RE: Metrics cost at 1991

[Gregg Kervill]

Sorry about the HTML but this is an abstract from the book The Practical
Guide to the Low Voltage Directive  ISBN 0 7506 3745 5

Metrics come in all sizes - what does your management want to hear?

How much we spend - how could have been save with better project management
and design control - how much compliance cost?

How much R&D spend - How much compliance costs? (I believe that DELL commit
30% of R&D to compliance)

I wonder why?  I wonder if their competitors would advertise the fact that
"We commit MUCH less than that - so buy our products."

Does sell to me!!!  But I have been called cynical by more that two people.


LOOK at history for the TRUE cost of getting it wrong.





These - hopefully explain the TRUE cost of 'keeping it right' and not just
consider the cost of adding a few extra scraps of metal or fuses.



  Titanic ( faulty material)

  Challenger (Faulty gasket)

  Meteosat (the one with the dead French PSU that should have driven the
down-link Tx)

  Herald of Free Enterprise (faulty 'safety' switch and operator error -
drunk and asleep)

  GoodYear Tyres  (jury still out)


The problem with compliance is that the TANGIBLE COST is always evident - it
is only when there is non-compliance that the intangible benefits become
self evident.

Please not the following abstract and the graphs.


PLEASE remember that the cost indicated here are from 1991 data. However -
if we are looking at OVERALL costs think also of a few of the high profile
examples.




 COPYRIGHT   Butterworth-Heinemann  andGregg Kervill
The Limitations of the guidance notes
In addition to a detailed step by step guide to electrical safety, this book
contains an Easy Guide. This provides simple, easy to follow steps that will
result in a compliant product, at the same time reducing design effort, and
simplifying safety compliance testing.

The strength of these guidance notes is that they reduce development time
and design changes, because by following the guidance it will remove many
opportunities for designing  a non-compliant product.

The penalty for using only the Easy Guide may be that the unit cost is
higher than a similar product designed following the Detailed Guidance
notes. The Easy Guide is therefore particularly suited to the design of
one-off equipment and low volume products

Conversely, the Detailed Guidance Notes will be required for high volume,
low margin products. They describe all aspects of the standard in depth
allowing the designer to take advantage of low cost design options to
minimise the unit cost of the final product.

The penalty for using this approach is that greater knowledge of the
standard and its interpretation is required and the cost of safety
compliance verification can be significantly higher.

Reducing costs and time to market
It is surprising how few people appreciate that most of the whole life costs
of a product are fixed  early on during the initial design phase. The
adjacent diagrams show the relative costs that can be set in stone even
before the design reaches the manufacturing department. It is important for
us all  to be aware of  the large amounts of money involved within our
company and where  it is committed.

With this knowledge, it is a simple process to identify the departments and
individuals where any company investment in training or resources  have the
most beneficial response. Remember that these ratios will depend upon the
type of product, the volumes and manufacturing processes. But let us also
consider the cost of a simple mistake - it has often been said that “failing
to plan in planning to fail” and so in this book we shall acknowledge that
we all are fallible - that we will make mistakes and accept that when they
occur they form a significant source of additional costs and delay.

This is an important consideration because if we know that there will be
errors - then we know that to look for them is a good and positive thing to
do.

The cost of not getting it right has not been stated more clearly than
during the October 1991 EuroPACE Quality Forum. Mr. Hiroshi Hamada, the
President of Ricoh, gave the cost of fixing a single defect as:



·  $35 during the design phase

·  $177 before procurement

·  $368 before production

·  $17,000 before shipment

·  $690,000 on customer site



>From this it is simple example it is obvious that the earlier an error can
be identified the more money a company will save.

Figure ???

It also follows that - since time and money are related - that if defects
are corrected early then  it will take less time for a product to reach
production - hence the “time to market” will be reduced.

Spend VERSUS Committed Cost


Personally, I believe that the most powerful way to identify where resources
(time, money and material) are wasted is to consider the Spend during each
phase in a project and to compare these to the Whole-Life costs that are
committed during that phase. Figure???

The following figure

Re: "Safety Critical" etc - the future

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Scott Barrows 
wrote (in <3be2f16a.b72a7...@curtis-straus.com>) about '"Safety
Critical" etc - the future', on Fri, 2 Nov 2001:
>I think it may be time to inject that there are local Product Safety Societies 
>(or the IEEE versions)
>that were formed for this particular reason. Perhaps the Engineers that sit on 
>these TAG and TC committees should join
>up and take an ACTIVE role in these groups.

There are countries other than USA, you know, and many do not have local
Product Safety Societies.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Eat mink and be dreary!

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: "Safety Critical" etc - the future

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Doug McKean  wrote (in
<001901c163c7$9e47ec80$3e3e3...@corp.auspex.com>) about '"Safety
Critical" etc - the future', on Fri, 2 Nov 2001:
>John,
>
>Extremely valid question since we are it seems in the 
>process of moving toward the world-wide concept 
>of 'one test, one approval'.  I would be very surprised 
>if this very question has not been addresssed. 

If you are referring to my post, I plan to report that there is
discussion here on the subject, and recount some of the points made.
What we need is a very-widely accepted standard definition.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Eat mink and be dreary!

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Vendor night

[Scott Barrows]

Hi All,
I have attached a flyer for the Northeast Product Safety Society, 7th
annual Vendors night, that will be held on the 15th of November this
year. Looking forward to all of the New England local people to show up
as well as any of our friends that might be in the area.

Scott Barrows
Vice President NPSS




npssflyr.doc
Description: MS-Word document

Re: "Safety Critical" etc - the future

[Scott Barrows]

Hi All,
With the remarks about this topic needing to be discussed in IEC and industry 
committees as well as  between
professionals, I think it may be time to inject that there are local Product 
Safety Societies (or the IEEE versions)
that were formed for this particular reason. Perhaps the Engineers that sit on 
these TAG and TC committees should join
up and take an ACTIVE role in these groups. With their participation in local 
safety societies, the entire industry
will be represented and can be considered to have a voice in the development of 
standards and the considerations
therein. I am not so sure that the NRTL's and Notified bodies should have the 
only voice in this process.

Scott Barrows
NPSS



geor...@lexmark.com wrote:

> John,
>
> Allow me to comment further on this issue.  I seem to remember
> a saying that goes "The proof of the pudding is in the eating."
> By the same token, I have always expressed within my area of
> influence that the truest test of our internal ITE safety
> policies, practices and processes is field history.
>
> We all know that standards, like many other sets of knowledge,
> evolve from errors over time.  Another saying that makes this
> point is "Success comes from experience.  Experience comes from
> failure."  Overall, I believe the ITE industry has a superb safety
> record, given the exponential growth of this industry from corporate
> uses to homes, dorm rooms, etc.
>
> Hundreds of people are killed or injured every day in the use of
> various products, e.g. vehicles, farm equipment, firearms (hunting
> accidents), aircraft, etc.  The majority of these are due to
> operator error and/or poor judgement.  The more complex products
> are the ones more likely to develop a defect that could lead to
> deaths, e.g. aircraft.
>
> In the eight plus years I have been in product safety, I am not
> aware of a reported serious injury or death from the intended
> use or misuse of an ITE product.  This does not mean there have
> been none, but it does mean that ITE is not a significant cause
> of injury or death.  This is a result of fairly sound standards,
> common sense, experience, and due diligence in maintaining the
> original certified design of each product.
>
> We probably all know of improvements we would make in this
> process if we got to be "king for a day".  Most of us handle
> these as internal requirements beyond the imposed external
> requirements.  The way we define and account for the use of safety
> critical parts is one small aspect of a much more complex series
> of processes leading to protecting ITE users from harm.
>
> George Alspaugh
>
> These are personal opinions only.
>
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
>
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
>
> 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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
> messages are imported into the new server.


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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: "Safety Critical" etc - the future

[Doug McKean]

John,

Extremely valid question since we are it seems in the 
process of moving toward the world-wide concept 
of 'one test, one approval'.  I would be very surprised 
if this very question has not been addresssed. 

Regards, Doug McKean 



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: classification for part 18

[Peters, Michael]

Stuart,

The scope of Part 18 is for a device that uses locally generated RF energy
to perform some sort of work.  See the definition of ISM in 47 CFR
18.107(c).  If your product meets this definition then you must test to Part
18 to market in the US.

If also thinking about the Canadian market, Canada's definition of ISM is
similar to Europe's, not the US's (Note the subtle difference between "and"
and "or").  See Industry Canada  ICES-001.

Others have mentioned the importance of other applicable standards such as
47 CFR 68 and UL 2601-1 (includes references to EMC), which your product
probably falls under the scope of.

Michael Peters

-Original Message-
From: Stuart Lopata [mailto:stu...@timcoengr.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:39 AM
To: emc
Subject: classification for part 18



Does a medical device that connects to a blood pressure unit and sends info
over the phone lines need to be tested under part 18.  I think not, however,
it is a medical device.  Please comment.

Sincerely,

Stuart Lopata



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

"Safety Critical" etc - the future

[georgea]

John,

Allow me to comment further on this issue.  I seem to remember
a saying that goes "The proof of the pudding is in the eating."
By the same token, I have always expressed within my area of
influence that the truest test of our internal ITE safety
policies, practices and processes is field history.

We all know that standards, like many other sets of knowledge,
evolve from errors over time.  Another saying that makes this
point is "Success comes from experience.  Experience comes from
failure."  Overall, I believe the ITE industry has a superb safety
record, given the exponential growth of this industry from corporate
uses to homes, dorm rooms, etc.

Hundreds of people are killed or injured every day in the use of
various products, e.g. vehicles, farm equipment, firearms (hunting
accidents), aircraft, etc.  The majority of these are due to
operator error and/or poor judgement.  The more complex products
are the ones more likely to develop a defect that could lead to
deaths, e.g. aircraft.

In the eight plus years I have been in product safety, I am not
aware of a reported serious injury or death from the intended
use or misuse of an ITE product.  This does not mean there have
been none, but it does mean that ITE is not a significant cause
of injury or death.  This is a result of fairly sound standards,
common sense, experience, and due diligence in maintaining the
original certified design of each product.

We probably all know of improvements we would make in this
process if we got to be "king for a day".  Most of us handle
these as internal requirements beyond the imposed external
requirements.  The way we define and account for the use of safety
critical parts is one small aspect of a much more complex series
of processes leading to protecting ITE users from harm.

George Alspaugh

These are personal opinions only.



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: general product classification

[Peters, Michael]

Stuart,

Go to the following link:

http://www.cenelec.org/

click on "Publications"
then click on:
"Information on the Links Between Products, Directives and Standards in the
Electrotechnical Field"

For Europe, this sounds like the tool you want.  It isn't free.  But if this
is your business, it would be a worthwhile investment.

Unless things have changed in the past few months, ETSI standards can be
downloaded for free from their website.

Michael Peters

-Original Message-
From: Stuart Lopata [mailto:stu...@timcoengr.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:00 PM
To: emc
Subject: general product classification



If I have product xyz (generic) how do I go about finding the relevant
standards that it must comply with for EN-BS/IEC/ETSI (European)?

Of course, simply by looking at the list of standards titles I can get
somewhat of an idea if they are relevant. However, I cannot view their scope
without buying the standard first.  Any ideas?

Sincerely,

Stuart Lopata
Rookie Compliance Engineer



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: EMC test table construction plans

[Sundstrom Michael (NMP-RD/Dallas)]

We use a styrofoam table here at our lab, it is a round plug of
styrofoam 80cm tall and 1m across. This has worked the best for us, and
it has the least reflections at any frequency we can reliably test at. I
would guess that some form of hard material on top of this type of table
would support 200lBs.

Michael Sundstrom
 NOKIA 
  TCC Dallas / EMC
   ofc: (972) 374-1462
cell: (817) 917-5021
 amateur call: KB5UKT


-Original Message-
From: ext Pommerenke, David [mailto:davi...@ece.umr.edu]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:16 PM
To: 'POWELL, DOUG'; EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Subject: RE: EMC test table construction plans



Doug,

For emissions and immunity you should not use any wood in the table. It
will
significantly (+/-2 dB up to 1 GHz for emissions , more above, +/-10 dB
for
immunity up to 1 GHz) change the test result. My experience has shown
that
Styrofoam is basicly the best material. There are a couple of published
papers on this issue. As surface material the following worked out fine:

  - Foamed PVC (rather stiff, low dielectric constant due to the foamed
nature), maybe 4 mm thick.

  - PE sheet, maybe 2 mm thick.

David Pommerenke



-Original Message-
From: POWELL, DOUG [mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:38 AM
To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Subject: EMC test table construction plans



Hello all,

I plan to construct my own insulated EMC test table for a 5 meter
chamber.
Seems simple enough to do and I could easily come up with something.  I
thought I might first ask for input from those of you in the discussion
group who have experience or maybe even construction plans.  Here are
some
features I want:

1) I will be testing products that weight up to 200 Lbs (91 kg).

2) I want to minimize metalic fastners.

3) I would like to make it a pivoting table (not motorized).

4) Height is 80 cm.

5) The surface should be replacable if it gets badly worn or scarred.
I'm
thinking of using hardboard.

6) Suggestions on length & width?

-doug

---
Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer
Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
Mail stop: 203024
1626 Sharp Point Drive
Ft. Collins, CO 80525

970.407.6410 (phone)
970-407.5410 (fax)
mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com
---



_ 

This message, including any attachments, may contain information that is
confidential and proprietary information of Advanced Energy Industries,
Inc.
The dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this message or any
of
its attachments is strictly prohibited without the express written
consent
of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported i

RE: EMC test table construction plans

[Ehler, Kyle]

In our OATS dome, we use a pair of large antistatic plastic Rubbermaid 
wheeled carts with a sheet of plywood laid across the tops.
A tabletop host pc is set on that.
How's that effecting the measurements?  
Should these effects be part of the 'uncertainty'?

Kyle Ehler  KCØIQE
 
Assistant Design Engineer
LSI Logic Storage Systems Div.
3718 N. Rock Road
U.S.A.  Wichita, Kansas  67226
Ph. 316 636 8657
Fax 316 636 8321



-Original Message-
From: umbdenst...@sensormatic.com [mailto:umbdenst...@sensormatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:12 PM
To: doug.pow...@aei.com; emc-p...@ieee.org; davi...@ece.umr.edu
Subject: RE: EMC test table construction plans



David,

On a similar note I had heard that an EUT shelter might demonstrate a 6 dB
variation between wet and dry conditions, or dirty vs. clean (pressure
cleaned) condition.  

Did the papers comment on wood properties?  Perhaps identifying soft wood
vs. hard wood, minerals absorbed during growth, wet vs. dry, or other
"conditioning" situations?

I have only seen a handful of labs, but they all had wooden tables (defacto
standard for the times -- past?).  I wonder if the standards were written
around the convention of wooden tables?

You've raised an interesting issue.

Best regards,

Don Umbdenstock
Sensormatic

> --
> From: Pommerenke, David[SMTP:davi...@ece.umr.edu]
> Reply To: Pommerenke, David
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:15 PM
> To:   'POWELL, DOUG'; EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
> Subject:  RE: EMC test table construction plans
> 
> 
> Doug,
> 
> For emissions and immunity you should not use any wood in the table. It
> will
> significantly (+/-2 dB up to 1 GHz for emissions , more above, +/-10 dB
> for
> immunity up to 1 GHz) change the test result. My experience has shown that
> Styrofoam is basicly the best material. There are a couple of published
> papers on this issue. As surface material the following worked out fine:
> 
>   - Foamed PVC (rather stiff, low dielectric constant due to the foamed
> nature), maybe 4 mm thick.
> 
>   - PE sheet, maybe 2 mm thick.
> 
> David Pommerenke
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: POWELL, DOUG [mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:38 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
> Subject: EMC test table construction plans
> 
> 
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I plan to construct my own insulated EMC test table for a 5 meter chamber.
> Seems simple enough to do and I could easily come up with something.  I
> thought I might first ask for input from those of you in the discussion
> group who have experience or maybe even construction plans.  Here are some
> features I want:
> 
> 1) I will be testing products that weight up to 200 Lbs (91 kg).
> 
> 2) I want to minimize metalic fastners.
> 
> 3) I would like to make it a pivoting table (not motorized).
> 
> 4) Height is 80 cm.
> 
> 5) The surface should be replacable if it gets badly worn or scarred.  I'm
> thinking of using hardboard.
> 
> 6) Suggestions on length & width?
> 
> -doug
> 
> ---
> Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer
> Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
> Mail stop: 203024
> 1626 Sharp Point Drive
> Ft. Collins, CO 80525
> 
> 970.407.6410 (phone)
> 970-407.5410 (fax)
> mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com
> ---
> 

RE: EMC test table construction plans

[Douglas_Beckwith]

From:  Douglas Beckwith@MITEL on 11/02/2001 08:21 AM
Sorry guys, finger trouble here with a mouse, didn't mean to send a reply.

Regards

Doug Beckwith



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: EMC test table construction plans

[WOODS]

David, or anyone else, would you please site any papers that cover the error
issue with emissions or immunity testing below 1 GHz?

Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics


-Original Message-
From: Pommerenke, David [mailto:davi...@ece.umr.edu]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:16 PM
To: 'POWELL, DOUG'; EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Subject: RE: EMC test table construction plans



Doug,

For emissions and immunity you should not use any wood in the table. It will
significantly (+/-2 dB up to 1 GHz for emissions , more above, +/-10 dB for
immunity up to 1 GHz) change the test result. My experience has shown that
Styrofoam is basicly the best material. There are a couple of published
papers on this issue. As surface material the following worked out fine:

  - Foamed PVC (rather stiff, low dielectric constant due to the foamed
nature), maybe 4 mm thick.

  - PE sheet, maybe 2 mm thick.

David Pommerenke



-Original Message-
From: POWELL, DOUG [mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:38 AM
To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Subject: EMC test table construction plans



Hello all,

I plan to construct my own insulated EMC test table for a 5 meter chamber.
Seems simple enough to do and I could easily come up with something.  I
thought I might first ask for input from those of you in the discussion
group who have experience or maybe even construction plans.  Here are some
features I want:

1) I will be testing products that weight up to 200 Lbs (91 kg).

2) I want to minimize metalic fastners.

3) I would like to make it a pivoting table (not motorized).

4) Height is 80 cm.

5) The surface should be replacable if it gets badly worn or scarred.  I'm
thinking of using hardboard.

6) Suggestions on length & width?

-doug

---
Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer
Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
Mail stop: 203024
1626 Sharp Point Drive
Ft. Collins, CO 80525

970.407.6410 (phone)
970-407.5410 (fax)
mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com
---



_ 

This message, including any attachments, may contain information that is
confidential and proprietary information of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
The dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this message or any of
its attachments is strictly prohibited without the express written consent
of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Low Frequency Conducted Immunity....

[Scott . Mee]

Thank you to all who have responded to my LFC immunity issue.  Your help is
much appreciated.


Regards,

Scott Mee
EMC Engineer

Johnson Controls Inc.
PH:  616.394.2565
EMAIL:  scott@jci.com



+++



Hello Group,

I am working with and electronic device which contains and audio output.
During a low frequency conducted immunity test, a tone can be heard at the
output of the audio section with a frequency equal to that of the test
frequency.  The test starts at the lower end of the audio spectrum [~400Hz]
and progresses over time up to the top end of the audio spectrum [~30kHz].
I would like to be able to filter the conducted noise from getting into my
electronic device.  This is an automotive application, so if I am
unsuccessful alternator noise may also be heard in my audio signal during
normal operation in the vehicle.

I have tried a few things to reduce the amount of noise such as:

 1.  LC filter with a cutoff at 1kHz
 2.  Series inductance [large amounts ~ 3mH]
 3.  Various common mode choke types, each with different core
materials [ie. iron core, ferrite core, etc]

#1 helped some, but is not effective enough, #2 was very successful, but
the size of the choke would be enormous and not practical in this
application, #3 was not effective


Can anyone suggest an improvement upon the three methods above, or suggest
something different?

I would like to implement something on the board itself if possible, but
modification to the harness may be possible if necessary.


Thank you in advance for any help!


Regards,

Scott Mee
EMC Engineer

Johnson Controls Inc.
PH:  616.394.2565
EMAIL:  scott@jci.com



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: EMC test table construction plans

[Pommerenke, David]

John,

You are arguing

"Should the test conditions not reflect the actual environment in use of
the product, rather than employ these unusual materials?"

The problem is that we do not know the actual conditions. So we need to
define the test conditions. If everyone use be using the SAME wooden table,
it would be fine. But that is not the case and there are large variations
between different wooden tables, surface materials etc.

So if one uses a wooden table, its influence must be taken into the
uncertainty calculation. This adds a few more dBs, much more above 1 GHz. In
radiated immunity it is even worse, as there is no maximization done.

David Pommerenke





-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 1:34 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: EMC test table construction plans



I read in !emc-pstc that Pommerenke, David  wrote
(in <9da8d24b915bd1118911006094516eaf0ba31...@umr-mail02.cc.umr.edu>)
about 'EMC test table construction plans', on Thu, 1 Nov 2001:
>For emissions and immunity you should not use any wood in the table. It
will
>significantly (+/-2 dB up to 1 GHz for emissions , more above, +/-10 dB for
>immunity up to 1 GHz) change the test result. My experience has shown that
>Styrofoam is basicly the best material. 

You mean that it gives the worst-case results?

>There are a couple of published
>papers on this issue. As surface material the following worked out fine:
>
>  - Foamed PVC (rather stiff, low dielectric constant due to the foamed
>nature), maybe 4 mm thick.
>
>  - PE sheet, maybe 2 mm thick.

Should the test conditions not reflect the actual environment in use of
the product, rather than employ these unusual materials?
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

Eat mink and be dreary!

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: EMC test table construction plans

[Douglas_Beckwith]

Doug,

You might want to look at a paper that was presented at the Montreal IEEE
EMC Symposium by HP on measurements that they made on a table when starting
to test above 1 GHz.  As you know, the FCC (ANSI C63.4) and CISPR 22
requirements simply call out that the table should be non-conducting.
That's about all that is said.  Measurements made by HP in Vancouver, WA
show that this might just be an inadequate specification for the table due
to reflections from the table/air boundary.  Their table was wood with no
metal fasteners of any kind, with a plastic sheet on the top.  It meets the
"non-conducting" requirement, but demonstrated that this minimal standard is
inadequate to ensure accurate and repeatable results.  I am certain that the
results of their tests will cause some interesting discussions in various
standards bodies over the next few years.

That said, a wood or fiberglass table should meet your needs quite nicely.
I've seen a number of construction techniques over the years that have all
had minimal metal content (our tables have two swivel casters under the legs
at one end and metal axels for the wheels at the other end as their total
metal content).  These range from all wood, to PCV pipe frame with a wood
top to fiberglass construction.  All are sturdy enough to hold 200 pounds
and all are "non-conductive".  I'm not sure what to suggest for your swivel
mount, but I have seen turntables built with a single metal pivot in the
middle with a race of pool balls used for ball bearings further out on the
table.  Quick, simple and elegant.  Non-conductive, except for the pivot in
the middle.

Good luck and have fun.  Based on HP's paper, I suspect that a lot of us
will be building new tables of a yet to be determined material in the next
few years.  Should make for some interesting conversations.

Ghery Pettit
Intel


-Original Message-
From: POWELL, DOUG [mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 9:38 AM
To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Subject: EMC test table construction plans



Hello all,

I plan to construct my own insulated EMC test table for a 5 meter chamber.
Seems simple enough to do and I could easily come up with something.  I
thought I might first ask for input from those of you in the discussion
group who have experience or maybe even construction plans.  Here are some
features I want:

1) I will be testing products that weight up to 200 Lbs (91 kg).

2) I want to minimize metalic fastners.

3) I would like to make it a pivoting table (not motorized).

4) Height is 80 cm.

5) The surface should be replacable if it gets badly worn or scarred.  I'm
thinking of using hardboard.

6) Suggestions on length & width?

-doug

---
Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer
Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
Mail stop: 203024
1626 Sharp Point Drive
Ft. Collins, CO 80525

970.407.6410 (phone)
970-407.5410 (fax)
mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com
---



_

This message, including any attachments, may contain information that is
confidential and proprietary information of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
The dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this message or any of
its attachments is strictly prohibited without the express written consent
of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages
are imported into the new server.



---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Pro

Re: EMC test table construction plans

[Robert Macy]

John,

Your point is well taken with regard to testing a unit while closely
matching the testing environment to the environment it will be used in.
However, we don't sell a lot of equipment to people who have 40 meters of
ground plane, either.

It is my understanding a reasonable "false" environment is an attempt to
control the testing environment and obtain repeatable results.   Controlling
the table material so it does not appreciably affect the outcome of the test
seems to be consistent with that goal.

 - Robert -

   Robert A. Macy, PEm...@california.com
   408 286 3985  fx 408 297 9121
   AJM International Electronics Consultants
   619 North First St,   San Jose, CA  95112

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Friday, November 02, 2001 2:30 AM
Subject: Re: EMC test table construction plans


>
>I read in !emc-pstc that Pommerenke, David  wrote
>(in <9da8d24b915bd1118911006094516eaf0ba31...@umr-mail02.cc.umr.edu>)
>about 'EMC test table construction plans', on Thu, 1 Nov 2001:
>>For emissions and immunity you should not use any wood in the table. It
will
>>significantly (+/-2 dB up to 1 GHz for emissions , more above, +/-10 dB
for
>>immunity up to 1 GHz) change the test result. My experience has shown that
>>Styrofoam is basicly the best material.
>
>You mean that it gives the worst-case results?
>
>>There are a couple of published
>>papers on this issue. As surface material the following worked out fine:
>>
>>  - Foamed PVC (rather stiff, low dielectric constant due to the foamed
>>nature), maybe 4 mm thick.
>>
>>  - PE sheet, maybe 2 mm thick.
>
>Should the test conditions not reflect the actual environment in use of
>the product, rather than employ these unusual materials?
>--
>Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
>



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: "Safety Critical" etc - the future

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Allen, John 
wrote (in <999c839e7e27d41185ec00d0b7473692024cd...@norway.int.rdel.co.u
k>) about '"Safety Critical" etc - the future', on Fri, 2 Nov 2001:
>I know that some of the forum participants operate in these areas, and thus
>ask them how we should proceed from here?

I will raise the question at a meeting of what will be IEC TC108/WG2 in
London later this month.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Eat mink and be dreary!

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: EMC test table construction plans

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Pommerenke, David  wrote
(in <9da8d24b915bd1118911006094516eaf0ba31...@umr-mail02.cc.umr.edu>)
about 'EMC test table construction plans', on Thu, 1 Nov 2001:
>For emissions and immunity you should not use any wood in the table. It will
>significantly (+/-2 dB up to 1 GHz for emissions , more above, +/-10 dB for
>immunity up to 1 GHz) change the test result. My experience has shown that
>Styrofoam is basicly the best material. 

You mean that it gives the worst-case results?

>There are a couple of published
>papers on this issue. As surface material the following worked out fine:
>
>  - Foamed PVC (rather stiff, low dielectric constant due to the foamed
>nature), maybe 4 mm thick.
>
>  - PE sheet, maybe 2 mm thick.

Should the test conditions not reflect the actual environment in use of
the product, rather than employ these unusual materials?
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Eat mink and be dreary!

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

"Safety Critical" etc - the future

[Allen, John]

Hi Folks

We have now had this discussion and it brought out a number of useful and
enlightening points, and Lauren's and Rich's summaries of the various inputs
are both interesting and thought-provoking. 

However, I now come back to a point that I made in one of my earlier
messages: Where do we go from here?

For most people participating in this forum, I suspect that the major
contact that they have with any concept of component- criticality is in
respect of simple standards (e.g. standards mandated under the LVD/EMC/R&TTE
or other national equivalents) compliance for a single item of equipment. 

Their major issue will, I guess, be the attitudes taken by the various
product test and certification authorities that they deal with because those
organisations directly influence what the product design and manufacturing
companies need to reflect in their internal documentation and processes. 

Therefore, the test and certification authorities need to jointly decide and
declare the following:

a) The methods and criteria for identification, selection and listing of
"critical components" for both product standards compliance and system
safety compliance

b) The terms they wish to use for the various aspects of criticality.

Personal Comment: 
I think that "safety critical component" is fine in the system safety
context - and that is how it is already referenced in many risk-assessment
standards and guidance documents. 

However, I am not so sure/happy about Rich's suggestion of "safeguard" as I
think that it is similar to the term "safety critical" in the system-safety
context but will sound rather "vague" to many non-knowledgable people (and
is not very appropriate in the context of product standards compliance).

Nevertheless it seems to me that this subject does need to be debated at a
very high level (of knowledgable people!)within the IEC (notably the CB
Certification organisation, CENELEC and the US/Canadian NRTL organisations
with the object of reaching some mutually agreed methodologies. (Once they
reach some decisions, most other organisations will follow!)

I know that some of the forum participants operate in these areas, and thus
ask them how we should proceed from here?

This will be a long process - but I think it is essential to kick it off
ASAP.

Over to you guys!

Regards

John Allen
Thales Defence Communications Division (for the moment!!)
Bracknell, UK

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: classification for part 18

[Peter Merguerian]

Stuart,

For the telecoms part, the unit must pass FCC Part 68 and for safety, the
relevant requirements of equipment connected to the telecommunication
network in the UL60950 Standard for Safety of Information Technology
Equipment. The latter is in addition to the safety requirements for the
device covered underv the Standard for Medical Equipment, UL2601-1.



This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If
you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate,
distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you
received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the
message and its attachments to the sender.






PETER S. MERGUERIAN
Technical Director
I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd.
26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211
Or Yehuda 60251, Israel
Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022  Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019
Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175






-Original Message-
From: Stuart Lopata [mailto:stu...@timcoengr.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 6:39 PM
To: emc
Subject: classification for part 18



Does a medical device that connects to a blood pressure unit and sends info
over the phone lines need to be tested under part 18.  I think not, however,
it is a medical device.  Please comment.

Sincerely,

Stuart Lopata



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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: general product classification

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Stuart Lopata  wrote (in
) about 'general
product classification', on Thu, 1 Nov 2001:
>If I have product xyz (generic) how do I go about finding the relevant
>standards that it must comply with for EN-BS/IEC/ETSI (European)?
>
>Of course, simply by looking at the list of standards titles I can get
>somewhat of an idea if they are relevant. However, I cannot view their scope
>without buying the standard first.  Any ideas?

You ask here, giving as much detail about the product as you can.
'Detail' means:

What type of product is it?

Is it a high-volume product sold to the general public?

What is the current consumption at what voltage?

Single or 3-phase power?

Where is it to be marketed?

Does it use intentional r.f. emission?


There is a move to making Scope clauses available on-line, but not yet!
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Eat mink and be dreary!

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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.