Does anyone have a feel for the degree of acceptance of GR-63/1089 in
Europe? I can remember at a previous company we got LONIIS in Russia to
accept NEBS test results with minimal additional assessment against ETS 300
019/119.
Anyone else have any stories to tell, other than the obvious spatial
We made a probe using rigid coax with its built in SMA connector. Solder a
pin to the side of the coax and file it diagonally to create a sharp point.
To increase the loading impedance we used an SMA collar that had been
filed out to place a series chip resistor of 470 ohms in series with the
Cameron,
Checkout Doug Smith's webpage for some insight on making RF measurements
using various (homemade) probes.
http://emcesd.com/
Good Luck,
George
-Original Message-
From: Cameron O'phee [mailto:O'p...@ali.com.au]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 8:59 PM
To: 'EMC - PSTC
Cameron,
If you are looking for a measure of the conducted RF coming off the
board the standard AC LISN works for DC power as well. The voltage probe
per CISPR 16 will also work and gives a standardized impedance that can be
probed from point to point (or if you are looking for a down and
Anyone know where to obtain a draft copy of the H.248 spec? The ITU-T
website says To Be Published and a 06/00 date, but doesn't say when
it will really be available...
Thanks
D
--
---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical
Hello All,
I have been asked by one of our design engineers if I can measure the RF
signature on the 3v plane on one of our PCB designs. The purpose of this is
to compare it to proposed changes for cost reduction, ie removal of bypass
caps. I would assume I need some sort of CDN but I have no
Cameron:
That's fairly easy to do as long as you:
1. Take all measurments from the same reference points before and after the
changes and
2. Use a DC block on the input to the analyzer ;other wise you may have an
expensive input to replace. Most analyzers inputs are not protected for DC.
BSI's on-line and printed catalogues give the following information
about the above standard:
BS EN 50178:1998 Electronic equipment for use in power installations
That's all it says, except a list of cross references as long as both
your arms. Before I waste GBP56 of my hard earned cash on
There is a pdf version of the form in the guest center on our web site at
www.curtis-straus.com
-Jon Curtis.
Jim Bacher wrote:
forwarding for : bgilmar...@cereva.com
Reply Separator
Subject:VCCI application
Author: Gilmartin; Bob
The way I remember it, test labs are 'associate members'. Only
manufacturers can be 'members'.
Has this changed?
Regards,
Bandele
Jetstream Communications, Inc.
badep...@jetstream.com
-Original Message-
From: Gary McInturff [mailto:gary.mcintu...@worldwidepackets.com]
Sent:
Don,
In the EU guidance document for the EMC directive that they published
in July of 1997 they differentiate between apparatus that is simply
repaired, and apparatus that is repaired / refurbished to as new condition.
The latter falls under the EMC directive and standards in effect at the
UL1697 (not in existence yet) will likely be the Standard for the broadband
communications equipment detailed in NEC Article 830. If your equipment
fits the description someone may be trying to get a head start.
Best Regards,
Jody Leber
Laboratory Manager
jle...@ustech-lab.com
Conformity-Update for the week ending Sept. 22, 2000 is now available
at:
http://www.conformity-update.com
---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail
Earlier this year, I believe that ETSI EN 300 386 was formally adopted as an
EU harmonized standard for telecom network equipment. However, looking on
the DG III web page, it looks like this standard has not yet been published
in the OJ. I had heard earlier that the anticipated target for
Hi Mike:
I'm posting this for a friend who is having a problem with CSA and hipot
testing. He has several products which operate on 115/230 VAC. They are
industrial control products (don't know the CSA standard number but they
fall under UL508 is the US). In one CSA report he is
Mike,
Doesn't sound that strange to me. To help answer your question I looked at
several UL Follow-Up Service Procedures that we have here in the plant for
various types of Information Technology Equipment. This equipment has input
voltages of 100-240VAC. UL has a table in the FUS that specifies
I'm posting this for a friend who is having a problem with CSA and hipot
testing. He has several products which operate on 115/230 VAC. They are
industrial control products (don't know the CSA standard number but they
fall under UL508 is the US). In one CSA report he is required to run a 1500
Equipment shall not become dangerous or unsafe as a result of the application
of the tests defined in this section of IEC 1000-4.
That statement appears in (with only slight variations) -2, -3, -4, -5 and -6.
Dangerous or unsafe is not defined. There are no links to any safety standards
or
Hello from San Diego:
One of our colleagues has asked me to discuss further
the reason behind the hi-pot test.
The insulation between the mains and accessible
conductive parts (including low-voltage-energized
accessible conductive parts) is critical to the
scheme of protection from
The problem is that when two separate products have the same input voltage
and have been tested to the same standard, why are there two different hipot
levels? Its rather difficult to have procedures etc. that don't line up.
Also try and explain this to a worker trying to understand hipot
20 matches
Mail list logo
