From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor
Sent: Freitag, 28. November 2008 23:58
To: c...@prodigy.net; John Woodgate; Untitled
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
Your point being? It's an important topic. And sound advice was provided
concerning EMI receivers and pre
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf
Of michael.na...@emerson.com
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 1:05 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMI Receivers
An instrument, IMHO, should not primarily named by its application
Well, yes. Not surprising. German terminology is quite exact.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: michael.na...@emerson.com
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 09:04:48 -
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Conversation: EMI Receivers
Subject: RE: EMI Receivers
There is something I do not understand about
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken
Javor
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 8:08 AM
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
With this sloppy terminology, rife
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken
Javor
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 8:08 AM
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
Second, please folks
In message
384ddcf824e208478e2aba72f5fbeb4cefa...@etsmsg-lonexm01.etsmsg.org,
dated Mon, 1 Dec 2008, michael.na...@emerson.com writes:
An instrument, IMHO, should not primarily named by its application. In
this case, I would call it a test receiver, not an EMI receiver (not
good) or EMC
From: Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 06:18:32 -0800
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Conversation: EMI Receivers - Now Terminology
Subject: RE: EMI Receivers
In message c5598078.328cf%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Mon, 1
Dec 2008, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
The clear and undeniable truth is that radiated emission limits are
necessary to protect BCB radio reception, and only that.
This question is being studied by CENELEC.
Many posts have addressed the calibration part of this question, but not the
make and model part. We have an aging HP rack that we are considering
relegating to spare status by purchasing a new or nearly new spectrum analyzer
or EMC receiver (I think the line there is blurring a bit these days
: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:50:18 -0800
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Conversation: EMI Receivers
Subject: RE: EMI Receivers
Many posts have addressed the calibration part of this question, but not the
make and model part. We have an aging HP rack that we are considering
relegating
In message c5557365.32493%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Fri, 28
Nov 2008, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
For instance, we control RE at three meters so that at typical BCB
reception levels, we have clear reception. That is EMC. If we move the
culprit emitter closer to
original comment about careful use of the EMI/EMC terminology.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:53:53 +
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
In message c5557365.32493%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Fri, 28
In message c55593df.324c0%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Fri, 28
Nov 2008, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
This paragraph also shows the corrosive influence of poor terminology.
In fact, getting this from Mr. Woodgate, the pre-eminent sage of this
very large forum - stated
Is this not getting far afield from the original topic?
--- On Fri, 11/28/08, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote:
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Date: Friday, November 28, 2008, 2:13 PM
In message
c55593df.324c0%ken.ja
2008 14:53:50 -0800 (PST)
To: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk, emc-p...@ieee.org, Ken Javor
ken.ja...@emccompliance.com
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
Is this not getting far afield from the original topic?
--- On Fri, 11/28/08, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote:
From: John
Tim,
Many members answered your questions. Regarding calibration, I attach RS
response from the sales manager, who sold me an ESU40 early this year, for
your reference.
In spite of what you may have read or heard, the ESU40 is calibrated in our
Columbia Maryland facility unless you require
Tim,
RS receivers do not have to go back to the manufacturer. We have our
receivers calibrated on site by a UK calibration lab.
Luke Turnbull
emcp...@aol.com 20 November 2008 19:39
Hello,
I'm looking to purchase an EMI receiver for use in a 5 meter chamber. Does
anyone recommend a
. J. Paxman
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Luke Turnbull
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 11:01 AM
To: emcp...@aol.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
*** WARNING ***
This mail has originated outside your
Tim,
In the US, RS calibrations are not accredited to ISO 17025. The reasons are
probably financial – they haven’t wanted to spend the $ to attain
accreditation.
We send our RS receivers out for cal to a well-known accredited cal lab in
the US, but we have had an instance of damage by the
Of Luke Turnbull
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 3:01 AM
To: emcp...@aol.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
Tim,
RS receivers do not have to go back to the manufacturer. We have our
receivers calibrated on site by a UK calibration lab.
Luke Turnbull
emcp...@aol.com 20 November
Tim,
I second Jim's caution about shipping of EMI Receivers. Make sure you buy
the hard transit cases to ship receivers, or better yet, rent or take a
van/truck and bring it to the lab yourself.
Larry Stillings
From: emcp...@aol.com [mailto:emcp...@aol.com]
...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMI Receivers
Tim,
In the US, RS calibrations are not accredited to ISO 17025. The reasons are
probably financial – they haven’t wanted to spend the $ to attain
accreditation.
We send our RS receivers out for cal to a well-known accredited cal lab in
the US
In message d4e.3f85a8f3.36571...@aol.com, dated Thu, 20 Nov 2008,
emcp...@aol.com writes:
I'm looking to purchase an EMI receiver for use in a 5 meter chamber.
Does anyone recommend a certain model? I would want one that has at
least a frequency range from 150kHz to 18GHz so one unit can be
23 matches
Mail list logo
