Re: Short circuit tests in GR-1089

I'm not an expert on GR1089 but I think that your interpretation should include careful consideration of what constitutes damage. The operation of a fuse or a circuit breaker is not damage. That is normal operation. What the specification is seeking to eliminate is overheating, explosion, loss

RE: Self Oscillating Flyback Converters

Look at websites for companies that make SMPS controller ICs; e.g. Cherry, TI/Unitrode, etc. Brian -Original Message- From: Fred Waechter [mailto:w...@skybest.com] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 1:28 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Self Oscillating Flyback Converters Hi

Product Safety Engineer Position

Hello Group, My company Pelco a leading CCTV manufacturer located in California's Central San Joaquin Valley is in search of a Product Safety Engineer. This individual should be familiar with IEC 60950 and IEC 60065 and their UL counterparts. Any interested parties please contact me offline for

RE: Ferrite clamps

Ghery, You are right. The parameters for S11 and ferrite are widely varying and probably that is why no specifications were made up. However, most ferrites do behave in the area around 75-300 ohms so a 100 % tolerance (SWR 1:2) may be achieved. This needs investigations of course. I think that

Re: Ferrite clamps

I read in !emc-pstc that Walter Anderson ander...@symbol.com wrote (in sde23e68@symbol.com) about 'Ferrite clamps' on Mon, 25 Nov 2002: Fisher Custom Communications P/N F-201-DCN-xxmm BW: 30 - 1000MHz       Walter J. Anderson EMC Regulatory Engineer Symbol

RE: Ferrite clamps

Gert, A flat 150 ohms from 30 MHz to 1000 MHz is not realistic. Have you measured S11 for a clamp over that range? We did such measurements several years ago while A1:2000 was still under discussion and found a far higher value for typically available clamps down near 30 MHz. I agree with the

Self Oscillating Flyback Converters

Hi All, Does anyone out there know of a good source for theory of operation and design of self-oscillating flyback converters? Particularly the variable on time, off time, variable frequency types, also referred to as RCC circuits. Thanks, Fred Waechter SMPS Consulting

Re: Short circuit tests in GR-1089

This was resolved a couple of NEBS conferences ago. All the main RBOCs were present and they agreed that a fuse was a special case. The fuse is designed to open, therefore operation of the fuse is normal and allowed. This may be a semantic strech, but that's where the current NEBS

RE: Short circuit tests in GR-1089

Joe, I was going to suggest that you look into Issue 3 of GR-1089, but you have been given the basics. I would suggest anyone who has to live with this standard, get the new issue and spend a day or so to really look it over in detail. There was a great deal of work put into clarifying

RE: Ferrite clamps

The test requirements for these ferrite clamps are part of an amendment for CISPR16-1. The amendment is in the stage of committee draft (CD) so very early. (CISPR/A/424/CD) Basically the troughput losses are measured. I have suggested the NL committee to add input CM-impedance (S11) (150 ohm +/-

Re: DC Input Power Conducted Emissions

Bob, Also to what Leslie has stated, if your equipment is considered to be Telecommunications Network Equipment, then ETSI's EN300386 would apply, which requires a conducted emissions test, according to EN55022, of the DC input power port (see clause 6.2) if the input wiring is greater than

RE: Ferrite clamps

Patrick, I'm not certain that the labs won on this one. They now get to go out and buy more test equipment (ferrites). On the other hand, I guess they do win while some regulators accept the clamps and other don't. The lab gets to run the radiated emissions test twice (more money). Fischer

RE: Short circuit tests in GR-1089

Joe, Short-Circuit Tests NOTE: The short-circuit tests that follow are intended to be performed only on out-of-service equipment. NOTE: Discrete equipment assemblies that have been listed by an NRTL to UL 60950[31] generally need not be subjected to the short circuit tests in Section 9.10.1

RE: Ferrite clamps

Fisher Custom Communications P/N F-201-DCN-xxmm BW: 30 - 1000MHz Walter J. Anderson EMC Regulatory Engineer Symbol Technologies One Symbol Plaza Technical Services MS:B4 Holtsville, NY 11742 631 738 4492 Conway, Patrick R conw...@louisville.stortek.com 11/25/02 11:43AM Gherry- Thanks

Re: DC Input Power Conducted Emissions

Bob, EN55022 is applicable to ITE equipment, there is no conducted emissions on DC port. However, EN55022 excludes any equipment (or part of the ITE equipment) which has a primary function of radio transmission and/or reception according to the ITU Radio Regulations (excerpt from EN55022:1998,

RE: test requirements of MIL-STD -461 vs EN61326-1.

Other than they are both EMC test requirements, the difference is night and day. The MIL-STD-461 tests are: Much more severe/sensitive Cover much wider frequency bands Are typically done with different equipment. The MIL Radiated Immunity tests use 8 different antennas, EN61326-1 uses 1. The

RE: Short circuit tests in GR-1089

Oops - wrong short circuit test - just realized. Sorry about that. My mind is occupied by that one currently... The on-board short-circuit test is to simulate a short occurring for whatever reason (manufacturing defect, design defect, operational fault). Since something bad happened, in my

DC Input Power Conducted Emissions

Is it a requirement to measure conducted emissions on a DC input power port under CISPR 22 or EN55022? The equipment is a PC that runs off a DC power bus? Thanks, Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252

RE: Ferrite clamps

Gherry- Thanks for the response. I was very interested in knowing what the responses were at the committee level to those basic questions. From your report it seems the basics of non-interference were brought up but other factors weighed heavier in the argument. If I worked

RE: test requirements of MIL-STD -461 vs EN61326-1.

Folks, We have received an inquiry, concerning on the key differences between the test requirements of MIL-STD -461 and EN61326-1. Can someone familiar with these two stds provide some details on these different test requirements. Your input would

Re: Revised EMCD

I read in !emc-pstc that Gordon,Ian ian.gor...@edwards.boc.com wrote (in E1BA0362B28ED211A1E80008C71EA3060181919C@z- 160-100-30-252.est.ibm.com) about 'Revised EMCD' on Mon, 25 Nov 2002: Does anybody know how long it may be before the new directive might be implemented? It depends on whether the

RE: Domestic or International stds for noise or sound pressure level requirements

Folks, In addition to the many IEC 1010 test and measurement equipment related stds and SEMI S2 requirements, what are the sound pressure level requirements stated in any other domestic or international stds? Your input would be appreciated. Best Regards,Paul J Smith

RE: Bluetooth in Israel, Brazil, Argentina and India

Kim/David, I can confirm that only the reduced 2.418 to 2.457 GHz band is available in Israel for SRD devices complying with EN 300 328 and EN 300 440. Maximum EIRP is 100 mW. Contact me offline for info about the other countries. Best Regards, Roger Magnuson Managing Director TGC Communication

RE: EMC EH close field probes / Mindcruiser

I fully agree with Ken. I have many times used house-made sniffer probes to locate sources (and also coupling paths and/or antennas) of radiated emissions. They helped me identify and fix a number of compliance issues by pointing to the critical elements. That is the real plus of these tools.

New EMCD Implementation

Re below, I have in the back of my mind 2005 but I cannot lay my hands on the piece of paper containing the information. will keep looking Cheers Alan E Hutley www.compliance-club.com Gert et al Does anybody know how long it may be before the new directive might be implemented? Thanks Ian

RE: When CE doesn't pass

For large systems which cannot logistically either fit into chambers or would cost a small fortune to ship to a lab I believe you can have a notified body do modified EMC on site. I know TUV Rheinland in Newtown CT has a very nice Mobile EMC lab where they will come to your facility and do

RE: ReIssue: When CE doesn't pass

You would certainly violate any warranties such as service and manufacturing. Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 =

RE: Bluetooth in Israel, Brazil, Argentina and India

Dear Kim, I do not work with Bluetooth myself, but I have just spoken with a colleague on your behalf. To my surprise, he states that Bluetooth has not yet been approved for use in Israel due to a clash with frequencies used by the military. However, the Ministry of Communications is working on

Re: Bluetooth in Israel, Brazil, Argentina and India

In a message dated 11/25/2002 7:52:58 AM Central Standard Time, kimb...@post7.tele.dk writes: Hi all Sorry to bring this matter up again. I have now a list of 21 countries requirements for BlueTooth products national type approvals, and still need 4 more which I can't find. Can some one

Bluetooth in Israel, Brazil, Argentina and India

Hi all Sorry to bring this matter up again. I have now a list of 21 countries requirements for BlueTooth products national type approvals, and still need 4 more which I can't find. Can some one help with national requirements for SRD and BlueTooth for; Israel Brazil Argentina India Thank you

RE: ReIssue: When CE doesn't pass

I would be a bit concerned with altering another's product. Two things could happen, you could violate some other aspect of CE, so you would need to re-test everything, or, you could violate something in the design itself, and how would you explain a field problem? The liability would rest on

RE: Revised EMCD

Gert et al Does anybody know how long it may be before the new directive might be implemented? Thanks Ian Gordon _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by