[PSES] Questions on RCB, RCCB and ELCBs

Hi all, I am Vincent, newbies in Product Safety. Hence, I sincerely hope to seek your professional answers to my following questions, 1) What are the major differences between RCB, RCCB, GFCI and GFEP ? 2) If the human-let-go-current-threshold is about 10mA, why does IEC 61008 RCCBs used in

[PSES] Questions on GFCI & GFEP

Hi all, Good evening, May I know what are the difference between Ground Fault Current Interrupter (GFCI) and Ground Fault Equipment Protector (GFEP) in terms of safety features (e.g. response time, trip current), usage and operation principle? What are the common industry standards for GFCI

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Michael / Bill,Really good points, thanks.One thought comes to mind; If the module is for Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) and installed in a  vehicle without it's own enclosure e.g. module board installed inside a vehicle under the dash board, would the entire vehicle be considered an

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

I would agree with Bill, that the FCC is certainly moving in the direction of a more “holistic approach toward the whole end product”, and less interested in the separation of the component parts (component parts, in the sense of assessing operations separately). I would suspect that if

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

What is the purpose of the separation, anyway? Known effects of two close senders are cross-modulation and intermodulation, caused by the emission from one sender impinging on the non-linearity of the output stage of the other. But there is no way of specifying a distance (other than a trivial

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

I don't have any conclusively documented evidence from the FCC. This supposition is taken from recent FCC presentations, current KDB's and conversations with trusted "co-inhabitants" in this industry. An example of this indication is provided below. It is from an April 2015 FCC TCB Council

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Bill -- This "in the same enclosure" interpretation sounds new and drastic to me. Do you have any official document/link on this interpretation? thanks Mike Sherman Graco Inc. - Original Message - From: "Bill Stumpf" To: "EMC-PSTC"

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

The other issue is that, just because the FCC may consider collocated as being antennas in the same unit, does not affect the 20 cm rf exposure requirement for rf exposure in a mobile configuration. I am not, however, that the FCC only considers collocation as stated. For example,

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Thank you, everyone! Regards,Stephen On Wednesday, February 15, 2017 8:37 AM, Bill Stumpf wrote: #yiv1807988800 #yiv1807988800 -- _filtered #yiv1807988800 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv1807988800 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

The latest chatter I gathered on this topic is that the FCC considers collocated as "in the same enclosure". Indications are that any reference to <20cm being considered collocated has been set aside. Bill From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Yes. But what's a factor of 1.852 x 10^12 between friends? With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England Sylvae in aeternum manent. From: alfred1520list

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Nautical miles? On February 14, 2017 11:48:13 PM PST, John Woodgate wrote: >OT story. I saw an official instruction for aircraft that specified a >minimum separation of '5 nm'. Pretty close! > >With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Hi Stephen, One thing to remember is that “must not be co-located” really just means “must not be co-located without some additional effort” For example, co-locating two modules and then calculating the new combined RF Exposure MPE value to verify that the product still meets the