrete arguments is proving to be a bit elusive. I luckily have some high level backing that will let me push my views, but I am one person up against a team of industry vets. If anyone has been in this boat before and won, could you share some of the tactics or arguments that you used? I know this issue has been discussed in the past, but a fresh discussion of the relative benefits of isolating the D and Cgnds would probably be beneficial to the group as well. See below for my views on the issue. Thanks Dave My views for telecom equipment with a backplane and plug in circuit packs (and a good tight chassis around it all): (Note that Analog grounds are outside of the scope of this statement - I'm focusing on Digital grounds and Chassis ground) The benefits of separating Dgnd and Cgnd have to do with defining your signal impedances and SI in general. When you place this system inside a Cgnd balloon, all should be well but maybe there is some extra noise due to RF being trapped within the balloon. However, if the Cgnd and Dgnd are tied together throughout the system, the effect should be similar to heat shrinking your conductive chassis Cgnd ballon onto your Dgnd. The single ended signal return currents should still follow their original paths and things should essentially remain unchanged. I could see some possibility (I'll avoid use of the word potential here :o) ) for RF currents on the circuit pack card grounds due to RF fields contained within the faraday cage, but I think these could be mitigated by clever bonding of the grounds on circuit packs. I think that isolating the faceplate from the Dgnd on the circuit packs but stitching the bottom edge (faceplate to backplane) Cgnd ESD guard band to Dgnd could alleviate stray currents on the cards and keep them relatively clean - all while still maintaining the bonding of the Cgnd and Dgnd on a system level. The idea (as my brain developed it) is to keep the stray currents at the periphery of the card by limiting the through connections on the circuit packs and forcing stray currents to flow near the edge of the card. The backplane should for the most part have Dgnd and Cgnd be one and the same. Does this raise any red flags for anyone? I'm expecting at least a few, but this is the best scheme that I can come up with right now. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Central Office Wiring - Conducted Emissions
Dude, The CO will wire your power inputs with two separate power pairs feeding from two different sources. This way, if there is some fault in the 'primary' centralized distributed DC source, the redundant source can take over without the product losing power. I think the test method depends on how your product chooses which feed to draw from. If your product diode-OR's the inputs, only the feed with the higher voltage will actually power the entire product. If this is the case, I would recommend using two supplies and differing the voltages on your supplies so that one supply is a few volts higher than the other. Take your readings on both the higher voltage (loaded) feed as well as the lower voltage (unloaded) feed. Just be certain to recheck your voltages at the input to your product to make sure that there is still a few volts of difference between the feeds after the inductors are placed in front of the loaded LISNs (assuming this is the test you're doing). OK, now that I think about it - this method should work well for just about any redundant power scheme. Quiet DC supplies are also enormously important if filters are not present on the output of the secondary DC source. You don't need a lot of ampacity on the secondary supply if you set up the voltages correctly. (CS linears run at 52± when unloaded) Dave -Original Message- From: Plante, Dereck Raymond (Dereck) [mailto:drpla...@lucent.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 1:23 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Central Office Wiring - Conducted Emissions Does a CO wire up to a redundant cabinet with 2 wires, so jumpered at the cabinet, or 4 wires (any theory on percentages)??? And if it is 4 wires, do the two Feeds go to two completely seperate sources, or are they jumpered sources (so in parallel)? How do people typically test there cabinet for Conducted Emissions??? We were testing with the cabinet jumpered and going throught the LISNs to one Source. We had a passing system with mods, and so we tried to only connect the LISN to one feed and power the other feed with a seperate DC source, then we got failing results with or without mods. Interesting. We are thinking we are getting some crazy current loops. Does anyone have an opinion as to their best recommended test setup for conducted emissions that will best represent the true wiring in a central office? We are thinking, but have not yet tried, to test 4 wires coming out of the cabinet, going through 4 different LISNs and then going to one DC power source. Any comments??? Dereck R. Plante Compliance Engineer Lucent Technologies Switching Solutions Group, OPENet Solutions 255 Independence Drive Hyannis, MA 02601-1854 (508) 862-3302 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: DSL Modems
I remember working on such a filter a few years ago and from what I remember there were no isolation type components - it was more of a high pass/low pass filter rather than an isolation type device. This is just my memory though, so I could be wrong. If you think about it though, there is really not much need for an isolation type device within such a filter ( it would add cost) ...and the loss from an isolation component would further effect the already critical distance requirements for DSL, so I doubt that these filters would have an isolation component. Dave -Original Message- From: Roman, Dan [mailto:dan.ro...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 8:56 AM To: 'Peter Merguerian'; 'Rob Keller'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: DSL Modems All, When Verizon installed my ADSL service a couple years back they put in what they called a whole house filter, but it is actually a splitter/filter. I don't recall any Listing marks of any kind on the device. It was installed on the network side of the gray box on the side of my house, not on the customer premise side so Listing may not apply. I took the device with me when I moved but DSL was not available in my new location. It is potted so I have no hope of determining the construction, guess I could apply ring voltage to it in the lab and hi-pot it and see what happens! I suspect though that it is TNV-3 in and TNV-3 out. Shortly after my DSL was installed (I was one of the first in my area) they stopped installing the whole house splitter and required the user to put a filter on every phone (yuk) except for the DSL modem. So even if splitters are available that do a TNV-3 to TNV-1 or even TNV-3 to SELV connection, at least in the Verizon NJ customer area DSL modems are TNV-3 all the time. Dan -Original Message- From: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 9:24 AM To: 'Rob Keller'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: DSL Modems Rob Hi! I assume that the ADSL modem is connected to the phone line through an external splitter. If you find an approved splitter having the required TNV-3 to TNV-1 insulation, and you specify the specific splitter in your manual, I gather that your interface can be TNV-1. If no such splitter is specified, then the interface should be classified TNV-3. Now a question to the group - is anyone familiar with external Listed/Certified splitters that have the TNV-3 - TNV-1 insulation? This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender. PETER S. MERGUERIAN Technical Director I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. 26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022 Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019 Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175 http://www.itl.co.il http://www.i-spec.com -Original Message- From: Rob Keller [mailto:r...@cclab.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:38 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: DSL Modems Greetings all, Question regarding the classification of DSL modems. DSL modems connect to the standard telecom network yet they do not require a ring signal or go on/off hook, therefore the classification would be TNV-1. Yet there are ring signals still present on the telecom lines for the the other equipment. So, because of the ring signals, which would exceed the limits of SELV, connecting to the input the modem, should the classification be TNV-3. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Rob Keller Product Safety Engineer Communication Certification Laboratory r...@cclab.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators:
RE: NEBS - Bonding and Grounding
Dan, Read on below R9-20 and the requirement is clarified significantly. The requirements are DEFINITELY applicable to the outputs of your DC/DC converters (a.k.a. embedded DC power supplies): If your 48V feeds into a power supply circuit pack/module which then supplies the 3.3, 5, 12, etc... V to the other circuit packs, you must first short the outputs of each individual DC/DC converter (within the common power circuit pack/module) and then (provided you have a passing result from the first test) place shorts on each type of circuit pack that is powered from the common power supply circuit pack/module. (Think of a Compact PCI chassis for an example of this scenario). You must perform the test on each output. If you have your DC/DC converters on each individual circuit pack (most complex telecom type boxes), You must first directly short the outputs of each DC/DC Converter and then move the shorts out to a remote location on the board (Replace a power cap with a short in somewhere on the far corner of the board). This must be done for every type of and each output on the DC/DC modules. Also, if you have DC/DC's of greater than 150W, the outputs are required to be referenced to chassis (R9-9), so you will also need to short the non-referenced side of the outputs to chassis. This test checks the bonding path to ensure that it is sufficient to carry any resulting fault current. The reference path must not be damaged. It should be noted that (contrary to R9-20) many RBOCs do allow damage (damage free is effectively an 'Objective'). They have applied the fire, fragmentation, or electrical safety hazard performance criteria to the short circuit test. The product does not necessarily have to function after the test, it just can't catch the cheesecloth on fire or smoke too much (although I've never actually seen a product catch fire, so I haven't looked into this last cheesecloth/smoke bit too much). I hope this helps, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: Roman, Dan [mailto:dan.ro...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 8:24 AM To: EMC-pstc List Subject: NEBS - Bonding and Grounding NEBS Gurus, Do the 1089 bonding and grounding DC short circuit tests apply down to the component level in a system or are they limited to the power supply or some other demarcation point? If it applies anywhere in the system it seems to me that you'd never finish testing. You'd have to test the power supply, backplane, mother board, daughter cards, IC dies...sort of like doing the UL 15W test for home entertainment equipment. Reading through section 9 and specifically 9.8 it seems they are keying on the power supplied directly from the CBN and not that power indirectly derived from the CBN after DC to DC converters. Where is the demarcation point if there is one? Do labs that test to NEBS handle this consistently? Thanks in advance. Dan Roman Compliance Engineer Intel --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Adding A/C Power to DC Telecom Gear
But they do ask for an AC convenience outlet location in the bottom of every rack (granted I've never actually seen a CO installation so I don't know if they actually install the AC convenience outlets). Dave -Original Message- From: Cortland Richmond To: christine...@aol.com; ieee pstc list Sent: 9/10/02 6:49 PM Subject: Re: Adding A/C Power to DC Telecom Gear Chris, You SURE you want to do this? I believe CO's strictly isolate AC powered gear. They have this thing about AC hum, you know... Cortland --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
WEEE directive and halogen (PVC) wire insulation
Folks, I've been searching all afternoon for recent news on halogen flame retardent regulation in the EU. I'm beginning to think that other than brominated flame retardents, there really is not much current concern and the risks involved with accelerated fire spread (over that with halogenated flame retardents) outweigh the environmental concerns from chemical release during burning or recycling. (I'm trying to make a decision on wire insulation specificaitons) Does anyone know where the WEEE and/or EEE is headed in this regard? The last official info I could find was April 2000. Thanks, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
IEC 60068-2-30 Condensation cycle time
Greetings all, Does anyone know the time length of the condensation cycles in IEC 60068-2-30 (EN 300 019 states that the condensation test lasts 2 cycles and references 60068-2-30 as the test method). Thanks in advance! Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Halogen free cables for the EU
Does anyone know where the halogen restrictions for wire insulation in the EU come from? I remember dealing with this issue sometime in the last few years, but now I can't remember where the actual requirement came from. Also, does anyone know if the Halogen restrictions only apply to, say, power wiring - with low voltage intrasystem wiring exempt? Thanks, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Thermal breakers vs magnetic breakers for telecom
Greetings all, In the spirit of the continual quest for cost reduction, I have been asked to look into the use of thermal circuit breakers instead of magnetic ones. It seems like we rejected thermal breakers before for some reason, but now no one can remember why. Does anyone know of any telecom (or general) reasons why thermal circuit breakers may be unacceptable for telecom products? Thanks and Best Regards, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: China approvals - CCC
After looking through the Circular Relevant to the Implementation of the Compulsory Product Certification System, I found the following in section 2.5: Starting from May 1, 2002, with regard to products for which the Old Certificate and the Old Mark was compulsory but no longer covered by the Catalogue this time, the Old Certificate and the Old Mark will not be required when they are marketed or imported. So this says that the old mark no longer needs to be applied to products not covered in the Catalogue. By extension, it sounds as if we could argue that this indicates that the new CCC mark doesn't apply either.(?) Best Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: am...@westin-emission.no [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 4:39 AM To: Emc-Pstc Group (E-mail) Subject: China approvals - CCC Hi all, Rules and Procedures for Compulsory Product Certification were implemented on May 1, 2002. The certification mark is referred to as China Compulsory Certification (CCC). The first Catalogue of Products Subject to Compulsory Certification is now released. Question: If my product is not listed in the catalogue, does it mean what I do not have to document compliance to the EMC or electrical safety requirements ? no need for Chinese certification ? I have be told so via competent sources. I would like to check the discussion form for other views. Best regards Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil
(Going theoretical here - and off the top of my head at that so please don't just accept this argument. Corrections would be appreciated if applicable) I am unsure if the critical property is the reflective surface or the conductive properties (to prevent part of the field from making it through the ground plane). Think of the latter as the surface of the earth trying to function as a faraday cage. If there is a nonconductive or semi-conductive section around the OATS ground plane (dry sand?), part of the energy from waves that hit the ground plane may be able to make it through (around?) the ground plane to the other side. This energy will certainly be attenuated rapidly by the soil under the ground plane, but some of the energy is nontheless lost from the point of view of the 'system' above the ground plane. On the other hand with moist soil and/or ground plane extension well into the soil, the conductive properties of the earth around the OATS ground plane will serve more effectively as an extension of that ground plane (enormous Faraday cage or infinite ground plane effect) and reduce the chances of the 'lost' energy from above'. So from that point of view the lake-OATS is ideal if the water level stays fairly constant and the ground plane dips into the water all the way around the periphery. Plus, testing on a lake sounds good to me! Do they have a driving range too? :-) Best Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: michael.sundst...@nokia.com [mailto:michael.sundst...@nokia.com] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 3:31 PM To: dhe...@tellium.com; emc-p...@ieee.org; richwo...@tycoint.com Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil I have heard of an OATS built over a fresh water ground plane, ( a pond / lake?). I imagine a slight breeze would upset the characteristics of the site? Michael Sundstrom NOKIA TCC Dallas / EMC ofc: (972) 374-1462 cell: (817) 917-5021 amateur call: KB5UKT -Original Message- From: ext David Heald [mailto:dhe...@tellium.com] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:50 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org; 'richwo...@tycoint.com' Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil I can't offer quantitative experience, but I can offer some theory that has always made sense to me (and my results were usually quite repeatable at my last job where we employed these practices): While the measurement site itself probably has a defined ground plane for at least most of the ellipse, the surrounding earth also plays an important factor. For the best repeatability, an effective infinite ground plane is desirable. I remember we 'extended' our ground planes out and down into the ground around the sites. Due to our location over a town aquifer and the high water table (annoyingly high at times!), the effect was a good approximation of an infinite ground plane with very little fluctuation over time. I could theorize that in Florida with sandy soil that would drain water/dry out more quickly, there would be more uncertainty due to the infinite ground plane property variations (does that phrase make sense?:). When it rained, the top surface would be a 'better' ground plane approximation and your site characteristics would change. When the top foot or so of sand dried out, it would cease to be a good infinite ground plane (- or at least change to a lossy one) and your site characteristics would change again. Best Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 8:11 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS We have noticed a change in our OATS characteristics depending upon the dampness of the area. It is especially noticeable this time of year when we get a lot of rain in Florida. Does anyone else experience this phenomena? More to your question Mat, the major contributors to the measurement uncertainty would be the repeatability of the setup of the EUT and test equipment (e.g., distance from EUT to antenna) and the stability/drift of the EUT and test equipment. Half of these parameters are human based (setup) and should vary less if the same person performs all of the tests. I have not seen a paper on this subject. Unually these variations are lighly covered in texts on measurement uncertainty. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International -Original Message- From: Aschenberg, Mat [mailto:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com] Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 10:49 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Measurement Consistency of OATS Hello, Have any of you seen a paper written on the measurement consistency of an OATS? If I were to have a product repeatedly measured at an OATS, how close should I expect the measurements to be? For sake of this example, there are no cables. All measurements are performed at the same OATS. The EUT is assumed not to change between tests. Mat snip
RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil
I can't offer quantitative experience, but I can offer some theory that has always made sense to me (and my results were usually quite repeatable at my last job where we employed these practices): While the measurement site itself probably has a defined ground plane for at least most of the ellipse, the surrounding earth also plays an important factor. For the best repeatability, an effective infinite ground plane is desirable. I remember we 'extended' our ground planes out and down into the ground around the sites. Due to our location over a town aquifer and the high water table (annoyingly high at times!), the effect was a good approximation of an infinite ground plane with very little fluctuation over time. I could theorize that in Florida with sandy soil that would drain water/dry out more quickly, there would be more uncertainty due to the infinite ground plane property variations (does that phrase make sense?:). When it rained, the top surface would be a 'better' ground plane approximation and your site characteristics would change. When the top foot or so of sand dried out, it would cease to be a good infinite ground plane (- or at least change to a lossy one) and your site characteristics would change again. Best Regards, Dave Heald -Original Message- From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 8:11 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS We have noticed a change in our OATS characteristics depending upon the dampness of the area. It is especially noticeable this time of year when we get a lot of rain in Florida. Does anyone else experience this phenomena? More to your question Mat, the major contributors to the measurement uncertainty would be the repeatability of the setup of the EUT and test equipment (e.g., distance from EUT to antenna) and the stability/drift of the EUT and test equipment. Half of these parameters are human based (setup) and should vary less if the same person performs all of the tests. I have not seen a paper on this subject. Unually these variations are lighly covered in texts on measurement uncertainty. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International -Original Message- From: Aschenberg, Mat [mailto:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com] Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 10:49 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Measurement Consistency of OATS Hello, Have any of you seen a paper written on the measurement consistency of an OATS? If I were to have a product repeatedly measured at an OATS, how close should I expect the measurements to be? For sake of this example, there are no cables. All measurements are performed at the same OATS. The EUT is assumed not to change between tests. Mat --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
Re: Pencil erasers for pre-EMI cleaning?
Thanks everyone for your input. And let me put everyone's fears at ease by saying that this particular sample has been thoroughly abused in environmental testing (including several unintentional unfortunate CONDENSING temp humidity runs - ever look into a chamber and see what looks like your product sitting in a cloud? Not fun). Months and tests later, the dirt or grime is easily visible on a lot of the mating surfaces and is not at all present on new samples. Unfortunately, an entire new sample costs over $1M, so let's just say I'm not getting a new one. And for the steel / Al concerns, the different metals are in different sections so mating is not an issue, just the risk of corrosion if I remove the protective coatings. So, I am simply trying to restore the sample to its original condition (or as close as I can get to it). I would never advocate sprucing up a test sample just to pass a test. And it turns out we use nickel plate which should be quite durable. Again, any comments from experience would be welcome, but my guys say that I shouldn't have problems. Thanks again! Dave Heald David Heald wrote: All, I'm preparing for an emissions test and I had started cleaning some of my chassis mating surfaces with a pen/pencil eraser then alcohol to ensure the surface to surface contact was good. A friend then told me that using an eraser would also remove the anti-corrosive coating that was on the metal (Thanks Paul!). So I would end up with a very short term benefit, then rust. What I am trying to determine is if maybe light rubbing with a pencil eraser might only remove surface contaminants and leave the metal and coatings intact. (the pencil eraser is much less abrasive than the pen side) So the real question is... Does anyone have direct good or bad experience with the aftereffects of using a pencil eraser to clean mating edges (card faceplates in a telco box for example)? I have both steel and aluminum surfaces to worry about so info for either type is welcome. (and don't worry the different metal types are not adjacent). Any feedback would be greatly appreciated as the system is really dirty right now. Thanks and Best Regards, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Pencil erasers for pre-EMI cleaning?
All, I'm preparing for an emissions test and I had started cleaning some of my chassis mating surfaces with a pen/pencil eraser then alcohol to ensure the surface to surface contact was good. A friend then told me that using an eraser would also remove the anti-corrosive coating that was on the metal (Thanks Paul!). So I would end up with a very short term benefit, then rust. What I am trying to determine is if maybe light rubbing with a pencil eraser might only remove surface contaminants and leave the metal and coatings intact. (the pencil eraser is much less abrasive than the pen side) So the real question is... Does anyone have direct good or bad experience with the aftereffects of using a pencil eraser to clean mating edges (card faceplates in a telco box for example)? I have both steel and aluminum surfaces to worry about so info for either type is welcome. (and don't worry the different metal types are not adjacent). Any feedback would be greatly appreciated as the system is really dirty right now. Thanks and Best Regards, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
[Fwd: Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting on Wednesday, February 27]
Forwarded for Matt Campanella Original Message Subject: Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting on Wednesday, February 27 List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 19:14:16 + From: matt.campane...@att.net To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org There will be a Northeast Product Safety Society meeting on Wednesday, February 27, at EMC Corporation's Customer Briefing Center in Hopkinton, MA. A social hour with light refreshments will begin at 7:00 PM and the technical meeting will start at 7:30 PM. Jon Curtis, Founder and Director of Engineering of Curtis-Straus LLC, will be presenting this month's technical topic concerning Laser Safety Issues in Optical Fiber Communication Systems. For further information about this meeting and Mr. Curtis, please see the NPSS website at http://www.nepss.org/call/next-mtgFeb27.html. The 2002 NPSS meeting schedule is available on the NPSS website at http://www.nepss.org/about/npss2002kf.html. The January President's message is now available on the NPSS website at http://www.nepss.org/messagepres_011802.htm. Further information about the Northeast Product Safety Society and how to become a member is available at http://www.nepss.org. You can also contact one of the NPSS officers via links at http://www.nepss.org/about/officerskf.html. Directions: From Route 495 North or South take exit 21B to South Street. At the first traffic light, turn left (Note: This is on South direction side of Route 495). EMC Corporation is the second driveway on the right. Matt Campanella NPSS Secretary Compliance Engineer Motorola, Inc. Broadband Communications Sector 3 Highwood Drive East Tewksbury, MA 01876 (978) 858-2303 Direct (978) 858-2300 Main (978) 858-2399 Fax --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
[Fwd: RE: TUV NRTL]
Forwarded for Patty Knudsen patricia.knud...@ericsson.com Original Message Subject: RE: TUV NRTL Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 11:11:12 -0600 From: Patricia Knudsen (EWU) patricia.knud...@ewu.ericsson.se To: 'Doug McKean' dmck...@corp.auspex.com,EMC-PSTC Discussion Groupemc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org There is a difference between the TUVs and UL's branch offices. The TUVs are all different companies, not franchises of the same company. TUV Rheinland is a completely different entity than TUV Product Service or TUV America. It's more like the relationship between UL, ETL, MET, FM, CSA, etc. All are NRTLs but different companies. Patty Knudsen (former TUV-R employee) Ericsson Wireless Communications patricia.knud...@ericsson.com -Original Message- From: Doug McKean [mailto:dmck...@corp.auspex.com] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:45 PM To: EMC-PSTC Discussion Group Subject: Re: TUV NRTL It's been my understanding that the various branches of TUV reside and oversee product safety in specific regions within Germany. And that being in a sense franchises, they compete directly with each other outside of Germany. It's also been my understanding that in a similar way though more subtle, the various branches of UL within the US also compete with each other. In other words, even though the Santa Clara facility is conviently right down the road from me, I could send product off to Melville. Any profits made by Melville aren't really benefited by Santa Clara. The difference between TUV and UL is that in some cases, and I'm going out on a limb, TUV Rheinland might not accept results from TUV Product Services although that would have to be some extreme case IMO. UL branches on the other hand accept each others results. Corrections anyone? - Doug McKean --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
Re: Clean class B test bed
Greetings all, In my days at an EMC test house, we used Dell Dimension series P1 -133 to 200's and PII 233-300's with great success. I think Micron may have used the same case as well. The dells were opened daily but kept their excellent shielding for at least 2-3 years. Good luck finding one, but if you can find someone still using one of these at their desk, I'm sure you convince them to upgrade. The cases were plastic looking on the exterior with one side that slid off. The insides of 5 sides of the case were a metal chassis inside and the removable side panel had a thin metal panel resembling a huge springfinger panel. I think they refreshed the plastic on the outside when they came out with PIII's, but the inside was still pretty much the same. Best Regards, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
[Fwd: Compliance Engineer seeking position]
Forwarded for John Roche. Please direct all replies directly to John (do not 'reply all') Thanks. Best Regards, Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin Original Message Subject: Compliance Engineer seeking position List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 09:11:11 -0500 From: John Roche john_ro...@compuserve.com CC: emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org, TREG t...@world.std.com Dear All I am not sure if this message made it out last week so at the risk of boring everyone here it is again. We have a former client contact located in the San Francisco / San Jose / Bay Area who is currently seeking a position as a Compliance Engineer/Manager in the SF Bay area. This gentleman is a knowledgable and reliable Compliance Engineer/Manager, competent in all three sciences (Safety, EMC Telecom). The areas covered at his latest employer include projects for all the usual major EU and Pac-Rim target countries for Safety, EMC and Telephony projects; TBR 4 and ETS 300 nnn series PBX telephony testing. This is over and above previous company experience as a POTS Compliance Manager and Safety/EMC engineer. I would ask that if anyone can help or has any suggestions, would they please contact me in the first instance and I will act as postman. If any of the other Consultancies out there have any clients who need such an engineer on their staff please let me know. Many thanks Best regards, John Roche Patton Associates (UK) Ltd. The Forge, Nepcote Lane, FINDON, West Sussex. BN14 0SE. UK GB. TEL: +44 1903 877 327. FAX: +44 1903 877 023 INTERNET: ro...@patton-assoc.com Web Page: http//www.patton-assoc.com Telecommunications Consulting, Design and Type Approval/Certification for Europe, North America and the Pacific Rim --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: TNV-2 to Earth requirement
Does your equipment plug into a primary (AC) circuit? Any TNV circuit is considered a secondary circuit and if any and all power is derived from the TNV network, the notes you referenced would not apply as a primary circuit is not present. Best Regards, Dave Heald Ed Eszlari wrote: All, I have a DC to DC filter which is rated 32 - 72 VDC input and output which I am considering to be TNV-2 according to EN60950/IEC60950 2nd edition. This filter has a metal chassis which is earthed, and it will be installed in a service access area only by qualified service personnel. It is not permanently connected or pluggable type B, and does not have a provision for a permanently connected earthing conductor. With all this considered, it seems that Norway and Sweden are the only Countries that require Supplemental insulation for a primary circuit between this TNV-2 circuit and earth. Is there any way around this requirement due to this filter operating at 72VDC and not being directly connected to mains? Any help would be appreciated. Ed -- MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: Click Here --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: New China Compulsory Certification
Forwarded for Alain Samlai alain.sam...@gigabyte.com.tw due to strange internet phenomena. Enjoy Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin Cecil the CCIB has a page relating to CCC, but in its Chinese section only. http://www.cqc.com.cn/ccc.htm just click the links to open the PDF files and view the new CCC mark. as far as I understand this new scheme, major points are: 1- the old certification scheme stay valid until 1st May 2003 2- the first batch of equipment subject to the new certicification scheme (CCC) includes 19 types of items (for a total of 132 products - according to the CCIB documents) 3- for the equipment listed in this first batch, application for CCC mark are accepted starting 1st May 2002. 4- after 1st May 2003, equipment listed and without CCC approval will not be allowed for sale, export or import. 5- this first batch includes household products, micro-computer, etc... and is close to the second batch of product subject to CCIB/CCEE certification. 6- CCC labels have to be purchased from authorized printers. Alain Sam-Lai Gigabyte Technology Safety Dpt. mailto:alain.sam...@gigabyte.com.tw --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
[Fwd: Who or what is W letter in a circle]
Forwarded for Paul Smith. Please CC:paul_j_sm...@teradyne.com on any relpies. Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin Original Message Subject: Who or what is W letter in a circle List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:29 -0500 From: paul_j_sm...@teradyne.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Folks, Is anyone familiar with Who or what is W symbol in a circle? Your commnets would be appreciated. Paul J Smith, Teradyne, Boston --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
[Fwd: clearance and working voltage]
Forwarded to the list for xingwb xin...@cesi.ac.cn. Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin Begin forwarded message Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is correct for this situation? regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Frame Surge Test applicability
Mark, Is this section applicable to your product? Section 9.10 only applies to equipment that was formerly installed in an IBN system (now in a CBN), and newer products rarely fall into this category. At my last job, I performed a lot of GR-1089 evaluations and 95% of the products were exempt from 9.10. The only products I saw that fell into this category was some old 80's era boxes that had new cards to allow updated functionality (almost impossible to get them EMI compliant due to the initial design for LOW bandwidth isolated shield grounds, but we got it.) Best Regards, Dave Mark Pascarelli wrote: Hi all, I am trying to re-design our current power supply to meet GR-1089-Core Specification. The Power Supply has a -48V input and 5VDC/100W, 5VDC/100W and 12VDC/150W Output. Based on current testing, we did not comply with Section 9.10.6 Frame Surge Test. This test applies a surge current as defined in IEEE C62.41. The filter capacitor was destroyed during this test. The capacitor is rated at 100V. I think this capacitor should be replaced with a higher voltage X or Y capacitor. Possibly a GDT or TVS is required. If anyone can help, I will email a portion of the schematic in PDF format. Thank you, Mark Pascarelli Electrical Engineer Carlo Gavazzi, Inc. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
80/80 rule for euro compliance?
Greetings all, I remember hearing somewhere ( it seems that I found the answer somewhere but I can't remember) that there is a stipulation for European compliance that one should have 80% certainty that 80% of one's products are compliant. I have no idea where this idea originally came from or what standards it may apply to. Can anyone out there help me out? Dave --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
[Fwd: User Warning Signal Words]
Forwarded for Nick Martin. Please 'Reply All' and/or CC: ni...@tsd.serco.com when replying. Dave Heald EMC-PSTC Admin Original Message Subject: User Warning Signal Words List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 13:33:48 + From: Nick Martin ni...@tsd.serco.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Hi List Can anyone help with the following regarding warnings to users and signal words User warnings normally use one of three signal words CAUTION, WARNING, DANGER. I believe that each of these increases the severity of the warning. Can anyone define any specific criteria for when a caution becomes a warning and ideally point to an IEC or other specification that provides guidelines on the use of these words? Or is my belief incorrect and the words are inter-changeable? thanks in advance for any answers Nick Martin Serco Test Systems --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: HiPot testing of DC mains powered products
Chris, Greetings! You may not even need to perform production line hipot if the unit is a fiber only product. Since the mains are SELV (unless you are shipping to certain Euro Telco's) the only time you should need production line hipot is if you have wired (TNV-2 or TNV-3) interfaces, assuming no other connections to hazardous circuits. Granted my advice may be flawed as I am used to permanently connected, stationary, restricted access location products that are a far cry from portable equipment as far as safety standards go. Best Regards, Dave Heald Chris Maxwell wrote: Hi all, I have a question. I have a 48VDC powered product which will be hipot and ground continuity tested off of the production line in order to maintain agency certification. The product uses D-shaped three pin power connector. (Same size as a DB15, but has three large power pins instead of 15 signal pins). When we sell the unit, we pack it with an accessory kit which includes a 15' cable assembly terminated with the mate to the product's power connector. So, essentially, we sell the unit with a DC mains cable that we make. Now, where should the hipot test be performed? Should I make a test cable assembly for the hipot/ground bond tester which is terminated with the proper connector so that the tester can plug directly into the chassis? This would essentially test the chassis only. (because we would use this same test cable for every unit) Or Should I take each unit and connect the DC mains cable to be shipped with it, then apply the hipot/ground bond probes to the other end of the DC mains cable? This would test the entire system including the chassis and the cable. In my mind, this question comes up because we are making a custom mains cable for this DC product. It is different than AC products; because, with AC products, we can test the chassis by itself and assume that the mains cable is OK because we buy mains cables that have been previously hipot/ground bond tested by their manufacturers. Any words of wisdom? Thanks, Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: IEC 60950-1 released
Is this equivalent to UL 60950? If so, the differences may be substantial. Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
[Fwd: PC cameras]
forwarded for Gaby Abboud. Please reply all or send replies directly to gabb...@zoom.com Original Message Subject: PC cameras List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 08:49:23 -0400 From: Gaby Abboud gabb...@zoom.com To: IEEE (E-mail) emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Hello Group, A friend had asked me if there is any requirements for a PC camera to have any compliance approvals. Such as FCC, CE UL or anything else? the reason, he had seen a product on the market without any marking what so ever. His claim was that the product is being sold at a final cost of $10.00. any information would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Gaby --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Thailand, country matrix available
Greetings, all I have a quick question about exporting to Thailand. On my country matrix Thailand is listed as requiring CISPR22 only (no safety, etc). Does anyone know if this is actually the case. BTW, I have finally determined that my country matrix is not company proprietary info, so anyone who wants a copy can have one - just email me. I am unsure of how up to date it is, though. And thanks for all the responses on Australia! Everything is moving right along for me. Best regards, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
[Fwd: Re: RTI on Plastics]
forwarded for Steve Williams. Original Message Subject: Re: RTI on Plastics List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 10:56:00 -0400 From: steve.willi...@apcc.com To: tony.reyno...@pb.com CC: emc-p...@ieee.org, owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Tony, some background UL sets the world standards on plastic and they look at alot more than just flammability. So, the RTI issue is a UL 1950 issue. Now, I took a two day seminar to learn all of UL's crazy plastic requirements (very boring but useful). Here is how RTI ratings work. The actual temperature of the plastic part in question has to be measured. The RTI has to be greater than or equal to the temp measured during test. Now, here is the tough thing. Your plastic has an RTI of 60. What this means is that it has never been tested (UL assigns a generic rating of 60C to ABS and my guess is that you are using an ABS). What you need to do is ask the lab if you can do an end product test. In this case mold stress relief at 85C for 7 hours would be appropriate (Max Temp plus 10). Now, in terms of Ball pressure that only applies if you are using this plastic piece for direct support of live parts. If you are then the test needs to be done. I didn't think that UL1950 looked at things like RTI (I build products to UL 1950, 1778, 1449 etc. and I deal with RTI daily but I have never had to for UL 1950). My guess is that the test lab will have a hard time understanding your arguments and you may need to call UL's plastic division in Melville, NY USA. Good Luck Steve tony.reyno...@pb.com Sent by: To: emc-p...@ieee.org owner-emc-pstc@majordom cc: o.ieee.org Subject: RTI on Plastics 10/02/2001 08:45 AM Please respond to Tony.Reynolds All, I am having some fun with a lab over RTI ratings on plastics. Basically we have a plastic moulding with a component mounted directly on it. The RTI of the plastic is 60C and the component is getting to around 75C actual. I have always looked at the flammability of plastics 5V, V-0, V-1, etc but never the RTI. Is this a just a UL1950 requirement or is it in EN60950 as well. We have done the thermal stress at 70C and all is OK. They are suggesting doing the ball pressure test at 125C, however, I have only used this for qualifying mains transformer bobbins, etc. Regards Tony Reynolds Pitney Bowes +44 (0) 1279 449479 +44 (0) 1279 449118 tony.reyno...@pb.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy
[Fwd: RE: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals]
Forwarded for Ron Allen ral...@tuvam.com Original Message Subject: RE: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:51:19 -0400 From: ral...@tuvam.com To: j.schan...@worldnet.att.net, wo...@sensormatic.com,emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Richard, As the International Compliance Manager for TUV America, I concur with many of Jacob's points. I believe that the primary ket to gaining approvals is to make sure the first time, which countries you want to enter and why. If you do not have local reps in the targeted countries and you deceide you are going to process the approvals internally, don't waste your time if you do not have a local rep. In many cases, the local rep may not have the experience to deal with the various regulatoty isues that arise, not to mention the technical issues. In these cases, you may want to seek an alternatative method. If your team is not familiar with the regulatory requirements for each country you want to enter, it may be too much for you to expect your reps to understand all the in's out's. If you don't and they don't, the time, frustration, and cost can quickly mount up. Ron Allen TUV America -Original Message- From: Jacob Schanker [mailto:j.schan...@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:37 PM To: wo...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals Richard: Radio approval requirements still remain largely unharmonized. It really is a country by country thing, but there are some guidelines that you can follow to reduce the amount of work and grief. I speak from first hand experience. 1) Have Marketing define which countries are your target markets, and have them list them in order of priority. You cannot reasonably be expected to get approval for the whole world That doesn't mean that they won't want you to, however, so you have to push back. 2) Make copies of your FCC test report and of the test report for ETS 300 328 and whatever other EU testing you did. Have each copy notarized as a true and complete copy (or get multiple originals from the test labs). These will be useful in gaining approvals in South America, New Zealand, Australia, and other areas such as Eastern Europe and Africa. 3) Work closely with your local in-country people, distributors or agents to identify requirements. If they expect to make money off the sale of the product, they should be helping in getting approvals. You need them because regulations and applications are generally in the local language, and because many countries (Mexico, for instance) require a local entity to make the actual application and hold the approval. By the way, don't believe that 2.45 GHz is legal to use unlicensed everywhere. It isn't. Just check out the rules and allocation in Canada for an eye-opener. Good luck. Jack Jacob Z. Schanker, P.E. 65 Crandon Way Rochester, NY 14618 Phone: 716 442 3909 Fax: 716 442 2182 j.schan...@ieee.org - Original Message - From: wo...@sensormatic.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 1:47 PM Subject: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals We are currently developing a low-power, short range, transmitter for use in the 2.45 GHz band. We know how to handle the testing, certifications and licensing in Europe and North America, but we need to determine the most cost effect method of testing to obtain licenses in other countries. Obviously, we don't want to re-test in each target country if we don't have to; but we are unaware of any CB type scheme for radio testing and approvals. What methods have you found to be most cost effective? --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For
[Fwd: RE: LVD testing suite for ITE devices]
Forwarded for Eric Meunier Original Message Subject: RE: LVD testing suite for ITE devices List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:08:34 -0400 From: Meunier, Ériceric.meun...@ca.kontron.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org For Ethernet ports you may also want to consider the high-voltage isolation requirement specified in the IEEE-802.3 Ethernet specification. I found that Ethernet isolation is usually not required as part of the EN60950 certification process but it may be a good safety feature to consider and can improve product reliability as well. === Éric Meunier Hardware Architect E-mail: mailto:emeun...@teknor.com mailto:emeun...@teknor.com Kontron Communication Inc. (Teknor) 616, rue Curé-Boivin Boisbriand, Québec Canada, J7G 2A7 Tel: 1-450-437-4661 ext. 2419 Fax: 1-450-437-8053 Web: http://www.teknor.com http://www.teknor.com -Original Message- From: Stuart Lopata [SMTP:stu...@timcoengr.com] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:35 PM To: emc Subject:LVD testing suite for ITE devices Can anyone point me to specific tests and standards applicable for safety testing for ITE devices? Specifically, we are looking to meet the low voltage directive for computers and computer peripherals ( such as hardware that plugs into the bus slots and wireless networking equipment that connects to pcmia or ethernet ports). Sincerely, Stuart Lopata --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: ESD - time between successive discharges
Greetings, Let me add something to Joe's position (which I agree with entirely) based upon my experience at a former job. Some products with no ground or not so great grounds will need time (one sec or sometimes more) between discharges to ensure that there is no build up of charge on the system. Not only does charge buildup reduce the effect of same polarity discharges, but just think of the discharge level when a unit with a few kV of charge suddenly gets hit with a -XkV event after the polarity change. The effective net discharge is way over the spec and can often cause perceived failures. For the case of no ground (say a handheld battery powered device), a high impedance drain should be used to remove the charge. Ever pick up a handheld device charged to around 8kV? Best regards Dave Heald Joe Finlayson wrote: Amund, My experience has been that the labs would prefer to perform the ESD tests at a rate of 1 pulse/second (pps) for the sake of efficiency. If the product passes then it was completed in the least amount of time and everyone's happy. If the product fails at 1 pps, then you are allowed to decrease the pulse rate until the product passes. If it still fails at lower rates (say 0.1 pps - one ESD event every 10 seconds), then you probably have problems. I've had products fail at 1 pps and pass at 0.5 pps. It took longer to run the test, but it passed and met the requirements of the standard(s). My interpretation of the requirements is that there is no maximum limit between ESD discharges. Thx, Joe -Original Message- From: am...@westin.org [mailto:am...@westin.org] Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 4:07 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: ESD - time between successive discharges Dear members, From IEC61000-4-2 and several EN-product standards, they specify the time between successive discharges to be at least 1 second. But what is the maximum time between each pulse ? I can not see that it is stated in any standards. I guess the test labs use 1 pulse pr second. I feel that the pulse rate can have influences on the EUT performance, so 1 second compared to 3-5 seconds might be the difference between PASS and FAIL. Any suggestions ? Best regards Amund Westin Oslo, Norway -- Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: LCD Monitors etc.
Greetings all, At a former job, I actually performed many scans of LCD monitors from many 'unnamed' manufacturers and found them to be different from normal CRT's for emissions purposes. The LCD's would incorporate fast (for monitors) clocks for processing. I have seen clocks anywhere from 65 to 140MHz in these monitors. Needless to say with the cost-cutting involved with mass-production, these production monitors were almost always very close to if not over the Class B limits. (Keep in mind I was not performing the scans for the initial manufacturers, so I doubt anything changed because of my results). The emissions peaks were narrowband harmonics of the clock instead of the more random seeming Scrolling H's noise that is typical for CRT monitors. For that matter, I NEVER saw a CRT monitor that passed class B with H's scrolling at a high resolution (BTW, the scrolling H's pegs the PC processor as well). As these monitors were almost always support equipment, the typical fix was to run the scrolling H's in a DOS window and then ALT-TAB to a full-screen dos window. This greatly reduced the resolution, refresh rates, etc sufficiently to make the monitors very quiet. Hope this helps (and that my memory is correct) Dave George Stults wrote: Hello All, I have theorized that a Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) monitors should have less radiated emission than a comparabe CRT (same viewing area) since there is no high voltage tube and high powered oscillators, etc. I am wondering if anyone can confirm or deny this rumor based on actual testing. Also If there are folks in the crowd who sell LCD monitors, I would like to hear from you offline. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: Pre-amps for EMC Use
I have used Miteq or Mini-Circuits preamps with a custom box (Al project box) and a 15Vdc regulator. These had around 20dB of gain which was sufficient at 3 or 1 meter for most frequencies between 1 - 18 GHz. The exact model that we used has been discontinued though and I am unsure if a replacement has been designed. I believe the cost for these preamps was between $1k - $3k, so they were pretty cheap if you are handy enough to build your own box to protect/power it. Regards, Dave Heald andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com wrote: Hi everyone Can anyone help, I am trying to identify a per-amplifier low noise gain 29dB to 36dB to cover frequency range 1GHz to 18GHz for Emission testing. I know HP do a couple but usual problem expensive and I only have a limited budget. Has anyone used a DBS Microwave amplifier type DBS-0119N410? Are they suitable for emission testing? Any help would be gratefully received. Regards Andy Price BAE SYSTEMS Avionics email andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: Cable layout per GR1089
Greetings all, I just peeked at GR-63 and it appears that a 9-10' height for cabling trays is normal (Figure 2-4). You are correct that GR-1089 is very vague on the requirement (something like line of sight??). Due to the final installation config, I would go with a 9' cable crossbar height and I have always seen at least a 6' cable crossbar length. Also, I would ensure that your crossbar and supports are nonconductive. 2 - 2.5 PVC Piping works well and is easy to work with. (plus, you can get it at the Home Depot). I have a great collapsible design that I developed at my last job; if anyone is interested, contact me off list and I can describe it to you. Best Regards, Dave Paolo Roncone wrote: Hi, anyone can get me clarifications on the cable layout for radiated immunity and emissions testing per GR1089 with overhead cable trays (ref. fig.3-13 ) ? In fig.3.13 + sections 3.4.6 and 3.5.5 of GR1089 I don't see any specified length of the horizontal section projecting out of the EUT boundaries. Also I don't see any indication thereof in ANSI C63.4 (fig.10), while CISPR22/EN55022 (fig.13) specifies MINIMUM 20 cm of horizontal length. Thanks, Paolo --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC?]
Forwarded for Dan Irish dan.ir...@sun.com Original Message Subject: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC? List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 19:14:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Dan Irish - Sun BOS Hardware dan.ir...@sun.com Reply-To: Dan Irish - Sun BOS Hardware dan.ir...@sun.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org, croni...@hotmail.com John, See 47CFR2.909, Responsible party: The following parties are responsible for compliance of radio frequency equipment with the applicable standards: [snip] (c) In the case of equipment subject to authorization under the Declaration of Conformity procedure: (1) The manufacturer or, if the equipment is assembled from individual component parts and the resulting sustem is subject to authorization under a Declaration of Conformity, the assembler. I just downloaded this section to verify that it hasn't changed. http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/index.html#page1 Use the search terms: 47cfr2 and 909 I hope this helps. Regards, Dan X-Originating-IP: [159.134.229.84] From: John Cronin croni...@hotmail.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: FCC + FCC = FCC? Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 22:24:35 - Mime-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jun 2001 22:24:35.0260 (UTC) FILETIME=[9EA13FC0:01C0F90E] X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org X-Listname: emc-pstc X-Info: Help requests to emc-pstc-requ...@majordomo.ieee.org X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to majord...@majordomo.ieee.org X-Moderator-Address: emc-pstc-appro...@majordomo.ieee.org Hi Group This is a question regarding a plug in PC card that has been stated as FCC compliant which is inserted in a PC that is also stated to be FCC compliant and the emissions are found to actually exceed the FCC limits. What is the responsibility of the manufacturer who is intending to place this on the market as a functional unit? Are they liable for the overall unit or can they sell on the basis that it comprises FCC compliant sub assemblies, albeit evidently originally tested in different configurations. If they are liable, how can anyone sell any PC/PC card combination considering that the card could have originally been tested in a so called golden PC. Many thanks John Cronin --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: Amendment of Spanish Channels]
Forwarded for Gaby Abboud. Please CC: Gaby gabb...@zoom.com with on any replies. Regards, David Heald Original Message Subject: Amendment of Spanish Channels List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 10:24:43 -0400 From: Gaby Abboud gabb...@zoom.com To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Hello Group, Has anyone heard about the Spanish channel limitation if they are going to be amended in the near future? Presently the channels are: N. America has 11 Channels, Japan 14 Channels, Europe (ETSI) 13 Channels, Spain 2 Channels, France 4 Channels I do thank you in advance, Gaby F. Abboud Senior Compliance Engineer Zoom Telephonics Inc. 207 South Street Boston, MA 02111 Tel # 617-753-0046 (Direct) Main # 617-423-1702 x 3046 Fax # 617-542-8276 E-mail gabb...@zoom.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: Re: Laser Safety]
Forwarded for Bert Planting. Original Message Subject: Re: Laser Safety List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 06:59:41 +0200 From: Bert Planting bert.plant...@asml.com Organization: ASML To: Matt Kilkenny mkilke...@opthos.com CC: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org References: 0954d2e4fe26d411909100b0d022a345191...@mail.opthos.com Matt, Because you are using a microprocessor limitating it this is not seen as sufficient safe solution for reduction of the output by safety people (based on my experience with US third parties). Reduction should only be done by hardware and not by fault sensitive microprocessor. In this case you should use an interlock. regards, Bert Planting Prodct safety ASML Matt Kilkenny wrote: I have a question on lasers for ITE concerning IEC-825 and FDA requirements. According to IEC, class 3b lasers have to have safety doors (interlocks). Can automatic power reduction be used if you are not pumping the laser to a 3b class level of power. In other words, can we not put interlocks on the system if the 3b laser power has been reduced to a 3a or class 1 level through microprocessor limitating it? Or is their single fault concerns if the microprocessor fails? Thanks for any help, Matt Kilkenny mkilke...@opthos.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: EN55022 Radiated Test Set up
Greetings everyone, I just chatted with one of the authors of ANSI C63.4 (1992) where the procedure for radiated emissions is defined. I found out that it was the committee's intent that the distance be measured from a radius set by the furthest point of the EUT during rotation. Of course the setup must still comply with the C63.4, so no fair stretching a 10' cable out and measuring from that radius :o). The intent was based on a simple and repeatable setup that could be easily duplicated. My take: At 10 meters, the difference is negligible anyway - in 99.9% of the cases it would be less than 1 dB. At 3 or 1 meter, things change and it is probably left up to the lab/client to determine if they should deviate from the standard (for large oblong products, etc). Keep in mind that any deviation from the standard and will probably result in less repeatability between labs (very anti-standardish). There are also other limitations such as antenna beam width that you may (or may not ;) want to address at closer radii. Also, it is my personal belief that the limits set in standards must reflect some margin set in place for just this type of situation. (may or may not be the case, but they thought of everything else). Best regards, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: Field wiring terminal size]
Forwarded for Susanne Delisle. Please cc Susanne (sdeli...@unispherenetworks.com) on any replies Original Message Subject: Field wiring terminal size List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 10:09:11 -0400 From: Delisle, Susanne sdeli...@unispherenetworks.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Group, I'm in the process of specifying field wiring terminals for a -48Vdc product that's rated 100A. Table 3E in 60950 only specifies sizes up to 63 A. Does anyone know how I go about sizing a terminal for the higher current? Susanne Delisle Product Safety Engineer Unishpere Networks 10 Technology Park Drive Westford, MA 01886 (978) 589-0349 (978) 589-0800 fax sdeli...@unispherenetworks.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: RE: ESD Question]
Forwarded for Mike Hopkins. Original Message Subject: RE: ESD Question List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:06:48 -0400 From: Mike Hopkins mhopk...@thermokeytek.com To: 'Chris Maxwell' chris.maxw...@nettest.com,'Sandy Mazzola'mazzo...@symbol.com, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org There is an amendment to IEC 61000-4-2 in process that is intended to clarify the issue of connector pins. I basically states that for connectors with metal shells, a contact mode discharge is performed to the shell. For plastic connectors, an air discharge is done in the vicinity of the connector -- if a break-down to a pin occurs in either case, tough luck. There was never any intention that discharges be done to individual pins in a connector. Some other specific exclusions include ESD sensitive connectors -- scope inputs, etc... that are marked as ESD sensitive and there is reference to that in the product documentation. Also excluded are battery contacts which might be contacted when the batteries are changed but are not accessed during operation of the product. Hope this is helpful.. Best Regards, Mike Hopkins KeyTek (member IEC SC77B WG9, which is the working group responsible for IEC 61000-4-2) -Original Message- From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 2:07 PM To: 'Sandy Mazzola'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: ESD Question Hi Sandy, Have you seen the sunshine in your end of New York? If you have, send it back!! Personally, I have never seen a product that required air or contact ESD testing on the individual pins of connectors. I can only speak for products tested to EN 50082-1(Generic Immunity), EN 50082-1(Generic Immunity/Heavy Industrial), ETS 300-386-1(Telcom EMC) and EN 61326-1 (Test , Measurement and Control Equipment EMC). The basic standard which covers ESD testing itself (for the product and product family standards mentioned above) is EN 61000-4-2. EN 61000-4-2 is also the basic standard which EN 55024 references for ESD testing. EN 61000-4-2 gives no definite example or statement regarding discharge to individual connector pins. It just says to discharge to all locations normally accessible by the customer (paraphrased). So, this can be rationalized either way.Apparantly, the authors of EN 55024 have already done the rationalization for you. What I have typically seen and performed is ESD testing whereby direct contact discharges are made to the shells of connectors (i.e. D-subs ) but not to the individual pins. Since EN 61000-4-2 gives no exact direction, I think that there has been a general consensus of interpretation (my own words) that ESD is not required on individual pins. I have heard some myth/horror stories that say otherwise from people selling ESD hardened connectors, IC's but they turned out to be exaggerations. Having said that, I must add the caveat that there may be standards and products that are an exception, especially in the military, aerospace or medical fields. I just haven't seen any. !PLEASE NOTE THE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS Chris Maxwell Design Engineer NetTest 6 Rhoads Drive, Building 4 Utica,NY 13502 email: chris.maxw...@nettest.com phone: 315-266-5128 fax: 315-797-8024 -Original Message- From: Sandy Mazzola [SMTP:mazzo...@symbol.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 9:30 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: ESD Question Hi all, In EN 55024: 1998 Page 9 Paragraph 4.2.1, I found the following statement: The application of electrostatic discharges to the contacts of open connectors is not required by this publication My question is twofold has everybody interpreted this to mean that no air discharges or contact discharges are required to the connector or pins of the open connector. And secondly if the answer to the above is no discharges of any type are required, what other publications would require either air or contact discharges to open connectors. Thanks Sandy Mazzola Santo Mazzola Regulatory Engineer Symbol Technologies Inc 1 Symbol Plaza Holtsville, N. Y. 11742-1300 Phone: (631) 738-5373 Fax: (631) 738-3318 E-mail: mazzo...@symbol.com File: Sandy Mazzola.vcf --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
[Fwd: Search for a Gtem Cell]
Forwarded for John Kehs (jk...@witusa.com). Please direct all responses to John. Regards, David Heald Original Message Subject: Search for a Gtem Cell List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 07:18:40 -0400 From: Kehs, John jk...@witsusa.com To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' emc-p...@ieee.org I am looking to purchase a Gtem cell that will handle an EUT up to 18 square. If you have one or know of one please let me know. Thanks. John P. Kehs Jr. Manager, Windermere Calibration Repair Center (WCRC) 401 Defense Hwy. Annapolis, MD 21401 410-266-1880Fax 410-266-1751 www.witscrc.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: ESD Gun recommendations?]
Forwarded for Daniel Biggs daniel.bi...@gefanuc.com. Please include Daniel in any replies. -Dave Heald Original Message Subject: ESD Gun recommendations? List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:04:23 -0400 From: Biggs, Daniel (IndSys, GEFanuc, NA) daniel.bi...@gefanuc.com To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Greetings, Looking to replace our old ESD guns and would appreciate any recommendations on who makes a good product and what features are most important. Also, when it comes to EMC test equipment which companies offer better services and technical support. Thanks, DB ___ GE Fanuc Automation Daniel Biggs Test Engineer Hardware Design Services ph: 804-978-6946 fax: 804-978-5588 e-mail: daniel.bi...@cho.ge.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Environmental test labs
Greetings all, I am looking for recommendations for a NEBS environmental test lab that has an operational temp/humidity chamber of significant size and with tremendous cooling capacity (8kW or more). I have a large (6+'wide, 7+'tall) telecom product that consumes about 8kW of energy during operation and I am having trouble finding environmental labs with chambers that can handle this without a liquid nitrogen feed. I am based in the Boston area and am talking to a few local labs, but my next product will be bigger and use more power. I am willing to expand the search outside of the Boston area since no one I know will likely be able to handle it. All you lab sales guys out there - I am actually asking for you to contact me on this one (OFF LIST, private email, of course). Thanks in advance, Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: Capacitor Discharge Test
Greetings Joe and everyone, I can't speak for lab equipment, but I know that for UL 1950 (EN 60950/ IEC 950) my former employer (a recent NRTL who works/worked closely with the biggest) would always test with the mains switch both on and off. If you think about it, it makes sense to test with the mains switch off. Are you more likely to unplug a product that is on, or are you going to turn it off first? As you noticed, the mains capacitors do take longer to decay when the power switch is off. For this reason, I would have to side with the NRTL Engineer in question here - even if I am now working on the industry side of things. Dave Heald marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote: We evaluate our laboratory equipment to UL 3101-1, CSA 1010.1 and EN 61010-1. Section 6.10.3 of UL 3101-1 states If plug pins of cord-connected equipment receive a charge from an internal capacitor, the pins shall not be HAZARDOUS LIVE 5s after disconnection of the supply. We have always performed this test with the power switch in the ON position and would have the unit running then unplug the power cord and take our reading on the oscilloscope. We have never measured any voltages above the HAZARDOUS LIVE limits of 30Vrms, 42.4V peak or 60Vdc. Our new NRTL Engineer has now also requested us to perform this test with the power switch in the OFF position. With the switch in the off position our voltages after 5 seconds are close to line voltage. The NRTL is considering this a failure. However, UL 3101-1 also states in Section 6.10.3 For plugs receiving a charge from an internal capacitor, the measurements of 6.3 are made to establish that the levels of 6.3.1.3 are not exceeded. 6.3.1.3 requires measuring the overall capacitance from the unit. Our NRTL states that there is no method available to measure the overall capacitance of the unit. Has anyone else in the group had any experience with this issue? Does your NRTL require testing with the switch in the OFF position? Do your units fail with the switch in the OFF position? Is it a failure just because the voltage limits are exceeded, or is it only a failure if the current and capacitance limits are exceeded. (Similar to the Permissible Limits Requirements). Have you had any experience with NRTL's not being able to measure the overall capacitance? All responses are greatly appreciated. Regards Joe Martin Applied Biosystems marti...@appliedbiosystems.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Re: looking for used power supply
How about the good old HP Harmonic Flicker Test Sysytem that Agilent was thinking about discontinuing support on? (remember that thread a while ago?) I don't know about the current (it seems like I remember 9-10A max), but I know you could dial in any voltage and frequency (DC-500Hz??) and it would produce it! If Agilent did discontinue support, you could probably get a great deal! Dave Mike Stone wrote: Good Day, I am looking into purchasing a used power supply. Minimum requirements are: 3 phase input, single phase output variable frequency, 50/60 Hz variable voltage, 120VAC, 230 VAC 3 KVA 16 Amps I have tried a number of resellers, with not much luck. Thank you in advance for your help. Best Regards, Michael Stone L. S. Compliance W66 N220 Commerce Court Cedarburg, WI 53012 V 262-375-4400 F 262-375-4248 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: Romania certifications]
Forwarded for Gaby Abboud. Please CC Mr. Abboud gabb...@zoom.com on
any replies.
David Heald
Original Message
Subject: Romania certifications
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 14:28:34 -0400
From: Gaby Abboud gabb...@zoom.com
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I received this from one of our sales people today. Does anyone know
what
is the process to have the following product certified for Romania. Is
there a standard or a directive that will help me research their
concerns.
{{Now I need for authorization process in Romania of 11Mbps PCI wireless
products some measuring bulletins for noise and interferences made
according
normatives from European Community standard 300/350.}}
Thank you in advance.
Gaby F. Abboud
Senior Compliance Engineer
Zoom Telephonics Inc.
207 South Street
Boston, MA 02111
Tel # 617-753-0046 (Direct)
Main # 617-423-1702 x 3046
Fax # 617-542-8276
E-mail gabb...@zoom.com
---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
ETSI telecom acoustic power test (fan noise, etc...)
Greetings everyone, I was wondering if anyone has already worked this out. The test under question measures the sound power level generated by fan trays or other noise producing structures in Central Office type telecom equipment. ETS 300 753 Acoustic noise test calls for the test to be carried out under 23+-2 deg C ambient conditions. Apparently the results from this test are the official results from which one would derive a rating for the product. The standard then asks that the test be repeated at the maximum operating temperature (i.e. 50 deg C). Is this second test at elevated ambient for informational purposes only or does it factor into the rated sound power level for the product? Thanks in advance for any help Dave Heald --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: Re: Product Safety - Japan]
Forwarded for Jun Nakamura. Please include Mr. Nakamura (nakamur...@naka.melco.co.jp) on any replies Dave Heald Original Message Subject: Re: Product Safety - Japan List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 23:10:05 +0900 From: nakamur...@naka.melco.co.jp To: emc-p...@ieee.org References: 200105041727.naa21...@interlock2.lexmark.com George, John, Mark and group members: Please see below. geor...@lexmark.com wrote: The new Japan DENAN requirements are not completely clear, I quite agree. I have got many information about DENAN requirements because I work at a Japanese manufacturer but DENAN confuse and disgust me. and I know of no on-line source in English to clear up certain aspects. You can see KANPOH dated on March 19 2001 which is Official journal of the Japanese government but I don't know whether there is Enlgish translated KANPOH. For example, in the past, AC/DC adapters have required certification and the application of the Dentori-T mark with cert. number. However, there was no mandatory Japan certification for most ITE end products, e.g. the laser and inkjet printers we market. For most ITE end products like laser and inkjet printers,as you say, the Dentori-T mark didn't need to be affixed to these products but most electrical products sold in Japan including ITE end products had to conform to DENTORI requirements,that is,most ITE end products belonged to Category B(Self-Declaration and no Dentori-T mark) under DENTORI law. The attached MS Word file refers to specified products (SP) and non-specified products (NSP), and lists 19 product categories. However, it does not reveal if ITE might be included in categories 17 (electronic appliances) or 18 (other electronic apparatuses), or even incuded at all as an SP or NSP product requiring certification. George I'm not sure but I think most ITE end products belong to NSP because I have heard that almost all in Category B under DENTORI law were changed to NSP under DENAN law, therefore,for instance, affixing PSE mark(PSE in a circle) and maintaining product inspection records are needed. JET which is one of conformity assessment bodies can judge whether a product is in SP or NSP. If you can see Japanese visiting http://www.jet.or.jp will probably be a great help. If you can't then fax your question in English to the number shown in the web page. Jun Nakamura nakamur...@naka.melco.co.jp MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
[Fwd: FW: Field trial requirements]
Forwarded for Joel Mandel. Please select reply all when responding or include Joel in your CC line joel_man...@adc.com. Dave Heald -Original Message- From: Mandel, Joel Sent: á îøõ 19 2001 10:33 To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org' Subject: Field trial requirements Hi All Does anybody now if their are any NEBS requirements for field trials? Is their any difference between CLECS ,ILECS,RBOCS? Have a great day to all, Joel Mandel Compliance ADC Israel --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall,
Periphery ESD ground rings on high speed interface cards
Greetings all. I have a general question about the use of isolated ground rings at the periphery of rack type optical interface cards (so maybe it's specific). My understanding is that isolated (fully moated) ground rings are often placed around the edges of high speed interface cards in an attempt to keep ESD out of critical areas on the board (or to hold in edge radiation is another more suspect reason I have heard). This just seems like a bad idea to me, but I must admit that I am not on the design end of things. I ran this by a microwave specialist I know and he shared my opinion. There just seem to be too many opportunities for arc-over or induced voltages that could cause the same or more damage to the board. My question is this: does anyone have a concrete reason why such a ground ring would be a good idea? I would like to keep this discussion in the 1+GHz range, but anyone with experience please feel free to chip in. Thanks in advance David Heald Senior EMC Engineer/ Product Safety Engineer Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom Voice:978.486.8880x254 Fax:978.486.8828 www.curtis-straus.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
Re: Site Correlation
Greetings again. I received some questions about this off list and there has been more discussion in this direction, so I thought I would throw my other two cents in. For small fully anechoic chambers with little room for antenna height adjustment, you should be able to have uncertainty of about 6dB or so (10dB is much safer realistically) when you apply correction factors for a 10m site. The reason for this is, as John Barnes pointed out, the absence of reflected waves being received in addition to the direct waves. The key importance to a fully lined chamber (including the floor) is that destructive waves are not present. With a reflective floor, destructive waves can lower your readings by more than 30dB. Add this to the 6 dB or so of uncertainty for additive waves and your total error could be enormous. With an absorber lined floor, the influence of the destructive waves is eliminated or reduced, so a correlation of 6dB (again 10dB is safer) should be achievable (this simply accounts for the absence of constructive interference). Another important factor to ensure you don't have any surprises when moving from precompliance to a compliance run is to manipulate the cables during testing (oh, how much easier our job would be without cables). Large signal strength changes can be achieved just by moving cables a few inches. I also have to agree with Gert's and Ken's comments on far field measurements. I mentioned this in my original message, but didn't elaborate at all. These are very important considerations that can greatly affect any expected correlation to a 10m OATS. -- David Heald Senior EMC Engineer/ Product Safety Engineer Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom Voice:978.486.8880x254 Fax:978.486.8828 www.curtis-straus.com Tudor, Allen wrote: Greetings: What's the best way to correlate a pre-compliance chamber (smaller than a 3m chamber) to a 10m anechoic chamber? Should I use a signal generator and antenna or should I use a comb generator? Would the answer be different if I were correlating the pre-compliance chamber to an OATS? Thanks in advance. Allen Tudor, Compliance Engineer ADC DSL Systems Inc. 6531 Meridien Dr. Raleigh, NC 27616 phone: 919.875.3382 email: allen_tu...@adc.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
Re: Site Correlation
Hello all There are a few variables that need to be addressed to answer this question. The first is the nature of the chamber. My reply will assume that this is a fully anechoic chamber (walls, floor, and ceiling all lined with absorber material). Otherwise, all bets are off due to the unpredictable reflections from the surfaces in the chamber. In a chamber this size, I will also assume that the antenna height is fixed, or at least not very adjustable. Given a fully anechoic room and a fixed antenna height, theoretically you should be able to extrapolate (about 10 dB from 1 to 3 meters antenna distance and another 10 dB from 3 to 10 meters) with only about 6 dB of uncertainty. In practice this is usually accurate but real world conditions have slightly more uncertainty so 10 dB is a fairly safe margin to use. A few things to keep in mind: if the chamber is only semi-anechoic (walls and ceiling lined) you will have more uncertainty due to possible cancellation due to floor reflections. At this point, relative change or frequency identification is about the only thing the chamber is good for. Also, near field readings can be significantly different from far-field readings. If you come up with marginal near field readings, be prepared for the worst when you take 10m readings. Finally, be sure to check BOTH antenna polarities. I hope this helps Usual employer disclaimer . . .David Heald Senior EMC Engineer/ Product Safety Engineer Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom Voice:978.486.8880x254 Fax:978.486.8828 www.curtis-straus.com Tudor, Allen wrote: Greetings:What's the best way to correlate a pre-compliance chamber (smaller than a 3mchamber) to a 10m anechoic chamber? Should I use a signal generator andantenna or should I use a comb generator?Would the answer be different if I were correlating the pre-compliancechamber to an OATS?Thanks in advance.Allen Tudor, Compliance EngineerADC DSL Systems Inc.6531 Meridien Dr. Raleigh, NC 27616phone: 919.875.3382email: allen_tu...@adc.com---This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product SafetyTechnical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org! with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstcFor help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.orgFor 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: Surge (immunity) requirement for equipment in telecommunication c
Hello all. One related NEBS interpretation is based on the occurrence of the building housing the equipment being hit by lightning. If the frame of the building is carrying this large current spike, on the longer cables that are run through the building (likely over 10m) enough energy could be coupled onto the cables to create a hazard. By extension, shorter cables would probably be confined to within one equipment room and would not be long enough or near enough the current carrying building members to have dangerous amounts of energy coupled onto them. Hope this helps. Dave Usual views of employer disclaimer , etc. . . Zohar Zosmanovich wrote: Hi, The EN 300 386 (EMC requirements for telecommunication network equipment) require to perform a surge of 1.2/50 Tr/Th us, 0,5 kV to ports for indoor signal lines (in telecommunication centers), when cables longer than 10 m are connected ! Can some one explain my the rational of divided up to 10 m and more than 10 m, anyway all cable is in the building (indoors) ? Zohar (Jana) Zosmanovich Compliance Engineer, RADWIN ltd. 34 Habarzel St., Tel Aviv 69710, Israel Tel.: 972-3-7666735 ; Fax: 972-3-7657535 Email: mailto:zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.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 -- David Heald Senior EMC Engineer/ Product Safety Engineer Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom Voice:978.486.8880x254 Fax:978.486.8828 www.curtis-straus.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
Re: CISPR 24 and telecom ports
Hello, For Emisssions, I think the standard you may want to look at is EN55022(1998) which defines telecommunicaiotns ports as those connected to telecommunications networks(POTS, ISDN, ETC) and Local Area Networks. As for the Surge tests, there is a subnote under 55024 that applies surge tests to only those cables that leave the building. I hope this helps. David Heald Guy Story wrote: I am looking to see what the general conception is on I/O port conducted emissions and surge immunity is. The company I work for manufactures various types of network cards. Some of these tie to the outside word (public network) and others are LAN based. I can see performing the testing on ISDN and other style devices but not to a device, say and Ethernet card or a device, that does not access the public network directly. I have not read over the CISPR 24 document yet but based on what I have been told, the spec is vague on the areas of I/O ports and the outside world. Regards, Guy Story, KC5GOI Compliance Technician Interphase Corporation Dallas Texas phone: 214.654.5161 fax: 214.654.5406 --- 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 attachment: dheald.vcf
