In message
e8fe7b2b522643a5b229902d6244c...@bl2pr08mb052.namprd08.prod.outlook.com
, dated Fri, 5 Sep 2014, Nyffenegger, Dave
dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com writes:
Yes, I meant another standard specific to power supplies, compliance to
which would without a doubt include SELV rating. -Dave
But John, HDMI uses a differential signalling interface which is known to
provide low emissions! 8-)
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 04 September 2014 19:44
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC EMI Test and Ferrites on
Hi Doug,
If you cut through the hype, and follow the clues (the pocket claims 100dB attenuation) you arrive here:
http://www.aaronia.com/products/shielding-screening/Aaronia-X-Dream-100dB-shielding-fleece/
I only spent 2 minutes looking, there are likely to be other similar products.
In message
cec6039c09630543852b1a8cfa0a0c790de63...@stwpiexc03.sats.corp, dated
Fri, 5 Sep 2014, Pawson, James james.paw...@echostar.com writes:
But John, HDMI uses a differential signalling interface which is known
to provide low emissions! 8-)
Oh, right. So no ferrites are actually
On 9/4/2014 1:09 PM, Richard Nute wrote:
They use the argument that the NRTL must KNOW that the
equipment is safe through their own measurements. They
cannot be held responsible for tests that are done by
another NRTL.
Or liable for another's.Pay for three approvals and use the one
On 9/2/2014 8:21 PM, Nyffenegger, Dave wrote:
So if my employer who is not CA based but does have other direct employees in
CA, sends me to CA for a few days to work, they have to take out the CA income
tax too?
Seems like CA has put up a big closed for business sign.
Could be worse.
In message 54097f7a.3030...@earthlink.net, dated Fri, 5 Sep 2014, CR
k...@earthlink.net writes:
Pay for three approvals and use the one that's granted? Ouch!
Yes, that's a danger; some test houses (not in USA, of course) would see
a commercial advantage in being a bit lax, so more clients
Wow,100 dB is pretty impressive.I have seen heavy drapery mean to set up a temporary shield room that was not that good. And at one time a shield room I worked in had about 103 dB shielding effectiveness at 3GHz, with all steel walls and EMI gasketed seams.
In message 20140905132845.6037649.80805.13...@gmail.com, dated Fri, 5
Sep 2014, Doug Powell doug...@gmail.com writes:
100 dB is pretty impressive.
It's a matter of a very fine, interlocked weave.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Quid faciamus nisi sit?
Ah yes,
But can coax cable with a double layer shield claim that much attenuation at
all frequencies?
Thanks, - doug
Douglas Powell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
Original Message
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Friday, September 5, 2014 7:51 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Reply To:
Hello Sudhakar,
I am just trying to understand here.
India is CB Scheme member but it does not accept any CB test report and
they also have in country test requirement using BIS standard instead
i don't understand it . Please clarify the steps and process including
advantage of using CB
In message 20140905135401.6037649.303.13...@gmail.com, dated Fri, 5
Sep 2014, Doug Powell doug...@gmail.com writes:
Ah yes,
But can coax cable with a double layer shield claim that much
attenuation at all frequencies?
I doubt that braided shields made of such fine filaments would be
Hi group,
A ITE product is tested to EN55022 Radiated emission with a well defined setup
(cables, traffic, etc...) trying to find the worst case emissions and it passes.
I think finding the real worst case emission for all frequencies with one and
the same set-up is in practice not possible in
Hi,
regarding health and safety requirements required by RTTED 1999/5/EC:
Is compliance with EN 50385 or EN 62311 required?
Best regards
Dipl.-Ing. Michael Loerzer
Managing Director
Regulatory Affairs Specialist
Globalnorm GmbH
Kurfürstenstr. 112
10787 Berlin
Phone
It is my understanding that what you say is correct. From memory, PROVING
something complies is different than VERIFYING something complies. For example,
as a customer, or a monitoring entity, when 'verifying'; you are allowed a
single tone over the limit, because statistically that can just
Kris,
The test standards describe a standardized setup of the environmental
conditions, the test equipment, the field calibrations and the UUT, all
described in enough detail to be able to duplicate the setup at a later
time. This is supposed to ensure that testing at another qualified lab,
Hi Doug,
Assuming both labs are qualified as you say, you also make the assumption that
the 2nd lab has full knowledge about the setup of the EUT. And that's exactly
the problem. That 2nd lab doesn't know and thus results may be different, even
fail, due to the relative positions of the EUT
Hi Kris,
As long as the configuration that the customer / market surveillance authority
has used is valid and representative of use and tested according to the
standard I don't think you will have a leg to stand on.
Have a look at Whereas: (17) in the EMC Directive 2004/108/EC. It states
Hi Kevin,
Thank you for the clarifications and status of the NRTL program. And the link
for updates!!
Have a nice weekend!
From: Kevin Robinson [mailto:kevinrobinso...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 3:51 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Battery
All
Many regulations allow for the regulatory marks to be applied to
accompanying documentation or packaging when the item is too small.
There does not appear to be any guidance in this respect in UN ECE R10 for
EMC.
Sub-assembly
An approval mark described in paragraph 5.3. below
One of the reasons, many years ago, that a 'standard' setup was determined in
both CISPR and ANSI standards was to relieve the never ending always present
constant manipulation of cables and equipment. While the EUT is to be
operating in a typical use scenario, the setup should be as depicted
unlikely
Dennis Ward
This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST
Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and I sintended for the exclusive use of the
recipient(s) named above. It may contain information that is confidential
and/or legally privileged. Any unauthorized use
Many years ago while employed by a different company we had one of our products
surveillance tested at a national test lab in another country. Our product
failed radiated emissions by 2db. They said that because this was within their
Measurement Uncertainty of 4.5db that they could not fail it
I'm curious if users of these shielding pockets will discover the law of
unintended consequences. If a cell phone is placed in the pocket, it will have
trouble picking up the signal from any cell towers. The phone will boost its
transmit power and my try linking to the towers more frequently. I
Hi Michael,
Those standards look reasonable. Sometimes it is possible that more than
one standard could apply.
I would recommend this TGN document for good European RF Exposure
guidance
..
http://www.rtteca.com/TGN%2017%20Version%203%20Update%20February%202014.pdf
Michael.
Michael
The RTTE Compliance Association have a useful Technical Guidance Note on this:
http://www.rtteca.com/TGN%2017%20Version%203%20Update%20February%202014.pdf
regards
Charlie
From: Michael Loerzer [mailto:loerzer_mob...@globalnorm.de]
Sent: 05 September 2014 15:58
To:
Snooping just poked it's little head into my life recently. There are about a
bazillion people monitoring, or capable of monitoring, you, Apple, Samsung,
NSA, local police, etc. And even though I knew it was being done I posted a
picture to social media that was taken by someone else. The app
In general, agree with the mfr if not part of the vehicle's original equipment
and not a spare part identical to what was installed as original equipment. R10
describes the mark in annex 1. The NCB or CAB that does the assessment and
writes the report should provide marking info. For EU/EFTA
Exactly. In fact before the standard setup the worst case setup would mean an
examination of permutations. A system of 6 devices could have a million test
configurations. A,B,C,D,E,F - A,C,D,E,F,B - A,C,D,E,B, F ad nausium. And a
strict interpretation of that could mean that you do if for
Snooping has been a common subject with the media recently, but realistically,
as long as I'm not breaking any laws or post nude pictures of myself on the
cloud, what do I care if someone is snooping my cell phone? What real harm can
come of it?
And I'm not talking about skilled hackers
Colleagues,
Well, altho my initial question ran far afield I thank
everyone who chimed in to respond.
The discussion has been quite interesting even tho the
initial question is still left somewhat hanging.
The business/cultural/legal
Are not forgetting site variations also?
I think the site attenuation has leeway also. I remember something like +8-0
dB???
Michael Sundstrom
Garmin Compliance Engineer
2-2606
(913) 440-1540
Whatever your discipline, become a student of excellence in all things. Take
every opportunity to
Using apps is conditional on accepting the app developers¹ terms.
But if the question includes what difference it makes if the police can
track you, well that isn¹t a big deal at all. Just the difference between
being a subject or being a citizen. People who don¹t know or care about the
Brian,
One point on e/E-marking - in the automotive sector, 'e' marking is going away.
As of November, the EU is only doing certification per UN ECE R10, so requires
the 'E' mark.
Thanks,
David Schaefer
EMC Chief Technical Advisor
TÜV SÜD America Inc
Office: 651 638 0251
Cell: 612 578 6038
In message 006201cfc938$cf4f3560$6deda020$@cs.com, dated Fri, 5 Sep
2014, Pete Perkins 0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org writes:
. From my perspective the NA Recognition of component safety provides
a unique building block capability for mfgrs in that the same
components do not need to
What harm?!?! Space aliens and zombies, most obviously.
Many people have their life's data on their smartphone. Potential for financial
or medical disaster. Also, this personal information goes to 'big' data where
marketing dweebs generate profiles to enable sales manipulations. Nothing new
In message d02f7164.5f1ab%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Fri, 5
Sep 2014, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
But if the question includes what difference it makes if the police can
track you, well that isn¹t a big deal at all. Just the difference
between being a subject or
In message
65eb7d8099b14f948b584475acc1f...@bn1pr0201mb0819.namprd02.prod.outlook.c
om, dated Fri, 5 Sep 2014, Carpentier Kristiaan
kristiaan.carpent...@technicolor.com writes:
A ITE product is tested to EN55022 Radiated emission with a well
defined setup (cables, traffic, etc...) trying to
From: John Cochran
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 3:47 PM
To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: UL 60950-1 clause 2.2.3
I am doing compliance testing on an outdoor computer/display and am having
problems with complying with clause 2.2.3 of UL 60950-1 and clause 6.2 of UL
60950-22. When the earth
Dear list members,
I was hoping some one might be able to point me in the right direction for
Vietnam wireless approvals. The device is already FCC certified under
15.247 and is a 2.4 GHz transmitter. I am trying to find out the
requirements for the test lab, the requirements or standards for
Once the technology/cost allow for the tracking of everyone then that's what
they will do. And decide later what to do with the data. People will come up
with lots of ideas to do with the data once they have it.
-Dave
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate
Hey Gary, at least this one is relatively mundane but not necessarily benign. The picture had GPS coordinates in the meta data inserted by the device that took the original picture (geo-tagged). When you received a copy of the picture that meta data came along with it. Any picture manipulation
Hi John,
In which document can I find the provision that market surveillance testing is
done,
in case of dispute, in the way the manufacturer did it?
Best regards,
Kris Carpentier
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: vrijdag 5 september 2014
Dangerous ground indeed, and not a technical subject.
Infinitely more important than whether a device meets an EMI requirement, or
how to make it do so, but nevertheless this is not the forum for it.
However, I didn't bring the subject up. The gentlemen who opined that if he
had nothing to
In message
e7baf06cd71c4cc59654ac9ac55e6...@bn1pr0201mb0819.namprd02.prod.outlook.c
om, dated Fri, 5 Sep 2014, Carpentier Kristiaan
kristiaan.carpent...@technicolor.com writes:
In which document can I find the provision that market surveillance
testing is done, in case of dispute, in the way
Hi John:
Nothing wrong. When the ground is opened, you get
about half the mains on the (formerly) grounded
parts. All equipment does this, including two-
wire equipment. Even a three-wire power cord does
this!
The voltage is due to a capacitive voltage divider,
line-chassis-neutral. The
46 matches
Mail list logo
