Re: Test voltage for products to the U.K.
Raymond, I can confirm that such a 'memo' was issued, since I recall discussing it with a colleague in a UK notified body at the time (circa 1994). As I recall, it resulted from a meeting of whatever forum represents LVD Notified Bodies in the UK shortly after the document declaring an intent to harmonise UK voltage with the rest of the EU was issued. The objective was to ensure that products are properly tested even for those areas where the supply voltage has not yet been reduced to 230V. The standards (esp. 60335-1) don't really cope with this well since they set test voltage limits based on a percentage of the manufacturer's stated rated voltage, not on fixed voltage values. Therefore, manufacturers could squeeze an appliance past the tests by stating a lower limit (e.g. 230V instead of 220-240V). This makes a surprising amount of difference, especially for high power heating appliances such as electric kettles (believe me, this is one smoke signal I do know how to read!) Ask one of the notified bodies you deal with in the UK on a regular basis and they should be able to come up with a copy of the memo. Failing that, let me know and I'll see what I can get for you. Regards Nick. At 17:52 +0800 1/8/2000, raymond...@dixonsasia.com.hk wrote: A few years ago, BEAMA or other similar body has issued a memo to public laboratories about testing voltage for products selling in the U.K. The memo says the U.K. mains is still 240Vac although the rated voltage is agreed to be 230Vac and the products have to be taken care the safety at 240Vac. Can anyone tell me where I can find a copy of this memo and if there is any updated version to replace this one. Thanks and regards, Raymond Li Dixons Asia Ltd. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: EN 60335-1
Koh , EN60335-1 is not the appropriate standard for your purposes, and I'd be very suspicious of the supplier who claims it is. There is no such standard as EN60335-2-207. IEC742/EN60742 is definitely not the same as EN60335. EN60742 was the standard for plug-top (and other) transformers but was superseded in 1998 by EN61558. Unlike EN60742 (which was a single part standard), EN61558 has a part 1 (general requirement) and several part 2s (particular requirements). However, neither of these standards are what you want. You should have tested your speakers to EN60065 or EN60950. (EN60065 is probably the 'right' standard, but not everyone uses it!) Both standards contains specific requirements for transformers (EN60950 - annex C, EN60065 - section 14.3) and do not cross reference to any other standard as being equivalent to their requirements. You must therefore be very careful in relying on any transformer tested to another standard since it is possible the test requirements of the other standard are not consistent with those of the EN60065 or EN60950. In practice, the requirements of EN60950 and EN60065 are likely to be similar to those of EN61558, and for your application you will probably be safe using a transformer properly tested to EN61558. If you want to rely on certification to EN61558, you will need to perform a careful cross reference exercise to be sure of its relevance/results for your application. If you want my opinion, a company who claims compliance with EN60335 for this sort of product has already shown sufficient ignorance to be discounted from my list of possible suppliers. I would not expect to have difficulty finding a competitively priced supplier who can provide independent certification to EN60065 and/or EN60950 for a transformer of this type. Regards Nick. At 23:44 +0800 1/8/2000, Koh Nai Ghee wrote: Dear EMC-PSTC, I'm posting this message again. (had posted to wrong address). My company is currently designing a speaker system meant for ITE (that is PC) connection. The speaker requires external supply which the hardware team is looking into using a AC/AC adaptor instead of AC/DC adaptor. This AC/AC adaptor which steps down the 230Vac or 110Vac to the required low voltage for the speaker supply. A supplier of such AC/AC adaptor has said that their product complies to EN60335-1 standards. As I'm not familar with this standard, and need advice on the following doubts. 1) Is this EN60335-1 equivalent to IEC 742 ? 2) Heard from a colleague (from his source) that EN 60335-2-207 should be the standard ? 3) Was browing through the LVD Harmonised standard and unable to find this 60335-2-207. Could someone advice what is this standard ? 4) Is this supplier statement of the AC/AC adaptor conforms to EN60335-1 sufficient? Or should this AC/AC adaptor meant for household electrical appliance required to fulfil EN60335-2-207 standard ? 5) Does EN60335-1 applicable to AC-AC adapter only ? 6) Are this standards (EN60335-1 and EN60335-2-207) still valid? Or it has been obsolete/replaced? 7) Could this AC/AC adapter that complied with EN60335-1 be bundled with ITE product meant for Home or Office use? Looking forward to you advice. Thanks in advance. Regards Koh --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
EN 61000-4-6 CDNs for a high speed bus.
Hello Friends, We are getting into faster interconnects that can be affected by the CDNs called out by EN 61000-4-6. Has anyone tested a system consisting of an EUT connected to various peripherals by USB, Firewire, 10 Base T or other bus configurations considered high speed today? It seems decoupling by an inductor 280 uH @ 150 kHz as indicated in the various CDNs in Annex D should cause considerable signal integrity issues even before the test signal is applied. If you have tested high speed interconnects to EN 61000-4-6, how did you manage the signal integrity issues? Special CDNs? Special test setup? This seems like a topic everyone would be interested in. Just call me curious, Don (not George) --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
E1 connector
Is there a document specifying connector types and pinouts for E1 connections in Europe. Thanks in advance Jack ___ Jack Murphy, Compliance Engineer Quantum Bridge, One High St, N. Andover, MA 01845 tel-978 688-9100x555, fax-978 688-1363 jmur...@quantumbridge.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Test voltage for products to the U.K.
Hello Raymond I do not have access to the memo but I can certainly assure you that it is the case. I have just measured the voltage as I sit here and it is 242V. The nominal change was all to do with harmonisation within the European union. The old supply regulations allowed the public supply to be 240V + 6% -10%. Because the committee that dealt with implementing the harmonisation was packed with representatives of the electricity generation industry and had few representative of manufacturers of voltage sensitive equipment such light bulbs, the path for harmonisation was that which suited the electricity suppliers. They simply declared that the supply voltage was 230V with a tolerance of +10% and -6% . If you work out the sums you will find that the new allowable range is almost identical with the old. When the appointed change over day came, numbers changed on paper but that was all. Not one generator setting was changed and not one transformer tap was changed. I have a friend in charge electrical supply in our local region and he tells me that they have no intention of changing in the near future. Even new supply equipment is designed to deliver 240V. To made this situation worse, some other European countries went the other way and declared a supply that was and remains 220V to be nominally 230V. We now have light bulbs for sale in Europe that are marked 230V but designed to work with 240V and light bulbs marked 230V but designed to work with 220V and nothing to tell them apart. Get them the wrong way around and in one case you get a brilliant light that dies in about 100 hours and in the other a light that lasts almost for ever but is ridiculously dim and inefficient. Vive! European Unity Nick Rouse - Original Message - From: raymond...@dixonsasia.com.hk To: emc-p...@ieee.org Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 10:52 AM Subject: Test voltage for products to the U.K. A few years ago, BEAMA or other similar body has issued a memo to public laboratories about testing voltage for products selling in the U.K. The memo says the U.K. mains is still 240Vac although the rated voltage is agreed to be 230Vac and the products have to be taken care the safety at 240Vac. Can anyone tell me where I can find a copy of this memo and if there is any updated version to replace this one. Thanks and regards, Raymond Li Dixons Asia Ltd. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Compliance Technician - RadiSys Corporation - Portland, Oregon
RadiSys currently has this posting and will likely have others in the next 6 months for compliance engineers and technicians. If interested, please forward material to the address below. - Compliance Technician RadiSys Corporation is currently seeking qualified applicants for a compliance technician at its Hillsboro, Oregon facility (15 miles west of Portland). This is a new position that will report to the Sr. Compliance Engineer responsible for worldwide conformity assessment. This person will be responsible for facilitation of internal testing activities with project teams, internal prequalification of RadiSys designs to applicable product standards, coordination of testing activities performed at third party laboratories, and maintainence of all compliance test equipment. Additional duties may include maintaining compliance documentation, preparation of documentation packages required by labs for certification and support of laboratory audit activities. The applicant must have an AA Degree or equivalent training, at least 5 years of experience in a similar position with strong computer skills, and experience in hardware and software setup, configuration, troubleshooting and operation. Experience with the operation of at least one of the following is required: semi-anechoic EMC chamber, temp/humidity chambers, HALT/HASS processes, and four corners testing. Knowledge of other certification test equipment and procedures is desirable. Familiarity with product safety, EMC and telecom standards (such as UL 1950, EN 55022, and NEBS) is helpful. Travel may be required to support remote project teams and testing performed at third party laboratories. RadiSys fosters a strong team environment, which requires solid interpersonal communication skills and a willingness to cooperate with others. The successful applicant will need to be comfortable working with several project teams concurrently and will be expected to prioritize obligations to meet project commitments with minimal supervision. RadiSys (NASDAQ: RSYS) is a US$350 million company that designs and manufactures embedded computers for telecommunications and other industries. We have over 1,000 employees in design centers worldwide and have consistently experienced aggressive growth, while achieving 32 consecutive profitable quarters. RadiSys offers competitive benefits, including incentive compensation and stock options for all full-time employees. For more information on the company, including a summary of benefits and an overview of our product line, please browse our website at http://www.radisys.com For specific information about this position contact: Michael Garretson Sr. Compliance Engineer RadiSys Corporation 5445 NE Dawson Creek Drive Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 +1 503 615-1100 x6149 Fax +1 503 615-1112 RadiSys Corporation - Invisible Computers for Visible Results --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: What safety lesson we may learn from Concord crash?
What safety lesson we may learn from Concord crash? There are lot of Safety standards in Electronic and Electrical industries. If we strictly follow them we can avoid fatal accidents. True. Because, the standards specify safeguards for KNOWN failures that lead to injury. Is there any previous example showing that accident still happens although all relevant Safety regulations have been followed and maintained, and then resulting in revision of some safety standard? One wag said that safety standards are the inversion of bad experiences. As such, they should, and do, prevent recurrence of the bad experiences. In my opinion, our product safety standards do an adequate job specifying safeguards against electric shock. But, they do not do an adequate job of specifying safeguards against electrically- caused fire. I am aware of fires in products that comply with their safety standards. We simply don't understand root cause of electrically-caused fires. The real issue is that of prediction of a failure that leads to injury or fatality. Once a failure can be identified, there are some good analysis tools that can take the failure to various bad experiences. Two good tools are FMEA and FTA. In the absence of actual failure incidents, prediction of a specific failure and its consequences are the result of imagination. Imagination of failure events (in the absence of data) is a tough sell to designers and management. Rich FMEA = Failure Modes and Effects Analysis FTA = Fault Tree Analysis --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Regulatory Compliance Engineer Wanted
Inter-Tel Inc. is looking for a qualified Regulatory Compliance Engineer. This individual will be responsible for the Safety, EMC and Telecom Compliance for PBX and Peripheral products. Products must comply with US, EU, Mexican and Japanese requirements. Familiarity with these regulations is desired. An engineering degree or equivalent experience in the compliance field is required. Inter-Tel is located in Chandler, (Phoenix), Arizona and offers competitive compensation and benefits. Send resume or call for more information. Joe Dwyer Manager of Product Validation Inter-Tel Inc. 7300 West Boston Street Chandler, AZ 85226 Tel:800-669-5858 x21235 Tel:480-961-9000 x21235 Fax: 480-961-6940 Email mailto: dw...@inter-tel.com Home Page http://www.inter-tel.com Inter-Tel is the largest provider of business key telephone systems, voice processing systems and related software applications for the 40+ station key telephone system market in the United States. Inter-Tel is also a leading provider of IP telephony voice and data convergence products and operates an IP telephony-based long distance network. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EN60335-1
Dear Koh, The IEC 335-1 is the Standard of Household and Similiar Appliances, General Requirements. The IEC 742 pertains to Isolating transformers and Safety isolating transformers requirements. Both of these standards have equivalent EN standards which are EN 60335-1, and EN 60335:95. The standard noted below EN 60335-2-207 I as of now cannot find any reference too. The IEC and EN standard on 335 are still valid for the European market, so my question is what market are you selling into? Mark -Original Message- From: Koh Nai Ghee [mailto:koh...@cyberway.com.sg] Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 11:00 AM To: EMC-PSTC Subject: EN60335-1 Dear EMC-PSTC, My company is currently designing a speaker system meant for ITE (that is PC) connection. The speaker requires external supply which the hardware team is looking into using a AC/AC adaptor instead of AC/DC adaptor. This AC/AC adaptor which steps down the 230Vac or 110Vac to the required low voltage for the speaker supply. A supplier of such AC/AC adaptor has said that their product complies to EN60335-1 standards. As I'm not familar with this standard, and need advice on the following doubts. 1) Is this EN60335-1 equivalent to IEC 742 ? 2) Heard from a colleague (from his source) that EN 60335-2-207 should be the standard ? 3) Was browing through the LVD Harmonised standard and unable to find this 60335-2-207. Could someone advice what is this standard ? 4) Is this supplier statement of the AC/AC adaptor conforms to EN60335-1 sufficient? Or should this AC/AC adaptor meant for household electrical appliance required to fulfil EN60335-2-207 standard ? 5) Does EN60335-1 applicable to AC-AC adapter only ? 6) Are this standards (EN60335-1 and EN60335-2-207) still valid? Or it has been obsolete/replaced? 7) Could this AC/AC adapter that complied with EN60335-1 be bundled with ITE product meant for Home or Office use? Looking forward to you advice. Thanks in advance. Regards Koh --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Industrial Control Equipment
Richard, I field evaluated many conveyor systems in warehouses during my tenure at UL. The guiding principle was always what the local AHJ asked for. Usually a don't ask don't tell policy was in place. i.e. these systems are installed after electrical inspections take place. So they do not call for re-inspection. Some AHJ's will take the time to look at a system installed using Listed parts. Some will require the entire unit to be listed as installed, some will not care either way, and in many areas there simple is no inspections period. (70% of Georgia has no inspections) Of course, 29CFR1910 is brought into play AFTER someone is hurt or killed. In the federal governments eyes ignorance of the law is no excuse. John L. Allen, P.E. Chief Electrical Engineer Engineering and Fire Investigations 4405 International Blvd. Suite B-115 Norcross (Atlanta), Georgia 30093-3013 Tele: 800-245-9601 in GA: 770-925-9600 Fax: 770-925-9649 Cell: 404-931-4481 Visit our web site at http://www.efiinfo.com -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of wo...@sensormatic.com Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 9:42 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Industrial Control Equipment My company has contracted for a motorized conveyer belt to be built. We will be reselling the device into light industrial locations in the USA such as warehouses. We requested that the equipment be Listed, but the contractor says they have been selling these types of assemblies into this type of environment for 20 years and have never been required to obtain Listing. Is it common practice, in a warehouse environment, for non-UL Listed equipment to be installed? I understood it to be an NEC and OSHA requirement that the equipment be Listed or accepted by the inspector which they normally do not do. Richard Woods --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
EN 60335-1
Dear EMC-PSTC, I'm posting this message again. (had posted to wrong address). My company is currently designing a speaker system meant for ITE (that is PC) connection. The speaker requires external supply which the hardware team is looking into using a AC/AC adaptor instead of AC/DC adaptor. This AC/AC adaptor which steps down the 230Vac or 110Vac to the required low voltage for the speaker supply. A supplier of such AC/AC adaptor has said that their product complies to EN60335-1 standards. As I'm not familar with this standard, and need advice on the following doubts. 1) Is this EN60335-1 equivalent to IEC 742 ? 2) Heard from a colleague (from his source) that EN 60335-2-207 should be the standard ? 3) Was browing through the LVD Harmonised standard and unable to find this 60335-2-207. Could someone advice what is this standard ? 4) Is this supplier statement of the AC/AC adaptor conforms to EN60335-1 sufficient? Or should this AC/AC adaptor meant for household electrical appliance required to fulfil EN60335-2-207 standard ? 5) Does EN60335-1 applicable to AC-AC adapter only ? 6) Are this standards (EN60335-1 and EN60335-2-207) still valid? Or it has been obsolete/replaced? 7) Could this AC/AC adapter that complied with EN60335-1 be bundled with ITE product meant for Home or Office use? Looking forward to you advice. Thanks in advance. Regards Koh --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: [SI-LIST] : Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB
Hi Doug, Yes, I have tried a similar approach based on an article a few years back that used two HP 11940 probes mounted on a wooden jig. Maybe someone else on the list can remember who the author was. It worked quite well. Best regards, Brent DeWitt Douglas C. Smith d...@dsmith.org on 07/31/2000 09:53:52 PM Please respond to Douglas C. Smith d...@dsmith.org To: emc-pstc emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org, SI-LIST si-l...@silab.eng.sun.com cc:(bcc: Brent Dewitt/US/D-O) Subject: [SI-LIST] : Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB Hi All, Shielding effectiveness is normally measured using plane waves (relatively far from the source). This method of measurement for shielding effectivenes does not always correspond to the way a shielding material is used. It is especially true when shielding material is incorporated into small products, such as the new wave of wireless devices on the market. If you rely on shielding to keep different parts of a product from interfering with each other, correlation of specification to use is especially important. The August 2000 Technical Tidbit on http://www.dsmith.org (or http://emcesd.com) describes a simple method of shielding effectiveness measurement that can be easily done in the development laboratory. This measurement method can give a better measure of shielding effectiveness that industry standard measurement techniques when the shield is close to the source being shielded. Has anyone here who is into shielding used something like this method which uses magnetic field loops? Doug -- --- ___ _ Doug Smith \ / ) P.O. Box 1457 = Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457 _ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799 / /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528 | q-( ) | o |Email: d...@dsmith.org \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org --- To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to majord...@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list or UNSUBSCRIBE si-list-digest, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail communication may contain information that is proprietary, confidential and/or privileged from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended to be for the use of the addressee only. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that use, copying, dissemination or continued possession of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have any reason to believe you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please delete all copies of this e-mail from computer memory or storage. Thank you. To unsubscribe from si-list or si-list-digest: send e-mail to majord...@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list or UNSUBSCRIBE si-list-digest, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
EN60335-1
Dear EMC-PSTC, My company is currently designing a speaker system meant for ITE (that is PC) connection. The speaker requires external supply which the hardware team is looking into using a AC/AC adaptor instead of AC/DC adaptor. This AC/AC adaptor which steps down the 230Vac or 110Vac to the required low voltage for the speaker supply. A supplier of such AC/AC adaptor has said that their product complies to EN60335-1 standards. As I'm not familar with this standard, and need advice on the following doubts. 1) Is this EN60335-1 equivalent to IEC 742 ? 2) Heard from a colleague (from his source) that EN 60335-2-207 should be the standard ? 3) Was browing through the LVD Harmonised standard and unable to find this 60335-2-207. Could someone advice what is this standard ? 4) Is this supplier statement of the AC/AC adaptor conforms to EN60335-1 sufficient? Or should this AC/AC adaptor meant for household electrical appliance required to fulfil EN60335-2-207 standard ? 5) Does EN60335-1 applicable to AC-AC adapter only ? 6) Are this standards (EN60335-1 and EN60335-2-207) still valid? Or it has been obsolete/replaced? 7) Could this AC/AC adapter that complied with EN60335-1 be bundled with ITE product meant for Home or Office use? Looking forward to you advice. Thanks in advance. Regards Koh --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Test voltage for products to the U.K.
Spec on mains is 230 +/- 6% so as 240 falls within that range, then that is where the reference regard the UK staying at 240Vac came from. We used to see voltages several % above 240Vac in the past. In my particular area they used to stay spot on 240V most of the time. I note however that in the last 6 months the local voltage has dropped to 235Vac, although the generating board won't admit to having consciously made this change! We here continue to design for 264Vac max. Chris -Original Message- From: raymond...@dixonsasia.com.hk [mailto:raymond...@dixonsasia.com.hk] Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 10:53 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Test voltage for products to the U.K. A few years ago, BEAMA or other similar body has issued a memo to public laboratories about testing voltage for products selling in the U.K. The memo says the U.K. mains is still 240Vac although the rated voltage is agreed to be 230Vac and the products have to be taken care the safety at 240Vac. Can anyone tell me where I can find a copy of this memo and if there is any updated version to replace this one. Thanks and regards, Raymond Li Dixons Asia Ltd. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Industrial Control Equipment
My company has contracted for a motorized conveyer belt to be built. We will be reselling the device into light industrial locations in the USA such as warehouses. We requested that the equipment be Listed, but the contractor says they have been selling these types of assemblies into this type of environment for 20 years and have never been required to obtain Listing. Is it common practice, in a warehouse environment, for non-UL Listed equipment to be installed? I understood it to be an NEC and OSHA requirement that the equipment be Listed or accepted by the inspector which they normally do not do. Richard Woods --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Not EMC equipment but one of you may need one
Please contact Stephen Anderson if interested. This is all the information I have but I am sure that Stephen would be willing to answer any questions you may have. We have a Thermotron S-Series, 1993 Model S-4S-SL Temperature Test Chamber; range and specifications as detailed: - interior light - 12 x 12 mulitpan heated window - 2 diameter access port with plug - 3 diameter casters - shelf with mounting hardware - CFC Free Air-Cooled Refrigeration System - Refrigeration Gauges - 2800 Programmer/Controller This chamber is located in Needham, MA. If you are interested in this chamber, please make an offer. Best Regards, Stephen Anderson VP of Engineering Transition Networks 612-996-1547 steph...@transition.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Test voltage for products to the U.K.
It was agreed a few years ago, by the European community members, that mains voltages should be harmonised to 230V. At that time the UK was 240V nominal and the rest of Europe 220V. Of course it isn't that easy to change a country's mains voltage overnight so a compromise was made. The UK would be 230V +10% -6% and the rest of Europe 230V +6% -10%. Slowly but surely the voltages in the UK are coming down to 230V as the power companies modify their supply equipment. Two years ago 240-245V was common, I measured the voltage just now and it is 232.4V. For a product to be sold in Europe, if you assume a nominal voltage of 230V and test at +/- 10% you can't go wrong. Hope this helps. Regards Chris Colgan EMC Safety TAG McLaren Audio Ltd mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com -Original Message- From: raymond...@dixonsasia.com.hk [SMTP:raymond...@dixonsasia.com.hk] Sent: 01 August 2000 10:53 To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Test voltage for products to the U.K. A few years ago, BEAMA or other similar body has issued a memo to public laboratories about testing voltage for products selling in the U.K. The memo says the U.K. mains is still 240Vac although the rated voltage is agreed to be 230Vac and the products have to be taken care the safety at 240Vac. Can anyone tell me where I can find a copy of this memo and if there is any updated version to replace this one. Thanks and regards, Raymond Li Dixons Asia Ltd. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org = Authorised on 08/01/00 at 13:55:49; code 37f48bf3C80619F4. ** The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error, please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either by E-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail. TAG McLaren Audio Ltd, The Summit, 11 Latham Road Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600) Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159) ** --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: What safety lesson we may learn from Concord crash?
The question was Do we really have to pay so high price to learn the lesson? My response is in two parts. The first one is, as I assume you believe since you ask the question in the context you did, no -- not really. The second one is yes, look at history. I was in the US Air Force for 23 year, the last 9 in System Safety for various development and test programs. There are two things that will continue to keep us at the blood threshold *. The first is economics. Both time and money. The second is human attitude, which is partially driven by the first, but is also driven by the attitude that it won't happen to me. On the first point, how much can you afford spend to prevent mishaps and still make a profit or stay within budget? How long can you delay a product delivery and still satisfy the customer, or even have one if your competitor beats you to it? (In the military this is seen as meeting a threat before it overcomes you.) On the second point, budgets and schedules impact our decision making. If we don't meet the deadline we might be replaced. The news history is replete with stories of people who have tried to get safety issues corrected before a project was finished. They are called whistle blowers. They usually pay a high price for their integrity. Additionally, just like adolescents but in a different way, we think we are invincible. Problems only happen to others that are not as good as we are. We will do it better and avoid the same problems. But we never seem to attempt to learn the lessons being taught by another's failures. How do these play into the standards and regulation development. The same way as it does in product development. It is often driven by economics and time. We hesitate to impose a requirement on ourselves that might cost us profit or schedule. We aren't intentionally trying to hurt anyone and if we knew if one of our decisions to limit the scope of a standard was the direct result of an injury or death, we would be regretful. It is just that since we don't see the immediate payoff of a stricter standard and we do see the immediate cost, we tend to not impose the more strict requirement. I realize that this is a rather jaded view. Most of the safety professionals that I have met are truly concerned and dedicated to their work in minimizing risk. I think the bigger problem is not the safety professionals but the profit (budget), promotion, ego, stockholder, and customer driven environment in which we are working. There are so many engineers and managers on programs that the responsibility is now diluted to the point where no one is responsible. The Company is as fault and the insurance will take care of any losses. I know that insurance is necessary, but like every other protective system we develop, we start relying on it for primary protection instead of back up. Another element in the problem is individuals that are into product (system) safety because of reasons other than that is what they wanted to do. I have met several people that were doing safety work because the company needed some safety people and picked someone that was expendable from another department. Or a department was being eliminated or downsized and a position was offered in product safety instead of letting that person go. That is not to demean those who have been chosen (I have met some really good safety people from that situation), but to show the attitude of management toward what it takes to be a safety engineer, manager, whatever you want to call the position. When I first got into system safety, a co-worker ask me who I ticked off to get stuck in that job. I had to inform him that I had worked hard and risked much to take that safety job. But it illustrates the perception that many have of product safety. To get back to the point of regulation. As long as engineers/accounting/marketing/management/customers see regulations as a hindrance and a cost, we will continue to see mishaps such as the Concord, Arian, Challenger, Hyatt Regency, Pinto, ad infinitum. Gentlemen and Ladies, we have job security because without us there would be no one to blame for missing all the errors that cause mishaps. Please don't get me wrong -- I love my job and have been doing it for over 15 years now and intend to do it for at least another 15 years. As the famous philosopher, Clint Eastwood, has said, A man's gotta know his limitations. We do what we can, we tilt at windmills, and know that without us; it would be a lot worse. We try to use the examples of the failures of the past to convince the engineers and managers that the future doesn't have to be the same. * The blood threshold is the point where action is delayed until a mishap is serious enough that an serious injury or death occurs, at which time vigorous action ensues. Minor mishaps that do not result in any significant action, even though they are indicative of a pending Major mishap. The views expressed do not
Re: iec60950 CB TEST REPORT FORM
Anyone can make their own IEC 60950 report form. This is simply a list of every paragraph number in the standard, with a few words describing the test, the results, and whether the unit passed or not. However, it has become common for many Certification Bodies to use a form generated by FIMKO or another CB. These are available in hard or soft copy but may involve a fee. George Please respond to xingwb%cesi.ac...@interlock.lexmark.com To: emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com cc:(bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: iec60950 CB TEST REPORT FORM Dear sirs and Colleagues: Our client request iec950 test report (including a1+a2+a3+a4), can you provide me a copy of cb test report form of iec950(including a1+a2+a3+a4) Thank you in advance My e-mail: xin...@cesi.ac.cn Xing weibing BTIEP 2000-08-01 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Test voltage for products to the U.K.
A few years ago, BEAMA or other similar body has issued a memo to public laboratories about testing voltage for products selling in the U.K. The memo says the U.K. mains is still 240Vac although the rated voltage is agreed to be 230Vac and the products have to be taken care the safety at 240Vac. Can anyone tell me where I can find a copy of this memo and if there is any updated version to replace this one. Thanks and regards, Raymond Li Dixons Asia Ltd. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB
I have successfully used small loops for performing shielding effectiveness measurements. They are ideal to locate weak spots or points in a seam or isolate the leakage from aperture areas. We then compared these readings to a final shielding effectiveness measurement for the entire chassis and found that on an empirical basis there was a reasonable correlation that the localized readings were typically always equal to or greater than the final measurement. Ed Nakauchi EMI/EMC Consultant Principal Scientist Instrument Specialties, Inc. -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Douglas C. Smith Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 4:54 AM To: emc-pstc; SI-LIST Subject: Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB Hi All, Shielding effectiveness is normally measured using plane waves (relatively far from the source). This method of measurement for shielding effectivenes does not always correspond to the way a shielding material is used. It is especially true when shielding material is incorporated into small products, such as the new wave of wireless devices on the market. If you rely on shielding to keep different parts of a product from interfering with each other, correlation of specification to use is especially important. The August 2000 Technical Tidbit on http://www.dsmith.org (or http://emcesd.com) describes a simple method of shielding effectiveness measurement that can be easily done in the development laboratory. This measurement method can give a better measure of shielding effectiveness that industry standard measurement techniques when the shield is close to the source being shielded. Has anyone here who is into shielding used something like this method which uses magnetic field loops? Doug -- --- ___ _ Doug Smith \ / ) P.O. Box 1457 = Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457 _ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799 / /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528 | q-( ) | o |Email: d...@dsmith.org \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org --- --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB
I have been using plane shielded loops for over 15 years. Small magnetic loops allow localizing defects to small areas and use of small samples. I don't claim objective figures, but by comparing the material under test to a known good shield (i.e.: galvanized iron sheet) and to air, one gets a good feel for the merit of the material in hand. Cortland == Original Message Follows Date: 31-Jul-00 20:53:05 MsgID: 1072-33864 ToID: 72146,373 From: Douglas C. Smith INTERNET:d...@dsmith.org Subj: Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB Chrg: $0.00 Imp: Norm Sens: StdReceipt: NoParts: 1 List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:53:52 -0700 From: Douglas C. Smith d...@dsmith.org Subject: Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB Reply-To: Douglas C. Smith d...@dsmith.org Hi All, Shielding effectiveness is normally measured using plane waves (relatively far from the source). This method of measurement for shielding effectivenes does not always correspond to the way a shielding material is used. It is especially true when shielding material is incorporated into small products, such as the new wave of wireless devices on the market. If you rely on shielding to keep different parts of a product from interfering with each other, correlation of specification to use is especially important. The August 2000 Technical Tidbit on http://www.dsmith.org (or http://emcesd.com) describes a simple method of shielding effectiveness measurement that can be easily done in the development laboratory. This measurement method can give a better measure of shielding effectiveness that industry standard measurement techniques when the shield is close to the source being shielded. Has anyone here who is into shielding used something like this method which uses magnetic field loops? Doug -- --- ___ _ Doug Smith \ / ) P.O. Box 1457 = Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457 _ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799 / /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528 | q-( ) | o |Email: d...@dsmith.org \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org --- --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org == End of Original Message = --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Shielding Effectiveness - or when a dB is not a dB
Hi All, Shielding effectiveness is normally measured using plane waves (relatively far from the source). This method of measurement for shielding effectivenes does not always correspond to the way a shielding material is used. It is especially true when shielding material is incorporated into small products, such as the new wave of wireless devices on the market. If you rely on shielding to keep different parts of a product from interfering with each other, correlation of specification to use is especially important. The August 2000 Technical Tidbit on http://www.dsmith.org (or http://emcesd.com) describes a simple method of shielding effectiveness measurement that can be easily done in the development laboratory. This measurement method can give a better measure of shielding effectiveness that industry standard measurement techniques when the shield is close to the source being shielded. Has anyone here who is into shielding used something like this method which uses magnetic field loops? Doug -- --- ___ _ Doug Smith \ / ) P.O. Box 1457 = Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457 _ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799 / /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528 | q-( ) | o |Email: d...@dsmith.org \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org --- --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Re: iec60950 CB TEST REPORT FORM
Hello Xing Weibing, I believe that the CB Test Reports are protected by copyright. You can purchase them (including the 950 report and amendments 1-4) from the CB Scheme website at www.cbscheme.org . Regards, Art Michael * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * International Product Safety Bookshop * * Check out our current offerings! * * http://www.safetylink.com/bookshop.html * * * * Now offering BSI's Books Reports* * including, World Electricity Supplies * * * * Another service of the Safety Link* * www.safetylink.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --- On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, xingwb wrote: Dear sirs and Colleagues: Our client request iec950 test report (including a1+a2+a3+a4), can you provide me a copy of cb test report form of iec950(including a1+a2+a3+a4) Thank you in advance My e-mail: xin...@cesi.ac.cn Xing weibing BTIEP 2000-08-01 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
CTR test equipment
Hi; I am looking for a complete set of CTR test equipment that can perform CTR 3, CTR 12, CTR13, and CTR 21. Can somebody tell me where I can buy one? Thank you in advance. Best Regards; John Chan
iec60950 CB TEST REPORT FORM
Dear sirs and Colleagues: Our client request iec950 test report (including a1+a2+a3+a4), can you provide me a copy of cb test report form of iec950(including a1+a2+a3+a4) Thank you in advance My e-mail: xin...@cesi.ac.cn Xing weibing BTIEP 2000-08-01 --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
What safety lesson we may learn from Concord crash?
Hi, What safety lesson we may learn from Concord crash? When having read recent reports on Concord crash the question occurred. - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2191-2000Jul29.html reads A preliminary report on Tuesday's crash is due to be published at the end of August, but just three days after the tragedy, a sketchy image of the sequence of events has surfaced. At least one tire exploded, which could have triggered a chain of events, structural damages, a fire and an engine breakdown, the Transport Ministry said Friday. .. In 1981, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board reported five potentially catastrophic incidents resulting from blown-out tires during Concorde takeoffs between June 1979 and February 1981. -- There are lot of Safety standards in Electronic and Electrical industries. If we strictly follow them we can avoid fatal accidents. Is there any previous example showing that accident still happens although all relevant Safety regulations have been followed and maintained, and then resulting in revision of some safety standard? It looks weird if the maintenance was not required to exclude possibility of tire blown-out, due to what the above article said: FIVE 'potentially catastrophic' incidents resulting from blown-out tires during Concorde takeoffs between June 1979 and February 1981. I have no knowledge of aviation safety aall. It was really sad to the world that the potentially catastrophic danger finally became a real catastrophe. Do we really have to pay so high price to learn the lesson? Barry Ma ANRITSU company ___ Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now! http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html ___ --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
