RE: Spacing Issue

[Matsuda, Ken]

Chris, interesting discussion I had today with UL.  Per UL 1012, Clause
28A.1.7 "With respect to evaluating spacings, spacings between uninsulated
parts of different circuits shall be based on the highest of the circuit
voltages"   Per Clause, primary spacings between the traces of earth ground
and secondary are required.  But what really got me was there was no
reference in terms of rating components in this case, such as the proposed
cap.  Interesting dilemma



-Original Message-
From: Maxwell, Chris [mailto:chr...@gnlp.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 12:54 PM
To: 'Ed Eszlari'; matsu...@curtisinst.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Spacings Issue


I don't get this one? And I'm not ashamed to ask the questions that confuse
me.  Maybe some of the more safety oriented people can shed some light on
this subject. (See Ken's original email at the bottom.)

Capacitors between secondary circuits and chassis ground needing to meet
High Voltage isolation requirements?  

I can only think of a few of scenarios where high voltage safety testing of
secondary caps might apply. 

One would be if your "secondary" is still carrying lethal voltages with
enough energy to be considered "hazardous".  

The other would be if your primary to secondary isolation doesn't include
double insulation or equivalent. 

Another case would be TNV circuits.  But TNV circuits aren't "secondaries".
They are their own class of potentially lethal circuits that I consider much
like a primary. 

There may be other instances, such as high voltage measuring circuits ...

In my experience, our secondaries are considered "SELV" (if their ground is
floating) or "SELV-E" (if they reference Earth ground) because they carry
non-lethal voltages, have low energy and they are isolated from primaries
and TNV with double insulation.   We have all sorts of capacitors that
reference these SELV secondaries to chassis ground.  We never once think
about their high voltage withstand and/or isolation.  These products have
been safety tested at a third party lab with no problems.  So what gives?

Maybe Ken has a secondary that violates one of these principles (either
voltage, energy or isolation)?  Maybe that is why his agencies are
considering short circuit testing?  

I especially wonder why they would short primary to secondary.  I could only
see a reason for this if there was no double (or, in some cases,
re-inforced) insulation from primary to secondary.  My understanding is that
shorting double insulation constitutes a double fault test.  The safety
standards that I am familiar with require only single fault testing.  
   
Is there something that I'm missing here?  

Happy Holidays!

Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer
GN Nettest Optical Division
6 Rhoads Drive, Building 4  
Utica, NY 13502
PH:  315-797-4449
FAX:  315-797-8024
EMAIL:  chr...@gnlp.com





> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Eszlari [SMTP:bosesaf...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 9:34 AM
> To:   matsu...@curtisinst.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject:  Re: Spacings Issue
> 
>  
> 
> Hello Ken, 
>  
> First of all the "floating secondary ground" (if not connected directly to
> earth) should be treated as part of the secondary circuit which in many
> cases will require reinforced insulation to the primary circuit according
> to the working voltage measured.  Next, in most applications, the
> secondary circuitry can be cap coupled to earth ground and does not
> require basic insulation spacings for a primary circuit. I have seen
> equipment which incorporates TNV circuitry that does require supplemental
> insulation spacing at the primary working voltage from the TNV to earth
> due to Nordic Country deviations. I believe this is required due to poor
> earthing in these countries, and the thought is that if the safety earth
> was removed, reinforced insulation will remain between the primary
> circuitry and the TNV (basic + supplemental = reinforced). This is the
> information I had received in the past, but maybe some others in the group
> can provide you with more information. 
>  
> Ed
>  
> >From: "Matsuda, Ken" 
> >Reply-To: "Matsuda, Ken" 
> >To: emc-p...@ieee.org 
> >Subject: Spacings Issue 
> >Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:37:22 -0500 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >Hello Group, 
> > 
> >A circuit uses a floating ground in the secondary, and caps are used for 
> >protection from the secondary outputs to earth ground. The question is, 
> >under spacings requirements, would the secondary have to meet the high 
> >voltage requirements for spacings for primaries due to this earth ground.
> 
> >A few agencies have expressed desires to short the primary to secondary
> and 
> >require the the secondary to meet primary voltage spacings to this earth 
> >ground trace. 
> > 
> >Any help would be greatly appreciated. And thanks again for all your 
> >opinions 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >Thanks, 
> > 
> >Ken Matsuda 
> > 
> >--- 
> >This message is fro

RE: Spacings Issue

[Maxwell, Chris]

I don't get this one? And I'm not ashamed to ask the questions that confuse
me.  Maybe some of the more safety oriented people can shed some light on
this subject. (See Ken's original email at the bottom.)

Capacitors between secondary circuits and chassis ground needing to meet
High Voltage isolation requirements?  

I can only think of a few of scenarios where high voltage safety testing of
secondary caps might apply. 

One would be if your "secondary" is still carrying lethal voltages with
enough energy to be considered "hazardous".  

The other would be if your primary to secondary isolation doesn't include
double insulation or equivalent. 

Another case would be TNV circuits.  But TNV circuits aren't "secondaries".
They are their own class of potentially lethal circuits that I consider much
like a primary. 

There may be other instances, such as high voltage measuring circuits ...

In my experience, our secondaries are considered "SELV" (if their ground is
floating) or "SELV-E" (if they reference Earth ground) because they carry
non-lethal voltages, have low energy and they are isolated from primaries
and TNV with double insulation.   We have all sorts of capacitors that
reference these SELV secondaries to chassis ground.  We never once think
about their high voltage withstand and/or isolation.  These products have
been safety tested at a third party lab with no problems.  So what gives?

Maybe Ken has a secondary that violates one of these principles (either
voltage, energy or isolation)?  Maybe that is why his agencies are
considering short circuit testing?  

I especially wonder why they would short primary to secondary.  I could only
see a reason for this if there was no double (or, in some cases,
re-inforced) insulation from primary to secondary.  My understanding is that
shorting double insulation constitutes a double fault test.  The safety
standards that I am familiar with require only single fault testing.  
   
Is there something that I'm missing here?  

Happy Holidays!

Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer
GN Nettest Optical Division
6 Rhoads Drive, Building 4  
Utica, NY 13502
PH:  315-797-4449
FAX:  315-797-8024
EMAIL:  chr...@gnlp.com





> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Eszlari [SMTP:bosesaf...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 9:34 AM
> To:   matsu...@curtisinst.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject:  Re: Spacings Issue
> 
>  
> 
> Hello Ken, 
>  
> First of all the "floating secondary ground" (if not connected directly to
> earth) should be treated as part of the secondary circuit which in many
> cases will require reinforced insulation to the primary circuit according
> to the working voltage measured.  Next, in most applications, the
> secondary circuitry can be cap coupled to earth ground and does not
> require basic insulation spacings for a primary circuit. I have seen
> equipment which incorporates TNV circuitry that does require supplemental
> insulation spacing at the primary working voltage from the TNV to earth
> due to Nordic Country deviations. I believe this is required due to poor
> earthing in these countries, and the thought is that if the safety earth
> was removed, reinforced insulation will remain between the primary
> circuitry and the TNV (basic + supplemental = reinforced). This is the
> information I had received in the past, but maybe some others in the group
> can provide you with more information. 
>  
> Ed
>  
> >From: "Matsuda, Ken" 
> >Reply-To: "Matsuda, Ken" 
> >To: emc-p...@ieee.org 
> >Subject: Spacings Issue 
> >Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:37:22 -0500 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >Hello Group, 
> > 
> >A circuit uses a floating ground in the secondary, and caps are used for 
> >protection from the secondary outputs to earth ground. The question is, 
> >under spacings requirements, would the secondary have to meet the high 
> >voltage requirements for spacings for primaries due to this earth ground.
> 
> >A few agencies have expressed desires to short the primary to secondary
> and 
> >require the the secondary to meet primary voltage spacings to this earth 
> >ground trace. 
> > 
> >Any help would be greatly appreciated. And thanks again for all your 
> >opinions 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >Thanks, 
> > 
> >Ken Matsuda 
> > 
> >--- 
> >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 
> > 
> > 
> 
>   _  
> 
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
> 
> 
> --- This message is from the IEEE
> EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee

RE: Standards

[CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more...]

Most deviations are from the IEC placing itself on a position it has no
right to be
-according to the European Commission-,  so some aspects of the IEC are
unacceptable to
the EC -in casu CENELEC- to be used as a harmonized standard. If CENELEC
still wants
the standard, then some modifications are necessary.

Most often these modifications are on "Clauses" that make an IEC standard
escape 'certain test aspects , so not satisfying the essential requirements
for the
EMC-directive , or due to "limits under consideration". The EC states that
or there are,
or there are no limits. "Under consideration" suggest that compliance is
achieved while
there is not.

Basically all these impairs are caused by the EC representing European Law,
and the IEC being
a private organization, not allowed to create exemptions to the Essential
requirements.

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 wo...@sensormatic.com
>>Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 2:32 PM
>>To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>>Subject: RE: Standards
>>
>>
>>
>>Paul, the EU Commission has encouraged CENELEC and CEN to adopt IEC/ISO
>>standards whenever possible. CENELEC and CEN have agreements with the IEC
>>that the former will not work on standards that are currently underway in
>>the IEC unless there is an urgent need for a standard and the IEC cannot
>>meet the needed date. In many if not most cases, proposed
>>standards follow a
>>parallel approval process in CENELEC/CEN and IEC. However, there are
>>sometimes unique EU requirements that cause EU deviations to occur.
>>Amendments to IEC documents may also follow this common approval process;
>>but, again, EU deviations may and sometimes do occur.
>>
>>Richard Woods
>>
>>--
>>From:  Finn, Paul [SMTP:fi...@pan0.panametrics.com]
>>Sent:  Monday, December 18, 2000 4:14 PM
>>To:  'emc-pstc'
>>Subject:  Standards
>>
>>
>>Please bear with me on this one, this is not my strong point.
>>
>>I am under the impression that the EN standards are derived from thier IEC
>>equivalent.  Also for compliance with the EMC directive we test to the
>>applicable EN standard.
>>
>>When the IEC version(s) are amended is it safe to assume that the
>>equivalent
>>EN will be amended?  Alternatively is it possible the EN already includes
>>the IEC amendments?
>>
>>Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>>Paul Finn, Manager Test and Certification Group
>>Panametrics 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: EN61000-3-2 A14

[Gorodetsky, Vitaly]

Chris,

If my memory serves me well, EN60555-2 required measurement of THD vs.
complete/individual 40 harmonics' signature with individual limits required
by  -3-2.  This results in the mandatory re-testing.

Vitaly  Gorodetsky
Compliance Engineer Direct: (818) 678-3840
Canoga Perkins Corp.Main:   (818) 718-6300
20600 Prairie StreetFAX:(818) 678-3740
Chatsworth, CA 91311-6008   e-mail:
vgorodet...@canoga.com   

The suitability of this information for making decision is solely with the
reader


-Original Message-
From:   Colgan, Chris [SMTP:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, December 19, 2000 1:51 AM
To: 'Emc-Pstc' (E-mail)
Subject:EN61000-3-2 A14


Sorry for another post about this amendment but

Can anyone confirm that the limits for class A equipment are the
same as
those in EN60555-2 and that the measurement techniques are the same?

That is, if I have equipment (not TV or PC) conforming to EN60555-2
can I
say that it conforms to EN61000-3-2 + A14 without any further
testing?

Have a great holiday

Regards

Chris Colgan
Compliance Engineer
TAG McLaren Audio Ltd
The Summit, Latham Road
Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU
*Tel: +44 (0)1480 415 627
*Fax: +44 (0)1480 52159
* Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com
* http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com



**  
   Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com
**

The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive
use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error,
please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either
by E-mail, telephone or fax. You  should not  copy, forward or 
otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail.

TAG McLaren Audio Ltd
The Summit, 11 Latham Road
Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU
Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600)
Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159)

**  
   Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.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

Dec. 15, 2000 EMC/Telco/Product Safety Update Now Available

[Glen Dash]

The Curtis-Straus Update for the week ending Dec. 15, 2000 is now
available at:

http://www.conformity-update.com

This week's headlines are:

EU PUBLISHES NEW EMC STANDARDS LIST.
FCC LAYS MILLION DOLLAR FINE ON FAX SPAMMER.
FCC RELEASES NPRM ON SOFTWARE DEFINED RADIO.
BRITAIN: CHILDREN SHOULDN'T USE CELL PHONES?
UK PARLIAMENT DEBATES THE EMI POTENTIAL OF DSL.
US, EU REGULATORY BRIEFS.
STANDARDS UPDATE.
MEETINGS, SEMINARS, ETC.

---
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: Crossed Vane ESD Simulator

[jrbarnes]

Sandy,
IBM developed a Tabletop Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) test using a crossed-vane
ESD simulator, which we still use here at Lexmark to supplement IEC 61000-4-2
ESD testing.  (We used to be IBM Lexmark.)  I just ran across an article about
it a week ago in my research into methods of hardening electronic products
against ESD, I believe:
 Calcavecchio, Ralph J., and Pratt, Daniel J., "A Standard Test to Determine
 the
 Susceptibility of a Machine to Electrostatic Discharge," 1986 IEEE
 International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility Symposium Record,
 San Diego, CA, Sept. 16-18, 1986, pp. 475-482.

Our test setup has an aluminum plate bolted to the middle of the long edge of a
metal table,
about 60 inches x 30 inches.  A grounding wire with a couple of series resistors
 connects the
table to the groundplane (metal raised floor) in the lab.  We put the Equipment
Under Test
(EUT) on the table, with its front edge lined up with the edge of the table and
approximately
centered on the metal plate.  Then we put the crossed-vane simulator in front
and roughly
parallel to the table, with the probe touching the center of the metal plate.
The top view
is something like this:


+--+
!  !-/\/\/ ground plane
!  !
!  !
!  !
!+-+   !
!! !   !
!! !   !
!!   EUT   !   !
!! !   !
++---===---+---+
  A
! !
 \   /
   X
 /   \
! !

As I understand the theory behind the crossed-vane ESD tester, the vanes provide
 "free-space
capacitance".  Because this capacitance is to every conductive item in the
vicinity, it has
negligible inductance and thus will discharge very quickly (fraction of a
nanosecond rising edge?)
when the relay in the probe closes.  This hits the EUT with impulses covering a
very-wide frequency
span, exciting all the antennas (dipoles, monopoles, and loops) that we have
accidently
designed into the product and causing Non-Linear Rectification anywhere we are
susceptible.



 John Barnes   Advisory Engineer
 Lexmark International



---
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: Crossed Vane ESD Simulator

[Mike Hopkins]

Hi Sandy -- KeyTek built many of the crossed vane testers used by IBM and
their suppliers. Older units (pre 1980's) were built by another company --
don't remember who.

The crossed vane tester produces a ringing waveform which more closely
resembles the kind of waves you would see from a furniture ESD event - one
large charged metal object bumping into a product (computer mainframe). The
current peaks are much higher than from human ESD.

The vanes themselves are radiators -- they radiate like an antenna when the
field collapses, and this is, in fact, part of the ESD test. It's been a
while, but as I remember, there were two modes of operation:

1) discharge probe is placed in direct contact to metal on the unit under
test. ESD current injection and radiation from the vanes takes place.

2) discharge probe is placed in direct contact with the ground below the
vanes.  This is a radiated test only (each time a discharge is made to
ground, the vanes radiate.

The other thing I remember from being around these units is that they
radiate quite a strong field -- we took down an HP mainframe computer
located in an adjacent room during the days when we were developing this
unit. Injected currents are quite high -- I could dig out some old
literature if you're interested. 

Hope this is helpful.

Michael Hopkins
KeyTek
mhopk...@keytek.com

-Original Message-
From: Sandy Mazzola [mailto:mazzo...@symbol.com]
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 7:13 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Crossed Vane ESD Simulator



To all,

   I am looking for information on a Crossed Vane ESD simulator.
Specifically looking for what the vanes are for and how they affect the
results and  is the position of the ESD simulator probe significant, should
it be on the edge of the table or near the unit.
Any information on Crossed Vane ESD Simulators  would be appreciated.

Thanx a lot
Have a great day

Sandy Mazzola
Regulatory Engineer
Symbol Technologies Inc
1 Symbol PLaza 
Holtsville, N.Y 11742-1300
Phone (631) 738-5373
Fax (631) 738-3318 or (631) 738-3915
E-mail: mazzo...@symbol.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: Singapore

[Gaetan Hogue]

For safety you can go to the PSB web site:
http://www.psb.gov.sg/awards/cps/index.html

-Original Message-
From: Bill Somerfield [mailto:bi...@eliz.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 6:32 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Singapore



Hello Group,

Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety
Conpliance for Singapore?

Any help will be  appreciated.

Thank you,

Bill Somerfield
QA/Compliance Manager
Elizabeth-Hata International
North Huntingdon, PA USA
412-829-7700
fax 412-829-7330
bi...@eliz.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: Singapore

[Pryor McGinnis]

Try:

link to the "Singapore Productivity and Standards Board" PSB.

http://www.psb.gov.sg/awards/certification/sqm_procedure.html


- Original Message -
From: Bill Somerfield 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 6:31 AM
Subject: Singapore


>
> Hello Group,
>
> Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety
Conpliance for Singapore?
>
> Any help will be  appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bill Somerfield
> QA/Compliance Manager
> Elizabeth-Hata International
> North Huntingdon, PA USA
> 412-829-7700
> fax 412-829-7330
> bi...@eliz.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: Spacings Issue

[Ed Eszlari]

 
Hello Ken, 

 

First of all the "floating secondary ground" (if not connected directly to earth) should be treated as part of the secondary circuit which in many cases will require reinforced insulation to the primary circuit according to the working voltage measured.  Next, in most applications, the secondary circuitry can be cap coupled to earth ground and does not require basic insulation spacings for a primary circuit. I have seen equipment which incorporates TNV circuitry that does require supplemental insulation spacing at the primary working voltage from the TNV to earth due to Nordic Country deviations. I believe this is required due to poor earthing in these countries, and the thought is that if the safety earth was removed, reinforced insulation will remain between the primary circuitry and the TNV (basic + supplemental = reinforced). This is the information I had received in the past, but maybe some others in the group can provide you with more information.
 
Ed
 
>From: "Matsuda, Ken" 

>Reply-To: "Matsuda, Ken" 

>To: emc-p...@ieee.org 

>Subject: Spacings Issue 

>Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:37:22 -0500 

> 

> 

> 

>Hello Group, 

> 

>A circuit uses a floating ground in the secondary, and caps are used for 

>protection from the secondary outputs to earth ground. The question is, 

>under spacings requirements, would the secondary have to meet the high 

>voltage requirements for spacings for primaries due to this earth ground. 

>A few agencies have expressed desires to short the primary to secondary and 

>require the the secondary to meet primary voltage spacings to this earth 

>ground trace. 

> 

>Any help would be greatly appreciated. And thanks again for all your 

>opinions 

> 

> 

> 

>Thanks, 

> 

>Ken Matsuda 

> 

>--- 

>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 

> 

> 

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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: Singapore

[Maxwell, Chris]

Bill,

Definitely not my strong suit, but I did archive an email from Rich Nute
which gave the following URL;

   http://www.psb.gov.sg/awards/cps/index.html

This is a website concerning Singapore product safety.

Happy Holidays!

Chris Maxwell


> -Original Message-
> From: Bill   Somerfield  [SMTP:bi...@eliz.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 6:32 AM
> To:   emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject:  Singapore
> 
> 
> Hello Group,
> 
> Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety
> Conpliance for Singapore?
> 
> Any help will be  appreciated.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Bill Somerfield
> QA/Compliance Manager
> Elizabeth-Hata International
> North Huntingdon, PA USA
> 412-829-7700
> fax 412-829-7330
> bi...@eliz.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: Singapore

[georgea]

Bill,

>From one of the PSB webpages: "Administration of the Singapore
Consumer Protection (Safety Requirements) Registration Scheme.
The scheme is mandatory for all consumer products designated as
controlled goods."

The Singapore Productivity and Standards Board (PSB) requires us
to submit our consumer level printers for safety certification.  They will
accept, and may now require, a CB Report.  Since the PSB is a bit like
the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, they do not require
certification of our business level printers.

George

-- Forwarded by George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark on 12/19/2000
08:59 AM ---

acarson%uk.xyratex@interlock.lexmark.com on 12/19/2000 08:07:13 AM

Please respond to acarson%uk.xyratex@interlock.lexmark.com

To:   bills%eliz@interlock.lexmark.com
cc:   emc-pstc%ieee@interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  Re: Singapore




Bill

Try

http://www.psb.gov.sg/awards/cps/index.html

it will give a list of products that require mandatory approval, but basically
all IT and Telecoms equipment requires the Singapore Safety mark and as of  1st
May 2000, all telecoms equipment requires EMC emissions testing.

Bill Somerfield wrote:

> Hello Group,
>
> Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety
Conpliance for Singapore?
>
> Any help will be  appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bill Somerfield
> QA/Compliance Manager
> Elizabeth-Hata International
> North Huntingdon, PA USA
> 412-829-7700
> fax 412-829-7330
> bi...@eliz.com
>


Andrew Carson - Product Safety Engineer
Xyratex Engineering Laboratory
Tele 023 92496855 Fax 023 92496014



---
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: Standards

[WOODS]

Paul, the EU Commission has encouraged CENELEC and CEN to adopt IEC/ISO
standards whenever possible. CENELEC and CEN have agreements with the IEC
that the former will not work on standards that are currently underway in
the IEC unless there is an urgent need for a standard and the IEC cannot
meet the needed date. In many if not most cases, proposed standards follow a
parallel approval process in CENELEC/CEN and IEC. However, there are
sometimes unique EU requirements that cause EU deviations to occur.
Amendments to IEC documents may also follow this common approval process;
but, again, EU deviations may and sometimes do occur.

Richard Woods

--
From:  Finn, Paul [SMTP:fi...@pan0.panametrics.com]
Sent:  Monday, December 18, 2000 4:14 PM
To:  'emc-pstc'
Subject:  Standards


Please bear with me on this one, this is not my strong point.
 
I am under the impression that the EN standards are derived from thier IEC
equivalent.  Also for compliance with the EMC directive we test to the
applicable EN standard.

When the IEC version(s) are amended is it safe to assume that the equivalent
EN will be amended?  Alternatively is it possible the EN already includes
the IEC amendments? 

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.



Paul Finn, Manager Test and Certification Group
Panametrics 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: Singapore

[Spadaccini, Fabian]

Try this link to help get started.  

http://www.psb.gov.sg/technical/testing/electrical_electronic.html



Regards,
Fabian Spadaccini
TA Instruments-Waters LLC
(p) 302-427-4189
(f) 302-427-4081
fspadacc...@tainst.com
www.tainst.com


-Original Message-
From: Bill Somerfield [mailto:bi...@eliz.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 6:32 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Singapore



Hello Group,

Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety
Conpliance for Singapore?

Any help will be  appreciated.

Thank you,

Bill Somerfield
QA/Compliance Manager
Elizabeth-Hata International
North Huntingdon, PA USA
412-829-7700
fax 412-829-7330
bi...@eliz.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: Standards

[reheller]

And the IEC in their wisdom will number them exactly like an
EN..good move!






Mike Hopkins  on 12/18/2000 04:26:09 PM

Please respond to Mike Hopkins 


To:   "'Finn, Paul'" 
  "'emc-pstc'" 
cc:(bcc: Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US)
Subject:  RE: Standards




Theoretically

Already we have EN's that are NOT identical with the IEC standards
What's the odds of the EU (CENELEC) coordinating closely with IEC on these
issues?? I'd say close to zero -- as convenor of IEC SC77B WG11 responsible
for such things as Surge and EFT immunity standards, and as a member of WG9
responsible for ESD immunity standards, I can tell you these documents are
all in the process of revision and I know of no mechanism in place to
insure
the equivalent EN's are revised at the same time. Anyone out there have
better information?

I'd like to think there is a way of coordinating these things,
but..

Michael Hopkins
mhopk...@keytek.com


-Original Message-
From: Finn, Paul [mailto:fi...@pan0.panametrics.com]
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 4:14 PM
To: 'emc-pstc'
Subject: Standards






Please bear with me on this one, this is not my strong point.

I am under the impression that the EN standards are derived from thier IEC
equivalent.  Also for compliance with the EMC directive we test to the
applicable EN standard.

When the IEC version(s) are amended is it safe to assume that the
equivalent
EN will be amended?  Alternatively is it possible the EN already includes
the IEC amendments?

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.



Paul Finn, Manager Test and Certification Group
Panametrics 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









---
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: Up to Date EMC and Safety Standards

[Andrew Carson]

Peter

If you can not find a local source, you could try a UK company called ILI. They
cover most standards, have not found one yet that they do not have, and provide
a tailored update service for clients.

Contact is

www.ili.co.uk

or phone +44 1344 636300

Peter Merguerian wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I am looking for one (single point contact) reliable organization that can
> supply me the most updated edition/revision dates/scope for a minimum North
> American (UL and CSA) and European safety/emc standards. Preferrably, the
> information should extracted "on-line". It would be also nice to order the
> standards from that single source.
>
> Thanks and Merry Xmas!
>
> 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

--

Andrew Carson - Product Safety Engineer
Xyratex Engineering Laboratory
Tele 023 92496855 Fax 023 92496014

Re: Singapore

[Andrew Carson]

Bill

Try

http://www.psb.gov.sg/awards/cps/index.html

it will give a list of products that require mandatory approval, but basically 
all IT and Telecoms
equipment requires the Singapore Safety mark and as of  1st May 2000, all 
telecoms equipment requires
EMC emissions testing.

Bill Somerfield wrote:

> Hello Group,
>
> Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety 
> Conpliance for Singapore?
>
> Any help will be  appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bill Somerfield
> QA/Compliance Manager
> Elizabeth-Hata International
> North Huntingdon, PA USA
> 412-829-7700
> fax 412-829-7330
> bi...@eliz.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

--

Andrew Carson - Product Safety Engineer
Xyratex Engineering Laboratory
Tele 023 92496855 Fax 023 92496014



---
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: Singapore

[Martin Garwood]

Bill,

http://www.psb.gov.sg

Cheers,
Martin.


- Original Message -
From: "Bill Somerfield " 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 3:31 AM
Subject: Singapore


>
> Hello Group,
>
> Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety
Conpliance for Singapore?
>
> Any help will be  appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bill Somerfield
> QA/Compliance Manager
> Elizabeth-Hata International
> North Huntingdon, PA USA
> 412-829-7700
> fax 412-829-7330
> bi...@eliz.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

Singapore

[Bill Somerfield]

Hello Group,

Could anyone point me in the right dirrection for info on EMC and Safety 
Conpliance for Singapore?

Any help will be  appreciated.

Thank you,

Bill Somerfield
QA/Compliance Manager
Elizabeth-Hata International
North Huntingdon, PA USA
412-829-7700
fax 412-829-7330
bi...@eliz.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

Up to Date EMC and Safety Standards

[Peter Merguerian]

Dear All,

I am looking for one (single point contact) reliable organization that can
supply me the most updated edition/revision dates/scope for a minimum North
American (UL and CSA) and European safety/emc standards. Preferrably, the
information should extracted "on-line". It would be also nice to order the
standards from that single source.

Thanks and Merry Xmas!







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

EN61000-3-2 A14

[Colgan, Chris]

Sorry for another post about this amendment but

Can anyone confirm that the limits for class A equipment are the same as
those in EN60555-2 and that the measurement techniques are the same?

That is, if I have equipment (not TV or PC) conforming to EN60555-2 can I
say that it conforms to EN61000-3-2 + A14 without any further testing?

Have a great holiday

Regards

Chris Colgan
Compliance Engineer
TAG McLaren Audio Ltd
The Summit, Latham Road
Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU
*Tel: +44 (0)1480 415 627
*Fax: +44 (0)1480 52159
* Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com
* http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com



**  
   Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com
**

The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive
use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error,
please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either
by E-mail, telephone or fax. You  should not  copy, forward or 
otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail.

TAG McLaren Audio Ltd
The Summit, 11 Latham Road
Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU
Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600)
Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159)

**  
   Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.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: OEM Issues (EU context)

[Peter Merguerian]

Dear All,

Who is liable? By purchasing a component that is CE marked will not satisfy
your needs! You need to check the technical file of the component to ensure
that it indeed meets the requirements. At the end of the day, you the
end-product manufacturer are liable for the overall CE and your people are
the ones spending time in jail!

Merry Xmas and Have a Happy and Safe New Year!


---Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of
wmf...@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 5:03 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: OEM Issues (EU context)



Similar to the 'SAFETY LISTING' thread this week:

As a manufacturer of electrical equipment, we purchase another manuf's power

supply, CE-marked by them with a copy of their Declaration of Conformance.
We 
then re-label it with our own label, make only minor physical changes, 
document the product and sell it in the EU. In the event that the unit's 
conformance to the Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive (89/336/EEC) or
to 
the Low Voltage Directive (73/23/EEC) is challenged, who is liable to 
represent the product? My guess is that we are ast least as responsible as 
the 'manufacturer', above, but mine is not a legal opinion.

Anyone out there (especially on the continent)in a position to offer advice 
on how I should proceed? 

Many thanks.

WmFlanigan

---
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: Thermocouple issues

[Colgan, Chris]

Supper glue?  I wouldn't fancy dinner at your place

:o)

Chris Colgan
Compliance Engineer
TAG McLaren Audio Ltd
The Summit, Latham Road
Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU
*Tel: +44 (0)1480 415 627
*Fax: +44 (0)1480 52159
* Mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com
* http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com


> -Original Message-
> From: Dick Grobner [SMTP:dick.grob...@medgraph.com]
> Sent: 18 December 2000 14:56
> To:   IEEE EMC-PSTC E-Mail Forum (E-mail)
> Subject:  RE: Thermocouple issues
> 
> 
> Opps - I ment to say cyanoacrylate adhesive (supper glue) and an
> accelerator.
> Sorry!
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Dick Grobner [mailto:dick.grob...@medgraph.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 4:03 PM
> To: 'Joe Finlayson'
> Cc: IEEE EMC-PSTC E-Mail Forum (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: Thermocouple issues
> 
> 
> 
> If you are welding up your own thermocouples, 2 part epoxy works well. You
> may destroy the thermocouple removing it but if you weld up your own - who
> cares.
> Hope this helps.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Finlayson [mailto:jfinlay...@telica.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 1:53 PM
> To: 'NEBS Newsgroup'; 'EMC PSTC'
> Subject: Thermocouple issues
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   I am in the process of performing a thermal evaluation and am using
> thermocouples to measure surface temperatures of IC's, etc.  I'm finding
> that the thermocouple tape that I'm using tends to experience a
> degradation
> of the adhesive as the temperatures increase (in the 80-100°C range)
> causing
> the thermocouples to separate from the surfaces.  I'd appreciate any
> advice
> that could point to a higher performing tape/adhesive for such an
> application.  Some of the IC's are quite small which doesn't leave much
> surface area for adhesion and I am using as many as 40 thermocouples per
> card.
> 
> Thx,
> 
> 
> Joe
> 
> *
>  <<...>> 
> 
> Joe Finlayson
> Manager, Compliance Engineering
> Telica, Inc.
> 734 Forest Street, Bldg. G, Suite 100
> Marlboro, MA 01752
> Tel:  (508) 480-0909 x212
> Fax:  (508) 480-0922
> Email:jfinlay...@telica.com
> Web:  www.telica.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
> 
> 
> ---
> 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
> 


**  
   Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.com
**

The contents of this E-mail are confidential and for the exclusive
use of the intended recipient. If you receive this E-mail in error,
please delete it from your system immediately and notify us either
by E-mail, telephone or fax. You  should not  copy, forward or 
otherwise disclose the content of the E-mail.

TAG McLaren Audio Ltd
The Summit, 11 Latham Road
Huntingdon, Cambs, PE29 6ZU
Telephone : 01480 415600 (+44 1480 415600)
Facsimile : 01480 52159 (+44 1480 52159)

**  
   Please visit us at www.tagmclarenaudio.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
 M

RE: EN55024 and EN55022 1998

[Praveen Rao]

Hi Fred,
You might have to register to open this document.
 http://www.elliottlabs.com/reference/infoBulletin/cas/001106.htm

If not see attachment.
Praveen Rao


-Original Message-
From: Friedemann Adt [mailto:a...@viewsonic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 19 December 2000 2:31 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: EN55024 and EN55022 1998



Dear collegues,

could somebody please point me in the right direction where to obtain a
summary of following impending EMC changes for IT equipment:

Generic Immunity 

from   EN 50082-1:1992  to EN55024:1998 
by Jul 1st 2001

and

Radio Interference 

from   EN 55022: 1997 to EN 55022:1998 
by Aug 1st 2001

Thank you

Fred Adt

compliance & reliability manager
a...@viewsonic.com
phone (909) 444-8958


---
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




Transition to the new editions of standards for Information Technology Equipment (ITE).htm
Description: Binary data

Spacings Issue

[Matsuda, Ken]

Hello Group,

A circuit uses a floating ground in the secondary, and caps are used for
protection from the secondary outputs to earth ground.  The question is,
under spacings requirements, would the secondary have to meet the high
voltage requirements for spacings for primaries due to this earth ground.
A few agencies have expressed desires to short the primary to secondary and
require the the secondary to meet primary voltage spacings to this earth
ground trace.   

Any help would be greatly appreciated.   And thanks again for all your
opinions



Thanks,

Ken Matsuda

---
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

EN55024 and EN55022 1998

[Friedemann Adt]

Dear collegues,

could somebody please point me in the right direction where to obtain a summary 
of following impending EMC changes for IT equipment:

Generic Immunity 

from   EN 50082-1:1992  to EN55024:1998 
by Jul 1st 2001

and

Radio Interference 

from   EN 55022: 1997 to EN 55022:1998 
by Aug 1st 2001

Thank you

Fred Adt

compliance & reliability manager
a...@viewsonic.com
phone (909) 444-8958


---
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

IEC 60950 - ITE safety testing

[Patrick Wong]

Hi all,

Our company is going to develop the compliance testing capability for ITE 
products. As we understood the main remaining problem is clause 6 of the 
standard (safety testing for TNV circuit- the telecommunication port). 
Can anyone in the group may offer help of locating manufacturers for the 
associated test equipment or possibly any associated information.

Regards

Patrick Wong
The Hong Kong Standards and Testing Centre

LAN legislation

[Gary McInturff]

This probably applies mostly to those folks that are making internet
equipment. Can anyone provide me with a group of industry watchdogs that
would be monitoring the attempts at legislating or changing the current
legislation as it regards the internet and the closely aligned
telecommunications network. They are not yet the same but it appears that
there are attempts to make them the same.
Normally, I only worry about these things afterwards and how it
affects standards and submittals, but I was asked to research the political
area as well. I would appreciate any pointers in the right directions.
Thanks
Gary McInturff

---
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

IEC 60950 - ITE safety testing

[Patrick Wong]

Hi all,

Our company is going to develop the compliance testing capability for ITE 
products. As we understood the main remaining problem is clause 6 of the 
standard (safety testing for TNV circuit- the telecommunication port). 
Can anyone in the group may offer help of locating manufacturers for the 
associated test equipment or possibly any associated information.

Regards

Patrick Wong
The Hong Kong Standards and Testing Centre

Re: Compliance in Korea for IT Equipment

[Jong Ho,Lee]

In korea need EMC test certification.

Test items are EN55022:1995,IEC1000-4-2,IEC1000-4-3(No 
modulation),IEC1000-4-4,IEC1000-4-5.
It take about 2 weeks from test to approval.

If you want to reach product Approval procedure more easly,I recommand you use 
the certified lab. by Govermement.

Thanks.

- Original Message - 
From: "Brent Pahl" 
To: "EMC-PSTC" 
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 3:44 AM
Subject: Compliance in Korea for IT Equipment


> 
> Hi Group,
> 
> Is anybody familiar with the nuances of the Korean Regulatory Approval
> process?  More specifically for IT Equipment:
> 
> What are the requirements?  I have been told that they are simply EN55022,
> with no Immunity or Product Safety requirements.  Is this true?
> 
> Are there any Korea-certified test labs in the U.S., or is our only option
> to send a prototype to a Korean test lab for testing?  What is there typical
> turnaround time?  Is there one lab you would recommend?
> 
> Does only the manufacturer need to submit for testing, or does each Korean
> vendor of our products need to have testing done?  This one sounds odd to
> me, but I heard it through the grapevine and wanted to verify or disprove
> it.
> 
> Thanks for you help!  I look forward to your responses.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Brent Pahl
> EMC/Compliance Engineer
> Dynarc, Inc.
> bre...@dynarc.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

Crossed Vane ESD Simulator

[Sandy Mazzola]

To all,

   I am looking for information on a Crossed Vane ESD simulator.
Specifically looking for what the vanes are for and how they affect the results 
and  is the position of the ESD simulator probe significant, should it be on 
the edge of the table or near the unit.
Any information on Crossed Vane ESD Simulators  would be appreciated.

Thanx a lot
Have a great day

Sandy Mazzola
Regulatory Engineer
Symbol Technologies Inc
1 Symbol PLaza 
Holtsville, N.Y 11742-1300
Phone (631) 738-5373
Fax (631) 738-3318 or (631) 738-3915
E-mail: mazzo...@symbol.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