Hello All,
Juniper is continuing to grow. I believe this is my third job posting in as
many months.
This position is located in Beijing. If you are interested, please send your
resume directly to me.
Thanks,
Marko
mradoji...@juniper.net
Homologation Manager - China
Requirements:
·
There is always the old story of the manager of the service dept of skilled
and trained people and he went on site to show them how to get it done, and
promptly fell over dead just as he removed the green wire ground from the
chassis.
Assuming that because you manage trained, skilled, and
Like this notes says... +/- 8 dB per NSA between all qualified sites. Then
there is the uncertainty part of the equipment to add in. Then if you have
cables hanging off the EUT, all bets are off, unless you can ensure that those
are NOT radiating. Not likely, so Mr. Murphy conspires to
Hi Brian:
What are the legal effects on my employer for
Ordinary vs. Skilled vs. Instructed Persons ?
By law, I cannot answer this question. Ordinary
persons cannot give legal advice.
How does this affect the concept of an existing
hazard as compared to a fault condition ?
This question
In message 001b01cb77a2$ec696ad0$d600a...@tamuracorp.com, dated Fri,
29 Oct 2010, Brian O'Connell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes:
Do you think that now is the time to get some HBSE training, or will we
see a national implementation of IEC62368-1 before the apocalypse ?
Undoubtedly, but note
Rich,
What are the legal effects on my employer for Ordinary vs. Skilled vs.
Instructed Persons ? How does this affect the concept of an existing hazard as
compared to a fault condition ? UL says that A skilled person is expected to
use their training and experience to recognize energy sources
I don't want to re-invent the wheel, but I'm looking to find a simple
way to communicate the idea that some systems don't need protection,
others need protection, others need protection that will still protect
even with a single-fault present anywhere, and so-on. Somewhere somebody
must
Look at NEC/CEC and IEC60364, and perhaps BS7671. You will find that there a
certain combinations of VA, current, and voltage where there is no further
consideration to product safety.
In general, look at the requirements for the application of section 725 of
NFPA70.
In particular, look at the
Hello,
I need to get some USB to fiber optic converters and RS-232 to fiber optic
converters to use in a semi-anechoic chamber. I need to use these interfaces
over about a 15-20 meter distance, while isolating noise from outside the
chamber.
Does anyone know of what specific devices I should
I don't want to re-invent the wheel, but I'm looking to find a simple way to
communicate the idea that some systems don't need protection, others need
protection, others need protection that will still protect even with a
single-fault present anywhere, and so-on. Somewhere somebody must have
HI Charlie,
you point out one of the problems in EMI testing that always plagued us. The
response by some has been to levy all sorts of controls on the measurement.
While this has enabled a more accurate measurement, it hasn't improved
correlation one bit.
The whole premise of EMC measuring
Some products are very sensitive to interconnecting cable placement. I don't
know of many labs that actually go through cable manipulation at each
frequency being measured, along with rotating the product and scanning the
antenna height, to make sure the emissions measured are truly maximized. I
In message
B5113F712514D611BC3C00D0B76954220122312F@cw-server.complianceworld,
dated Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Larry Stillings la...@complianceworldwide.com
writes:
I have seen products leave the lab and come back and have the same
profile within 1 dB or less.
It's reasonable to think that the
You should be using a different test lab.
We have never had that much of a variation on the same EUT. I attribute that
to using a true EMI receiver, which has much better amplitude accuracy then a
spectrum analyzer. But that is a whole different discussion. I have seen
products leave the lab and
Seen as much as 12 dB at test labs which have performed site testing with
less than 0.5dB variation between them.
1.8dB was traced to spectral regions using conservative antenna factor
table, and part [at least to my thinking] was caused by the choice of GND
plane which interacts with the
Quite often I see 4-5 dB variation on the same EUT and on the same lab.
Day 1: Make measurement. Take down the test setup.
Day 2: New measurement. Same EUT. Tries to recapitulate the test setup with
same EUT position on the table and cables.
This is a challenge …. J
#Amund
In message 00f201cb7737$825fe3a0$871faae0$@com, dated Fri, 29 Oct
2010, Charlie Blackham emcp...@sulisconsultants.com writes:
Testing a product to CISPR11 class B and seeing quite a difference in
results below 1 GHz when tested at two different labs.
How much is 'quite a difference'? It's
Group
Testing a product to CISPR11 class B and seeing quite a difference in results
below 1 GHz when tested at two different labs.
I don’t wish to discuss why this is being done, but would be very grateful
for any Quantitative data people have on differences between different OATS or
18 matches
Mail list logo
