Re: [PSES] Boom? Job description.
In message d250d01e39356a4e9cc3b4b459d665503b782...@ms-cda-01.advanced-input.com, dated Mon, 31 Oct 2011, McInturff, Gary gary.mcintu...@esterline.com writes: I prefer my planes not to explode Surely everyone agrees with you, BUT if a job ad gets extra publicity by using unlikely wording, it does its job better. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Some people who are peeling the finch of the financial crisis are thinking of biting a rook. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] Boom? Job description.
I prefer my planes not to explode -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:51 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Boom? Job description. In message 4eae5a67.3090...@earthlink.net, dated Mon, 31 Oct 2011, Cortland Richmond k...@earthlink.net writes: Who WRITES these things? Senior Electrical Design Engineer for Exploding Aircraft Company X - Seattle ,WA - Oct 24, 2011 Very clever people - they get five to ten times the publicity of conventional (dull) job ads. We all remember the concrete technologist and the rubber engineer. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Some people who are peeling the finch of the financial crisis are thinking of biting a rook. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Boom? Job description.
In message 4eae5a67.3090...@earthlink.net, dated Mon, 31 Oct 2011, Cortland Richmond k...@earthlink.net writes: Who WRITES these things? Senior Electrical Design Engineer for Exploding Aircraft Company X - Seattle ,WA - Oct 24, 2011 Very clever people - they get five to ten times the publicity of conventional (dull) job ads. We all remember the concrete technologist and the rubber engineer. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Some people who are peeling the finch of the financial crisis are thinking of biting a rook. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Boom? Job description.
Who WRITES these things? Senior Electrical Design Engineer for Exploding Aircraft Company X - Seattle ,WA - Oct 24, 2011 Cortland Richmond ka5s - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Paging in Japan
Niels Can you give us the specifications so we can guide you to the proper requirements? Best Regards Peter Merguerian (408) 931-3303 pe...@goglobalcompliance.com www.goglobalcompliance.com Sent from my iPhone On Oct 27, 2011, at 11:49 PM, Niels Hougaard n...@bolls.dk wrote: Esteemed members, The product in question is a pager which will be used in bars, shops, exhibitions and so on. If not using a previously approved communication module for the pager, what are the requirements in Japan? Would it be possible to point me to the standard/law (preferably in English!). If using a previously approved communication module for the pager, what would then be the requirements in Japan? TIA Niels Hougaard Bolls ApS Ved Gadekæret 11F DK-3660 Stenløse Denmark T: +45 48 18 35 66 F: +45 48 18 35 30 n...@bolls.dk mailto:n...@bolls.dk www.bolls.dk http://www.bolls.dk/ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: ESD Brush
Hi Bill Even the discharge from a charged penny can have a high peak current, many Amperes, and a sub-nanosecond pulse width. With today's high speed circuitry, these small but fast events (di/dt much higher at low voltages than high voltages) can cause upsets. So it is best not to take chances. Just the capacitance of the brush itself is enough. And even a 300 volt difference will result in a large di/dt when connection is made. Best to be safe. I think you will like the design of the easy to build discharge wand I will post this weekend (pictures taken, just need to add the text). The main component is a plastic ball point pen. Doug On 10/28/11 4:01 PM, Bill Owsley wrote: Doug, ( a somewhat disjointed note, numerous interruptions) The initial ESD event charges the EUT up to the value of the applied ESD thru the series resistor in the gun and the displacement current from the EUT to the reference plane . A somewhat high current event. In the standard, when this initial charge has decayed below 10 % of the initial value, it is considered discharged. So the initial event is some voltage in 150 pF thru 330 ohms to then dissipate by natural decay until one can touch the brush to the EUT to discharge the remaining voltage thru the mentioned 1 pf cap (resistor and wire tip?) bypassing the 470 Kohm resistor and then into some inductance of the wire between the two 470 Kohm resistors and some parallel capacitance of this assembly to the reference plane that conducts a displacement current. The EUT capacitance to reference place might of the same order depending on relative sizes. The wire from the closest resistor to the tip is suggested to be less than 30 mm. The capacitance of that to the EUT seems to be on the smallish side and parallel to the wire ? All these parasitic capacitance's seem to be in series. Now what invokes the dv/dt in the first place? The contact of the brush to the charged EUT. If the parasitic capacitance was significant enough then there would be no need for the conductive path, but there is no dv/dt to use that capacitance - until a conductive path is established and that path involves a static charge into two 470 Kohm resistors which brings to mind the RC time constant. So, my impression is dt = RC, I = Cdv/RC = dv/R From: Doug Smith d...@emcesd.com mailto:d...@emcesd.com To: Bill Owsley wdows...@yahoo.com mailto:wdows...@yahoo.com Cc: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net ; emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 4:37 PM Subject: Re: ESD Brush Hi Bill, Not sure of your question about the current loop. The discharge is one of a small capacitor, and the air path is not negligible (displacement current completing the loop). Low frequency analysis does not apply here. Doug On 10/27/11 11:14 PM, Bill Owsley wrote: And what might the current loop be? ps. what was the intial intentional ESD current into the EUT? to bring it up to equal charge? If you are really quick, you might get the discharge brush in before the voltage has decayed a lot. From: Doug Smith d...@emcesd.com mailto:d...@emcesd.com To: Bill wdows...@yahoo.com mailto:wdows...@yahoo.com Cc: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net ; emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 12:29 AM Subject: Re: ESD Brush Anything really conductive like copper or low resistance carbon fibers will subject the EUT multi-ampere CDM-like (charged device model) ESD events. In addition the 470K resistors are good low value capacitors to ESD and can also allow fast high peak currents as well. Plus the wire from the closest resistor to the tip has capacitance as well. Note: I = Cdv/dt = 1pF * 2000V/1ns = 2 Amperes of current!! At 8 kV thus would be a fast peak of 8 Amperes. I am currently writing a new Technical Tidbit on the best way to do this. It will be up this weekend so don't want to write it twice here. Will post link to the article. Doug Tel: 408-356-4186 Mobile: 408-858-4528 Email: d...@dsmith.org Sent: from my iPhone On Oct 27, 2011, at 19:30, Bill wdows...@yahoo.com wrote: When used with the two 470 Kohm resistors, anything
Re: ESD Brush
Doug, ( a somewhat disjointed note, numerous interruptions) The initial ESD event charges the EUT up to the value of the applied ESD thru the series resistor in the gun and the displacement current from the EUT to the reference plane . A somewhat high current event. In the standard, when this initial charge has decayed below 10 % of the initial value, it is considered discharged. So the initial event is some voltage in 150 pF thru 330 ohms to then dissipate by natural decay until one can touch the brush to the EUT to discharge the remaining voltage thru the mentioned 1 pf cap (resistor and wire tip?) bypassing the 470 Kohm resistor and then into some inductance of the wire between the two 470 Kohm resistors and some parallel capacitance of this assembly to the reference plane that conducts a displacement current. The EUT capacitance to reference place might of the same order depending on relative sizes. The wire from the closest resistor to the tip is suggested to be less than 30 mm. The capacitance of that to the EUT seems to be on the smallish side and parallel to the wire ? All these parasitic capacitance's seem to be in series. Now what invokes the dv/dt in the first place? The contact of the brush to the charged EUT. If the parasitic capacitance was significant enough then there would be no need for the conductive path, but there is no dv/dt to use that capacitance - until a conductive path is established and that path involves a static charge into two 470 Kohm resistors which brings to mind the RC time constant. So, my impression is dt = RC, I = Cdv/RC = dv/R From: Doug Smith d...@emcesd.com To: Bill Owsley wdows...@yahoo.com Cc: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net; emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 4:37 PM Subject: Re: ESD Brush Hi Bill, Not sure of your question about the current loop. The discharge is one of a small capacitor, and the air path is not negligible (displacement current completing the loop). Low frequency analysis does not apply here. Doug On 10/27/11 11:14 PM, Bill Owsley wrote: And what might the current loop be? ps. what was the intial intentional ESD current into the EUT? to bring it up to equal charge? If you are really quick, you might get the discharge brush in before the voltage has decayed a lot. From: Doug Smith d...@emcesd.com mailto:d...@emcesd.com To: Bill wdows...@yahoo.com mailto:wdows...@yahoo.com Cc: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net ; emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 12:29 AM Subject: Re: ESD Brush Anything really conductive like copper or low resistance carbon fibers will subject the EUT multi-ampere CDM-like (charged device model) ESD events. In addition the 470K resistors are good low value capacitors to ESD and can also allow fast high peak currents as well. Plus the wire from the closest resistor to the tip has capacitance as well. Note: I = Cdv/dt = 1pF * 2000V/1ns = 2 Amperes of current!! At 8 kV thus would be a fast peak of 8 Amperes. I am currently writing a new Technical Tidbit on the best way to do this. It will be up this weekend so don't want to write it twice here. Will post link to the article. Doug Tel: 408-356-4186 Mobile: 408-858-4528 Email: d...@dsmith.org Sent: from my iPhone On Oct 27, 2011, at 19:30, Bill wdows...@yahoo.com wrote: When used with the two 470 Kohm resistors, anything conductive to brush the contact locations and EUT to reduce any induced charge back to the ground level will work just fine. As will just standing around for a minute or two, or an ion generator that is turned on after the discharge and NOT during the discharge. The brush is a speed enhancer. The resistors in the line are an attempt to reduce a secondary discharge due to the build up from the initial discharge or a wimpy discharge into an already charged item - low current since the voltage delta is less than expected, or larger than expected discharge if you reverse polarity for the next shot. A breath of warm moist human exhalation across the item will knock the charge build up out rather quick. PS. you'll find this is a highly variable test. I don't think any results have ever been duplicated. ;-) On 10/27/2011 09:58 PM, Scott Douglas wrote: Sending for the subscriber by List Admin. Subject: ESD Brush From: Sundstrom, Michael
Re: ESD Brush
Hi Bill, Not sure of your question about the current loop. The discharge is one of a small capacitor, and the air path is not negligible (displacement current completing the loop). Low frequency analysis does not apply here. Doug On 10/27/11 11:14 PM, Bill Owsley wrote: And what might the current loop be? ps. what was the intial intentional ESD current into the EUT? to bring it up to equal charge? If you are really quick, you might get the discharge brush in before the voltage has decayed a lot. From: Doug Smith d...@emcesd.com mailto:d...@emcesd.com To: Bill wdows...@yahoo.com mailto:wdows...@yahoo.com Cc: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net ; emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 12:29 AM Subject: Re: ESD Brush Anything really conductive like copper or low resistance carbon fibers will subject the EUT multi-ampere CDM-like (charged device model) ESD events. In addition the 470K resistors are good low value capacitors to ESD and can also allow fast high peak currents as well. Plus the wire from the closest resistor to the tip has capacitance as well. Note: I = Cdv/dt = 1pF * 2000V/1ns = 2 Amperes of current!! At 8 kV thus would be a fast peak of 8 Amperes. I am currently writing a new Technical Tidbit on the best way to do this. It will be up this weekend so don't want to write it twice here. Will post link to the article. Doug Tel: 408-356-4186 Mobile: 408-858-4528 Email: d...@dsmith.org Sent: from my iPhone On Oct 27, 2011, at 19:30, Bill wdows...@yahoo.com wrote: When used with the two 470 Kohm resistors, anything conductive to brush the contact locations and EUT to reduce any induced charge back to the ground level will work just fine. As will just standing around for a minute or two, or an ion generator that is turned on after the discharge and NOT during the discharge. The brush is a speed enhancer. The resistors in the line are an attempt to reduce a secondary discharge due to the build up from the initial discharge or a wimpy discharge into an already charged item - low current since the voltage delta is less than expected, or larger than expected discharge if you reverse polarity for the next shot. A breath of warm moist human exhalation across the item will knock the charge build up out rather quick. PS. you'll find this is a highly variable test. I don't think any results have ever been duplicated. ;-) On 10/27/2011 09:58 PM, Scott Douglas wrote: Sending for the subscriber by List Admin. Subject: ESD Brush From: Sundstrom, Michael mailto:michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/27/2011 9:47 AM To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG I’m looking to test an ungrounded module to IEC 61000-4-2 . Of which 7.2.4.deals with ungrounded equipment. In 7.2.4.1 General (toward the end ) it says you can: sweeping of the EUT with a grounded carbon fibre brush with bleeder resistors (for example, 2 × 470 kÙ) in the grounding cable. Where can I find a carbon fiber brush I can then ground (with two 470Kohm resistors)? Would a fanned out multi-strand copper wire work just as well to dissipate the ESD charge buildup? Thanks for any help, Michael Sundstrom OHD / TREQ Dallas Electronic Lab Analyst, EMC Lead 2170 French Settlement Rd, Suite B Dallas, Texas 75212 (214) 579 6312 (940) 390 3644c KB5UKT - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org
RE: [PSES] ESD Brush
This is the brush I use. http://www.gordonbrush.com/thunderon/go t-conductive-short-handle-brush-p-1323-l-en.html -David Gray From: Scott Douglas [mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:58 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] ESD Brush Sending for the subscriber by List Admin. Subject: ESD Brush From: Sundstrom, Michael michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com mailto:michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/27/2011 9:47 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG I’m looking to test an ungrounded module to IEC 61000-4-2 . Of which 7.2.4.deals with ungrounded equipment. In 7.2.4.1 General (toward the end ) it says you can: sweeping of the EUT with a grounded carbon fibre brush with bleeder resistors (for example, 2 × 470 kÙ) in the grounding cable. Where can I find a carbon fiber brush I can then ground (with two 470Kohm resistors)? Would a fanned out multi-strand copper wire work just as well to dissipate the ESD charge buildup? Thanks for any help, Michael Sundstrom OHD / TREQ Dallas Electronic Lab Analyst, EMC Lead 2170 French Settlement Rd, Suite B Dallas, Texas 75212 (214) 579 6312 (940) 390 3644c KB5UKT - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Paging in Japan
Esteemed members, The product in question is a pager which will be used in bars, shops, exhibitions and so on. If not using a previously approved communication module for the pager, what are the requirements in Japan? Would it be possible to point me to the standard/law (preferably in English!). If using a previously approved communication module for the pager, what would then be the requirements in Japan? TIA Niels Hougaard Bolls ApS Ved Gadekæret 11F DK-3660 Stenløse Denmark T: +45 48 18 35 66 F: +45 48 18 35 30 n...@bolls.dk mailto:n...@bolls.dk www.bolls.dk http://www.bolls.dk/ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: ESD Brush
And what might the current loop be? ps. what was the intial intentional ESD current into the EUT? to bring it up to equal charge? If you are really quick, you might get the discharge brush in before the voltage has decayed a lot. From: Doug Smith d...@emcesd.com To: Bill wdows...@yahoo.com Cc: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net; emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 12:29 AM Subject: Re: ESD Brush Anything really conductive like copper or low resistance carbon fibers will subject the EUT multi-ampere CDM-like (charged device model) ESD events. In addition the 470K resistors are good low value capacitors to ESD and can also allow fast high peak currents as well. Plus the wire from the closest resistor to the tip has capacitance as well. Note: I = Cdv/dt = 1pF * 2000V/1ns = 2 Amperes of current!! At 8 kV thus would be a fast peak of 8 Amperes. I am currently writing a new Technical Tidbit on the best way to do this. It will be up this weekend so don't want to write it twice here. Will post link to the article. Doug Tel: 408-356-4186 Mobile: 408-858-4528 Email: mailto:d...@dsmith.org d...@dsmith.org Sent: from my iPhone On Oct 27, 2011, at 19:30, Bill wdows...@yahoo.com wrote: When used with the two 470 Kohm resistors, anything conductive to brush the contact locations and EUT to reduce any induced charge back to the ground level will work just fine. As will just standing around for a minute or two, or an ion generator that is turned on after the discharge and NOT during the discharge. The brush is a speed enhancer. The resistors in the line are an attempt to reduce a secondary discharge due to the build up from the initial discharge or a wimpy discharge into an already charged item - low current since the voltage delta is less than expected, or larger than expected discharge if you reverse polarity for the next shot. A breath of warm moist human exhalation across the item will knock the charge build up out rather quick. PS. you'll find this is a highly variable test. I don't think any results have ever been duplicated. ;-) On 10/27/2011 09:58 PM, Scott Douglas wrote: Sending for the subscriber by List Admin. Subject: ESD Brush From: Sundstrom, Michael mailto:michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/27/2011 9:47 AM To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG I’m looking to test an ungrounded module to IEC 61000-4-2 . Of which 7.2.4.deals with ungrounded equipment. In 7.2.4.1 General (toward the end ) it says you can: sweeping of the EUT with a grounded carbon fibre brush with bleeder resistors (for example, 2 × 470 kÙ) in the grounding cable. Where can I find a carbon fiber brush I can then ground (with two 470Kohm resistors)? Would a fanned out multi-strand copper wire work just as well to dissipate the ESD charge buildup? Thanks for any help, Michael Sundstrom OHD / TREQ Dallas Electronic Lab Analyst, EMC Lead 2170 French Settlement Rd, Suite B Dallas, Texas 75212 (214) 579 6312 (940) 390 3644c KB5UKT - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail
Re: ESD Brush
Anything really conductive like copper or low resistance carbon fibers will subject the EUT multi-ampere CDM-like (charged device model) ESD events. In addition the 470K resistors are good low value capacitors to ESD and can also allow fast high peak currents as well. Plus the wire from the closest resistor to the tip has capacitance as well. Note: I = Cdv/dt = 1pF * 2000V/1ns = 2 Amperes of current!! At 8 kV thus would be a fast peak of 8 Amperes. I am currently writing a new Technical Tidbit on the best way to do this. It will be up this weekend so don't want to write it twice here. Will post link to the article. Doug Tel: 408-356-4186 Mobile: 408-858-4528 Email: mailto:d...@dsmith.org d...@dsmith.org Sent: from my iPhone On Oct 27, 2011, at 19:30, Bill wdows...@yahoo.com wrote: When used with the two 470 Kohm resistors, anything conductive to brush the contact locations and EUT to reduce any induced charge back to the ground level will work just fine. As will just standing around for a minute or two, or an ion generator that is turned on after the discharge and NOT during the discharge. The brush is a speed enhancer. The resistors in the line are an attempt to reduce a secondary discharge due to the build up from the initial discharge or a wimpy discharge into an already charged item - low current since the voltage delta is less than expected, or larger than expected discharge if you reverse polarity for the next shot. A breath of warm moist human exhalation across the item will knock the charge build up out rather quick. PS. you'll find this is a highly variable test. I don't think any results have ever been duplicated. ;-) On 10/27/2011 09:58 PM, Scott Douglas wrote: Sending for the subscriber by List Admin. Subject: ESD Brush From: Sundstrom, Michael mailto:michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/27/2011 9:47 AM To: mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG I’m looking to test an ungrounded module to IEC 61000-4-2 . Of which 7.2.4.deals with ungrounded equipment. In 7.2.4.1 General (toward the end ) it says you can: sweeping of the EUT with a grounded carbon fibre brush with bleeder resistors (for example, 2 × 470 kÙ) in the grounding cable. Where can I find a carbon fiber brush I can then ground (with two 470Kohm resistors)? Would a fanned out multi-strand copper wire work just as well to dissipate the ESD charge buildup? Thanks for any help, Michael Sundstrom OHD / TREQ Dallas Electronic Lab Analyst, EMC Lead 2170 French Settlement Rd, Suite B Dallas, Texas 75212 (214) 579 6312 (940) 390 3644c KB5UKT - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website
Re: ESD Brush
When used with the two 470 Kohm resistors, anything conductive to brush the contact locations and EUT to reduce any induced charge back to the ground level will work just fine. As will just standing around for a minute or two, or an ion generator that is turned on after the discharge and NOT during the discharge. The brush is a speed enhancer. The resistors in the line are an attempt to reduce a secondary discharge due to the build up from the initial discharge or a wimpy discharge into an already charged item - low current since the voltage delta is less than expected, or larger than expected discharge if you reverse polarity for the next shot. A breath of warm moist human exhalation across the item will knock the charge build up out rather quick. PS. you'll find this is a highly variable test. I don't think any results have ever been duplicated. ;-) On 10/27/2011 09:58 PM, Scott Douglas wrote: Sending for the subscriber by List Admin. Subject: ESD Brush From: Sundstrom, Michael michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com mailto:michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/27/2011 9:47 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG I’m looking to test an ungrounded module to IEC 61000-4-2 . Of which 7.2.4.deals with ungrounded equipment. In 7.2.4.1 General (toward the end ) it says you can: sweeping of the EUT with a grounded carbon fibre brush with bleeder resistors (for example, 2 × 470 kÙ) in the grounding cable. Where can I find a carbon fiber brush I can then ground (with two 470Kohm resistors)? Would a fanned out multi-strand copper wire work just as well to dissipate the ESD charge buildup? Thanks for any help, Michael Sundstrom OHD / TREQ Dallas Electronic Lab Analyst, EMC Lead 2170 French Settlement Rd, Suite B Dallas, Texas 75212 (214) 579 6312 (940) 390 3644c KB5UKT - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Lead Compliance Engineer Position
Sending to the List for the employer. Sonos, with offices in Santa Barbara, CA and Cambridge MA, continues to double in size! We are looking to hire a leader for our global product compliance. By joining our Product Development team, this person contributes to the design of our highly customized components and support Marketing in our initiative to grow products sales worldwide. Job description: http://jobs.sonos.com/index.cfm?fuseact on=83077.viewjobdetailCID=83077JID=117539cfcend Please contact directly: Rick Huff Sonos | Senior Technical Recruiter | o - 617-225-2110 x579 | m - 617-256-7258 | rick.h...@sonos.com Facebook/Sonos | @sonos | YouTube/sonos | blog.sonos.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickhuff54 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
ESD Brush
Sending for the subscriber by List Admin. Subject: ESD Brush From: Sundstrom, Michael michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com mailto:michael_sundst...@overheaddoor.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/27/2011 9:47 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG I’m looking to test an ungrounded module to IEC 61000-4-2 . Of which 7.2.4.deals with ungrounded equipment. In 7.2.4.1 General (toward the end ) it says you can: sweeping of the EUT with a grounded carbon fibre brush with bleeder resistors (for example, 2 × 470 kÙ) in the grounding cable. Where can I find a carbon fiber brush I can then ground (with two 470Kohm resistors)? Would a fanned out multi-strand copper wire work just as well to dissipate the ESD charge buildup? Thanks for any help, Michael Sundstrom OHD / TREQ Dallas Electronic Lab Analyst, EMC Lead 2170 French Settlement Rd, Suite B Dallas, Texas 75212 (214) 579 6312 (940) 390 3644c KB5UKT - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: HERO / HERF
Ed, You didn’t quantify low power, but if the power output is less than the no-fire power of possibly exposed EEDs, seems you would be home free. If that isn’t the case, and you can spec out the highest field intensity at say 1 meter, or half a meter, or whatever be your exclusion zone, then you could calculate the current coupled to a twisted shield pair running to an EED, based on 1.5 mA per Volt per meter. That current, multiplied by the shield transfer impedance, ought to be orders of magnitude lower than the EED no-fire level. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 10:22:53 -0700 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Conversation: HERO / HERF Subject: HERO / HERF One of our product lines includes soldier-worn vests that carry low-power UHF transponders with integral antennas. We have already performed radiated emission field strength testing (RE102) and determined the levels of the fundamental and harmonic emissions. Although there was nothing in our formal requirements, we were asked if the product is also compliant with Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO) and Fuels (HERF). My first action was to try to find limits for these conditions. MIL-STD-464C talks a very little about HERO HERF, referencing a NAVSEA OP-3565 Volumes 1 2, and a NAVAIR 16-1-529, Volume 2, 17th Revision. I was able to access the NAVSEA document. For HERO, in OP-3565 Volume 2, I found a mention of a HERO Safe Distance Calculator (but the links were bad), I also found a Paragraph 3-1.1 (that defined a 10-foot exclusionary zone for low-power portable emitters) and a Table 3 that described exceptions to this rule for very low-power emitters (like RFID systems). For HERF, I found references to OP-3565 Volume 1, but I can’t seem to find any place to access that document. So, my plaint for help is simple (or it ought to be). Is there some more accessible document that defines emission limits for low-power devices operated in an environment of Ordnance and Fuels, preferably for Army ground equipment. Thanks in advance for any comments! Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com blocked::mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com WB6WSN NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Applications San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] thermocouple tutorial
Acknowledged - placement of t/c is mucho very extremely important. Am careful about application technique and component selection, and is emphasized in company policy/procedure. FWIW, for my place of employment, the two big sources or error are isothermal routing of t/c wire and attachment technique of t/c bead. The long-term properties of plastics and insulation as 'systems' are well defined by UL1446, UL746B, IEC61857, and others. The assumption is that these standards are representative. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 11:18 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] thermocouple tutorial With instrument and connecting cables at room temperature, likely more than close enough to a zone box. I suggest the thermocouple bead attachment method along with choice of bead placement likely far greater source of error that all other variables combined. I think industry in general obsesses over insulation temperature, since degradation of that material properties over time/temperature is surly an in-exact science. _ Ralph McDiarmid | Schneider Electric | Renewable Energies Business | CANADA | Regulatory Compliance Engineering From: Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/25/2011 12:26 PM Subject: [PSES] thermocouple tutorial Just found this in the archives of Electronics Cooling Journal. In some ways it is better tutorial than mine, but the 1% thermocouple accuracy can be improved due to modern instruments. Do not agree with the ambient temperature measurement technique due to the non-laminar nature of air flow. Have never used a 'zone box' - anyone else used this technique? www.electronics-cooling.com/1997/01/notes-on-using-thermocouples/ Brian - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] thermocouple tutorial
In message OFF24C4F08.28036D3D-ON88257936.006349C4-88257936.0064908B@US.Schneider-E lectric.com, dated Thu, 27 Oct 2011, ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com writes: I think industry in general obsesses over insulation temperature, since degradation of that material properties over time/temperature is surly an in-exact science. It probably isn't for a very closely-specified material, but one man's 'PVC' is not another man's PVC. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Some people who are peeling the finch of the financial crisis are thinking of biting a rook. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] thermocouple tutorial
With instrument and connecting cables at room temperature, likely more than close enough to a zone box. I suggest the thermocouple bead attachment method along with choice of bead placement likely far greater source of error that all other variables combined. I think industry in general obsesses over insulation temperature, since degradation of that material properties over time/temperature is surly an in-exact science. ___ _ Ralph McDiarmid | Schneider Electric | Renewable Energies Business | CANADA | Regulatory Compliance Engineering From: Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/25/2011 12:26 PM Subject:[PSES] thermocouple tutorial Just found this in the archives of Electronics Cooling Journal. In some ways it is better tutorial than mine, but the 1% thermocouple accuracy can be improved due to modern instruments. Do not agree with the ambient temperature measurement technique due to the non-laminar nature of air flow. Have never used a 'zone box' - anyone else used this technique? www.electronics-cooling.com/1997/01/notes-on-using-thermocouples/ Brian - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
HERO / HERF
One of our product lines includes soldier-worn vests that carry low-power UHF transponders with integral antennas. We have already performed radiated emission field strength testing (RE102) and determined the levels of the fundamental and harmonic emissions. Although there was nothing in our formal requirements, we were asked if the product is also compliant with Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO) and Fuels (HERF). My first action was to try to find limits for these conditions. MIL-STD-464C talks a very little about HERO HERF, referencing a NAVSEA OP-3565 Volumes 1 2, and a NAVAIR 16-1-529, Volume 2, 17th Revision. I was able to access the NAVSEA document. For HERO, in OP-3565 Volume 2, I found a mention of a HERO Safe Distance Calculator (but the links were bad), I also found a Paragraph 3-1.1 (that defined a 10-foot exclusionary zone for low-power portable emitters) and a Table 3 that described exceptions to this rule for very low-power emitters (like RFID systems). For HERF, I found references to OP-3565 Volume 1, but I can’t seem to find any place to access that document. So, my plaint for help is simple (or it ought to be). Is there some more accessible document that defines emission limits for low-power devices operated in an environment of Ordnance and Fuels, preferably for Army ground equipment. Thanks in advance for any comments! Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com blocked::mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com WB6WSN NARTE Certified EMC Engineer Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Applications San Diego, CA USA 858-505-2780 Military Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
thermocouple tutorial
Just found this in the archives of Electronics Cooling Journal. In some ways it is better tutorial than mine, but the 1% thermocouple accuracy can be improved due to modern instruments. Do not agree with the ambient temperature measurement technique due to the non-laminar nature of air flow. Have never used a 'zone box' - anyone else used this technique? www.electronics-cooling.com/1997/01/notes-on-using-thermocouples/ Brian - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] Medical equipment versus ITE equipment used in medical facilities
If a patient can have access to the keyboard, it needs to meet 60601-1. Generally if it is located in a patient’s room near the bed, they are considered to have access to it. Patty Knudsen Teradata Corporation PH: 858-485-3748 patricia.knud...@teradata.com From: McInturff, Gary [mailto:gary.mcintu...@esterline.com] Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:21 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Medical equipment versus ITE equipment used in medical facilities List members, I’ve been looking over the medical directive or at least summaries of it, and EN60601-1 trying to determine what requirements would say that a general purpose keyboard must be evaluated or identified as a medical device or a part of a medical device. The keyboard is designed with bacterial contamination and cleaning in mind. It is completely sealed – not just a cover added over an existing keyboard – and resistant to typical clearers and chemicals use in hospitals. But other than that it’s a standard qwerty keyboard with a USB connection to a host. For data collection etc. Typical usage can be at a nurses station or in a patient room as part of a patient records systems. But there is no designed function to specifically help out with patient treatment systems like cat scanners, infusion pumps et al. I suppose there is nothing to prevent one of these system with a USB port to plug in the keyboard. Can someone point me in the direction of the relevant documents that would describe when an ITE item used in a medical environment is required to be evaluated as a medical device. Thanks - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] IEC 60601-2-47 magnetic field immunity test
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 17:00:28 +0100, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote: In message elvaa7la5l74q8p95vgbo2no8l8cddh...@4ax.com, dated Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Pat Lawler pat.law...@verizon.net writes: Consider testing at 3 A/m *and* 1 Gauss (80 A/m) in case the higher test level is needed. What would 80 A/m at 150 Hz or 180 Hz be simulating? It's also very odd that one level is in A/m and the other in the CGS unit - not tesla. Use of the unit gauss mixed with A/m in the same sentense, funny syntax of the phase (no and between ...3 A/m and magnetic...) and the level of 1 gauss - all suggested me something is wrong. But I though maybe I'm misreading something, as it seems too funny and I could find no corrigendum (if it is simple editorial error, it should able to be fixed soon, I thought) issued in these ten years. I'll discuss that with my client, but if he insist to test his equipment for 80 A/m at 150/180Hz, will do the test. Thanks. Regards, Tom -- Tomonori Sato vef00...@nifty.ne.jp URL: http://homepage3.nifty.com/tsato/ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting Tomorrow, October 26th
All, There will be a Northeast Product Safety Society / CNEC Product Safety Engineering Society meeting tomorrow, October 26th, at the Holiday Inn, Boxborough MA. A social hour with light refreshments will begin at 7:00 PM and the technical meeting will start at 7:30 PM. Tam Savino, Senior Product Safety Engineer at Curtis-Straus (Bureau Veritas), will present this month’s topic concerning Measurement Laser Guards and Laser Safety. If you will be in the area, please feel free to join us as advanced notice or membership in NPSS or IEEE PSES is not required. Tam Savino’s presentation concerns Laser Guards and Laser Safety based on IEC/EN 60825-1 (Safety of laser products – Part 1: Equipment classification and requirements) and ISO/EN 11553-1 (Safety of Machinery-Laser Processing Machines). The first section, “An Overview of IEC60825-4: Laser Guards,” defines the scope of the standard; i.e. who should comply, and provides basic definitions. The second section, “How to Design Laser Processing Equipment With Compliance to IEC60825-4 in Mind,” describes how to assess the foreseeable exposure limit (FEL) of Appendix B, as well as some of the testing that should be considered.. Tom Savino has been a Senior Product Safety Engineer since 1998. He tests and evaluates various types of equipment and machineries to various standards including medical, laboratory/measurement, and office. Much of this equipment has lasers, and must be evaluated to the IEC60825 standard. He helps client’s prepare submittals to the CDRH for the laser Accession number. Tom has a BS degree in Physics from the University of Connecticut, and worked on his Masters Degree in Applied Physics from the University of Massachusetts. He is a member of the Northeast Product Safety Society and the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society, and is a NARTE Certified Engineer. If you or anyone you know would like to give a product safety technical presentation, please contact Steve Brody by email at steven.br...@brooks.com mailto:steven.br...@brooks.com . A technical presentation should be 45 to 60 minutes in duration and be related to product safety. Although the presentation may reference your company and it’s services, the presentation must not be simply company advertising. We would also appreciate any slides or handout materials be made available for posting on the NPSS web site. Releasing presentation materials for posting is desired but not a requirement to make a presentation. The 2011 NPSS meeting schedule is available on the NPSS website at http://www.nepss.net/calendar.html. Further information about the Northeast Product Safety Society and how to become a member is available at http://www.nepss.net http://www.nepss.net/Calendar.html . You can also contact one of the NPSS officers via links on the NPSS web site. Directions: From Route 495 North or South, take Exit 28 to Route 111 East Turn right onto Adams Place (approximately 500 feet from Route 495 North) The Holiday Inn is the last building on the left. Regards, Matt Campanella NPSS Secretary (508) 786-7629 Direct (508) 480-6332 Fax matthew.campane...@motorola.com email - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] IEC 60601-2-47 magnetic field immunity test
In message elvaa7la5l74q8p95vgbo2no8l8cddh...@4ax.com, dated Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Pat Lawler pat.law...@verizon.net writes: Consider testing at 3 A/m *and* 1 Gauss (80 A/m) in case the higher test level is needed. What would 80 A/m at 150 Hz or 180 Hz be simulating? It's also very odd that one level is in A/m and the other in the CGS unit - not tesla. One begins to wonder what the Central Office editors are allowed to do these days. They used to be hot on this sort of whimsy. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Some people who are peeling the finch of the financial crisis are thinking of biting a rook. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] IEC 60601-2-47 magnetic field immunity test
Hi Tom: Although I can't help clear the confusion in IEC 60601-2-47, there are some IEC 60601-2-x standards that require power line magnetic field testing at high levels. The one that I came across was IEC 60601-2-22 (safety of infusion pumps), which required 400 A/m. I can only assume they thought the system might be used near MRI machines when they wrote that clause. Consider testing at 3 A/m *and* 1 Gauss (80 A/m) in case the higher test level is needed. Pat Lawler On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:02:09 +0900, you wrote: I read IEC 60601-2-47 ed.1 (2001) clause 36.202.6 (magnetic field immunity), and confused with the following sentense: The EQUIPMENT shall be exposed to a magnetic field intensity of 3 A/m magnetic flux density of 1 gauss at three times the line frequency. Is the test level 3 A/m or 1 gauss or both of them? I think the level of 1 gauss (80 A/m in air) is pretty high and use of the unit gauss is unusual, so I thought maybe this is mistake or maybe I'm misreading it. Can anyone know something about this requirement? Regards, Tom - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: IEC 60601-2-47 magnetic field immunity test
In message 20111024210209v.vef00...@nifty.ne.jp, dated Mon, 24 Oct 2011, T.Sato vef00...@nifty.ne.jp writes: I think the level of 1 gauss (80 A/m in air) is pretty high Very. and use of the unit gauss is unusual, Unfortunately, the use of these CGS units has persisted for some 60 years. so I thought maybe this is mistake or maybe I'm misreading it. If you have copied the text exactly, it cannot be misread and is thus a mistake. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Some people who are peeling the finch of the financial crisis are thinking of biting a rook. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
IEC 60601-2-47 magnetic field immunity test
Hello All, I read IEC 60601-2-47 ed.1 (2001) clause 36.202.6 (magnetic field immunity), and confused with the following sentense: The EQUIPMENT shall be exposed to a magnetic field intensity of 3 A/m magnetic flux density of 1 gauss at three times the line frequency. Is the test level 3 A/m or 1 gauss or both of them? I think the level of 1 gauss (80 A/m in air) is pretty high and use of the unit gauss is unusual, so I thought maybe this is mistake or maybe I'm misreading it. Can anyone know something about this requirement? Regards, Tom -- Tomonori Sato vef00...@nifty.ne.jp URL: http://homepage3.nifty.com/tsato/ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] Medical equipment versus ITE equipment used in medical facilities
Hi Gary, According with the philosophy of the 3rd edition of IEC 60601-1 an ITE item is accepted in medical electrical equipment if is located in the USER part. The subject keyboard needs to be evaluated globally with the whole equipment for the relevant clauses of IEC 60601-1. Pending the intended use of the medical device additional means of protection can be added to the ITE part. This addition should be result of the Risk Management process. I hope that the above can help. Regards, Steli Steli Loznen, M.Sc.,SM-IEEE Q.A. and Certification Manager Convener of IEC/TC62/SC62A/WG17 I.T.L (Product Testing) Ltd. 1, Bat Sheva St., POB 87 LOD 71100, ISRAEL Tel: 972-8-9153100 Fax: 972-8-9153101 Mobile: 972-54-7245794 E-mail: st...@itl.co.il www.itl.co.il ___ This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender. From: McInturff, Gary [mailto:gary.mcintu...@esterline.com] Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 8:21 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Medical equipment versus ITE equipment used in medical facilities List members, I’ve been looking over the medical directive or at least summaries of it, and EN60601-1 trying to determine what requirements would say that a general purpose keyboard must be evaluated or identified as a medical device or a part of a medical device. The keyboard is designed with bacterial contamination and cleaning in mind. It is completely sealed – not just a cover added over an existing keyboard – and resistant to typical clearers and chemicals use in hospitals. But other than that it’s a standard qwerty keyboard with a USB connection to a host. For data collection etc. Typical usage can be at a nurses station or in a patient room as part of a patient records systems. But there is no designed function to specifically help out with patient treatment systems like cat scanners, infusion pumps et al. I suppose there is nothing to prevent one of these system with a USB port to plug in the keyboard. Can someone point me in the direction of the relevant documents that would describe when an ITE item used in a medical environment is required to be evaluated as a medical device. Thanks - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Medical equipment versus ITE equipment used in medical facilities
You will receive hundreds of opinions - none will be correct; all will be correct. For the 3d edition of 60601-1, if you can justify the use of ITE-certified equipment in the RMF, go for it... For the U.S., there may be some problems with the FDA, as there is a disjoint between the 2d edition and adoption of 3d edition. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of McInturff, Gary Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:21 AM To: 'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' Subject: Medical equipment versus ITE equipment used in medical facilities List members, I've been looking over the medical directive or at least summaries of it, and EN60601-1 trying to determine what requirements would say that a general purpose keyboard must be evaluated or identified as a medical device or a part of a medical device. The keyboard is designed with bacterial contamination and cleaning in mind. It is completely sealed - not just a cover added over an existing keyboard - and resistant to typical clearers and chemicals use in hospitals. But other than that it's a standard qwerty keyboard with a USB connection to a host. For data collection etc. Typical usage can be at a nurses station or in a patient room as part of a patient records systems. But there is no designed function to specifically help out with patient treatment systems like cat scanners, infusion pumps et al. I suppose there is nothing to prevent one of these system with a USB port to plug in the keyboard. Can someone point me in the direction of the relevant documents that would describe when an ITE item used in a medical environment is required to be evaluated as a medical device. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Medical equipment versus ITE equipment used in medical facilities
List members, I’ve been looking over the medical directive or at least summaries of it, and EN60601-1 trying to determine what requirements would say that a general purpose keyboard must be evaluated or identified as a medical device or a part of a medical device. The keyboard is designed with bacterial contamination and cleaning in mind. It is completely sealed – not just a cover added over an existing keyboard – and resistant to typical clearers and chemicals use in hospitals. But other than that it’s a standard qwerty keyboard with a USB connection to a host. For data collection etc. Typical usage can be at a nurses station or in a patient room as part of a patient records systems. But there is no designed function to specifically help out with patient treatment systems like cat scanners, infusion pumps et al. I suppose there is nothing to prevent one of these system with a USB port to plug in the keyboard. Can someone point me in the direction of the relevant documents that would describe when an ITE item used in a medical environment is required to be evaluated as a medical device. Thanks - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Need Signal Integrity Engineer ( Contract) for a Silicon Valley Bay Area Project
Group, I'm looking for a Signal Intgrity Engineer for a consulting project in the Silicon Valley Bay Area. You must have proven SI skills vs EMC skills. Contact me off-list if you or someone you know may be interested. Regards, Jeff Six 9s Reliable jcoll...@six9sreliable.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Seismic Testing to Japan Expectations
Group, Can anyone recommend a test lab that can conduct Seismic / Vibration testing to Japan requirements? They differ from the NEBS and ETSI spec's by requiring testing on three (3) axis instead of two (2). I would prefer to use a lab located in either N.CA http://n.ca/ or S.CA http://s.ca/ but will consider other US locations. Regards, Jeff Collins Six 9's Reliable - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Application of EMC directive
...@cecoforma.com; vlafrag...@primaricerca.it; wolfgang.hoepf...@eu.panasonic.com; wolfgang.landgr...@meg.mee.com; y.jude...@emitech.fr; yuriy.litvi...@intertek.com; zam@fh- kempten.de; zbigniew.joskiew...@pwr.wroc.pl Subject: RE: Application of EMC directive Hello all, For SIM cards I assume it is reasonable to handle them under the RTTE directive as normal use of them is inside mobile phone. Other types of the cards à it depends how it is used by the end user. Kind Regards Arto Subject: Application of EMC directive Hello, I submitted a question of application of the EMC Directive. The EMC Directive does apply to smart cards, SIM cards and other contact cards? If so, what do you think the applicable standards? Thank you in advance for your help Best regards Thierry RAFESTHAIN Co Responsable de centre [image removed] 7, rue Georges Méliès 69680 CHASSIEU 04 78 40 66 55 t.rafesth...@emitech.fr www.emitech.fr - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting Next Wednesday, October 26th
All, There will be a Northeast Product Safety Society / CNEC Product Safety Engineering Society meeting next Wednesday, October 26th, at the Holiday Inn, Boxborough MA. A social hour with light refreshments will begin at 7:00 PM and the technical meeting will start at 7:30 PM. Tam Savino, Senior Product Safety Engineer at Curtis-Straus (Bureau Veritas), will present this month’s topic concerning Measurement Laser Guards and Laser Safety. If you will be in the area, please feel free to join us as advanced notice or membership in NPSS or IEEE PSES is not required. Tam Savino’s presentation concerns Laser Guards and Laser Safety based on IEC/EN 60825-1 (Safety of laser products – Part 1: Equipment classification and requirements) and ISO/EN 11553-1 (Safety of Machinery-Laser Processing Machines). The first section, “An Overview of IEC60825-4: Laser Guards,” defines the scope of the standard; i.e. who should comply, and provides basic definitions. The second section, “How to Design Laser Processing Equipment With Compliance to IEC60825-4 in Mind,” describes how to assess the foreseeable exposure limit (FEL) of Appendix B, as well as some of the testing that should be considered.. Tom Savino has been a Senior Product Safety Engineer since 1998. He tests and evaluates various types of equipment and machineries to various standards including medical, laboratory/measurement, and office. Much of this equipment has lasers, and must be evaluated to the IEC60825 standard. He helps client’s prepare submittals to the CDRH for the laser Accession number. Tom has a BS degree in Physics from the University of Connecticut, and worked on his Masters Degree in Applied Physics from the University of Massachusetts. He is a member of the Northeast Product Safety Society and the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society, and is a NARTE Certified Engineer. If you or anyone you know would like to give a product safety technical presentation, please contact Steve Brody by email at steven.br...@brooks.com mailto:steven.br...@brooks.com . A technical presentation should be 45 to 60 minutes in duration and be related to product safety. Although the presentation may reference your company and it’s services, the presentation must not be simply company advertising. We would also appreciate any slides or handout materials be made available for posting on the NPSS web site. Releasing presentation materials for posting is desired but not a requirement to make a presentation. The 2011 NPSS meeting schedule is available on the NPSS website at http://www.nepss.net/calendar.html. Further information about the Northeast Product Safety Society and how to become a member is available at http://www.nepss.net http://www.nepss.net/Calendar.html . You can also contact one of the NPSS officers via links on the NPSS web site. Directions: From Route 495 North or South, take Exit 28 to Route 111 East Turn right onto Adams Place (approximately 500 feet from Route 495 North) The Holiday Inn is the last building on the left. Regards, Matt Campanella NPSS Secretary (508) 786-7629 Direct (508) 480-6332 Fax matthew.campane...@motorola.com email - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
2.4 GHz and GPS test equipment wanted
Client is looking for some test equipment if anyone is selling any, or knows anyone who is: Agilent N4010A (x4 sets) Spirent GSS6100 (x3 sets) Regards Charlie Charlie Blackham Sulis Consultants Ltd Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317 Web: www.sulisconsultants.com http://www.sulisconsultants.com/ Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Job opening for Product Safety Engineer
Hello All, We are EMC test lab in Toronto and work very closely with a NRTL test lab in the city. This NRTL lab is looking for a experienced product safety engineer. Experience with 60950-1, 61010-1, 60065 and 60606-1 is a must. Knowledge of machinery directive and MDD will be an asset. Please send me an email and I will direct your mail to the appropriate person. Get ready for IEC 60601 3rd edition with Global EMC Inc TÜV SÜD America For more information on training dates and locations, click here! http://tuvamerica.com/tuvnews/seminars/seminarinfo.cfm?id=141 If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact me. Ashwani Malhotra, M.Sc, P.Eng Phone 905-883-8189 | Fax 905-883-7995 Cell 647-898-2732 Toll Free 1-866-996-8298 Email: amalho...@globalemclabs.com mailto:g...@globalemlabs.com www.globalemclabs.com http://www.globalemclabs.com/ Trusted Certification Compliance Advisors for your Global markets - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Keeping up with new revisions
Hi Christopher, I have found this email notification service Notify U.S. useful to discover new or revised requirements being announced by countries worldwide. https://tsapps.nist.gov/notifyus/data/index/index.cfm The purpose of Notify U.S. is to collect and fulfill user requests for information on World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreements relating to Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). Member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are required under the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) to report to the WTO all proposed technical regulations that could affect trade with other Member countries. Respectfully yours, Chuck McDowell Meyer Sound Laboratories Inc. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 10:26 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Keeping up with new revisions Folks, What website or email notification should I get onto so I can stay current with changing standards. For example: 60950-1, 60950-22, 301-489-1, 301-489-4, EN 302 217-2-2 etc. From time to time there are different amendments etc. I am sure these can all be found somewhere, I am not signed up on anything and should like to find some agency service. thanks in advance for your help. Christopher - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com NOTICE: This email may contain confidential information. Please see http://www.meyersound.com/confidential/ for our complete policy. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Keeping up with new revisions
As others commented, standards vendors can provide info for specific standards lists via RSS or email. You cannot expect regulatory requirements information (safety, EMC, environmental, code) to be available from a single source. Do you sole-source critical components in your products? There was a previous thread where I offered my crawler/aggregator engine to the community. For those not wanting to be a code monkey - there is stuff such as Google Reader. Why? Because humans are not capable of tracking or crawling many data sources, and humans are poor at finding new data sources. To make the situation worse, humans are not capable of turning all of this acquired data into useful information. To make the situation more complex, there is much data not directly searchable - typically referred to as the 'Deep Web'. And yet another data source can be found in unlinked pages (yes, there are techniques to find these pages). Basic theory http://qprober.cs.columbia.edu/publications/sigmod2001.pdf Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Christopher Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 10:26 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Keeping up with new revisions Folks, What website or email notification should I get onto so I can stay current with changing standards. For example: 60950-1, 60950-22, 301-489-1, 301-489-4, EN 302 217-2-2 etc. From time to time there are different amendments etc. I am sure these can all be found somewhere, I am not signed up on anything and should like to find some agency service. thanks in advance for your help. Christopher - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Keeping up with new revisions
Techstreet www.techstreet.com have a free monitoring service, you can list your standards of interest. Also I use www.changedetection.com to monitor numerous web pages for change. Regards, Tony - Original Message - From: Christopher Sent: 10/18/11 06:25 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Keeping up with new revisions Folks, What website or email notification should I get onto so I can stay current with changing standards. For example: 60950-1, 60950-22, 301-489-1, 301-489-4, EN 302 217-2-2 etc. From time to time there are different amendments etc. I am sure these can all be found somewhere, I am not signed up on anything and should like to find some agency service. thanks in advance for your help. Christopher - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to LT;emc-p...@ieee.orgGT; All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas LT;emcp...@radiusnorth.netGT; Mike Cantwell LT;mcantw...@ieee.orgGT; For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher LT;j.bac...@ieee.orgGT; David Heald LT;dhe...@gmail.comGT; - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Keeping up with new revisions
Hej Christopher, IEC, Just published: http://webstore.iec.ch/justpublished At the bottom of the page you can subscribe to “IEC Just Published”. IEC, Working documents: http://www.iec.ch/heb/d_hebdoc-e.htm At the top you can subscribe on a emailed list every Saturday. ETSI, new (revision of ) standards, votes etc.: http://webapp.etsi.org/deliverables/Subscribe.asp On the menu at the left side click on “Free subscription” and follow the instruction to get a notification mail every Sunday. In the “Archive” you can see what you get. I do not know if Cenelec, CEN or ISO have similar services. Best regards Helge Knudsen Bolls Rådgivning Denmark From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Sent: 18. oktober 2011 07:26 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Keeping up with new revisions Folks, What website or email notification should I get onto so I can stay current with changing standards. For example: 60950-1, 60950-22, 301-489-1, 301-489-4, EN 302 217-2-2 etc. From time to time there are different amendments etc. I am sure these can all be found somewhere, I am not signed up on anything and should like to find some agency service. thanks in advance for your help. Christopher - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Keeping up with new revisions
Folks, What website or email notification should I get onto so I can stay current with changing standards. For example: 60950-1, 60950-22, 301-489-1, 301-489-4, EN 302 217-2-2 etc. From time to time there are different amendments etc. I am sure these can all be found somewhere, I am not signed up on anything and should like to find some agency service. thanks in advance for your help. Christopher - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: thermocouple tutorial
Hi Brian, As I was not in attendance at PSES symposium so you could not have lost my card and not sure that I meet the good person status, is there any other way to qualify for your tutorial? Thanks Rick -Original Message- From: Brian Oconnell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 2:31 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: thermocouple tutorial To the good people that gave me their business cards at the PSES symposium (on Tuesday) for a copy my t/c construction tutorial - I lost them. Sorry. If you want it, send me your email address. Brian - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] ESD standards for Brazil
Hi Christopher, Suggest you contact Carlos Eduardo Delalibera, he works at IBEC a leading EMC test house in Brazil. While most Brazilian standard are officially published in Portuguese, possibly he knows of a translated copies or he could answer your specific questions. Good luck and let me know if I can help. cedua...@ibec.com.br +55 19 3845 5965 Scott Griggs Rua Rio Juquia,48 Bairro Sao Joaquim Vinhedo, SP, Brazil CEP 13280-000 +55 (19) 8314 3822 mobile +1 (224) 999 0441 home griggs_sc...@yahoo.com From: Christopher cksal...@yahoo.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 8:39 PM Subject: [PSES] ESD standards for Brazil Folks, Does anyone know of a URL for ESD requirements in Brazil for a Radio equipment. Please dont send me to Portuguese language sites. I know it is higher than EN 61000-4-2 and among the highest for Air and Contact discharge. Thanks in advance for your help. Christopher 408-470-4915 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Why?
I don't know what to say. I too have a desire to meet the people we have corresponded with over the many. Recent economical restraints have limited or prohibited participation in the Expos, but I'm hopeful that soon things will turn around. Until then I will have to rely on this email group for information, continued education, and entertainment. :o) The Other Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Brian Oconnell Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 1:56 PM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Why? Being a sneaky, underhanded, despicable person; I have two installs - a config that will match the pretty pics in the standards, and a config that will make the measurements. The customer's auditor goes away happy after he visits my site, but my reports clearly specify the test setup 'variation' in text and pics. And customer's compliance engineers are happy. As for Mr Kunde, you seem to have a cult following. I was asked by no less than three people at the PSES symposium if I was 'The Other Brian'. You should know that there are people out there that want to meet you. Was most aghast that I would be associated with a reasonable and normal persona. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Kunde, Brian Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 10:29 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Why? Sorry to jump in on this so late but I've been on vacation. What is the reason for the table size called out in ANSI and why 1.5m x 1m? Is there some science behind it? Is it explained anywhere? Just curious. Below 1Ghz isn't the table suppose to be invisible to RF anyway? We test to CISPR11 which only calls out the height of the table (0.8m). The other dimensions are not listed and I never questioned it because I always assumed they were not important. I see someone posted that only the height was important and the other dimensions are Nominal, but out 'big' test table is 0.8m deep by 3m long. Can hardly be considered nominal. Why I'm so curious is we are looking to purchase or build some new test tables and I want to get the dimensions correct. They must be able to handle instruments of 600 lbs, have wheels, and can fit through a standard 48 doorway (3' 9 available). A 1m deep table is a tight fit with cables, hoses, etc.. Are there any companies who sell test tables or do you still have to make them? The Other Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of WNya Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 7:54 PM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Table Size in Emissions test Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas
FIPS-140-2
Folks, I am looking for a Lab or Consultant who can help us with FIPS-140-2 approval. Our Product description link is below. http://www2.aerohive.com/DS-350 http://www2.aerohive.com/DS-AP330 It will be good to find someone in the Bay area. Thanks in advance for your help. Regards Christopher 408-470-4915 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
thermocouple tutorial
To the good people that gave me their business cards at the PSES symposium (on Tuesday) for a copy my t/c construction tutorial - I lost them. Sorry. If you want it, send me your email address. Brian - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Why?
Being a sneaky, underhanded, despicable person; I have two installs - a config that will match the pretty pics in the standards, and a config that will make the measurements. The customer's auditor goes away happy after he visits my site, but my reports clearly specify the test setup 'variation' in text and pics. And customer's compliance engineers are happy. As for Mr Kunde, you seem to have a cult following. I was asked by no less than three people at the PSES symposium if I was 'The Other Brian'. You should know that there are people out there that want to meet you. Was most aghast that I would be associated with a reasonable and normal persona. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Kunde, Brian Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 10:29 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Why? Sorry to jump in on this so late but I've been on vacation. What is the reason for the table size called out in ANSI and why 1.5m x 1m? Is there some science behind it? Is it explained anywhere? Just curious. Below 1Ghz isn't the table suppose to be invisible to RF anyway? We test to CISPR11 which only calls out the height of the table (0.8m). The other dimensions are not listed and I never questioned it because I always assumed they were not important. I see someone posted that only the height was important and the other dimensions are Nominal, but out 'big' test table is 0.8m deep by 3m long. Can hardly be considered nominal. Why I'm so curious is we are looking to purchase or build some new test tables and I want to get the dimensions correct. They must be able to handle instruments of 600 lbs, have wheels, and can fit through a standard 48 doorway (3' 9 available). A 1m deep table is a tight fit with cables, hoses, etc.. Are there any companies who sell test tables or do you still have to make them? The Other Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of WNya Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 7:54 PM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Table Size in Emissions test Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Why?
Sorry to jump in on this so late but I've been on vacation. What is the reason for the table size called out in ANSI and why 1.5m x 1m? Is there some science behind it? Is it explained anywhere? Just curious. Below 1Ghz isn't the table suppose to be invisible to RF anyway? We test to CISPR11 which only calls out the height of the table (0.8m). The other dimensions are not listed and I never questioned it because I always assumed they were not important. I see someone posted that only the height was important and the other dimensions are Nominal, but out 'big' test table is 0.8m deep by 3m long. Can hardly be considered nominal. Why I'm so curious is we are looking to purchase or build some new test tables and I want to get the dimensions correct. They must be able to handle instruments of 600 lbs, have wheels, and can fit through a standard 48 doorway (3' 9 available). A 1m deep table is a tight fit with cables, hoses, etc.. Are there any companies who sell test tables or do you still have to make them? The Other Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of WNya Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 7:54 PM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: Table Size in Emissions test Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Vehicle level radiated immunity
Thanks to everyone who replied, and I learned from you and by calling UL today that I was wrong, they only do component-level testing. Regards, Neven From: Derek Walton lfresea...@aol.com To: neve...@comcast.net Cc: EMC-PSTC EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG, Robert Nelson (SvT) robert.nels...@jacobs.com Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 5:39:46 AM Subject: Re: Vehicle level radiated immunity Hi Neven, Jacobs in Detroit can also do this for you Cheers, Derek. On 10/13/2011 12:19 AM, neve...@comcast.net wrote: Can anyone in Southern California run a radiated-immunity test in a semi-anechoic chamber on a car or a small SUV using: 1) Stripline (car under it), between 1 MHz and 30 MHz, 150 V/m (CW) 2) Antenna (automotive, large log-periodic, not for EN61000-4-3) between 30 MHz and 60 MHz (100 V/m, CW) ? Not necessarily with all full accreditations for various automotive OEMs, although it woud be good, but It must be a lab that has some experience with this type of testing. I know I can do it e.g. in UL near Detroit, but I am trying to see if it can be done relatively closer to home. Thanks, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Vehicle level radiated immunity
Hi Neven, Jacobs in Detroit can also do this for you Cheers, Derek. On 10/13/2011 12:19 AM, neve...@comcast.net wrote: Can anyone in Southern California run a radiated-immunity test in a semi-anechoic chamber on a car or a small SUV using: 1) Stripline (car under it), between 1 MHz and 30 MHz, 150 V/m (CW) 2) Antenna (automotive, large log-periodic, not for EN61000-4-3) between 30 MHz and 60 MHz (100 V/m, CW) ? Not necessarily with all full accreditations for various automotive OEMs, although it woud be good, but It must be a lab that has some experience with this type of testing. I know I can do it e.g. in UL near Detroit, but I am trying to see if it can be done relatively closer to home. Thanks, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
CANADA- ENERGY EFFICIENCY REGULATIONS
Dear Colleagues, Yesterday, on October 12, 2011, the Canada Gazette, Part II, published the Amendment 11 to the Energy Efficiency Regulations; It comes into force six months after publication, on April 12, 2012. For general contact information, please refer to Canada Gazette or to the PDF SOR/DORS-2011-182. The amendment will: Increase the stringency and/or scope of existing minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for seven currently regulated products: Electric motors, Residential gas boilers, Residential oil boilers, Dry-type transformers, Large air-conditioners and heat pumps, Commercial self-contained refrigeration, General service incandescent reflector lamps and Introduce new MEPS and associated reporting and compliance requirements for five products: Standby for electronic products, Compact audio products, Television (TV) and TV combination units (and reporting only of TV on mode), Video products, External power supplies, Digital TV adaptors, Electric boilers, and Single package vertical air-conditioners and heat pumps. At the following links you may access the the text for: Energy Efficiency Regulations - Standby Power Consumption: http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/regulations/amendment11/standby-power-consumption -oct2011.cfm and Energy Efficiency Regulations for External Power supplies: http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/regulations/amendment11/external-power-supplies-o ct2011.cfm Respectfully yours, Constantin Constantin Bolintineanu P.Eng. iNARTE Certified Product Safety Engineer Digital Security Controls (DSC) a Division of Tyco Safety Products Canada 3301 LANGSTAFF Road, L4K 4L2 CONCORD, ONTARIO, CANADA e-mail: cbolintine...@dsc.com Tel: 905 760 3000 ext 2568 Fax: 905 760 3020 Before printing this e-mail think if it is necessary DISCLAIMER: This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return the message and its attachments to the sender, and then please delete from your system without copying or forwarding it or call TSPC at 905 760 3000 extension 2568 so that the sender's address records can be corrected. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Beyond Power Supply Safety
Dear Members, Thank you very much to those who have commented online and offline. In summary, the best and worry-free approach is to recycle/replace flood damaged electronics and any items with electrical wiring (heating cooling system, water heater, vehicle, etc.). I received proof of loss report from the FEMA contacted flood adjuster last night. Electronics are covered (though 10% depreciation for the HP CP2025dn and 65% for the AIO). Thanks to Ted's comment for the line voltage supplies. It can become safety hazard down the road. The adjuster's report does include replacement for the wire and receptcles. Best regards, Grace Lin On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Bill Owsley wdows...@yahoo.com wrote: re-cycle electronic equipment. We have events at work where we get to bring in old electronic stuff to toss into the special bin going to the re-cycler. From: IBM Ken ibm...@gmail.com To: oconne...@tamuracorp.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 8:28 PM Subject: Re: Beyond Power Supply Safety It's best to throw the printer(s) out. If you don't have kids at home and you're going to use the printer somewhere where fire damage is less of a concern then you could: -disassemble -flush with clean water -dry thoroughly -reassemble -hipot test if you have a tester (why not?) -set on fireproof surface and power via GFI -check for abnormal voltages at SELV interfaces using multimeter with insulated leads -function check -place back into service Then worry for the next several years about if/when the printer is going to burn down the house... Again - it's best to throw the printers out. Maybe your homeowner's insurance will pay for them. -Ken A. On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com wrote: It's dead, Jim Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:17 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Beyond Power Supply Safety Dear Members, How much damage would be after shorting the input of power supplies? An HP all-in-one machine (purchased in 2001) and a color laser printer (HP CP2025dn) were damaged by about 1.5 feet of flood water brought into the house by Hurricane Irene. They were safe (no fire and damage to the property and human beings). Both power cords were connected to the receptacles (no surge protectors) which were about 1 foot above the ground. The all-in-one machine, powered by an AC adapter, was on a table and didn't touch water. Some components of the laser printer burned when it had about 1 of flood water on the bottom. My question is: is it worth for me, not a hardware troubleshooting expert, to try to fix them? Or, just say good bye to them and move on? Thank you very much and look forward to your comments. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety
Vehicle level radiated immunity
Can anyone in Southern California run a radiated-immunity test in a semi-anechoic chamber on a car or a small SUV using: 1) Stripline (car under it), between 1 MHz and 30 MHz, 150 V/m (CW) 2) Antenna (automotive, large log-periodic, not for EN61000-4-3) between 30 MHz and 60 MHz (100 V/m, CW) ? Not necessarily with all full accreditations for various automotive OEMs, although it woud be good, but It must be a lab that has some experience with this type of testing. I know I can do it e.g. in UL near Detroit, but I am trying to see if it can be done relatively closer to home. Thanks, Neven - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Beyond Power Supply Safety
re-cycle electronic equipment. We have events at work where we get to bring in old electronic stuff to toss into the special bin going to the re-cycler. From: IBM Ken ibm...@gmail.com To: oconne...@tamuracorp.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 8:28 PM Subject: Re: Beyond Power Supply Safety It's best to throw the printer(s) out. If you don't have kids at home and you're going to use the printer somewhere where fire damage is less of a concern then you could: -disassemble -flush with clean water -dry thoroughly -reassemble -hipot test if you have a tester (why not?) -set on fireproof surface and power via GFI -check for abnormal voltages at SELV interfaces using multimeter with insulated leads -function check -place back into service Then worry for the next several years about if/when the printer is going to burn down the house... Again - it's best to throw the printers out. Maybe your homeowner's insurance will pay for them. -Ken A. On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com wrote: It's dead, Jim Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:17 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Beyond Power Supply Safety Dear Members, How much damage would be after shorting the input of power supplies? An HP all-in-one machine (purchased in 2001) and a color laser printer (HP CP2025dn) were damaged by about 1.5 feet of flood water brought into the house by Hurricane Irene. They were safe (no fire and damage to the property and human beings). Both power cords were connected to the receptacles (no surge protectors) which were about 1 foot above the ground. The all-in-one machine, powered by an AC adapter, was on a table and didn't touch water. Some components of the laser printer burned when it had about 1 of flood water on the bottom. My question is: is it worth for me, not a hardware troubleshooting expert, to try to fix them? Or, just say good bye to them and move on? Thank you very much and look forward to your comments. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Beyond Power Supply Safety
It's best to throw the printer(s) out. If you don't have kids at home and you're going to use the printer somewhere where fire damage is less of a concern then you could: -disassemble -flush with clean water -dry thoroughly -reassemble -hipot test if you have a tester (why not?) -set on fireproof surface and power via GFI -check for abnormal voltages at SELV interfaces using multimeter with insulated leads -function check -place back into service Then worry for the next several years about if/when the printer is going to burn down the house... Again - it's best to throw the printers out. Maybe your homeowner's insurance will pay for them. -Ken A. On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com wrote: It's dead, Jim Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:17 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Beyond Power Supply Safety Dear Members, How much damage would be after shorting the input of power supplies? An HP all-in-one machine (purchased in 2001) and a color laser printer (HP CP2025dn) were damaged by about 1.5 feet of flood water brought into the house by Hurricane Irene. They were safe (no fire and damage to the property and human beings). Both power cords were connected to the receptacles (no surge protectors) which were about 1 foot above the ground. The all-in-one machine, powered by an AC adapter, was on a table and didn't touch water. Some components of the laser printer burned when it had about 1 of flood water on the bottom. My question is: is it worth for me, not a hardware troubleshooting expert, to try to fix them? Or, just say good bye to them and move on? Thank you very much and look forward to your comments. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
Absolutely – and if you do not like a particular assessor, you can insist that they not be assigned to your audit. Give a reason though, accrediting organizations do want to know how their assessors are doing and behaving. Stand up for your rights in the audit process. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Derek Walton Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 11:30 AM To: Bob Richards Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test Hi Everyone, It seems that there are many instances where labs disagree with findings. I would like to stress to everyone that you dont have to accept the assessors opinion. When you sign your report you are actually saying that. In the case of especially trivial things like those mentioned, just have your assessor document it, and move on. When you reply to the assessing body, state your case and make sure you stress you believe the assessor is wrong. If the deficiency is wishy washy, get it clarified. This way a second reviewer will be asked to review the finding. If indeed it's not a finding, then you are done. If you are indeed wrong, it will be explained why: and clearly. This whole mechanism is there to stop cases where an over zealous assessor is grasping at straws: so USE IT. There are so many preconceived notions about assessing that are plain wrong. One of them is that you will be punished for pushing back, this is not true. My 10 cents worth.. Derek Walton On 10/12/2011 12:29 PM, Bob Richards wrote: Harry, Yes, you have to pick your battles. :-) We've done the same thing, it is sometimes quicker to change a procedure than to argue the validity. I remember an auditor not liking an ESD setup, regarding the VCP. I was injecting on the same side of the VCP that the ground lead was attached. The auditor stated something about the current path needs to cross the coupling plane for it to be a valid setup. There was no wording in the standard to that effect, but the example setup picture showed it that way. The ground lead, IMHO, is just a bleeder circuit to bring the VCP back to 0v before the next discharge, so it doesn't matter where it is attached. Now, in the latest version of the standard, one of the example setups show the lead on the same side as the ESD gun. I feel vindicated. :-) Bob R. --- On Wed, 10/12/11, Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net mailto:harrywa...@att.net wrote: From: Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net mailto:harrywa...@att.net Subject: Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2011, 1:14 PM Hi Derek, I fully agree with your sentiments. The deficiency was objected to the accreditation body but it was quicker to satisfy the auditor's whims rather than engage in an elongated discussion about the rights and wrongs.. Mea culpa - I never did follow up with the accreditation body - simply because there were more pressing things to take care of and the problem was fixed; well, until the next audit! ht p://mail.yimg.com/a/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif . Regards, Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org
RE: Beyond Power Supply Safety
It's dead, Jim Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:17 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Beyond Power Supply Safety Dear Members, How much damage would be after shorting the input of power supplies? An HP all-in-one machine (purchased in 2001) and a color laser printer (HP CP2025dn) were damaged by about 1.5 feet of flood water brought into the house by Hurricane Irene. They were safe (no fire and damage to the property and human beings). Both power cords were connected to the receptacles (no surge protectors) which were about 1 foot above the ground. The all-in-one machine, powered by an AC adapter, was on a table and didn't touch water. Some components of the laser printer burned when it had about 1 of flood water on the bottom. My question is: is it worth for me, not a hardware troubleshooting expert, to try to fix them? Or, just say good bye to them and move on? Thank you very much and look forward to your comments. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
In message 1318445064.93913.yahoomail...@web112606.mail.gq1.yahoo.com, dated Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Philo Beddo ashwort...@yahoo.com writes: But don't get me started on calibration, verification, and quality checks! Because I've been told that a LISN verification falls within MU while NSA does not. In writing from an acceditation body. oh was that a tangent? Ash. Or a cosh? (;-) -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Some people who are peeling the finch of the financial crisis are thinking of biting a rook. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
All, I don't think questioning an assessor is a bad thing. Many of us in the EMC field have as much or more experience than the assessors who visit our labs. Often what it comes down to is the letter of the law...we all live and die by the word shall in test standards (as was pointed out earlier).It's healthy for the acceditation bodies to handle rebutals as long as they're not without merit. But don't get me started on calibration, verification, and quality checks! Because I've been told that a LISN verification falls within MU while NSA does not. In writing from an acceditation body. oh was that a tangent? Ash. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
Hi Everyone, It seems that there are many instances where labs disagree with findings. I would like to stress to everyone that you dont have to accept the assessors opinion. When you sign your report you are actually saying that. In the case of especially trivial things like those mentioned, just have your assessor document it, and move on. When you reply to the assessing body, state your case and make sure you stress you believe the assessor is wrong. If the deficiency is wishy washy, get it clarified. This way a second reviewer will be asked to review the finding. If indeed it's not a finding, then you are done. If you are indeed wrong, it will be explained why: and clearly. This whole mechanism is there to stop cases where an over zealous assessor is grasping at straws: so USE IT. There are so many preconceived notions about assessing that are plain wrong. One of them is that you will be punished for pushing back, this is not true. My 10 cents worth.. Derek Walton On 10/12/2011 12:29 PM, Bob Richards wrote: Harry, Yes, you have to pick your battles. :-) We've done the same thing, it is sometimes quicker to change a procedure than to argue the validity. I remember an auditor not liking an ESD setup, regarding the VCP. I was injecting on the same side of the VCP that the ground lead was attached. The auditor stated something about the current path needs to cross the coupling plane for it to be a valid setup. There was no wording in the standard to that effect, but the example setup picture showed it that way. The ground lead, IMHO, is just a bleeder circuit to bring the VCP back to 0v before the next discharge, so it doesn't matter where it is attached. Now, in the latest version of the standard, one of the example setups show the lead on the same side as the ESD gun. I feel vindicated. :-) Bob R. --- On Wed, 10/12/11, Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net mailto:harrywa...@att.net wrote: From: Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net mailto:harrywa...@att.net Subject: Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2011, 1:14 PM Hi Derek, I fully agree with your sentiments. The deficiency was objected to the accreditation body but it was quicker to satisfy the auditor's whims rather than engage in an elongated discussion about the rights and wrongs.. Mea culpa - I never did follow up with the accreditation body - simply because there were more pressing things to take care of and the problem was fixed; well, until the next audit! ht p://mail.yimg.com/a/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif . Regards, Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
Harry, Yes, you have to pick your battles. :-) We've done the same thing, it is sometimes quicker to change a procedure than to argue the validity. I remember an auditor not liking an ESD setup, regarding the VCP. I was injecting on the same side of the VCP that the ground lead was attached. The auditor stated something about the current path needs to cross the coupling plane for it to be a valid setup. There was no wording in the standard to that effect, but the example setup picture showed it that way. The ground lead, IMHO, is just a bleeder circuit to bring the VCP back to 0v before the next discharge, so it doesn't matter where it is attached. Now, in the latest version of the standard, one of the example setups show the lead on the same side as the ESD gun. I feel vindicated. :-) Bob R. --- On Wed, 10/12/11, Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net wrote: From: Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net Subject: Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2011, 1:14 PM Hi Derek, I fully agree with your sentiments. The deficiency was objected to the accreditation body but it was quicker to satisfy the auditor's whims rather than engage in an elongated discussion about the rights and wrongs.. Mea culpa - I never did follow up with the accreditation body - simply because there were more pressing things to take care of and the problem was fixed; well, until the next audit! ht p://mail.yimg.com/a/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif . Regards, Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Beyond Power Supply Safety
Grace I would say replace everything. I am a hardware type. For years I have fixed every broken piece of my hardware. Today I find the cost of repair parts to very quickly exceed the total cost of the machine. In part, that’s because the replaceable parts are usually large modules. Power supplies are often glued together so you have to cut into them to replace component parts. Sadly we are a throwaway society. I think printers are a unique case. Have you noticed the printer repair stores are going out of business? Again in part, because the manufactures practically give away the hardware and make their money on the expendables. Fred Townsend DC to Light Consulting Services From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:17 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Beyond Power Supply Safety Dear Members, How much damage would be after shorting the input of power supplies? An HP all-in-one machine (purchased in 2001) and a color laser printer (HP CP2025dn) were damaged by about 1.5 feet of flood water brought into the house by Hurricane Irene. They were safe (no fire and damage to the property and human beings). Both power cords were connected to the receptacles (no surge protectors) which were about 1 foot above the ground. The all-in-one machine, powered by an AC adapter, was on a table and didn't touch water. Some components of the laser printer burned when it had about 1 of flood water on the bottom. My question is: is it worth for me, not a hardware troubleshooting expert, to try to fix them? Or, just say good bye to them and move on? Thank you very much and look forward to your comments. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
I also had similar issues during audits. I was able to argue that it is impossible to have anything that is EXACTLY any dimension. At issue was the height above the ground plane for a 61000-4-6 conducted immunity test. I was able to back it up by finding precedence in the 61000-4-4 EFT standard stating the 10cm height +/- 10%. I'm sure there are some auditors that would not budge, though. I like the quote EMC testing is like measuring Jello with a micrometer. Bob R. --- On Wed, 10/12/11, Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net wrote: From: Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net Subject: RE: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2011, 12:00 PM Interesting thread………. Several years ago I had a similar issue: The table height was measured by (a well-respected) auditor and deemed to be 79.5cm, not 80cm. Several discussions followed regarding the accuracy/traceability of the auditor’s tape measure, validity of the deficiency etc. Initially I rejected the deficiency but after time just added a 0.5cm board to the table. When in business to make money it’s often easier and quicker to fix the perceived problem than to argue against it. Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
Hi Derek, I fully agree with your sentiments. The deficiency was objected to the accreditation body but it was quicker to satisfy the auditor's whims rather than engage in an elongated discussion about the rights and wrongs.. Mea culpa - I never did follow up with the accreditation body - simply because there were more pressing things to take care of and the problem was fixed; well, until the next audit! http://mail.yimg.com/a/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif . Regards, Harry From: Derek Walton lfresea...@aol.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Sent: Wed, October 12, 2011 11:23:32 AM Subject: Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test Harry, alas what you say is true, but not the way it should be. It should never have been a deficiency... I am greatly opposed to this nonsense. I do wish more labs would make instances like this known to their assessing bodies.. Cheers, Derek. On 10/12/2011 11:00 AM, Harry Ward wrote: Interesting thread………. Several years ago I had a similar issue: The table height was measured by (a well-respected) auditor and deemed to be 79.5cm, not 80cm. Several discussions followed regarding the accuracy/traceability of the auditor’s tape measure, validity of the deficiency etc. Initially I rejected the deficiency but after time just added a 0.5cm board to the table. When in business to make money it’s often easier and quicker to fix the perceived problem than to argue against it. Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
Harry, alas what you say is true, but not the way it should be. It should never have been a deficiency... I am greatly opposed to this nonsense. I do wish more labs would make instances like this known to their assessing bodies.. Cheers, Derek. On 10/12/2011 11:00 AM, Harry Ward wrote: Interesting thread………. Several years ago I had a similar issue: The table height was measured by (a well-respected) auditor and deemed to be 79.5cm, not 80cm. Several discussions followed regarding the accuracy/traceability of the auditor’s tape measure, validity of the deficiency etc. Initially I rejected the deficiency but after time just added a 0.5cm board to the table. When in business to make money it’s often easier and quicker to fix the perceived problem than to argue against it. Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
That was absolutely the correct course to take as long as there were more profitable venues to pursue. But long term, such events are sand in the gears, and they will wear things down if not properly addressed. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Harry Ward harrywa...@att.net List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:00:43 -0700 (PDT) To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test Interesting thread………. Several years ago I had a similar issue: The table height was measured by (a well-respected) auditor and deemed to be 79.5cm, not 80cm. Several discussions followed regarding the accuracy/traceability of the auditor’s tape measure, validity of the deficiency etc. Initially I rejected the deficiency but after time just added a 0.5cm board to the table. When in business to make money it’s often easier and quicker to fix the perceived problem than to argue against it. Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] Table Size in Emissions test
Interesting thread………. Several years ago I had a similar issue: The table height was measured by (a well-respected) auditor and deemed to be 79.5cm, not 80cm. Several discussions followed regarding the accuracy/traceability of the auditor’s tape measure, validity of the deficiency etc. Initially I rejected the deficiency but after time just added a 0.5cm board to the table. When in business to make money it’s often easier and quicker to fix the perceived problem than to argue against it. Harry - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Beyond Power Supply Safety
Hello Grace, I would recommend replacing line voltage supplies that have been flooded. The water can carry conductive contaminants. You can also get water penetrating into components causing potential problems. There is less risk for SELV circuits, but that doesn’t mean that there is no risk. There may be enough energy available in circuits such that a low impedance fault could cause problems. In general, I would recommend replacing flooded electronics. A larger concern can be the building wiring. Nonmetallic sheathed cable, such as Romex®, does not handle water well. Water can enter the cable and rot it from the inside out. Water and contaminants can also get stuck in electrical receptacles. If the receptacles and wiring are below the water line from the flood, they will need to be checked carefully. It is likely that the wiring will need to be replaced. UL has guidance on handling flooded electronics on this page. http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/offe ings/perspectives/regulator/electrical/additionalresources/flooding/ Regards, Ted Eckert Compliance Engineer Microsoft Corporation ted.eck...@microsoft.com The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:17 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Beyond Power Supply Safety Dear Members, How much damage would be after shorting the input of power supplies? An HP all-in-one machine (purchased in 2001) and a color laser printer (HP CP2025dn) were damaged by about 1.5 feet of flood water brought into the house by Hurricane Irene. They were safe (no fire and damage to the property and human beings). Both power cords were connected to the receptacles (no surge protectors) which were about 1 foot above the ground. The all-in-one machine, powered by an AC adapter, was on a table and didn't touch water. Some components of the laser printer burned when it had about 1 of flood water on the bottom. My question is: is it worth for me, not a hardware troubleshooting expert, to try to fix them? Or, just say good bye to them and move on? Thank you very much and look forward to your comments. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: [PSES] CE Mark with exclamation mark
Also, note subclause 22 of the ERO RTTE site. http://www.ero.dk/rtte On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Aldous, Scott scott.ald...@aei.com wrote: Here is the guidance doc for the RTTE Directive: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/files/guide2009-04-20_en.pdf Section 6.5 goes over marking, and 6.5.1 shows the CE with the Notified Body identification number and the class identifier (alert sign). Section 4.2 has specific information on classes. Scott Aldous Compliance Engineer Solar Energy +1.970.492.2065 Direct +1.970.214.9427 Mobile +1.970.407.5872 Fax +1.541.312.3832 Main scott.ald...@aei.com 1625 Sharp Point Drive Fort Collins, CO 80525 www.advanced-energy.com/solarenergy -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of lauren_cr...@amat.com Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 2:03 PM To: oconne...@tamuracorp.com; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: CE Mark with exclamation mark Keep in mind there is also an bold-exclamation-mark-inside-a-bold-circle known as the alert mark of the RTTE (Radio and Telecommunications Terminal Equipment) Directive. I believe it is supposed to be used for class II radio transmitters. I am probably mistaken when I guess that class II transmitters use frequencies that have not been harmonized across all EU Member States yet. I suggest looking for a guidance document on the EU Commission website. Regards, -- Lauren Crane (mr.) Product Regulatory Analyst | Corporate Product EHS | Applied Materials Office 512.272.6540 | Mobile 512.736.7201 | America - Europe - Asia - External Use – The opinions expressed here are my own opinions only and not necessarily those of my employer. ** Save paper and trees! Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Brian Oconnell Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 2:43 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: CE Mark with exclamation mark The '!' notation is typically used within triangle (ISO symbol 0434) to indicate that there is something important that the operator needs to read about; or that it is being used to indicate special components on a PCB. Is a stand-alone '!' being proposed? Did they refer to a symbol out of IEC60417 or ISO7000? Would really like to know the reference for this. Brian -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Christopher Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 12:05 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: CE Mark with exclamation mark Folks, I have a question Our overseas test lab suggested to add “exclamation mark behind CE mark because it’s related to RF 2.4GHz products to meet CE requirement Is it necessary? Our AP product is a 80211 a/b/g/n with DFS Christopher - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
Beyond Power Supply Safety
Dear Members, How much damage would be after shorting the input of power supplies? An HP all-in-one machine (purchased in 2001) and a color laser printer (HP CP2025dn) were damaged by about 1.5 feet of flood water brought into the house by Hurricane Irene. They were safe (no fire and damage to the property and human beings). Both power cords were connected to the receptacles (no surge protectors) which were about 1 foot above the ground. The all-in-one machine, powered by an AC adapter, was on a table and didn't touch water. Some components of the laser printer burned when it had about 1 of flood water on the bottom. My question is: is it worth for me, not a hardware troubleshooting expert, to try to fix them? Or, just say good bye to them and move on? Thank you very much and look forward to your comments. Best regards, Grace Lin - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Verification for Immunity tests
Dear Experts, It is required by ISO17025 to carry out verifications of the test stations/equipments at predefined regular intervals. What is the minimum acceptable verifications for ESD, EFT, Surge and CI stations? I am reluctant to purchase ESD targets, 50/1000 ohm attenuators, differential HV probes, etc. Besides having to spend money, time is also a critical factor. Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
RE: [PSES] ESD standards for Brazil
Not only ESD level is higher than CE, but also ac surge immunity is higher than CE too. Regards Tim From: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguerian2...@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 9:16 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] ESD standards for Brazil Christopher Resolution 442 article 9 6 kV direct 8 kV air Peter Merguerian pe...@goglobalcompliance.com Go Global Compliance Inc. www.goglobalcompliance.com (408) 931-3303 Sent from my iPhone On Oct 11, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Christopher cksal...@yahoo.com wrote: Folks, Does anyone know of a URL for ESD requirements in Brazil for a Radio equipment. Please dont send me to Portuguese language sites. I know it is higher than EN 61000-4-2 and among the highest for Air and Contact discharge. Thanks in advance for your help. Christopher 408-470-4915 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: ESD standards for Brazil
Christopher Resolution 442 article 9 6 kV direct 8 kV air Peter Merguerian pe...@goglobalcompliance.com Go Global Compliance Inc. www.goglobalcompliance.com (408) 931-3303 Sent from my iPhone On Oct 11, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Christopher cksal...@yahoo.com wrote: Folks, Does anyone know of a URL for ESD requirements in Brazil for a Radio equipment. Please dont send me to Portuguese language sites. I know it is higher than EN 61000-4-2 and among the highest for Air and Contact discharge. Thanks in advance for your help. Christopher 408-470-4915 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent
it seems to me the problem is an auditor who does not know what the test does, and what it takes to make it repeatable and accurate (as much as these tests are, anyway). In such a case, people tend to stick with what the reg says and not try to understand. I was once at a test lab in California that had a vacuum variable capacitor with spark gap and a solenoid coil on display. An auditor had rejected its use for damped sine wave Lightning Indirect Effects tests because it wasn't calibrated and had to be adjusted by the user. Some of the list may know which lab. They bought a expensive piece of equipment that had to be calibrated. Problem... fixed. Suggestion: Change the table as needed. If you do a test that has to meet someone elses' requirement, use the nominal size. Cortland Richmond On 10/11/2011 1:52 PM, don_borow...@selinc.com wrote: When confronted with problems like this, I always try to determine the intent of the particular statement in the test. To me, it is clear that the intent is to fully support the EUT and associated equipment, with cables dropping off the edges of the defined area, as needed. The table should serve this support function and be invisible to RF. In the case of a small EUT with no cables, the intent is satisfied with a table just large enough to support the EUT. Heck, for something like a digital camera without cables, a threaded plastic rod coming up from the turntable, screwed into the mounting hole in the bottom of the camera, would be sufficient to support it and satisfy the intent. Of course, getting an auditor to understand the intent, as opposed to a literal reading, might be difficult to do. Donald Borowski Senior EMC Compliance Engineer Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, Washington, USA From: Derek Waltonlfresea...@aol.com To: dw...@acbcert.com Cc: 'Grace Lin'graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: 10/11/2011 10:12 AM Subject:Re: Table Size in Emissions test Sent by:emc-p...@ieee.org Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling [SNIPPED] - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
ESD standards for Brazil
Folks, Does anyone know of a URL for ESD requirements in Brazil for a Radio equipment. Please dont send me to Portuguese language sites. I know it is higher than EN 61000-4-2 and among the highest for Air and Contact discharge. Thanks in advance for your help. Christopher 408-470-4915 - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
I really dislike having to repeat myself because my comments are being misrepresented. Accreditation is only useful if on average the assessors are significantly more knowledgeable than the assessees. We should have a large number of assessees represented within this forum. Is there a general feeling that the the average assessor walks into the average test house knowing significantly more than the average tester? Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:14:09 -0700 To: 'Ken Javor' ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test Accreditation is like coffee, you either like it or you don’t. If you do not like it, then no one can make you accept the benefits. If you like it, no one needs to explain the benefits. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 12:48 PM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test The issue isn’t with a properly written standard; the issue with an assumed intelligentsia smart enough to tell various labs what they are and are not doing correctly. While there is no doubt that some assessors are more knowledgeable than some assessees, it is nowhere near obvious that is true in the general case; in fact it seems quite the opposite is true in the general case. Unless the average assessor is quite a bit more knowledgeable than the average test house, the value of the process is as I stated below. This accreditation process is nothing but window dressing to gussy up something to look like something it’s not. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:14:53 -0700 To: 'Ken Javor' ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test Heaven forbid we ever go back to the early 80’s when there was no acceptable methods, no accepted procedures, no accepted setup and when the FCC expected cable manipulation till the cows came home to find the maximum emissions levels. Talk about a waste of time – days upon days moving every cable into every likely position finding the ‘worse’ case. Then to find out that the FCC or another lab found that one cable position that showed 10dB more than the other lab measured. Everyone was right in their own eyes and most of those eyes were blind except to their own erroneous methods and practices. No, conformity of setup, table size, configuration, support equipment etc, may not be the best, but it is infinitely better than 30, even 25 years ago. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:29 AM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Within his frame of reference, Ward is correct, which is why this entire accreditation process is flawed and broken. We got along without it before, and it is adding nothing but extra costs and bureaucracy, and negative value to the process of controlling EMI. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:15:00 -0700 To: 'Derek Walton' lfresea...@aol.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test HI Derek The point of anything ‘nominal’ is that it starts with what is expected and allows reasonable variations of sorts. And you hit the right words “relating to a designated or theoretical size”. If you say you must follow the standard, then follow it. The designated size of a table is 1m x 1.5m x 0.8m. This then is the size generally expected. It is not a micrometer reading with 0.01m measurement uncertainty tolerances; it is a general designated and expected size – a nominal size. Now, and without going into uncertainties and its minutia, a 0.8m x 1.2m table, while not typically or generally expected, could be stretched to be within a range of what could be considered within the nominal range. Likewise a table 1.2m x 1.8m would or should still be considered within an expected or nominal value. To the contrary, a table 0.2m x 0.2m, for many reasons, would not be generally considered expected and thus
RE: Table Size in Emissions test
And just like coffee, some assessors are great and some need to be thrown out. Chris From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Dennis Ward Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 2:14 PM To: 'Ken Javor'; 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test Accreditation is like coffee, you either like it or you don’t. If you do not like it, then no one can make you accept the benefits. If you like it, no one needs to explain the benefits. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 12:48 PM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test The issue isn’t with a properly written standard; the issue with an assumed intelligentsia smart enough to tell various labs what they are and are not doing correctly. While there is no doubt that some assessors are more knowledgeable than some assessees, it is nowhere near obvious that is true in the general case; in fact it seems quite the opposite is true in the general case. Unless the average assessor is quite a bit more knowledgeable than the average test house, the value of the process is as I stated below. This accreditation process is nothing but window dressing to gussy up something to look like something it’s not. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:14:53 -0700 To: 'Ken Javor' ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test Heaven forbid we ever go back to the early 80’s when there was no acceptable methods, no accepted procedures, no accepted setup and when the FCC expected cable manipulation till the cows came home to find the maximum emissions levels. Talk about a waste of time – days upon days moving every cable into every likely position finding the ‘worse’ case. Then to find out that the FCC or another lab found that one cable position that showed 10dB more than the other lab measured. Everyone was right in their own eyes and most of those eyes were blind except to their own erroneous methods and practices. No, conformity of setup, table size, configuration, support equipment etc, may not be the best, but it is infinitely better than 30, even 25 years ago. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:29 AM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Within his frame of reference, Ward is correct, which is why this entire accreditation process is flawed and broken. We got along without it before, and it is adding nothing but extra costs and bureaucracy, and negative value to the process of controlling EMI. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:15:00 -0700 To: 'Derek Walton' lfresea...@aol.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test HI Derek The point of anything ‘nominal’ is that it starts with what is expected and allows reasonable variations of sorts. And you hit the right words “relating to a designated or theoretical size”. If you say you must follow the standard, then follow it. The designated size of a table is 1m x 1.5m x 0.8m. This then is the size generally expected. It is not a micrometer reading with 0.01m measurement uncertainty tolerances; it is a general designated and expected size – a nominal size. Now, and without going into uncertainties and its minutia, a 0.8m x 1.2m table, while not typically or generally expected, could be stretched to be within a range of what could be considered within the nominal range. Likewise a table 1.2m x 1.8m would or should still be considered within an expected or nominal value. To the contrary, a table 0.2m x 0.2m, for many reasons, would not be generally considered expected and thus not nominal, but abnormal in size for the intent and purposes of the standard. Remembering that there are three dimensions given (i.e. 1mx1.5mx0.8m), if we take your ‘exception’, then I could place a device on the ground plane as long as it was on a nonconducting surface. Yet I know of no lab nor auditor that would accept this as a ‘nominal’ height condition for any of the standards mentioned. I would not be able to reject
RE: Table Size in Emissions test
Accreditation is like coffee, you either like it or you don’t. If you do not like it, then no one can make you accept the benefits. If you like it, no one needs to explain the benefits. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 12:48 PM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test The issue isn’t with a properly written standard; the issue with an assumed intelligentsia smart enough to tell various labs what they are and are not doing correctly. While there is no doubt that some assessors are more knowledgeable than some assessees, it is nowhere near obvious that is true in the general case; in fact it seems quite the opposite is true in the general case. Unless the average assessor is quite a bit more knowledgeable than the average test house, the value of the process is as I stated below. This accreditation process is nothing but window dressing to gussy up something to look like something it’s not. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:14:53 -0700 To: 'Ken Javor' ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test Heaven forbid we ever go back to the early 80’s when there was no acceptable methods, no accepted procedures, no accepted setup and when the FCC expected cable manipulation till the cows came home to find the maximum emissions levels. Talk about a waste of time – days upon days moving every cable into every likely position finding the ‘worse’ case. Then to find out that the FCC or another lab found that one cable position that showed 10dB more than the other lab measured. Everyone was right in their own eyes and most of those eyes were blind except to their own erroneous methods and practices. No, conformity of setup, table size, configuration, support equipment etc, may not be the best, but it is infinitely better than 30, even 25 years ago. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:29 AM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Within his frame of reference, Ward is correct, which is why this entire accreditation process is flawed and broken. We got along without it before, and it is adding nothing but extra costs and bureaucracy, and negative value to the process of controlling EMI. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:15:00 -0700 To: 'Derek Walton' lfresea...@aol.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test HI Derek The point of anything ‘nominal’ is that it starts with what is expected and allows reasonable variations of sorts. And you hit the right words “relating to a designated or theoretical size”. If you say you must follow the standard, then follow it. The designated size of a table is 1m x 1.5m x 0.8m. This then is the size generally expected. It is not a micrometer reading with 0.01m measurement uncertainty tolerances; it is a general designated and expected size – a nominal size. Now, and without going into uncertainties and its minutia, a 0.8m x 1.2m table, while not typically or generally expected, could be stretched to be within a range of what could be considered within the nominal range. Likewise a table 1.2m x 1.8m would or should still be considered within an expected or nominal value. To the contrary, a table 0.2m x 0.2m, for many reasons, would not be generally considered expected and thus not nominal, but abnormal in size for the intent and purposes of the standard. Remembering that there are three dimensions given (i.e. 1mx1.5mx0.8m), if we take your ‘exception’, then I could place a device on the ground plane as long as it was on a nonconducting surface. Yet I know of no lab nor auditor that would accept this as a ‘nominal’ height condition for any of the standards mentioned. I would not be able to reject or challenge their claim that my table height was not 80cm by saying, nominal is “of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual, and I don’t have to have a table 80cm high.” One might say, yes, but height matters. And they would
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
The issue isn’t with a properly written standard; the issue with an assumed intelligentsia smart enough to tell various labs what they are and are not doing correctly. While there is no doubt that some assessors are more knowledgeable than some assessees, it is nowhere near obvious that is true in the general case; in fact it seems quite the opposite is true in the general case. Unless the average assessor is quite a bit more knowledgeable than the average test house, the value of the process is as I stated below. This accreditation process is nothing but window dressing to gussy up something to look like something it’s not. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:14:53 -0700 To: 'Ken Javor' ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test Heaven forbid we ever go back to the early 80’s when there was no acceptable methods, no accepted procedures, no accepted setup and when the FCC expected cable manipulation till the cows came home to find the maximum emissions levels. Talk about a waste of time – days upon days moving every cable into every likely position finding the ‘worse’ case. Then to find out that the FCC or another lab found that one cable position that showed 10dB more than the other lab measured. Everyone was right in their own eyes and most of those eyes were blind except to their own erroneous methods and practices. No, conformity of setup, table size, configuration, support equipment etc, may not be the best, but it is infinitely better than 30, even 25 years ago. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:29 AM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Within his frame of reference, Ward is correct, which is why this entire accreditation process is flawed and broken. We got along without it before, and it is adding nothing but extra costs and bureaucracy, and negative value to the process of controlling EMI. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:15:00 -0700 To: 'Derek Walton' lfresea...@aol.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test HI Derek The point of anything ‘nominal’ is that it starts with what is expected and allows reasonable variations of sorts. And you hit the right words “relating to a designated or theoretical size”. If you say you must follow the standard, then follow it. The designated size of a table is 1m x 1.5m x 0.8m. This then is the size generally expected. It is not a micrometer reading with 0.01m measurement uncertainty tolerances; it is a general designated and expected size – a nominal size. Now, and without going into uncertainties and its minutia, a 0.8m x 1.2m table, while not typically or generally expected, could be stretched to be within a range of what could be considered within the nominal range. Likewise a table 1.2m x 1.8m would or should still be considered within an expected or nominal value. To the contrary, a table 0.2m x 0.2m, for many reasons, would not be generally considered expected and thus not nominal, but abnormal in size for the intent and purposes of the standard. Remembering that there are three dimensions given (i.e. 1mx1.5mx0.8m), if we take your ‘exception’, then I could place a device on the ground plane as long as it was on a nonconducting surface. Yet I know of no lab nor auditor that would accept this as a ‘nominal’ height condition for any of the standards mentioned. I would not be able to reject or challenge their claim that my table height was not 80cm by saying, nominal is “of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual, and I don’t have to have a table 80cm high.” One might say, yes, but height matters. And they would be correct, however, the dimensions are together in the same frame of reference in the same sentence. So any exceptions to the dimensions would have to follow the same process. The issue then is not uncertainty and its issues, but what is generally expected and accepted as a reasonable table for the intent of the standard. Remembering that standards are produced as much to make something consistent wherever used, then the nominal would be that which is generally consistent within the population that uses the standard. As to ‘bigger fish to fry’, this would be a good size fish for a lab
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
Hi Dennis, we have common ground, and I'm in agreement, except for table size. If we have to show it's not influencing the measurement, it's not a factor. If you want to argue about height I'll pass on that. It's 80 cm. Cheers, Derek. On 10/11/2011 2:14 PM, Dennis Ward wrote: Heaven forbid we ever go back to the early 80’s when there was no acceptable methods, no accepted procedures, no accepted setup and when the FCC expected cable manipulation till the cows came home to find the maximum emissions levels. Talk about a waste of time – days upon days moving every cable into every likely position finding the ‘worse’ case. Then to find out that the FCC or another lab found that one cable position that showed 10dB more than the other lab measured. Everyone was right in their own eyes and most of those eyes were blind except to their own erroneous methods and practices. No, conformity of setup, table size, configuration, support equipment etc, may not be the best, but it is infinitely better than 30, even 25 years ago. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:29 AM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Within his frame of reference, Ward is correct, which is why this entire accreditation process is flawed and broken. We got along without it before, and it is adding nothing but extra costs and bureaucracy, and negative value to the process of controlling EMI. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com mailto:dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com mailto:dw...@acbcert.com Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:15:00 -0700 To: 'Derek Walton' lfresea...@aol.com mailto:lfresea...@aol.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com mailto:graceli...@gmail.com , 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com mailto:wendy...@yahoo.com , 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test HI Derek The point of anything ‘nominal’ is that it starts with what is expected and allows reasonable variations of sorts. And you hit the right words “relating to a designated or theoretical size”. If you say you must follow the standard, then follow it. The designated size of a table is 1m x 1.5m x 0.8m. This then is the size generally expected. It is not a micrometer reading with 0.01m measurement uncertainty tolerances; it is a general designated and expected size – a nominal size. Now, and without going into uncertainties and its minutia, a 0.8m x 1.2m table, while not typically or generally expected, could be stretched to be within a range of what could be considered within the nominal range. Likewise a table 1.2m x 1.8m would or should still be considered within an expected or nominal value. To the contrary, a table 0.2m x 0.2m, for many reasons, would not be generally considered expected and thus not nominal, but abnormal in size for the intent and purposes of the standard. Remembering that there are three dimensions given (i.e. 1mx1.5mx0.8m), if we take your ‘exception’, then I could place a device on the ground plane as long as it was on a nonconducting surface. Yet I know of no lab nor auditor that would accept this as a ‘nominal’ height condition for any of the standards mentioned. I would not be able to reject or challenge their claim that my table height was not 80cm by saying, nominal is “of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual, and I don’t have to have a table 80cm high.” One might say, yes, but height matters. And they would be correct, however, the dimensions are together in the same frame of reference in the same sentence. So any exceptions to the dimensions would have to follow the same process. The issue then is not uncertainty and its issues, but what is generally expected and accepted as a reasonable table for the intent of the standard. Remembering that standards are produced as much to make something consistent wherever used, then the nominal would be that which is generally consistent within the population that uses the standard. As to ‘bigger fish to fry’, this would be a good size fish for a lab that was seeking accreditation. Yes there are allowable variations, equipment considerations, etc that can be discussed with the accrediting
Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent
HI Dennis, I did not in anyway state that table top size should dictate set-up. Wendy's EUT has no cables, it's 10cm by 10cm: A non issue. There are rules for what has to reside on the table and their placement in terns of separation. I believe it's also addressed when a set up is too big for a table. So this is all covered. The crux of my concern is that an assessor is wasting everyone's time for a non-event, time equals $$$. It gives credence to folks like Ken ( who I count as a very good friend ) who are not fans of the assessing process. And in cases like this, I agree with him. For all the pontificating going on, nominal means big enough to hold your set-up in accordance with placement rules. Height means 80 cm. Cheers, Derek. On 10/11/2011 2:07 PM, Dennis Ward wrote: Derek True, if you have one device, no cables, no power and no support equipment. If you have anything else, then there are stated separation distances between devices, stated cable routing etc. Again, the standard is not written to the anomaly, but to the expected generalized configurations in which sufficient space must be given to accommodate expected support equipment, not just the EUT. The reason you have a suggested/recommended/designated table size is to allow a standardized setup, standardized configuration, standardized separation and standardized cable manipulation. And, remember the subject line Table Size in Emissions test - Intent Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 -Original Message- From: Derek Walton [mailto:lfresea...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:50 AM To: Dennis Ward Cc: don_borow...@selinc.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent Dennis, Test set-up is independent of table size. Especially since we prove the table is not part of the equation.. Cheers, Derek. On 10/11/2011 1:20 PM, Dennis Ward wrote: Yes, and you can get accredited to test only cameras in that configuration if that is what you do and what you want. But the intent of a general scope of accreditation to ANSI C63.4 or C63.10 (or any standard) is not the anomaly, but the general test configurations specified in the standard. Consequently, unless you limit your testing capabilities, going with the expected dimensions is simply easier, faster and allows all configurations in test setup etc. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of don_borow...@selinc.com Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:52 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent When confronted with problems like this, I always try to determine the intent of the particular statement in the test. To me, it is clear that the intent is to fully support the EUT and associated equipment, with cables dropping off the edges of the defined area, as needed. The table should serve this support function and be invisible to RF. In the case of a small EUT with no cables, the intent is satisfied with a table just large enough to support the EUT. Heck, for something like a digital camera without cables, a threaded plastic rod coming up from the turntable, screwed into the mounting hole in the bottom of the camera, would be sufficient to support it and satisfy the intent. Of course, getting an auditor to understand the intent, as opposed to a literal reading, might be difficult to do. Donald Borowski Senior EMC Compliance Engineer Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, Washington, USA From: Derek Waltonlfresea...@aol.com To: dw...@acbcert.com Cc: 'Grace Lin'graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: 10/11/2011 10:12 AM Subject:Re: Table Size in Emissions test Sent by:emc-p...@ieee.org Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain
RE: Table Size in Emissions test
Heaven forbid we ever go back to the early 80’s when there was no acceptable methods, no accepted procedures, no accepted setup and when the FCC expected cable manipulation till the cows came home to find the maximum emissions levels. Talk about a waste of time – days upon days moving every cable into every likely position finding the ‘worse’ case. Then to find out that the FCC or another lab found that one cable position that showed 10dB more than the other lab measured. Everyone was right in their own eyes and most of those eyes were blind except to their own erroneous methods and practices. No, conformity of setup, table size, configuration, support equipment etc, may not be the best, but it is infinitely better than 30, even 25 years ago. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:29 AM To: 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Within his frame of reference, Ward is correct, which is why this entire accreditation process is flawed and broken. We got along without it before, and it is adding nothing but extra costs and bureaucracy, and negative value to the process of controlling EMI. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 From: Dennis Ward dw...@acbcert.com Reply-To: dw...@acbcert.com List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:15:00 -0700 To: 'Derek Walton' lfresea...@aol.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: Table Size in Emissions test HI Derek The point of anything ‘nominal’ is that it starts with what is expected and allows reasonable variations of sorts. And you hit the right words “relating to a designated or theoretical size”. If you say you must follow the standard, then follow it. The designated size of a table is 1m x 1.5m x 0.8m. This then is the size generally expected. It is not a micrometer reading with 0.01m measurement uncertainty tolerances; it is a general designated and expected size – a nominal size. Now, and without going into uncertainties and its minutia, a 0.8m x 1.2m table, while not typically or generally expected, could be stretched to be within a range of what could be considered within the nominal range. Likewise a table 1.2m x 1.8m would or should still be considered within an expected or nominal value. To the contrary, a table 0.2m x 0.2m, for many reasons, would not be generally considered expected and thus not nominal, but abnormal in size for the intent and purposes of the standard. Remembering that there are three dimensions given (i.e. 1mx1.5mx0.8m), if we take your ‘exception’, then I could place a device on the ground plane as long as it was on a nonconducting surface. Yet I know of no lab nor auditor that would accept this as a ‘nominal’ height condition for any of the standards mentioned. I would not be able to reject or challenge their claim that my table height was not 80cm by saying, nominal is “of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual, and I don’t have to have a table 80cm high.” One might say, yes, but height matters. And they would be correct, however, the dimensions are together in the same frame of reference in the same sentence. So any exceptions to the dimensions would have to follow the same process. The issue then is not uncertainty and its issues, but what is generally expected and accepted as a reasonable table for the intent of the standard. Remembering that standards are produced as much to make something consistent wherever used, then the nominal would be that which is generally consistent within the population that uses the standard. As to ‘bigger fish to fry’, this would be a good size fish for a lab that was seeking accreditation. Yes there are allowable variations, equipment considerations, etc that can be discussed with the accrediting organization. To say that because ‘nominal’ is used and because ‘shall’ is not, I can do what I want, is simply not the case if they want to become accredited. It is fairly easy and cheap to construct a nominal table of dimensions in the standards. There is probably more money, time and effort in trying to challenge or reject the assessment than to simply hire a carpenter and build one. But the choice is the labs and how they wish to relate to their accreditation body. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: Derek Walton [mailto:lfresea...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:09 AM To: Dennis Ward
RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent
Derek True, if you have one device, no cables, no power and no support equipment. If you have anything else, then there are stated separation distances between devices, stated cable routing etc. Again, the standard is not written to the anomaly, but to the expected generalized configurations in which sufficient space must be given to accommodate expected support equipment, not just the EUT. The reason you have a suggested/recommended/designated table size is to allow a standardized setup, standardized configuration, standardized separation and standardized cable manipulation. And, remember the subject line Table Size in Emissions test - Intent Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 -Original Message- From: Derek Walton [mailto:lfresea...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11:50 AM To: Dennis Ward Cc: don_borow...@selinc.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent Dennis, Test set-up is independent of table size. Especially since we prove the table is not part of the equation.. Cheers, Derek. On 10/11/2011 1:20 PM, Dennis Ward wrote: Yes, and you can get accredited to test only cameras in that configuration if that is what you do and what you want. But the intent of a general scope of accreditation to ANSI C63.4 or C63.10 (or any standard) is not the anomaly, but the general test configurations specified in the standard. Consequently, unless you limit your testing capabilities, going with the expected dimensions is simply easier, faster and allows all configurations in test setup etc. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of don_borow...@selinc.com Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:52 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent When confronted with problems like this, I always try to determine the intent of the particular statement in the test. To me, it is clear that the intent is to fully support the EUT and associated equipment, with cables dropping off the edges of the defined area, as needed. The table should serve this support function and be invisible to RF. In the case of a small EUT with no cables, the intent is satisfied with a table just large enough to support the EUT. Heck, for something like a digital camera without cables, a threaded plastic rod coming up from the turntable, screwed into the mounting hole in the bottom of the camera, would be sufficient to support it and satisfy the intent. Of course, getting an auditor to understand the intent, as opposed to a literal reading, might be difficult to do. Donald Borowski Senior EMC Compliance Engineer Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, Washington, USA From: Derek Waltonlfresea...@aol.com To: dw...@acbcert.com Cc: 'Grace Lin'graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: 10/11/2011 10:12 AM Subject:Re: Table Size in Emissions test Sent by:emc-p...@ieee.org Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, ?Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement ?Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ?nominal? size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, “Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement “Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m ◊ 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ‘nominal’ size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com mailto:wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com mailto:dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc
Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent
Dennis, Test set-up is independent of table size. Especially since we prove the table is not part of the equation.. Cheers, Derek. On 10/11/2011 1:20 PM, Dennis Ward wrote: Yes, and you can get accredited to test only cameras in that configuration if that is what you do and what you want. But the intent of a general scope of accreditation to ANSI C63.4 or C63.10 (or any standard) is not the anomaly, but the general test configurations specified in the standard. Consequently, unless you limit your testing capabilities, going with the expected dimensions is simply easier, faster and allows all configurations in test setup etc. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of don_borow...@selinc.com Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:52 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent When confronted with problems like this, I always try to determine the intent of the particular statement in the test. To me, it is clear that the intent is to fully support the EUT and associated equipment, with cables dropping off the edges of the defined area, as needed. The table should serve this support function and be invisible to RF. In the case of a small EUT with no cables, the intent is satisfied with a table just large enough to support the EUT. Heck, for something like a digital camera without cables, a threaded plastic rod coming up from the turntable, screwed into the mounting hole in the bottom of the camera, would be sufficient to support it and satisfy the intent. Of course, getting an auditor to understand the intent, as opposed to a literal reading, might be difficult to do. Donald Borowski Senior EMC Compliance Engineer Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, Washington, USA From: Derek Waltonlfresea...@aol.com To: dw...@acbcert.com Cc: 'Grace Lin'graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Date: 10/11/2011 10:12 AM Subject:Re: Table Size in Emissions test Sent by:emc-p...@ieee.org Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, ?Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement ?Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ?nominal? size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, “Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement “Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ‘nominal’ size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website
RE: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent
Well Don, this is the intelligent, technologically aware approach. But we are not expected to think while reading standardsbut obey. Common sense is explicitly excluded in ISO 17025 ;)) Gert Gremmen -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens don_borow...@selinc.com Verzonden: dinsdag 11 oktober 2011 19:52 Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org Onderwerp: Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent When confronted with problems like this, I always try to determine the intent of the particular statement in the test. To me, it is clear that the intent is to fully support the EUT and associated equipment, with cables dropping off the edges of the defined area, as needed. The table should serve this support function and be invisible to RF. In the case of a small EUT with no cables, the intent is satisfied with a table just large enough to support the EUT. Heck, for something like a digital camera without cables, a threaded plastic rod coming up from the turntable, screwed into the mounting hole in the bottom of the camera, would be sufficient to support it and satisfy the intent. Of course, getting an auditor to understand the intent, as opposed to a literal reading, might be difficult to do. Donald Borowski Senior EMC Compliance Engineer Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, Washington, USA From: Derek Walton lfresea...@aol.com To: dw...@acbcert.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/11/2011 10:12 AM Subject:Re: Table Size in Emissions test Sent by:emc-p...@ieee.org Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, ?Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement ?Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ?nominal? size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge
RE: Table Size in Emissions test
nominal dimension Definition Approximate or roughcut dimension by which a material is generally called or sold in trade, but which differs from the actual dimension. In lumber trade, for example, a finished (dressed) 'two by four' piece is less than 2 inches thick and less than 4 inches wide. Also called nominal size. “ but which differs from the actual dimension” Mcgrawhill: (design engineering) Size used for purposes of general identification; the actual size of a part will be approximately the same as the nominal size but need not be exactly the same; for example, a rod may be referred to as ¼ inch, although the actual dimension on the drawing is 0.2495 inch, and in this case ¼ inch is the nominal size. IMHO it relates to identification of the size within a number of defined classes, such a lumber standard sizes, and or clothing sizes. As there are no classes of table sizes, this word is misused here. Any table will do. The normative aspect as EUT size and height. BTW the inaccuracy of the sizes is also omitted. In the absence of definition, usage is 50% of least relevant digit. Interpreted this way the table length may be 0.50 to 1m5 in one size and 1m45 to 1m55 in the other. The table height must be within 79.5 and 80.5 Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl www.cetest.nl Kiotoweg 363 3047 BG Rotterdam T 31(0)104152426 F 31(0)104154953 Before printing, think about the environment. Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/nominal-size#ixzz1aUzLeYzu http://www.answers.com/topic/nominal-size#ixzz1aUzLeYzu Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Dennis Ward Verzonden: dinsdag 11 oktober 2011 18:44 Aan: 'Grace Lin'; 'WNya' CC: 'EMC-PSTC' Onderwerp: RE: Table Size in Emissions test Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, “Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement “Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ‘nominal’ size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m ◊ 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ‘nominal’ size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc
Re: [PSES] hi-pot tester
Perhaps some inspectors cannot or will not interpret the 'spirit' of the requirement and so always go blindly by the book. ___ _ Ralph McDiarmid | Schneider Electric | Renewable Energies Business | CANADA | Regulatory Compliance Engineering From: Robert Johnson john...@itesafety.com To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/11/2011 10:41 AM Subject:Re: [PSES] hi-pot tester I would suggest you recommend that the inspectors review and take part in our online discussions. They should be able to justify their position or consider changing it. It is also reasonable to identify them. Either they have a fair and reasonable position of which they should be proud, or it is not justifiable and they should be challenged. Bob Johnson ITE Safety __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. __ - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com mailto:dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
RE: Table Size in Emissions test
HI Derek The point of anything ‘nominal’ is that it starts with what is expected and allows reasonable variations of sorts. And you hit the right words “relating to a designated or theoretical size”. If you say you must follow the standard, then follow it. The designated size of a table is 1m x 1.5m x 0.8m. This then is the size generally expected. It is not a micrometer reading with 0.01m measurement uncertainty tolerances; it is a general designated and expected size – a nominal size. Now, and without going into uncertainties and its minutia, a 0.8m x 1.2m table, while not typically or generally expected, could be stretched to be within a range of what could be considered within the nominal range. Likewise a table 1.2m x 1.8m would or should still be considered within an expected or nominal value. To the contrary, a table 0.2m x 0.2m, for many reasons, would not be generally considered expected and thus not nominal, but abnormal in size for the intent and purposes of the standard. Remembering that there are three dimensions given (i.e. 1mx1.5mx0.8m), if we take your ‘exception’, then I could place a device on the ground plane as long as it was on a nonconducting surface. Yet I know of no lab nor auditor that would accept this as a ‘nominal’ height condition for any of the standards mentioned. I would not be able to reject or challenge their claim that my table height was not 80cm by saying, nominal is “of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual, and I don’t have to have a table 80cm high.” One might say, yes, but height matters. And they would be correct, however, the dimensions are together in the same frame of reference in the same sentence. So any exceptions to the dimensions would have to follow the same process. The issue then is not uncertainty and its issues, but what is generally expected and accepted as a reasonable table for the intent of the standard. Remembering that standards are produced as much to make something consistent wherever used, then the nominal would be that which is generally consistent within the population that uses the standard. As to ‘bigger fish to fry’, this would be a good size fish for a lab that was seeking accreditation. Yes there are allowable variations, equipment considerations, etc that can be discussed with the accrediting organization. To say that because ‘nominal’ is used and because ‘shall’ is not, I can do what I want, is simply not the case if they want to become accredited. It is fairly easy and cheap to construct a nominal table of dimensions in the standards. There is probably more money, time and effort in trying to challenge or reject the assessment than to simply hire a carpenter and build one. But the choice is the labs and how they wish to relate to their accreditation body. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: Derek Walton [mailto:lfresea...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:09 AM To: Dennis Ward Cc: 'Grace Lin'; 'WNya'; 'EMC-PSTC' Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, “Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement “Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ‘nominal’ size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p
Re: Table Size in Emissions test - Intent
When confronted with problems like this, I always try to determine the intent of the particular statement in the test. To me, it is clear that the intent is to fully support the EUT and associated equipment, with cables dropping off the edges of the defined area, as needed. The table should serve this support function and be invisible to RF. In the case of a small EUT with no cables, the intent is satisfied with a table just large enough to support the EUT. Heck, for something like a digital camera without cables, a threaded plastic rod coming up from the turntable, screwed into the mounting hole in the bottom of the camera, would be sufficient to support it and satisfy the intent. Of course, getting an auditor to understand the intent, as opposed to a literal reading, might be difficult to do. Donald Borowski Senior EMC Compliance Engineer Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, Washington, USA From: Derek Walton lfresea...@aol.com To: dw...@acbcert.com Cc: 'Grace Lin' graceli...@gmail.com, 'WNya' wendy...@yahoo.com, 'EMC-PSTC' EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 10/11/2011 10:12 AM Subject:Re: Table Size in Emissions test Sent by:emc-p...@ieee.org Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, ?Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement ?Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ?nominal? size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well
Re: [PSES] hi-pot tester
I would suggest you recommend that the inspectors review and take part in our online discussions. They should be able to justify their position or consider changing it. It is also reasonable to identify them. Either they have a fair and reasonable position of which they should be proud, or it is not justifiable and they should be challenged. Bob Johnson ITE Safety - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
Sorry Dennis, you are not correct. Nominal means: b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual. This is from Websters. As you indicate, there is NOTHING that says it has to be 1 by 1.5m I'm sorry to be so anal about this, but it is happening too much where assessors are assessing to opinions and personal agendas. We must follow the standard. Usually there are MUCH bigger fish to fry than quibbling over something like this I repeat, again, that there is NOTHING that says the table SHALL be 1 by 1.5m. Only then could a deficiency be written. Sincerely, Derek. On 10/11/2011 11:43 AM, Dennis Ward wrote: Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, “Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement “Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ‘nominal’ size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings
RE: Table Size in Emissions test
Both ANSI C63.10 and ANSI C63.4, the typical standards for which ISO17025 accreditation is used, contain the following statement, “Tabletop devices shall be placed on a nonconducting platform, of nominal size 1 m by 1.5 m, raised 80 cm above the reference ground plane. While a bit more open to variation due to size of equipment, CISPR 22 has the statement “Equipment intended for tabletop use shall be placed on a non-conductive table. The size of the table will nominally be 1,5 m × 1,0 m but may ultimately be dependent on the horizontal dimensions of EUT. So while you may challenge the accreditation organization, they are correct, your table does not meet the ‘nominal’ size requirements for at least the two standards ANSI C63.4 and C6310. Other standards may also have the nominal size issue as well. Thanks Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American Certification Body Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry http://www.acbcert.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:16 AM To: WNya Cc: EMC-PSTC Subject: Re: Table Size in Emissions test Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy
Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting Wednesday, October 26th
All, There will be a Northeast Product Safety Society / CNEC Product Safety Engineering Society meeting on Wednesday, October 26th, at the Holiday Inn, Boxborough MA. A social hour with light refreshments will begin at 7:00 PM and the technical meeting will start at 7:30 PM. Tam Savino, Senior Product Safety Engineer at Curtis-Straus (Bureau Veritas), will present this month’s topic concerning Measurement Laser Guards and Laser Safety. If you will be in the area, please feel free to join us as advanced notice or membership in NPSS or IEEE PSES is not required. Tam Savino’s presentation concerns Laser Guards and Laser Safety based on IEC/EN 60825-1 (Safety of laser products – Part 1: Equipment classification and requirements) and ISO/EN 11553-1 (Safety of Machinery-Laser Processing Machines). The first section, “An Overview of IEC60825-4: Laser Guards,” defines the scope of the standard; i.e. who should comply, and provides basic definitions. The second section, “How to Design Laser Processing Equipment With Compliance to IEC60825-4 in Mind,” describes how to assess the foreseeable exposure limit (FEL) of Appendix B, as well as some of the testing that should be considered.. Tom Savino has been a Senior Product Safety Engineer since 1998. He tests and evaluates various types of equipment and machineries to various standards including medical, laboratory/measurement, and office. Much of this equipment has lasers, and must be evaluated to the IEC60825 standard. He helps client’s prepare submittals to the CDRH for the laser Accession number. Tom has a BS degree in Physics from the University of Connecticut, and worked on his Masters Degree in Applied Physics from the University of Massachusetts. He is a member of the Northeast Product Safety Society and the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society, and is a NARTE Certified Engineer. If you or anyone you know would like to give a product safety technical presentation, please contact Steve Brody by email at steven.br...@brooks.com mailto:steven.br...@brooks.com . A technical presentation should be 45 to 60 minutes in duration and be related to product safety. Although the presentation may reference your company and it’s services, the presentation must not be simply company advertising. We would also appreciate any slides or handout materials be made available for posting on the NPSS web site. Releasing presentation materials for posting is desired but not a requirement to make a presentation. The 2011 NPSS meeting schedule is available on the NPSS website at http://www.nepss.net/calendar.html. Further information about the Northeast Product Safety Society and how to become a member is available at http://www.nepss.net http://www.nepss.net/Calendar.html . You can also contact one of the NPSS officers via links on the NPSS web site. Directions: From Route 495 North or South, take Exit 28 to Route 111 East Turn right onto Adams Place (approximately 500 feet from Route 495 North) The Holiday Inn is the last building on the left. Regards, Matt Campanella NPSS Secretary (508) 786-7629 Direct (508) 480-6332 Fax matthew.campane...@motorola.com email - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
Derek, I agree with you. I also checked CISPR22, only the height is mentioned. Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone On Oct 11, 2011, at 9:21 PM, Derek Walton lfresea...@aol.com wrote: Wendy, please see my earlier comment. The table dimensions are NOMINAL. This is NOT cast in stone. The deficiency is Bogus. Sincerely, Derek Walton. On 10/11/2011 6:15 AM, Grace Lin wrote: Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya mailto:wendy...@yahoo.com wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: mailto:dhe...@gmail.com dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
Wendy, please see my earlier comment. The table dimensions are NOMINAL. This is NOT cast in stone. The deficiency is Bogus. Sincerely, Derek Walton. On 10/11/2011 6:15 AM, Grace Lin wrote: Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: Table Size in Emissions test
Wendy, When I look for an accredited ANSI C63.4 laboratory, I expect the laboratory has the facility as stated in the standard, including a standard size of the table as defined in the standard. For this reason, unless the accreditation certificate bears a restriction note, I support the auditor's comment. From the other point of view, many manufacturers' laboratories are for internal use only, including my employer's. For this reason, the auditor may be willing to accept the smaller size of the table. The question is how to determine if the laboratory is for internal use only (for testing certain type of products). An example is Alcatel-Lucent's EMC laboratory in New Jersey, USA. It opens to the general public. With regards, Grace On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:54 PM, WNya wendy...@yahoo.com wrote: Dear Experts, Recently my company went through the first ISO17025 audit. We have a table smaller than the standard requirement of 1.5m x 1m since our products are small, typically 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. The height of our table was 0.8m. The auditor wanted us to change the table size to follow the standard. What does it matter since we never use the extra space on the table? I do agree we must keep to the height requirement since the floor is a ground plane and thus it sets a fixed capacitance to the EUT and also controls the lengths of any attached cables. Can we reject or challenge the auditor's request? Has anyone experience the same situation? Sent from Wendy.Nya iPhone - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
