Yes I agree
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
e-mail and destroy all copies and the original message.
manent.
-Original Message-
From: Harris, Kevin J (DSC) [mailto:kevinharr...@tycoint.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 4:27 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
Hello All
Have I misunderstood the words in IEC62052-31?
In a hypothetical measurement
to
insist on 99V.
Does this imply the test has to be applied twice?
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 4:13 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
Thank you.
With best wishes
To: John Woodgate <jmw1...@btinternet.com>; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
It is in IEC62052-31; which I believe refers to IEC61010-1
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 11
It is in IEC62052-31; which I believe refers to IEC61010-1
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 11:28 AM
To: Balmukund Vyas; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
Which standard has
, September 22, 2016 5:05 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
It might be worth mentioning the text from one of the safety standard as below :
If, when carrying out a conformity test, there is any uncertainty about the
exact value of an applied or measured
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
Incorrect for product safety, there would be no 'gray area'. Per the error
band, the temperature measurement exceeds limits. It is important to not
confuse the 'accuracy method' in Guide 115 with the calculated UoM. Limits per
instrument accuracy are only
On 9/21/2016 1:34 PM, Brian O'Connell wrote:
For EMC - it is all magic and hand-waving
Given reasonably well calibrated test equipment, for EMC it's "whose lab
and how different they set up the test".
The magic is coming within 6 dB of each other.
Cortland Richmond
-
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
Measurement uncertainty depends on instruments used, method used etc. Each lab
has to do calculation of measurement uncertainty for particular method.
Measurement uncertainty becomes critical when results are close to the limit.
High
[mailto:balmukund.v...@ymllabs.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 12:17 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
in general, the test standards prescribe the accuracy / type of equipments and
method to be used for testing. This means that measurement uncertainty
Thanks for the link to that paper Rich, it makes for interesting reading in
plain English.
James
From: Richard Nute [mailto:ri...@ieee.org]
Sent: 20 September 2016 21:18
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
…
I didn’t know what “uncertainty” is, so I did
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
Measurement uncertainty depends on instruments used, method used etc. Each lab
has to do calculation of measurement uncertainty for particular method.
Measurement uncertainty becomes critical when results are close to the limit.
High uncertainty means you
regards,
Bostjan
From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 12:54 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
ISO, International Standardization Organization, Guide to the Expression of
Uncertainty in Measurement, GUM
ISO
...@ieee.org]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 1:18 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy
I was wondering if anyone was aware of any guidance documents that provided
acceptable levels of uncertainty when conducting various tests.
I didn’t know what
I was wondering if anyone was aware of any guidance documents that provided
acceptable levels of uncertainty when conducting various tests.
I didn’t know what “uncertainty” is, so I did a Google search and found this
reference:
Hi Kevin!
You didn't specify the measurement method, but if you use thermocouples,
does your lab use use OD5012 (used to be called OP-108 and 109)? It is
also from the IECEE but gives guidance on how to prepare and use
thermocouples. You asked for guidance on acceptable tolerances, which this
coincident with uncertainty) and the
test conditions were correct (this is out of over 20 visits to various labs on
behalf of clients).
R/S,
Brian
From: Kevin Robinson [mailto:kevinrobinso...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 6:59 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Measuremen
Kevin,
Most certifying agencies will provide information on their expectations for
measurement uncertainty. The EMC people of this world can go on for ages
about the topic, you will almost always see a workshop on this at the
annual EMC symposium. For safety testing this usually does not come
I was wondering if anyone was aware of any guidance documents that provided
acceptable levels of uncertainty when conducting various tests. The
specific measurement that I am interested in this case is temperature
measurements, but I would be interested in seeing other guidance for other
In message c653e730.4535c%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Tue, 9
Jun 2009, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
Do any active loop antennas feed the actual loop into a zero-impedance
load, thus producing a response independent of frequency?
Walker Scientific does that very thing.
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 15:44:25 +0100
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
In message
9d04b979323dcd428297dda95108893e0287f...@bb-corp-ex2.corp.cubic.cub,
dated Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com writes:
In my example
In message
9d04b979323dcd428297dda95108893e0287f...@bb-corp-ex2.corp.cubic.cub,
dated Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com writes:
In my example of the factor set of an H-field loop antenna, which I
used because the amplitude might go from 28 dB @ 300 kHz to 88 dB @ 20
Hz (data
Specialty
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Luke
Turnbull
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 3:37 AM
To: Ken Javor; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
...@ix.netcom.com, Ken Javor
ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Conversation: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
Subject: RE: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
But Ken – You don’t know a priori where the AF slope changes
@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 13:09:06 -0700
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Conversation: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
Subject: RE: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
I think that's the method I also use when the correction factor is moving over
a large range, say
...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken
Javor
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 12:43 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
That is only true if the calibration is done like in the old days, like
my
old biconicals
@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 12:29:43 -0600
To: Brent G DeWitt bdew...@ix.netcom.com, Ken Javor
ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Conversation: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
Subject
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
I’m not a fan of all this tenth of a dB concern with uncertainty. I also
disagree that antenna factors are selected randomly to be entered into a data
file.
It seems obvious to me that intelligent data entry would use
in frequency than I want.
- Bill
Indecision may or may not be the problem.
--- On Sun, 6/7/09, Brent G DeWitt bdew...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
From: Brent G DeWitt bdew...@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
To: 'Ken Javor' ken.ja
: [PSES] Measurement Accuracy and antenna factors
I’m not a fan of all this tenth of a dB concern with uncertainty. I also
disagree that antenna factors are selected randomly to be entered into a data
file.
It seems obvious to me that intelligent data entry would use an analog
simulation of what
30 matches
Mail list logo
