EMI receiver: Dynamic Sciences DSI-2020
Hello, Has anyone had any experiance with this receiver that they would be willing to share with me (on or off the listserve?) Interested, also if you are using any other EMI control S/W package to control this guy. I am interested in it's price and it's advertised compliant cispr 16 detector.) 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: 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: Conducted immunity of a USB port
Gents, You might be happy to know, that according to the USB 1.1 2.0 Specification standard, http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/ the defined shield coverage for 1.1 2.0 USB cable is: a minimum of a 65% tinned copper braided + aluminum metalized polyester inner shield. I can't help asking what were the USB developers thinking when they spec'ed such a thin cable shield coverage? Performing the 61000-4-6 test (on the 5M length USB cable) to an external box connected to our product has certainly caused me gas! (New product is tested to 60601-1-2 Rev 2.) 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 From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 9:32 PM To: Ton Bouw; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Conducted immunity of a USB port I can only answer parts of this question. You should test for the maximum length the USB interface could attain, but since that length is 5 meters in this case, the limit lower frequency should be tailored upwards to account for that. There is no use testing at 150 kHz on such a short cable. This is right out of IEC 61000-4-6. If CDN design presents obstacles to testing high speed USB, I think an EM clamp is a better approach. In fact, I believe an EM clamp is a better approach for any shielded cable. The point of a CDN is to inject a signal into an equipment connector pin. When a cable is shielded, the mechanism for getting the rf signal on a pin is the transfer impedance of the shield. In order to test that, you need to get current flowing down the length of the shield. I think an EM clamp is a better mechanism for achieving that. From: Ton Bouw pa0...@mubo.nl Reply-To: Ton Bouw pa0...@mubo.nl List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:51:07 +0100 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Conducted immunity of a USB port Dear group, I have the following questions on testing a USB port for conducted immunity 1) USB extension cables are available in the consumer market. The USB 1.0 spec limits the cable length to 5.0m. Therefor I believe that the conducted immunity test is required even if the cable length of the DUT is less than 3m, unles a restriction is made in the user manual.. Is that correct? 2) I tested conducted immunity using a CDN-S9 with home-made adaptors from DB9 to USB using 4 pins of the DB-9 and the screen connection. I assume that this should give a representative result? For information: this does not work for hi-speed USB because of the LPF in the CDN. 3) Are CDN's for USB available? Or is it better to use an EM clamp? kind regards, Ton Bouw
Experiance with the PMM-9000 emi receiver?
Hello, Anybody have any experiance with this box that they would be willing to share? This is a 9 Khz to 1.2 Ghz emi receiver that is fully CISPR 16-1 compliant. 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: 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: OK, what's going on?
... BB conducted emissions from a battery charger... The last product that I cert'ed was a PC based product, its ATX supply was a special model which contained a UPS. During product certification I discovered the our product's worst conducted emissions occured when our product was off and the UPS was trickle charging its batteries. I don't like surprises like this that end up add extra modes of operation for product testing. 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 From: Doug Smith [mailto:d...@emcesd.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 12:38 AM To: Grasso, Charles Cc: 'lfresea...@aol.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: OK, what's going on? Hi All, Just wanted to put my 2 cents worth in. The same thing may be happening in Mil-spec testing. Recently, I was at a client's site for a purpose unrelated to this story. I noticed interference to the measurement I was trying to make on a piece of equipment. The equipment had enough common mode current on its leads to fail emissions, even though it was turned off! There was a military battery charger for small batteries on their bench so I connected my current probe to its power cord and noticed enough common mode current to cause a 30 dB+ failure of emissions over a broad frequency range. I would suppose the battery charger had been tested to mil-specs. If so there is a problem here, even accounting for the repeatability problems in mil-spec testing. Doug Grasso, Charles wrote: Hi Derek - Go Reds!! This is not a surprise to me. I have railed at much length a couple of years ago as to the latest FCC changes to the emissions qualification. I am sure you are familiar with it so I won't belabour the point. Fundementally the FCC PC emissions procedure has rendered the EMC discipline almost irrelevent. The new procedures coupled with the lack of enfocement makes it difficult to justify the increased costs of EMC design test. It also makes the whole measurement uncertainty push ridiculous. After all if the procedures allow for prodcut that 20dB out of spec why bother with a couple of dB of error?? Lets give the emissions standards some teeth or eliminate it all together. Best Regards Charles Grasso Senior Compliance Engineer Echostar Communications Corp. Tel: 303-706-5467 Fax: 303-799-6222 Cell: 303-204-2974 Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com; mailto:charles.gra...@echostar.com; Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org mailto:chasgra...@ieee.org -Original Message- From: lfresea...@aol.com [mailto:lfresea...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:05 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: OK, what's going on? Hi all, This e-mail has been prompted because of a number of things that have all come together. This may take a little reading, but please stick with it. Last note... this is not intended to pick on any individuals, or organization, but I do want to stir the pot. .. -- ___ _ Doug Smith \ / ) P.O. Box 1457 = Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457 _ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799 / /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528 | q-( ) | o |Email: d...@dsmith.org \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to:
RE: Fw, Yahoo Groups Recommendation?: Changes to IEEE emc-pstc we b-based services...
Pardon me if this has been decided already but I think you need to be made aware of this. Our corporate net nanny has blocked access to all Yahoo accounts (and other free mail accounts) - moving the EMC listserve there would prevent access from anyone within the GE.COM domain. Our local IEEE EMC chapter is blocked, (all appeals for access have been ignored.) You might me asking yourself why should I care? (Dave could certainly subscribe to the listserve at home - ((please enable the digest mode.)) This company is a trendsetter and many others emulate our practices, your impending move may impact other subscribers in the future. 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 From: Guy Boone [mailto:bo...@sympatico.ca] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 3:24 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Fw, Yahoo Groups Recommendation?: Changes to IEEE emc-pstc web-based services... Jim/Richard; Any update on the data transfer from http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ to ttps://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc https://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc... or a tentative date? For your information... the Yahoo group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emc-pstc/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emc-pstc/ can be easily configured to operate both as a listserver-based service and a web-based service. As a web-based service, https://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc https://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc does offer some advantages over Yahoo Groups (as referenced below)... but as a listserver-based service, it's advantage over majordomo is that it allows the member to control the delivery of messages (ie, individual emails, daily digest or no email) and messages can be viewed online http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emc-pstc/messages. I would recommend that you consider a migration to Yahoo Groups, once the data transfer to https://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc https://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc is complete. Should the planned data transfer be not possible, you may want to consider a full migration to Yahoo Groups, as listserver/web-based solution. Here in Ottawa, Canada... we have a group called RAFT - Regulatory Approvals Forum for Technology, and have been using Yahoo Groups http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RAFT-Global/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RAFT-Global/ for the past 2 years. I have joined http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emc-pstc/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emc-pstc/ some time ago... If you want to give it some consideration, I can volunteer to make the additional configuration changes. Please let me know your thought, and the Group owner will need to have me assigned as Moderator. Regards, http://ca.geocities.com/guyboone/My_Page.html Guy Boone, P. Eng Electrical Engineer, specializing in Safety Compliance, Power/Control Systems Design Buildings Engineering Steering Committee Member - http://www.raft-global.org/ www.RAFT-Global.org 35 Athena Way Tel: 613-823-7534 Ottawa (Nepean), ON K2G 6S1 Cell: 613-850-6533 From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Jim Bacher Sent: January 23, 2003 10:54 AM To: 'Andre, Pierre-Marie'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EMC-PSTC Email Forum We have had a couple major glitches with the movement of data. We are working on an alternate solution to the issue. As soon as we have worked out the details we will let you know. Jim From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Andre, Pierre-Marie Sent: January 23, 2003 4:24 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EMC-PSTC Email Forum On the http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/index.html http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/index.html I can read : The EMC-PSTC archives will be moved to another site shortly. The new location will be announced shortly. Make sure you check here often. Is there any target date to make the new location available? Many thanks for your answer This forum is really useful Pierre-Marie Andre Senior Approval Engineer From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Rich Nute Sent: January 2, 2003 12:22 PM To: Product Safety Technical Committee Cc: Jim Bacher; mg.ca...@ieee.org Subject: The listserver WILL continue. Thank you for all the comments on the listserver-based service versus the web-based service. The IEEE listserver WILL continue. I apologize for not being clear on this point. We started with listserver service. However, the listserver does not satisfy all of the needs of our subscribers. So, we supplement the listserver with a web service. Some of
Is EMC Test Design magazine kaput?
Gentlemen, Is EMC Test Design magazine still being published? I can't find seem to find a listing for it... 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
RE: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests
I am going to jump into this frey, here is my 2 cents... In the case of Medical Electronics, if the fault condition would cause more exposure of radiation to the patient than what was dialed in (X-Ray, MRI, Ultrasound) that would be a BAD thing. End of subject. dave garnier From: Lou Aiken [mailto:ai...@gulftel.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 11:00 PM To: peter merguerian; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests Here is what I think the requirements are: If the product remains safe, within the meaning of the standard, and the branch circuit overcurrent protection device does, or does not, operate as a result of fault testing, internal overcurrent is unnecessary. If the product does NOT remain safe, within the meaning of the standard, as a result of fault testing, internal overcurrent protection IS necessary, branch circuit overcurrent protection is inadequate, and internal overcurrent protection is necessary. Safe within the meaning of the standard: Does not exceed allowable fault temperature limits, does not catch fire, enclosure does not deform to the extent that parts involving the risk of electric shock or personal injury become exposed to the test finger or probe, will pass the required electric strength test after the fault, etc. IN order to be confident that the design is safe one must continue the fault testing until steady state conditions exist, OR for the maximum clearing time (for the resulting fault current) as stated in the standard for the particular overcurrent device. It is incorrect consider the result acceptable when the overcurrent device opens the circuit. The overcurrent device should be removed from the circuit and the current monitored during the fault test. Only approved fuses and circuit breakers should be specified if they are necessary make the product remain safe - within the meaning of the standard. There is a significant difference in the endurance and clearing limits between the UL and IEC standards for fuses and circuit breakers with the same current rating. Lou Aiken, LaMer LLC 27109 Palmetto Drive Orange Beach, AL 36561 USA tel ++ 1 251 981 6786 fax ++ 1 251 981 3054 Cell ++ 1 251 979 4648 - Original Message - From: peter merguerian mailto:pmerguerian2...@yahoo.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 1:54 PM Subject: Circuit Breaker Tripping Dring Fault Tests Dear All, For safety, it is not clear from the standards whether the main branch circuit breaker tripping during fault conditions is an acceptable result. I see no reason why this should not be acceptable. What is your view? Some third party labs find it acceptable and others do not. Anyone can lead me to some inernational decisions regarding this issue? Thanks, Peter _ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up ttp://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com now
RE: radiated emission from 15 inch TFT-LCD
Hi, The Hitachi Europe website has a app note on flat panel displays called APPS/043/1.0, titled flat panel displays - emi considerations. I have a copy on my hard drive that I would be willing to send. dave garnier -Original Message- From: XU,CATHERINE (HP-SanDiego,ex1) [mailto:x...@hp.com] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 6:27 PM To: EMC-PSTC Internet Forum Subject: RE: radiated emission from 15 inch TFT-LCD Hi, The following paper might be a good references on this topic: EMC analysis of an 18 LCD monitor Zeeff, T.M.; Hubing, T.H.; Drewniak, J.L.; Dussroff, R.E.; Van Doren, T.P. Electromagnetic Compatibility, 2000. IEEE International Symposium on , Volume: 1 , 2000 Page(s): 169 -173 vol.1 Catherine Xu ---| EMC Engineer | Hardware Test Regulations| All-in-One Personal Printing - HP | -Original Message- From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 2:02 PM To: EMC-PSTC Internet Forum Subject: Re: radiated emission from 15 inch TFT-LCD Importance: High Hi, It has been my (limited) experience that the LCD itself isn't much trouble for emissions. However, typically the LCD is in the face of the product and there may be some high speed, processor type circuits behind it. We have run into trouble with the processor emissions leaking around the LCD. Most of the LCD's that I have experience with have a metal plate on the back of them. This plate is usually a fairly good shield. So, emissions don't go through the LCD. However, if this plate isn't bonded well to the metal chassis at its edges (either with gasketing or with straps placed every 1/2 or so), then emissions will leak around the LCD. I'm wondering what type of shielded window you have. If it is an ITO (Indium Tin Oxide) coating, it is conductive enough to dissipate static; but not very good for emissions. We have tried them before only to remove them (because they hurt visibility) and concentrate instead on sealing around the LCD as mentioned above with better results. However, if you have a metal mesh shielded window, that should be good enough to contain any emissions; but again, check how it is sealed around the edges. I still think that even in this case, it would be worth a try to get rid of the shielding window and concentrate on bonding the metal backplate of the LCD to your product chassis. In a pinch at the lab, we've done it with copper tape with decent results. Another thing to look at is the power and signal interface cables to the LCD. They may be carrying processor noise up to your LCD. We typically filter them with some very light capacitance ( 10's of pF or so). Just enough to let the video signals through while bleeding off some of that nasty processor noise. We have also tried clamp on ferrites on these cables. Best of luck my man. 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: 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 --- 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
ESD isolation of RS232 port
Hello I am looking for advice from the emc group on the ESD / EMC design of an RS-232 port device that is a patient connected medical device. I am one of those troublesome technicians that has to test and certify our company's products, and then report back the results to those in charge. Esd testing is going badly because I am breaking things at low discharge levels. First off, our product requires 510K approval. During normal of the device, the patient is capacitively coupled to the device, other times the patient can be directly coupled to an ECG connection. It is roll around device the plugs into a 15 amp outlet, In most installations, the unit will be connected to an external modem (supplied locally by that country, meeting their reg requirements) for external service diagnostics. Our RS-232 cable design has an full outside shield (for EMC) which connects the sub-d backshells together, but the mounting screws are exposed metal. The RS-232 connection on the back of our product has been designed to float the backshell and mounting hardware. I presume the design reason here was to have an extra layer of isolation from the patient. I see 2 problems (maybe more) with this design: 1) This design negates the nice 360 degree EMC shielded cables by isolating the sub-d backshells and mounting hardware from ground. 2) PCB layout needs lots of trace isolation, high breakdown RS-232 transceivers and opto isolators to standing off the ESD discharge to ground. The nice Maxim parts survive but the optocouplers (2.5 kV RMS) aren't so lucky. A side effect of the design is that the isolated circuity floats and maintains the ESD discharge for a while. I would like to ground the sub-d backshell and mounting hardware at the bulkhead and be done with it. Comments??? g GE Medical Systems _ David Garnier Senior Technician Ultrasound Engineering TEL: 414-647-4286 FAX: 414-647-4090 EMAIL: david.garn...@med.ge.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
FW: CAN Bus system
Hello, Can someone enlighten me here, what is a Category 5 cable? thanks, dave garnier -- From: mkel...@es.com[SMTP:mkel...@es.com] Reply To: mkel...@es.com Sent: Monday, November 02, 1998 1:25 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:RE: CAN Bus system I don't have any particular expertise in this area. However, it looks like Phillips CAN controller PCA82C250T, for instance, has a speed control input that can control the rise and fall slope. A shielded Category 5 cable might provide protection against transients and limit radiated emissions. Max Kelson -Original Message- From: Martin Johnson [SMTP:calpe1...@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, November 02, 1998 9:13 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:CAN Bus system Any pointers to good information for EMC related problems on CAN bus systems would be appreciated Ideally looking towards ESD, transient immunity and radiated emissions etc. Martin _ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
