Looking at spec requiring compliance with Aus/NZ standard for exposure to RF
from 3k to 300GHz; which seems to be another tyep of SAR.
Unit is nonintentional radiator that meets CISPR22 Class B limits (tests
done to 1GHz). Reasonable to use the ITE EMC report as rationale for
compliance with
Brian,
I would hope so. We have never been challenged on this but if we were we feel
the CISPR22 (CISPR11) test report will be adequate proof of compliance.
If you do the math, the CISPR limits are nowhere near the ARPANSA limits even
when you calculate for the operator position. Many order of
Who has any SAR equipment up past 10GHz or so?
Michael Sundstrom
OHD TREQ Dallas
Electronic Lab Analyst EMC Lead
(214) 579 6312 office
(940) 390 3644 cell
マイク
KB5UKT
-Original Message-
From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 2:22 PM
To:
Brian,
Not exactly sure I understand your question but from a regulatory compliance
point of view, the ARPANSA standard is indeed used as an SAR requirements
standard (i.e. requirements regarding exposure to RF) under the Australian
EMR (Electromagnetic Radiation) regulations.
The regulations
In message 037101cdf9b6$b1ecc260$15c64720$@richardson, dated Thu, 24
Jan 2013, Kevin Richardson kevin.richard...@ieee.org writes:
The regulations require portable intentional emitters (e.g. mobile
phones etc) comply with the ARPANSA standard.
CISPR 22 is an EMC standard and not used in
John,
Essentially yes but remember, I am talking from a purely regulatory
compliance perspective.
Of course there is nothing to stop anyone including an ARPANSA compliance
requirement in their purchase spec for example, rightly or wrongly applying
the ARPANSA standard.
Best regards,
Kevin
Posted at the request of a subscriber. Please respond as directed and do
not respond to me.
Scott Douglas EMC-PSTC List Admin
*Manager, Product Engineering Compliance - Westminster, CO*
HID Global is the trusted source for secure identity solutions for
millions of customers around the world.
In message 038501cdf9be$69b00c20$3d102460$@richardson, dated Thu, 24
Jan 2013, Kevin Richardson kevin.richard...@ieee.org writes:
Of course there is nothing to stop anyone including an ARPANSA
compliance requirement in their purchase spec for example, rightly or
wrongly applying the ARPANSA
8 matches
Mail list logo