In message <c2b141c4.58eb8%[email protected]>, dated Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Ken Javor <[email protected]> writes:
>I don't know what the commercial standards require, but for instance >MIL-STD-461 has the field intensity (Tesla) limit augmented by a >precise description of the coil diameter to be used when generating the >field. This completes the requirement and makes it repeatable across >test facilities. I think the distance of the coil from the surface of the product is also specified, isn't it? That determines, in practical terms, the field pattern of an inhomogeneous field, which is very difficult to define otherwise. -- 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 ______________________________________________________________________
