RE: Proposition 65

[Hovland, Jenifer]

When I saw this post this morning, I forwarded to my manager to see how it
effected us.  He contacted our legal folks.  They came back with a ~10-page
document that lists all the chemicals found by this committee.  This leads
me to 2 questions.

Doesn't the California government know that the leading cause of death is
life?
And, does the California government not have anything better to do with
their tax dollars?

Jen Hovland
Sr. EMC Engineering Technician
Regulatory Compliance
Phone: (605) 232-2230 x26548
Fax: (605) 232-2814
Email: jenifer.hovl...@gateway.com

-Original Message-
From:   Werlwas, Mark [SMTP:mark.werl...@lamrc.com]
Sent:   Thursday, August 05, 1999 11:06 AM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject:Proposition 65


| For those on the frontline: has anyone been exposed to any of 

| these legal

| requirements? Would you mind sharing your experience(s)?

| ...

| 2. The State of California statue called Proposition 65 requires
that

| manufacturers place a warning label on the containers of 

| products (and the

| products themselves) if they contain harmful carcinogens or
chemicals,

| including lead. The solder on your circuit boards constitutes 

| a product

| with toxic exposure potential to both customers and employees.

| 

As a resident here on the left coast I can share a personal
observation. It
seems like every building has (or had) a prop. 65 warning on it.
Apparently
there are detectable levels of listed chemicals everywhere. So most
buildings are labeled. Even gas pumps are labeled. The labels were
placed
almost everywhere so I don't think that people pay any attention to
them any
more -- at least I don't notice them any longer. I don't know why
signs are
not posted outside of the buildings, I've heard that sunlight can
cause
cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm too.

Here is a link to California's EPA page describing the law:
http://www.oehha.org/prop65/p65plain.htm

Here is a link to a dissenting opinion on the law.
http://www.public-policy.org/~ncpa/studies/s137/s137b.html This link
has
some interesting (although I don't know how accurate) information
regarding
relative risks in the tables.

Mark Werlwas

 
Mark Werlwas
Product Safety Engineer
Lam Research
4650 Cushing Parkway
Fremont, California 94538
 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: new legal issues re: Bar Code

[Terry Meck]

So I find out.  It was a news release and http://www.autoidnews.com must
limit the time they consider something news and maintain it.
Sorry about that.

>>> "POWELL, DOUG"  08/05 1:16 PM >>>
The link in your email comes up with the 404 Not Found error


-doug

===
Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer
Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
1625 Sharp Point Dr.
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 USA
---
970-407-6410  (phone)
970-407-5410  (e-fax) 
mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com 
http://www.advanced-energy.com 
===


-Original Message-
From: Terry Meck [mailto:tjm...@accusort.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 8:47 AM
To: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com 
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org 
Subject: Re: new legal issues re: Bar Code



Naftali:

I understand there is a lawsuit pending see news release below.


BAR CODE VENDORS TEAM UP TO TAKE ON LEMELSON FOUNDATION

New York
Seven automatic identification companies have joined forces and filed 
suit in federal court to invalidate bar code patents held by late 
inventor Jerome Lemelson. The suit seeks a declaration that certain 
patents asserted by the Lemelson Medical, Education & Research 
Foundation, Limited Partnership, against end users of bar code 
equipment are invalid, unenforceable and not infringed. 

For full story see:
http://www.autoidnews.com/news/news723.htm#anchor1 




Best regards,
Terry J. Meck
Senior Compliance/Test Engineer
Phone:215-721-5280
Fax:215-721-5551 hard copy;
Fax PC: 215.799.1650 To my desk PC
tjm...@accusort.com 
Accu-Sort Systems Inc.
511 School House Rd.
Telford, PA 18969-1196 USA


>>> "Naftali Shani"  08/04 4:07 PM >>>

For those on the frontline: has anyone been exposed to any of these
legal
requirements? Would you mind sharing your experience(s)?

Regards,
Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S46, MS 117/C1/N04
21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada  K2K 2C1
Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.3365 (ESN 393)
E-mail: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com  


-Original Message-
From:   Ray Alderman [SMTP:e...@vita.com] 

Sent:   Wednesday, August 04, 1999 15:23
To: v-...@vita.com  
Subject:new legal issues

Hello Members:
I should make you aware of two new legal issues that you may
run
into in the near future:

1. Lemelson Medical, Educational, and Research Foundation holds some
patents on barcode reading processes, and they are asserting those
patents
on USERS of that equipment (ie, users who barcode their products and
read
those codes). So far, they have targeted grocery stores, distributors,
and
now manufacturers in the elctronics industry. They have granted over
100
licenses, and over 200 companies have payed hundreds of millions of
dollars
to license them. The patents have not been challenged or litigated. If
you
use bar codes on your products and read them, then you may see these
folks
in your future.

2. The State of California statue called Proposition 65 requires that
manufacturers place a warning label on the containers of products (and
the
products themselves) if they contain harmful carcinogens or chemicals,
including lead. The solder on your circuit boards constitutes a
product
with toxic exposure potential to both customers and employees.

The state of California has 90 days to prosecute the manufacturer for
non-compliance. After that time, private lawsuits can then be placed
by
employees or customers. If you ship products into California, you
might
want to heed this information. They like to get money from outside
their
own economy to fund their latest social programs.

Now you know.

Regards...Ray Alderman

---
Ray Alderman   PH: 480-951-8866
Executive Director, VITA   FX: 480-951-0720
7825 E. Gelding Dr. #104   email: e...@vita.com 
  or
Scottsdale, AZ 85260  e...@busandboard.com 
 
WEB:
http://www.vita.com 

 
http://www.pcisource.com


 
http://www.esofta.com 
 
http://www.busandboard.com


 
Famous Cowboy Quotes From Arizona #21:
"Make enemies when you must, and friends when you can."
---

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org 
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j

RE: new legal issues

[POWELL, DOUG]

Eric,

This really is not a bad idea.  Ultimately the consumer pays for everything,
either explicitly or as hidden or built-in cost.  Why not fully disclose and
only penalize the consumers in the state that is causing the expense instead
of all the consumers of the same product world-wide.

This is not unlike that sticker you see on the gas pump that tells you how
much the gasoline you just purchased is taxed.


Opinions my own...

-doug

-Original Message-
From: eric.lif...@natinst.com [mailto:eric.lif...@natinst.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 6:03 AM
To: EMC PSTC
Subject: Re: new legal issues



Problems create opportunities - so I've heard.  Prop 65 sounds like one.

Why not just charge all orders destined for California a surcharge, call it
"California Prop 65 Special Materials Handling".  Make sure you charge
enough to
make a nice profit above the cost of the marking and enough to cover the
cost
plus profit against any future legal problems.

And especially make sure that the new charge appears as a line-item on the
invoice so the California customer knows who to blame.

This way, we all extract even more money out of the California economy.  So
the
net effect is a minus for California.  The state government will realize
this
and they'll be a little less prone to make more such opportunities for us in
the
future.

Though I started this in jest, it's starting to sound like a doggone good
idea

Regards,
Eric





Please respond to Dwight Hunnicutt 

To:   Naftali Shani , EMC PSTC

cc:(bcc: Eric Lifsey/AUS/NIC)
Subject:  Re: new legal issues


Item #2 would set an interesting precendent...just about every
electronic product on the market has some solder...so everything from
the little beeping, blinking toy imported from Asia, to home theatre
equipment, to your desk phone, fax machine, and pager would need a Prop.
65 warning marking?


Naftali Shani wrote:
>
> For those on the frontline: has anyone been exposed to any of these legal
> requirements? Would you mind sharing your experience(s)?
>
> Regards,
> Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S46, MS 117/C1/N04
> 21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada  K2K 2C1
> Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.3365 (ESN 393)
> E-mail: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com 
>
> -Original Message-
> From:   Ray Alderman [SMTP:e...@vita.com] 
> Sent:   Wednesday, August 04, 1999 15:23
> To: v-...@vita.com 
> Subject:new legal issues
>
> Hello Members:
> I should make you aware of two new legal issues that you may run
> into in the near future:
>
> 1. Lemelson Medical, Educational, and Research Foundation holds some
> patents on barcode reading processes, and they are asserting those patents
> on USERS of that equipment (ie, users who barcode their products and read
> those codes). So far, they have targeted grocery stores, distributors, and
> now manufacturers in the elctronics industry. They have granted over 100
> licenses, and over 200 companies have payed hundreds of millions of
dollars
> to license them. The patents have not been challenged or litigated. If you
> use bar codes on your products and read them, then you may see these folks
> in your future.
>
> 2. The State of California statue called Proposition 65 requires that
> manufacturers place a warning label on the containers of products (and the
> products themselves) if they contain harmful carcinogens or chemicals,
> including lead. The solder on your circuit boards constitutes a product
> with toxic exposure potential to both customers and employees.
>
> The state of California has 90 days to prosecute the manufacturer for
> non-compliance. After that time, private lawsuits can then be placed by
> employees or customers. If you ship products into California, you might
> want to heed this information. They like to get money from outside their
> own economy to fund their latest social programs.
>
> Now you know.
>
> Regards...Ray Alderman
>
>
---
> Ray Alderman   PH: 480-951-8866
> Executive Director, VITA   FX: 480-951-0720
> 7825 E. Gelding Dr. #104   email: e...@vita.com
>   or
> Scottsdale, AZ 85260  e...@busandboard.com
> 
>







-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
qu

Seeking Position

[AppEngr899]

Applications Engineer for high speed digital cable assemblies seeking new 
opportunity in the Mid-Atlantic region. Currently designing and 
characterizing interconnects for customers in the datacom, networking, and 
telecommunications industries.  Experienced with signal integrity and analog 
issues of advanced electronic interconnects and transmission lines. Extensive 
hands-on lab experience, design of test boards, characterization of interface 
chipsets, and interacting with customers on large volume opportunities.  
Looking for similar opportunities as an Applications, Product, or Design 
Engineer.  Interested parties may respond to appengr...@aol.com for more 
information or a copy of my resume.

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: WEEE Directive

[POWELL, DOUG]

John,

Eventually I did find that symbol on the EUR-LEX Legislation in Force web
pages.   When I saw the symbol it surprised me that they did not use the
circle-bar logo over the trash bin.

This directive does concern us as it deals with more than just heavy metals
and the 2nd draft of the proposal indicates that the manufacturer may need
to provide free recycling services.  My understanding is that the content of
this draft is based partly on the German "Blue Angel" mark, Scandinavian
"Nordic Swan" and the EU's "Eco-Label".

-doug


-Original Message-
From: Crabb, John [mailto:jo...@exchange.scotland.ncr.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 3:34 AM
To: 'EMC-PSTC (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: WEEE Directive



Doug, I would have thought you would already have come across the
symbol for the "crossed-out wheeled bin" in the directive 93/86/EEC
which "adapts to technical progress Council Directive 91/157/EEC
on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances",
the dangerous substances being lead, cadmium, and mercury.

The WEEE directive is a real "bag of worms" - it bans the use of lead 
based solder for a start !
I'm afraid I haven't been following the progress of  this particular
directive
very diligently, since it is really "environmental" rather than "safety",
but
there is certainly a lot of criticism from industry flying around.
John Crabb, Development Excellence (Product Safety) , 
NCR  Financial Solutions Group Ltd.,  Kingsway West, Dundee, Scotland. DD2
3XX
E-Mail :john.cr...@scotland.ncr.com
Tel: +44 (0)1382-592289  (direct ). Fax +44 (0)1382-622243.   VoicePlus
6-341-2289.


> -Original Message-
> From: POWELL, DOUG [SMTP:doug.pow...@aei.com]
> Sent: 03 August 1999 01:01
> To:   EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
> Subject:  WEEE Directive
> 
> 
> Hello group,
> 
> This may be off-topic, then again it maybe not.  It is regulatory for
> electronic equipment.
> 
> I currently have a copy of the second draft of the "Proposal for a
> directive
> on waste from electrical and electronic equipment".  Now I have done a
> fair
> amount of searching about this and located a number of pages to review on
> the Eur-Lex website.  But I still am not sure what the impact is for my
> company.  It appears that manufacturers will eventually be required to
> provide a free service for recycling their obsolete products.
> 
> Does anyone know if and when this goes into force.  And if this comes
> about
> what are the implications to manufacturers who import their products into
> the European Community.  What is the appearance of this symbol described
> as
> a "crossed-out wheeled bin"?  What notifications are required in user
> documentation?  Is there a requirement to either provide or contract
> recycling centers?
> 
> Thanks for any help,
> 
> -doug
> 
> ===
> Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer
> Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
> Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 USA
> ---
> 970-407-6410  (phone)
> 970-407-5410  (e-fax)
> mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com  
> http://www.advanced-energy.com  
> ===
> 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

HP 9000 workstation

[Paul Slavens]

Dear group,

Does any have a HP 9000 workstation they would like to sell?

Regards

Paul Slavens
Acme Testing

There are three seasons to each year:

1. January to April = Steelhead Season
2. April to October = Baseball Season
3. October to January = Salmon Season



___
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Re: cost effective EMC facility

[rayg]

Matt,

The salt mine is not so absurb, having visited it I can assure you it does 
exist.

Also the company concerned only rent a small corner in what is a working salt 
mine, they have not bought the whole mine.

To throw another thought in a different direction, another prosecution has 
taken place in the UK under the EMC Directive.  Again a computer, however what 
has made this interesting is that two firms were have been prosecuted over the 
same product.

Company A designed and built and were found guilty and fined.

Company B rebadged it and sold it and were also found quilty and fined.

So it would appear that other than the designer/manufacturer can be prosecuted.

RCIC - http://www.rcic.com
Regulatory Compliance Information Center




-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: cost effective EMC facility

[Geoff Lister]

There is a nice picture of the underground facility at
http://www.celesticades.com/conformance/conformance.htm

I have been told that it has the characteristics of an ambient-free 
OATS, but if you need to go back to your car to get a screwdriver, it 
can take some time.
Regards,
Geoff Lister

> From:  "Aschenberg, Mat" 
> To:"'roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com'" 
> ,
>"Lacey,Scott" 
> Cc:"'Price, Ed'" ,
>"'emc-p...@ieee.org'"
>
> Subject:   RE: cost effective EMC facility
> Date:  Thu, 5 Aug 1999 07:16:54 -0600 
> Reply-to:  "Aschenberg, Mat" 

> 
> I was under the impression that we were discussion the "Cost-effective" emc
> testing solutions, not the cost-absurd solutions. Maybe salt mines are going
> for a lot less these days. 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com]
> > Sent:   Thursday, August 05, 1999 2:28 AM
> > To: Lacey,Scott
> > Cc: 'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> > Subject:RE: cost effective EMC facility
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > A very large EMC test site has been operating underground in England for
> > some
> > years. This is in Cheshire where salt is mined, leaving large underground
> > open
> > spaces surrounded by absorbing salt-laden walls. The reduction in ambient
> > emissions is another benefit of this site. As an article in the UK EMC
> > Journal
> > reports (http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/archive1/980402.html) , it is now
> > run by
> > Celestica.
> > 
> > Roger Viles
> > WWG
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > "Lacey,Scott"  on 04/08/99 16:37:09
> > 
> > Please respond to "Lacey,Scott" 
> > 
> > To:   "'Price, Ed'" 
> > cc:   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Roger
> > Viles/PLY/Global)
> > 
> > Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Ed,
> > 
> > I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine
> > the
> > salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry
> > would
> > have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool. The
> > problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps,
> > which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near
> > fault
> > lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools
> > would
> > be "shaken, not stirred").   : )
> > 
> > On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below
> > ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding
> > material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early
> > pioneers "soddie" (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even
> > incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC
> > engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at lunch
> > time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?).  : )
> > 
> > Scott Lacey
> > 
> >  -Original Message-
> >  From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
> >  Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM
> >  To:  'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
> >  Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> > 
> > 
> >  Arun:
> > 
> >  I was just struck by what you said about "setup a Sea Plane or a
> > salt water
> >  based  site" . Has anyone ever set up an OATS using salt water as
> > the ground
> >  plane? Talk about excellent surface smoothness, easy to level and
> > cheap
> >  material, plus simple repair! (Uhh, could we say it fixes itself?)
> > 
> >  Just what conductivity would be enough? Could we get enough
> > conductivity
> >  before we reach salt saturation?
> > 
> >  I suppose the upper limit on surface area would be when we get to
> > the point
> >  of the wind causing surface ripples. Or gravitational tides.
> > 
> >  Turntables might be a lot cheaper, too. Just a thin raft that
> > floats.
> > 
> >  Seriously, has anyone tried this for an OATS? (I seem to recall the
> > US Navy
> >  had a really big ship simulator here in San Diego, where they placed
> > scale
> >  models of ships on a sheet-steel "sea" in order to model HF wire
> > antennas.)
> > 
> >  Regards,
> > 
> >  Ed
> > 
> > 
> > :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> > ):
> >  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
> >  Ed Price
> >  ed.pr...@cubic.com
> >  Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
> >  Cubic Defense Systems
> >  San Diego, CA.  USA
> >  619-505-2780 (Voice)
> >  619-505-1502 (Fax)
> >  Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
> >  Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
> > 
> > :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> > ):
> >  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
> > 
> > 
> > -
> > This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion lis

RE: cost effective EMC facility

[Aschenberg, Mat]

So you are saying I should go into buisness, open a salt mine, and hey! I
could make some side cash doing EMC testing   Cool   
Any takers? 

I wonder is gold mines are good.. There are a lot of old abandoned gold
mines in Colorado.   :)

Mat


> -Original Message-
> From: rehel...@mmm.com [SMTP:rehel...@mmm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 10:26 AM
> To:   Aschenberg, Mat; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
> 
> It could be very cost effective if EMC testing is a by-product of the salt
> mine :-).
> 
> ===
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Aschenberg, Mat"  on 08/05/99 08:16:54 AM
> 
> Please respond to "Aschenberg, Mat" 
> 
> 
> To:   "'roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com'" 
>   "Lacey,Scott" 
> cc:   "'Price, Ed'" 
>   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Robert E.
>   Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US)
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that we were discussion the "Cost-effective"
> emc
> testing solutions, not the cost-absurd solutions. Maybe salt mines are
> going
> for a lot less these days.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com]
> > Sent:   Thursday, August 05, 1999 2:28 AM
> > To: Lacey,Scott
> > Cc: 'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> > Subject: RE: cost effective EMC facility
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > A very large EMC test site has been operating underground in England for
> > some
> > years. This is in Cheshire where salt is mined, leaving large
> underground
> > open
> > spaces surrounded by absorbing salt-laden walls. The reduction in
> ambient
> > emissions is another benefit of this site. As an article in the UK EMC
> > Journal
> > reports (http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/archive1/980402.html) , it is now
> > run by
> > Celestica.
> >
> > Roger Viles
> > WWG
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Lacey,Scott"  on 04/08/99 16:37:09
> >
> > Please respond to "Lacey,Scott" 
> >
> > To:   "'Price, Ed'" 
> > cc:   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Roger
> > Viles/PLY/Global)
> >
> > Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ed,
> >
> > I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine
> > the
> > salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry
> > would
> > have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool.
> The
> > problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps,
> > which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near
> > fault
> > lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools
> > would
> > be "shaken, not stirred").   : )
> >
> > On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below
> > ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding
> > material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early
> > pioneers "soddie" (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even
> > incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC
> > engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at
> lunch
> > time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?).  : )
> >
> > Scott Lacey
> >
> >  -Original Message-
> >  From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
> >  Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM
> >  To:  'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
> >  Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> >
> >
> >  Arun:
> >
> >  I was just struck by what you said about "setup a Sea Plane or a
> > salt water
> >  based  site" . Has anyone ever set up an OATS using salt water as
> > the ground
> >  plane? Talk about excellent surface smoothness, easy to level and
> > cheap
> >  material, plus simple repair! (Uhh, could we say it fixes itself?)
> >
> >  Just what conductivity would be enough? Could we get enough
> > conductivity
> >  before we reach salt saturation?
> >
> >  I suppose the upper limit on surface area would be when we get to
> > the point
> >  of the wind causing surface ripples. Or gravitational tides.
> >
> >  Turntables might be a lot cheaper, too. Just a thin raft that
> > floats.
> >
> >  Seriously, has anyone tried this for an OATS? (I seem to recall the
> > US Navy
> >  had a really big ship simulator here in San Diego, where they
> placed
> > scale
> >  models of ships on a sheet-steel "sea" in order to model HF wire
> > antennas.)
> >
> >  Regards,
> >
> >  Ed
> >
> >
> >
> :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> > ):
> >  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
> >  Ed Price
> >  ed.pr...@cubic.com
> >  Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
> >  Cubic Defense Systems
> >  San Diego, CA.  USA
> >  619-505-2780 (Voice)
> >  619-505-1502 (Fax)
> >  Military & Avioni

RE: Laser Warning Label

[John Juhasz]

John,

The laser warning labels are located in 21CFR1040, which deals with the
performance and labeling requirements of laser products. The there are no
size limitations. There is guidance for the text which is dependant upon the
laser classification of the product. Below is the URL (when Acrobat come
sup, labeling requirements are on
page 14 of 19).

http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/radhlth/cfr/21cfr1040.10.pdf


John A. Juhasz
Product Qualification &
Compliance Engr.

Fiber Options, Inc.
80 Orville Dr. Suite 102
Bohemia, NY 11716 USA

Tel: 516-370-1324
Fax: 516-567-8322 


-Original Message-
From: Kretsch, John [mailto:john_kret...@adc.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 9:52 AM
To: 'EMC PSTC Group'
Subject: Laser Warning Label



Can anyone point me to a source regarding the clarity of the laser warning
label per CFR 1010?
I'm talking about things like size, fonts, etc.  
We need to attach a pretty small label to the front of a product.

Regards,

John R. Kretsch, P.E.
Manager, Design Assurance Engineering
ADC Broadband Communications
john_kret...@adc.com 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: cost effective EMC facility

[reheller]

It could be very cost effective if EMC testing is a by-product of the salt
mine :-).

===




"Aschenberg, Mat"  on 08/05/99 08:16:54 AM

Please respond to "Aschenberg, Mat" 


To:   "'roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com'" 
  "Lacey,Scott" 
cc:   "'Price, Ed'" 
  "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Robert E.
  Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US)
Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility





I was under the impression that we were discussion the "Cost-effective" emc
testing solutions, not the cost-absurd solutions. Maybe salt mines are
going
for a lot less these days.

> -Original Message-
> From:   roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com]
> Sent:   Thursday, August 05, 1999 2:28 AM
> To: Lacey,Scott
> Cc: 'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> Subject: RE: cost effective EMC facility
>
>
>
>
> A very large EMC test site has been operating underground in England for
> some
> years. This is in Cheshire where salt is mined, leaving large underground
> open
> spaces surrounded by absorbing salt-laden walls. The reduction in ambient
> emissions is another benefit of this site. As an article in the UK EMC
> Journal
> reports (http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/archive1/980402.html) , it is now
> run by
> Celestica.
>
> Roger Viles
> WWG
>
>
>
>
> "Lacey,Scott"  on 04/08/99 16:37:09
>
> Please respond to "Lacey,Scott" 
>
> To:   "'Price, Ed'" 
> cc:   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Roger
> Viles/PLY/Global)
>
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
>
>
>
>
>
> Ed,
>
> I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine
> the
> salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry
> would
> have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool.
The
> problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps,
> which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near
> fault
> lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools
> would
> be "shaken, not stirred").   : )
>
> On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below
> ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding
> material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early
> pioneers "soddie" (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even
> incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC
> engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at lunch
> time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?).  : )
>
> Scott Lacey
>
>  -Original Message-
>  From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
>  Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM
>  To:  'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
>  Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
>
>
>  Arun:
>
>  I was just struck by what you said about "setup a Sea Plane or a
> salt water
>  based  site" . Has anyone ever set up an OATS using salt water as
> the ground
>  plane? Talk about excellent surface smoothness, easy to level and
> cheap
>  material, plus simple repair! (Uhh, could we say it fixes itself?)
>
>  Just what conductivity would be enough? Could we get enough
> conductivity
>  before we reach salt saturation?
>
>  I suppose the upper limit on surface area would be when we get to
> the point
>  of the wind causing surface ripples. Or gravitational tides.
>
>  Turntables might be a lot cheaper, too. Just a thin raft that
> floats.
>
>  Seriously, has anyone tried this for an OATS? (I seem to recall the
> US Navy
>  had a really big ship simulator here in San Diego, where they placed
> scale
>  models of ships on a sheet-steel "sea" in order to model HF wire
> antennas.)
>
>  Regards,
>
>  Ed
>
>
>
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> ):
>  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
>  Ed Price
>  ed.pr...@cubic.com
>  Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
>  Cubic Defense Systems
>  San Diego, CA.  USA
>  619-505-2780 (Voice)
>  619-505-1502 (Fax)
>  Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
>  Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
>
>
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> ):
>  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
>
>
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (with

Proposition 65

[Werlwas, Mark]

| For those on the frontline: has anyone been exposed to any of 

| these legal

| requirements? Would you mind sharing your experience(s)?

| ...

| 2. The State of California statue called Proposition 65 requires that

| manufacturers place a warning label on the containers of 

| products (and the

| products themselves) if they contain harmful carcinogens or chemicals,

| including lead. The solder on your circuit boards constitutes 

| a product

| with toxic exposure potential to both customers and employees.

| 

As a resident here on the left coast I can share a personal observation. It
seems like every building has (or had) a prop. 65 warning on it. Apparently
there are detectable levels of listed chemicals everywhere. So most
buildings are labeled. Even gas pumps are labeled. The labels were placed
almost everywhere so I don't think that people pay any attention to them any
more -- at least I don't notice them any longer. I don't know why signs are
not posted outside of the buildings, I've heard that sunlight can cause
cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm too.

Here is a link to California's EPA page describing the law:
http://www.oehha.org/prop65/p65plain.htm

Here is a link to a dissenting opinion on the law.
http://www.public-policy.org/~ncpa/studies/s137/s137b.html This link has
some interesting (although I don't know how accurate) information regarding
relative risks in the tables.

Mark Werlwas

 
Mark Werlwas
Product Safety Engineer
Lam Research
4650 Cushing Parkway
Fremont, California 94538
 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: cost effective EMC facility

[Gary McInturff]

The one I work in seems inexpensive enough
Gary

-Original Message-
From: Aschenberg, Mat [mailto:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 6:17 AM
To: 'roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com'; Lacey,Scott
Cc: 'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: RE: cost effective EMC facility



I was under the impression that we were discussion the "Cost-effective" emc
testing solutions, not the cost-absurd solutions. Maybe salt mines are going
for a lot less these days. 

> -Original Message-
> From: roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 2:28 AM
> To:   Lacey,Scott
> Cc:   'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A very large EMC test site has been operating underground in England for
> some
> years. This is in Cheshire where salt is mined, leaving large underground
> open
> spaces surrounded by absorbing salt-laden walls. The reduction in ambient
> emissions is another benefit of this site. As an article in the UK EMC
> Journal
> reports (http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/archive1/980402.html) , it is now
> run by
> Celestica.
> 
> Roger Viles
> WWG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Lacey,Scott"  on 04/08/99 16:37:09
> 
> Please respond to "Lacey,Scott" 
> 
> To:   "'Price, Ed'" 
> cc:   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Roger
> Viles/PLY/Global)
> 
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ed,
> 
> I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine
> the
> salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry
> would
> have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool. The
> problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps,
> which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near
> fault
> lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools
> would
> be "shaken, not stirred").   : )
> 
> On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below
> ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding
> material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early
> pioneers "soddie" (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even
> incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC
> engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at lunch
> time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?).  : )
> 
> Scott Lacey
> 
>  -Original Message-
>  From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
>  Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM
>  To:  'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
>  Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
>  Arun:
> 
>  I was just struck by what you said about "setup a Sea Plane or a
> salt water
>  based  site" . Has anyone ever set up an OATS using salt water as
> the ground
>  plane? Talk about excellent surface smoothness, easy to level and
> cheap
>  material, plus simple repair! (Uhh, could we say it fixes itself?)
> 
>  Just what conductivity would be enough? Could we get enough
> conductivity
>  before we reach salt saturation?
> 
>  I suppose the upper limit on surface area would be when we get to
> the point
>  of the wind causing surface ripples. Or gravitational tides.
> 
>  Turntables might be a lot cheaper, too. Just a thin raft that
> floats.
> 
>  Seriously, has anyone tried this for an OATS? (I seem to recall the
> US Navy
>  had a really big ship simulator here in San Diego, where they placed
> scale
>  models of ships on a sheet-steel "sea" in order to model HF wire
> antennas.)
> 
>  Regards,
> 
>  Ed
> 
> 
> :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> ):
>  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
>  Ed Price
>  ed.pr...@cubic.com
>  Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
>  Cubic Defense Systems
>  San Diego, CA.  USA
>  619-505-2780 (Voice)
>  619-505-1502 (Fax)
>  Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
>  Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
> 
> :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> ):
>  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
> 
> 
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, 

RE: EMC & Safety Standards

[Brumbaugh, David]

For non ionizing radiation limits, refer to ANSI/IEEE C95.1

> --
> From: Muriel Bittencourt de Liz[SMTP:mur...@grucad.ufsc.br]
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 11:42 AM
> To:   Lista de EMC da IEEE
> Subject:  EMC & Safety Standards
> 
> 
> Dear Group,
> 
> I'm making a study on EMC & Safety Standards, and some questions
> appeared. I'd like to post them to the group to see if someone can help
> me. The questions are:
> 
> # Safety standards seem only to aim the protection the equipment... And
> the operator/user of the equipment? Is there any standard for protection
> of the user/operator?
> 
> # The VCCI Standard is more restrictive than the European Norms (ENs)??
> 
> # Is there any standard which covers the effects of Non-Ionizing
> Radiation (Electromagnetic Radiation) on the human health?
> 
> I think that's all... Thanks in advance for those who can help!
> 
> 
> Best Regards, 
> 
>   Muriel
> -- 
> ==
> Muriel Bittencourt de Liz
> GRUCAD - Grupo de Concep> ção e Análise de Dispositivos Eletromagnéticos
> Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
> Caixa Postal - 476 88040-900 - Florianópolis - SC - BRASIL
> Fone: +55.48.331.9649 - Fax: +55.48.234.3790
> e-mail: mur...@grucad.ufsc.br
> ICQ#: 9089332
> 
> 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Weee Directive

[Brian Harlowe]

Like John Crabb I am not too well informed regarding this directive.

I believe though that the bare bones of it is that by the year 200* 
ALL electronic equipment must be able to be recycled. I believe I saw 
something where this will be phased in where a certain percentage of 
the unit will have to comply but the ultimate aim is to achieve total 
recycling.

This has started in a limited fashion in the UK there are now 
companies being set up to dismantle old PCs and other units and 
recycle the plastic housings and the CRTs and other components.

As I say my knowledge is thin but I do have some info in an ERA 
Safety and EMC newsletter that I will fax to any one if they want it.

Regards

Brian Harlowe
* opinions expressed here are personal and in no way reflect the position of VG 
Scientific
* opinions expressed here are personal and in no way reflect the position of VG 
Scientific

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: new legal issues

[Lacey,Scott]

Prop 65 sounds like another case of the "technically illiterate" creating
convoluted laws which burden the productive sector and create more work for
the bureaucrats. The entire electronics industry is tooled up for lead-tin
solders. I doubt that the California market is large enough to justify the
use of lead-free substitutes, and many manufacturers may simply decide not
to expose themselves to potential future liability - the example of the
State-financed tobacco megasuits looms large in corporate offices today.
Massachusetts recently enacted a new victim disarmament law which goes so
far as to regulate the technical aspects of firearm construction, including
melting points of alloys and stringent drop test requirements. Many
manufacturers have simply refused to ship certain firearms into the state,
including current models of the M1911, which the U.S. military found safe
and reliable enough to issue in World Wars I and II, Korea, and Vietnam. If
individual states continue in this vein, either Congress will have to step
in and deal with liability issues, or many of us will find ourselves living
in landlocked islands where some technology is simply unobtainable. I
shudder to think what the legal eagles (or is it vultures?) could find
objectionable in the typical laser printer. "LASERS! High Voltage! These
things are too dangerous to be sold to consumers!"

As to the Lemelson patents, and barcodes, I can't help but wonder if he was
a Patent Attorney by trade? The group is claiming that he invented barcodes,
cordless phones, cassette players, camcorders, etc. Some years back one of
the automotive magazines published an interesting story about a Patent
Attorney named Selden who patented the automobile. He had every auto
manufacturer in the country paying him royalties, until one by the name of
Henry Ford decided to fight. In the final stages of the court battle
plaintiff Selden, who had never built any autos, was challenged to actually
build a working vehicle according to his patents. The finished vehicle was
brought to a track where it was to race a production Ford in front of the
judge. The Selden "auto" never got to race, due to numerous design defects.
The patents were invalidated, and the auto industry thrived. Will history
repeat itself?

Scott Lacey



-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Re: surge protection for ISDN U and S/T

[Dorababu R.]

Ok, I got the answer, it is required.
Dorababu.



> Is longitudinal protection not required for
> ISDN circuits at U interface and S/T interface ?

> Dorababu
> 
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Re: new legal issues re: Bar Code

[Terry Meck]

Naftali:

I understand there is a lawsuit pending see news release below.


BAR CODE VENDORS TEAM UP TO TAKE ON LEMELSON FOUNDATION

New York
Seven automatic identification companies have joined forces and filed 
suit in federal court to invalidate bar code patents held by late 
inventor Jerome Lemelson. The suit seeks a declaration that certain 
patents asserted by the Lemelson Medical, Education & Research 
Foundation, Limited Partnership, against end users of bar code 
equipment are invalid, unenforceable and not infringed. 

For full story see:
http://www.autoidnews.com/news/news723.htm#anchor1 




Best regards,
Terry J. Meck
Senior Compliance/Test Engineer
Phone:215-721-5280
Fax:215-721-5551 hard copy;
Fax PC: 215.799.1650 To my desk PC
tjm...@accusort.com
Accu-Sort Systems Inc.
511 School House Rd.
Telford, PA 18969-1196 USA


>>> "Naftali Shani"  08/04 4:07 PM >>>

For those on the frontline: has anyone been exposed to any of these
legal
requirements? Would you mind sharing your experience(s)?

Regards,
Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S46, MS 117/C1/N04
21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada  K2K 2C1
Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.3365 (ESN 393)
E-mail: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com  


-Original Message-
From:   Ray Alderman [SMTP:e...@vita.com] 

Sent:   Wednesday, August 04, 1999 15:23
To: v-...@vita.com  
Subject:new legal issues

Hello Members:
I should make you aware of two new legal issues that you may
run
into in the near future:

1. Lemelson Medical, Educational, and Research Foundation holds some
patents on barcode reading processes, and they are asserting those
patents
on USERS of that equipment (ie, users who barcode their products and
read
those codes). So far, they have targeted grocery stores, distributors,
and
now manufacturers in the elctronics industry. They have granted over
100
licenses, and over 200 companies have payed hundreds of millions of
dollars
to license them. The patents have not been challenged or litigated. If
you
use bar codes on your products and read them, then you may see these
folks
in your future.

2. The State of California statue called Proposition 65 requires that
manufacturers place a warning label on the containers of products (and
the
products themselves) if they contain harmful carcinogens or chemicals,
including lead. The solder on your circuit boards constitutes a
product
with toxic exposure potential to both customers and employees.

The state of California has 90 days to prosecute the manufacturer for
non-compliance. After that time, private lawsuits can then be placed
by
employees or customers. If you ship products into California, you
might
want to heed this information. They like to get money from outside
their
own economy to fund their latest social programs.

Now you know.

Regards...Ray Alderman

---
Ray Alderman   PH: 480-951-8866
Executive Director, VITA   FX: 480-951-0720
7825 E. Gelding Dr. #104   email: e...@vita.com 
  or
Scottsdale, AZ 85260  e...@busandboard.com 
 
WEB:
http://www.vita.com

 
http://www.pcisource.com

 
http://www.esofta.com 
 
http://www.busandboard.com

 
Famous Cowboy Quotes From Arizona #21:
"Make enemies when you must, and friends when you can."
---

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org 
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).



-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: cost effective EMC facility

[Price, Ed]

Matt:

Agreed that digging your own hole in the ground is a tad costly for creating
RF shielding. OTOH, when the salt is removed from a mine, they don't
back-fill it to delete the insult to Mother Earth. So, as the miners extract
their economic interest, they move on, leaving access and big, relatively
useless holes. To paraphrase Dire Straits; "Shielding for nothing and your
holes for free."

Obviously, a hole in the ground may yield shielding, but it's very echoic.
It's a long correlation to OATS conditions. 

My flash on the subject had to do with the myriad problems we have with the
darn ground plane. We want it big but cheap, highly conductive but exposed
to the weather, made up of repairable (or replaceable) pieces but
electrically smooth and flat.

There's not much cheaper in this world than water and salt. Combined into a
conductive fluid, gravity (and the fact that the Earth is flat) pulls the
fluid into a nice flat, smooth surface. Maybe the conductivity of the
near-saturated solution is good enough to use by itself. Or possibly the
salt water could be used to flood the existing mesh or plate ground plane to
just a half-inch or so, where it would function to smooth the surface
roughness of the underlying conductive metal. (We might need to provide some
type of active galvanic protection to prevent corrosion.)

I don't have any current need to investigate this idea, as I'm primarily
involved in Military related EMC. But the cost/benefits seem very
interesting, and someone may be able to follow up on it. (I'm visualizing
those big, shallow salt marshes at the south end of San Francisco Bay. Or
maybe someone has a computer routine for investigating OATS performance.)

Ed


:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA.  USA
619-505-2780 (Voice)
619-505-1502 (Fax)
Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)

> -Original Message-
> From: Aschenberg, Mat [SMTP:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 6:17 AM
> To:   'roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com'; Lacey,Scott
> Cc:   'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that we were discussion the "Cost-effective"
> emc
> testing solutions, not the cost-absurd solutions. Maybe salt mines are
> going
> for a lot less these days. 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com
> [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com]
> > Sent:   Thursday, August 05, 1999 2:28 AM
> > To: Lacey,Scott
> > Cc: 'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> > Subject:RE: cost effective EMC facility
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > A very large EMC test site has been operating underground in England for
> > some
> > years. This is in Cheshire where salt is mined, leaving large
> underground
> > open
> > spaces surrounded by absorbing salt-laden walls. The reduction in
> ambient
> > emissions is another benefit of this site. As an article in the UK EMC
> > Journal
> > reports (http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/archive1/980402.html) , it is now
> > run by
> > Celestica.
> > 
> > Roger Viles
> > WWG
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > "Lacey,Scott"  on 04/08/99 16:37:09
> > 
> > Please respond to "Lacey,Scott" 
> > 
> > To:   "'Price, Ed'" 
> > cc:   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Roger
> > Viles/PLY/Global)
> > 
> > Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Ed,
> > 
> > I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine
> > the
> > salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry
> > would
> > have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool.
> The
> > problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps,
> > which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near
> > fault
> > lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools
> > would
> > be "shaken, not stirred").   : )
> > 
> > On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below
> > ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding
> > material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early
> > pioneers "soddie" (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even
> > incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC
> > engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at
> lunch
> > time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?).  : )
> > 
> > Scott Lacey
> > 
> >  -Original Message-
> >  From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
> >  Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM
> >  To:  'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
> >  Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> > 
> > 
> >

Re: Laser Warning Label

[kshadoff]

   John:

   Refer to 21CFR 1040.10(g)(10) which covers label
   specifications.  You can access this section of the rules on
   line at http:
   //www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_99/21cfr1040_99.html

   (10) Label specifications. Labels required by this section
  and
  Sec. 1040.11 shall be permanently affixed to, or inscribed
  on, the laser
  product, legible, and clearly visible during operation,
  maintenance, or
  service, as appropriate. If the size, configuration, design,
   or function
  of the laser product would preclude compliance with the
  requirements for
  any required label or would render the required wording of
  such label
  inappropriate or ineffective, the Director, Office of
  Compliance (HFZ-
  300), Center for Devices and Radiological Health, on the
  Director's own
  initiative or upon written application by the manufacturer,
  may approve
  alternate means of providing such label(s) or alternate
  wording for such
  label(s) as applicable.

   Hope this helps.

   Best regards,

   Ken Shadoff
   Senior Product Safety Engineer
   Quality Management Dept.
   Canon U.S.A., Inc.
   Tel. (516) 328-5602
   Fax. (516) 328-5169



   From: "Kretsch John"  AT ~internet on
 08/05/99 08:5c2 AM

   To:   "'EMC PSTC Group'"  AT
 ~internet@FCC
   cc:(bcc: Kenneth A. Shadoff/NewYork/CanonUSA)

   Subject:  Laser Warning Label






   Can anyone point me to a source regarding the clarity of the
   laser warning label per CFR 1010?
   I'm talking about things like size, fonts, etc.
   We need to attach a pretty small label to the front of a
   product.

   Regards,

   John R. Kretsch, P.E.
   Manager, Design Assurance Engineering
   ADC Broadband Communications
   john_kret...@adc.com

   -
   This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
   To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
   with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
   quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
   jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
   roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Re: new legal issues

[eric . lifsey]

Problems create opportunities - so I've heard.  Prop 65 sounds like one.

Why not just charge all orders destined for California a surcharge, call it
"California Prop 65 Special Materials Handling".  Make sure you charge enough to
make a nice profit above the cost of the marking and enough to cover the cost
plus profit against any future legal problems.

And especially make sure that the new charge appears as a line-item on the
invoice so the California customer knows who to blame.

This way, we all extract even more money out of the California economy.  So the
net effect is a minus for California.  The state government will realize this
and they'll be a little less prone to make more such opportunities for us in the
future.

Though I started this in jest, it's starting to sound like a doggone good
idea

Regards,
Eric





Please respond to Dwight Hunnicutt 

To:   Naftali Shani , EMC PSTC 
cc:(bcc: Eric Lifsey/AUS/NIC)
Subject:  Re: new legal issues


Item #2 would set an interesting precendent...just about every
electronic product on the market has some solder...so everything from
the little beeping, blinking toy imported from Asia, to home theatre
equipment, to your desk phone, fax machine, and pager would need a Prop.
65 warning marking?


Naftali Shani wrote:
>
> For those on the frontline: has anyone been exposed to any of these legal
> requirements? Would you mind sharing your experience(s)?
>
> Regards,
> Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S46, MS 117/C1/N04
> 21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada  K2K 2C1
> Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.3365 (ESN 393)
> E-mail: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com 
>
> -Original Message-
> From:   Ray Alderman [SMTP:e...@vita.com] 
> Sent:   Wednesday, August 04, 1999 15:23
> To: v-...@vita.com 
> Subject:new legal issues
>
> Hello Members:
> I should make you aware of two new legal issues that you may run
> into in the near future:
>
> 1. Lemelson Medical, Educational, and Research Foundation holds some
> patents on barcode reading processes, and they are asserting those patents
> on USERS of that equipment (ie, users who barcode their products and read
> those codes). So far, they have targeted grocery stores, distributors, and
> now manufacturers in the elctronics industry. They have granted over 100
> licenses, and over 200 companies have payed hundreds of millions of dollars
> to license them. The patents have not been challenged or litigated. If you
> use bar codes on your products and read them, then you may see these folks
> in your future.
>
> 2. The State of California statue called Proposition 65 requires that
> manufacturers place a warning label on the containers of products (and the
> products themselves) if they contain harmful carcinogens or chemicals,
> including lead. The solder on your circuit boards constitutes a product
> with toxic exposure potential to both customers and employees.
>
> The state of California has 90 days to prosecute the manufacturer for
> non-compliance. After that time, private lawsuits can then be placed by
> employees or customers. If you ship products into California, you might
> want to heed this information. They like to get money from outside their
> own economy to fund their latest social programs.
>
> Now you know.
>
> Regards...Ray Alderman
>
> ---
> Ray Alderman   PH: 480-951-8866
> Executive Director, VITA   FX: 480-951-0720
> 7825 E. Gelding Dr. #104   email: e...@vita.com
>   or
> Scottsdale, AZ 85260  e...@busandboard.com
> 
>







-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Laser Warning Label

[Kretsch, John]

Can anyone point me to a source regarding the clarity of the laser warning 
label per CFR 1010?
I'm talking about things like size, fonts, etc.  
We need to attach a pretty small label to the front of a product.

Regards,

John R. Kretsch, P.E.
Manager, Design Assurance Engineering
ADC Broadband Communications
john_kret...@adc.com 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

surge protection for ISDN U and S/T

[Dorababu R.]

Is longitudinal protection not required for
ISDN circuits at U interface and S/T interface ?

Thanks 
Dorababu

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: year in which the CE mark was affixed" marked on Declaration of Conformity

[Paul J Smith]

Alan,

Why not use the dated signature of the authorized senior personnel on the D of C
meet this year code specification on the document?It would seem correct to
use that date since it generally is the first time that the product is CE marked
to be placed on the EU market.  Please comment

Paul J. Smith
Compliance Engineer
Teradyne, Inc.
Boston




Alan Brewster  on 08/04/99 05:51:38 PM

Please respond to Alan Brewster 

To:   "'Chuck Seyboldt'" , EMC-PSTC Discussion Group
  
cc:(bcc: Paul J Smith/Bos/Teradyne)
Subject:  RE: The meaning of "Affixed"





Greetings,

The need to have "the last two digits of the year in which the CE mark
was affixed" marked on the Declaration of Conformity is simply to make
the job of enforcement officers simpler. It is bourne out of the very
nature and application of the LVD in that there are many electrical
products that have been in serial production since the introduction of
the Directive in the early seventies. During my four years as a Notified
Body signatory in the UK, I saw many products that also followed a
fashion cycle. It is not unusual for items such as lighting products to
lie dormant for a number of years e.g.: the Lava Lamp.
There is some confusion about the format of the use of the last two
digits. my advice has always been to find space in the middle of the
page and put "99". Whilst this looks odd it follows, to the letter, the
requirement and again it is worth remembering that the intended audience
for D of C's are the enforcement folks.
The D of C should not be changed from year to year. The only reason for
doing this would be if the product was revised, or the source of
manufacture was changed to sufficiently need the re-definition of the
product. This might be the case for a retailer who was sourcing an item
from a new factory each season.
I hope that this is of interest.


Alan

_
Alan Brewster
Compliance Certification Services
1366 Bordeaux Drive
Sunnyvale, CA 94089-1005
Tel: 408-752-8166 ext. 122
Fax: 408-752-8168
e-mail: abrews...@ccsemc.com
http://www.ccsemc.com



> -Original Message-
> From:   Chuck Seyboldt [SMTP:cbo...@nlis.net]
> Sent:   Tuesday, August 03, 1999 10:54 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC Discussion Group
> Subject: The meaning of "Affixed"
>
>
>
>The requirements for the contents of a Declaration of
> Conformity under the Low Voltage Directive were amended by
> Directive 93/68/EEC.
>
>Directive 73/23/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
>. . .
>ANNEX III
> CE CONFORMITY MARKING AND EC DECLARATION OF CONFORMITY
>. . .
> B. EC declaration of conformity
> The EC declaration of conformity must contain the following
> elements:
>. . .
> - the last two digits of the year in which the CE marking was
> affixed.
>
>
>I recognize that this requirement is a "formality" but I
> am interested in understanding how to comply, particularly when
> the goods are produced substantially unchanged, year after year.
>
>One could argue that "affixing of the CE mark" means
> affixing the CE mark to the goods, and that a new declaration is
> to be prepared at least once per year, in order that the proper
> year is recited on the declaration.
>
>But, I have seen DofC's that clearly are not done in this
> fashion.  For example, Allen Bradley keeps a series of DofC's
> online - and for currently produced goods, the latest year
> appearing on one DofC is 1995.
>
>Obviously, it is easier to NOT revisit the DofC in the
> case of series production.  Naturally, a freshly prepared and
> dated DofC can be expected when a new model is introduced, or a
> change in an existing model is made that requires a technical
> re-evaluation (e.g. a design change that warrants updating the
> design justification in the Technical File), but is it the
> intent of the subject 93/68/EEC amendments to create an
> obligation to create annually dated DofC's for each year that
> series production is undertaken?
>
>It is interesting that the Low Voltage Directive has this
> requirement, and Directive 93/68/EEC also likewise amended these
> Directives . . .
>
> Directive 87/404/EEC (relating to simple pressure vessels)
> Directive 89/686/EEC (relating to Personal Protective Equipment)
> Directive 90/384/EEC (relating to non-automatic weighing instruments)
> Directive 90/396/EEC (relating to appliances burning gaseous fuels)
> Directive 92/42/EEC (relating to Boilers)
>
>. . . but the recent Pressure Equipment Directive,
> 97/23/EC, does not have a requirement to include "the last two
> digits of the year in which the CE mark was affixed" on the DofC.
>
>Does anybody here know the original intended purpose for
> including the "year of affixing" requirement?
>
>Thanks in advance for your insights - on this decidedly
> non-technical matter.
>
> Regards,
> Chuck Seyboldt
>
>
> -
> This message is coming from the em

RE: cost effective EMC facility

[Aschenberg, Mat]

I was under the impression that we were discussion the "Cost-effective" emc
testing solutions, not the cost-absurd solutions. Maybe salt mines are going
for a lot less these days. 

> -Original Message-
> From: roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com [SMTP:roger.vi...@wwgsolutions.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 2:28 AM
> To:   Lacey,Scott
> Cc:   'Price, Ed'; 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A very large EMC test site has been operating underground in England for
> some
> years. This is in Cheshire where salt is mined, leaving large underground
> open
> spaces surrounded by absorbing salt-laden walls. The reduction in ambient
> emissions is another benefit of this site. As an article in the UK EMC
> Journal
> reports (http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/archive1/980402.html) , it is now
> run by
> Celestica.
> 
> Roger Viles
> WWG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Lacey,Scott"  on 04/08/99 16:37:09
> 
> Please respond to "Lacey,Scott" 
> 
> To:   "'Price, Ed'" 
> cc:   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Roger
> Viles/PLY/Global)
> 
> Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ed,
> 
> I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine
> the
> salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry
> would
> have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool. The
> problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps,
> which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near
> fault
> lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools
> would
> be "shaken, not stirred").   : )
> 
> On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below
> ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding
> material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early
> pioneers "soddie" (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even
> incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC
> engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at lunch
> time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?).  : )
> 
> Scott Lacey
> 
>  -Original Message-
>  From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
>  Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM
>  To:  'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
>  Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility
> 
> 
>  Arun:
> 
>  I was just struck by what you said about "setup a Sea Plane or a
> salt water
>  based  site" . Has anyone ever set up an OATS using salt water as
> the ground
>  plane? Talk about excellent surface smoothness, easy to level and
> cheap
>  material, plus simple repair! (Uhh, could we say it fixes itself?)
> 
>  Just what conductivity would be enough? Could we get enough
> conductivity
>  before we reach salt saturation?
> 
>  I suppose the upper limit on surface area would be when we get to
> the point
>  of the wind causing surface ripples. Or gravitational tides.
> 
>  Turntables might be a lot cheaper, too. Just a thin raft that
> floats.
> 
>  Seriously, has anyone tried this for an OATS? (I seem to recall the
> US Navy
>  had a really big ship simulator here in San Diego, where they placed
> scale
>  models of ships on a sheet-steel "sea" in order to model HF wire
> antennas.)
> 
>  Regards,
> 
>  Ed
> 
> 
> :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> ):
>  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
>  Ed Price
>  ed.pr...@cubic.com
>  Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
>  Cubic Defense Systems
>  San Diego, CA.  USA
>  619-505-2780 (Voice)
>  619-505-1502 (Fax)
>  Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
>  Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
> 
> :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-
> ):
>  -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
> 
> 
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
> 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
ji

RE: MOV's Vs Unipolar Suppressors

[Jacowleff, Bill]

Darrell:

Is "Transorb" a brand name?  On a prototype level I recently tried AVX
"Transguard" with success against positive and negative ESD Pulses up to 8KV
air discharge.  These parts according to the mfg. are MLVs, Multilayer
Varistors and act in a bipolar manner.
Best Regards,

Bill Jacowleff
VDO Control Systems
Airpax Instruments
150 Knotter Drive
Cheshire, CT 06410
Phone: 203 271-6394
FAX:203 271-6200
bjacowl...@vdo.com


-Original Message-
From: Darrell Locke (MSMail) [mailto:dlo...@advanced-input.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 12:48 PM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: MOV's vs Unipolar Suppressors



Compliance Collegues,

I have a question on MOV's (bi-polar) vs "Transorbs" (unipolar) devices for
board level transient protection, specifically ESD pulses that are very fast
rising.  The MOV type devices are inexpensive and come in arrays, so theyr'e
pretty easy to use.  I have heard  arguments against these type of devices
because a negative going pulse can drive an IC pin below ground (greater
than a diode drop) and cause the IC to be damaged by sourcing a large
current.  Some engineers prefer a unipolar device for this purpose.  I have
not however, seen this to occur in the test lab.  Has anyone experimented or
have opinions on this?

Thanks
Darrell Locke

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Re: National Communication and Information Committee of The Russian Federation

[Jerry Roberton]

Joe,

For starters

Try   

or attend the ' Worldwide Approvals 99' Seminar <
http://www.ibctelecoms.com/approvals>  in London.  I hope to get an updated
picture of Russian  Certification developments before the end of September
which I will present.

Jerry Roberton
EMEA Homologation Engineer
NET Europe




"Finlayson, Joe" wrote:

> I have a customer who is requesting certification in Russia by The
> National Communication and Information Committee of The Russian Federation.
> I am in the process of obtaining GOST-R certification and they are insistent
> that this is insufficient.  I was hoping that this was for Telecom certs,
> etc.  This particular product does not connect to the PSTN and that would
> put this issue to rest.  Would anyone be able to provide information
> relating to the function of this organization and the products covered.  I
> could not find anything on the web.
>
> Thx,
>
> Joe
>
> *
> Joe Finlayson
> Compliance Engineering Manager
> NBase-Xyplex
> 295 Foster Street
> Littleton, MA 01460
> Tel:+1 (978) 952-5887
> Fax:+1 (978) 952-5054
> Email:  jfinlay...@nbase-xyplex.com
>
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: WEEE Directive

[Crabb, John]

Doug, I would have thought you would already have come across the
symbol for the "crossed-out wheeled bin" in the directive 93/86/EEC
which "adapts to technical progress Council Directive 91/157/EEC
on batteries and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances",
the dangerous substances being lead, cadmium, and mercury.

The WEEE directive is a real "bag of worms" - it bans the use of lead 
based solder for a start !
I'm afraid I haven't been following the progress of  this particular
directive
very diligently, since it is really "environmental" rather than "safety",
but
there is certainly a lot of criticism from industry flying around.
John Crabb, Development Excellence (Product Safety) , 
NCR  Financial Solutions Group Ltd.,  Kingsway West, Dundee, Scotland. DD2
3XX
E-Mail :john.cr...@scotland.ncr.com
Tel: +44 (0)1382-592289  (direct ). Fax +44 (0)1382-622243.   VoicePlus
6-341-2289.


> -Original Message-
> From: POWELL, DOUG [SMTP:doug.pow...@aei.com]
> Sent: 03 August 1999 01:01
> To:   EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
> Subject:  WEEE Directive
> 
> 
> Hello group,
> 
> This may be off-topic, then again it maybe not.  It is regulatory for
> electronic equipment.
> 
> I currently have a copy of the second draft of the "Proposal for a
> directive
> on waste from electrical and electronic equipment".  Now I have done a
> fair
> amount of searching about this and located a number of pages to review on
> the Eur-Lex website.  But I still am not sure what the impact is for my
> company.  It appears that manufacturers will eventually be required to
> provide a free service for recycling their obsolete products.
> 
> Does anyone know if and when this goes into force.  And if this comes
> about
> what are the implications to manufacturers who import their products into
> the European Community.  What is the appearance of this symbol described
> as
> a "crossed-out wheeled bin"?  What notifications are required in user
> documentation?  Is there a requirement to either provide or contract
> recycling centers?
> 
> Thanks for any help,
> 
> -doug
> 
> ===
> Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer
> Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
> Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 USA
> ---
> 970-407-6410  (phone)
> 970-407-5410  (e-fax)
> mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com  
> http://www.advanced-energy.com  
> ===
> 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: cost effective EMC facility

[roger . viles]

A very large EMC test site has been operating underground in England for some
years. This is in Cheshire where salt is mined, leaving large underground open
spaces surrounded by absorbing salt-laden walls. The reduction in ambient
emissions is another benefit of this site. As an article in the UK EMC Journal
reports (http://www.emc-journal.co.uk/archive1/980402.html) , it is now run by
Celestica.

Roger Viles
WWG




"Lacey,Scott"  on 04/08/99 16:37:09

Please respond to "Lacey,Scott" 

To:   "'Price, Ed'" 
cc:   "'emc-p...@ieee.org'"  (bcc: Roger Viles/PLY/Global)

Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility





Ed,

I find your idea of a salt water ground plane very intriguing. I imagine the
salts used would involve more than just table salt, and the chemistry would
have to be checked and adjusted regularly, similar to a swimming pool. The
problem of stratification could easily be solved with circulator pumps,
which would be turned off just prior to actual use (those of you near fault
lines might take advantage of natural agitation, your salt water pools would
be "shaken, not stirred").   : )

On a related note, does anyone have any experience doing EMC scans below
ground? It seems that the earth would be about the lowest cost shielding
material available. Perhaps an updated and enlarged version of the early
pioneers "soddie" (sod hut) might be just the ticket. It might even
incorporate a salt water ground plane. A side benefit would be that EMC
engineers might gain some useful exercise by swimming a few laps at lunch
time (how many laps around the turntable/raft equals one mile?).  : )

Scott Lacey

 -Original Message-
 From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
 Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 5:35 PM
 To:  'Arun Kaore'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
 Subject:  RE: cost effective EMC facility


 Arun:

 I was just struck by what you said about "setup a Sea Plane or a
salt water
 based  site" . Has anyone ever set up an OATS using salt water as
the ground
 plane? Talk about excellent surface smoothness, easy to level and
cheap
 material, plus simple repair! (Uhh, could we say it fixes itself?)

 Just what conductivity would be enough? Could we get enough
conductivity
 before we reach salt saturation?

 I suppose the upper limit on surface area would be when we get to
the point
 of the wind causing surface ripples. Or gravitational tides.

 Turntables might be a lot cheaper, too. Just a thin raft that
floats.

 Seriously, has anyone tried this for an OATS? (I seem to recall the
US Navy
 had a really big ship simulator here in San Diego, where they placed
scale
 models of ships on a sheet-steel "sea" in order to model HF wire
antennas.)

 Regards,

 Ed


:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):
 -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
 Ed Price
 ed.pr...@cubic.com
 Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
 Cubic Defense Systems
 San Diego, CA.  USA
 619-505-2780 (Voice)
 619-505-1502 (Fax)
 Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
 Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis

:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):
 -):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).









-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Mercury Switches in Europe

[James, Chris]

Try searching at:

http://www.europa.eu.int



-Original Message-
From: Michael Taylor [mailto:mtay...@hach.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 4:46 PM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Cc: Gail Birdsall
Subject: Mercury Switches in Europe



Greetings All.   
Does anyone know if the EC ban on Mercury applies to (small) sealed Mercury
Switches.  We have a new product that requires a "tilt" switch for safety
compliance.  The R&D group has evaluated lots of "Logic Level" non Mercury
tilt switches and found none to be as reliable as a mercury switch.  
1.  Does anyone remember the EC directive number on mercury ???
2.  Does the Mercury ban extend to tiny sealed Mercury bulbs ???
2.  Is there any way we could get a tiny mercury tilt switch into Europe
under the Mercury ban ???  
Any ideas will be gratefully received.

Regards,

Michael Taylor
Principal EMC Engineer
HACH Company


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Re: new legal issues

[Dwight Hunnicutt]

Item #2 would set an interesting precendent...just about every
electronic product on the market has some solder...so everything from
the little beeping, blinking toy imported from Asia, to home theatre
equipment, to your desk phone, fax machine, and pager would need a Prop.
65 warning marking? 


Naftali Shani wrote:
> 
> For those on the frontline: has anyone been exposed to any of these legal
> requirements? Would you mind sharing your experience(s)?
> 
> Regards,
> Naftali Shani, Nortel Networks, Dept. 0S46, MS 117/C1/N04
> 21 Richardson Side Road, Kanata, Ontario, Canada  K2K 2C1
> Voice +1.613.765.2505 (ESN 395) Fax +1.613.763.3365 (ESN 393)
> E-mail: nsh...@nortelnetworks.com 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From:   Ray Alderman [SMTP:e...@vita.com] 
> Sent:   Wednesday, August 04, 1999 15:23
> To: v-...@vita.com 
> Subject:new legal issues
> 
> Hello Members:
> I should make you aware of two new legal issues that you may run
> into in the near future:
> 
> 1. Lemelson Medical, Educational, and Research Foundation holds some
> patents on barcode reading processes, and they are asserting those patents
> on USERS of that equipment (ie, users who barcode their products and read
> those codes). So far, they have targeted grocery stores, distributors, and
> now manufacturers in the elctronics industry. They have granted over 100
> licenses, and over 200 companies have payed hundreds of millions of dollars
> to license them. The patents have not been challenged or litigated. If you
> use bar codes on your products and read them, then you may see these folks
> in your future.
> 
> 2. The State of California statue called Proposition 65 requires that
> manufacturers place a warning label on the containers of products (and the
> products themselves) if they contain harmful carcinogens or chemicals,
> including lead. The solder on your circuit boards constitutes a product
> with toxic exposure potential to both customers and employees.
> 
> The state of California has 90 days to prosecute the manufacturer for
> non-compliance. After that time, private lawsuits can then be placed by
> employees or customers. If you ship products into California, you might
> want to heed this information. They like to get money from outside their
> own economy to fund their latest social programs.
> 
> Now you know.
> 
> Regards...Ray Alderman
> 
> ---
> Ray Alderman   PH: 480-951-8866
> Executive Director, VITA   FX: 480-951-0720
> 7825 E. Gelding Dr. #104   email: e...@vita.com
>   or
> Scottsdale, AZ 85260  e...@busandboard.com
> 
>

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Terminal Marking

[Werlwas, Mark]

|   Is there a EU-wide convention for the marking of
| terminals in a single-phase appliance?
| 
IEC-445 contains information on just this subject.

|   It is understood that the PE terminal must be marked or
| identified with the green-yellow color, but is there any
| expectation or requirement that "L" and/or "N" be present?
| 
IEC-445 says, "Equipment terminals which are intended to be
connected directly or through intermediate equipment to certain designated
conductors shall be marked with reference letters according to Table 1."
Table 1 recommends U, V, and W for phase 1, 2, and 3. It specifies N for
neutral. These letters are for "Equipment terminal marking" according to
table 1.

What is interesting is that Table 1 specifies L1, L2, L3, N as
designators for "Identification of conductor terminations." I presume this
is the marking on the wires. This leads to wire L1 connected to U, L2
connected to V, etc.

|   What if only "L" was present?  only "N"?  neither?  Is
| there any objection to marking both "L" and "N"?
| 
|   In the risk assessment for a hypothetical device, no
| additional hazards are created during operation if the live and
| neutral lines are switched.  

IEC 445 specifies that the marking principles only need to be
followed "Where the identification of equipment terminal and of terminations
of certain designated conductors is considered necessary..."  I wonder who
is the one that determines the necessity of identification.

It should be considered that some level B or C standards require
that the marking on the documentation match that on the machine. For
example, this is required by 60204.

Mark Werlwas
Product Safety Engineer
Lam Research
4650 Cushing Parkway
Fremont, California 94538

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Re: NSA (using acid)

[Steve Kuiper]

Rinsing with water may also cause puddling thereby posing a potential hazard
when dropping liquified solder on the joint.  As some of you may know when
hot solder is dropped on cool water it explodes and may cause serious harm
to worker.  Use at a min. eye, hand and arm protection.

Solder burn victim.

-Original Message-
From: tim.hay...@gecm.com 
To: emc-p...@ieee.org 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: NSA (using acid)


>
>Hi Folks,
>For what it is worth
>
>MURIATIC ACID
>
>Synonyms: Hydrochloric acid, Spirits of salt.
>
>Safety profile: A corrosive irritant to the skin, eyes, and mucous
>membranes. Mildly toxic to humans by inhalation, and moderately toxic
>by ingestion. A concentration of 35 ppm causes irritation of the
>throat after short exposure.
>
>Is it wise to "blow" the acid off with an airline as suggested in one
>of the other replies?
>
>Regards
>Tim Haynes
>
>
>-
>This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
>To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
>with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
>quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
>jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
>roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
>
>
>




-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).