Re: Info on EMI Filters
Robert, what do you mean by "...Use a y cap, not two caps..."? Aren't two y caps used, one from line to ground and one from neutral to ground? - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
RE: ESD test levels for medical equipment
Many companies have internal standards that are much higher than the CE requirements. Sometimes they are historical accidents. Before general ESD requirements out on the production floor 25Kv testing for product survivability was a good idea. I still have some larger customers that require 20 to 25 Kv end product survivability. I personally require our equipment to meet 16 Kv air discharge, and 8 Kv direct contact discharges because of the mission criticality of large LAN systems. In short I would take into account not only the minimum requirements (Europe may like to think they have all the answers) but how often people (no people to touch or shove things into the equipment no ESD event), and the results of an ESD failure, either operationally or functionally and then make a determination of the levels you want. Gary McInturff -Original Message- From: plaw...@west.net [SMTP:plaw...@west.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 1998 11:47 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; me...@world.std.com Subject:ESD test levels for medical equipment My company has been testing our standard power supply products to the ESD test voltages in IEC601-1-2:1993 (Medical EMC requirements). The levels are 3kV contact & 8kV air. Recently, one of our customers started testing to IEC601-2-24 (Safety of Infusion Pumps and Controllers). They said the levels in that spec are 8kV contact & 15kV air - much higher than our test levels. Is this a trend for ESD test levels in product-specific standards, of significantly higher test levels? Or are other medical product-specific standards comparable to IEC601-1-2 (ie, with a few kV)? I realize that the next version of IEC601-1-2 raises the contact discharge voltage to 6kV. This doesn't seem like a big change. If the trend is toward higher voltages in these other standards, I'd like to find out so we can plan accordingly. -- Patrick Lawler plaw...@west.net - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
RE: FDA Requirements
Mike, I posed this question to the group a few weeks back. See the archive postings for July 28 and 29 for responses. I also did research and could not come up with any written requirements for stainless steel. It seems to just be a commonly accepted practice. Darrell Locke Advanced Input Devices -- From: Mike Morrow To: IEEE EMC Board Subject: FDA Requirements List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: Thursday, August 27, 1998 6:03AM I've always been told that any piece of equipment being used in a "sanitary" application (i.e. food processing, etc) must be constructed of stainless steel. I'm after the actual standard that has this requirement. Can aluminum be used?? Any help is appreciated. Mike Morrow Product Standards Engineer Data Instruments mike_mor...@datainstruments.com mmor...@compuserve.com Phone 978-264-9550 xt-201 Fax 978-263-0630 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators). - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
FDA Requirements
I've always been told that any piece of equipment being used in a "sanitary" application (i.e. food processing, etc) must be constructed of stainless steel. I'm after the actual standard that has this requirement. Can aluminum be used?? Any help is appreciated. Mike Morrow Product Standards Engineer Data Instruments mike_mor...@datainstruments.com mmor...@compuserve.com Phone 978-264-9550 xt-201 Fax 978-263-0630 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
Southeast Asia's Regulation for Transmitter.
Hello, I want to know about Southeast Asia's Regulation for Transmitter. We have a plan to export our client transmitter which provides 800MHz,10mW output to Indonesia,Singarpore,Philippines and Malaysia. Is there any regulation to regulate this kind of equipment in their countries. If there are , please advice about the regulation and then how we can conform to the regulation. 〒516-1106 108 Yokowa-cho Ise-city Mie-ken A-pex International Co.,Ltd. 2nd Division EMC Yokowa Lab. Tetsuya Hashimoto TEL 0596-39-1485 FAX 0596-39-0232 E-mail: has...@a-pex.co.jp
IEC1000-4-12
Hi all, Can anyone tell me to which EMC standard does it call for the IEC1000-4-12 tests? Thanks & Regards, Roger Hsu - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
Interpretation of Australian Standard TS001
John, This clause means that IF a detachable plug is used it should not be of a type which is normally used to connect to the network. In other words, if you disconnect the cable from the CE to the LIU, at the LIU, you should not be able to then plug that cable (coming directly from the CE) into a standard network line connection socket. Hope this clears it up a little. Best regards, Kevin > Sender: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Received: from ruebert.ieee.org (ruebert.ieee.org [199.172.136.3]) > by arl-img-9.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.12) with ESMTP id LAA07709; > Wed, 26 Aug 1998 11:35:21 -0400 (EDT) > Received: by ruebert.ieee.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) > id KAA21826 for emc-pstc-resent; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:07:29 -0400 (EDT) > From: f...@netc.ie > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 98 14:56:55 > Message-Id: <9807269041.aa904168...@netc.netc.ie> > To: emc-p...@ieee.org, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Interpretation of Australian Standard TS001 > Sender: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: f...@netc.ie > X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients > X-Listname: emc-pstc > X-Info: Help requests to emc-pstc-requ...@majordomo.ieee.org > X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to majord...@majordomo.ieee.org > X-Moderator-Address: emc-pstc-appro...@majordomo.ieee.org > > > Hi all, > > I have a question regarding TS001 - 1997 which is an Australian > Standard for safety of telecoms equipment for customer use. > > Clause 5.3 permits the use of a separate Line Isolation Unit which is > connected between the telecoms device, typically a modem, and the > network. The purpose of this LIU is to provide electrical separation > from the network to SELV, in the case where the device itself does not > provide that separation. > > Clause 5.3.2 allows three methods to prevent the possibility of the > LIU being bypassed, resulting in the device being directly connected > to the network. The first method is the "Use of detachable cabling > that will not allow direct connection of CE to a telecommunications > network" > > My question is should the above sentence read "non-detachable" istead > of "detachable"? Otherwise can anybody shed some light on the intent? > > All comments appreciated. > > John Fee > > f...@netc.ie > > - > This message is coming from the emc-pstc discu Best regards, Kevin RichardsonPh: 02-43-29-4070 Stanimore Pty Limited Fax: 02-43-28-5639 "The Technology Requirements Specialists" Int'l: +61-2-43-2x- Email: Internet: k...@compuserve.com Compuserve: 100356,374 - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
THANK YOU: Frank Goto
To: All subscribers to the IEEE emc-pstc listserver. From: Roger Volgstadt, Ed Price, Richard Nute Subject: THANK YOU, Frank Goto We do our best not to post non-technical, administrative messages. But, occasionally we must make some announcements as to the status of our operation, problems, policies, and such. Today, we are posting a different kind of administrative message: We are recognizing one of our subscribers. Frank Goto, is not only a subscriber, but one of our two listserver administrators. Frank is moving on to other things. The listserver admin job is to maintain a 100% valid e-mail address list. As many of you know, each new address is tested by our admins before we add it to our list. But, this is not the only job. Many subscribers move without notifying us. Often, servers go down which make addresses look invalid. IT departments change your default address without telling you! For these and other reasons, our listserver, majordomo, bounces these undeliverable messages back to our admins. We get up to 100 such bounce messages a day from our 730 subscribers! Some bounces are valid, some are not. Each message must be read, and a decision must be made as to what must be done. (We reduce the load by splitting it between two admins.) Despite what appears to be an overwhelming job, each admin, including Frank, that has served has said it was a personally rewarding activity. Through it, we get to meet our subscribers, who are a marvelous bunch of professionals! Our subscribers are in many, many countries. E-mail has no special traits to show you the country location of whoever posts a message. Administering our listserver can be done from anywhere in the world. And so it is with Frank. Frank has done his job from Japan! I have been very fortunate in having the opportunity to meet Frank face-to-face in Japan earlier this spring. (I've not yet met Ed Price who is right here in San Diego!) So, for all the good work for the past year or so, a big THANK YOU! to Frank! And we wish you the best! With best personal regards, Rich ps: Our replacement admin is Jim Bacher. pps: go...@a-pex.co.jp go...@mint.or.jp - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
Re: Interpretation of Australian Standard TS001
Hello John, There is no mistake with the spec's wording. The intent of the clause is to have cabling that will prevent the LIU from being easily bypassed. With the method that you have mentioned this could be achieved by the CE having a non-standard connector that will prevent direct connection to the network. In this case the user is encouraged to connect the CE to the LIU via the non-standard connector and then make the network connection to the LIU using a standard connector (RJ11 etc). If the LIU and CE were joined with a "non-detachable" cable this would also meet the intention of this clause as the user would need to make some serious changes to bypass the LIU. Regards Barry Esmore -- > From: f...@netc.ie > To: emc-p...@ieee.org; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Interpretation of Australian Standard TS001 > Date: Thursday, 27 August 1998 0:56 > > > Hi all, > > I have a question regarding TS001 - 1997 which is an Australian > Standard for safety of telecoms equipment for customer use. > > Clause 5.3 permits the use of a separate Line Isolation Unit which is > connected between the telecoms device, typically a modem, and the > network. The purpose of this LIU is to provide electrical separation > from the network to SELV, in the case where the device itself does not > provide that separation. > > Clause 5.3.2 allows three methods to prevent the possibility of the > LIU being bypassed, resulting in the device being directly connected > to the network. The first method is the "Use of detachable cabling > that will not allow direct connection of CE to a telecommunications > network" > > My question is should the above sentence read "non-detachable" istead > of "detachable"? Otherwise can anybody shed some light on the intent? > > All comments appreciated. > > John Fee > > f...@netc.ie - This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list administrators).
