Re: PDF file copy method

[Bruce Touzel]

which version of Acrobat Reader do you have ?

Acrobat Reader 3.0, under Tools menu, has "select text" and "select graphic".

Acrobat Reader 4.0 does not have this feature anymore, or at least I can't
find it.

Jim Bacher wrote:

> Forwarding for George..  Jim
>
> Reply Separator
> Subject:RE: PDF file copy method
> Author: "Seminsky; George" 
> Date:   7/17/00 2:30 PM
>
> It is my understanding that at the time the pdf file is generated, the pdf
> generation software has a user-settable flag to allow that feature in the
> resulting pdf file.
>
> George Seminsky
> Compliance Engineering
> Nuera Communications. Inc.
> 10445 Pacific Center Court
> San Diego, CA 92121
> Ph 858 625 9220 X1248
> Fx 858 625 2422
> www.nuera.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Barry Ma [mailto:barry...@altavista.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 2:00 PM
> To: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject: PDF file copy method
>
> Hi,
>
> When reading an EMC article in PDF file, I sometimes want to copy a couple
> of sentences or paragraph to my MS WORD document. Most of times I failed.
> But a few times I could do it. I don't know why. Do you have the same
> experience?
>
> ---
> 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:RE: PDF file copy method

[Jim Bacher]

Forwarding for George..  Jim

Reply Separator
Subject:RE: PDF file copy method
Author: "Seminsky; George" 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date:   7/17/00 2:30 PM

It is my understanding that at the time the pdf file is generated, the pdf
generation software has a user-settable flag to allow that feature in the
resulting pdf file.

George Seminsky
Compliance Engineering
Nuera Communications. Inc.
10445 Pacific Center Court
San Diego, CA 92121
Ph 858 625 9220 X1248
Fx 858 625 2422
www.nuera.com 


-Original Message-
From: Barry Ma [mailto:barry...@altavista.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 2:00 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: PDF file copy method



Hi,

When reading an EMC article in PDF file, I sometimes want to copy a couple
of sentences or paragraph to my MS WORD document. Most of times I failed.
But a few times I could do it. I don't know why. Do you have the same
experience?



---
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

PDF file copy method

[Barry Ma]

Hi,

When reading an EMC article in PDF file, I sometimes want to copy a couple of 
sentences or paragraph to my MS WORD document. Most of times I failed. But a 
few times I could do it. I don't know why. Do you have the same experience?



___

$1 million in prizes! 20 daily instant winners. 
AltaVista Rewards: Click here to win! 
http://shopping.altavista.com/e.sdc?e=3

___


---
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: TL-9000

[CARTER]

Sounds reminiscent of some of Bell Labs' doings

-Original Message-
From: Grant, Tania (Tania) [mailto:tgr...@lucent.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 2:04 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; 'Doug'
Subject: RE: TL-9000



Doug,

My understanding is that TL-9000 is not an international effort but more of
a U.S. effort.   How or why it originated, I don't know.   All I know is
that Bell Atlantic is threatening that it will require companies that supply
equipment to them to comply with TL-9000.Other RBOCs, I believe, are not
pushing it; however, they may conveniently adopt a "me too" strategy.   This
is a customer/marketing issue rather than a true regulatory compliance
issue.

Tania Grant, tgr...@lucent.com  
Lucent Technologies, Intelligent Network Unit
Messaging Solutions Group


--
From:  Doug [SMTP:dmck...@gte.net]
Sent:  Monday, July 17, 2000 12:04 AM
To:  emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:  Re: TL-9000



I suppose this is a good time to vent as any. 

One of the other hats I wear is ... I've been involved 
with ISO 9001 for about 5 years now.  I've been involved 
with two registration efforts from the ground up.  I'm 
trained as a lead auditor.  I thought that since my primary 
job is compliance, this ISO thing would also be good to 
get a glimpse into how a company works.  Well, it is.  
I'm currently involved with paring down an existing 
registration which has become a speed bump. 

I gotta say that as soon as everyone got through the 
gauntlet with 9001, they come along with "TL" 9001 that's 
"specific" for "telecommunications".  As if to say ISO 9001 
isn't enough.  We have to go beyond with a TL 9001 that 
gets into auditing metrics.And, as if to say, 
those telecommunication companies already ISO 9001 certified 
don't get into reliability estimates, costing, software 
development, life-cycle management and a host of other 
requirements already.  I mean jeez guys ... 

Have no idea if this is sanctioned on an international 
level with ISO or what.  I mean it seems to be headed 
up by the ASQ which "sports" an international membership. 
But so what?  

Instead of being headed up by a group of countries on 
an international level, this is being headed up by 
a professional society of quality people?  What's the 
implications of this and where does this mean the future 
of other standards which greatly impact companies who 
actually do the work going to go?  an international 
organization isn't enough.  No ...  You have to be a 
member of a special society now.  

What's this saying?  ISO itself isn't good enough? 
I'm not sure what the British have to say about this. 
I mean they are the ones who turned everyone onto ISO. 
Like it or not, that is fact.  And of all the registrars 
to deal with, if you were telecommunications, you went 
with BSI (at one point. not sure if that's true anymore).  

  What is this then, an end around 
attempt to push BSI out of the ISO telecommunications 
business?  Or, does BSI embrace this? 

It's getting to be that as soon as everyone gets evened 
out (or bankrupt) with TL 9001, some committee somewhere 
will decide that TL isn't enough for "datacommunications"! 
No siree.  We need a "DL" 9001 now ... 

Rant stopped.  Sorry for the length ... 

- Doug

---
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


---
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: Capacitor Electrolytic Fluid - restrictions

[Ralph Cameron]

Ed:

For years Tektronix used to use freon as a dielectric in their 40KV HV
probes.  Then replaced it with a non CFC liquid.

Ralph Cameron
EMC Consulting and Suppression of Consumer Electronic Equipment
(After sale)

- Original Message -
From: "Price, Ed" 
To: "'Robert Legg'" ; "IEEE EMC-PSTC Forum"

Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 9:42 AM
Subject: RE: Capacitor Electrolytic Fluid - restrictions


>
> Bob:
>
> Here's a search point for Material Safety Data Sheets; if it's a chemical
> and you ship it, you have to have an MSDS:
>
> http://www.msdssearch.com/
>
> Unfortunately, I didn't find any R4N. There's an R-14, a refrigerant
> (Freon), but it's an unlikely capacitor dielectric.
>
> Ed
>
>
> :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
> Ed  Price
> ed.pr...@cubic.com
> Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
> Cubic Defense Systems
> San Diego, CA.  USA
> 858-505-2780 (Voice)
> 858-505-1583 (Fax)
> Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
> Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
> :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Robert Legg [mailto:rl...@tectrol.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 9:13 AM
> > To: IEEE EMC-PSTC Forum
> > Subject: Capacitor Electrolytic Fluid - restrictions
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Group,
> >
> > Is anyone aware of safety/environmental restrictions on the use of an
> > electrolytic capacitor fluid, referenced to me verbally as 'R4N+' ?
> >
> > Rob Legg
> > Tectrol Inc.
> > rl...@tectrol.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
>
>
>


---
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: TL-9000

[John Juhasz]

Having worked at a telecom product manufacturer and deal with all the
internationl compliance regs, then put the products through NEBS (another
RBOC scheme) then get ISO . . .whew!! 
Now 'TL'  . . . unbelieveable . . . it's coming to the point that only LARGE
coporations that manufacture telecom equipment will be able to afford all of
this regulation (whether or not it is customer or government generated) have
their equipment in COs . . . the little guy will either sell themselves to
the big boys, or go out of business . . . 

John Juhasz
Fiber Options
Bohemia, NY 


-Original Message-
From: Grant, Tania (Tania) [mailto:tgr...@lucent.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 2:04 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; 'Doug'
Subject: RE: TL-9000



Doug,

My understanding is that TL-9000 is not an international effort but more of
a U.S. effort.   How or why it originated, I don't know.   All I know is
that Bell Atlantic is threatening that it will require companies that supply
equipment to them to comply with TL-9000.Other RBOCs, I believe, are not
pushing it; however, they may conveniently adopt a "me too" strategy.   This
is a customer/marketing issue rather than a true regulatory compliance
issue.

Tania Grant, tgr...@lucent.com  
Lucent Technologies, Intelligent Network Unit
Messaging Solutions Group


--
From:  Doug [SMTP:dmck...@gte.net]
Sent:  Monday, July 17, 2000 12:04 AM
To:  emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:  Re: TL-9000



I suppose this is a good time to vent as any. 

One of the other hats I wear is ... I've been involved 
with ISO 9001 for about 5 years now.  I've been involved 
with two registration efforts from the ground up.  I'm 
trained as a lead auditor.  I thought that since my primary 
job is compliance, this ISO thing would also be good to 
get a glimpse into how a company works.  Well, it is.  
I'm currently involved with paring down an existing 
registration which has become a speed bump. 

I gotta say that as soon as everyone got through the 
gauntlet with 9001, they come along with "TL" 9001 that's 
"specific" for "telecommunications".  As if to say ISO 9001 
isn't enough.  We have to go beyond with a TL 9001 that 
gets into auditing metrics.And, as if to say, 
those telecommunication companies already ISO 9001 certified 
don't get into reliability estimates, costing, software 
development, life-cycle management and a host of other 
requirements already.  I mean jeez guys ... 

Have no idea if this is sanctioned on an international 
level with ISO or what.  I mean it seems to be headed 
up by the ASQ which "sports" an international membership. 
But so what?  

Instead of being headed up by a group of countries on 
an international level, this is being headed up by 
a professional society of quality people?  What's the 
implications of this and where does this mean the future 
of other standards which greatly impact companies who 
actually do the work going to go?  an international 
organization isn't enough.  No ...  You have to be a 
member of a special society now.  

What's this saying?  ISO itself isn't good enough? 
I'm not sure what the British have to say about this. 
I mean they are the ones who turned everyone onto ISO. 
Like it or not, that is fact.  And of all the registrars 
to deal with, if you were telecommunications, you went 
with BSI (at one point. not sure if that's true anymore).  

  What is this then, an end around 
attempt to push BSI out of the ISO telecommunications 
business?  Or, does BSI embrace this? 

It's getting to be that as soon as everyone gets evened 
out (or bankrupt) with TL 9001, some committee somewhere 
will decide that TL isn't enough for "datacommunications"! 
No siree.  We need a "DL" 9001 now ... 

Rant stopped.  Sorry for the length ... 

- Doug

---
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: TL-9000

[Grant, Tania (Tania)]

Doug,

My understanding is that TL-9000 is not an international effort but more of
a U.S. effort.   How or why it originated, I don't know.   All I know is
that Bell Atlantic is threatening that it will require companies that supply
equipment to them to comply with TL-9000.Other RBOCs, I believe, are not
pushing it; however, they may conveniently adopt a "me too" strategy.   This
is a customer/marketing issue rather than a true regulatory compliance
issue.

Tania Grant, tgr...@lucent.com  
Lucent Technologies, Intelligent Network Unit
Messaging Solutions Group


--
From:  Doug [SMTP:dmck...@gte.net]
Sent:  Monday, July 17, 2000 12:04 AM
To:  emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:  Re: TL-9000



I suppose this is a good time to vent as any. 

One of the other hats I wear is ... I've been involved 
with ISO 9001 for about 5 years now.  I've been involved 
with two registration efforts from the ground up.  I'm 
trained as a lead auditor.  I thought that since my primary 
job is compliance, this ISO thing would also be good to 
get a glimpse into how a company works.  Well, it is.  
I'm currently involved with paring down an existing 
registration which has become a speed bump. 

I gotta say that as soon as everyone got through the 
gauntlet with 9001, they come along with "TL" 9001 that's 
"specific" for "telecommunications".  As if to say ISO 9001 
isn't enough.  We have to go beyond with a TL 9001 that 
gets into auditing metrics.And, as if to say, 
those telecommunication companies already ISO 9001 certified 
don't get into reliability estimates, costing, software 
development, life-cycle management and a host of other 
requirements already.  I mean jeez guys ... 

Have no idea if this is sanctioned on an international 
level with ISO or what.  I mean it seems to be headed 
up by the ASQ which "sports" an international membership. 
But so what?  

Instead of being headed up by a group of countries on 
an international level, this is being headed up by 
a professional society of quality people?  What's the 
implications of this and where does this mean the future 
of other standards which greatly impact companies who 
actually do the work going to go?  an international 
organization isn't enough.  No ...  You have to be a 
member of a special society now.  

What's this saying?  ISO itself isn't good enough? 
I'm not sure what the British have to say about this. 
I mean they are the ones who turned everyone onto ISO. 
Like it or not, that is fact.  And of all the registrars 
to deal with, if you were telecommunications, you went 
with BSI (at one point. not sure if that's true anymore).  

  What is this then, an end around 
attempt to push BSI out of the ISO telecommunications 
business?  Or, does BSI embrace this? 

It's getting to be that as soon as everyone gets evened 
out (or bankrupt) with TL 9001, some committee somewhere 
will decide that TL isn't enough for "datacommunications"! 
No siree.  We need a "DL" 9001 now ... 

Rant stopped.  Sorry for the length ... 

- Doug

---
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: Telecom Ports

[Lothar Schmidt]

I agree with you Corinne.

I was with our Notified Body in Germany until June this year, before I
changed to our facility in the US.

Best Regards

Lothar Schmidt
Technical Manager EMC/Bluetooth, 
BQB, Competent Body
Cetecom Inc.
411 Dixon Landing Road
Milpitas, CA 95035
Phone: +1 (408) 586 6214
Fax:   +1 (408) 586 6299


-Original Message-
From: Corinne SALINGRE [mailto:corinne.salin...@cstelecom.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 7:49 AM
To: IEEE EMC-PSTC E-Mail Forum (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Telecom Ports





Dale Albright wrote :

> CAUTION!  The Notified Body is not optional.  The ISM band is not
> harmonized.  The transmitter is a class 2 product and member countries may
> have restrictions.  Further, the EC authority of each memeber country must
> be notified 4 weeks prior to placing on the market and a fee of $500 is
> required.

I never heard before about this fee of 500$. There is no mention of this fee
neither in the directive nor in the national laws.
In France the authority where to notify is ANFR (national french frequency
agency) and there is no mention of any fee (www.anfr.fr).
(and if there was a fee from the european commission, it would have been
mentionned in euros !).
Perhaps, this is the fee that a lab will charge you to the notificaiton for
you
in all countries.

Regards
C. Salingre
CS TELECOM, France


---
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: ism band phones

[Schanker, Jacob]

Ron:

The power levels vary widely, but I doubt if many are even 500 mW, much less
1 Watt.

You could do a "generic search" on the FCC authorization database at:
https://gullfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/index.html
Search between 2400 and 2483.5 MHz and put in some known cordless phone
manufacturer's names, such as Matsushita. Then look at the individual grants
for power details.

Regards,

Jack

Jacob Z. Schanker, P.E.
Director of Agency Compliance
Adaptive Broadband Corporation
615 Fishers Run
Victor, NY 14564
+716 742 6154 (voice)
+716 742 6102 (fax)
+716 820 7364 (US cellphone)
+0777 992 5368 (UK cellphone)
jschan...@adaptivebroadband.com
  



-Original Message-
From: ron_cher...@densolabs.com [mailto:ron_cher...@densolabs.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 12:00 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: ism band phones



I am looking for specifications on the signal for 2.4 GHz ISM band spread
spectrum home use phones. Power output?
Antenna gain? Coding? Etc. I will be operating a device in the same band
and am concerned about interference.

Thanks, Ron Chernus, DENSO



---
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: Implanted IC in brain

[Mike Hopkins]

Rather than IC's implanted in humans, I foresee IC's incorporating
biological material such as neuron cells. Killing a device or product will
take on a whole new meaning!
 
Mike Hopkins
KeyTek

-Original Message-
From: Kazimier Gawrzyjal [mailto:k...@nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 1:56 PM
To: 'Mel Pedersen'; 'Barry Ma'; EMC-PSTC
Subject: RE: Implanted IC in brain



Greetings, 

Interesting topic 

Personally if forced to choose, I'd place my money on the recent advances
announced by the genetics community to get my great-grand kids to the
"enhanced" state of humanity as opposed to a chip set in the old
noodlemy thoughts will continue to be my own and not accessible by the
crackers of tomorrow via the wireless web concept.

Seems some form of operating system would be required to get the web
interface runninganyone have that much faith in the existing options
today as to load up some software in your noggin??  Hopefully airline pilots
will be excluded from this vision of the future else face at least one crash
per week.Can you go to "Bob's Headshop" for some aftermarket knock-off
parts?

Does UL 1950 cl. 1.1.2 and 1.1.3 allow for added abnormals? 

My 2 Cents and not those of my current employer. 
Kaz Gawrzyjal 
Safety Guy 
nortel networks 
k...@nortelnetworks.com 
k...@hotmail.com 

-Original Message- 
From: Mel Pedersen [ mailto:mpeder...@midcom-inc.com
 ] 
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 10:54 AM 
To: 'Barry Ma'; EMC-PSTC 
Subject: RE: Implanted IC in brain 



Hello: 

I believe we should consider what precedents the Medical Equipment community

has laid out hereat least as a startIEC 60601, FDA regs, etc 

these address safety concerns for implanted. 

Just my humble thoughts on the matter. 

- Mel 

-Original Message- 
From: Barry Ma [ mailto:barry...@altavista.com
 ] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2000 7:14 PM 
To: EMC-PSTC 
Subject: Implanted IC in brain 



Hi, 

It seems not a pure friction to implant intelligent IC into human brains. 
Some people made prediction about this new breed of human being. Some are 
talking about downloading certain virtual sense from Internet. ... Let's put

aside the feasibility and focus only on related EMC/Safety concerns. 

1. If there going to be a wireless access from human brain to Internet, do 
we have the same Safety concern as cellular phone? 
2. It would also be possible to directly communicate each other via brain 
ICs. We don't have to exchange thoughts by means of any language (spoken and

written) or eye contact. ...  Should we have EMC standards to regulate the 
emission level of brain waves and immunity capability for brain ICs? 

Thanks. 
Best Regards, 
Barry Ma 
ANRITSUwww.anritsu.com 
Morgan Hill, CA 95037 
Tel. 408-778-2000 x 4465 
___ 

$1 million in prizes! 20 daily instant winners. 
AltaVista Rewards: Click here to win! 
http://shopping.altavista.com/e.sdc?e=3
  

___ 


--- 
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 

ism band phones

[RON_CHERNUS]

I am looking for specifications on the signal for 2.4 GHz ISM band spread
spectrum home use phones. Power output?
Antenna gain? Coding? Etc. I will be operating a device in the same band
and am concerned about interference.

Thanks, Ron Chernus, DENSO



---
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: Telecom Ports

[Corinne SALINGRE]

Dale Albright wrote :

> CAUTION!  The Notified Body is not optional.  The ISM band is not
> harmonized.  The transmitter is a class 2 product and member countries may
> have restrictions.  Further, the EC authority of each memeber country must
> be notified 4 weeks prior to placing on the market and a fee of $500 is
> required.

I never heard before about this fee of 500$. There is no mention of this fee
neither in the directive nor in the national laws.
In France the authority where to notify is ANFR (national french frequency
agency) and there is no mention of any fee (www.anfr.fr).
(and if there was a fee from the european commission, it would have been
mentionned in euros !).
Perhaps, this is the fee that a lab will charge you to the notificaiton for you
in all countries.

Regards
C. Salingre
CS TELECOM, France


---
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: Capacitor Electrolytic Fluid - restrictions

[Price, Ed]

Bob:

Here's a search point for Material Safety Data Sheets; if it's a chemical
and you ship it, you have to have an MSDS:

http://www.msdssearch.com/

Unfortunately, I didn't find any R4N. There's an R-14, a refrigerant
(Freon), but it's an unlikely capacitor dielectric.

Ed
 

:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
Ed  Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA.  USA
858-505-2780 (Voice)
858-505-1583 (Fax)
Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)



> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Legg [mailto:rl...@tectrol.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 9:13 AM
> To: IEEE EMC-PSTC Forum
> Subject: Capacitor Electrolytic Fluid - restrictions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Group,
> 
> Is anyone aware of safety/environmental restrictions on the use of an
> electrolytic capacitor fluid, referenced to me verbally as 'R4N+' ?
> 
> Rob Legg
> Tectrol Inc.
> rl...@tectrol.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

RE: Telecom Ports

[Schanker, Jacob]

Dale:

This is the first I've heard that a fee is involved in the process of
notifying each country. Can you explain further? Where does this information
come from?

Jack

-Original Message-
From: Dale Albright [mailto:dale.albri...@flextronics.com]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 5:20 PM
To: Schanker, Jacob; 'Dick Grobner'; IEEE EMC-PSTC E-Mail Forum (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Telecom Ports


CAUTION!  The Notified Body is not optional.  The ISM band is not
harmonized.  The transmitter is a class 2 product and member countries may
have restrictions.  Further, the EC authority of each memeber country must
be notified 4 weeks prior to placing on the market and a fee of $500 is
required.  Contacting a NB is good advice.

Dale.


-Original Message-
From: Schanker, Jacob [mailto:jschan...@adaptivebroadband.com]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 1:56 PM
To: 'Dick Grobner'; IEEE EMC-PSTC E-Mail Forum (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Telecom Ports



The ETSI standard you refer to is actually ETS 300 328, and you can retrieve
a copy from www.etsi.org

Your transmitter module would certainly fall under the scope of the R&TTE
Directive. I would contact a European notified body, and pay them to tell
you which standards you need to meet. Then, test to those standards, which
are likely to include radio performance and EMC and safety. Then, have them
assess the test reports for compliance to the R&TTE Directive. FInally, you
can then declare conformity to the applicable directive, and that you meet
"all essential requirements" and put the CE Mark on the product and sell it
in the EU.

If you have never been through this (and because the R&TTE is new as of
April most people have not) it pays to get a Notified Body and test lab
helping you along.

Jacob Z. Schanker, P.E.
Director of Agency Compliance
Adaptive Broadband Corporation
615 Fishers Run
Victor, NY 14564
+716 742 6154 (voice)
+716 742 6102 (fax)
+716 820 7364 (US cellphone)
+0777 992 5368 (UK cellphone)
jschan...@adaptivebroadband.com
  



-Original Message-
From: Dick Grobner [mailto:dick.grob...@medgraph.com]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 10:45 AM
To: IEEE EMC-PSTC E-Mail Forum (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Telecom Ports



Mr. Woods informed me of missing data from my first e-mail - sorry about
that!

Equipment is medical (EN60601-1 Safety, EN60601-1-2 EMI)
Countries: USA, Canada and Europe at this time
There is also an option to use a short range telemetry unit with this device
to transmit patient data. It is spread spectrum at 2.4 GHz. Is an OEM
configuration which we repackage (the transmitter) into the battery back
(+12V) worn my the athlete/patient. It does not have CE, but is complaint
with ETSI 300.28 (I'm not sure what this is it yet)and FCC (which I still
have not seen any FCC cert. yet). Does the telemetry module fall under the
scope of the RTTE directive?   
If I'm missing any other pertinent information please advise.
Thank you

-Original Message-
From: wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 9:32 AM
To: dick.grob...@medgraph.com
Subject: RE: Telecom Ports


You will have to provide the forum with additional information. 

What kind of equipment? ITE, test equipment, medical, etc.
What countries? Europe, North America, other

Richard Woods

--
From:  Dick Grobner [SMTP:dick.grob...@medgraph.com]
Sent:  Friday, July 14, 2000 10:07 AM
To:  IEEE EMC-PSTC E-Mail Forum (E-mail)
Subject:  Telecom Ports


Good Day Forum Members
I have a very similar question that Barry Ma presented on 7-13. It
regarded
a Ethernet port on test equipment. His question was as follows:
 
1. A phone line port has to comply with related regulations in
Telecom
world. In my recollection, PC industry just added an Immunity
requirement to
the phone line port. (It is included in EN55024?) But Ethernet can
be
converted to phone line through an adapter. Is there a similar
immunity
requirement for the Ethernet port in test equipment? If not, should
it be
added to EN61326?

My dilemma is that my company "inherited" a piece of equipment via
an
earlier acquisition. On this piece of equipment they incorporated an
RJ-11
telecom jack. Over this jack they are running power (+12V & pwr gnd)
from a
remote battery pack and RS-232 (Tx & Rx)comm which terminates to a
PC. Can
anyone provide me with some insight with regards to EMI/RFI
requirements and
device safety (I have somewhat of a handle on the safety side - but
welcome
other opinions!). None of these four lines have any type of safety
(over
current/voltage) protection nor any EMI filtering, etc. If you can
provide
some insight or reference to required standards I would appreciate
it

Thank You (in advance)
 
Dick Grobner
Compliance Engineering
Medical Graphics Co

Re: TL-9000

[Doug]

I suppose this is a good time to vent as any. 

One of the other hats I wear is ... I've been involved 
with ISO 9001 for about 5 years now.  I've been involved 
with two registration efforts from the ground up.  I'm 
trained as a lead auditor.  I thought that since my primary 
job is compliance, this ISO thing would also be good to 
get a glimpse into how a company works.  Well, it is.  
I'm currently involved with paring down an existing 
registration which has become a speed bump. 

I gotta say that as soon as everyone got through the 
gauntlet with 9001, they come along with "TL" 9001 that's 
"specific" for "telecommunications".  As if to say ISO 9001 
isn't enough.  We have to go beyond with a TL 9001 that 
gets into auditing metrics.And, as if to say, 
those telecommunication companies already ISO 9001 certified 
don't get into reliability estimates, costing, software 
development, life-cycle management and a host of other 
requirements already.  I mean jeez guys ... 

Have no idea if this is sanctioned on an international 
level with ISO or what.  I mean it seems to be headed 
up by the ASQ which "sports" an international membership. 
But so what?  

Instead of being headed up by a group of countries on 
an international level, this is being headed up by 
a professional society of quality people?  What's the 
implications of this and where does this mean the future 
of other standards which greatly impact companies who 
actually do the work going to go?  an international 
organization isn't enough.  No ...  You have to be a 
member of a special society now.  

What's this saying?  ISO itself isn't good enough? 
I'm not sure what the British have to say about this. 
I mean they are the ones who turned everyone onto ISO. 
Like it or not, that is fact.  And of all the registrars 
to deal with, if you were telecommunications, you went 
with BSI (at one point. not sure if that's true anymore).  

  What is this then, an end around 
attempt to push BSI out of the ISO telecommunications 
business?  Or, does BSI embrace this? 

It's getting to be that as soon as everyone gets evened 
out (or bankrupt) with TL 9001, some committee somewhere 
will decide that TL isn't enough for "datacommunications"! 
No siree.  We need a "DL" 9001 now ... 

Rant stopped.  Sorry for the length ... 

- Doug

---
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