Thanks to everyone for all of the information. Most of our products are analog, both 2 and 4 wire, E-E or E&M. They support pulse and DTMF dialing, Basically a little mix of everything. I've only been given a week do the comparison between Australia and Part 68. So, any information on potential problems would be helpful.
Jim Robson -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 8:57 AM To: Jim Robson Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Australian Telco Compliance vs US Part 68 In a message dated 1/22/2002, Jim Robson writes: Has anyone had any experience with getting Australian Compliance for Part 68 equipment? Are there any areas that I should pay special attention too. Hi Jim: I have done this several times and it typically requires modifications to the design. You have already gotten some very good responses from other list members regarding the administrative process required for Australia, so my comments below will be restricted to some key technical issues: 1) Your product will have to meet the safety and EMC requirements for Australia, but these are very similar to current USA and European requirements, so you may be OK here. The main difference is that Australia uses slightly higher voltages to test the isolation barrier (creepage and clearance requirements are identical to current USA requirements). 2) You do not mention whether your product is a modem, phone, PBX or something else. For Australia this makes a big difference, because Australia still has separate, mandatory requirements for basic analog PSTN access (TS 002), voice telephony (TS 004), and PBXs (TS 003). Some products will be subject to all three. 3) In TS 002, the three areas where most USA designs fail are DC V-I, return loss, and pulse dialing. The DC V-I must be less than 6 volts at 20 mA for at least the first 300 mS after going off hook. The return loss reference impedance is a complex termination, so equipment that was optimized for 600 ohms will likely fail. The pulse dialing requirements impose limits on voltage transients that typically require additional components. However, Australia's central offices are now almost 100% DTMF compatible, so I would suggest that you support DTMF dialing only and avoid the pulse dialing tests. 4) I won't elaborate on TS 003 and TS 004, since I do not know if they even apply to your product. Suffice it to say that the requirements in both documents are quite stringent and it is highly unlikely that a product designed for the USA would meet them without modification. I recently completed an Australian approval for a USA PBX that was subject to TS 002, TS 003, and TS 004. Most of the effort was focused on modifications to meet TS 003 and TS 004. I hope the above comments are helpful. If you would like to further clarify whether TS 003 and/or TS 004 apply to your particular product, please post an expanded description of your product or contact me offline. Joe Randolph Telecom Design Consultant Randolph Telecom, Inc. 781-721-2848 http://www.randolph-telecom.com
