Here is the problem with the ‘2 dB rule’.  If there are only two ports it 
simply makes more sense to cable the ports.  If the device passes, go no 
further.  If you only fill one port, then you have to still fill the remaining 
port to meet the 2dB rule, even if it passes.  So, why waste the time?

The 2dB rule is basically meant for those systems having many identical ports.  

 

The same reasoning can be applied to adding identical modules.  If a host only 
has the capacity of two identical modules, you will need to put both modules in 
and test once.  If you use the 2dB rule for identical modules, you test one 
host with one module, then you must still add the second identical module to 
meet the 2dB rule.  Again, why waste the time – test both, get done.  

 

The 2dB rule in both scenarios is still for those instances where many of the 
same identical modules or ports are used in a single host’; but then it appears 
no one defines what “many” means.  In that case, put one module in, then put 
the second.  If no more than 2dB is seen, test done; if more than 2dB put the 
third in.  If still more than 2dB keep going till all modules are in place or 
no more than 2dB increase seen.

 

​​​​​Thanks 

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 legally privileged.  Any unauthorized use that may compromise that 
confidentiality via distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  Please notify 
the sender immediately if you receive this communication in error, and delete 
it from your computer system.  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.

 

From: Bill Stumpf [mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 11:26 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

 

Right - ANSI C63.4 still makes reference to the "2dB rule"

 

Bill

 

From: Adam Dixon [mailto:lanterna.viri...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 1:03 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

 

It's been awhile, but at the time when wanting to understand modular test 
requirements, the 2dB asymptote/leveling off  was a reference in FCC Part 15 
Section 15.31 (a) (3)  pointing to ANSI C63.4-2003.  

Regards,

Adam in Atlanta

 

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Sundstrom, Mike <mike.sundst...@garmin.com 
<mailto:mike.sundst...@garmin.com> > wrote:

Regan,

In regards to the daisy chaining:

Hook up equipment (daisy chaining) until such a time as you don’t get a 2 dB 
increase of any unwanted signals. I think this is in ANSI or CISPR? 

Everyone,

What am I remembering partly here?

 

 

Thanks,

 

Michael Sundstrom

Garmin Compliance Engineer

2-2606

(913) 440-1540 <tel:(913)%20440-1540> 

KB5UKT

 

"We call it theory when we know much about something but nothing works, 
and practice when everything works but nobody knows why."      -- Albert 
Einstein

 

From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com 
<mailto:re...@empowermicro.com> ] 
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 11:50 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

 

Hi Bill. Thanks for this great info! Much appreciated.

 

The second part of my original email was merely philosophical discussion 
points. Let me clarify. I would love to hear what people think:

 

1.     How many different types of ancillary equipment shall you test with your 
main EUT? i.e. PCs or laptops with HDMI & USB ports……the sky’s the limit as to 
the myriad of devices that now can be connected. Where does one ‘stop’?

a.     Also, not all devices (that claim to be Class B) are noise free. I’ve 
personally experienced extremely noisy devices using a reputable brand name 
(yes, FCC logo on the device), but had to exchange it for their competitor to 
ensure no unintentional emissions, so my main EUT passes. (Moral of the 
story….don’t believe everything you read on the label – lol)

 

2.     Another related question: what about identical devices that can be daisy 
chained? i.e. some devices allow a daisy chain of up to 12 or more. (i.e. 
telecom trunk card). Does one use the chamber table as the determination for 
the quantity of daisy chained samples to test? Or does one compile all the max 
# of daisy chained devices on the table despite the congestion of I/O & power 
cables (not recommended)? Or is there a rule of thumb that one shall prove that 
there will not be an increase in emissions past a certain number of devices? 
(The latter is my preference).

 

Thoughts?

 

From: Bill Stumpf [mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 6:54 AM
To: Regan Arndt <re...@empowermicro.com <mailto:re...@empowermicro.com> >; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: RE: EMC co-location distance question

 

Regan,

I'm not sure I understand your question correctly, but I will try to provide an 
answer.  ANSI C63.4 is used when testing for FCC part 15 subpart B compliance 
for unintentional radiators. When testing a table-top system, the collocated 
equipment should be spaced at 10cm, unless this is not typical of normal 
operation. If so, then the EUT and its accessories/peripheral devices should be 
placed as they would be in typical applications.  It is important to read the 
text of the ANSI standard, as it goes into great detail on how to set up and 
select accessories for testing.  The drawings are for general reference only 
and the text always takes precedence. As for EN/CISPR standards, they mostly 
accept similar setup conditions to ANSI C63.4, but you will have to verify the 
specific requirements in each standard.   The <20cm you refer to was at one 
time unofficially (FCC) considered the distance for collocation of transmitter 
antennas, but this is no longer the case.  The FCC considers that two 
transmitters/antennas are collocated if they are in the same product / 
enclosure.  I hope this helps.

 

Bill

 

From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 1:50 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> 
Subject: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

 

Greetings members,

 

Can anyone shed any light on what ANSI defines as the max distance/limit of a 
‘co-located’ piece of ancillary equipment or other support equipment (on the 
table) to the main EUT being tested for FCC Part 15 class B for ‘unintentional 
radiators’. I seem to recall 20 cm but I think this was referring to 
‘intentional’ radiators. 

 

Is there a similar requirement in the EMC directive and/or EN/CISPR standards? 
Or is this really dictated on your recommended set-up? Shall that device be 
removed from the test bed if typical installation indicates that it will be 
greater than 20cm from the main EUT?

 

I believe that the set-up in ANSI only showed the PC, printer, mouse, keyboard 
& monitor but that’s it. There are so many other/different electronic devices 
that connect to a laptop/PC/other, etc. (i.e. smart phone) these days, it is 
not viable for anyone to test all devices/configurations. I understand that one 
must use good judgment and exercise due diligence but there must be a limit. 
Agree? Some of these electronic devices state compliance to Class B, it may 
still have interference with another closely co-located device because they did 
not test it fully to the myriad of other electronic devices out there that it 
could be connected to. There is no guarantee per se.

 

Can anyone comment? Thanks in advance.

 

Regan

 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 




CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you. 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 

 

  _____  


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the sole use of 
the intended recipient(s) and contain information that may be Garmin 
confidential and/or Garmin legally privileged. If you have received this email 
in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message. Any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication (including 
attachments) by someone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. Thank 
you.

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
&LT;emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> &GT;

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas &LT;sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> &GT;
Mike Cantwell &LT;mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> &GT; 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher &LT;j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> &GT;
David Heald &LT;dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> &GT; 

 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> > 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> > 


-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Reply via email to