Class 2 and Class 3 Power
Hi Group, I'm looking for the voltage perimeters on Class 2 and Class 3 equipment according to NFPA 70. We have some models that run at 24VAC input power. Thank you in advance for your help. Joe Josiah P. Burch Compliance Engineer II Andover Controls Corporation 300 Brickstone Square Andover,Ma 01810 (978)-470-0555 x335 (978)-470-3615 Fax
Re: EU heat exchanger standard?
If it's got electrical power (e.g. self contained with pumps) try EN60335-2-40. Otherwise, if it's under 0.5bar gauge there's no requirement and if it's more than 0.5bar gauge at any point the Pressure Equipment Directive may apply. Drop me a line direct if you need more help. Rgds Nick. At 07:14 -0500 3/11/2000, wmf...@aol.com wrote: I've looked through the OJ (.pdf, april'00) for both the LVD and the EMCD and I can't come up with anything obviously applicable to demonstrating compliance for a water-to-water heat exchanger. Process water is (re)circulated through the exchanger and where heat is traded to a reservior of cooling water. Enclosure is all metal. Any advice? Many thanks WmFlanigan Ameritherm 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 --- 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: Speed Measuring Devices
actually, with the judges i've seen you would fit right in as an unfair and partial to his own interests type of judge. Jim Freeman "Maxwell, Chris" wrote: > Maybe the only thing in need of calibration here is our collective > conscience and our speedometers. > > I thought the purpose of laws, radar guns, speeding tickets ... was for the > public good, not so that we could invent the most clever way to avoid > getting caught. It may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but I don't > know if it's worth the effort. I also don't know if it merits the attention > of this forum. > > If I were a judge, I'd start charging by the hour if I had to listen to all > sorts of "what if" scenarios. If the "what if's" didn't pan out, I'd triple > the fine just for wasting my time. (I guess that's why I'm not a judge :-) > > > -Original Message- > > From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com] > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 8:04 PM > > To: 'Peter Merguerian'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > > Subject: RE: Speed Measuring Devices > > > > > > Peter: > > > > The best chance to win is through a technicality. Look for errors on the > > officer's report; time, date, road conditions, traffic, license #. Also, > > there's the possibility that the officer may not show up in court, and you > > win by default. > > > > If you search the web about "police radar", you will find several sites > > which offer detailed commentary on the legal points of officer training, > > experience, observation of the infraction, etc. Unfortunately, this may > > all > > have little bearing on Isreali civil jurisdiction. > > > > BTW, USA radars come with a printed, signed C of C attesting to the > > calibration. No idea what the recommended cal interval is. I have a Kustom > > K-1 X-band unit, and it also came with a little tuning fork (also with > > it's > > own C of C). When struck, and held in front of the radar horn, the fork > > tines physically move back and forth at a velocity equal to 50 MPH. Thus, > > a > > field check simply involves striking the fork and demonstrating an > > indicated > > 50 MPH. > > > > FWIW, I have never had this unit read incorrectly. It's sensitive enough > > to > > clock a car at one kilometer, or a human walking at about 200 meters. I > > have > > deliberately tried to induce error in it with a cell phone, amateur > > 2-meter > > 7 watt transceiver and a 5 watt CB 11-meter transceiver. (Guess you don't > > want this testimony!) > > > > I have always thought, if I felt like really sticking my neck out, that I > > would try to get the radar unit impounded as evidence until the trial. > > After > > all, the ultimate witness against you is one person swearing that they > > operated a meter correctly. That meter is now evidence against you, and > > it's > > condition must be preserved for your inspection at trial. (If a pistol is > > obtained from an investigation scene, it's impounded as evidence. So why > > not > > a Doppler radar?) > > > > The tactic here isn't fair; it's economic blackmail. A radar is sold to a > > municipality as a an enforcement tool, which just happens to pay for > > itself > > and go on making bundles of bucks (shekels?) How long till your trial? How > > long will the municipality be denied the use of the radar? How much money > > per day? How many continuations can you get? Your hope is that they decide > > that you aren't worth the loss of the revenue stream. > > > > Let us know if you need to change you email address for a while. > > > > 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: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 6:28 AM > > To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > > Subject: Speed Measuring Devices > > > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > Yes, I did get a speeding ticket today! I am not sure if I was speeding or > > not - I do not have my eyes on the speedometer all the time! I asked the > > policewoman to show me the calibration certificate on her speed measuring > > gun. She did not know what I was talking about! I inspected the gun and > > did > > not see any stickers on it. > > > > I plan to go to court and attempt to convince the judge that the speeding > > gun was not calibrated and/or the gun's measurement data may have been > > affected by emissions from another device. > > > > Can anyone in the calibration business send me professional opinions on > > the > > methods and reasons for calibrating speeding guns? > > > > What is the best way to present this case in court? > > Peter Merguerian > > Managing Director > > Product Testing Division > > I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. > > Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 > > Or Yehuda 60251, Israe
RE: Speed Measuring Devices
Thank you, Chris. You expressed my sentiments precisely. While I haven't received a ticket in 24 years (sound of knocking on wood inserted here), there have been many times when I have more than deserved one. Therefore, I think I would pay my expected dues and feel lucky the outcome wasn't worse than a ticket. Thanks for listening (reading?) Richard Hunt -Original Message- From: Maxwell, Chris [mailto:chr...@gnlp.com] Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 5:09 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:RE: Speed Measuring Devices Maybe the only thing in need of calibration here is our collective conscience and our speedometers. I thought the purpose of laws, radar guns, speeding tickets ... was for the public good, not so that we could invent the most clever way to avoid getting caught. It may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but I don't know if it's worth the effort. I also don't know if it merits the attention of this forum. If I were a judge, I'd start charging by the hour if I had to listen to all sorts of "what if" scenarios. If the "what if's" didn't pan out, I'd triple the fine just for wasting my time. (I guess that's why I'm not a judge :-) > -Original Message- > From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 8:04 PM > To: 'Peter Merguerian'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: RE: Speed Measuring Devices > > > Peter: > > The best chance to win is through a technicality. Look for errors on the > officer's report; time, date, road conditions, traffic, license #. Also, > there's the possibility that the officer may not show up in court, and you > win by default. > > If you search the web about "police radar", you will find several sites > which offer detailed commentary on the legal points of officer training, > experience, observation of the infraction, etc. Unfortunately, this may > all > have little bearing on Isreali civil jurisdiction. > > BTW, USA radars come with a printed, signed C of C attesting to the > calibration. No idea what the recommended cal interval is. I have a Kustom > K-1 X-band unit, and it also came with a little tuning fork (also with > it's > own C of C). When struck, and held in front of the radar horn, the fork > tines physically move back and forth at a velocity equal to 50 MPH. Thus, > a > field check simply involves striking the fork and demonstrating an > indicated > 50 MPH. > > FWIW, I have never had this unit read incorrectly. It's sensitive enough > to > clock a car at one kilometer, or a human walking at about 200 meters. I > have > deliberately tried to induce error in it with a cell phone, amateur > 2-meter > 7 watt transceiver and a 5 watt CB 11-meter transceiver. (Guess you don't > want this testimony!) > > I have always thought, if I felt like really sticking my neck out, that I > would try to get the radar unit impounded as evidence until the trial. > After > all, the ultimate witness against you is one person swearing that they > operated a meter correctly. That meter is now evidence against you, and > it's > condition must be preserved for your inspection at trial. (If a pistol is > obtained from an investigation scene, it's impounded as evidence. So why > not > a Doppler radar?) > > The tactic here isn't fair; it's economic blackmail. A radar is sold to a > municipality as a an enforcement tool, which just happens to pay for > itself > and go on making bundles of bucks (shekels?) How long till your trial? How > long will the municipality be denied the use of the radar? How much money > per day? How many continuations can you get? Your hope is that they decide > that you aren't worth the loss of the revenue stream. > > Let us know if you need to change you email address for a while. > > 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: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 6:28 AM > To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Speed Measuring Devices > > > > Dear All, > > Yes, I did get a speeding ticket today! I am not sure if I was speeding or > not - I do not have my eyes on the speedometer all the time! I asked the > policewoman to show me the calibration certificate on her speed measuring > gun. She did not know what I was talking about! I inspected the gun and > did > not see any stickers on it. > > I plan to go to court and attempt to convince the judge that the speeding > gun was not calibrated and/or the gun's measurement data may have been > affected by emissions from another device. > > Can anyone in
yet another HAZLOC question
Hello group - I have another question about equipment for use in hazardous locations. I find no requirements in any of the relevant standards regarding the proper colors of indicators (LED's). For instance, a red LED on a standard-use product could indicate something benign like "battery low" - but for people who work in HAZLOCs, does a red indicator mean "run like hell, it's gonna blow" ? Also, what would be an appropriate color for the enclosure ? Our product being a portable device, we want to make the intrinsically safe version easily distinguishable from our standard product line which would have the same shape, and there may be both at a facility. I'm thinking orange generally means "caution" to people. Thanks in advance for your input. Doug Massey Safety Approvals Engineer LXE, Inc. Norcross, GA., USA Ph. (770) 447-4224 x3607 FAX (770) 447-6928 e-mail: masse...@lxe.com Cruise our website at: http:\\www.lxe.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: Intrinsically safe equipment
Paul, thanks for the reply. Now, the real stickler for me is that we are trying to leverage an existing non-I-safe design - the entire enclosure is plastic. There are materials available with the correct properties but they are prohibitively expensive, and because the shrink factor is different, would require re-tooling, making the development cost prohibitive. Clause 7.3.2 (b)allows an expansion of the size to 100cmsquared "if the plastics parts are additionally protected against the occurance of dangerous electrostatic charges". Also, 7.3.2 (c) gives a very ambiguous statement about other methods being acceptable - it's basically an out allowing engineering judgement. I'm interested in learning what some of the other methods are. I believe that the use of a leather case may meet the requirements of sub-clause (b) as long as the size of the openings are constrained to <100cmsquared, and may meet sub-clause (c) with larger openings based on engineering judgement. By the way, the standard still allows warning text. I shy away from that because while it may help in litigation, the bottom line with this type product is someone's life is definitely at stake. Also, I'm not sure what safety measures there may be that can reliably prevent ESD from occuring. Doug -Original Message- From: Finn, Paul [mailto:fi...@pan0.panametrics.com] Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 6:56 AM To: Massey, Doug C. Subject: RE: Intrinsically safe equipment This requirement addresses the likelihood of ignition to the release of a static electricity which is capable of building up on a non-metallic surface. Prior to ATEX you were able to address this issue by means of a warning label. Know you must either select a suitably rated material, i.e. tested in accordance with 23.4.7.8 which verifies it has a resistance less than 1Gohm at 23C, 50%RH. Or to reduce the total area of the non-metallic surface to 100cmsquared for gas groups IIA, IIB and 20cmsquared for IIC. This can be accomplished by segregating a lager area into smaller sections which meet the requirements. The sections need to be separated by grounded partition. I do not know the requirements for the grounding of the partitions. Paul Finn Panametrics Inc > -Original Message- > From: Massey, Doug C. [SMTP:masse...@lxe.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 2:59 PM > To: 'IEEE Forum' > Subject: Intrinsically safe equipment > > > Hello group - > > I'm looking for help regarding the safety of equipment for use in > hazardous > locations, especially intrisically safe systems. > Specifically, I have questions regarding clause 7.3.2 of standard EN > 50014:1997, concerning electrostatic charges of enclosures of plastic > materials. > > If anyone has experience with the ATEX Directive standards (IEC-79 based), > I > would greatly appreciate hearing from you. Please e-mail me directly or > call > at (770) 447-4224 x3607. > > I'm afraid this discussion may get a little large for this forum, so I am > hesitant to post detailed questions here to a group that may likely be > uninterested in the topic. > > Thanks in advance. > > Doug Massey > Safety Approvals Engineer > LXE, Inc. > Norcross, GA., USA > Ph. (770) 447-4224 x3607 > FAX (770) 447-6928 > e-mail: masse...@lxe.com > > Cruise our website at: http:\\www.lxe.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: Speed Measuring Devices
Maybe the only thing in need of calibration here is our collective conscience and our speedometers. I thought the purpose of laws, radar guns, speeding tickets ... was for the public good, not so that we could invent the most clever way to avoid getting caught. It may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but I don't know if it's worth the effort. I also don't know if it merits the attention of this forum. If I were a judge, I'd start charging by the hour if I had to listen to all sorts of "what if" scenarios. If the "what if's" didn't pan out, I'd triple the fine just for wasting my time. (I guess that's why I'm not a judge :-) > -Original Message- > From: Price, Ed [SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 8:04 PM > To: 'Peter Merguerian'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: RE: Speed Measuring Devices > > > Peter: > > The best chance to win is through a technicality. Look for errors on the > officer's report; time, date, road conditions, traffic, license #. Also, > there's the possibility that the officer may not show up in court, and you > win by default. > > If you search the web about "police radar", you will find several sites > which offer detailed commentary on the legal points of officer training, > experience, observation of the infraction, etc. Unfortunately, this may > all > have little bearing on Isreali civil jurisdiction. > > BTW, USA radars come with a printed, signed C of C attesting to the > calibration. No idea what the recommended cal interval is. I have a Kustom > K-1 X-band unit, and it also came with a little tuning fork (also with > it's > own C of C). When struck, and held in front of the radar horn, the fork > tines physically move back and forth at a velocity equal to 50 MPH. Thus, > a > field check simply involves striking the fork and demonstrating an > indicated > 50 MPH. > > FWIW, I have never had this unit read incorrectly. It's sensitive enough > to > clock a car at one kilometer, or a human walking at about 200 meters. I > have > deliberately tried to induce error in it with a cell phone, amateur > 2-meter > 7 watt transceiver and a 5 watt CB 11-meter transceiver. (Guess you don't > want this testimony!) > > I have always thought, if I felt like really sticking my neck out, that I > would try to get the radar unit impounded as evidence until the trial. > After > all, the ultimate witness against you is one person swearing that they > operated a meter correctly. That meter is now evidence against you, and > it's > condition must be preserved for your inspection at trial. (If a pistol is > obtained from an investigation scene, it's impounded as evidence. So why > not > a Doppler radar?) > > The tactic here isn't fair; it's economic blackmail. A radar is sold to a > municipality as a an enforcement tool, which just happens to pay for > itself > and go on making bundles of bucks (shekels?) How long till your trial? How > long will the municipality be denied the use of the radar? How much money > per day? How many continuations can you get? Your hope is that they decide > that you aren't worth the loss of the revenue stream. > > Let us know if you need to change you email address for a while. > > 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: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 6:28 AM > To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Speed Measuring Devices > > > > Dear All, > > Yes, I did get a speeding ticket today! I am not sure if I was speeding or > not - I do not have my eyes on the speedometer all the time! I asked the > policewoman to show me the calibration certificate on her speed measuring > gun. She did not know what I was talking about! I inspected the gun and > did > not see any stickers on it. > > I plan to go to court and attempt to convince the judge that the speeding > gun was not calibrated and/or the gun's measurement data may have been > affected by emissions from another device. > > Can anyone in the calibration business send me professional opinions on > the > methods and reasons for calibrating speeding guns? > > What is the best way to present this case in court? > Peter Merguerian > Managing Director > Product Testing Division > I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. > Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 > Or Yehuda 60251, Israel > > Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 > e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il > website: http://www.itl.co.il > > TO LEARN ABOUT AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND REQUIREMENTS, CONTACT ME AT THE > EARLIEST STAGES OF YOUR DESIGN; REQUIREMENTS CAN BE TRICKY! > > > > > > > --- > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety >
RE: Speed Measuring Devices
Peter: The best chance to win is through a technicality. Look for errors on the officer's report; time, date, road conditions, traffic, license #. Also, there's the possibility that the officer may not show up in court, and you win by default. If you search the web about "police radar", you will find several sites which offer detailed commentary on the legal points of officer training, experience, observation of the infraction, etc. Unfortunately, this may all have little bearing on Isreali civil jurisdiction. BTW, USA radars come with a printed, signed C of C attesting to the calibration. No idea what the recommended cal interval is. I have a Kustom K-1 X-band unit, and it also came with a little tuning fork (also with it's own C of C). When struck, and held in front of the radar horn, the fork tines physically move back and forth at a velocity equal to 50 MPH. Thus, a field check simply involves striking the fork and demonstrating an indicated 50 MPH. FWIW, I have never had this unit read incorrectly. It's sensitive enough to clock a car at one kilometer, or a human walking at about 200 meters. I have deliberately tried to induce error in it with a cell phone, amateur 2-meter 7 watt transceiver and a 5 watt CB 11-meter transceiver. (Guess you don't want this testimony!) I have always thought, if I felt like really sticking my neck out, that I would try to get the radar unit impounded as evidence until the trial. After all, the ultimate witness against you is one person swearing that they operated a meter correctly. That meter is now evidence against you, and it's condition must be preserved for your inspection at trial. (If a pistol is obtained from an investigation scene, it's impounded as evidence. So why not a Doppler radar?) The tactic here isn't fair; it's economic blackmail. A radar is sold to a municipality as a an enforcement tool, which just happens to pay for itself and go on making bundles of bucks (shekels?) How long till your trial? How long will the municipality be denied the use of the radar? How much money per day? How many continuations can you get? Your hope is that they decide that you aren't worth the loss of the revenue stream. Let us know if you need to change you email address for a while. 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: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il] Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 6:28 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Speed Measuring Devices Dear All, Yes, I did get a speeding ticket today! I am not sure if I was speeding or not - I do not have my eyes on the speedometer all the time! I asked the policewoman to show me the calibration certificate on her speed measuring gun. She did not know what I was talking about! I inspected the gun and did not see any stickers on it. I plan to go to court and attempt to convince the judge that the speeding gun was not calibrated and/or the gun's measurement data may have been affected by emissions from another device. Can anyone in the calibration business send me professional opinions on the methods and reasons for calibrating speeding guns? What is the best way to present this case in court? Peter Merguerian Managing Director Product Testing Division I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd. Hacharoshet 26, POB 211 Or Yehuda 60251, Israel Tel: 972-3-5339022 Fax: 972-3-5339019 e-mail: pmerguer...@itl.co.il website: http://www.itl.co.il TO LEARN ABOUT AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND REQUIREMENTS, CONTACT ME AT THE EARLIEST STAGES OF YOUR DESIGN; REQUIREMENTS CAN BE TRICKY! --- 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: ITE Emissions above 1 GHz
Dick, The standard ETS 300-683 is for Radio Equipment used in short range. Is the unit described by Richard falls under this category? Richard, A question raised by you about how to regulate ITE (Information Technology Equipment) device in compliance with Telecom standards is of very important and practical interest. Telecom industry is developing so fast that many other equipment which fall under categories of ITE or Test equipment are involved in the Telecom environment. ... If customers in Telecom industry really want us to test devices of other categories in compliance with Telecom standards, should we raise our price for the extra cost? :-) Barry - On Thu, 16 November 2000, Dick Grobner wrote: > Short range device? Look at ETSI 300-683, EMC Std for Short Range Devices - > operating freq. 9kHz to 25GHz. Chapter 8 deals with emissions. > Hope this helps! > > -Original Message- > From: wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 3:10 PM > To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: ITE Emissions above 1 GHz > I have an Information Technology device that intentionally generates and > uses 2.45 GHz signals. EN55022 does not provide limits above 1 GHz. Is there > another harmonized EN that can be applied for spurious emissions above 1 > GHz? If not, will this product have to be submitted to a Competent Body? > > Richard Woods --- Thanks. Best Regards, Barry Ma ANRITSUwww.anritsu.com Morgan Hill, CA 95037 Tel. 408-778-2000 x 4465 ___ Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now! http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html ___ --- 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
