In message <[email protected]>, dated Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Curt McNamara <[email protected]> writes:
>I certainly don't disagree with this, and see a fair amount of the >variation from set-up and not measurement. Yet if I do a test in MN and >then send the equipment to a lab in CA for a client to redo the test >the chance of a substantial variation exists. Technically this is >+/-3dB as I understand it, It isn't a fixed amount, of course, and the 'typical' value is different for different tests. >although I do agree that 3dB overall is more realistic. In what sense? It is *desirable*, in fact 0 dB overall would be even more desirable (!), but +/-1.5 dB only *feasible* for some tests. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
