Re: [PSES] CE Marking Provoqium

Let's not confuse a CFR with law. While a Code of Federal Regulations may be backed up by a law, they are in themselves not law. It is like CFR 47 for telecom. The only teeth it has is contained in the telecommuncations act of 1934 updated in 1999. Outside this law, the CFR has no teeth

Re: [PSES] ANSI C63.4:2009 1GHz Testing

Under ANSI C63.4 2009 you are to test with the absorbers above 1GHz, but if the lab uses ANSI C63.4 2003 you CANNOT use the absorbers. Under ANSI C63.4:2009 the minimum attenuation for the absorbers must be 20dB and cover a 2.4 m by 2.4 m square. Thanks Dennis Ward Senior Certification

Re: [PSES] ANSI C63.4:2009 1GHz Testing

Hi Tim Correct, ANSI C63.4:2009 uses the absorbers from 1 to 40 GHz per section 5.5 of C63.4:2009 Thanks Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive

Re: [PSES] OATS vs FAR Radiated Emissions Limits

Yes TASO is correct. TASO 3 is a picture that has noise (snow) that is present but not objectionable. Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use

Re: [PSES] OATS vs FAR Radiated Emissions Limits

Today we have computers, transmitters and receivers that do not interfere to much with other devices. But none of that would be possible if it weren't for the work of what far too many today see as 'capricious and arbitrary'. So soon the makers of things forget why things were done, why limits

Re: [PSES] Possible Counterfeit EMC Components?

Sounds like you have found 'yellow paint in butter'. Just the note that the component came the 'far east' send shivers up the spine. Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is

Re: [PSES] Testing EUT

You mean to them there those ones what aint got no gud englitch Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient (s) named above. It

Re: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements

Now if you were meditating on it, then it would be the u holtz coils Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient (s) named

Re: [PSES] Boeing engineers use spuds to improve in-air Wi-Fi

Maybe they can substitute potatoes for SAR solutions. If the potato bakes, then the power is too high and the device fails:) Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for

Re: [PSES] FCC IC and Product Information

Sorry Ron but your information is quite outdated. It should not be assumed that Canada is a slam dunk for confidentiality or that all documents can be held confidential. While it is true that Canada (IC) does not go out of its way to make documents available, Canada does have a right to access

Re: [PSES] EU Group

system.  Usage of PCTEST email addresses for non-business related activities is strictly prohibited. No warranty is made that the e-mail or attachment(s) are free from computer virus or other defect.  Thank you. -Original Message- From: Dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Friday, March

Re: [PSES] EU Group

Kronos blew up, they had to move Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient (s) named above. It may contain information that is

Re: [PSES] FCC and very low-power wireless devices

Be careful with the idea that you can do anything on any frequency under 15.209. This simply is not true. While under 15.209 a perimeter protection device can operate in the 54-72 MHz and 76-88 MHz bands, no other type intentional radiator is allowed to have its fundamental in the 54-72 MHz,

Re: [PSES] Critical component in EMC report

From: Dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:53 PM To: 'Derek Walton'; 'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' Subject: RE: [PSES] Critical component in EMC report I would have to disagree with you. I do not know what version you are reciting, but 17025 does not contain

Re: [PSES] 3rd party labs due-diligence

Well, unfortunately it is too often that some labs just know how to pass an audit, but when it comes to testing, they fall very short. Far too many 'so called' good labs rely on instrumentation and simply do not question results. This leads to bad measurements, even though the lab is supposedly

Re: [PSES] Retest because of supersded standard?

Testing and meeting essential requirements. – indeed an interesting combination. A man goes to a doctor and asks how he can meet his bodies directive that it receives essential nourishment without using his stomach because his stomach ‘changes’, gives him gas and gets upset too often.

Re: [PSES] USA Canada rf emission test standards

Well, first, ANSI C63.4 is not a UL document, it is an ANSI standard published by IEEE. So there is no ANSI UL C63.4. That aside, the FCC KDB data base and DA-09-2478 confirm that either the 2003 or 2009 version can be used. There are differences, so a test lab cannot or should not assume

Re: [PSES] USA Canada rf emission test standards

On the second part of the question about FCC and IC having the same test standards. Canada allows the use of ANSI C63.4 however, ICES-003 does say that is must be the latest addition. This only means that if both FCC and IC are being done, then the 2009 version would be the one used. As with

RE: mobile phone safety

Here is the relationship of cell phones to popping corn. 1 Place the popcorn in a bowl with butter and salt. 2 Place one two or three cellphones in a plastic bag and place in the same bowl. The plastic bag is to protect the cell phone from the butter. 3

RE: like your eggs raw /// mobile phone safety

To paraphrase an old adage dealing with those who may actually believe this video has any credibility what so ever - You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him THINK. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American TCB Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry www.atcb.com

RE: Radio module integration (Part 22/24)

Hi Adam While the FCC does have a policy statement about licensed modular transmitters using “Contains FCC ID: xxxyyyzzz” on the outside of a host device, it does not have a policy about full transmitters (i.e. non-modular). If the licensed transmitter is not a modular transmitter but has an

RE: Radio module integration (Part 22/24)

, but you never hear of anyone retiring and moving North!!! --- On Fri, 9/5/08, dward dw...@atcb.com wrote: From: dward dw...@atcb.com Subject: RE: Radio module integration (Part 22/24) To: 'Rudd, Adam' ar185...@ncr.com, emc-p...@ieee.org Date: Friday, September 5

RE: Radio module integration (Part 22/24)

-2825 From: dward [mailto:dw...@atcb.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:35 PM To: wdows...@yahoo.com; Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: Radio module integration (Part 22/24) The FCC has two different approaches to part 15 and to licensed modules

RE: Labeling Requirements per Industry Canada

HI Grace While it may be a desire of a marketing company to use their name, they are not the certificate holder and thus putting only the marketing companies name on the device would be incorrect. The standard is pretty clear on this issue. The “the applicant's name (i.e. manufacturer's name,

RE: FCC Requirement Note

Hi Andrew Grant notes, while some being generic, are always applicable to the particular grant on which they occur. In this case the source of the note is the device itself. The limit to gain is most likely due to the MPE caused by the gains listed being able to meet the separation distance

RE: FCC

In the situation you mention, as long as the antenna is of the same or lesser gain and also of the same type as approved, then the device can be used based on its approval and would not mandate any further testing when placed in a system. However, approval status only shows an assumption of

RE: EU/OJ Blacklist

Hi Gail I would think that you should look into the Anti-dumping laws in the EU for this sort of thing. Dennis Ward Director of Engineering American TCB Certification Resource for the Wireless Industry www.atcb.com 703-847-4700 fax 703-847-6888 direct - 703-880-4841 From:

RE: rod antenna measurement not allowed below 30 MHz for FCC

Hi Mario This has been a very long standing position from the FCC. It goes way back to the 80’s when I first started dealing with the FCC. This very old policy has been reiterated in the Knowledge Data Base (KDB). For example when specifically asked the FCC responded in KDB460108 which states

RE: EMI Receiver

I would ALWAYS caution anyone making measurements not to rely solely on what an analyzer is supposed to do or not do and to always use his/her own noodle to judge any measurement made. Measuring instruments make errors, don't report error, or sometimes are just setup wrong. Never never rely

RE: Mobile Phones in EMC Labs

Whatever happened to the time when a good engineer could repair his own dipole, fix minor front end analyzer problems, be able to tell the difference between 20dBm and 20dBuV, know what dBm and dBuV meant, understand you can't put the output of a 100W transmitter directly into the front end of the

RE: Mobile Phones in EMC Labs

11:58 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Mobile Phones in EMC Labs In message 00b201c95a35$f528d430$df7a7c90$@com, dated Tue, 9 Dec 2008, dward dw...@atcb.com writes: Automation, without proper control, only gives a lot of paper with meaningless unsubstantiated number. Doesn't matter

RE: FCC question RF exposure question

There are two rf exposure conditions provided in the FCC rules that must be addressed at the time of certification. One is for portable configurations for devices that are used within 20cm of the body, and the other is mobile configurations for devices that are used more than 20cm from the body.

RE: EMC Eduction and Training

In keeping with the season and to insure beginning EMC engineers I recite, with editorial license, Church’s response to Virginia O’Hanlon. Virginia- I am 8 years old. Some of my little friends say there is no EMC and that it is Black Magic. Papa says, “If you see it on the emc-pstc, it’s so.”

Re: [PSES] TCBs FCC Shut Down

To be more specific – a TCB does not actually issue a grant, even though it has their name on it as the TCB. Only the FCC can issue a legal grant of equipment authorization and no device, except under the special conditions of marketing in part 2, can be sold or offered for sale, used or

Re: [PSES] Standards copyright lawsuit

Probably more accurate is that we see laws we do not like and then try to find ways around them or to find loopholes that apply to us. Sometimes it is simply better for all if we just read and understand the intent of laws and not try to sway them in one way or the other. H not gonna

Re: [PSES] Job Opening for EMC Engineer

I tend to agree with Brian's statements. I would also add that even if experience is gained in another field, it is probably not enough in the EMC field to meet the they want several years of experience criteria. After all, it is not just engineering experience they are looking for, it is

Re: [PSES] Job Opening for EMC Engineer

Old EMC engineers never 'retire', they just attenuate their activities. J Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient (s) named

Re: [PSES] FCC draft comments on WiFi operation in channels 12 and 13

Michael gives a good over view of the situation. The bottom line is that a device CANNOT transmit on any frequency that it has not been shown to comply. So, even if the device passive scans, it still cannot transmit on channels 12 and 13 unless those channels have been shown to comply in the

Re: [PSES] Concerning FCC classification of digital devices

HI Neils Your client should understand that it is not his point of view that matters, it is what the FCC says about the device and what they say needs to be done in order for the device to be authorized. The simple fact that it can, at any time, connect to a PC and download software makes this

Re: [PSES] Foam Table Documentation

Hi Michael The FCC is not going to state any specific table material requirement. While they recommend material like XPS (Styrofoam - an extruded polystyrene foam) above 1GHz, the only requirement is that the table be non-conductive at whatever frequency you are measuring. ANSI C63.4

Re: [PSES] radiated emissions testing may understate actual emissions, an example using a class D stereo amp

I do not want to speak for Mike Violette, but what I think he is referring to by interference is the fact that, while the FCC could care less if two part 15 devices interfered with each other, they do care if part 15 devices interfere with licensed services. And it is in this area that the 'issue

Re: [PSES] radiated emissions testing may understate actual emissions, an example using a class D stereo amp

While there is a distance difference between Class A and Class B, it is not the distance that defines the Class, it is the Class that defines the distance. The definition of a Class B is similar, but not exactly the same as for EN. Class B part 15 digital devices are defined as A digital device

Re: [PSES] radiated emissions testing may understate actual emissions, an example using a class D stereo amp

, 2014 12:40 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] radiated emissions testing may understate actual emissions, an example using a class D stereo amp In message 000a01cf8024$494154b0$dbc3fe10$@pctestlab.com, dated Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Dward dw...@pctestlab.com writes: Currently the rules

Re: [PSES] FCC EMI Test and Ferrites on Cables

The designer is flat wrong. 15.27 makes it clear that if such a 'special accessory' is required for compliance of a device the they either must be provided with the device or they must ensure a method such that the special accessory is provided to the user of the device without additional charge

Re: [PSES] Battery certification issue

Europe is dealing with separate and sovereign countries, so MRA and the like between certifiers in all countries are needed. But, if you go to one test house in one country and another test house in that same country, even in Europe, I am sure you will find that they do not all 'accept' each

Re: [PSES] RF shielding in clothing.

Probably from the same people that brought you snake oil and the like. ​ 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

Re: [PSES] Failure of Radiated emission

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

Re: [PSES] RF shielding in clothing.

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

Re: [PSES] FCC EMI Test and Ferrites on Cables - a conundrum

Since it is the ferrite that is the ‘special accessory’, the company would not necessarily need to provide the cable, they would only have to provide the special accessory ferrite that would fit on the cable. Or they would provide a means of obtaining the ferrite at the time of purchase for

Re: [PSES] California Prop 65

It must be tattooed on your forehead or right hand in permanent ink and the letters must be of a size that can be easily read without the use of magnification. :) Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and I sintended for

Re: [PSES] California Prop 65

Actually, since the US has no legal National Language, it needs to be in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese (common character), Portuguese, Italian, Gaelic, French, Lithuanian, Russian and German. Hope you have a big forehead. :) Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain

Re: [PSES] Misuse mains cordset

If the normal stated operating temperatures of a laptop is 30 degrees to 100 degrees F then leaving a laptop in a hot car in for example AZ would be misuse as it is not being used within the parameters of its design. And there are ladders that are designed for use across small open crevasses so

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

Also, if an NB did such a thing, I would think (hope) their AB would not only slap their hands, but either suspend them or remove their accreditation as an NB. Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and I sintended for the

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

Competent and reliable = interesting concept. Until the RED is actually usable existing means of NB appointments do not do a lot in the area of competence. For example, a TCB has to show competence in the area they certify. They must prove that reviewers can actually do the testing and they

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

In a perfect world, all Authorizing Bodies, NBs, TCBs and test labs would do everything right. Alas, they world is far less than perfect and errors abound. Accreditation helps, but it is only paper and does not monitor the actual work involved. It relies on the integrity and reliability of

Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

activities is strictly prohibited. No warranty is made that the e-mail or attachments(s) are free from computer virus or other defect. Thank you. From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 10:30 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] New Radio

Re: [PSES] Brick power supplies and test errors (two topics)

Surprise surprise:) As long as assessment of labs is being done by people not even in the proper field of expertise, should we really expect more?? ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and I sintended

Re: [PSES] Brick power supplies and test errors (two topics)

Exactly. While assessors may look over paperwork, that does not actually mean those involved in testing know what the standard to which they are testing actually says or if they do that they actually test to them. Cannot tell you how many times I review reports from supposedly accredited labs

Re: [PSES] test errors

I don’t think the original discussion is or was centered on testing ‘black boxes’ or even the fact that a manufacturer should know his product and what it takes to get it in the market. The original discussion was that labs which are supposed to know what they are doing, because they have a

Re: [PSES] EMC on Industrial Cut-Off Saws

Nah – they just had a bigger lobby when the FCC rules were put in place:) So, that is why no one invites me to dinner ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and I sintended for the exclusive use of the

Re: [PSES] RS FSP Spectrum Analyzer

In the field of certification or compliance testing the workings of analyzers can be a daunting task to understand. However, understanding the analyzer and what it does is a must - especially with the newer analyzers. These devices do things that are amazing and that reduce test time.

Re: [PSES] RS FSP Spectrum Analyzer

HI Grace If it meets CISPR 16 and/or ANSI requirements, then it is OK to use for this type measurement. You just have to be careful and make sure the engineer pays attention to the values and understands how the device works. Dennis Ward Senior Certification Engineer PCTEST This communication

Re: [PSES] RS FSP Spectrum Analyzer

Since even radiated spurious emissions for FCC licensed radios is ERP/EIRP measurements, currently it would not matter a whole lot. Currently the only requirement to use CISPR 16 for analyzers for licensed devices is in TIA603 when TEM cells are used. However, for part 15 devices, where

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

“Risk Assessment” or in plain English – How many people have to get injured or killed before anything is done that should have been done in the beginning anyway. ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

or attachments(s) are free from computer virus or other defect. Thank you. From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 11:14 AM To: 'dward'; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering Good evening My

Re: [PSES] Quasi Peak - Length of Measurement Time for Final Spot Measurement?

Yes, worst case means worst case. ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient(s) named above. It may contain information that is confidential and/or

Re: [PSES] Preamplifiers

HI Grace Pre-amp gain compression occurs when the input is too high and it causes non-linearity in the amp. The issue then is to make sure that the input stays within the stated linearity range of the amp otherwise, too much input will cause readings that are not accurate. This is a very

Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven

The solution to that is simple - get a new microwave but don't buy the same brand. :) ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient(s) named above. It may contain

Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven

$4068c0f0$c13a42d0$@pctestlab.com, dated Fri, 15 May 2015, dward dw...@pctestlab.com writes: May your Sinicism not cause you to miss the good things in life. I'm not Chinese! And I'm not of the canine persuasion, which is what the word you aimed at originally alluded to. -- OOO - Own

Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven

. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 9:04 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven In message 001001d08f24$621e6c60$265b4520$@pctestlab.com, dated Fri, 15 May 2015, dward dw

Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven In message 002701d08f2c$fbcc7d40$f36577c0$@pctestlab.com, dated Fri, 15 May 2015, dward dw...@pctestlab.com writes: The fact that this seems an anomaly says the Bayesian probability is satisfied by reason

Re: [PSES] Integrating radio COSTs into other equipment

First, there is no such thing as an RTTE certified device. Second, a module is an apparatus and any apparatus, regardless of where used, is to comply with the associated directives. Third. all device using CE marking, must still comply. If it does not comply in a final configuration, then it

Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven

-Original Message- From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 1:34 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven Sinicism - a word made up from Latin for Chinese (sinicus) and Greek for belief, ideology or style (ism

Re: [PSES] Interference Caused by Microwave Oven

. Usage of PCTEST email addresses for non-business related activities is strictly prohibited. No warranty is made that the e-mail or attachments(s) are free from computer virus or other defect. Thank you. -Original Message- From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Friday, May 15

Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,) Where?

Actually, that is not exactly correct. While many standards are written as 'voluntary' the FCC does in fact incorporate by reference some ANSI standards. To incorporate by reference means that the full content of the referenced document is part and parcel of the document to which it is

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

operators (especially in some countries! ) may use illegal amps (“boosters”) to raise the transmit power beyond the legal limits! John Allen W.London, UK From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: 12 September 2015 20:00 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

I agree -an amateur could not and would not use a call sign other than his or her designated licensed call sign. No blue leader, no quacking duck, nothing but respective number licensed to him or her. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone Original message From:

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

I for one would never want the US to get into this arena. Too much regulation in the US as it is. Don’t need more and don’t want more. I’ll decide what is best for me, not the government. ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

7a0$@pctestlab.com>, dated Mon, 14 Sep 2015, dward <dw...@pctestlab.com> writes: >I for one would never want the US to get into this arena. Too much >regulation in the US as it is. Don’t need more and don’t want more. >I’ll decide what is best for me, not the government. But if y

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

for you, because you are what I would call an expert customer. You have the knowledge to ameliorate immunity problems, but most of the population does not have this capability. Ed Price WB6WSN Chula Vista, CA USA From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 8

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

oblems, but most of the population does not have this capability. Ed Price WB6WSN Chula Vista, CA USA From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 8:20 AM To: 'Ed Price'; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: RE: [PSES] RF

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

have the knowledge to ameliorate immunity problems, but most of the population does not have this capability. Ed Price WB6WSN Chula Vista, CA USA From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 8:20 AM To: 'Ed Price'; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-P

Re: [PSES] RF Common Mode Immunity Test Question

As a US citizen my premise on any government involvement is to make it as impossible or as hard for them to regulate anything as can be. This includes EMC, immunity or any other thing. Too many fall under the idea that personal safety outweighs personal freedom. That may work in a socialist

Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment

Ain't no such thing.   Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone Original message From: Richard Nute Date: 12/8/2015 12:23 PM (GMT-08:00) To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment Hmm.

Re: [PSES] Bluetooth audio product

Careful with the idea that the US and Canada are ‘fully harmonized’. That simply aint the case. There are a number of things that must be considered for transmitters that are different between the US and Canada. What can be said is that most likely, if you do testing per the Canadian

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

Several issues. First, 15.123 is not the clause exempting devices it is a clause referring to labeling of digital ready devices. Clause 15.103 is for exemption of devices. So, while it may say exempt, unintentional radiator devices are still subject to 15.5 and 15.29 with ‘strong’

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

defect. Thank you. From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 8:46 AM To: 'Ted Eckert' <ted.eck...@microsoft.com>; 'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' <EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> Subject: RE: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicab

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

ments of Part 15. The general operation requirements of 15.5 always apply. As to the Class A/B application, you have to look at how the device is marketed. If it is not marketed to the consumer and is not intended to be used in the home, then Class A applies. Bill Stumpf From:

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

As to the Class A/B application, you have to look at how the device is marketed. If it is not marketed to the consumer and is not intended to be used in the home, then Class A applies. Bill Stumpf From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 11:06

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

? Unless the PC manufacturer designed that PC so that it could only be used for one specific control purpose. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 _ From: dward <dw...@pctestlab.com <mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com> > Reply-To: dward <dw...@pctestlab.com <mailto:dw...@pctestla

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

ies, it only pertains to the technical requirements of Part 15. The general operation requirements of 15.5 always apply. As to the Class A/B application, you have to look at how the device is marketed. If it is not marketed to the consumer and is not intended to be used in the home, then Class A

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

Actually I believe it was if it was exempt from compliance issues because of ISM under 15.103 (mistakenly referred to as 15.123. From there it went to the issue of it being a piece of test equipment that met the exemption, etc etc etc. The Class A or B came about after that discussion. But

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

ss has nothing to do with the CE Marking "Declaration of Conformity" To the original question poster: It may be worthwhile to take a look at the FCC Rules Part 15.31(3)(k) relating to Composite Systems. Confused yet? Glad it's Friday? -Bob Sykes From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestl

Re: [PSES] Maximum Allowed Duty Cycle Correction Factor per FCC 15.35

Remember, these are in regards to the limit, NOT the measured values. ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient(s) named above. It may contain information

Re: [PSES] NFC Near Field Communication Devices

For FCC NFC transmitters are a certified device. And starting very soon, testing can only be done at an accredited lab either in the US or in an MRA partner. NOTE that the accredited lab in an MRA partner country must be listed as a CAB under the MRA and not simply accredited. Evidently

Re: [PSES] iNARTE EMC accreditation - thoughts?

Had several of them; dropped them; don’t need them; don’t want them; never helped me get work, never stopped me from getting work. So, while the certs look pretty, they have little meaning and unless a company pays for them, they simply are not worth the expense. But that is just my view.

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] Cell phone power output, legal limits in USA

Part 22H, 24E, 27 and 90S. Part 90S however, has some bands that are not ERP but antenna conducted. ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient(s) named above. It

Re: [PSES] Cell phone power output, legal limits in USA

web site for free. Regards, Deniz -Original Message- From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com] Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 10:32 AM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Cell phone power output, legal limits in USA Yes they are CFR 47. Part 22H has a limit of 7W ERP

Re: [PSES] Cell phone power output, legal limits in USA

of distance cm to meters) in use in the USA, and I expected a legal limit on transmit power would upper-side bound that. Ken Javor Phone: (256) 650-5261 > From: dward <dw...@pctestlab.com> > Reply-To: dward <dw...@pctestlab.com> > Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:04:11 -0700 > To: <

  1   2   >