Re: Searching for a Design for EMC email list

[Robert Macy]

Jose,

I've seen software go by on
   sci.engr.electrical.compliance
newsgroup.

I think more depth is discussed here than there, though.

You might take a look at Douglas Smith's web site
 www.dsmith.org

Or Charles Grasso's web site:
  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/r5/denver/rockymountainemc

Or at Dr. Howard Johnson's site:
http://signalintegrity.com/seminar.htm

  - Robert -

-Original Message-
From: Jose Rodriguez 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 2:36 PM
Subject: Searching for a Design for EMC email list


>
>Hi all,
>
>  I understand that this Forum was founded to discuss product safety
issues.  And also discussed are product EMC and other product regulatory
issues.
>
>  I am trying to find an email list forum that deals with product design
issues as related to EMC.
>
>  For example:
>  Discussions about available CAD software for EM radiation of PCBs.
>  Comments on validity of "rules of thumb" and when they can be applied to
reduce EM radiation and susceptibility.
>  PCB design for EMC.
> etc, etc etc
>
>  Could you direct me to such an email list? (the closest I have found is
the Signal Integrity at "si-l...@silab.eng.sun.com", but it mainly deals
with SI issues).
>
>  Best Regards,
>
>Jose
>
>



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Minimum Coaxial Ethernet Cable Length?

[Patrick, Al]

Scott,  In a former life I did some 10 MB Ethernet NIC card designs.  The
IEEE spec for 10base-? (I can't even remember the spec number) called for
cable not shorter than 4 meters.  In fact, I think that the Ethernet cards
would not even work with shorter cables.  I don't know about other Ethernet
speeds but I would check the IEEE Standards, they should tell you minimum
length.

Hope this helps.

Al Patrick
Sr. EMC Engineer
Scientific-Atlanta Inc.
al.patr...@sciatl.com  

 -Original Message-
From:   Lacey,Scott [mailto:sla...@foxboro.com] 
Sent:   Wednesday, March 01, 2000 2:33 PM
To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject:Minimum Coaxial Ethernet Cable Length?


To the group,

Does anyone know if there is a minimum cable length requirement for coaxial
Ethernet? I have an idea in mind for an EFT/Surge suppression method, but I
need to know if there is any limitation on the short cable which will
connect between the suppression point and the receiving device (I will leave
the terminator on the receiving device). All connections will be BNC. I am
concerned to know if there are any 1/4 wavelength type issues (due to
connector discontinuities).

Thanks in advance,

Scott Lacey
Test Engineer (EMC, Safety, Product Verification)
The Foxboro Company
Foxboro, Massachusetts, USA

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Conducted Emissions Testing for CNS13438 Class B

[Angus McGill (Cascade Engineering Svcs, Inc.)]

Hi everyone:

Does Taiwan's CNS13438 Class B approval require both 115V and 235V conducted
emissions tests?

Thanks,
Angus McGill
Regulatory Engineer
Cascade Engineering Services, Inc.



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Conducted Emissions Testing for Taiwan CNS13438 Class B

[Angus McGill (Cascade Engineering Svcs, Inc.)]

Does this approval require both 120V and 230V conducted emissions?  Any good
English language links relating to this?

Angus McGill
Regulatory Engineer
Cascade Engineering Services, Inc.



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Searching for a Design for EMC email list

[Jose Rodriguez]

Hi all,

  I understand that this Forum was founded to discuss product safety issues.  
And also discussed are product EMC and other product regulatory issues.

  I am trying to find an email list forum that deals with product design issues 
as related to EMC.

  For example:
  Discussions about available CAD software for EM radiation of PCBs.
  Comments on validity of "rules of thumb" and when they can be applied to 
reduce EM radiation and susceptibility.
  PCB design for EMC.
 etc, etc etc

  Could you direct me to such an email list? (the closest I have found is the 
Signal Integrity at "si-l...@silab.eng.sun.com", but it mainly deals with SI 
issues).

  Best Regards,

Jose


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Re: EN61000-4-3

[Patrick Lawler]

Concerning putting your rack-mounted equipment an additional 0.8m
above the floor:
Clause 7.2 also says that this arrangement must be safe.  If the 0.8m
support is too small in area, the test setup would violate this
requirement.

The clause also says that this setup may be done if specifically
required by the product committees (my paraphrase).
Is this the case with your testing?

On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 20:55:13 -0800, David Spencer
  wrote:
>I have been going over the test set-up section of the radiated immunity test
>standard while working on some requirement documents.  I am a little fuzzy
>about the interpretation of the following sections in section 7:
>
>"If the equipment is designed to be mounted in a panel, rack or cabinet, it
>shall be tested in this configuration."
>
>and
>
>"When a means is required to support the test sample, it shall be
>constructed of a non-metallic, non-conducting material.  However, grounding
>of housing or case of the equipment shall be consistent with the
>manufacturer's installation recommendations."
>
>Our equipment is mounted in standard EIA 23" racks which are made of steel
>or aluminum.  The way I read the standard, I should mount my rack to a 0.1m
>insulating platform, place my equipment in the rack such that the bottom
>edge of my box is 0.8m off the chamber floor, and ground my box to the rack
>and the rack to the reference ground to the chamber.  I also assume I can
>insist the insulating platform is big enough to prevent the setup from
>falling over.


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Static Switch

[Joe Finlayson]

...and to go one step further, here's piece of info I received from
a ULDS representative:


"UL's on-line access to our Certifications Database is scheduled for
public access by the 
end of March of this year and it is free of charge.  Please keep
checking our home page 
(www.ul.com) for the announcement."


If this is true, the job of verifying UL Listed and Recognized
components, etc. would be much 
easier.  Let's see how it turns out.

Thx,


Joe


Joe Finlayson
Manager, Compliance Engineering
Telica, Inc.
734 Foster Street, Bldg. G, Suite 100
Marlboro, MA 01752
Tel:(508) 480-0909 x212
Fax:(508) 480-0922
Email:  jfinlay...@telica.com



-Original Message-
From: Paul J Smith [mailto:paul_j_sm...@notes.teradyne.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 1:20 PM
To: dfitz...@apcc.com
Cc: t...@world.std.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: Static Switch





TRY WEB SITE  http://www.ul.com/info/ulds.htm  SITE INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING
TEXT.
"Need to verify that a product is UL Listed and which Standard was used for
the
evaluation?
  Can't find the part for your product?
  Expanding into new markets and need to know if UL Recognized
Components
are available from
  manufacturers in other countries?
  Changing your product design to include plastic materials, but you
don't
know which ones are
  suitable for outdoor use?
  Design specifications call for low voltage Appliance Wire, and you
need to
 find a supplier in your
  area?

 Where do you turn? Let UL Data Services find the answers!


 What is UL Data Services (ULDS)?

 ULDS is a team of researchers available to search and retrieve up-to-date,
non-proprietary information from UL's
 vast Listing, Recognition and Classification systems.Results are available
quickly - usually within 24 hours. Only a
 minimum amount of information about your specifications is required to
conduct
a computer directed search"

Regards,  Paul J. Smith- Teradyne, Boston




dfitz...@apcc.com on 02/29/2000 11:10:50 AM

Please respond to dfitz...@apcc.com

To:   t...@world.std.com, emc-p...@ieee.org
cc:(bcc: Paul J Smith/Bos/Teradyne)
Subject:  Static Switch






I am attempting to locate manufacturers of static switches rated up to 1 MW
that are recognized to UL 991.
Any help would be appreciated.


http://www.apcc.com









-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org









-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5

[UMBDENSTOCK]

Jim,

Does your product connect to any auxiliary equipment that has an earth
connection, whether directly or indirectly?

Don Umbdenstock
Sensormatic

> --
> From: Jim Hulbert[SMTP:hulbe...@pb.com]
> Reply To: Jim Hulbert
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 10:32 AM
> To:   emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject:  Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Colleagues,
> 
> EN 55024 calls for surge pulses to be applied line-to-line and
> line-to-earth on
> the AC mains port and line-to-ground on signal and telecommunications
> ports that
> connect directly to outdoor cables.   However, if my EUT is encased in
> plastic
> covers and has no direct earth ground connection (class 2 power supply),
> is the
> line-to-line test on the AC mains the only surge test that I need to
> apply?   It
> seems to me that performing a line-to-earth test on either the AC mains
> port or
> on signal/telecommunications ports is not warranted since the basic
> standard EN
> 61000-4-5 does not specify placing the EUT over a reference ground plane.
> With
> no reference ground plane and no direct ground connection how can a test
> be
> applied with respect to ground?
> 
> Jim Hulbert
> Pitney Bowes
> 
> 
> 
> -
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
>  Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
> 
> 

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Minimum Coaxial Ethernet Cable Length?

[Steve Grobe]

2.5 meters for 10Base5(thicknet) and 0.5 meters for 10Base2(thinnet).

-Original Message-
From: Lacey,Scott [mailto:sla...@foxboro.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 1:33 PM
To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject: Minimum Coaxial Ethernet Cable Length?



To the group,

Does anyone know if there is a minimum cable length requirement for coaxial
Ethernet? I have an idea in mind for an EFT/Surge suppression method, but I
need to know if there is any limitation on the short cable which will
connect between the suppression point and the receiving device (I will leave
the terminator on the receiving device). All connections will be BNC. I am
concerned to know if there are any 1/4 wavelength type issues (due to
connector discontinuities).

Thanks in advance,

Scott Lacey
Test Engineer (EMC, Safety, Product Verification)
The Foxboro Company
Foxboro, Massachusetts, USA

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Techinical Documentation

[Stafford, Jim]

a couple of questions to round out this thread.

Let me start off with definitions
TCF : document for "type" approval by competent body
Technical documentation file (TDF): manufacturer's documentation
that show conformity with essential requirements.


1) Can either of the these files mentioned above (which depends upon the
certification route) be held by a foreign manufacturer (non-EC member) or do
they need to be held
within the community by authorized representative?

2) Does this vary depending upon the directive(s) to which conformity is
being shown?


jim stafford 
carrier access corporation
jstaff...@carrieraccess.com


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Minimum Coaxial Ethernet Cable Length?

[Lacey,Scott]

To the group,

Does anyone know if there is a minimum cable length requirement for coaxial
Ethernet? I have an idea in mind for an EFT/Surge suppression method, but I
need to know if there is any limitation on the short cable which will
connect between the suppression point and the receiving device (I will leave
the terminator on the receiving device). All connections will be BNC. I am
concerned to know if there are any 1/4 wavelength type issues (due to
connector discontinuities).

Thanks in advance,

Scott Lacey
Test Engineer (EMC, Safety, Product Verification)
The Foxboro Company
Foxboro, Massachusetts, USA

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5

[Lfresearch]

Mike,

can't agree with you on this one. See Scotts comments in his e-mail. You test 
to prove things are as you think they are... Otherwise why test at all?

Derek Walton
Invensys

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5

[Mike Hopkins]

As long as there is no other path to ground, a line to line test would be
all thats required, but keep in mind, if you have other I/O, telecom,
control lines, or anything else coming out of that plastic box, you then
have a potential path back to ground, and in fact, will likely have REAL
ground connections. For example, many television sets have two wire power
plugs, are in plastic cases, but if you have cable tv, the odds are that
coax cable is grounded.  Same thing applies if there is a telecom line
involved -- very likely one of the telecom lines is ground. ..   

 Mike Hopkins
mhopk...@keytek.com

> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Hulbert [SMTP:hulbe...@pb.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 10:32 AM
> To:   emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject:  Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Colleagues,
> 
> EN 55024 calls for surge pulses to be applied line-to-line and
> line-to-earth on
> the AC mains port and line-to-ground on signal and telecommunications
> ports that
> connect directly to outdoor cables.   However, if my EUT is encased in
> plastic
> covers and has no direct earth ground connection (class 2 power supply),
> is the
> line-to-line test on the AC mains the only surge test that I need to
> apply?   It
> seems to me that performing a line-to-earth test on either the AC mains
> port or
> on signal/telecommunications ports is not warranted since the basic
> standard EN
> 61000-4-5 does not specify placing the EUT over a reference ground plane.
> With
> no reference ground plane and no direct ground connection how can a test
> be
> applied with respect to ground?
> 
> Jim Hulbert
> Pitney Bowes
> 
> 
> 
> -
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
>  Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
> 

---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5

[Lacey,Scott]

Jim,
I'm not quite sure from the description what your product looks like, but,
here are a few things to keep in mind. If you use a 3-prong ac mains plug
you absolutely should do the line-to-ground test. If you use a 2-prong ac
mains plug you still might want to perform the test anyway, depending on how
your product is used. For example, if your plastic housing may be DIN rail
mounted or screwed to a wall, you may have a leakage or arc path to earth.
Your customer may have deliberately grounded the DIN rail to satisfy the
requirements of other vendor's equipment already mounted. Even if it only
gets screwed to a plasterboard wall, it still may get grounded by accident.
I have seen two such scenarios over the years. In the first instance one
mounting screw went through the wallboard and touched the grounded sheath of
a BX cable in an older building. In the second instance a screw penetrated a
metal stud used to frame the wall. An outlet box was attached to another
stud. Bingo - instant ground.

I'm sure there are many who will disagree with me, but we test products not
only to conform to a standard, but also to ensure a more robust product. I
want to find any vulnerability first, before the product gets to a customer.
Customers tend to get VERY angry when their new product "hiccups", and the
nasty stuff tends to flow downhill real fast when their CEO calls yours.

Scott Lacey

-Original Message-
From:   Jim Hulbert [SMTP:hulbe...@pb.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, March 01, 2000 10:32 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5




Colleagues,

EN 55024 calls for surge pulses to be applied line-to-line and
line-to-earth on
the AC mains port and line-to-ground on signal and
telecommunications ports that
connect directly to outdoor cables.   However, if my EUT is encased
in plastic
covers and has no direct earth ground connection (class 2 power
supply), is the
line-to-line test on the AC mains the only surge test that I need to
apply?   It
seems to me that performing a line-to-earth test on either the AC
mains port or
on signal/telecommunications ports is not warranted since the basic
standard EN
61000-4-5 does not specify placing the EUT over a reference ground
plane.   With
no reference ground plane and no direct ground connection how can a
test be
applied with respect to ground?

Jim Hulbert
Pitney Bowes



-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Technical Files

[WELLMAN,RON (A-PaloAlto,ex1)]

Hello Brian,

Could  you please provide more information as to who is driving this? 

Regards,
+=+
|Ronald R. Wellman|Voice : 408-345-8229   |
|Agilent Technologies |FAX   : 408-345-8630   |
|5301 Stevens Creek Blvd.,|E-Mail: ron_well...@agilent.com|
|Mailstop 51L-SQ  |WWW   : http://www.agilent.com |
|Santa Clara, California 95052 USA|   |
+=+
| "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age   |
|  eighteen." - Albert Einstein   |
+=+
 

-Original Message-
From: bharl...@vgscientific.com [mailto:bharl...@vgscientific.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 4:07 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Technical Files




Just to throw an English two pennorth into this discussion

There appears to be a move in the UK towards creating a single 
technical file in which you keep the records , test results drawings 
calculations etc for every directive that your product has to comply 
with. i.e Low voltage, emc, pressure equipment etc.

The object being that should the worst happen you have a nice tidy 
document to show that you have shown "due diligence" which seems 
to be what the courts will be looking for.

As other correspondents have stated this does not apply if you have 
chosen the TCF route for emc compliance  

Regards

Brian Harlowe

-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Surge Testing per EN 55024/EN61000-4-5

[Jim Hulbert]

Colleagues,

EN 55024 calls for surge pulses to be applied line-to-line and line-to-earth on
the AC mains port and line-to-ground on signal and telecommunications ports that
connect directly to outdoor cables.   However, if my EUT is encased in plastic
covers and has no direct earth ground connection (class 2 power supply), is the
line-to-line test on the AC mains the only surge test that I need to apply?   It
seems to me that performing a line-to-earth test on either the AC mains port or
on signal/telecommunications ports is not warranted since the basic standard EN
61000-4-5 does not specify placing the EUT over a reference ground plane.   With
no reference ground plane and no direct ground connection how can a test be
applied with respect to ground?

Jim Hulbert
Pitney Bowes



-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Medical safety & EMC standards tied together?

[Ned Devine]

Hello,

1.  Yes.  One of the main goals of the second amendment of IEC/EN
60601-1 was to bring it closer to the Essential Requirements of the Medical
Device Directive.  That is why 60601-1 also references requirements for
biocompatibility and risk analysis.

Also, the EN version of 61010-1 has a requirement for compliance to the EMC
directive.

2.  According to my records, A2 to EN 60601-1 was published in the OJ
(for the MDD) in C 307 on 18 November 1995.  EN 60601-1-2 was published in
the OJ (for the MDD) in C 204 on 09 August 1995.  

I thought that the effective date of the second amendment for IEC 60601-1
was the date of publication (1995).  I would assume that the effective date
for the EN version would also be the date of publication (1995).  

There was a lot of complaints about this, because A2 also required the
remote end of patient leads to be touch proof.  But, the FDA also required
it, so manufactures gave up.  

FYI - The history behind that requirement, was that a nurse in a Chicago
hospital, plugged in the remote ends of an apnea monitor cable, for an
infant, into a IEC 320 detachable power cord.  Seems the lead were colored
Black, White and Green.  If the USA, hospital grade power cords have clear
ends.  The nurse saw the Black, White and Green wires in the IEC 320
connector and plugged in the leads.  The infant died.  I believe that the
FDA had reports of 8 similar incidences.


Ned Devine
Entela, Inc.
Program Manager III
Phone 616 248 9671
Fax  616 574 9752
e-mail  ndev...@entela.com 



-Original Message-
From: plaw...@west.net [mailto:plaw...@west.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 5:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: Medical safety & EMC standards tied together?



I recently found out something interesting, and wanted to verify it.

IEC 60601-1 is a standard dealing with electrical safety of medical
equipment, and has two amendments.

IEC 60601-1-2 is a standard dealing with EMC aspects of safety of
medical equipment.

IEC 60601-1 Amendment 2 specifies that paragraph 36 ('Protection
against hazards from unwanted or excessive radiation - Electromagnetic
compatibility') be changed
From'Under consideration'
To  'See IEC 601-1-2'

1) Does this hold for the EN versions as well?  Do statements of
compliance with the basic electrical safety standard automatically
include EMC testing as well?

2) The EN versions were published in the OJ in June 1999.  What is the
DOW of these specifications (if there is one)?


-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Web Sites

[Scott Douglas]

Hello All,

I have been traveling the internet for the past several weeks tracking down
agency approval information for the various components we use in our
products. Of the more than 30 sites I have visited, one stands out
particularly well. It is a good example of how a well designed web site
could function, navigation was always clear, the information complete. Well
almost anyway. The only thing lacking from this site is a copy of the agency
approval certifications for the components in question. This is not an
advertisement for the company, but for the logic of a well done site. Would
that many more were this well done.

http://www.volex.com


Scott
s_doug...@ecrm.com
ECRM Incorporated
Tewksbury, MA  USA



-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Technical Files

[bharlowe]

Just to throw an English two pennorth into this discussion

There appears to be a move in the UK towards creating a single 
technical file in which you keep the records , test results drawings 
calculations etc for every directive that your product has to comply 
with. i.e Low voltage, emc, pressure equipment etc.

The object being that should the worst happen you have a nice tidy 
document to show that you have shown "due diligence" which seems 
to be what the courts will be looking for.

As other correspondents have stated this does not apply if you have 
chosen the TCF route for emc compliance  

Regards

Brian Harlowe

-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Modem Requirements for Chile

[Alejandro Torrecilla Torregrosa]

Hello Gail & all,

First of all let me introduce myself. My name is Alejandro Torrecilla
and I work in the company CETECOM (Malaga - Spain). I am very involved
in Latin American approvals and think that I can help you with your
question.

If the modem you refer to is an analogue modem, in order to put the
product into Chilean market you will have to pass through the
telecommunications approval (not EMC, Safety). The approvals body is
SUBTEL and it is necessary for you to test the equipment in a Chilean
laboratory.

Regarding rest of Latin America, the countries which requires approval
for your equipment are:

ARGENTINA
Telecommunications approval for the modem. Safety approval for the
complete product.

BRAZIL
Telecommunications approval for the modem. NOTE: A new approvals
procedure will entry into force during this year and you will have to
comply with telecommunications but also EMC and Safety requirements.

MEXICO
Telecommunications approval for the modem. Safety for the complete
product.

PERU
Telecommunications approval for the modem

ECUADOR
Telecommunications approval for the modem

URUGUAY
Approval mandatory for the equipment to be connected to the public
operator (ANTEL)

VENEZUELA
Authorisation letter for commersialising the product in Venezuela. Not
mandatory but recommended.

OTHERS: For other Latin American countries, foreign certificates
accepted or no approval requirements.

Hope it helps you,

Alejandro Torrecilla
Cetecom

> --
> De:   Gail Birdsall[SMTP:gbird...@hach.com]
> Responder a:  Gail Birdsall
> Enviado el:   martes 29 de febrero de 2000 16:05
> Para: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> Asunto:   Modem Requirements for Chile
> 
> 
> We are using a modem in a product that has FCC and Canadian approvals.
> Can
> anyone out there tell me, if there are any approvals needed (beyond
> what we
> have) for Chile (S. America)?
> Thanks,
> Gail Birdsall,
> Hach Co.
> 
> -
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
>  Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
> 
> 

-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Re: TCF for EMC Directive

[Jerry Roberton]

Sam,

You  have a choice of 3 basic routes to satisfy the  EMC Directive.

1.  The standards  route.   You had the product tested  to  the appropriate
harmonised  Standards.   So you have  evidence you pass.  You can self declare.

2.  You use the Technical Construction File Route.  This mandates  production
and retention of the TCF  document.  Then you self declare.

3.  The EC Type examination route.  Getting a  Notified Body involved.
 They will get all the documents out of you, their checks  reduce your risk
considerably.  You get a certificate  instead of a self declaration.  This route
is a bit old.


For your  own peace of mind  the minimum  material I would  store  to back up D
of C would be the test reports + BOM and schematics  of the product  to prove
identification at any later  challenge.

Only  route 2.  requires  production of a formal TCF  but  actions you took to
comply with routes 1 and 3  would create a  document trail anyway.

My option has  been to use  route 1 wherever possible  and keep  supporting
evidence  with the product file.

Jerry Roberton
International Compliance Manager
NET Europe Ltd.
www.net.com


"Wismer, Sam" wrote:

> Bob et. al,
> Thanks for your comments.  I use the term TCF only because we include all
> the same materials as would be required if we did submit it to a competent
> body.   Perhaps Technical file is more appropriate.  We do not submit it
> because we do not deviate from the Directive.  However some feel that it is
> a document that, according to the directive, must be created to back up your
> declaration.  My question is, does the directive really require such a
> document be created?
>
> Sam Wismer
> RF Approvals Engineer
> LXE, Inc.
> (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3654
>
> Visit Our Website at:
> http://www.lxe.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Chaplis, Bob [mailto:chapl...@genrad.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 3:14 PM
> To: 'John Juhasz'
> Cc: Wismer, Sam
> Subject: RE: TCF for EMC Directive
>
> John,
> I think what Sams question relates to is a TCF required to show
> compliance with the EMC Directive, and to that the answer is no, The TCF is
> but one avenue that a manufacturer can use to show conpliance to the
> Directive. I wonder if Sam did not mean "Techical File: instead of TCF. Is
> that correct Sam? The TCF must be under control of a Competant Body.
>
>Bob Chaplis
>  Genrad.
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Juhasz [SMTP:jjuh...@fiberoptions.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 12:38 PM
> > To:   'Wismer, Sam'; EMC Forum (E-mail)
> > Subject:  RE: TCF for EMC Directive
> >
> > Sam,
> >
> > Regarding TCFs, it really depends on your product/product's configuration
> > management.
> >
> > If you have a product (with a specific model name/munber) that will only
> > be used 'as is'
> > (no variations) then a TCF is required.
> > However, if you have a product which is a base model for which there may
> > be numerous
> > variations, then the TCF is the way to go.
> >
> > John Juhasz
> > Fiber Options
> > Bohemia, NY
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wismer, Sam [ ]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 10:34 AM
> > To: EMC Forum (E-mail)
> > Subject: TCF for EMC Directive
> >
> >
> >
> > All,
> > Thank you for your replies to my VCCI question.  The point came through
> > loud
> > and clear that VCCI certification is only voluntary, however maybe
> > mandated
> > by the market.  In short, if your customer doesn't care, then why bother.
> >
> > New question:
> >
> > There is some debate whether or not it is mandatory for a manufacturer to
> > create and maintain a TCF to show compliance to the EMC Directive(ITE
> > Equipment only).  We currently do create a TCF for every product when we
> > apply the EMC directive.  Some here think it is necessary, and some think
> > not, however in any case it happens to be a great place to keep test
> > reports, schematics, drawings and the like so it is not really an issue
> > until we contract a vendor to produce a product for us.  Usually we
> > require
> > them to obtain all the necessary approvals so that we don't have to.
> >
> > With this scenario, and the difference of opinion in the necessity for a
> > TCF, should we require our vendor to create a TCF?  If they choose not to,
> >
> > are we liable since we will private label it and place it on the market?
> > Should we create the TCF with their reports?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> >
> >
> > Sam Wismer
> > RF Approvals Engineer
> > LXE, Inc.
> > (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3654
> >
> > Visit Our Website at:
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> >
> > To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
> >  majord...@ieee.org
> > with the single line:
> >  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> >
> > For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
> >  Jim 

UL 891

[Paul Smith]

UL891 requires a 100 KA short circuit test. I know of facilities in the US that 
can cope with this test. Does anybody know of a facility in the UK that could 
do it also?

Thanks,

Paul


Excite -- Control Yourself.
This E-mail brought to you by Excite's free E-mail service.
Get your own E-mail address at http://www.excite.co.uk

-
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Medical safety & EMC standards tied together?

[Gert Gremmen]

Hello Patrick and group,

It is true. Product safety includes
some EMC parts.  EM phenomena can have impact
on safety just as rough behavior , water or dust.

However the tests have another
purpose. The product must stay safe after and/or during 
tests, where EMC testing for the EMC-directive 
has the purpose of protecting the spectrum, and
guaranteeing the proper functioning in EM polluted environments.

Both tests can be done in one EMC-test suite. At 
ce-test (test house) we are already implementing such a suite.

Yes these requirements will finally find their way in many
safety standards. Look f.a. in the EN 60730 for house hold
controlling systems.

I am not aware of the exact dates of the amendment, but it will
certainly be published in the OJEC, with a suitable date.

The EN version will almost sure follow the IEC. 

Regards,
 
Gert Gremmen, (Ing)

ce-test, qualified testing
 
===
Web presence  http://www.cetest.nl
CE-shop http://www.cetest.nl/ce_shop.htm
/-/ Compliance testing is our core business /-/
===


>>-Original Message-
>>From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf
>>Of Patrick Lawler
>>Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 11:45 PM
>>To: EMC-PSTC
>>Subject: Medical safety & EMC standards tied together?
>>
>>
>>
>>I recently found out something interesting, and wanted to verify it.
>>
>>IEC 60601-1 is a standard dealing with electrical safety of medical
>>equipment, and has two amendments.
>>
>>IEC 60601-1-2 is a standard dealing with EMC aspects of safety of
>>medical equipment.
>>
>>IEC 60601-1 Amendment 2 specifies that paragraph 36 ('Protection
>>against hazards from unwanted or excessive radiation - Electromagnetic
>>compatibility') be changed
>>  From'Under consideration'
>>  To  'See IEC 601-1-2'
>>
>>1) Does this hold for the EN versions as well?  Do statements of
>>compliance with the basic electrical safety standard automatically
>>include EMC testing as well?
>>
>>2) The EN versions were published in the OJ in June 1999.  What is the
>>DOW of these specifications (if there is one)?
>>
>>
>>-
>>This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
>>Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
>>
>>To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>> majord...@ieee.org
>>with the single line:
>> unsubscribe emc-pstc
>>
>>For help, send mail to the list adminstrators:
>> Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com, or
>> Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>>For policy questions, send mail to:
>> Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>>
>><>