Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2024 9:51 PM
To: 'rmm.priv...@gmail.com' ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Burden test
Thank you all. I decided to contact TC57 which prepared this standard and let’s
see.
When I went once more through standard, I think it is really lik
current, continuous value and short time value for 1 s;
• withstand voltage across open contacts.
Compliance with 6.1.3.1 to 6.1.3.4 is checked by inspection or by measurement.
6.8 Burden test
Burden 6.8.1 for AC power supply
6.8.1.1 Typical load condition
The equipment is powered at rated auxiliary
, 2024 10:41 AM
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] Burden test
I think you are required to state the power consumption of every port
that consumes power. If your SMPS really is 'intelligent', then the
standard applies. But I wonder what the relevant definition of
: [PSES] Burden test
I think you are required to state the power consumption of every port that
consumes power. If your SMPS really is 'intelligent', then the standard
applies. But I wonder what the relevant definition of 'intelligent' is. There
appears to be no method of mea
y, August 22, 2024 4:32 AM
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* [PSES] Burden test
Dear all,
Is anyone familiar with burden test according IEC 61850-3 standard? Is
this test applicable for switch mode power supply with AC input and
DC output?
How to conduct the test? What is the idea of
AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Burden test
Dear all,
Is anyone familiar with burden test according IEC 61850-3 standard? Is this
test applicable for switch mode power supply with AC input and DC output?
How to conduct the test? What is the idea of the test?
Stand
Dear all,
Is anyone familiar with burden test according IEC 61850-3 standard? Is this
test applicable for switch mode power supply with AC input and DC output?
How to conduct the test? What is the idea of the test?
Standard is not really clear.
Thank you for your support.
Best regards
facebook.com/SIQLjubljana/> [SIQ LinkedIn]
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/siq> [SIQ YouTube]
<https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCURzJFvP5CDVtL_vdvWjbQA/featured>
From: Brian Kunde
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2024 2:51 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Touch/Lea
Greetings to all.
I would like to hear your recommendations for test equipment for performing
Touch/Leakage Current. If it is ok to say, we currently have an ED&D
LT-952 with the 30A option and it has been great. However, we would like to
get a second tester that has a LAN interface so we
We're going to DIY a portable table for CE. We won't have a dedicated space
for it, so the table and ground plane will need to me ... portable.1. How big
must the test table be for normal FCC class B (CISPR 16, I think) conducted
emissions, from 0.15 - 30 MHz?Same question for
John, a question. What's the date on your test reports / files?
I don't remember the details any more, but I hit something similar many
years ago. So I paid to have the files refreshed to solve the issue. It was
a minimal cost.
Jim Bacher, WB8VSU
ja.bac...@outlook.com or j.bac..
EN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=x40qV4DM3u4JrqHl_FVpxdOqkHDBo3f6BvwvAwIWGH8&m=B6fIOBUaG50CeATRoPrGe3aQoHBGiKZFSBIu-ovu97c5RZhLW5JAVauCDQwYc3UQ&s=dXknLUOcxSuYfVZ7A71XexAkwNhfOYqmzp9HADpQfIk&e=>
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 11:19 AM
To: John Riutta ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.I
How 'long past'? Do any of these standards, or the test certificates
associated with them, specify a validity period or an expiry date? Did
Amazon cite an authority for their rejection?
On 2024-03-05 18:51, John Riutta wrote:
Hello all,
I’m having a bit of bother with Amazon.
Hello all,
I'm having a bit of bother with Amazon.com at the moment. For a small
rechargeable battery-containing product they are requiring one of the following
in order for them to sell the product on their Canadian platform:
* CAN/CSA C22.2 No. 62133-2:20;
* IEC 62133:2012 or IEC 621
om
> From: Youngsik Kim
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 7:57 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: [PSES] Conducted Immunity test for EMC
>
> Hi All
>
> I'd like to inquire about the conduction resistance test.
> What is L in the picture below?
>
s.
From: Youngsik Kim
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 7:57 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Conducted Immunity test for EMC
Hi All
I'd like to inquire about the conduction resistance test.
What is L in the picture below?
1. Distance between CDN and EUT
2.
Hi All
I'd like to inquire about the conduction resistance test.
What is *L* in the picture below?
1. Distance between CDN and EUT
2. Length of cable between CDN and EUT
[image: image.png]
-
This message is from the IEEE Pr
Hi Steve:
In studying other standards, some have specified toppling, such as exceeding 15
degrees (IEC 62368-1, 4th ed., 8.6.5) or exceeding 10 degrees (IEC 62368-1, 2nd
ed., 8.6.2.2). On the other hand, IEC 60335, 4th ed., has no such stability
requirement that I could find. (By the wa
:10 PM EST Douglas Powell wrote:
>
>
> HI Steve,
>
> One thought that occurs to me. The method of test does not seem to mention if
> it is intended for final installation or during the time when the unit is
> mobile. By your description, I assume you intend it to be no
HI Steve,
One thought that occurs to me. The method of test does not seem to mention
if it is intended for final installation or during the time when the unit
is mobile. By your description, I assume you intend it to be non-mobile.
I did this sort of topple test once before on a telescopic
Stability test, Para 7.4 Stability
Experts:
I need your opinions on the following.
I am having a 'discussion' with an NRTL on a product that I can't show you a
picture of but here is a description:
* the base of the unit is 20" w x 26" l x 29" hf
* the base of
closed, except that those intended to be
opened by an OPERATOR are in their least favourable positions.
When the force was applied at the top of the robot mast, it unit started to
topple at 38 lbs, which is less than the required 44 lb force according to the
standard.
The case I presen
el: +44 (0)7946 624317
Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/
Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
From: Amund Westin
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2024 2:22 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Test lab in Germany - LVD testing
On behalf of a local company, I'm looking f
On behalf of a local company, Im looking for a German test lab within LVD
testing (EN 62368-1).
I have a listing of all CB scheme labs in Germany but would appreciate
suggestions of other labs.
Thanks!
Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Mvh
Amund Westin
Hi Chuck:
I don't know why your lab wants to do the primary-circuits-to-ground hi-pot
test to "unearthed socket terminals." I assume your secondary circuits are
grounded, and, if so, the pins of sockets (RJ45 and XLR) are therefore
referenced to ground and are subject to
If you test that connector with the blunt test probe (aka finger probe)
using the procedure described in the standard and it does not touch the
connector pins (and you have minimum clearance) then your certifier should
reconsider the dielectric test level. Many standards still use basic and
Thank you for pointing to IEC 62911 standard.
Chuck
From: Boštjan Glavič
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 11:35 PM
To: Chuck August-McDowell ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on
RJ45 and XLR sockets
[THIS EMAIL IS FROM AN
on requirements of IEC 62911
standard.
Best regards,
Boštjan
From: Chuck August-McDowell
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 1:33 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Products requiring dielectric voltage withstand test on RJ45
and XLR sockets
CAUTION: This email originated from
I'm working with a new lab and new product using IEC 62368-1 3rd Ed.
they are asking the company to perform production line test dielectric voltage
withstand test of 3600 Vp or DC 1 to 4 seconds on Ethernet port connector RJ45
and Pro Audio XLR connector sockets?
"Between primar
Has anyone come across a Maximum HV Bus Voltage Impulse test before and how did
they implement it?
This test starts with a steady state at 850V then has a 1.5mSec Rise Time to
1200V and immediately drops 1.5mS Fall time back to 850V. The impulse being a
triangular waveform.
Trying to work out
==
The information in this email is confidential, and is intended solely for the
addressee(s). Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized and therefore
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
https://www.mail-
I really hope not. See my story 'How to lose half a million dollars':
/April 2 2014
From: Compliance (JH)
To: MJ54 Team Leader (BB)
Subject: MJ54 tests
Not good news. Model for testing (MFT) failed several EMC tests, and
there are safety issues as well. Details in a following message. Can we
di
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] thoughts on ESD test lab problems
Thanks everyone for your thoughts. But in the case of ESD testing, IEC
61000-4-2 is not a very good standard. We knew this in 1996 where work done by
myself and others showed that the waveform needs to have a di/dt spec
From: Brent DeWitt
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2023 5:05:40 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] thoughts on ESD test lab problems
I suspect that folks who have been directly involved with air-discharge ESD can
appreciate it's inherent, operator influenced, uncertainly.
H
I suspect that folks who have been directly involved with air-discharge
ESD can appreciate it's inherent, operator influenced, uncertainly.
Having run both internal and third party EMC test labs, I recognize that
few things are done "perfectly" (whatever "perfect&q
26 AM John Woodgate wrote:
> But crossing t's and dotting i's is exactly what is required by competence
> standards, including the several ISO 170XX series. Furthermore, standards
> specify performance of test equipment, if possible, and only if that is not
> possible, the
But crossing t's and dotting i's is exactly what is required by
competence standards, including the several ISO 170XX series.
Furthermore, standards specify performance of test equipment, if
possible, and only if that is not possible, they specify design. If that
is not possible, th
find examples of non-idealities in the work of technicians
doing rote work following canned test procedures. A test facility isn’t going
to make a profit employing a septuagenarian devoted to crossing every “t” and
dotting every “i.” (Written by someone pushing that age bracket pretty hard
belligerent when I gently
suggested they performed the test incorrectly. In both cases, the labs relented
and retested after we examined the test standard and they realized they were
testing incorrectly.
A lab client needs to keep an eye out to make sure such an error does not
happen to them.
On
wrote:
You could certainly word this in a different way that doesn’t
generalize how “most” test labs are bad and/or incompetent. How about
in the future you find a different way to word things.
-
This message is from the IEEE Prod
V.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [External]: Re: [PSES] thoughts on ESD test lab problems
Doug,
Your once-a-year lab bashing is offensive, some years you do it more and
honestly I'm tired of not saying something about it. It's especially offensive
to people like myself whom has been running test
Doug,
Your once-a-year lab bashing is offensive, some years you do it more and
honestly I'm tired of not saying something about it. It's especially offensive
to people like myself whom has been running test labs for the last 33 years and
pride myself in the work we have provi
Hi All,
Just a couple of thoughts on what a good lab should do for ESD testing and how
to protect yourself as a client from test problems.
1. Bring an Ohmmeter with you to the lab and measure the resistance from the
Horizontal Coupling Plane to the Ground Reference Plane. It should be
otect licensed users of the radio spectrum.
Ghery S. Pettit
Chair, CISPR SC I
From: Bill Morse <2586a7f26805-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2023 1:37 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Immunity test field strength, residential settin
ent: Monday, July 24, 2023 1:20 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Immunity test field strength, residential setting
[Caution - External]
Hi Brian,
20V/m is seen in some bands for rail standards, but I've seen it elsewhere,
usually where there is a functional safety aspect
;
[cid:image964301.jpg@0A7F6A0F.D9CD69CE]<https://elementmaterials.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3xQqm84s6IydI5D>
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.com]
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2023 7:21 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Immunity test field strength, residential setting
CAUTION
standards sometimes call for higher immunity test levels.
For example, IEC 61000-6-7 calls for 20 V/m per IEC 61000-4-3 test method.
Also, although the regulation will not usually be required in US and
charging stations will not be covered by the regulation anyway, ECE R1
calls for 30 V/m per ISO 1
n.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
I hear, and I forget. I see, and I remember. I do, and I understand.
Xunzi (340 - 245 BC)
On 2023-07-21 20:30, Scott Aldous wrote:
Hi Brian,
The UL standard actually references IEC 61000-4-3 only for the test
method. Per the UL standard, the test level, 20 V/m, come
ndard actually references IEC 61000-4-3 only for the test
method. Per the UL standard, the test level, 20 V/m, comes from EN
60601-1-2, which is the CENELEC EMC standard for medical devices.
Per this article
<https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/understanding-central-differences-between-3rd-4th-editi
Hi Brian,
The UL standard actually references IEC 61000-4-3 only for the test method.
Per the UL standard, the test level, 20 V/m, comes from EN 60601-1-2, which
is the CENELEC EMC standard for medical devices.
Per this article
<https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/understanding-central-differen
Hi Brian,
Just for your information, in Europe residential EV chargers (for charging
an EV with AC voltage), typically needs to fulfill the requirements of EN
61851-21-2 (product standard for off-board EV chargers). In this standard
you will find the applicable test levels for immunity
Subject:Re: [PSES] Immunity test field strength, residential setting
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 18:05:59 +0100
From: John Woodgate
Organisation: J M Woodgate and Associates
To: Brian Gregory
61000-4-3 is a Basic Standard. It does not specify test levels but
indicates
of the modulation envelope being 18 V/m per 61000-4-3) may be able to do
20 V/m, peak as well.
--
Ken Javor
(256) 650-5261
From: Brian Gregory
Reply-To: Brian Gregory
Date: Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:44 AM
To:
Subject: [PSES] Immunity test field strength, residential setting
testing is "done at 3
Vrms, which is standard for most products in residential environments." He
can only test up to 10V, and we're hearing the same from an overseas lab to
whom our manufacturer refers. Does FCC Part B have guidelines for field
strength we can cite? Can some
> j...@randolph-telecom.com
<http://www.randolph-telecom.com> http://www.randolph-telecom.com
From: peterh...@aol.com
[mailto:06cee064502d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 5:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] IEC 82368-1 3rd Ed and MOV te
Hello group,
Does anyone know what the is purpose of introducing Clause G8? What purpose
does it serves and why was it introduced? It seems to me that is almost
impossible to comply with this clause unless you remove the MOV which brings
EMI issues. I am working with a client who makes desktop
Hello Scott
I do not understand. If you have a product intended for connection to mains
with available power less than 4000VA, V-0 material for fire enclosure is
sufficient without any additional testing. Needle flame is verification test
and cannot be compared to flammability rating test.
So
Hi Scott:
The answer to your question:
“is it possible the V-0 material does not meet the needle-flame test?”
is: Yes. See:
https://www.caplinq.com/blog/ul-94v-certification-vs-ul-94-vtm-certification_190/
Best regards,
Rich
From: Scott Xe
Sent: Tuesday
According to EN 62368-1 : 2020 + A11 : 2020 - Cl 6.4.8.4
Smaller distances are allowed provided that the part of the fire enclosure
or fire barrier within
the required separation distance complies with one of the following:
• the fire enclosure or fire barrier meets the needle-flame test
5D>
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 10:14 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Question for FCC Part 18 RE test?
CAUTION:This email originated from outside of Element Materials Technology. DO
NOT click links or open attachments unless you
@01D9685D.A09D4950]
From: Youngsik Kim
Reply-To: Youngsik Kim
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 11:32:20 +0900
To:
Subject: [PSES] Question for FCC Part 18 RE test?
Hi Experts
According to FCC part 18.305 FIELD STRENGTH LIMITS, a test article of Any type
unless otherwise specified
On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 11:32:20 +0900,
Youngsik Kim wrote:
> According to FCC part 18.305 FIELD STRENGTH LIMITS, a test article of Any
> type unless otherwise specified has a measurement distance of 300 meters,
> but I want to measure it at a distance of 3 meters because I need to
> m
2023 11:32:20 +0900
To:
Subject: [PSES] Question for FCC Part 18 RE test?
Hi Experts
According to FCC part 18.305 FIELD STRENGTH LIMITS, a test article of Any
type unless otherwise specified has a measurement distance of 300 meters,
but I want to measure it at a distance of 3 meters because I need
Hi Experts
According to FCC part 18.305 FIELD STRENGTH LIMITS, a test article of Any
type unless otherwise specified has a measurement distance of 300 meters,
but I want to measure it at a distance of 3 meters because I need to
measure it in a chamber.
In this case, what is the limit at 3 meters
Good day everyone, I hope this finds you well.
We have been pursuing ISO 17025 accreditation for an EMC test facility and one
standard on our scope is IEC 61326-3-1. We have been trying to avoid using
standards that are not EN’s so is there any reason we should have both IEC
61326-3-1 and EN
I was in touch with a test lab lately regarding environmental testing (shock,
temp cycling, etc.) a device with internal LiPo batteries.
They were very concern about testing such device, because if could cause fire,
explode, etc. during test. They did not want to test devices which contained
Hi All,
I recently had looked at a case where a piece of equipment being tested for
conducted RF immunity has some of its LEDs lit by the RF when the equipment was
unpowered, which caused a test failure as the LEDs indicated a safety
condition. The equipment had no power switch, when its
Hi All
I known that the class D limit of IEC 61000-3-2 applies only to devices
with less than 600W.
But why 600W?
Does anyone know?
Please reply to me..
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
di
It has been quiet.Happy new year to all. Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Original message From: Richard Georgerian
Date: 1/4/23 10:25 AM (GMT-05:00) To:
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: [PSES] Test only: I have not seen any email
since December 2022 Greetings everyone
Happy New Year !!
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 8:25 AM Richard Georgerian
wrote:
> * This message originated outside of DISH and was sent by:
> richa...@mesanetworks.net *
> --
>
> Greetings everyone,
>
>
>
> Apologies for the email. Just testing as I have not seen any PST
Greetings everyone,
Apologies for the email. Just testing as I have not seen any PSTC emails
since the December 21, 2022.
Thank-you,
.Richard Georgerian
Compliance Engineer
HID Global
-
This message is from the IEEE P
Hello Chuck,
I can't say with certainty, but it's highly unlikely that plywood would pass
the test. I wouldn't expect any wood products to pass tests for use in air
handling spaces.
Best regards,
Ted Eckert
The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those
Hi,
Happy Holiday's everyone.
I'm writing for an opinion or comment on whether a one to two cubic foot square
box made of one-half inch thickness hardwood plywood will pass the UL 2043 Fire
Test for Heat and Visible Smoke Release for Discrete Products and Their
Accessories Instal
Hi All,
Test failures (performance, compliance, or any other) just before product
introduction are very expensive. It is not unusual to cost a company US$100,000
or more revenue per day of product delay. Given that...
There is an issue with IEC61000-4-2 based ESD testing, and it is
Thank you Ryan Jazz and John Woodgate.
Christopher
On Thursday, October 27, 2022 at 02:02:32 PM PDT, Ryan Jazz
wrote:
Hello Chris,
“…the test is carried out at ambient temperature equal to the minimum ambient
temperature specified by the manufacturer or -33°C if no minimum ambient
Hello Chris,
“…the test is carried out at ambient temperature equal to the minimum ambient
temperature specified by the manufacturer or -33°C if no minimum ambient
temperature is specified, for 24 h.”
Ryan Jayasinghe
Regulatory Compliance Engineer
rjayasin...@line6.com<mailto:rjayasin...@li
Thanks Don.
Do you know at what temperature is the cold impact test done?
Christopher
On Friday, October 21, 2022 at 05:04:33 AM PDT, Don Gies
wrote:
Christopher,
Per Annex Y.6, you have to consider performing the cold impact tests on
polymeric outdoor enclosures housing
Hi Christopher,
This is applicable for outdoor product. IP test follows cold impact test.
Best regards,
Boštjan
From: Don Gies <0e5e843b011c-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2022 2:04 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 62368-1 ES3/PS
o: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] IEC 62368-1 ES3/PS3 cold impact test
[External email: Use caution with links and attachments]
Folks,
When do we need to do IEC 62368-1 ES3/PS3 cold impact test as per IEC 62368-1
Third edition.
I was told if
Folks,
When do we need to do IEC 62368-1 ES3/PS3 cold impact test as per IEC 62368-1
Third edition.
I was told if EUT is powered by ES3/PS3 then it is required.
any insight will be helpful
Thanks in advance
Christopher
-
This
4 911747 | +44(0)7811 139957
2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL
Registered in England and Wales # 10574298
From: John E Allen <09cc677f395b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: 31 August 2022 14:08
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES]
Afternoon all.
The TRF was designed for use by well-established test labs with experienced
test personnel who are familiar with all the “unspoken requirements” that lay
behind those actually stated.
As such they are a nightmare for manufacturers’ own engineers to try to
understand
07:50, Amund Westin wrote:
We are considering a review of the standard IEC/EN 62368-1. A test
report template would be helpful. Anyone who sell such a template?
BR
Amund
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engine
Hi Amund,
If you have the money you can buy these from the IEC -
https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/68495 - but they aren’t cheap (cue the
Yorkshire War Cry of “ ‘ow much? ”)
If you have the time, you can search for “EN 62368-1:2014 test report”, see the
format, and copy/paste/mess
We are considering a review of the standard IEC/EN 62368-1. A test report
template would be helpful. Anyone who sell such a template?
BR
Amund
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
Hello,
TUVRheinland of North America in Pleasanton is growing and is looking for
medicalsafety test engineers. We currently havemultiple openings for Test
Engineers, Technical Admin and Technicians.
If interested in theposition, please send your resumes/CVs to
jdute...@us.tuv.com.
To apply
Hi All
The click test of home appliances measures only for frequencies ( 150 kHz,
500 kHz etc )
Does the click test only test 4 specific frequencies?
What wat the first CISPR document to mention 4 frequencies?
Sincerely,
-
This
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 14:19:34 +,
"Paasche, Dieter" wrote:
> Is there a requirement to test harmonics in Japan to obtain VCCI on an ITE
> equipment.
> There is a JIS C 61000-3-2 standard, but it is required by VCCI?
No, it it not required by VCCI.
Compliance with
Hi,
Is there a requirement to test harmonics in Japan to obtain VCCI on an ITE
equipment. There is a JIS C 61000-3-2 standard, but it is required by VCCI? If
yes, I assume it is been tested to Japanese voltage.
Sincerely,
[img]
Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer
Electrical / EMC
On May 17, 2022, at 5:08 PM, David Garnier wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sorry about the off topic subject, but thank you for the bandwidth.
>
> I am interested in getting a hold of PSTC member(s) that run EMC test
> equipment museum. I have a piece of TE you might be interested
Hello,
Sorry about the off topic subject, but thank you for the bandwidth.
I am interested in getting a hold of PSTC member(s) that run EMC test
equipment museum. I have a piece of TE you might be interested in, free.
This piece of TE is from the estate well known microwave ham operator
(U3C)"
Reply-To: "James Pawson (U3C)"
Date: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 at 3:43 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [PSES] Dual antenna during RE test ?
Hi Ken, all,
The conversation about log spiral antennas has got me thinking and searching.
Apart from the Emco / ETS 3100 series, are there any oth
2022 19:26
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Dual antenna during RE test ?
For RE, the single biggest improvement for schedule is to use a time domain or
FFT EMI receiver. Basically that is 1 second for each multi-MHz sweep. If
your platform has a limited number of microwav
When Tandy sold out to another one gone [AST Research], I was working on a
midnight emissions site trying to find how a computer's RF was getting "out" on
our outdoor site with a LOT of broadcast RF.
I added another antenna to the test equipment coax with caox, a "T
the azimuth and altitude, no one uses it later.
Useless info to fill out. Every test setup is different, even using the same
equipment.
On Monday, May 2, 2022, 06:10:34 PM EDT, David Schaefer
<12867effceb4-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org> wrote:
Prescans you could do vertic
50:40 PM EDT, Patrick
wrote:
Ken - once again, I agree with you.
I don't see any path where dual antenna or dual tone can be used for
thresholding and debug
Finding any susceptibility moves a test to "normal" mode.
My motivation comes from the last RS test I was in... (really,
ation thing a quick experiment. I had one antenna on out 10 meter test
mast and put a second one on the edge of our 3 meter diameter turntable with a
preamp and attenuator on one of them. With that arrangement, I could adjust
both the relative amplitude and phase of FM and TV signals over a p
Brings back memories! MANY moons ago, I ran an OATS in the foothills of
Colorado with lots of radio and TV ambients. Thought I'd give the two
antenna cancellation thing a quick experiment. I had one antenna on out
10 meter test mast and put a second one on the edge of our 3 meter
dia
For RE, the single biggest improvement for schedule is to use a time domain or
FFT EMI receiver. Basically that is 1 second for each multi-MHz sweep. If
your platform has a limited number of microwave uplinks, the entire RE test
will take a few seconds. A log-spiral eliminates the need for
1 - 100 of 1519 matches
Mail list logo
