hello:
does anyone know ..
1. standard for vibration shock testing (especially small hand held
electronic devices like cell phone, pda, laptop)?
2. any test lab who does such testing?
how common is such testing?
thank you in advance.
Vijay Wani
---
I read in !emc-pstc that umbdenst...@sensormatic.com wrote (in
846BF526A205F84BA2B6045BBF7E9A6A219676@flbocexu05) about 'Steel ball
for impact tests', on Mon, 24 Sep 2001:
Additional holes should also be drilled along the
length of the pipe to prevent pressure build-up as the ball falls to the
What about calibration?
Is a trailer ball NIST traceable? =:P
As a 'CTDP' participant I have to maintain a cal list on all instruments I
use in the course of my tests and include it with any test reports I ship to
agencies.
I had to get my certified 'sphere' calibrated recently. -Not that it
And how much for the Calibration Certificate?
BTW - I have NEVER (in 10 years) used the pendulum test - I have placed the
UUT (or a representative piece) on the floor and dropped the steel ball
through a tube onto the test piece. (IMPORTANT NOTE - STAND ON A CHAIR - it
bounces and it hurts!!!)
Jon,
Several years ago, we contacted a ball-bearing company and told them what we
needed regarding the weight and diameter. They had no problem providing a
suitable ball. (It would not surprise me if this was the origin of the steel
ball standard.) The cost was about $6 per ball.
Originally
Jon,
Try the EDD at http://www.productsafet.com/main.html .
Best Regards,
Leszek M. Langiewicz
Homologation / Power Distribution
Phogenix Imaging, LLC
A joint venture of Kodak and HP
Phogenix Imaging LLC 16275 Technology Dr. San Diego, CA 92127-1815
www.phogenix.com
Phone: (858) 798-8004
Jon,
contact
Eric George
Ergonomics, Inc.
Product Safety and EMC Test Equipment
P.O. Box 964
Southampton, PA 18966
800-862-0102/215-357-5124
Fax 215-364-7582
i...@ergonomicsusa.com
www.ergonomicsusa.com
The above is being forwarded and should not be construed as an endorsement
by either
Or, you can go to a ball bearing company and get one for $15.
-Original Message-
From: Dan Irish - Sun BOS Hardware [SMTP:dan.ir...@sun.com]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 9:22 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Steel ball for impact tests
The cheapest
I read in !emc-pstc that Jon Jones jon.jo...@ascom.co.uk wrote (in
D1D4A262894FD511A65900902707BB241B3638@CARDIFF-NT-MAIL) about 'Steel
ball for impact tests', on Mon, 24 Sep 2001:
Can anyone detail a manufacturer / supplier who can supply the steel ball
for impact tests as per EN60950:2000
The cheapest way to go is to get a 2 trailer ball from
WalMart and cut off the flange and threads with a
hacksaw or Sawzall. File to a spherical shape.
Drill and tap a hole for an eye bolt that
can be installed for the pendulum test.
About $10 US?
Dan
From: JENKINS, JEFF jeff.jenk...@aei.com
Can anyone help?
I have the ANSI and NRPB figures for contact current but this only provides
data up to 100MHz.
Have been asked by a project what if any would the contact current at 4GHz
be if the connector broke of and somebody touched the cable.
Regards
Andrew Price
EMC Specialist
BAE
Hello Amund and rest of the group,
EN 300 339 is a Generic Radio communication EMC standard - Use this if no
harmonized product or product family standards exists, see quoted part of
scope below.
EN 301-489-1 is part one of a multi-series of product or product family
standards.
Until now 22
Can anyone detail a manufacturer / supplier who can supply the steel ball
for impact tests as per EN60950:2000 clause 4.2.5. (50mm diameter, 500g)
Thanks in advance,
Jon Jones
---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical
ETSI decided to consolidate the radio EMC standards into one multi-part
standard. The DOW of standards conflicting with EN 301489-01 and its
subparts is 2003-10-31. That includes EN 300 339 and EN 300683 and any other
older radio EMC standards.
--
From: am...@westin.org
The EN 301 489-1 with the other parts is intended as Harmonized standards
for RTTE directive that will be give precedence on other EMC standards, EN
300 339 shall be used only if don't exist a product EMC standards.
The EN 301 489-1 V1.2.1 shall not be used stand alone without another part
of
Move the antenna further away. then use correction factors to calculate
what it would have been at the original distance.
Magnetic fields decrease as the inverse cube of the distance. So just apply
a correction factor to boost the amplitude back up. For example, twice
the distance away means
Hi all,
Take a look on the standards below. It seems that they cover the same technical
EMC issues. Am I right and if so, why these two standards ?
EN 301 489-01: V1.2.1 (07-2000)
Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters (ERM); ElectroMagnetic
Compatibility (EMC) standard for
17 matches
Mail list logo
