Dear Ken, John and All,
Further to Ken Javor comments (27/07/2003 02:57 AM):
Mr. Woodgate subsequently humorously commented regarding my assertion
(that
this would be a more credible problem if the handset were a cordless
link).
And his comment was right on target. If that actually was the
Hello all,
We are planning to sell our product into Isreal, and I believe there are
some sort of compliance requirement. Can anybody advise the requirement,
like certification mark, will CB sufficient, is emission and immunity
requirement the same as CE?
Note: it is for Network firewall
looking for a compliance engineering job - emc, safety and immunity.
particular specialty is pcb board design for emc control.
been in the business for some 20 years. bay area preferably, but not solid.
salary is alway negotiable. if you know of some possible leads or are
looking
for a
Hi group,
I've heard of a different test set up for radiated emission measurement
between CISPR 22 and CISPR 11, in the sense that the antenna to EUT
distance is defined with reference to EUT boundary rather than to EUT
center. I have a copy of both the latest editions of those standards,
Hi Ken,
A lot of that work is I belive being done at
NIST right here in Boulder under the direction
of Dr R. Johnk. Some presentations he has made
can be downloaded from our website at http://www.ieee.org/rmcemc
under Archives. Search for Johnk.
Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Senior Compliance
I have an opportunity for shipments to a Japanese customer. I have been
told that the Japanese METI (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry) has a
regulation that the importers name or logo must be on the product. Has
anyone had experience with this requirement. Or can point me to where I can
As you are all aware August 1, 2003 is right around the corner. This is the
new date for the conducted emissions requirements for Telco ports. I know
there was talk of postponing this a second time. As of right now I have not
heard anything. Does anyone know if this will be postponed again?
***LEGAL DISCLAIMER: READ THIS FIRST***
This Email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom or the entity to which they are
addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender
immediately. Please note
Thanks to all those people who responded.
Regards
Mark
From: Marshall, Mark [mailto:mark.marsh...@teradyne.com]
Sent: 25 July 2003 14:03
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: Contact details for Compaq/HP
Dear Group,
Does anyone have any contact details for anyone who may be able to
I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote
(in bb49ae98.374a%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com) about 'pulse modulation
in reverb chambers' on Sun, 27 Jul 2003:
Sorry, but I don't understand the physics here. Could you please
explain how a 10 us delay could add 0.01 us to a
The DOW for EN 55022:1998 and A1:2000 are postponed until 2005-08-01
according to C172 published in the OJ on 22.07.2003.
Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International
From: Joshua Wiseman [mailto:jwise...@printronix.com]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 2:03 PM
To: Emc-Pstc (E-mail)
Joshua,
The delay was published in the OJ last week on the 22nd. The new DoW
for EN 55022:1998 is 1 August 2005.
Ghery Pettit
Intel Corporation
From: Joshua Wiseman [mailto:jwise...@printronix.com]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 11:03 AM
To: Emc-Pstc (E-mail)
Subject: EN55022
As you are all
Joshua,
EN 55022:1998 and its amendment A1:2000 have been delayed to August 1,
2005 in the latest listing of Harmonized Standards for the EMC
Directive--Official Journal of the European Communities (OJ), C172
Volume 46, pages 2-15, which came out July 22, 2003. The new listing
can be downloaded
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
The latest list of harmonized standards published in the OJ on July 22 shows a
new date for EN 55022:1998 of August 1, 2005, a two-year reprieve. Until then,
EN55022:1994 (+A1, A2) apparently remains valid.
Jim Hulbert
Pitney Bowes
Joshua Wiseman
We just went through this exercise recently and, yes that is correct,
someone in Japan must take the responsibility as the Reporting Supplier
(Importer) of the product. If you do not have an importer in place, or a
subsidiary in Japan, who can take on the responsibility then your customer
must
I read in !emc-pstc that Wan Juang Foo f...@np.edu.sg wrote (in
of7dfbb2f8.19104f2e-on48256d71.0007ebdb-48256d71.00098...@np.edu.sg)
about 'self blinking LEDs as EMI sources WAS: LED lamps' on Mon, 28 Jul
2003:
I must admit that whichever newspaper that ran the story must have some
team for
16 matches
Mail list logo
