Ed brings up a good point. This forum is designed to allow
communications between EMC and Product Safety professionals who are
looking to help each other in the interest of the advancement of the
compliance industry. If there is a certain test house or equipment
manufacturer that pro
--- On Tue, 26 Aug 1997 08:57:56 -0700 Patricia Elliot
wrote:
> At 08:49 AM 8/26/97 -0500, Lesmeister, Glenn wrote:
> >Does anyone know where I can get a copy of the latest version of the
> >ZH1/618 testing principles that are translated into English. My TUV
> >rep only has it in German.
> >
Hello SGour and fellow emc-pstc colleagues:
I understand that the FCC has finally adopted the long awaited harmonized
FCC/CS-03 requirements. They come into effect 90 days after the publication of
the new requirements. I just don't know when the 90 days begins. The new
surge requirements tak
Hi all,
As the Local Arrangements Chair of the organising committe for the IEEE
1998 International Syposium on EMC to be held in Denver, Colorado I am
interested in any feedback from those who attended last weeks 1997
symposium in Austin. The Austin Symposium was great but we plan to be even
great
At 08:49 AM 8/26/97 -0500, Lesmeister, Glenn wrote:
>Does anyone know where I can get a copy of the latest version of the
>ZH1/618 testing principles that are translated into English. My TUV
>rep only has it in German.
>
>Glenn Lesmeister
>Product Regulatory Compliance
>Compaq Computer Corporati
--- On Tue, 26 Aug 1997 08:12:00 -0400 "UMBDENSTOCK, DON"
wrote:
>
> Great dialog, just the path that I was hoping would develop.
>
> One thing I have learned since the question was first asked, all
> biconical antennas are not made equal. The original antenna calibrated
> at an outside test
A few weeks ago, a posting reported on a meeting between "a well known
computer manufacturer" and Mrs Elena Santiago of the European Commission.
I was surprised at the content of this report, since it did not appear to
be consistent with the recently-produced Guidelines, so I checked with
the D
The common bicon balun (the traditional long-neck variety) may explain the
differences encountered between V & H. If my feeble memory is correct, the
balun is only marginally "balanced". Consequently, it could be sensitive
to cable length and routing. (An easy test for imbalance would be to sl
Does anyone know where I can get a copy of the latest version of the
ZH1/618 testing principles that are translated into English. My TUV
rep only has it in German.
Glenn Lesmeister
Product Regulatory Compliance
Compaq Computer Corporation
(281) 514-5163
(281) 514-8029 fax
(713) 786-4930 pager
g
Hello group
Is anyone aware when the new part FCC pt 68 (68.302)surge (9x720us) requirements
actually coming into effect.
Has anybody bought the equipment--any recommendations.
Is this requirement similar to a EU Surge requirement? Can one tester cover
both??
Thanks in advance for the suggest
The SC62A WG13, producing the second edition of IEC 60601-1-2 will
have a meeting at DELTA Electronics Testing, Copenhagen, during this
week. The first CD has been commented and the work for the second
CD is in progress.
The second CD can be expected later this year and can then be viewed
at your
Great dialog, just the path that I was hoping would develop.
One thing I have learned since the question was first asked, all
biconical antennas are not made equal. The original antenna calibrated
at an outside test organization, exhibited a 5 dB difference between the
vertical and horizontal po
***MESSAGE #2***
Ignore first message!!
***
This has turned into an interesting discussion.
1. On the question of Class A vs Class B etc.. I vaguely remember that the
genesis of the FCC
Message received.
I believe you are referring to ANSI C63.4.
This is a result of much controversy in the EMC community - what to do with
cables?
The FCC took a lot of heat for maximizing cables in ways that the industry
did not agree with. So, after much discussion, industry & the FCC agreed on a
This has turned into an interesting discussion.
1. On the question of Class A vs Class B etc.. I vaguely remember that the
genesis of the FCC limits for Class A & Class B were indeed derived from the
concerns of installation. As I recall, extensive research went into
examination of the sensitiviti
For internal net problems I've lost the answers (if any) to the
following message.
Could you please send them again?
Thanks.
M.P.
--- Forwarded Message Follows ---
From: plaw...@west.net (Patrick Lawler)
To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Status of IEC601-1
Right. Harmful interference makes any classification meaningless.
Cortland
== Original Message Follows
>> Date: 25-Aug-97 18:43:26 MsgID: 1054-4643 ToID: 72146,373
From: Doug McKean >INTERNET:dmck...@paragon-networks.com
Subj: Re: Antenna Calibrati
Chris,
The rule that supersedes the others is: Don't interfere. However... there's a
general perception that Class A is cheaper to build than Class B and not to ask
for stricter standards if aiming at a better deal. This can result in specifying
Class A limits if there is any justification at all
> From: Cortland Richmond <72146@compuserve.com>
> To: "Grasso, Charles (Chaz)" ; ieee pstc
list
> Subject: RE: Antenna Calibration/Site Attenuation
> Date: Monday, August 25, 1997 11:19 AM
>
> If it's mutual coupling... sure. But if it's a surface wave, that's real
field
> strength. If the
19 matches
Mail list logo
