Re: To RTTE or not to RTTE
Dave, From your email address, it looks like you are at a test lab. Not sure what type of source the advice you got from, but this device falls into RTTE Directive, in specific, the standards to test against shall be: EN 300 330 series for radio parameters and EN 301 489 series for EMC parameters. Hope this helps. Leslie Dave Grant da...@alisonlabs.com wrote: Hello All. Is the RTTE directive applicable for proximity card readers in access control systems? The frequencies of interest are: 125 kHz 13.56MHz 134.2kHz I am getting some advice that these products fall outside of the above directive and instead fall under the EMC directive. What's your opinion? Can you guys point me to some info on the web that could clarify this? Thanks ... Dave Grant 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 _ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now h tp://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: China Approvals
Mat, YD/T993 does not have official English version, this standard consists of major requirements of three other Chinese standards, i.e. GB3482 (1982), GB3483 (1983) and GB 4943 (1995). GB3482/GB3483 are similar to ITU K.21 and G992.1. GB4943 is similar to IEC950. All requirements in TD/T993 are in either of three GB standards which are similar to international standards. If you need more information, contact me off-line. Hope this helps, Leslie Aschenberg, Mat matt.aschenb...@echostar.com wrote: Hello, I am looking get a copy of YD/T993: Technical Requirements and Test Methods of Lightening Resistibility for Telecommunication Terminal Equipment or preferably an equivalent document in English. Do you know where I might be able to locate this? Thanks, Mat Mat Aschenberg Agency Engineer EchoStar Technologies Corporation Englewood, Colorado (303) 706-5064 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: daveheald@at! tbi.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 _ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now h tp://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: SV: Singapore and IDA license
No, Colin Gan is my ex-colleague working at PSB, a product testing and certification house, not IDA licensing authority. The followings are correct contacts for IDA licenses. 1. Radio-communication Licensing Mr Tang Chee Mun Tel: (65) 6211 1905 E-mail: mailto:tang_chee_...@ida.gov.sg tang_chee_...@ida.gov.sg 2. SBO(Individual) Licensing Mr Badrul Hisham Tel: (65) 6211 1938 E-mail: mailto:badrul_his...@ida.gov.sg badrul_his...@ida.gov.sg 3. SBO(Class) Licensing Mr Png Soo Chuan Tel: (65) 6211 1931 E-mail: mailto:badrul_his...@ida.gov.sg png_soo_ch...@ida.gov.sg 4. Equipment Type Approval Matter Ms Chee Swee Lin Tel: (65) 6211 1919 E-mail: mailto:chee_swee_...@ida.gov.sg chee_swee_...@ida.gov.sg 5. Dealer's Licensing/Import Control Mr Tan Eng Soon Tel: (65) 6211 1948 E-mail: mailto:Tan_Eng_Soon@i! da.gov.sg Tan_Eng_S! o...@ida.gov.sg 6. Radio Frequency Matter Ms Teo Geok Hoon Tel: (65) 6211 1903 Email: mailto:teo_geok_h...@ida.gov.sg teo_geok_h...@ida.gov.sg Hope it helps, If you need further information or assistance on Singapore licenses or products approvals, contact me off-line. Leslie Amund Westin am...@westin-emission.no wrote: Visit www.ida.gov.sg or contact Colin Gan [mailto:colin@psbcorp.com] He might help you with the details. Amund I have been advised by the Singapore authorities that I need to get an IDA license . What is it and how do I get one? Thanks in anticipation 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 _ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now h tp://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: Singapore and IDA license
Rob, Singapore IDA stands for Info-Comm Development Authority, a government agency issues telecom operation licenses, e.g. 3G, mobile license. By its name, any information, communication related BUSINESS (I mean business) must get IDA license, even another Singapore government authority (SBA - Singapore Broadcasting Authority) must get IDA license to do the licensed business. IDA license is for Business or Facilities, it's not related to the products' approval. If you would like to know details of IDA license, how and where to get it, contact me off-line. I would refer you to Singapore local contacts. Regards Leslie At AM 10:02 01/17/03 +, Rob Humphrey wrote: I have been advised by the Singapore authorities that I need to get an IDA license . What is it and how do I get one? Thanks in anticipation -- -- Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd. _ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now h tp://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Re: strange symbols (to me anyway)
Gary, The symbol you described is to indicate Indoor or Outdoor use. If the arrow points outside, it means For outdoor use. If it points inside, it means For indoor use only. This house symbol is not an IEC recognized one but it IS required by some countries for certain types of products, e.g. China CCC for power supply. For details of applicable products and countries, contact me off-line. Hope it helps. Leslie _ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now h tp://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com
China and Singapore
For the benefits of members of this discussion group, I thought this news might be useful to this group. After over half a years negotiation and bi-monthly high-level meetings, CNCA China and SPRING Singapore (formerly Singapore Productivity and Standards Board) finally signed the MOU on CCC regulated products. From Dec 1, 2002, all products under CCC rules can be certified in Singapore and sold in China without CCC certification. Vice verse, all CCC marked products can be sold in Singapore without PSB certification. The restriction is the products must be made in either China or Singapore. This is the first such MOU signed since CCC was implemented in May 2002. Hope this helps. Leslie www.siemic.com - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
Re: DC Input Power Conducted Emissions
Bob, EN55022 is applicable to ITE equipment, there is no conducted emissions on DC port. However, EN55022 excludes any equipment (or part of the ITE equipment) which has a primary function of radio transmission and/or reception according to the ITU Radio Regulations (excerpt from EN55022:1998, Clause 3.1). For excluded equipement, Conducted emission testing on DC port may be required. Here is an example. For Short Range Device (SRD), EN 301 489-3 both DC and AC ports are required Conducted Emissions testing, refer to Clause 7.1 (Emissions) at Page 14 of EN 301 489-3 (2000-08). If your PC is just another personal computer mainly for data processing rather than data transmission, Conducted emission testing on the DC port is not applicable. Hope this helps. Leslie rehel...@mmm.com wrote: Is it a requirement to measure conducted emissions on a DC input power port under CISPR 22 or EN55022? The equipment is a PC that runs off a DC power bus? Thanks, Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 --- 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 - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
RE: When CE doesn't pass
It was about five years ago, I did an EMC job to meet the CE mark requirement for a Semiconductor equipment manufacturer by the approach of TCF (Technical Construction File). The whole system was real giant and there was no way to bring the system to the lab fitting in the chamber. Many sub-systems were OEM parts and most of them had been CE marked. However, during the site testing at customer's premises, a walky-talky made the system shut-down. It was quite straight-forward to find the cause of the failure and that was the CE marked UPS system. When we looked at the detail information of the CE Marked UPS system, it was truely CE marked, however the test report shows that this UPS system is a Class B device and that manufacturer declared CE compliance at Class B. Nobody was wrong, but the Semiconductor system must meet Class A environment. The advice to the semicondutor equipment manufacturer was to either fix the UPS immunity problem or change another UPS system. So CE marked - what does that mean? It is a manufacturer's self declaration. As a result of this when you shop around for CE marked sub-systems or OEM parts, make sure that CE mark is what you want. Regards, Leslie - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
Re: New Revision of CCC Rules
Following my previous email, I received some inquires about a complete list of CCC implementation rules. If you have not heard of the new CCC Mark requirements and want to learn more, you can visit http://www.siemic.com click the red China Approvals flag, or enter here at http://www.siemic.com/ca/ca-index.htm. Regards, Leslie Leslie Bai leslie_...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Group, It's to inform you that China CNCA has revised the CNCA-02C-023 (Rev 2002). The old revision published in 2001 is replaced by this new revision with effective from Nov.1, 2002. All manufacturers applying for CCC under this category shall refer to 2002 version. It's also confirmed from our Beijing office that other CNCA publications are under revision and will be published soon. Hope this information helps this group. Leslie - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
New Revision of CCC Rules
Dear Group, It's to inform you that China CNCA has revised the CNCA-02C-023 (Rev 2002). The old revision published in 2001 is replaced by this new revision with effective from Nov.1, 2002. All manufacturers applying for CCC under this category shall refer to 2002 version. It's also confirmed from our Beijing office that other CNCA publications are under revision and will be published soon. Hope this information helps this group. Leslie - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
Re: Conducted Line Emissions
Dan, Ask for the tabular QUASI-PEAK results against CISPR 22 limits from the lab if they told you your product failed FCC limits. I guess nobody can tell the pass/fail from the plot the lab presented to you. Leslie Dan Pierce wrote: Greetings: I am looking for proof that I can use the averaged value for emissions rather than the peak value. Attached is a chart that I was given by an Asia test site that told me I failed. According to my past experience, I believe that the average power is what I should be concerned about. Similar to radiated emissions right? Thank you. Daniel J. Pierce - Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley videos from Greatest Hits CD
Re: CCC mark testlab cetification
Following my previous email below. One of the members of this group asked me a very good question which I didn't put it in detail in my email. That's about acceptance of CB report. For EMC, this is no question about it. In-country testing is a must-go and I thought it's quite clearly expressed in my email below. CCC doesn't accept any EMC reports from any where else apart from their CNCA accredited labs. For safety, they accept CB report. However if the CB report doesn't include China deviations, additional test(s) will be performed in their accredited lab(s). If the CB report includes China deviations, they accept it. Of course, the cost and processing time will be different with and without CB report. Hope this helps. Leslie Leslie Bai leslie_...@yahoo.com wrote: Fred, You raised a good point here by answering Chet's questions. Here is the update of CNCA accreditation. Since CCC was initially anounced to be implemented in May, the whole system was actually not ready at that time even the cost of testing and certification were not defined until late July. BTW - The first US manufacturer who went through CCC factory inspection and certification since CCC was implemented is my customer so I know they were not ready when my customer applied for CCC. In June, CNCA announced TWO (2) CCC certification bodies accredited to issue CCC certification mark and 68 Chinese labs accredited to perform CCC testing covering 19 categories of products regulated under CCC. 9 labs located in different regions of China are accredited for electrical electronics and IT products testing. The complete set (47 volumes) of CCC regulations are available for manufacturer's reference for a couple of US dollars each volume. If I were you, the manufacturer, I would not spend several hundred dollars to buy them from other sources. For Chinese manufacturers, the closest lab will be assigned for CCC testing. For foreign manufacturers, the labs located in Beijing will be assigned for CCC testing. (This seems to loose recently and foreign manufacturer now can name a prefered lab to perform CCC testing if sufficient reasons being raised. One of my customers did this recently as two labs in Beijing have different views on the issue of whether the power adapter provided by other manufacturer shall be included in the certification of their products and we finally achieved a perfect agreement with one of the Certification body for the best interest of this customer, this, I thought, is the value of using a qualified agent). There is no other agency accredited to issue CCC mark other than 2 accredited Chinese agencies both located in Beijing. There is no so-called registered agent to perform CCC certification either issueing CCC mark or perform CCC testing. There is no foreign labs accredited by CNCA to perform CCC testing other than 68 accredited labs in China. All application must be made to 2 accredited CCC certification bodies and tested by one of 68 labs in China, either directly by the manufacturers or through an agent. However, the value of employing an agent, I believe, is to efficiently communicate with both certification body and test lab to facilitate the process, define the testing scope, and trouble-shooting with Chinese Engineers if unpleasant failure occurs. So such agent should have both Estern and Western backgrounds, understand Chinese culture, speak their language, and with sound Compliance Engineering knowledge. Please also note that MII Type approval is different. MII and CNCA are not in the same boat. MII has its own regulations and accredited labs. For foreign manufacturers, MII test lab can assign Engineers to the customer site to perform testing and issue MII accredited report for MII type approval - (BWT: We have done this for our customers before and it's is extremely helpful and benefitial to foreign manuacturers consdiering the transporation cost of big telecom racks shipped to China!, It could be OK if US Western coast ports are running smoothly). Should anyone like to understand more of China approvals, feel free to contact me off-line. Hope this helps. Leslie Fred Borda fbo...@typeapproval.com wrote: Hi Chet, The set of documents published by CNCA, the authority that administers the CCC mark scheme in China, is available in English at: http://www.typeapproval.com/cn/emc.html The document labeled Regulations for CPCS.pdf is the overall regulations guiding the regime. It addresses type testing. While I don't believe it specifically says that testing performed outside China is not accepted, a lot is determined at the implementation level. Testing must be performed at CNCA accredited laboratories. I don't know of any such accredited labs outside China. I know that several US manufacturers had sought to have their own labs accredited at one point, but the last I heard was that these applications have all been in limbo for a very long time
Re: CCC mark testlab cetification
Fred, You raised a good point here by answering Chet's questions. Here is the update of CNCA accreditation. Since CCC was initially anounced to be implemented in May, the whole system was actually not ready at that time even the cost of testing and certification were not defined until late July. BTW - The first US manufacturer who went through CCC factory inspection and certification since CCC was implemented is my customer so I know they were not ready when my customer applied for CCC. In June, CNCA announced TWO (2) CCC certification bodies accredited to issue CCC certification mark and 68 Chinese labs accredited to perform CCC testing covering 19 categories of products regulated under CCC. 9 labs located in different regions of China are accredited for electrical electronics and IT products testing. The complete set (47 volumes) of CCC regulations are available for manufacturer's reference for a couple of US dollars each volume. If I were you, the manufacturer, I would not spend several hundred dollars to buy them from other sources. For Chinese manufacturers, the closest lab will be assigned for CCC testing. For foreign manufacturers, the labs located in Beijing will be assigned for CCC testing. (This seems to loose recently and foreign manufacturer now can name a prefered lab to perform CCC testing if sufficient reasons being raised. One of my customers did this recently as two labs in Beijing have different views on the issue of whether the power adapter provided by other manufacturer shall be included in the certification of their products and we finally achieved a perfect agreement with one of the Certification body for the best interest of this customer, this, I thought, is the value of using a qualified agent). There is no other agency accredited to issue CCC mark other than 2 accredited Chinese agencies both located in Beijing. There is no so-called registered agent to perform CCC certification either issueing CCC mark or perform CCC testing. There is no foreign labs accredited by CNCA to perform CCC testing other than 68 accredited labs in China. All application must be made to 2 accredited CCC certification bodies and tested by one of 68 labs in China, either directly by the manufacturers or through an agent. However, the value of employing an agent, I believe, is to efficiently communicate with both certification body and test lab to facilitate the process, define the testing scope, and trouble-shooting with Chinese Engineers if unpleasant failure occurs. So such agent should have both Estern and Western backgrounds, understand Chinese culture, speak their language, and with sound Compliance Engineering knowledge. Please also note that MII Type approval is different. MII and CNCA are not in the same boat. MII has its own regulations and accredited labs. For foreign manufacturers, MII test lab can assign Engineers to the customer site to perform testing and issue MII accredited report for MII type approval - (BWT: We have done this for our customers before and it's is extremely helpful and benefitial to foreign manuacturers consdiering the transporation cost of big telecom racks shipped to China!, It could be OK if US Western coast ports are running smoothly). Should anyone like to understand more of China approvals, feel free to contact me off-line. Hope this helps. Leslie Fred Borda fbo...@typeapproval.com wrote: Hi Chet, The set of documents published by CNCA, the authority that administers the CCC mark scheme in China, is available in English at: http://www.typeapproval.com/cn/emc.html The document labeled Regulations for CPCS.pdf is the overall regulations guiding the regime. It addresses type testing. While I don't believe it specifically says that testing performed outside China is not accepted, a lot is determined at the implementation level. Testing must be performed at CNCA accredited laboratories. I don't know of any such accredited labs outside China. I know that several US manufacturers had sought to have their own labs accredited at one point, but the last I heard was that these applications have all been in limbo for a very long time. As a practical matter, the testing must be conducted in China. As for laboratories becoming accepted agents, if by that you mean accreditation to have their test reports accepted by certification bodies in China, this is the procedure mentioned above that some labs have tried. I'm eager to hear from any list members about progress they may have made in this accreditation process. If by accepted agent you mean a foreign lab to become a certification body to issue the CCC mark, I think we may not see this for some time to come. Has anyone else seen further movement on this front? -Fred Borda Compliance International www.typeapproval.com At AM 11:01 10/31/02 -0800, Summers, Chet wrote: Hello Listmembers. I am researching the procedures needed to obtain the CCC mark for shipment of
Re: CCC mark testlab cetification
Hi Chet, To get an overview of CCC regulations, download this file: http://www.siemic.com/Original%20files/CCC%20mark.pdf I just want to remind you that some other regulation may be applicable to your products in addition to CCC, particularly, the MPS regulations on security products. For a general review of Chinese regulations, pls take a look at the attached document (CHINA.pdf). For those who are not interested in this topic, please ignore the attachment although I thought it could be interesting to you. For more detail information and procedures of China approvals, pls contact me off-line. Thanks, Leslie Summers, Chet csumm...@pelco.com wrote: Hello Listmembers. I am researching the procedures needed to obtain the CCC mark for shipment of CCTV equipment into China and need some guidance from those experienced in the process. First, which Chinese document explicitly mandates type testing within China? I have read from various sourches that any testing not performed within the country is completely unacceptable. Where can I review the Chinese Government's official stand on type testing, for EMC and product safety? Lastly, I am looking for procedures necessary for a Regulatory Compliance Lab to become an accepted agent within China. Any experiences with this process that you are willing to share will be appreciated. Chet Summers Compliance Engineer Pelco tel 1-559-292-1981 X2822 fax 1-559-294-2697 --- 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 - Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now CHINA.pdf Description: CHINA.pdf
Re: Frequency Allocations for EU Countries
Scott, Here is the link to get a copy of ERC Report 25 (EU Frequency Allocation): www.ero.dk/EROWEB/FM/ECA-Lisboa-2002.pdf It is not a nice color chart but has everything you need (from 9kHz to 275GHz). Hope it helps. Leslie All, I have a question regarding frequency allocations for the European Union countries. Is anyone on this list aware of a source for the allocation of the RF spectrum in the EU? I'm looking for something similar to the following Domestic chart: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf But for EU instead... Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Best Regards, Scott Mee Johnson Controls Inc. Automotive Systems Group EMC Product Compliance 616.394.2565 scott@jci.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 - Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
Re: Effects of the Ground Plane
Tony, To answer your questions: 1)?Am I correct that the GRP reflectivity can add to the signal strength??If so, by what amount is typical? Yes, it will add roughly 6dB depending on interested frequency, etc. 2)?How can I prove to my client that this is so? 3)?What documentation exists that explains this? Search IEEE EMC Symposium records, I remember there were some discussions about it years ago, probably 1996 or 1997 Symposium??? either Austin or Denver, can't recall 4)?Or is my client correct and I have some unexplained problem? Pls remember the declared antenna gain could be antenna manufacturer's declaration which may be the standalone performance of the antenna thus may not consider the customized application of the equipment you are testing. Any installation may change the antenna pattern and affect the effective gain, either way is possible. That's why product manufacturers shall make antenna pattern analysis based on its customized installation, rather than purely relying on the antenna manufacturer's declaration of the antenna performance. Hope this helps, Leslie - Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos, more faith.yahoo.com
Re: Performance Criteria A
Richard, I am not sure if you have noticed the difference of performance criteria defined in the earlier version of ESTI EMC standard ETS 300 385 and current EN 301 489 series standards. In ETS 300 385 - Criteria A is clearly defined, for radio transceivers - No BER is allowed, e.g. zero tolorence. This means the performance is defined (not willingfully by manufacturer) and limited to be BER and degradation of BER is not allowed. Obviously manufacturers had no choice but to follow. In EN 301 489 series std, the definition changed. Manufactures can define own performance and its reasonable performance level, no degradation of performance means no worse than defined performance level. Example of taking BER as the performance, but percentage of BER is allowed as long as it is reasonable and more importantly acceptable by their customers, obviously if the bar is set too low, their customers may not buy it. Hope this helps. Leslie richwo...@tycoint.com wrote: Most of the CENELEC immunity standards specify performance criteria A as follows: The equipment shall continue to operate as intended without operator intervention. No degradation of performance or loss of function is allowed below a performance level specified by the manufacturer when the equipment is used as intended. The performance level may be replaced by a permissible loss of performance. If the minimum performance level or the permissible performance loss is not specified by the manufacturer, then either of these may be derived from the product description and documents, and by what the user may reasonably expect from the equipment if used as intended. However, ETS 300 683 and ETSI EN 301489-1 and -3 (and I presume the other parts) read less clearly as Operate as intended and No loss of function. Can one presume that CENELEC's more well defined wording of Criteria A can be applied to the ETSI standards? Specifically, can the manufacturer specify a degradation of performance or loss of function as long as the degraded performance is not less than what the user may reasonably expect from the equipment if used as intended. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International - Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos, more faith.yahoo.com
RE: Dwell time for Immunity under EN55024?
Dear Gert, Thanks for trying to answer my questions - I thought your comments are so misleading, at least I would have been fooled if I were not in the profession of regulatory compliance. I thought manufacturers have already taken too much trying to understand what are the routes to comply. Obviously - if the harmonized standards are available, simply following the standards would be sufficient to declare conformity, I believe that's why the standards are there in the first place. Why should we ask manufacturers to comply with essential requirements instead of following what standard says. TCF is only for certain conditions either when there is no harmonized standard available or the standard testing is not feasible to the EUT, etc. even though during TCF assessment, standard procedures should be followed as much as possible. If your comments were not misleading, I thought we should replace all test standards with test guidelines so that we could be exploring as much value-added essential requirements as possible and fully instilling our spirit of immunity testing. As test labs, we must be laughing as we are charging by time, and our manufacturers would never get out of debts. I would like to stop here, no more discussions on this, and you know time is money, once again we are charging you, dear manufacturers, by time Leslie I declare I am running a lab in California and partially own one lab in China. Gert Gremmen wrote:Hi Leslie, some answers: Is this called compliance testing or engineering verification?Anything that has to do with product quality (like EMI) needs to be addressed in termsof engineering. Can we do this and declare compliance? Sure you can declare compliance, as the European System is simply not targeted to complying with standards,but to complying with essential requirements. Of course you cannot declare compliance withthe standard (to the letter). Using standards is just a way to presumption of compliance. Art 10.1 EMCDIf you really DO deviate from the standard , you will needto follow the TCF route using a Competent Body to show compliance. Art 10.2 EMCD Any deviation of the standard is doomed to art 10.2 , but changing an undefined dwelltime to better meet the intention of the standard won't lead to a law suite. Several product type of standards do address the topic of dwell time btw. One never can get condamned by not following the prescriptions of the EMCD or standard, onlyby creating to much EMI or lacking susceptability (and other essential phenomenae). Gert Gremmence-test-Original Message- From: Leslie Bai [mailto:leslie_...@yahoo.com] Sent: donderdag 3 oktober 2002 21:37 To: Gert Gremmen; paul_sc...@mitel.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Dwell time for Immunity under EN55024? Gert Gremmen wrote: ... prescan with Increase frequency step size ! (watch out for resonances) Modify equipment to decrease fault response time (low pass filters ; software ) Build Specifc test features Write specific test software . I am wondering whoelse out there doing these - Is that not sufficient to demonstrate conformity by follwoing standard procedures? What specific test features, what specific test software, are they specifed in the standards? Is this called compliance testing or engineering verification? Of course you will be violating the standard; Can we do this and declare compliance? Leslie Bai NARTE Certified Engineer (EMC-002112-NE) www.siemic.com - Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! - Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo!
RE: Dwell time for Immunity under EN55024?
Gert Gremmen wrote: ... prescan with Increase frequency step size ! (watch out for resonances) Modify equipment to decrease fault response time (low pass filters ; software ) Build Specifc test features Write specific test software . I am wondering whoelse out there doing these - Is that not sufficient to demonstrate conformity by follwoing standard procedures? What specific test features, what specific test software, are they specifed in the standards? Is this called compliance testing or engineering verification? Of course you will be violating the standard; Can we do this and declare compliance? Leslie Bai NARTE Certified Engineer (EMC-002112-NE) www.siemic.com - Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo!
Re: China Switch Approval
John, Recently, one of our happy clients became the first US manufacturer (networking unit) who successfully went through CCC audit and obtained CCC within 3 weeks (in fact 12 working days) including product testing and factory inspection with the assistance from Siemic Labs - (Application was made on 9/5, Testing started on 9/9, Factory inspected on 9/16, and CCC approved on 9/20). Reference is available upon request. For more information about China approvals (CCC, NAL/NAI, MPS), visit us at: http://www.siemic.com We were also contracted by another Network Switching manufacturer for China MII approval early this year and thought my direct experience would be helpful. Pls feel free to contact me off-line for a detail discussion. As part of services, we also help to arrange direct dialogue with government officers (MII, CNCA, MPS) for our clients whenever necessary for the most cost-effective approach to get China approvals at the earliest opportunity. Regards, Leslie John Smith wrote: 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 - Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo!
Re: Taiwan and China approvals?
Patrick, I just came back from China with several China Approvals/Licenses/Certificates for our clients. Hope this reply is not too late. To have a rough idea of what approvals are currently required to access China market, including CCC, NAL/NAI, Type Approval, and Sales Permit, visit http://www.siemic.com/china-approvals.htm Should you have any questions, feel free to contact me off-line. Thanks Leslie pfitzgib...@attbi.com wrote: Greetings everybody! My boss just asked me what the procedure and timeframe for getting into Korea and China was. (Imagine my distress ;-). For optical networking type products (no TNV ports) where all of our Safety, NEBS and EU (386, 019, 753, etc...) tesing is complete, does anyone know what to submit (and to whom) and how long this might take for China or Korea? more background - Luckily our CB report is from a Korea certified lab, but our emissions and immunity were from non-global (but EU CAB NRTL status) labs that don't have Korean authorization. I've also done some looking into the new China CCC procedure. We're not specifically addressed in the catalogue. Does this mean we can just import our system? Any help on any of these points would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance, Patrick Fitzgibbon --- 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 - Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
RE: China approvals - CCC
Scott, Go to www.siemic.com , click ccc to download a 10-page complete introduction of CCC mark. Leslie Scott Douglas dougl...@naradnetworks.com wrote: Can anyone provide web links to look at these catalogues? I am interested to see if our products are on the list. Thanks, Scott At 08:02 AM 7/12/02 -0700, Joshua Wiseman wrote: Amund, I think you should also take a look at the old CCIB scheme. The CCC is still developing standards at this time. I believe it is safe to say that if your product was in the catalog for CCIB it will be for CCC as well. I also understand that CCC will cover more products than CCIB did as well. If nothing else keep your ear to the door you may find yourself working toward CCC approval in the future. Good Luck, Josh Josh Wiseman EMC/Product Safety (714) 368-2737 [mailto:jwise...@printronix.com] -Original Message- From: am...@westin-emission.no [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 1:39 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 - Do You Yahoo!? New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free unlimited access
Re: China approvals - CCC
In fact, the CCC mark was delayed to be implemented on July 1, 2002, accoordingly, the one-year transition period will end on July 1, 2003. If your product is under old system, be careful to say it is not covered under CCC, because the CCC product list may not be clear enough however, it does indicate that others... in some categories. In addition, even CCC isn't applicable to your product, it doesn't always mean you do not have to document compliance for EMC or safety. Your product may be under other regulations, e.g. NAL/NAI. Sometimes, they do need documentation of EMC compliance when you submit such applications. The best bet is to have a good communication with authorities before exporting your product. Leslie am...@westin-emission.no wrote: 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 - Do You Yahoo!? New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free unlimited access
Semi S2 expertise in the Bay Area
Hello Safety Guru, I need a product safety expert (particularly Semi S2) to work together with me on a project. Does anyone know any S2 guru in the Bay Area? Please NO organization or consulting firm or test lab is needed, rather than an individual consultant with strong semiconductor S2 experience. Please contact me for the project details off-line. Sorry, only Bay Area consulant is considered due to the nature of the project. Thanks Leslie - Do You Yahoo!? Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup
Re: Network Camera and EMC?
John, I forgot to mention that I assumed your camera is for professional, process control, or educational use. Leslie Leslie Bai leslie_...@yahoo.com wrote: John, For US, FCC Part 15B, for Europe, EN61326. Watch out the emissions, if you havn't done anything on the direct connection to 10/100BaseT. I would strongly suggest you make a pre-compliance measurement with sufficient confidence level before going to an accredited lab. I recently helped two companies resolved their EMI problems, both have connections to 10/100BaseT. Different devices but end up with the same EMC design issue. If you do have problem to pass the specification, contact me off line. Good luck, Leslie John Coyle jco...@silent-witness.com wrote: Hello, I am developing a network camera that will connect directly to a 10/100 BaseT network. I intend to sell in both US and Europe. Which standards apply for regulatory approval? My particular concern is EMC. All comments would be appreciated. Thanks John Coyle Senior Engineer, Silent Witness. Tel: 604-574-1526 Ext 8633 Email: jco...@silent-witness.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.co! m 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 - Do You Yahoo!? Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup - Do You Yahoo!? Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup
Re: Network Camera and EMC?
John, For US, FCC Part 15B, for Europe, EN61326. Watch out the emissions, if you havn't done anything on the direct connection to 10/100BaseT. I would strongly suggest you make a pre-compliance measurement with sufficient confidence level before going to an accredited lab. I recently helped two companies resolved their EMI problems, both have connections to 10/100BaseT. Different devices but end up with the same EMC design issue. If you do have problem to pass the specification, contact me off line. Good luck, Leslie John Coyle jco...@silent-witness.com wrote: Hello, I am developing a network camera that will connect directly to a 10/100 BaseT network. I intend to sell in both US and Europe. Which standards apply for regulatory approval? My particular concern is EMC. All comments would be appreciated. Thanks John Coyle Senior Engineer, Silent Witness. Tel: 604-574-1526 Ext 8633 Email: jco...@silent-witness.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 - Do You Yahoo!? Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup
Re: Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting on Wednesday, June 26
Matt, It sounds Doug's presentation would be quite interesting, unfortunately I am in the Bay Area and won't be able to attend the meeting. Will that be possible to share Doug's presentation after the meeting. Thanks Leslie - Do You Yahoo!? Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup
Re: EMC requirements
Cecil, What products are you marketing in those countries? If someone told you that there is no EMC requirement in those countries, that could be dangerous simply because they do have for certain types of products. Are you seriously looking for answers from this group? Without specific products, any answer to the route to compliance could be wrong. Leslie cecil.gitt...@kodak.com wrote: Hi All, Does any one know what the EMC requirements are for the countries listed below. Malaysia Philippines Thailand Vietnam Bangladesh Sri Lanka Myanmar Thanks Cecil --- 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 - Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
Re: FCC Contact
For MRAs, contact Art Wall (located at D.C.) at (202)-418-2442. For OET services, contact Richard Fabina at (301)-362-3021. For EMC (eg. Pt15, etc.), contact Tom Phillips at (301) - 362 - 3044. For Radio Approval (eg.Pt 101, etc.), contact Frank Coperich at 301-362-3023. I have found they are extremely helpful on above-mentioned matters respectively from my past several years experience dealing with FCC. Leslie rehel...@mmm.com wrote: Can anyone provide me with phone and/or name contacts for FCC rules interpretation (Parts 15, 18, and 68)? Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 --- 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 - Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
Re: Modem Approval for China
Russell, It's waste of time, effort, and money dealing with CQCC to get China approval on your Modem, Actually, CQCC is NOT the right authority to approve your Modem. Get in touch with me off line if you want to get your Modem approved in 30 days. Leslie Russell r@totalise.co.uk wrote: Can anybody advise on the best (or any!) route to approval for a UK manufactured modem for export to, and for sale in China (not Hong Kong). The modem in question already has European, North American and Australian approvals. I'm reasonably familiar with the requirements, it's the process that's proving difficult to establish, along with pinning down the *costs* and *timescales*. Correspondence to the China Quality Certification Centre for Import and Export (www.cqc.com.cn) has gone unanswered, though one can apply for submission on-line. I'd be interested in both least cost and least time options, and hearing from agencies or consultancies (preferably UK based) able to provide a turn-key service. Having the modem manufactured in China *may* be an option, though the volumes aren't huge. Thanks in anticipation. Russell. --- 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 - Do You Yahoo!? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
Re: FW: ERO Newsflash No 30
Rich and all interested members: I am wondering why EN 301 893 (BRAN HIPERLAN TYPE 2, Harmonized EN covering essential requirements of article 3.2 of the RTTE Directive) was not listed as specific standards (REC 70-03, Page 11), and only ETS 300 836-1 (HIPERLAN TYPE 1) was there. Also, on Page 34, Annex 3: LAN, RLAN and HIPERLAN, Frequency band b (5150-5350MHz) should be covered by EN 301 893, not ETS 300 836 which covers 5150-5300MHz, HIPERLAN TYPE 1. I thought, EN 301 893 should be included as a specific standards listed on Page 11, and also as a Harmonized stanadard listed on Page 34 (Annex 3) to cover frequency band b. What do you think? Leslie richwo...@tycoint.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Pia Hammer Bloch [mailto:bl...@ero.dk] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 9:07 AM To: ERO-NEWS Subject: ERO Newsflash No 30 ERO NEWSFLASH No 30 14 February 2002 -- Recommendation 70-03 updated The Short Range Device Recommendation 70-03 has been updated with new regulations and a new format. Changes have been agreed to several of its annexes, including Annex 1 on duty cycle in 433 MHz, Annex 10 on Radio microphone and Annex 13 on Wireless Audio application. A new Annex 11 on RFID has been added. The document is available for downloading at http://www.ero.dk/doc98/Official/Pdf/Rec7003e.pdf. Regards ERO . --- 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 - Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
Re: My subscription may have terminated
There must be lots of Chinese in this community, Happy Chinese New Year - Kong Shi Fat Choy! Leslie Rich Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com wrote: Hi Dan: I have received no emails today. Did my subscription cease? No, your emc-pstc subscription is not terminated. Today is the most unusual day in the history of emc-pstc in that there were no postings to the listserver between 5:30 PM PST Tuesday and 11 AM PST Wednesday. I, too, was a bit alarmed that the server might be down or there was some other problem. We checked, and everything is in working order. We've simply had no postings. Today, up to the time of your message, there was only one topic posted to the listserver. Best regards, Rich Administrator, 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...@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 - Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
Re: RTTE Notification Forms
Rich, What we have been doing for these two countries was writing to them to request for Notifocation Form. I know it's annoying but if you have found a better way, please let me know. For Greece, write to: Mrs. Mathiou, National Telecom Post Commission, 60 Kifissias Avenue, 151 25 Maroussi, Athens, Greece, Tel: 301 0610 5040, Fax: 301 0610 5049. For Portugal, write to: Sr.Manuel Barros, ICP-D.E.N., Instituto das Communicacoes de Portugal, Av.Jose Malhoa 12, 1099-017 Lisboa, Portugal, Tel: 351-217212302, Fax: 351-217211001. Good luck, Leslie richwo...@tycoint.com wrote: Can someone provide me with the RTTE Notification forms for Portugal and Greece or point me a web site where they can be found? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- 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. - Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions Great stuff seeking new owners! Bid now!
RE: China authority for Radio equipment
Rich, Thanks for quoting my last years' communication about radio approval in China. With the entry to WTO, China has been starting streamlining its approval and certification process, such as recently announced new CCC Mark for safety (annouced on Dec 3, 2001, and will take effective from May 1, 2002). Radio approval is another new regime under implementation as well, details has yet been released as far as I know. Leslie P/S: Under old scheme, both in-country testing and in-country representative is required. The cost and turn-around time of approval can be a nightmare. --- richwo...@tycoint.com wrote: Here is something from my archive that was posted last year -Original Message- From: Leslie Bai [mailto:leslie_...@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 2:46 PM To: wo...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Chinese Transmitter Approval Richard, We have been dealing with Chinese authority for radio type approval in the past a few years. They requires that radios being imported into the country go through authorized representative located in their country. As part of approval process, manufacturer need provide a letter stating who their authorized representative is to the Ministry of Information Industry (previously Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications). The importer need to provide at least 2 samples for audit testing at National Radio Audit Testing Labs located in various cities (Baijing, Xi'an, Shanghai, etc.) in the country. Parameters to be tested are frequency stability, output power, spectrum mask, occupied bandwidth, spurious emissions, co-channel and adjecent-channel ineterferences, etc... The interesting thing is that the sampling must follow their procedures defined in GB10111 (in Chinese only). GB 2828 specifies S-2 program to examine samples batch by batch and GB 2829 Level 1 sampling program specifies environment examinations. I have not actually experiened short-ranged low power radio type approval, such as Bluetooth devices, but as far as I am aware, the importer is required to file a copy of the FCC (Part 15.247), Canadian (RSS-210) , or ETSI (300 328) test report. Also a minimum of three to five samples is required for audit testing. Anyone else wants to input their experience on Bluetooth approval in China? Leslie --- wo...@sensormatic.com wrote: Has anyone received a radio type approval in China? How did you go about the process? I am particularly interested in short range (low power) device type approval. Richard Woods --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ -Original Message- From: Darren Pearson [mailto:dar...@genesysibs.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 11:56 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: China authority for Radio equipment Hi every one, I am currently trying to get a radio device approved in China, Can any one tell me who the authority is in China, or help with a contact e mail, Fax or Phone No ? === message truncated === __ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ --- 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
Re: New China Compulsory Certification
As officially announced on December 7th, 2001, CCC mark will take effective from May 1st 2002, replacing current CCIB (Safety) mark and CCEE (Great Wall) mark. I am currently in touch with relevant Chinese authorities for details. Leslie cecil.gitt...@kodak.com wrote: From: Cecil A. Gittens Does anyone have information about products that will required EMC certification to meet the new China Compulsory Certification system. It was mentioned that they will host meetings in the future to introduce this new system. Regards Cecil --- 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. - Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online at Yahoo! Greetings.
IPC TM-650
Is there anybody in this group who knows what is IPC TM-650? Where can we get a copy of this Test Method (I thought TM stands for Test Method)? Thanks, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.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: 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: 2.4GHz wireless headphone system
Noop, 2.4GHz falls within EN 300 440 (1GHz-40GHz), EN 300 220 covers frequencies from 25MHz-1GHz, and EN 300 330 covers 9kHz to 25MHz. Has anyone realized that some of the meaurement of EN 300 330 is extremely in-practical? Leslie --- Jacob Schanker schan...@frontiernet.net wrote: Dear KC Chan: For the RF standards, take a look at ETSI EN 300 330 on Short-range devices (SRD). This is available from www.etsi.org. Also look at ERC Recommendation 70-03 obtainable from www.ero.dk. These should get you started. 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: KC CHAN [PDD] kcc...@hkpc.org To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 7:53 PM Subject: 2.4GHz wireless headphone system | | Dear All | | My client is looking for the standards of a 2.4GHz wireless headphone system(not a SS product) for EU country. Would like to know what is the appropriate EMC and RF standards under EMC directive and RTTE directive. | | Thank You | KC Chan - PDD | | | | --- | 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 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. __ Do You Yahoo!? Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals http://personals.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: 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.
NVLAP vs A2LA
Members, Our lab is under UKAS accreditation and actually for the last 3 years. For some reason, I would like to look into either NVLAP or A2LA as our second accreditor. I would like to know pros cons between NVLAP A2LA accreditation from a test lab's point of view. I know they are both signatures of ILAC and should have the same status, what I need to know are in specific: 1. Cost involved in accreditation 2. Customer may think which one is more prestigious 3. Process complications (assume both with ISO 17025) 4. Time frame from application to completion (assume at the same readiness level). and the last but not the least, which one you prefer to choose and why. This is NOT a survey, neither an on-line discussion, but the actual decision I need to make shortly. I appreciate your comments off-line. Please be rest assured all of your valuable comments would be kept confidential. Thank you, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.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: 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: Marine Equipment
Hormonized EMC standards for maritime equipment are: EN 300 828 for maritime mobile services and EN 300 829 for maritime earth stations. Leslie --- noisel...@aol.com wrote: Hi Bob: In general, your statement: It is my understanding that marine equipment is exempt from the EMC Directive and from FCC regulations. is not true. We have had clients that were concerned with: IEC 945 (I did not check for harmonized EN) Maritime navigation and radiocommunication equipment and systems We also had a case where Lloyds of London required our client to show compliance with a proprietary marine EMC standard for an on-board measurement device- I took a quick look but apparently we have that standard archived where I can't find it quickly. Hope this limited info helps... Lee Hill Founding Partner Silent Solutions LLC EMC Consulting and Training 10 Northern Blvd., Suite 1 Northwood Executive Park Amherst, NH 03031 (603) 578-1842 x203 (V) (603) 578-1843 (F) lh...@silent-solutions.com www.silent-solutions.com In a message dated 10/2/2001 10:09:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rehel...@mmm.com writes: Subj: Marine Equipment Date: 10/2/2001 10:09:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time From:rehel...@mmm.com Sender:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Reply-to:rehel...@mmm.com To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org It is my understanding that marine equipment is exempt from the EMC Directive and from FCC regulations. Can anyone tell me what standards would cover a battery operated lighting system running at 100 VAC, 1500 Hz for both Europe and the U.S.? Thanks, Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: __ Do You Yahoo!? Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone. http://phone.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: 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: ETSI EN 300 330-X
Bob, Similar situation applies to EN 300 440 Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters (ERM); Short range devices; Radio equipment to be used in the 1 GHz to 40 GHz frequency range. 440-2 is harmonized but reference to 440-1 which is not harmonized. What I did for my customers was always present a copy of Compliance Strategy to Notified Body and always got a green light so far. I am not sure if I had to do so but it worked very well. Leslie --- rehel...@mmm.com wrote: ETSI EN 300 330-2, Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters (ERM); Short Range Devices (SRD); Radio equipment in the frequency 9 kHz to 25 MHz and inductive loop systems in the frequency range 9 kHz to 30 MHz; Part 2: Harmonized EN under article 3.2 of the RTTE Directive is now a harmonized standard under the RTTE Directive as it implies. ETSI EN 300 330-2 calls out ETSI EN 300 330-1 as the standard to use for test limits, test procedures, etc. However, ETSI EN 300 330-1 is not harmonized to the RTTE Directive. The question is this: if we use ETSI EN 300 330-2 is show compliance to the RTTE Directive, can we use ETSI EN 300 330-1 without having to submit through a Notified Body? It is my understanding that the use of any standard that is not harmonized to the RTTE Directive requires intervention by a Notified Body to ensure the proper test suite usage. Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 --- 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. __ Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help? Donate cash, emergency relief information http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/ --- 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: Power Amplifier for 2 GHz Immunity
No, EN301 489-1 specifies RF immunity from 80MHz-1GHz with the exception of the exclusion band for transmitters, receivers and duplex transceivers, see Clause 9.2 of EN 301 489-1 (2000-08). There is no indication that up to 2GHz be required. Leslie --- umbdenst...@sensormatic.com wrote: I agree that the 4-3 is a basic standard. EN 301489-1 is an immunity standard for radios and specifies the 2 GHz upper limit. As the foundation is established in the basic standard and there is a proliferation of personal communications devices, it would not surprise me to see other standards amended. For now, the product family standard due in 2003 is EN 301489-1. Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic Electronics Corporation -- From: Pettit, Ghery[SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:17 PM To: 'umbdenst...@sensormatic.com'; rehel...@mmm.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:RE: Power Amplifier for 2 GHz Immunity The question that would then arise is this - what standard using EN 61000-4-3 calls out immunity testing above 1 GHz? EN 55024:1998 for ITE does not, nor does CISPR 24 upon which it is based. Unless a standard using EN 61000-4-3 as a test method requires immunity testing above 1 GHz, the added procedure has no meaning for a particular product. Ghery Pettit Intel -Original Message- From: umbdenst...@sensormatic.com [mailto:umbdenst...@sensormatic.com] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 8:41 AM To: rehel...@mmm.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Power Amplifier for 2 GHz Immunity Bob, EN 301489-1 due in 2003 calls for radiated immunity testing to 2 GHz. EN61000-4-3 also indicates testing to 2 GHz due to the portable phone market. Best regards, Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic Electronics Corporation -- From: rehel...@mmm.com[SMTP:rehel...@mmm.com] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 11:15 AM To: umbdenst...@sensormatic.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Power Amplifier for 2 GHz Immunity We have recently purchased an Amplifier Research Model 25SIG4A and we use an AR FP2080 probe. We have two antennas for that range, a Schaffner bilog and an A. H. Systems horn. Other than the upcoming 60601-1-2 for medical equipment, are there any other upcoming standards that call out immunity testing over a gig? To my knowledge no present standard does. Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252 == UMBDENSTOCK@Senso rmatic.com To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc: (bcc: Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US) 09/05/2001 10:19 Subject: Power Amplifier for 2 GHz Immunity AM Please respond to UMBDENSTOCK Hello Forum, I was wondering what amplifier you are using for the 2 GHz testing requirement of EN61000-4-3? Any comments regarding if I had to do it over again, I would have . . . relative to your 2 GHz setup? Best regards, Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic --- 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:
Re: Shielding Effectivness Question
Neven, There are quite a number of books addressing the shielding effectiveness analysis. Personally, I will recommend two of them: 1. White: EMC Handbook, Volume 3: Shielding 2. Ott: Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems, Chapter 6: Shielding Hope this helps Leslie Neven Pischl npis...@cisco.com wrote: I would appreciate if anyone could let me know if there are any references (books, application notes, anythig ..) that deal with shielding efectivness in cases when a source is close to an (electrically small) opening in a shield (enclosure). In such a situation, the field will penetrate through the hole and leak even if the size is much smaller than the wavelength. I am particularly interested in situation when high-frequency source, such as a PCB edge or a component operating at (say) 1 GHz and above is in proximity of the venting holes, small gaps in the chassis etc. All references that I have deal with uniform plane wave propagating incident to a metal plane with a slot or hole, in which case it is enought o have electrically small size of the opening (e.g. lambda/10) to efficiently block any field propagation through the barrier. I can't find any useful reference that deals in any analytical way with the situation I am interst! ed in. I believe I might get some answers using some of the simulation programs, but at the moment I am more intersted in the analysis of the problem than in simulating it. Thank you, Neven Pischluite - Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
Clamp-on Ground Resistance Testers
Hi members, I have a quick question here for you, just we need to know your experience comments regarding to the so-called Clamp-on ground resistance tester. We need such kind of tester to take measurements of grounding resistance in the field, it seems such type of Clamp-on tester very useful for us, because we need do it on the building roof and the standard procedure is almost impossible to implement. Some of our applications are: * Measure ground rod and small grid resistance; * Measure resistance and continuity of grounding loops around pads and buildings; * Conduct quick field checks; * Measure leakage current flowing to ground or circulating in ground loops, etc. Does anyone have any recommendations, comments, suggestions, brands, specs..etc...for such tester...? Thanks in advance. Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.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: 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: Chinese Transmitter Approval
Richard, We have been dealing with Chinese authority for radio type approval in the past a few years. They requires that radios being imported into the country go through authorized representative located in their country. As part of approval process, manufacturer need provide a letter stating who their authorized representative is to the Ministry of Information Industry (previously Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications). The importer need to provide at least 2 samples for audit testing at National Radio Audit Testing Labs located in various cities (Baijing, Xi'an, Shanghai, etc.) in the country. Parameters to be tested are frequency stability, output power, spectrum mask, occupied bandwidth, spurious emissions, co-channel and adjecent-channel ineterferences, etc... The interesting thing is that the sampling must follow their procedures defined in GB10111 (in Chinese only). GB 2828 specifies S-2 program to examine samples batch by batch and GB 2829 Level 1 sampling program specifies environment examinations. I have not actually experiened short-ranged low power radio type approval, such as Bluetooth devices, but as far as I am aware, the importer is required to file a copy of the FCC (Part 15.247), Canadian (RSS-210) , or ETSI (300 328) test report. Also a minimum of three to five samples is required for audit testing. Anyone else wants to input their experience on Bluetooth approval in China? Leslie --- wo...@sensormatic.com wrote: Has anyone received a radio type approval in China? How did you go about the process? I am particularly interested in short range (low power) device type approval. Richard Woods --- 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: http://www.rcic.com/ click on Virtual Conference Hall, __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.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: 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,
Spurious Emissions Test up to 220GHz
Hello, Group, Is there any lab who can test radiated spurious emissions up to 220GHz (5th harmonics of radio operating at 38GHz)? Is there any supplier who can provide pre-amplifier(s) and harmonics mixer(s) up to 220GHz for this measurement (I already have all antennae up to 220GHz)? Thanks, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer. http://experts.yahoo.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
Immunity measurement uncertainty
Hello, members, Is there anyone who can direct me to somewhere I can find the method to derive the Immunity Test Uncertainties, e.g. ESD, RI, EFT/B, Surge, etc. Thanks, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.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
RFQ - Immunity Test Generators
Hello, Manufacturers: I am looking for ESD, EFT/B, Surge, Power dips/interruptions test generators and accessories. The equipment must be able to be delivered by September 15, 2000. For detail technical specifications, interested manufacturers please reply this email off-line or call me at (408)-944-1754. Thanks, Leslie Bai DMC Stratex Networks San Jose, CA 95134 __ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.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
Update-NEBS Testing RFQ
Group: I posted for NEBS testing RFQ a month ago and received lots of replies from competitive labs and advice from well-experienced group members. It's to update to the group that I have selected three potential testing labs for further discussion. Only those labs who sent us the quotation have been notifed individually. By any way, I would like to appreciate all labs who expressed their interests and all experienced members who offered their advice. Thank you. Leslie Bai Digital Microwave Corporation www.dmcwave.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.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
ETS 300 385 Vs. EN 300 385
Hello, All: I am trying to make a thorough comaparison between ETS 300 385 and EN 300 385 because our product was covered under ETS 300 385 but now is under EN 300 385. Here are some EMC standards quoted by ETS 300 385 and EN 300 385 respectively. Radiated Immunity: ETS 300 385 refers to ENV 50140 EN 300 385 refers to EN 61000-4-3 ESD: ETS 300 385 refers to EN 60801-2 EN 300 385 refers to EN 61000-4-2 EFT: ETS 300 385 refers to IEC 801-4 EN 300 385 refers to EN 61000-4-4 Conducted Immunity: ETS 300 385 refers to ENV 50141 EN 300 385 refers to EN 61000-4-11 Surge immunity: ETS 300 385 refers to ENV 50142 EN 300 385 refers to EN 61000-4-5 I need to know the difference between the following standards: ENV 50140 vs. EN 61000-4-3 EN 60801-2 vs. EN 61000-4-2 IEC 801-4 vs. EN 61000-4-4 ENV 50141 vs. EN 61000-4-6 ENV 50142 vs. EN 61000-4-5 Unfortunately, I don't have all of those quoted standards at hand to make the comparison. If anyone by any chance comapred these standards, or knew the differences in terms of test method, procedures, limits, any specific requirements, etcplease kindly share with me. Thanks, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
IEC801-4 (1998) EN61000-4-4
Hello Group: We have a product which was covered under ETS 300 385 but now EN 300 385. About EFT test, ETS 300 385 refers to IEC 801-4 (1988) but EN 300 385 refers to EN 61000-4-4. Has anyone compared these two standards; IEC 801-4 (1998) and EN61000-4-4, in terms of test method, procedures, limit, etc...what are the differences Thanks, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: Using RTTE directive before April 2000?
There is a transition regime applies. Before April 8, 2000, we knew what we should do Between April 8, 2000 and April 7, 2001, the transition regime applies and manufacturers can place on the market and put into service equipment which Case 1. complies with Directive 99/5/EC Case 2. complies with Directive 98/13/EC (for equipment within its scope) Case 3. complies with national regulations (for radio equipment, which don't fall within teh scope of Directive 98/13/EC). In Case 1 and Case 2, equipment can freeely move according to the provisions of the Directives. In Case 3, Articles 28 and 30 apply. As of April 8, 2001, ONLY Directive 99/5/EC applies. Rgds, Leslie --- H.T. Hildering h.t.hilder...@ktl.com wrote: The situation is simple, The European Commission has stated that the RTTE directive will come effectively in force on the 8th of April 2000 for all EU countries. Therefore all member countries are obliged to transpose it into their national regulation before that date. All member countries shall start to use the RTTE directive at the 8th of April. Best regards Theo Hildering -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of j...@aol.com Sent: 08 December 1999 22:13 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; t...@world.std.com Subject: Using RTTE directive before April 2000? Listmembers: I have a question that perhaps some of you can help me with. I'm developing a regulatory compliance plan for a new telecom product that is scheduled to begin shipping in the first quarter of 2000. The exact date is not certain, but it is likely to be before the April 8, 2000 date that appears in the RTTE directive. If possible, I would like to avoid the whole notified body route called out by the current directive 98/13/EC, especially since it would only be required for the brief period until April 2000. I seem to recall that a new directive can be used as soon as *any* member state has transposed it into national law. If so, this suggests that the RTTE directive could be used prior to April 2000 if at least one member state has transposed it into national law. In the case of the UK, however, recent postings on the emc-pstc listserver indicate that the draft legislation for the UK calls out an effective date of April 8, 2000. In other words, even if the UK transposes the directive prior to April 2000, the national law itself will call out an effective date of April 8. I do not know what the other member states are planning to do. So, am I stuck with using directive 98/13/EC and the notified body route if the product ships prior to April 8, 2000? Joe Randolph Telecom Design Consultant Randolph Telecom, Inc. - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). __ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: Singapore
Amund: The best person to answer your question is Mr. W.H.Chong (Director of IT Telecom Centre) and Mrs.S.G.Chay (Director of E.E.Test Centre). They are my ex-bosses a few years ago when I was working with PSB. Mr. Chong can be reached at (65)-7729721 email: cwh...@psb.gov.sg Mrs.Chay can be reached at (65)-7729678 email: cha...@psb.gov.sg Good luck, Regards, Leslie -Original Message- From: Westin, Amund [mailto:amund.wes...@dnv.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 1999 7:12 AM To: 'emc-pstc' Subject: Singapore What are the EMC and LVD requirements in Singapore ? Any suggestions ? Thanks ! Amund Westin Det Norske Veritas * amund.wes...@dnv.com = __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: Temperature probe
Scott, Thanks for your input. How about the probe? Any recommendation? Thanks Leslie --- Lacey,Scott sla...@foxboro.com wrote: Leslie, The Fluke Model 51 or 52 should be adequate for your needs. These are battery operated thermocouple instruments, single and dual input models. They are relatively inexpensive, and I would strongly recommend the dual input model for the extra features, as well as the ability to measure E.U.T. internal temperature and chamber ambient simultaneously. Scott Lacey -Original Message- From: Leslie Bai [SMTP:leslie_...@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 2:29 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:Temperature probe Hello, group: Seems that my question is not relavent to this group but hope someone there could help. I am looking for an ACCURATE temperature probe ( accuracy is about +/- 1 degree C from -50 to +80 degree C). It will be used to measure the microwave frequency drifting over the temperature. It will be put in a temperature chamber. Although the chamber has a temeprature display, it's not accurate as we expected (about +/-3 degree C), thus we need a more accurate probe to perform the measurement. If you have any info or similiar probe, pls kindly let me know - the brand, model, etc... Thanks in advance. Leslie http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/991006/ca_digit_m_1.html = __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). = __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Temperature probe
Hello, group: Seems that my question is not relavent to this group but hope someone there could help. I am looking for an ACCURATE temperature probe ( accuracy is about +/- 1 degree C from -50 to +80 degree C). It will be used to measure the microwave frequency drifting over the temperature. It will be put in a temperature chamber. Although the chamber has a temeprature display, it's not accurate as we expected (about +/-3 degree C), thus we need a more accurate probe to perform the measurement. If you have any info or similiar probe, pls kindly let me know - the brand, model, etc... Thanks in advance. Leslie http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/991006/ca_digit_m_1.html = __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
HP 85044A wanted
Hello, Group: Does anyone have two second-hand HP 85044A S-parameters' boxes for sale? Thanks, Leslie Tel: (408)-944-1754 __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: re: EN50082-1:1997 EN55024
Years ago, Diethard Moehr (Secretary of IEC TC77) invited me to join IEC TC77 representing Singapore but due to some personal reason, the invitation was declined (like I said in Seattle when I met him, I still feel sorry for that.) After reading Mike's email, I can't stop myself adding a few more words to my previous reply to Arun Kaore regarding ESD. Many people think ESD is conductive coupling and thus only take into account of Voltage applied. For contact discharge, it may be alright since in this case conductive coupling is dominate. But for air-discharge, it is not true. The ESD effects mainly result from radiative coupling (some conductive as well but not dominate). The test level is in Voltage but actual effects result from dV/dt. In other words, how many kVs is not so important but dV/dt becomes the killer. Different dV/dt result in different field distributions and different current indensities when picked up by different portions of the EUT which is actually exposed to an electromagnetic field. If you don't look at it in this way, I guess you may not be able to answer the question logically. Regards, Leslie --- Mike Hopkins mhopk...@keytek.com wrote: I'm not sure I'm the most appropriate person to answer, but here's my opinion. Doug Smith at Auspex (also a member of this ieee group) is probably the best qualified to talk about ESD and other noise phenomena: Back in the mid '80's when we were demonstrating ESD simulators (air discharge only), we saw a lot of cases where EUT's survived higer voltages -- 8 to 10kV, but failed when tested at a few kV. With the scopes at the time, we could see faster rise times at the lower voltages (about 2-5kV), slower risetimes at intermediate voltages (5-10kV) and faster risetimes again at the higher voltages (10kV). We attributed these low voltage failures to the faster risetimes with air discharges below about 5kV. I I think this scenereo is still valid, and we see risetimes of a few hundred pico seconds below about 3kV. Risetimes do get to be slower at higher voltages. David Pommerenke at HP has done a lot of recent work to characterize human ESD with modern scopes and high bandwidth instrumentation. With contact mode testing, I'm not sure the same argument applies. With a simulator that has very clean risetimes, the risetime is held constant (IEC is .7 to 1ns) with voltage. di/dt in fact increases with voltage, which would be evidence for more failures at higher voltages, but this doesn't seem to be the case in practice. Nevertheless, people keep coming up with cases where lower voltages cause failures where higher voltages are okay. Some possibilities for the problem with contact mode: 1. Some simulator have a considerable amount of ringing on the rising edge of the current waveform -- ESD Association work under WG14 -- also papers published at past ESD Symposiums by HP and others. This ringing could be inconsistant with voltage and be a significant contributor to failures. 2. Breakdowns inside the EUT in air across very small gaps could produce risetimes well under 400ps. 3. Other ideas In any case, it is still felt by members of IEC TC77B WG9 (now in the process of completely re-evaluating IEC 61000-4-2) that testing at lower voltages is required to insure a product is, in fact, immune to ESD. This requirement will likely continue into any future version of the IEC standard. The latest draft of ANSI/IEEE C63.16- includes statements recommending testing begin at the lowest voltage and progress to higher voltages -- 1kV intervals for contact mode and 2kV intervals for air discharge. It's clear these requirements will go forward -- there's just too much evidence for the existance of the phenomena, even though the reasons aren't always clearly understood for a specific EUT. Mike Hopkins mhopk...@keytek.com -Original Message- From: b...@anritsu.com [SMTP:b...@anritsu.com] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 1999 6:56 PM To: Mike Hopkins Subject:fwd: re: EN50082-1:1997 EN55024 Mike, You are the most appropriate person to answer the question that why DUT could fail at lower ESD voltage sometimes. Can you post your answer directly to the emc-pstc group? Thank you. Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com -- Original Text -- From: Leslie Bai leslie_...@yahoo.com, on 8/19/99 3:00 PM: To: Bailin Ma@MMDILAB@ACUS Barry, I agree with you but just wondering why DUT got larger current at lower ESD voltage. BTW, I called Anritsu early this week requesting for a demonstration of Site Master but just couldn't get any reply yet. Rgds, Leslie --- b...@anritsu.com wrote: Jim, You have been doing right thing. Those who directly go to the highest ESD voltage level may thought if DUT can pass the highest level
Re: ESD
Arun: When I started dealing with EMC 13 years ago, I always thought ESD is conductive testing but later I found it is not only conductive but also radiative! The way of doing testing looks like conductive but the effect of ESD is beyond that. Obviously, different dv/dt produce different field distribution - James C. Maxwell told us about 150 years ago - unless you can prove it is wrong. Different field distribution induces different current intensity in different portion of the EUT and results in different sympotum. That why if EUT can pass higher test levels does not mean it can pass lower levels due to the different susceptibility of the circuits exposed to different field distributions. If you only consider the conductive coupling , I guess you can not explain why EUT passed hihger levels but may not pass lower levels, can you? I also would like to share with you my experience when I did a TCF job years ago when I was working in Singapore. We know it is not possible to perform radiated immunity testing at the customer's workshop. It is just simply illegal! But how would you verify the machine's radiated susceptibility? ESD gun can help - think about it. Regards, Leslie --- Arun Kaore kao...@sg.adi-limited.com.au wrote: I differ from this theory of radiated coupling in air discharges. There will be air discharge if the creepage/clearance is less (than say 7mm for 8kV) such that the disturbance voltage just arcs over, if there is a path. The discharge current flows then via the shortest path, corrupting everything in the way, if it is not immune. We note that the Immunity noise threshold for most ICs is less than a couple of volts. The easiest way we employ to fix air discharge problems is by artificially increasing the creepage by adding plastic foil or increasing spacing. Schaffner has different probes, loop types, which are more suited for radiative coupling (near field types) as you suggest, but we use them for pre-compliance purposes only. These are the truly radiative coupling types. They are a poor man's friend for MIL STD 461/462 CS06 (in air!!), or CS115/CS116/ RS02 pre compliance. I cannot comment on your Fire Alarm system though, but I would hazard a guess and attribute it to HCP or capacitive coupling via unshielded cables spaced off the metal test sheet (the GRP). Regards Arun Kaore EMC Engineer ADI Limited Systems Group Test Evaluation Centre Forrester Road, St Marys NSW 2760 P O Box: 315, St Marys NSW 1790 Tel: 61 2 9673 8375 Fax: 61 2 9673 8321 Email: kao...@sg.adi-limited.com.au mailto:kao...@sg.adi-limited.com.au - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). Leslie Bai wrote: ESD test is to verify the EUT immunity due to induced current (nonsense!). The current can be induced by conducted coupling (direct contact) or/and radiated coupling. My understanding of the test is that for contact discharge, conduct coupling is dominate and for air-discharge, radiated coupling is dominate. Thus for contactt discharge, if you can pass the higher level, you may not have much problem with lower levels, but although radiated coupling is not dominate for contact discharge, the effects have to be verified through testing. For air-discharge, ESD test is to verify the effects of electromagnetic field on the EUT - i.e. a kind of field immunity test. Different levels will have a different field distribution around the EUT due to the different dV/dt - Maxwell told us. Thus, the induced current is (mainly) generated by the electromagnetic field. I tested one Fire Alarm system years ago. This system has 128 ports all connected with (at least 5m) twisted wires. I noticed that the cable layout can affect result (pass or fail) significantly when doing air-discharge. However, there is no noticable difference by varying cable layout when doing contact discharge. That was my understanding comes from. Rgds, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: EN50082-1:1997 EN55024
Hi, all Just put a few words of my understanding of ESD. ESD test is to verify the EUT immunity due to induced current (nonsense!). The current can be induced by conducted coupling (direct contact) or/and radiated coupling. My understanding of the test is that for contact discharge, conduct coupling is dominate and for air-discharge, radiated coupling is dominate. Thus for contactt discharge, if you can pass the higher level, you may not have much problem with lower levels, but although radiated coupling is not dominate for contact discharge, the effects have to be verified through testing. For air-discharge, ESD test is to verify the effects of electromagnetic field on the EUT - i.e. a kind of field immunity test. Different levels will have a different field distribution around the EUT due to the different dV/dt - Maxwell told us. Thus, the induced current is (mainly) generated by the electromagnetic field. I tested one Fire Alarm system years ago. This system has 128 ports all connected with (at least 5m) twisted wires. I noticed that the cable layout can affect result (pass or fail) significantly when doing air-discharge. However, there is no noticable difference by varying cable layout when doing contact discharge. That was my understanding comes from. Rgds, Leslie --- Hans Mellberg emcconsult...@yahoo.com wrote: --- Benoit Nadeau bnad...@matrox.com wrote: Bonjour de Montreal, In another life, I was working for a EMC Test lab and we always used the step by step procedure which was in the ESD Standard. We tested using this procedure for years and we did encounter some products who failed at low level ESD but had no problem at higher levels. We wondered what to conclude and had some hypothesis. 1) may be the current path was different at higher level or 2) Lower levels might have a slightly longer rise time which tends to produce more energy in the lower part of the frequency spectrum where the EUT was more sensible. Partly true. The risetime changes as the voltage increases. The risetime slows (dV/dt or dI/dt value gets reduced) down as you begin to go over 6-8kV. I also have seen products fail at 2-4 kV and pass at levels 8-10 kV. This ofcourse is on air discharge equipment where variability of the risetime is expected. Contact discharge equipment do not exhibit much risetime variability (at least not to a large degree) Hans T. Mellberg EMC/ESD Consultant member ANSI/IEEE C63.16 WG on ESD __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Calibration of 3-port waveguide coupler (up to 18GHz)
Hello, folks, I have another problem here to calibrate a 3-port waveguide coupler. Remember I posted a question regarding return loss measurement several days ago. I appreciate UKAS has agreed with our setup since we provided scientific error model of the setup and initial derivation of the measurement uncertainty is within scope of ETR 028. Why I am saying initial is that we used manufacturers specifications of the 3-port waveguide coupler, i.e. mismatch, insertion loss (coupler port thr' port), and directivity, etc...). Now, UKAS asked us to provide calibration data of those parameters instead of manufacturers specifications. The problem here is we are requested to calibrate it in NAMAS traceble calibration lab. I have called NIST, the reply was they can't do it. I called HP, they need one week to evaluate ($140 evaluation fee, no matter whether they can do it). I appreciate any recommendations - It's urgent! Thanks, Leslie __ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: EMC test chamber -- Reverberation and Others
Barry, NIST has put lots of effort to promote RC and achieved significant results through experimental approach. They deserved the honor of the best symposium paper. However, I guess we are the first team to study RC through modeling simulation approach building the 3-D RC model and obtaining the full wave solution of Maxwell equations. Lots of appreciation and encouragement was offered by audience after my presentation during the symposium. Does the community think our tried-out is a good kick-off??? Rgds, Leslie --- b...@anritsu.com wrote: Leslie, Thanks for the valuable info. You mentioned two articles in EMC'99 Seattle Symposium Record. Actually, right before them on pp. 1-6 of Vol. 1 is Reverberation Chamber Relationship: Corrections and Improvements by John Ladbury and Galen Koepke, which won the award of the best Symposium technical paper at Seattle. Barry Ma Morgan Hill, CA -- Original Text -- From: Leslie Bai leslie_...@yahoo.com, on 8/15/99 7:16 PM: I have studied Reverberation Chambers for some time, refer to recent EMC'99 Seattle Symposium Record Vol. 1, Page 7 to page 16. Measurement comparison will be published in the near future. Cost: RC is about 20 to 30% of an equivalent AC. Standards: There is a joint CISPR (emissions) and IEC (immunity) committee working to produce a common standard for RCs. Immunity standard can be found in IEC 61000-4-3, Anex I. I have no doubt there will eventually be an emissions standard which permits RC use. However, it is unlikely that an operative standard will be available in 2 years. Technology: RC uses statistical analysis to perform EMC measurement. It is realized by changing the boundary conditions using stirring paddle(s). However, the restriction of the Lowest Usable Frequency (LUF) may be a problem which is under study in the community. General comments: If you need to do emission and immunity certification testing in the near term, my recommendation would be for AC. It is the most expensive solution but it is acceptable today and if used properly (i.e., robust, many aspect angle tests) will provide detailed information on EUT characteristics. A RC will be a cost effective approach to a test facility for some test objectives (e.g., identifying emission frequencies very quickly and positively) and in the longer term will be the most cost effective. Rgds, Leslie --- Ray Levasseur ray_levass...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Barry for the suggestion but I know nothing about reverberation chambers, possibly somone could comment on the merits of RC over AC. Ray Levasseur EMC Compliance Creo Products From: b...@anritsu.com (Bailin Ma) Reply-To: b...@anritsu.com (Bailin Ma) To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC test chamber -- Reverberation and Others Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 9:13:21 PDT Ray, Did you consider using Reverberation Chamber (RC) instead of semi-anechoic chamber for pre-compliance? It seems to me that RC technique has become practically applicable for both emission and immunity tests. It's less expensive. Official EMC standards would accept it in a couple of years. IEC 61000-4-21: Reverberation Chamber is circulating for comments. I know little about RC and expect some knowledgeable colleagues to make comments. Barry Ma Anritsu Company -Original Message- From: Ray Levasseur [mailto:ray_levass...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 2:44 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Wanted:EMC test chamber Hi Group, I am setting up pre-compliance EMC testing at our facility and need some equipment to complete my setup. I was planning on a 3m shielded room with the possibility of making it semi-anechoic when the budget allows. Our products are large (relative to normal ITE equipment) with the largest that would be tested in the chamber 10ft wide X 6ft long X 3ft high. I have most of the equipment I need to do the tests for EN 55022 and EN 50082. I need a motorized antenna mast that goes from 1-4m and a chamber. If anyone could direct me to a person or company selling the chamber or antenna mast I would greatly appreciate it. Also I would like to get some feedback on the Cassper virtual chamber and if anyone has used it or has comments on the usability of such a system. Thanks, Ray Levasseur EMC Compliance, Creo Products - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators
Re: EMC test chamber -- Reverberation and Others
I have studied Reverberation Chambers for some time, refer to recent EMC'99 Seattle Symposium Record Vol. 1, Page 7 to page 16. Measurement comparison will be published in the near future. Cost: RC is about 20 to 30% of an equivalent AC. Standards: There is a joint CISPR (emissions) and IEC (immunity) committee working to produce a common standard for RCs. Immunity standard can be found in IEC 61000-4-3, Anex I. I have no doubt there will eventually be an emissions standard which permits RC use. However, it is unlikely that an operative standard will be available in 2 years. Technology: RC uses statistical analysis to perform EMC measurement. It is realized by changing the boundary conditions using stirring paddle(s). However, the restriction of the Lowest Usable Frequency (LUF) may be a problem which is under study in the community. General comments: If you need to do emission and immunity certification testing in the near term, my recommendation would be for AC. It is the most expensive solution but it is acceptable today and if used properly (i.e., robust, many aspect angle tests) will provide detailed information on EUT characteristics. A RC will be a cost effective approach to a test facility for some test objectives (e.g., identifying emission frequencies very quickly and positively) and in the longer term will be the most cost effective. Rgds, Leslie --- Ray Levasseur ray_levass...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Barry for the suggestion but I know nothing about reverberation chambers, possibly somone could comment on the merits of RC over AC. Ray Levasseur EMC Compliance Creo Products From: b...@anritsu.com (Bailin Ma) Reply-To: b...@anritsu.com (Bailin Ma) To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: EMC test chamber -- Reverberation and Others Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 9:13:21 PDT Ray, Did you consider using Reverberation Chamber (RC) instead of semi-anechoic chamber for pre-compliance? It seems to me that RC technique has become practically applicable for both emission and immunity tests. It's less expensive. Official EMC standards would accept it in a couple of years. IEC 61000-4-21: Reverberation Chamber is circulating for comments. I know little about RC and expect some knowledgeable colleagues to make comments. Barry Ma Anritsu Company -Original Message- From: Ray Levasseur [mailto:ray_levass...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 2:44 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Wanted:EMC test chamber Hi Group, I am setting up pre-compliance EMC testing at our facility and need some equipment to complete my setup. I was planning on a 3m shielded room with the possibility of making it semi-anechoic when the budget allows. Our products are large (relative to normal ITE equipment) with the largest that would be tested in the chamber 10ft wide X 6ft long X 3ft high. I have most of the equipment I need to do the tests for EN 55022 and EN 50082. I need a motorized antenna mast that goes from 1-4m and a chamber. If anyone could direct me to a person or company selling the chamber or antenna mast I would greatly appreciate it. Also I would like to get some feedback on the Cassper virtual chamber and if anyone has used it or has comments on the usability of such a system. Thanks, Ray Levasseur EMC Compliance, Creo Products - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: Horn antennas, pre-amplifier, and return loss measurement
EMCO has no horn over 40GHz. --- WOODS, RICHARD wo...@sensormatic.com wrote: Try EMCO for horns and MITEQ for preamps. -- From: Leslie Bai [SMTP:leslie_...@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 12, 1999 1:15 PM To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org' Subject: Horn antennas, pre-amplifier, and return loss measurement Hi, Folks, Is there anyone can direct me to some sources of horn antennas preamplifiers. What I need are sets of horn antenna for spurious emissions testing to meet FCC Part 101. 1 to 18GHz, 18 to 26.5GHz, 26.5 to 40GHz, or 18 to 40GHz instead, 40 to 60GHz, 50 to 75GHz, or 40 to 75GHz instead, 75 to 110GHz, 110 to 170GHz, or 75 to 170GHz instead. Due to the significant space loss over 110GHz, I guess I also need a set of preamplifier from 110 to 170GHz. I am also studying on return loss measurement methodologies to meet ETSI requirement for radios RF port. Since NAMAS calibration of network analyzer may cost thousands bucks, I am wondering if I could achieve a good result (in terms of accuracy and uncertainty) using spectrum analyser and waveguide coupler. If anyone by any chance has an ready error model of the test setup using spectrum analyzer and waveguide coupler, I appreciate you could share with me to short my research path. Thanks in advance. Leslie Bai Senior Compliance Engineer Compliance Quality Manager Digital Microwave Corporation 170 Rose Orchard Way San Jose, CA 95134 Tel: (408)-944-1754 _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Horn antennas, pre-amplifier, and return loss measurement
Hi, Folks, Is there anyone can direct me to some sources of horn antennas preamplifiers. What I need are sets of horn antenna for spurious emissions testing to meet FCC Part 101. 1 to 18GHz, 18 to 26.5GHz, 26.5 to 40GHz, or 18 to 40GHz instead, 40 to 60GHz, 50 to 75GHz, or 40 to 75GHz instead, 75 to 110GHz, 110 to 170GHz, or 75 to 170GHz instead. Due to the significant space loss over 110GHz, I guess I also need a set of preamplifier from 110 to 170GHz. I am also studying on return loss measurement methodologies to meet ETSI requirement for radios RF port. Since NAMAS calibration of network analyzer may cost thousands bucks, I am wondering if I could achieve a good result (in terms of accuracy and uncertainty) using spectrum analyser and waveguide coupler. If anyone by any chance has an ready error model of the test setup using spectrum analyzer and waveguide coupler, I appreciate you could share with me to short my research path. Thanks in advance. Leslie Bai Senior Compliance Engineer Compliance Quality Manager Digital Microwave Corporation 170 Rose Orchard Way San Jose, CA 95134 Tel: (408)-944-1754 _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: 50 ohm 75 ohm
Hi, all members, I just came back from a few days bussiness trip to somewhere isolated from this world and didn't anticipate huge amount of reply to my posted question on testing cable impedance. I do appreciate all your suggestions although I am going to try one or two approaches. Thanks regards, Leslie _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
50 ohm 75 ohm
Dear members, Anyone there can share the experience to measure cables' impedance thus to identify whether a BNC is a 50 ohm or 75 ohm cable. Thanks, Leslie _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: GTEM cell
Mike, Your comments can't be over stressed any more. We did find the deviation between correlations from products to products, however, as long as a suitable harness is used properly, the correlation is pretty consistent. Also we use modeling tools to assist correlation prediction. It helps as well. I am wondering if it is a mandatory to correlation GTEM cell result with OATS result for each of EUT, why we have to duplicate the test, why not just get the result from OATS to comply. For immunity test against CE using GTEM, it is stated in EN61000-4-3, Annex , as an alternative test facility. For emission test, as mentioned above, ANSIC63.4 accept GTEM result. EN has no specific standard such as EN55022 to accept GTEM result. However, compliance can be declared through TCF route against generic standards as allowed by EMC Directive. I personally have no doubt GTEM and also things like Reverberation Chambers (another alternative facility) will be fully recognized eventually, it's just the matter of time. Rgds, Leslie --- Mike Hopkins mhopk...@keytek.com wrote: Careful -- for FCC emissions it's allowed only if correlation with an OATS is achieved for a given product. For the next product, correlation may have to be re-done. For immunity to EN's, it isn't so clear. IEC 61000-4-3 is written as if any type of TEM cell is NON compliant, but a draft annex is now being circulated that would allow TEM cells, but ONLY if a TEM wave can be demonstrated throughout the frequency range being used (3-axis measurement, undesired vectors 6 db down). For emissions to EN's, TEM cells are not allowed for compliance testing. Mike Hopkins mhopk...@keytek.com -Original Message- From: Leslie Bai [SMTP:leslie_...@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 11:25 AM To: Qu Pingyu; 'emc' Subject:Re: GTEM cell Pingyu, I guess GTEM cell is a good choice for your case. Pls refer to IEC61000-4-3 (for immunity) and ANSI C63.4 (for emission), GTEM cell is not only recognized for pre-compliance test but also can be used for compliance test as long as some correlation can be achieved. We did correlation through both modeling, simulation using FDTD and actual testing to verify the results. We are using GTEM cell for many different kinds of products compliance test and PCB trouble-shooting. It is pretty good. But you have to pay attention to the uniformity volume of GTEM cell, it's a bit tricky, especially the cabling of EUT may affect the result, thus, during the correction, a harness is supposed to be used to simulate the EUT cabling. Hope it helps. Leslie --- Qu Pingyu pin...@ime.org.sg wrote: Hello, Everyone: I have some questions regarding the GTEM cell. Here in our Institute we are considering setting up some EMC measurement capability for precompliance testing. The EUTs we are dealing with are not very large, probably not larger than a desktop PC. Do you think that GTEM cell is a good choice ? Do many of you use GTEM as a precompliance testing facility ? Your comments are highly appreciated. Regards Qu Pingyu - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: GTEM cell
Pingyu, I guess GTEM cell is a good choice for your case. Pls refer to IEC61000-4-3 (for immunity) and ANSI C63.4 (for emission), GTEM cell is not only recognized for pre-compliance test but also can be used for compliance test as long as some correlation can be achieved. We did correlation through both modeling, simulation using FDTD and actual testing to verify the results. We are using GTEM cell for many different kinds of products compliance test and PCB trouble-shooting. It is pretty good. But you have to pay attention to the uniformity volume of GTEM cell, it's a bit tricky, especially the cabling of EUT may affect the result, thus, during the correction, a harness is supposed to be used to simulate the EUT cabling. Hope it helps. Leslie --- Qu Pingyu pin...@ime.org.sg wrote: Hello, Everyone: I have some questions regarding the GTEM cell. Here in our Institute we are considering setting up some EMC measurement capability for precompliance testing. The EUTs we are dealing with are not very large, probably not larger than a desktop PC. Do you think that GTEM cell is a good choice ? Do many of you use GTEM as a precompliance testing facility ? Your comments are highly appreciated. Regards Qu Pingyu - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: EFFECT
Peter, Think about why the standards define normal environment (temperature, humidity, airpressure,etc.)conditions when performing a test. Those environment parameters will cause the frequency to shift, cause the amplitude to change, etc..A simple example, when the emperature increases, the holes / gaps of the cover become larger, cut-off frequency becomes smaller, shielding effectiveness is reduced, your reading may become higher. If you had tested Radio Equipment against FCC Part 101, or ETSI 300-XXX, you would find both frequency and output power need to be tested by varying the environmental conditions. That's why we have to record all of those parameters during whatsever tests. Hope it helps, Leslie --- PETER PHILLIPS peter.phill...@mira.co.uk wrote: Dear group, Has anybody heard about the term EFFECT relating to EMC and environmental testing combined. I am looking for any information on the topic, also any views that people may have regarding the change in EMC performance due to adverse environmental conditions Looking forward to your comments Peter Peter Phillips MIRA (Motor Industry Research Association) Tel:++44 (0)1203 355576 Fax:++44 (0)1203 355486 e-mail peter.phill...@mira.co.uk - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: Speaker Stand
Is CE mark required for sales of this plastic stand? No. Is there any directive that this plastic stand falls under? No. Are there directive which requires the plastic material or the structure/shape to be of certain type? No. Hope it helps. Leslie _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: emc compliance
Lisa, Your product is experiencing radiated emissions testing, it can not pass the test at one particular frequency unless a ferrite has to be put at the external cable. What should you do for CE marking? Is this your question? You have two choices to CE mark legally: 1. Sell the product with that ferrite, and state in the test report this modification was made to comply You will be able to declare conformity as usual. 2. Redeign it and make it pass. Otherwise, you are not supposed to put any statement in the manual to justify the conformity since the product fails without modification. Hope it helps, Leslie --- lisa_cef...@mksinst.com wrote: Here's a question If you have a product that, at one particular frequency during radiated RF, you simply cannot get to pass the requirements of the relative CE standard without putting an external ferrite on the cable, is it legal , to still mark it, provided you inform your customers via the declaration of conformity or in the manual etc., that they could experience problems at such and such frequencies and if they do, to use a ferrite? (boy, that was a mouthful). Faced with a redesign or a statement, the words would be the easier route to take, since in this case, the customer could probably never see the problem frequency range. Comments? thank you for any advise, Lisa - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). _ 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, jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
