Re: [PSES] NFC (near field communication): FCC Approach?

[alfred1520list]

I'm not smart enough to add to the topic, but I sense something not to be over 
looked:

MIKE SHERMAN wrote:

> I'm not an EE

and 

> We're rating RF output as 0 mW (i.e., rounding off, it's a lot closer to 0 mW 
> than to 1 mW).

and Heckrotte, Michael wrote:

> Digital devices that have a power consumption not exceeding 6 nW are exempt 
> from specific technical standards per FCC Rules 15.103(f).

Not to over looked is the disparity in unit.  Thinking between 0 mW and 1 mW is 
in linear unit.  However radio frequency emissions are usually expressed in 
logarithmic unit.  The commonly encountered range of RF power expressed in 
logarithmic term is between -100 dBm to +60 dBm. In linear terms they are 10 nW 
to 1 kW.  That's a huge range, and more specifically, there is a lot of 
difference between 0 mW and 1 mW.

From what Michael wrote about, 6 nW is more about 160,000 times smaller than 1 
mW and yet is not exempted.

Heckrotte, Michael also wrote:

> There are no such exemptions for intentional radiators. See FCC Rules 15.225 
> for radiated emission limits applicable 

to radio devices operating on 13.56 MHz

And an NFC device intentionally radiate RF energy in order to communicate 
wirelessly.

Sincerely,
Alfred Lee


On October 19, 2018 3:22:50 PM PDT, MIKE SHERMAN  wrote:
>Esteemed fellow listers --
>
>
>I'm looking at a very low power, intermittent NFC card reader/writer.
>Alkaline battery operated device. NFC is only energized for 10 seconds
>at a time on demand, and range to read/write is less than 1 cm from the
>surface of the device.
>
>
>I'm not an EE, but my simplified thought process is: "I can barely get
>this to couple magnetically with a card sitting on its surface. How
>could I possibly interfere with broadcast services or other equipment?"
>
>
>So, oh wise ones, from your experience what actions with respect to FCC
>are reasonable to do? For example, radiated emissions testing seems to
>me like a total waste of time and money.
>
>
>More technical details: maximum input power to the NFC chip is 17 mW.
>Chip is coupled to a flat 30mm x 40mm "NFC Ferrite Antenna (13.56 MHz)"
>that my EE describes as "zero gain." We're rating RF output as 0 mW
>(i.e., rounding off, it's a lot closer to 0 mW than to 1 mW).
>
>
>Looking forward once again to interesting wisdom from this group.
>
>
>Mike Sherman
>
>Graco Inc.
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Current measurement

[alfred1520list]

While on the subject, any one familiar with the Kill A Watt meter? This listing 
sells for US$26 and free shipping:

https://www.amazon.com/P3-International-P4460-Electricity-Monitor/dp/B000RGF29Q

I swapped out the 2 mOhm current sensing resistor with a 0.2 ohm resistor (and 
of course greatly limiting the current capability) so I can measure standby 
power down to 10 mW. I did test with a 7 W incandescent light bulb and it 
reported reasonable readings. I tested are few phone chargers with nothing 
plugged and they idle at less than 50 mW. (But I don't know if I trust the 
figure down to decimal point:)

It could be a really inexpensive way to get a reasonable (but not certification 
grade) power measurements.

Best Regards,
Alfred




On February 12, 2018 1:36:10 PM PST, Brian O'Connell  
wrote:
>Will admit to having done this stuff with using microcontrollers and
>discrete sequential data channels and of sufficient sampling speed, but
>am subject to frequent bouts of idiocy. And this was for process
>control, and thus not a Type Test. Also, note that there is a
>difference in technique and equipment between power loggers and an
>analytical instrument.
>
>Best done with an instrument intended for this measurement; that is
>'power analyzers'. Typically found on shelves at Keysite, Tektronix
>(nee Voltech), Ametek, Chroma,  etc. And many Tek and keysite DSOs have
>a 'plug-in' for doing power measurements. All of this instrument-grade
>stuff can easily handle external sensors.
>
>
>Brian
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] 
>Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 1:05 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: [PSES] Current measurement
>
>If you want to calculate the consumed power (W) in a 1-phase AC
>circuit, you
>can use a current clamp-on device to measure the current in one
>lead/wire
>and multiply with the applied voltage.
>But with such a current clamp on device, to we measure the apparent
>power
>(VA) or the real power (W)?
>
>Best regards
>Amund
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] God EMC practice

[alfred1520list]

Hi Kim,

I've just had a chat with a compliance test lab engineer on this very topic 
yesterday. He said their measurements have a 3 dB uncertainty between labs. So 
it world seem when everything is as accurate as possible, 3dB margin would 
ensure you will always pass, possibly without any margin. So the 6 dB rules 
would give you 3 dB margin.

That's my humanly guess. God had different rules that we can't Divine:)

Best Regards,
Alfred


On September 1, 2017 6:01:20 AM PDT, Kim Boll Jensen  wrote:
>Hi
>
> 
>
>One of our customers want to know if there are some good practice for
>emission compliance. I normally recommend 3 dB margin, but I don't have
>any
>reference to why this is OK.
>
> 
>
>I know that some companies have internal rules for 3 or even 6 dB
>margin to
>compensate for production deviations and for many years ago VDE did
>have
>some rules like that.
>
> 
>
>Does anyone have some good references on this subject?
>
> 
>
>Best regards,
>
> 
>
>Mr. Kim Boll Jensen
>
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

[alfred1520list]

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
> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
>Associates Rayleigh England
> 
>Sylvae in aeternum manent.
> 
>From: Stephen Whalen [mailto:scwha...@bellsouth.net] 
>Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 11:34 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: [PSES] Co-located modules
> 
>All,
>For a module that has "must not be co-located" restriction on FCC
>grant.  
>What is the minimum separation distance allowed for another
>transmitter?  I recall 20cm but can't find where it is documented.
> 
>Regards,
>Stephen
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to  >
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)  
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas  >
>Mike Cantwell  > 
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher  >
>David Heald  > 
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

[alfred1520list]

On November 7, 2016 9:03:11 AM PST, Ted Eckert 
<07cf6ebeab9d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org> wrote:
>With a little imagination, I can come up with many scenarios that
>appear “no-win”. Imagine you are driving down a mountain road with a
>rock face on one side and a long drop off a cliff on the other. Vehicle
>to vehicle communications allow your self-driving vehicle to stay close
>to the car in front of you. It is a straight road and high speeds are
>allowed. Now imaging a rock slide starts dropping a large boulder onto
>the roadway. The vehicle in front of yours may hit the rocks, but it
>remains intact enough to protect its occupants. Your vehicle can either
>hit the vehicle in front of you potentially injuring its passengers or
>take evasive action risking your health. What does the vehicle do?
>
>I live in the state of Washington where rock slides are common.
>http://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/geology/geologic-hazards/landslides
>http://komonews.com/news/local/rock-slide-closes-highway-2-in-central-wash
>http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9957369/ns/us_news-life/t/rock-slide-closes-major-highway-washington/#.WCCyMIWcGeE
>
>Maybe vehicles will need to be programmed to have a much greater
>following distance in areas where there is a rock slide risk. However,
>there are many places where a tree can fall on the road, large animals
>can jump out or a child could run out into the road unexpectedly.
>
>These aren’t situations that are new with self-driving cars. They just
>create a new issue of liability.
>
>Ted Eckert
>Microsoft Corporation
>
>The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those
>of my employer.
>
>From: alfred1520list [mailto:alfred1520l...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 8:16 AM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.
>
>Obviously I can't think of all possibilities, but it seems to me that
>these sort of situations must be corner cases. After all I have never
>found myself in a situation where my only options are to hit a person
>or go down a 300 m cliff at 100 km/h. Further more, I won't be driving
>at 100 km/h when there is a cliff where I can go down!It's called
>defensive driving. I am sure defensive driving is programmed into all
>self driving cars so they are much less likely to be in this sort of
>situation. The only exceptions that I can imagine are deliberate acts
>on the part of the person.
>On November 7, 2016 5:06:36 AM PST, Jim Hulbert
><jim.hulb...@pb.com<mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com>> wrote:
>So a Mercedes automated vehicle would make the decision of who lives
>and who dies. That’s incredible.
>
>
>Jim Hulbert
>
>
>From: Pawson, James [mailto:james.paw...@echostar.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 6:23 AM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.
>
>
>This article in The Guardian is related to your first point regarding
>human drivers “gaming” driverless cars to gain an advantage
>
>
>https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/30/volvo-self-driving-car-autonomous
>
>
>“The first self-driving cars to be operated by ordinary British drivers
>will be left deliberately unmarked so that other drivers will not be
>tempted to “take them on”, a senior car industry executive has
>revealed.”
>
>
>Also
>
>
>“Meanwhile, Mercedes has made it clear that if a situation arises where
>a car has to choose between saving the lives of its occupants or those
>of bystanders, it will save the occupants. ‘If you know you can save at
>least one person, at least save that one. Save the one in the car,’
>Christoph von Hugo, manager of driver assistance systems and active
>safety at Mercedes, told the Paris Motor Show recently.”
>
>
>Bruce Schneier writes a lot on security issues and regularly covers IoT
>and occasionally driverless vehicles. His blog makes for interesting
>reading - https://www.schneier.com/  I’m sure it will end up being the
>usual round of addition of features, poor programming/testing (due to
>budget constraints), vulnerabilities, exploiting, patching, public
>outcry, legistlation, etc.
>
>
>All the more reason to buy a bicycle.
>
>
>James
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
>Sent: 06 November 2016 02:17
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
>Subject: [PSES] Automated vehicles.
>
>
>Although it's Saturday, I'll use this as my Friday Question.
>
>
>
>
>In light of two recent reports in the InComplisnce Magazine.  I feel
>prompted to ask if anyone on this forum can address a couple of
>questions.
>
>
>http://incomplia

Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.

[alfred1520list]

Obviously I can't think of all possibilities, but it seems to me that these 
sort of situations must be corner cases. After all I have never found myself in 
a situation where my only options are to hit a person or go down a 300 m cliff 
at 100 km/h. Further more, I won't be driving at 100 km/h when there is a cliff 
where I can go down!It's called defensive driving. I am sure defensive driving 
is programmed into all self driving cars so they are much less likely to be in 
this sort of situation. The only exceptions that I can imagine are deliberate 
acts on the part of the person.

On November 7, 2016 5:06:36 AM PST, Jim Hulbert  wrote:
>So a Mercedes automated vehicle would make the decision of who lives
>and who dies. That’s incredible.
>
>Jim Hulbert
>
>From: Pawson, James [mailto:james.paw...@echostar.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 6:23 AM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Automated vehicles.
>
>This article in The Guardian is related to your first point regarding
>human drivers “gaming” driverless cars to gain an advantage
>
>https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/30/volvo-self-driving-car-autonomous
>
>“The first self-driving cars to be operated by ordinary British drivers
>will be left deliberately unmarked so that other drivers will not be
>tempted to “take them on”, a senior car industry executive has
>revealed.”
>
>Also
>
>“Meanwhile, Mercedes has made it clear that if a situation arises where
>a car has to choose between saving the lives of its occupants or those
>of bystanders, it will save the occupants. ‘If you know you can save at
>least one person, at least save that one. Save the one in the car,’
>Christoph von Hugo, manager of driver assistance systems and active
>safety at Mercedes, told the Paris Motor Show recently.”
>
>Bruce Schneier writes a lot on security issues and regularly covers IoT
>and occasionally driverless vehicles. His blog makes for interesting
>reading - https://www.schneier.com/  I’m sure it will end up being the
>usual round of addition of features, poor programming/testing (due to
>budget constraints), vulnerabilities, exploiting, patching, public
>outcry, legistlation, etc.
>
>All the more reason to buy a bicycle.
>
>James
>
>
>
>From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
>Sent: 06 November 2016 02:17
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: [PSES] Automated vehicles.
>
>Although it's Saturday, I'll use this as my Friday Question.
>
>
>In light of two recent reports in the InComplisnce Magazine.  I feel
>prompted to ask if anyone on this forum can address a couple of
>questions.
>
>http://incompliancemag.com/u-s-dot-releases-federal-policy-on-automated-vehicles/
>
>http://incompliancemag.com/uber-self-driving-truck-delivers-budweiser-beer/
>
>Aside from the obvious concerns about vehicle safety, it occurs to me
>that there two problem that presently are missing in recent media
>reporting.  In particular for the Level 4 & 5 vehicles as described by
>the SAE and DOT report.
>
>1) I understand that these vehicles, such as the fully automated
>Budwiser truck have avoidance systems. Given the human condition of
>today, I foresee the distinct possibility of drivers in other vehicles
>"playing around" in such a way as to try and force a response from the
>avoidance algorithms and cause these vehicles to crash themselves. 
>This kind of sport would be exactly what some types would enjoy. What
>sort of preventative measures have been taken in this regard?
>
>2) Given the lack of attention to hacking we have already witnessed in
>the Internet of Things (IoT) crowd, how are the driverless vehicle
>people doing with regard to the cyber security of these vehicles. That
>is, is it conceivable that someone may try to hack the truck's
>operating system and hijack it?
>
>Thanks all,
>
>doug
>
>--
>
>Douglas E Powell
>
>doug...@gmail.com
>http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>-
>
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to >
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas >
>Mike Cantwell >
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher 

Re: [PSES] RE from Flat Panel ICs

[alfred1520list]

Hi Eugene,

Jokes aside, may be the meaning of general recommendations have different 
meanings to us so let's clarify that and see if it takes us any closer to 
finding help for you.

By focusing on chips specific causes to the RE problem implies that you have 
ruled out all other causes of the RE problems. One way to draw such conclusion 
is having a number of different designs differing only in the LVDS drivers chip 
being used. All other aspects such as circuit design, PCB layouts, peripheral 
connections, enclosures, environments, etc. are all significantly the same or 
identical. Thus the only variable is the LVDS drivers. Only then could we be 
blaming the chip and looking for chip specific causes. Otherwise you may risk 
chasing the wrong tail. 

It's worth stating my favorite statement about debugging: if one made the wrong 
assumption, one may never find the problem, so when you are facing a dead end, 
re-examine your assumptions. The most famous example is the software bug that 
causes the computer not to boot is an unplugged power cord:)

I apologize if I am merely repeating everything you already know very well. 
Again, wrong assumption leads to dead end and that helps nobody.

Best of luck debugging.

Sincerely
Alfred


On October 14, 2016 3:17:26 PM PDT, John Woodgate <jmw1...@btinternet.com> 
wrote:
>The ICs themselves are too small to produce significant RE. The RE
>comes from the PCB tracks and external cables. But of course you know
>that.
> 
>With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
><http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk/> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
>Associates Rayleigh England
> 
>Sylvae in aeternum manent.
> 
>From: MARINA PEYZNER [mailto:epeyz...@sbcglobal.net] 
>Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 10:25 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] RE from Flat Panel ICs
> 
> 
>Actually, my question was about Flat panel driver ICs, particularly
>about chips Intersil Techwell TW8804 and National Semiconductor
>DS90C385A. I had hope that somebody has valuable experience with this
>problem.
> 
>Thank you anyway,
>Eugene 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>On Friday, October 14, 2016 2:12 PM, alfred1520list
><alfred1520l...@gmail.com <mailto:alfred1520l...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> 
>And general recommendations also say to reduce common mode current. But
>obviously this shouldn't have been said too:)
>On October 14, 2016 9:24:36 AM PDT, John Woodgate
><jmw1...@btinternet.com <mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com> > wrote:
>It seems to me that claiming familiarity with general recommendations
>severely restricts what anyone can add. The general recommendation for
>reducing RE is to minimise the areas of current loops by pairing 'go'
>and 'return' conductors on adjacent layers of the PC board. But you
>obviously know that already.
> 
>With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
><http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk/> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
>Associates Rayleigh England
> 
>Sylvae in aeternum manent.
> 
>From: MARINA PEYZNER [mailto:epeyz...@sbcglobal.net] 
>Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 5:08 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
>Subject: [PSES] RE from Flat Panel ICs
> 
>  
>Dear experts,
>Flat panel driver ICs are known for their high emission. I have some
>problems with radiated emissions particularly from chips Intersil
>Techwell TW8804 and National Semiconductor DS90C385A.
>Could you, please share your knowledge about reducing this RE. We are
>familiar with general recommendations.
> 
>Thank you,
>Eugene 
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-p!
>stc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
><emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (in! cluding how to
>unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
>Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
>David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <

Re: [PSES] RE from Flat Panel ICs

[alfred1520list]

And general recommendations also say to reduce common mode current. But 
obviously this shouldn't have been said too:)

On October 14, 2016 9:24:36 AM PDT, John Woodgate  
wrote:
>It seems to me that claiming familiarity with general recommendations
>severely restricts what anyone can add. The general recommendation for
>reducing RE is to minimise the areas of current loops by pairing 'go'
>and 'return' conductors on adjacent layers of the PC board. But you
>obviously know that already.
> 
>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: MARINA PEYZNER [mailto:epeyz...@sbcglobal.net] 
>Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 5:08 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: [PSES] RE from Flat Panel ICs
> 
>  
>Dear experts,
>Flat panel driver ICs are known for their high emission. I have some
>problems with radiated emissions particularly from chips Intersil
>Techwell TW8804 and National Semiconductor DS90C385A.
>Could you, please share your knowledge about reducing this RE. We are
>familiar with general recommendations.
> 
>Thank you,
>Eugene 
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to  >
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)  
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas  >
>Mike Cantwell  > 
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher  >
>David Heald  > 
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Counterfeit tracking

[alfred1520list]

What do you mean by interacting? If you mean mostly one way, i.e. reading of 
the same posts without using emails, there's is the archive server. The link is 
in the banner at the end put in by the list server.

On September 28, 2016 6:21:13 AM PDT, "Kortas, Jamison" 
 wrote:
>On an unrelated note - is there another way to interact with this
>community other than through emails? Is there a board, or something
>somewhere? 
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jamison
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 8:30 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Counterfeit tracking
>
>There have been some consistency problems with this service, probably
>from usage of direct CSS url links and/or my stupid brute-force script,
>so my simple-minded approach is to have my crawler run the login(which
>has changed several times), then resolve the href-tagged links, then go
>from there to each notification page. Could be done manually, but all
>hail the power of beautifulsoup.
>
>Have not used for very long time, but so far does seem to be a decent
>source of global regulatory information.
>
>Brian
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Kortas, Jamison [mailto:jamison.kor...@ecolab.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 4:23 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Counterfeit tracking
>
>Hopefully - I am doing this right - this is my first post.
>
>I recently found Notify U.S.
>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tsapps.nist.gov_notifyus_data_home_home.cfm=DQIDaQ=clRTYxLjfWTYQkksq4Trqw=SuXR4v_cWDGps50Ob7OgG3eGvjdtolb5h84QBM8NxmY=IReRG-UxkmrJ8pyfltBE4hphRlWOTXCfdP53vklA2x4=urX8Yhg2scOT-Og6yRG5v1sZ5EbS7Klt5JP3l2bKbBU=
>which is run by the NIST in the Dept. Of Commerce and it notifies me of
>anything published by the WTO an others. You can filter it by field of
>interest and country. It is quite informative and free.
>
>Here are the "fields of interest":
>
>65  Agriculture
> 49  Aircraft and Space Vehicle Engineering
> 71  Chemical Technology
> 93  Civil Engineering
> 61  Clothing Industry
> CA  Conformity Assessment Procedures
> 91  Construction Materials and Building
> 97  Domestic and Commercial Equipment. Entertainment. Sports
> 29  Electrical Engineering
> 31  Electronics
> 27  Energy and Heat Transfer Engineering
> 13  Environment. Health Protection. Safety
>23  Fluid Systems and Components for General Use Measurement of fluid
>flow, see 17.120
> 67  Food Technology
> 01  Generalities. Terminology. Standardization. Documentation
> 81  Glass and Ceramics Industries
> 11  Health Care Technology
> 37  Image Technology
> 35  Information Technology. Office Machines
> 25  Manufacturing Engineering
>This field includes standards for general use
> 53  Materials Handling Equipment
> 07  Mathematics. Natural Sciences
> 21  Mechanical Systems and Components for General Use
> 77  Metallurgy
> 95  Military Engineering
> 73  Mining and Minerals
> 55  Packaging and Distribution of Goods
> 87  Paint and Colour Industries
> 85  Paper Technology
> 75  Petroleum and Related Technologies
> 17  Physical Metrology and Measurement. Physical Phenomena
> 39  Precision Mechanics. Jewellery
> 45  Railway Engineering
> 43  Road Vehicle Engineering
> 83  Rubber and Plastics Industries
> 47  Shipbuilding and Marine Structures
>03  Sociology. Services. Company Organization and Management.
>Administration. Transport
> 33  Telecommunications. Audio and Video Engineering
> 19  Testing
>This field includes standards for general use only Analytical
>chemistry, see 71.040
> 59  Textile and Leather Technology
> 79  Wood Technology
>
>Thanks,
>
>-Jamison
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 2:53 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Counterfeit tracking
>
>Thanks, I'll check out DuckDuckGo, it sounds like it may have
>possibilities.  
>
>I have looked at rss aggregators in the past.  It's kind of hard to
>find one that consolidates similar postings in multiple locations. 
>This also may be worth another look.
>
>All the best. Doug. 
>
>
>  Original Message
>From: oconne...@tamuracorp.com
>Sent: September 27, 2016 1:39 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Reply-to: oconne...@tamuracorp.com
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Counterfeit tracking
>
>Distill will monitor selected pages, but is not very selective. And
>indiscrete browser plugins are not good for a corporate computer. You
>still need something to traverse the web and find new/alternate
>regulatory information. Related - there are commercial aggregation
>services for compliance engineers for $$$. And as for 'keywords' much
>of the SEO gaming will not allow a simplistic parsing for words or
>phrases to return reliable data sets.
>
>Prefer the API for DuckDuckGo (duckduckgo.com/api) for search and url
>traversals, and if you wanna play code monkey, relatively easy to write
>'focused' crawlers 

Re: [PSES] Friday Question

[alfred1520list]

Hi Rich,

> ps:  Three or more axes?  I know x, y, and z.  What are the additional axes?

I've heard about six axes robots. I think they are the three translational 
axes, i.e. left/right, up/down, back/forth, and the three rotational axes which 
may not be aligned with the translational axes. Think your shoulder and arm 
give you the three translational movement, and your wrist gives you limited 
rotational movement. So a six degree robot is super human:)

On July 22, 2016 2:29:05 PM PDT, Richard Nute  wrote:
> 
>
>ISO 8373 defines robot as "An automatically controlled, reprogrammable,
>multipurpose manipulator programmable in three or more axes, which may
>be either fixed in place or mobile for use in industrial automation
>applications."  
>
> 
>
>My Roomba doesn’t fit this definition.  First, it is only two axes. 
>Second, it is for home use, not industrial.  Third, I don’t know if it
>is reprogrammable.
>
> 
>
>I still consider it a robot.
>
> 
>
> 
>
>Rich
>
> 
>
>ps:  Three or more axes?  I know x, y, and z.  What are the additional
>axes?
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Handheld or portable voltmeter/ammeter with built-in and adjustable limit function with audible alarm

[alfred1520list]

If none of these meet your needs, you can always find any number of those with 
a programming API and write a program to do whatever you want. Many support USB 
interface. You can get a cheap windows tablet as the buzzer and attach to the 
meter through USB.

Best regards,
Alfred

On May 30, 2016 10:57:38 AM PDT, Ken Javor  wrote:
>Ken & Dieter,
>
>Thank you, but none of those really met my criteria. I¹m looking for a
>piece
>of stand-alone test equipment, a multimeter, where I can set a limit
>and
>have the thing generate an audible tone (like during continuity
>testing) if
>the preset level is exceeded (or if  a measured value is below the
>preset
>minimum).   Datalogging is not of interest ­ what I need is a real-time
>alarm which I don¹t have to visually monitor.
>
>It just seems like this should exist, and would be extremely valuable
>for a
>test facility to have available, custom configurable for a wide variety
>of
>thresholds.
>
>Ken Javor
>Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
>
>
>From: Ken Wyatt 
>Reply-To: Ken Wyatt 
>Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 10:12:47 -0600
>To: 
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Handheld or portable voltmeter/ammeter with
>built-in and
>adjustable limit function with audible alarm
>
>Maybe one of these could work.
>
>http://www.poweringthenetwork.com/site-power-monitor/
>
>https://www.gavazzionline.com/pdf/DIB71CB.eng.pdf
>
>https://www.microdaq.com/data-loggers/voltage-current.php
>
>www.westell.com/document/dc-power-monitoring/?dl=1
>
>
>
>
>___
>
>I'm here to help you succeed! Feel free to call or email with any
>questions
>related to EMC or EMI troubleshooting - at no obligation. I'm always
>happy
>to help!
>
>Kenneth Wyatt
>Wyatt Technical Services LLC
>56 Aspen Dr.
>Woodland Park, CO 80863
>
>Phone: (719) 310-5418
>
>Email Me!   | Web Site
>  | Blog 
>The EMC Blog (EDN) 
>Subscribe to Newsletter
>
>Connect with me on LinkedIn 
>
>> On May 30, 2016, at 9:56 AM, Ken Javor 
>wrote:
>> 
>> Handheld or portable voltmeter/ammeter with built-in and adjustable
>limit
>> function with audible alarm
>> For an EMI test, I need to monitor direct current and set a limit
>above which
>> I get an audible alarm.  I don¹t want to constantly have to watch an
>> ammeter/voltmeter while also operating the susceptibility equipment.
>I also
>> don¹t want to have to connect a DVM to a PC; I want the limit setting
>function
>> to be self-contained.  Seems as if there ought to be such a device,
>but I
>> can¹t find it. Doesn¹t have to be an ammeter per se; if it can
>measure dc
>> millivolts, I can use a current shunt.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>> Ken Javor
>> Phone: (256) 650-5261
>> -
>> 
>> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc
>> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
>> 
>> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities
>site at
>> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used
>> formats), large files, etc.
>> Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>> Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>> unsubscribe) 
>> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>> Scott Douglas 
>> Mike Cantwell 
>> For policy questions, send mail to:
>> Jim Bacher  
>> David Heald 
>
>-
>
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc
>discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
>
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at
>http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe) 
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher  
>David 

Re: [PSES] Spectrum analyzer and noise floor

[alfred1520list]

I am just now gotten very interest on this subject. I think you mention a key 
factor: antenna factor. The SA noise floor unit is dBm. After you have added 
the antenna factor the unit is dBuV/m. Everything else being perfect, zero 
loss, 0 dBi antenna gain across frequency, etc., the antanna factor is still be 
highly frequency depedent. I think: AF = 20log(MHz) - 29.8. Therefore the flat 
SA noise floor in dBm will be traslated into a curve in dBuV/m.

Regards,
Alfred

On February 23, 2016 4:42:47 PM PST, "McDiarmid, Ralph" 
 wrote:
>I would like to explain to a colleague why the noise floor on a SA does
>
>not look flat as it sweeps across a given frequency range after antenna
>
>factors, cable factors, external gain and external attenuation are 
>programmed into its display function. 
>
>I think it breaks down to these fundamental points:
>
>1. the SA receiver has noise in its attenuator, mixer and filter
>circuits 
>(say -80 dBm, and maybe flat within a limited  frequency range)
>2. the external amplifier has some noise too, but its gain lowers the 
>noise floor created by #1  (also flat within a limited frequency range)
>3. the cables have losses which are frequency dependant, and those can
>be 
>entered as loss factors into the SA  (shapes the noise floor a little
>and 
>those losses raise the noise floor)
>4. the antenna has a gain which is frequency dependant with several dB
>of 
>hills and valleys across its usable frequency range (that really shapes
>
>the noise floor more than 1, 2 or 3 above)
>5. noise floor shape caused by #4 is the mirror image of the antenna 
>factor vs frequency
>
>Is that a decent summary?
>.
>Ralph McDiarmid
>Compliance Engineering
>Residential/Commercial
>Solar Business
>Schneider Electric
>D  +1 (604) 422 2622 x62622
>E  ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com
>3700 Gilmore Way
>Burnaby
>BC
>Canada
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] SV: Ferrite bead vs. resistor

[alfred1520list]

I don't know your circumstances but I can understand why in some situations 
adding a resistor help. In many circuits a driver side series termination is 
part of the circuit design to match the driver impedance to the trace impedance 
for source termination. The effect of this is that any reflections are absorbed 
by the driver when it is reflected back and therefore preserve the signal 
integrity at the receiving end. A side effect could be that there is less 
ringing which results in less EMI. You need to look closely at your design to 
under the mechanics of your problem and device a solution.

Alfred

On February 5, 2016 1:00:25 AM PST, Amund Westin  
wrote:
>A resistor will cause a voltage drop, and that could make problems for
>the functionality. Ferrite bead will not make a DC voltage drop.
>
>For higher frequencies (above 100MHz) the bead is more precise
>described (Z, X and R), while the impedance of a resistor is maybe not
>defined.
>
> 
>
>#Amund 
>
> 
>
> 
>
>Fra: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no] 
>Sendt: 5. februar 2016 09:38
>Til: 'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' 
>Emne: Ferrite bead vs. resistor
>
> 
>
>Had some EMI issues, caused by a LVDS line.
>
>By inserting CM chokes, the radiation seemed to lower significant.
>
>Inserting resistors as well (aprox 22 ohm) made it even better. I can’t
>check the eye curve, but 22ohm makes no problem with the EUT operation.
>
> 
>
> 
>
>But, should the series resistor be replaced by ferrite beads instead?
>Will it make any really differences?
>
>The LVDS clock is approx 40MHz and data rate 160Mbps.
>
> 
>
>#Amund
>
> 
>
> 
>
>
>-
>
>This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
>emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your
>e-mail to 
>
>All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>
>Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site
>at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
>well-used formats), large files, etc.
>
>Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
>unsubscribe)
>List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
>For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>Scott Douglas 
>Mike Cantwell 
>
>For policy questions, send mail to:
>Jim Bacher:  
>David Heald: 

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Is your company doing enough to ensure adequate EMC compliance?

[alfred1520list]

And now the fire catching hover boards are hard to buy, but not because no one 
wants to buy. Why?

On January 14, 2016 10:08:50 PM PST, "Ghery S. Pettit"  
wrote:
>Amen to that.
>
> 
>
>Ghery Pettit
>
> 
>
>From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] 
>Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 7:59 PM
>To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>Subject: Re: [PSES] Is your company doing enough to ensure adequate EMC
>compliance?
>
> 
>
>"Last week was a good one for the compliance profession. "
>
>Could not disagree more.  This is big brother, or socialism, call it
>what
>you will.  A product either meets requirements, or it doesn't. The
>gov't
>instructing the private sector on how to get there is worse than
>superfluous, it's damaging.
>
>Ken Javor
>Phone: (256) 650-5261
>
>
>
>  _  
>
>From: "gdstuyvenb...@yahoo.com"
><058ee1229c70-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
>Reply-To: "gdstuyvenb...@yahoo.com" 
>Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 03:33:42 +
>To: 
>Subject: [PSES] Is your company doing enough to ensure adequate EMC
>compliance?
>
>As this is a board that deals primarily with regulatory/compliance
>issues, I
>thought the following article was pertinent to our cause and deserving
>of
>consideration.  
>
>FEDS AS THOUGHT LEADERS: A BACK-DOOR COMPLIANCE DEFENSE TAKES SHAPE
>-compliance-defense-takes.html>
>-compliance-defense-takes.html> 
>By Richard L. Cassin  
>  | Wednesday, November
>11,
>2015 at 7:53AM
>Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell said last week the DOJ's
>hiring
>of a compliance counsel doesn't mean the agency is "moving toward
>recognizing or instituting a 'compliance defense.'"
>What then will the compliance counsel do?
>"She will help us evaluate each compliance program on a case-by-case
>basis
>-- just as the department always has -- but with a more expert eye,"
>AAG
>Caldwell told a gethering
>ell-speaks-sifma-compliance-and-legal-society>
>ell-speaks-sifma-compliance-and-legal-society>  of compliance officers
>in
>New York.
>Caldwell, pictured above, then set out the factors the DOJ compliance
>counsel will assess:
>
>*  Does the institution ensure that its directors and senior managers
>provide strong, explicit and visible support for its corporate
>compliance
>policies? 
>*  Do the people who are responsible for compliance have stature within
>the company? Do compliance teams get adequate funding and access to
>necessary resources? Of course, we won't expect that a smaller company
>has
>the same compliance resources as a Fortune-50 company. 
>*  Are the institution's compliance policies clear and in writing? Are
>they easily understood by employees? Are the policies translated into
>languages spoken by the company's employees? 
>*  Does the institution ensure that its compliance policies are
>effectively communicated to all employees? Are its written policies
>easy for
>employees to find? Do employees have repeated training, which should
>include
>direction regarding what to do or with whom to consult when issues
>arise? 
>*  Does the institution review its policies and practices to keep them
>up to date with evolving risks and circumstances? This is especially
>important if a U.S.-based entity acquires or merges with another
>business,
>especially a foreign one. 
>*  Are there mechanisms to enforce compliance policies? Those include
>both incentivizing good compliance and disciplining violations. Is
>discipline even handed? The department does not look favorably on
>situations
>in which low-level employees who may have engaged in misconduct are
>terminated, but the more senior people who either directed or
>deliberately
>turned a blind eye to the conduct suffer no consequences. Such action
>sends
>the wrong message -- to other employees, to the market and to the
>government
>-- about the institution's commitment to compliance. 
>*  Does the institution sensitize third parties like vendors, agents or
>consultants to the company's expectation that its partners are also
>serious
>about compliance? This means more than including boilerplate language
>in a
>contract. It means taking action -- including termination of a business
>relationship -- if a partner demonstrates a lack of respect for laws
>and
>policies. And that attitude toward partner compliance must exist
>regardless
>of geographic location.
>
>Two days after AAG Caldwell's talk in New York,  Andrew Ceresney, head
>of
>the SEC's enforcement division, spoke to
>