RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations. [Frivolous -- del ete]

[Christman, Timothy (STP)]

[Frivolous punchline coming, delete if not interested]

There's not difference, actually -- the violin player's head is just much
larger, making the relative size of the violin seem smaller to the observer.

In truth --

The viola is slightly larger, tuned differently (In 5ths?  C-G-D-A?) and has
a much darker or mellower timbre.

Violas don't create compliance issues, though, except in personal
relationships (speaking from past experience).  Forgive the digression.

Carry on...

Timothy J. Christman
Test Engineer
Tel 651.582.3141  Fax 651.582.7599
timothy.christ...@guidant.com
Guidant Corporation 
4100 Hamline Ave. N.  
St. Paul,  MN   55112  USA 
www.guidant.com


-Original Message-
From: don_macart...@selinc.com [mailto:don_macart...@selinc.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:23 PM
To: Pettit, Ghery
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.





Tuned differently?




Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com on 11/29/2001 08:34:10 AM

Please respond to Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com

To:   Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com, 'John Woodgate'
  j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk, 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
  emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
cc:(bcc: Don MacArthur/SEL)
Subject:  RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.




Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...

Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
.
.
.
.


































The Viola burns longer.  ;)

-Original Message-
From: Pettit, Ghery
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.


John,

That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.

Ghery
former Bassoonist ;)

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing out
a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)

It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.

The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
nobody blows good. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero.

---
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 e-mail may contain SEL confidential information.  The opinions
expressed
are not necessarily those of SEL.  Any unauthorized disclosure, distribution
or
other use is prohibited.  If you received this e-mail in error, please
notify
the sender, permanently delete it, and destroy any printout.  Thank you.



---
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 

RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[John Shinn]

Your'e close.  It is slightly larger than an violin and tuned 1/5 octave
lower.


-Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of
don_macart...@selinc.com
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 10:23 AM
To: Pettit, Ghery
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.





Tuned differently?




Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com on 11/29/2001 08:34:10 AM

Please respond to Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com

To:   Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com, 'John Woodgate'
  j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk, 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
  emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
cc:(bcc: Don MacArthur/SEL)
Subject:  RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.




Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...

Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
.
.
.
.


































The Viola burns longer.  ;)

-Original Message-
From: Pettit, Ghery
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.


John,

That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.

Ghery
former Bassoonist ;)

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing out
a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)

It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.

The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
nobody blows good. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero.

---
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 e-mail may contain SEL confidential information.  The opinions
expressed
are not necessarily those of SEL.  Any unauthorized disclosure, distribution
or
other use is prohibited.  If you received this e-mail in error, please
notify
the sender, permanently delete it, and destroy any printout.  Thank you.



---
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 

November, 2001 EMC/Telco/Product Safety Update Now Available

[Glen Dash]

The Curtis-Straus Update is for November, 2001 is now available at:

http://www.conformity-update.com

The headlines are:

FCC: Lies Will Cost You $2.52 Million.
Commission Allocates More Spectrum For Advanced Wireless.
ACTA Slowly but Surely Taking Charge.
OSHA Levies More Fines In Workplace Deaths.
Fed: Use of False UL Marks Leads to Indictment.
WHO Releases Fact Sheet On EMFs.
International Electrotechnical Vocabulary (IEV) Now On Line.
Meetings and Seminars.

---
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.

24 Mo. Warranty for the EU

[Veit, Andy]

Forum-
I was just informed (without any further details given) that warranty
periods for products shipped to Europe going to 24 months, mandated by law. 
Does someone know the specifics of this, or maybe point me in the right
direction?  
I started digging on the europa.eu.int website, but have not found anything
yet.  

Thanks-
-Andy

Andrew Veit
Systems Design Engineer
MTS Systems Corp
Ph: 919.677.2507
Fax: 919.677.2480
1001 Sheldon Drive 
Cary, NC 27513 


---
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: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[Ehler, Kyle]

I saw a kid use his bassoon like a Louisville Slugger once.
The competition for first chair was vicious in the woodwind section...

I played the cornet.  A really old silver plated one.
Funny thing was it always had a terrible hall-filling halitosis.
-maybe that is why the conductor was always picking on me.
I tried everything...listerine, toothpaste, WD-40, even PGA..
kyle

-Original Message-
From: Aschenberg, Mat [mailto:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 11:15 AM
To: 'Pettit, Ghery'; 'John Woodgate'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

I wonder how many of the engineers on here have been or currently musicians.
I play clarinet and saxiphone. 
I figure the bastard that invented the saxaphone made it out of metal
because they were always burning the bassoons. 


 -Original Message-
 From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com]
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 9:34 AM
 To:   Pettit, Ghery; 'John Woodgate'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
 Subject:  RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...
 
 Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
 .
 .
 The Viola burns longer.  ;)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Pettit, Ghery 
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
 To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 John,
 
 That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.
 
 Ghery 
 former Bassoonist ;)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
 Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 
 I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
 (in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
 EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
 Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing
 out
 a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)
 
 It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.
 
 The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
 nobody blows good. (;-)
 -- 
 Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
 http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
 
 After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 
 
 ---

Duty cycle - transmitting on power lines

[amund]

Hi all,

If a product transmit in a time period of 1 second pr hour, should it during
conformity testing be in this normal transmit mode, or should it be set in a
continuous transmitting mode which will be a kind of worst case situation,
but anyway not a realistic situation when installed out on the field ?

I ask this question because the product will send 1 seconds burst on a
powerline communication in the band 100kHz-400kHz and that will make
problems for the Conducted emission test in the same frequency range.

Best regards
Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway




---
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: EMI receiver desensitization and amplitude overhead

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that J.Feldhaar j.feldh...@telejet.de wrote (in
3c0672ab.afbfd...@telejet.de) about 'EMI receiver desensitization and
amplitude overhead', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:

I am looking for a URL or graphic that shows the headroom necessary for
correct QP emi measurements using an EMI receiver. 

If my information is correct, there must be up to 43.5 dB in excess of
the measurement range for measuring Quasipeak signals correctly,
decreasing when pulse frequency approaches 1 KHz.

Your information is correct, but there is much more.

I am looking for a source of information or a picture of this graphic.
Note: There are three curves, one each for 200 Hz, 9 KHz and 120 KHz
resolution bandwidth.

The information you need is in CISPR 16-1:1999, Tables 1 and 2, clause
4.1.4 and Annex A, and Figure 1. There is far too much to be copied to
you. You need either to buy the standard (from http://www.iec.ch) or 
the DIN equivalent, or find it in a library.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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.

SV: SV: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[amund]

On the CENELEC web they say regarding EN61000-6-1:  Note:Supersedes EN
50082-1:1997. What you are telling John, I assume that they should have
written Note: Will superseed EN 50082-1:1997.

http://www.cenelec.org/BASIS/celis/free/project/DDW?W%3DPR_LSCCOMM+PH+LIKE+%
2761000-6-1%27%26M%3D1%26K%3D8567%26R%3DY%26U%3D1

Agree ?

Amund




-Opprinnelig melding-
Fra: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]På vegne av John Woodgate
Sendt: 28. november 2001 10:58
Til: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Emne: Re: SV: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



I read in !emc-pstc that am...@westin-emission.no wrote (in LFENJLPMMJB
mhpeibniliefhcbaa.am...@westin-emission.no) about 'SV: Revised EMC
standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Note that EN 50082-1:1997 has been superseded by EN 61000-6-1:2001 EN
61000-6-1:2001 Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) -- Part 6-1: Generic
standards - Immunity for residential, commercial and light-industrial
environments. The DOW is 2004-07-01. It has not been published in the OJ
yet.

Since it hasn't been notified in the OJ the new standard has effectively
NOT yet superseded the previous one. But it SHOULD be used for new
designs that are likely to continue in production beyond 20014-07-01,
the dow in EN61000-6-1:2001 applying to EN50082-1:1997.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero.

---
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: Hi-Pot OK labels

[Veit, Andy]

Forum-
We are currently retaining a paper copy of the manufacturing/QC checklist
(includes hi-pot/ground-bond data) for each serial number shipped.
I am curious to know how NRTL's view the use of an Hi-Pot OK ink stamp 
on the product in lieu of keeping a paper record?  
Or is this a common practice in the industry and not typically an issue?

I like the idea because it solves several issues in one step: stickers
falling off, visual proof of testing, reducing paperwork, and the chance of
a paper record getting misplaced.

Thanks-
-Andy

Andrew Veit
Systems Design Engineer
MTS Systems Corp
Ph: 919.677.2507
Fax: 919.677.2480
1001 Sheldon Drive 
Cary, NC 27513 


-Original Message-
From: ron_du...@agilent.com [mailto:ron_du...@agilent.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 2:34 PM
To: Veit, Andy; ron_du...@agilent.com
Subject: RE: Hi-Pot OK labels


Hi Andy,

I have had no problem with the NRTLs. Way don't you challenge the practice
on the emc-pstc? Maybe there is some people from the NRTLs that can give a
answer.

The ink we use is Stadia 71-476BLK. Their number 800-765-6600. 


Ron Duffy
Product Safety Engineer
Design Validation Unit

Agilent Technologies
1900 Garden of the Gods Road
Colorado Springs, CO 80907-3483

719 590 2335 Tel
719 590 3033 Fax
www.agilent.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.

RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[Gelfand, David]

I played upright bass professionally for 20 years, in big bands and jazz
groups, before and while becoming an engineer.  Interest in acoustics led me
to electromagnetics, it was taught by the same teachers.  I still play part
time and enjoy it more.

David

-Original Message-
From: Aschenberg, Mat [mailto:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:15 PM
To: 'Pettit, Ghery'; 'John Woodgate'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



I wonder how many of the engineers on here have been or currently musicians.
I play clarinet and saxiphone. 
I figure the bastard that invented the saxaphone made it out of metal
because they were always burning the bassoons. 


 -Original Message-
 From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com]
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 9:34 AM
 To:   Pettit, Ghery; 'John Woodgate'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
 Subject:  RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...
 
 Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
 .
 .
 .
 .
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The Viola burns longer.  ;)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Pettit, Ghery 
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
 To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 John,
 
 That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.
 
 Ghery 
 former Bassoonist ;)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
 Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 
 I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
 (in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
 EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
 Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing
 out
 a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)
 
 It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.
 
 The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
 nobody blows good. (;-)
 -- 
 Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
 http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
 
 After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 
 
 ---
 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.

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

Visit our web site at:  

RE: Bellcore 1092

[Dave Lorusso]

Dave,

Do you mean GR-1089-CORE?  I searched the Store on www.telcordia.com and
could not find any reference to 1092.

Best regards,

Dave

 -Original Message-
From:   Dave Hutchins [mailto:hutch...@protek-tvs.com] 
Sent:   Wednesday, November 28, 2001 5:59 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Bellcore 1092


Can anyone tell me where I can obtain this document.  What I really need is
the is the conditions of the ring wave from this document.  Can anyone help
me on this?

Best Regards
David W. Hutchins
Director: World Wide Marketing  Applications
ProTek Devices
2929 S. Fair Lane
Tempe, AZ 85282 USA
Direct Dial: 602-414-5101
Company Phone: 602-431-8101
FAX: 602-431-2288
e-mail: hutch...@protek-tvs.com
Web: http://www.protecdevices.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: Hi-Pot OK labels

[Chris Maxwell]

I understand that a label is not required.

I asked in reference to a component (Telecom DC power cable) that we
make in-house.   They aren't serialized, so we aren't going to keep a
test result database cross-referencing serial numbers ...as we would for
serialized products.  We also aren't going to NRTL mark the cables.  It
boils down to a quality issue more than anything.

I was just looking into an efficient way for our manufacturing guys to
identify the tested cables from the untested cables as they are
being routed and stored.  I was looking into the labels as an option.  

A few of the responses have inspired me to look into other, more simple
means such as stamping

Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797
8024

NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | 






 -Original Message-
 From: geor...@lexmark.com [SMTP:geor...@lexmark.com]
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:49 PM
 To:   Chris Maxwell
 Cc:   EMC-PSTC Internet Forum
 Subject:  Re: Hi-Pot OK labels
 
 
 
 Chris,
 
 As I understand it, there is no standards requirement on how or were
 or
 if a OK hi-pot mark is required.  An initial factory inspection for
 a ITE product (UL, CSA, TUV,...) will usually require that the hi-pot
 process in place ensures no walk-arounds, but does not require
 marking.
 Typically, we require the hi-pot operator to scan the bar code on or
 near
 the power rating label, which identifies the S/N of the unit.  This is
 fed to computers which maintain a database of scanned (and presumably
 hi-potted) units.  For your own quality purposes, a label, indelible
 mark, etc. are all acceptable, but not required, means of tracking
 this.
 
 As to agency marks, it was once common for each to sell rolls of marks
 not unlike the way some postage stamps are done.  However, most mfrs
 evolved to a single power rating label which incorpoates the marks in
 the artwork at less cost than stickering separate agency marks.  I had
 thought that the individual stickers were still available, at a price,
 from the main agencies.
 
 George Alspaugh
 
 
 
 
 
 Chris Maxwell chris.maxwell%nettest@interlock.lexmark.com on
 11/28/2001
 04:16:37 PM
 
 Please respond to Chris Maxwell
   chris.maxwell%nettest@interlock.lexmark.com
 
 To:   EMC-PSTC Internet Forum
   emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com
 cc:(bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark)
 Subject:  Hi-Pot OK labels
 
 
 Hi all,
 
 I previously asked about Hi-Pot testing and NRTL labeling.
 
 Ok, so there is no such thing as a standard UL, CSA ... label that can
 be purchased.  Although the logos are available on the website, the
 labels have to be re-invented for every company (yawn).  Seems like
 a
 waste of time to me.. but in these days of layoffs... I guess every
 excuse for employment is OK.
 
 How about the little Hi-Pot OK labels that I have seen?  I would
 assume that these are widely used.
 
 Any sources for these?  Or do we have to go to a print shop and pay a
 tooling charge to make our own (what a waste)?
 
 Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
 email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797
 8024
 
 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
 web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 |
 
 
 
 
 
 

---
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: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[Pettit, Ghery]

Don,

Two options exist for demonstrating compliance with the essential
requirements of the EMC Directive.  You can create a Technical Construction
File with a Competent Body or you can test to the harmonized requirements
applicable for the product you are selling.  If you go the TCF file, you can
do whatever you and the CB agree upon.  If you test to the harmonized
standards, then you must test to all of them and re-test when they change.
The DOW is the date on which the old standard is no longer presumed to show
compliance with the applicable essential requirement of the Directive.  All
products placed on the market in the EU must be shown to be in compliance
with the current harmonized requirements.

Now, in the case that you bring up, if you can show that the standard to
which the product was previously qualified was more stringent than the new
one, you might have a case for not retesting.  However, seldom is the new
standard different from the old only in the test level.  Typically test
methods and technical details of how the test is run will change, making a
direct comparison of the two standards difficult.  For example, EN
50082-1:1992 (the old generic immunity standard for everything except heavy
industrial environments) used IEC 801-3 for radiated immunity and had one
test at 3 V/m.  No modulation.  Level on a field probe placed by the EUT (no
location specified) in any facility you cared to use (bare shielded room,
semi-anechoic chamber, fully anechoic chamber, your father-in-law's cow
pasture).  EN 55024:1998 (ITE specific immunity standard) uses IEC
61000-4-3.  You still test at 3 V/m, but add modulation to the signal (80%
at 1 kHz).  It is now a pre-calibrated field (w/o modulation) with a certain
uniformity of the field required.  You must now use a fully anechoic
chamber, or a semi-anechoic chamber with absorbers on the floor between the
EUT and antenna.  A far more repeatable test.  How would you compare the
two?  I don't think you can reasonably do so.  The addition of modulation on
the signal changes things radically.

Bottom line - I would test.  We did for all products remaining in production
past the cutoff dates for the new ITE standards this summer.

Ghery Pettit
Intel

-Original Message-
From: don_macart...@selinc.com [mailto:don_macart...@selinc.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 10:14 AM
To: Pettit, Ghery
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.




Ghery,

Is it a absolute must to test?  If you have reasonable justification that
your
products are compliant (the new requirement is wimpy), why not just document
your reasoning and continue to sell product after the DOW?

Regards,
Don






Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com on 11/27/2001 02:09:59 PM

Please respond to Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com

To:   'jasonxmall...@netscape.net' jasonxmall...@netscape.net,
  emc-p...@ieee.org
cc:(bcc: Don MacArthur/SEL)
Subject:  RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.




Jason,

You are correct.  All products placed on the market in the EU must be tested
to the latest standard once the magic date (DOW)  for the new standard is
reached.  Also, keep in mind that if a product specific standard is
published it takes precedence over the generic standard and the generic
standard no longer applies to the product family.  For example, EN
55024:1998 is the product specific immunity standard for ITE, so EN
50082-1:1997 is not used for these products.

This is one more example of why I refer to the EMC Directive as The EMC
Professionals Employment Act of 1989.

Ghery Pettit, NCE
Intel Corporation


-Original Message-
From: jasonxmall...@netscape.net [mailto:jasonxmall...@netscape.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 1:10 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



Hi all.

EN 50082-1:1992 was replaced by EN 50082-1:1997. According to the
newapproach.org website, from 1/7/2001 the old version no longer allows one
to presume conformity to the EMC Directive.

Does this mean I need to retest all equipment to the new standard before I
can declare conformance?

My guess is YES.

Thanks in advance for any confirmation or correction.

-Jason
Product Safety Consultant




--




__
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas.
Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape!
http://shopnow.netscape.com/

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at
http://webmail.netscape.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:

RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[Don_MacArthur]

Tuned differently?




Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com on 11/29/2001 08:34:10 AM

Please respond to Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com

To:   Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com, 'John Woodgate'
  j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk, 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
  emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
cc:(bcc: Don MacArthur/SEL)
Subject:  RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.




Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...

Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
.
.
.
.


































The Viola burns longer.  ;)

-Original Message-
From: Pettit, Ghery
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.


John,

That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.

Ghery
former Bassoonist ;)

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing out
a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)

It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.

The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
nobody blows good. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero.

---
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 e-mail may contain SEL confidential information.  The opinions expressed
are not necessarily those of SEL.  Any unauthorized disclosure, distribution or
other use is prohibited.  If you received this e-mail in error, please notify
the sender, permanently delete it, and destroy any printout.  Thank you.



---
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: Mains Cords in the UK and the fuse rating

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Allen chris_al...@eur.3com.com wrote
(in 80256b13.004f5079...@notesmta.eur.3com.com) about 'Mains Cords in
the UK and the fuse rating', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:
For an IT product there is a restriction in the use of mains cords with a cross
sectional area of 0.75mm2 for units up to 6 amps when the cord is greater than
2m in length (EN60950: 2000 section 3.2.5)

This, AIUI, is based on requirements in USA and Continental Europe for
the (6 A?) fuse in the consumer unit to operate correctly. A L-E fault
current of at least 9 A must flow.

Can anyone tell me is there is a requirement (in any standard) specifying a
maximum fuse rating that should be fitted to the plug of such a cord and what 
it
is?
BS1363. It was Table 2 in the 1984 edition, but may have moved. In that
edition, a 13 A fuse was allowed, but you should check with the latest
edition.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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: Hi-Pot OK labels

[georgea]

Chris,

As I understand it, there is no standards requirement on how or were or
if a OK hi-pot mark is required.  An initial factory inspection for
a ITE product (UL, CSA, TUV,...) will usually require that the hi-pot
process in place ensures no walk-arounds, but does not require marking.
Typically, we require the hi-pot operator to scan the bar code on or near
the power rating label, which identifies the S/N of the unit.  This is
fed to computers which maintain a database of scanned (and presumably
hi-potted) units.  For your own quality purposes, a label, indelible
mark, etc. are all acceptable, but not required, means of tracking this.

As to agency marks, it was once common for each to sell rolls of marks
not unlike the way some postage stamps are done.  However, most mfrs
evolved to a single power rating label which incorpoates the marks in
the artwork at less cost than stickering separate agency marks.  I had
thought that the individual stickers were still available, at a price,
from the main agencies.

George Alspaugh





Chris Maxwell chris.maxwell%nettest@interlock.lexmark.com on 11/28/2001
04:16:37 PM

Please respond to Chris Maxwell
  chris.maxwell%nettest@interlock.lexmark.com

To:   EMC-PSTC Internet Forum
  emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com
cc:(bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  Hi-Pot OK labels


Hi all,

I previously asked about Hi-Pot testing and NRTL labeling.

Ok, so there is no such thing as a standard UL, CSA ... label that can
be purchased.  Although the logos are available on the website, the
labels have to be re-invented for every company (yawn).  Seems like a
waste of time to me.. but in these days of layoffs... I guess every
excuse for employment is OK.

How about the little Hi-Pot OK labels that I have seen?  I would
assume that these are widely used.

Any sources for these?  Or do we have to go to a print shop and pay a
tooling charge to make our own (what a waste)?

Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797
8024

NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 |







---
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: LISN Calibration

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Peters, Michael mpet...@analogic.com wrote
(in 61c1e83d9da9d311a871009027d617f001632...@peaexch1.analogic.com)
about 'LISN Calibration', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:
If you have not already done so, I would recommend an isolation transformer.
Many factories and office buildings have a great deal of ambient noise that
will interfere with your measurements.

That could be a bit problematic. The LISN was designed to work with
normal mains supplies, in which the neutral is earthed or earthy. You
may not get the same results with a floating supply.

My LISN has a mains filter on the incoming supply. CISPR16-1 mentions
that this may be necessary and, by implication, allows it.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B691@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:
That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.

My musical education is clearly sadly lacking. I understand that the
saxophone is a metal woodwind. Didn't it come from Brussels, like EU
Directives? (;-)
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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.

EMI receiver desensitization and amplitude overhead

[J.Feldhaar]

Hi all,

this is my first post to the list. Greetings to all!

I am looking for a URL or graphic that shows the headroom necessary for
correct QP emi measurements using an EMI receiver. 

If my information is correct, there must be up to 43.5 dB in excess of
the measurement range for measuring Quasipeak signals correctly,
decreasing when pulse frequency approaches 1 KHz.

I am looking for a source of information or a picture of this graphic.
Note: There are three curves, one each for 200 Hz, 9 KHz and 120 KHz
resolution bandwidth.

Help will be appreciated.

Greetings from ice-cold Germany,

Jochen Feldhaar DH6FAZ

---
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: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

[Ed Eszlari]

I also agree with the 4.4mm reinforced and 2.2mm basic/supp. calculation. I will assume that there is a creepage requirement also and would use pollution 1 in this application as long as the enclosure does not have openings.
Ed

From: vit...@aol.com 
Reply-To: vit...@aol.com 
To: , 
CC: 
Subject: Re: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage] 
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 21:51:04 EST 
 
 
Rich and Xing, 
 
No arguments from me about the clearance of 4.4 mm for reinforced. The other 6.4 mm clearance requirement is probably a misapplication of the clarance rules using the 840 v peak row of Table 3H. 
 
I think the original question may also need to consider creepage requirements. Then again, maybe not. Can the inside of an ac adapter be considered a pollution degree 1 environment? If so, the creepages are determined using the clearance table. Has anyone taken this approach? I presume no ventillation openings are allowed? How good a seal is needed for the enclosure halves and connectors/output cables? 
 
vgl 
 
In a message dated Wed, 28 Nov 2001 7:50:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich Nute writes: 
 
  Hi Xing Weibing: 
  
  
  Here is my answer to the question. 
  
   Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of 
   IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING 
   VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY 
   AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE 
   READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM 
   CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is 
   correct for this situation? regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28 
  
  Since the product is an adapter, I will assume that 
  the question addresses clearance between the mains 
  circuit and a SELV secondary circuit. 
  
  I will also assume that the applicable standard is 
  IEC 60950, either 
  
  2nd Ed (Tables 3 and 4) or 
  3rd Ed (Tables 2H and 2J). 
  
  The parameters are: 
  
  nominal mains voltage: 240 V rms 
  340 V peak 
  working voltage: 364 V rms 
  540 V peak 
  
  The problem is confused because there is 
  
  a set of requirements for working voltage, 
  in Table 3/H, and 
  
  a set of requirements for peak working voltage, 
  Table 4/2J. 
  
  (The 2nd Ed. refers to "repetitive peak voltage;" 
  the 3rd Ed refers to "peak working voltage.") 
  
  According to the standard, if the peak value of the 
  working voltage exceeds the peak value of the mains 
  voltage, then the working voltage in Table 3/2H is 
  taken as the mains voltage. Then, the peak working 
  voltage (aka repetitive peak voltage) is used in 
  Table 4/2J. 
  
  In the example, the peak value of the working voltage 
  exceeds the peak value of the mains voltage. 
  
  The minimum clearance in Table 3/2H for 240 V mains 
  and 240 V working is: 
  
  4.0 mm reinforced 
  2.0 mm basic/supplementary 
  
  The additional clearance in Table 4/2J for 240 V mains 
  and 540 V peak is: 
  
  0.4 mm reinforced (567 V peak) 
  0.2 mm basic/supplemenatry (567 V peak) 
  
  So, the total clearance is: 
  
  4.4 mm reinforced 
  2.2 mm basic/supplementary. 
  
  Arguments? Another view or interpretation? 
  
  
  Best regards, 
  Rich 
  
  
  
  
  --- 
 
 
--- 
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 Heald davehe...@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. 
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.

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 

RE: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals

[John Juhasz]

Interesting thread . . . 
 
At the companies for which I managed the regulatory programs 
over the last 20 years, it has always been engineering's responsibility to
release to 
production a compliant product,and I have always been a member of the
engineering 
department.
In the early days, before regualtory compliance became the industry that it
is now, it was
basically 'putting out the fires' after formal evaluation. After a couple of
costly rework 
projects, 'design for compliance' became my mantra, and I have been able to
carry 
that along to other companies as well. And fortunately for me, it has been
well received.
 
As part of the design team, I am able review all product designs before and
during the
prototype stage and provide guidance/input as necessary. Each time I
announce that the 
product passed the first time (don't get me wrong, I do have the occassional
'gotcha') it gets easier to justify the 'design for compliance' concept.
It's a lot more difficult to cost-effectively rework a product.
So, besides making my job easier (and the cognizant design engineer's as
well), 
'design for compliance' does save costs in the long run. 
Additionally, as part of the corporation's quality team providing the
opportunity
to ensure continued compliance.
 
John Juhasz
Fiber Options
Bohemia, NY
 
-Original Message-
From: Tania Grant [mailto:taniagr...@msn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 11:15 PM
To: John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals



My personal experience agrees with John.   I prefer to work with Engineering
and reporting someplace in Engineering;--  it makes my job easier when
compliance is designed right from the very beginning rather than be
responsible later to get it past agencies.   At that point, it suddenly
became my problem when it did not comply!   When I told management that
they should fix things before we submitted the product formally, the
response was let's see what the agency will do   This left me
frustrated and embarrassed my ego.
 
If you catch things in the very beginning, engineering is usually amenable
to changing things.   Later, it is very difficult and, obviously, much more
costly.
 
taniagr...@msn.com mailto:taniagr...@msn.com 
 
 

- Original Message -
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 2:48 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals
 

I read in !emc-pstc that Mark Werlwas mark.werl...@home.com wrote (in
006701c1782b$69f56020$6401a...@frmt1.sfba.home.com) about 'Quality
Assurance and Product Approvals', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
On the aspect of the where to put Product Safety/Compliance in the
organization discussion bears mentioning on the forum. In general I
advocate that the Product Safety/Compliance department be separate from
Engineering, Sales, and Operations. The Safety/Compliance group should
avoid
conflicts of interest (real or apparent) that may arise in the above
mentioned groups. Even the occasional appearance of a conflicting
interest
can undermine the credibility of the Safety/Compliance team.

But this militates strongly against 'designing-in compliance', and is
very liable to create a 'them and us' conflict between Design
Engineering and Compliance. The *maintenance* of compliance in
manufacture is a Quality function.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero.

---
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: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[Aschenberg, Mat]

I wonder how many of the engineers on here have been or currently musicians.
I play clarinet and saxiphone. 
I figure the bastard that invented the saxaphone made it out of metal
because they were always burning the bassoons. 


 -Original Message-
 From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com]
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 9:34 AM
 To:   Pettit, Ghery; 'John Woodgate'; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
 Subject:  RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...
 
 Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
 .
 .
 .
 .
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The Viola burns longer.  ;)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Pettit, Ghery 
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
 To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 John,
 
 That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.
 
 Ghery 
 former Bassoonist ;)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
 Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
 
 
 
 I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
 (in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
 EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
 Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing
 out
 a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)
 
 It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.
 
 The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
 nobody blows good. (;-)
 -- 
 Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
 http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
 
 After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 
 
 ---
 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.

RE: LISN Calibration

[Chris Maxwell]

Hi Joe,

I made a homemade LISN using a schematic from Clayton R Paul's book.
Our company also bought a pre-compliance LISN from Wayne Kerr.  In my
experience, both are good enough for pre-compliance work.

My calibration is done by measuring products that were previously
tested at an outside lab.  I compare my actual results with thiers.  The
only bad part about this is that you need a product with a failing or
near failing emissions profile to get a good comb of data for
comparison.  Fortunately we had a power suppy about 4 years ago with a
150Khz switching frequency and a slightly failing emissions profile.  It
produced a beautiful set of harmonics at the lab.  So, I calibrated my
setup while I troubleshot this power supply.  This comparison gives me a
rough confidence factor in the setup.  No it's not a calibration
sticker;  but I'll take an actual comparison  over a cal sticker any
day.

I second Michael's opinion regarding the isolation transformer.  Our
measurements were erroneous and noisy (the copier in the other room
produced so much conducted noise that I couldn't see anything from the
DUT)  until I bought an Isolation Transformer.  We bought a Panel
Components part # 82520030.  It has served us well.  It offers the
option to wire it up for a 2:1 ratio, so I use it to create 230VAC for
European products.  

I would also like to add that I use our ESD bench as a pre-compliance
conducted emissions setup.  It already has a ground plane.  I tie the
LISN's ground to this plane as a reference.  Seems to work well.  So I
guess that a hunk of metal for a ground plane is a recommended purchase.


Other items that have proven to be valuable are various line cords with
ends cut and stripped.  These can be used along with wire nuts to
quickly allow your LISN to test products with different line cords ...

There are tricks to wiring ground through the isolation transformer,
wiring DC through your LISN (for DC products) ... it doesn't take a
great deal of money or time to set up for pre-compliance.

Have fun and don't kill yourself!!!

Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797
8024

NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | 




 -Original Message-
 From: Peters, Michael [SMTP:mpet...@analogic.com]
 Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:58 AM
 To:   'marti...@appliedbiosystems.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject:  RE: LISN Calibration
 
 
 Joe,
 
 For piece of mind.  The LISN provides repeatable results for different
 line
 impedances.  Making sure that the LISN impedance is what it is
 supposed to
 be and the insertion loss is satisfactory will give you a better
 comfort
 level when going to the test house.
 
 If you have not already done so, I would recommend an isolation
 transformer.
 Many factories and office buildings have a great deal of ambient noise
 that
 will interfere with your measurements.
 
 If you have an s-parameter network analyzer (that works from 150 kHz
 to 30
 MHz), the calibration is not too difficult to perform and there is a
 procedure outlined in ANSI C63.4 that is easy enough to follow
 (although for
 impedance it doesn't mention you need an RF splitter).
 
 Good Luck!
 
 Michael Peters
 mpet...@ieee.org
 
 -Original Message-
 From: marti...@appliedbiosystems.com
 [mailto:marti...@appliedbiosystems.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:16 PM
 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: LISN Calibration
 
 
 
 We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab.  One of
 the
 tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions
 per
 EN 61326.
 
 I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance
 measurements
 that calibration of the LISN is not required.  However, do you
 recommend
 calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements?  If so, why?
 
 Your responses are appreciated
 
 Regards
 
 Joe Martin
 Applied Biosystems
 
 
 
 
 ---
 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.
 
 

RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[Pettit, Ghery]

Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...

Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
.
.
.
.


































The Viola burns longer.  ;)

-Original Message-
From: Pettit, Ghery 
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.


John,

That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.

Ghery 
former Bassoonist ;)

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing out
a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)

It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.

The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
nobody blows good. (;-)
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals

[Scott Barrows]

Hi All,
When I was with Xerox, Versatec Division, we were placed in the Engineering 
Services Dept. with Drafting and Component
engineering. This worked very well and gave us input to the purchasing 
specifications as well as design
considerations. Our relationship with Engineering was very good, with our 
manager sitting on the change review and
material review boards. We reported ultimately to a Director of Engineering 
Services (and a good Director if you are
out there Joyce), but not a VP.

Scott


leeschm...@aol.com wrote:

 Hi all,

 Interesting discussion.  Here is my 2 cents.  Must be about $1.00 worth by
 now.

 I once came upon an interesting compromise as to the organization chart
 position of compliance.  They put it in test or quality, but funded it
 through the engineering budget.  Not perfect, but it prevented engineering
 from squeezing the last 0.5 dB or hi pot voltage from the device.  However it
 does encourage them to save money and design in compliance.

 I suppose in the best of all possible worlds this would not be necessary but
 it did seem to work.  A VP of compliance is probably work the best, of course
 if they chose me for the position.

 Lee Schmitz
 Electrical safety compliance consultant

 ---
 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: LISN Calibration

[Ken Javor]

There is nothing to go bad in a LISN if it hasn't been physically damaged,
which should be obvious by inspection.  If there is any concern, a spot
check or insertion loss sweep with a tracking generator or a sig gen is
perfectly okay for assessing LISN performance.  And the analyzer/generator
need not be calibrated either - the chance that all three devices are off by
the same amount are vanishingly small.


on 11/29/01 6:40 AM, Sundstrom Michael (NMP-RD/Dallas) at
michael.sundst...@nokia.com wrote:

 
 The only problem I see with not calibrating the LISN is you wouldn't
 know if / or when it goes bad until you cross check it with a calibrated
 LISN. 
 
 I would suggest you run your precompliance lab just like the real lab.
 This way you'll get the same results as the accredited lab you test
 with. No surprises this way.
 
 Michael Sundstrom
 NOKIA 
 TCC Dallas / EMC
 ofc: (972) 374-1462
 cell: (817) 917-5021
 amateur call: KB5UKT
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: ext Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 9:06 PM
 To: marti...@appliedbiosystems.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
 Subject: Re: LISN Calibration
 
 
 
 I would say that if it came calibrated from the manufacturer and has not
 suffered visible damage it should be okay.  It is easy to check a few
 spot
 frequencies or use a spectrum analyzer with tracking generator or
 separate
 sweeping sig gen to check performance.  Either way it is not a big deal.
 
 on 11/28/01 4:15 PM, marti...@appliedbiosystems.com at
 marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote:
 
 
 We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab.  One of
 the
 tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions
 per
 EN 61326.
 
 I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance
 measurements
 that calibration of the LISN is not required.  However, do you
 recommend
 calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements?  If so, why?
 
 Your responses are appreciated
 
 Regards
 
 Joe Martin
 Applied Biosystems
 
 
 
 
 ---
 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.
 


---
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 

RE: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[Pettit, Ghery]

John,

That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.

Ghery 
former Bassoonist ;)

-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.



I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B685@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Hey, John.  I resemble that remark.  I'm not complaining, just pointing out
a practical result of 89/336/EEC. ;)

It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.

The Directive is thus unlike a bassoon, which is an ill woodwind that
nobody blows good. (;-)
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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: Hi-Pot OK labels

[DUFFY,RON (A-ColSprings,ex1)]

Hi Chris,

I first would ask way do you need the label?

If it is to validate the process, then any label you purchase would be ok.

If it is proof that a required safety test was preformed on a product for
protection during litigation it is any entirely different matter.

Here at the Design Validation Unit of Agilent we had required the person
performing the hi-pot test to complete the safety portion of the paper work
immediately after the hi-pot test. This paper work was then archived for
very long time as dictated in our records retention policy, in our case 35
years.  This became quite a burden. For an alternative we started stamping
our products with a rubber stamp using an ink that was very tenacious. Now
if we need proof of a safety test during litigation the product its self is
the proof. 


Ron Duffy
Product Safety Engineer
Design Validation Unit

Agilent Technologies
1900 Garden of the Gods Road
Colorado Springs, CO 80907-3483

719 590 2335 Tel
719 590 3033 Fax
www.agilent.com

 

-Original Message-
From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 14:17
To: EMC-PSTC Internet Forum
Subject: Hi-Pot OK labels



Hi all,

I previously asked about Hi-Pot testing and NRTL labeling. 

Ok, so there is no such thing as a standard UL, CSA ... label that can
be purchased.  Although the logos are available on the website, the
labels have to be re-invented for every company (yawn).  Seems like a
waste of time to me.. but in these days of layoffs... I guess every
excuse for employment is OK.

How about the little Hi-Pot OK labels that I have seen?  I would
assume that these are widely used.  

Any sources for these?  Or do we have to go to a print shop and pay a
tooling charge to make our own (what a waste)?

Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797
8024

NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | 






---
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: LISN Calibration

[Sundstrom Michael (NMP-RD/Dallas)]

The only problem I see with not calibrating the LISN is you wouldn't
know if / or when it goes bad until you cross check it with a calibrated
LISN. 

I would suggest you run your precompliance lab just like the real lab.
This way you'll get the same results as the accredited lab you test
with. No surprises this way.

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


-Original Message-
From: ext Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 9:06 PM
To: marti...@appliedbiosystems.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: LISN Calibration



I would say that if it came calibrated from the manufacturer and has not
suffered visible damage it should be okay.  It is easy to check a few
spot
frequencies or use a spectrum analyzer with tracking generator or
separate
sweeping sig gen to check performance.  Either way it is not a big deal.

on 11/28/01 4:15 PM, marti...@appliedbiosystems.com at
marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote:

 
 We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab.  One of
the
 tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions
per
 EN 61326.
 
 I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance
measurements
 that calibration of the LISN is not required.  However, do you
recommend
 calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements?  If so, why?
 
 Your responses are appreciated
 
 Regards
 
 Joe Martin
 Applied Biosystems
 
 
 
 
 ---
 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.

Re: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals

[LeeSchmitz]

Hi all,

Interesting discussion.  Here is my 2 cents.  Must be about $1.00 worth by 
now.

I once came upon an interesting compromise as to the organization chart 
position of compliance.  They put it in test or quality, but funded it 
through the engineering budget.  Not perfect, but it prevented engineering 
from squeezing the last 0.5 dB or hi pot voltage from the device.  However it 
does encourage them to save money and design in compliance.

I suppose in the best of all possible worlds this would not be necessary but 
it did seem to work.  A VP of compliance is probably work the best, of course 
if they chose me for the position.

Lee Schmitz
Electrical safety compliance consultant

---
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: LISN Calibration

[Peters, Michael]

Joe,

For piece of mind.  The LISN provides repeatable results for different line
impedances.  Making sure that the LISN impedance is what it is supposed to
be and the insertion loss is satisfactory will give you a better comfort
level when going to the test house.

If you have not already done so, I would recommend an isolation transformer.
Many factories and office buildings have a great deal of ambient noise that
will interfere with your measurements.

If you have an s-parameter network analyzer (that works from 150 kHz to 30
MHz), the calibration is not too difficult to perform and there is a
procedure outlined in ANSI C63.4 that is easy enough to follow (although for
impedance it doesn't mention you need an RF splitter).

Good Luck!

Michael Peters
mpet...@ieee.org

-Original Message-
From: marti...@appliedbiosystems.com
[mailto:marti...@appliedbiosystems.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:16 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: LISN Calibration



We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab.  One of the
tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions per
EN 61326.

I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance measurements
that calibration of the LISN is not required.  However, do you recommend
calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements?  If so, why?

Your responses are appreciated

Regards

Joe Martin
Applied Biosystems




---
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: LISN Calibration

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote (in
offb519b0f.d5302b2b-on88256b13.3...@pe-c.com) about 'LISN
Calibration', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance measurements
that calibration of the LISN is not required.  However, do you recommend
calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements?  If so, why?

Well, you certainly need to know that it is working and not giving you
results that are 10 dB or more in error!

The procedure in F.8 of CISPR16-1 is much better that was originally
proposed, which I complained loudly was incomprehensible, but it is
still rather more complicated than necessary. You don't need a network
analyser: a signal generator and a spectrum analyser or calibrated
receiver will do quite well.

Is this a purchased LISN or did you make your own? The constructional
details in CISPR16-1 are also vastly over-complicated  - that huge
inductor is just crazy unless you really need it to carry 25 A. I made
one that will carry 10A without overheating for quite long enough to do
a test, and compares in performance quite well with a purchased product.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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: FW: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals - 2

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Charles Grasso chasgra...@hotmail.com wrote
(in f32rklpgtfur2iz2mb100022...@hotmail.com) about 'FW: Quality
Assurance and Product Approvals - 2', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
My point is that IF the regulatory agencies
allow ( however inadvertantly) products on
the market place that fail then the message
managers get is that it can't be that
important.

Incidentally it is my understanding that the
FCC Class B procedures have resulted in PC that
exceed the ClassB spec by as much as 20db.

In principle, emission limits are accepted as satisfactory and retained
if the number of complaints of interference is acceptably low. The
emission level that causes interference is not a fixed value but depends
very greatly on the location of the emitting equipment relative to
potential victim equipment. So even emitters that are seriously non-
compliant **may** not cause actual interference. As the disclaimers in
many EMC emission standards say, the emission level that causes
interference at a particular site may be *lower* than the established
limit.

While there are few survey results publicly available, AFAIK, 'thought
experiments' indicate that in any given geographical area, there are
'hot spots' where emission levels are critical, and the total area of
these hot spots may be less than 0.1% of the whole area. It is possible
to calculate the effects of introducing emitters into such an area,
taking into account numbers of emitters, their distribution of emission
levels and the number and sensitivity of hot spots. I have not heard
that there is any uniformity in the results of such calculations that
allow useful conclusions to be drawn.

So, in practice, releasing non-compliant products is like shooting at an
unknown number of invisible targets of different sizes, with the
intention of **missing** all of them!
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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: Hi-Pot OK labels

[Tania Grant]

Chris,

I think you have to generate your own labels or buy them to order.  Size would 
be an issue.   Proper glue would be another issue depending upon the surface 
material these labels are to be affixed (metal, plastic), since certain glues 
do not adhere to certain plastics.These Hi-pot OK labels are very likely 
part of an internal Quality Control process which provides visual 
differentiation between those that have been tested from those that have not.   

taniagr...@msn.com

- Original Message -
From: Chris Maxwell
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 2:19 PM
To: EMC-PSTC Internet Forum
Subject: Hi-Pot OK labels
  

Hi all,

I previously asked about Hi-Pot testing and NRTL labeling.

Ok, so there is no such thing as a standard UL, CSA ... label that can
be purchased.  Although the logos are available on the website, the
labels have to be re-invented for every company (yawn).  Seems like a
waste of time to me.. but in these days of layoffs... I guess every
excuse for employment is OK.

How about the little Hi-Pot OK labels that I have seen?  I would
assume that these are widely used.

Any sources for these?  Or do we have to go to a print shop and pay a
tooling charge to make our own (what a waste)?

Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797
8024

NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 |






---
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: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals

[Tania Grant]

My personal experience agrees with John.   I prefer to work with Engineering 
and reporting someplace in Engineering;--  it makes my job easier when 
compliance is designed right from the very beginning rather than be 
responsible later to get it past agencies.   At that point, it suddenly became 
my problem when it did not comply!   When I told management that they should 
fix things before we submitted the product formally, the response was let's 
see what the agency will do   This left me frustrated and embarrassed my 
ego.

If you catch things in the very beginning, engineering is usually amenable to 
changing things.   Later, it is very difficult and, obviously, much more costly.

taniagr...@msn.com
  
  
- Original Message -
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 2:48 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals
  

I read in !emc-pstc that Mark Werlwas mark.werl...@home.com wrote (in
006701c1782b$69f56020$6401a...@frmt1.sfba.home.com) about 'Quality
Assurance and Product Approvals', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
On the aspect of the where to put Product Safety/Compliance in the
organization discussion bears mentioning on the forum. In general I
advocate that the Product Safety/Compliance department be separate from
Engineering, Sales, and Operations. The Safety/Compliance group should 
 avoid
conflicts of interest (real or apparent) that may arise in the above
mentioned groups. Even the occasional appearance of a conflicting interest
can undermine the credibility of the Safety/Compliance team.

But this militates strongly against 'designing-in compliance', and is
very liable to create a 'them and us' conflict between Design
Engineering and Compliance. The *maintenance* of compliance in
manufacture is a Quality function.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero.

---
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: FW: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals - 2

[Charles Grasso]

Hi Dan,

No arguement here.

My point is that IF the regulatory agencies
allow ( however inadvertantly) products on
the market place that fail then the message
managers get is that it can't be that
important.

Incidentally it is my understanding that the
FCC Class B procedures have resulted in PC that
exceed the ClassB spec by as much as 20db.





From: Dan Teninty dteni...@dtec-associates.com
Reply-To: Dan Teninty dteni...@dtec-associates.com
To: Charles Grasso chasgra...@hotmail.com, 
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

Subject: RE: FW: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 10:15:43 -0800


Charles,

I would like to offer an explanation for EMC limits being set where they 
are
and a reason for meeting or beating the limits. I agree, 0.5 dB doesn't 
seem

like the end of the world and under management guidance/pressure to ship
product and produce revenue, it takes a lot of conviction to announce that
an additional turn or some tweaking of the design is required.

Those who have ever supplied avionics or anything electric to Boeing have
read somewhere in the spec that Boeing guarantees a certain level of
performance from the aircraft electrical system. Frequency stability, THC,
Voltage tolerance, etc. GREAT NEWS ! think the designers, until later in 
the

spec they read the part about the stringent requirements on the box going
into the airplane. It seems you can't have clean power without having clean
boxes.

The EMC limits in the standards are derived with some exceptions more or
less along the limits established long ago by MIL-STD 461/462. These limits
are well below where they would create problems in the environment, but
allow for the inevitable degradation in product performance that can occur
through component value shift, environmental conditions, and other fugitive
variables.

In order to be able to set limits for Radiated/Conducted susceptibility, an
assumption has to be made about the Radiated/Conducted emissions and how
much radiated/conducted noise there is in an intended environment.

If, the product works fine was the criteria for emissions, then the task
of hardening products against radiated and conducted energy would become
much more difficult.

My $0.02

Daniel E. Teninty, P.E.
Managing Partner
DTEC Associates LLC
Streamlining The Compliance Process
Advancing New Products To Market
http://www.dtec-associates.com
(509) 443-0215
(509) 443-0181 fax

-Original Message-
From: Charles Grasso [mailto:chasgra...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 9:29 AM
To: dteni...@dtec-associates.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: FW: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals


Hi all,

I have been following this discussion with great interest
and could not resist adding my 2c.

Lest face it - EMC is nothing more than pure overhead to
any corporation. We all have experience of products that
work perfectly fine yet fail the emissions profile by
0.5dB. I will contend that this experience far outweighs the
opposite .Spinning a board or adding ferrites or adding
shielding does nothing to help our discipline reputation.
Couple that with the twilight zone impression of EMC
and one can easily understand why most companies
implement EMC into their process reluctantly.

I will add to that one important factor The regulatory
bodies - especially the FCC. Thanks in large part to
the new FCC Class B compliance procedure ( which
inadvertantly allows failing products into the market
place) companies are more convinced that ever that
EMC is more of an annoyance than a necessity. ( Some
exceptions duly noted..)

Unlike safety, there is no perceived benefit in squeezing
that extra 0.5db out of the emissions profile at a cost
od even .03c. The saving grace might be the immunity
standards. I have had a whole lot more help when the
design engineer actually witnesses his product doing
wierd things.

NARTE is straying in the direction of elitism. Worse than
that they now have professors offering questions for inclusion in
the NARTE exam. We need to be vigilant and keep the
infulence of the academics to a minimum. Example:
The ACES (Applied Computations Society) started a
a group with the goal of PRACTICAL applications
for comutation ..sound familiar. ?? It wasn't long before
the academics (Phds  the like) dominated the group
and turned it to a purely theoretical group - a place
to publish papers etc
Now don't get me wrong.I am all for professors that are willing to teach 
and

guide and mentor. There is how ever a human tendancy
towards creeping elegance and we ned to ensure that the
EMC discipline does not tend in that direction.

My 2c

Charles Grasso
Ansoft Corporation


From: Dan Teninty dteni...@dtec-associates.com
Reply-To: Dan Teninty dteni...@dtec-associates.com
To: PSTC IEEE-EMC emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: FW: Quality Assurance and Product Approvals
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:11:38 -0800


Rich,

After sending you my reply, I thought that I would open it up 

Re: LISN Calibration

[Ken Javor]

I would say that if it came calibrated from the manufacturer and has not
suffered visible damage it should be okay.  It is easy to check a few spot
frequencies or use a spectrum analyzer with tracking generator or separate
sweeping sig gen to check performance.  Either way it is not a big deal.

on 11/28/01 4:15 PM, marti...@appliedbiosystems.com at
marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote:

 
 We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab.  One of the
 tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions per
 EN 61326.
 
 I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance measurements
 that calibration of the LISN is not required.  However, do you recommend
 calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements?  If so, why?
 
 Your responses are appreciated
 
 Regards
 
 Joe Martin
 Applied Biosystems
 
 
 
 
 ---
 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: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

[VitoGL]

Rich and Xing,

No arguments from me about the clearance of 4.4 mm for reinforced.  The other 
6.4 mm clearance requirement is probably a misapplication of the clarance rules 
using the 840 v peak row of Table 3H.

I think the original question may also need to consider creepage requirements.  
Then again, maybe not.  Can the inside of an ac adapter be considered a 
pollution degree 1 environment?  If so, the creepages are determined using the 
clearance table.  Has anyone taken this approach?  I presume no ventillation 
openings are allowed?  How good a seal is needed for the enclosure halves and 
connectors/output cables?

vgl

In a message dated Wed, 28 Nov 2001  7:50:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, Rich 
Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com writes:

 Hi Xing Weibing:
 
 
 Here is my answer to the question.
 
 Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE
READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM
CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
correct for this situation?  regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28
 
 Since the product is an adapter, I will assume that
 the question addresses clearance between the mains
 circuit and a SELV secondary circuit.
 
 I will also assume that the applicable standard is
 IEC 60950, either 
 
 2nd Ed (Tables 3 and 4) or 
 3rd Ed (Tables 2H and 2J).
 
 The parameters are:
 
 nominal mains voltage: 240 V rms
340 V peak
 working voltage:   364 V rms
540 V peak
 
 The problem is confused because there is 
 
 a set of requirements for working voltage, 
 in Table 3/H, and 
 
 a set of requirements for peak working voltage, 
 Table 4/2J.  
 
 (The 2nd Ed. refers to repetitive peak voltage; 
 the 3rd Ed refers to peak working voltage.)
 
 According to the standard, if the peak value of the
 working voltage exceeds the peak value of the mains
 voltage, then the working voltage in Table 3/2H is 
 taken as the mains voltage.  Then, the peak working
 voltage (aka repetitive peak voltage) is used in
 Table 4/2J.
 
 In the example, the peak value of the working voltage
 exceeds the peak value of the mains voltage.
 
 The minimum clearance in Table 3/2H for 240 V mains
 and 240 V working is:
 
 4.0 mm reinforced
 2.0 mm basic/supplementary
 
 The additional clearance in Table 4/2J for 240 V mains
 and 540 V peak is:
 
 0.4 mm reinforced (567 V peak)
 0.2 mm basic/supplemenatry (567 V peak)
 
 So, the total clearance is:
 
 4.4 mm reinforced
 2.2 mm basic/supplementary.
 
 Arguments?  Another view or interpretation?
 
 
 Best regards,
 Rich
 
 
 
 
 ---


---
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: [Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

[Rich Nute]

Hi Xing Weibing:


Here is my answer to the question.

Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
   IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
   VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
   AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE
   READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM
   CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
   correct for this situation?  regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28

Since the product is an adapter, I will assume that
the question addresses clearance between the mains
circuit and a SELV secondary circuit.

I will also assume that the applicable standard is
IEC 60950, either 

2nd Ed (Tables 3 and 4) or 
3rd Ed (Tables 2H and 2J).

The parameters are:

nominal mains voltage: 240 V rms
   340 V peak
working voltage:   364 V rms
   540 V peak

The problem is confused because there is 

a set of requirements for working voltage, 
in Table 3/H, and 

a set of requirements for peak working voltage, 
Table 4/2J.  

(The 2nd Ed. refers to repetitive peak voltage; 
the 3rd Ed refers to peak working voltage.)

According to the standard, if the peak value of the
working voltage exceeds the peak value of the mains
voltage, then the working voltage in Table 3/2H is 
taken as the mains voltage.  Then, the peak working
voltage (aka repetitive peak voltage) is used in
Table 4/2J.

In the example, the peak value of the working voltage
exceeds the peak value of the mains voltage.

The minimum clearance in Table 3/2H for 240 V mains
and 240 V working is:

4.0 mm reinforced
2.0 mm basic/supplementary

The additional clearance in Table 4/2J for 240 V mains
and 540 V peak is:

0.4 mm reinforced (567 V peak)
0.2 mm basic/supplemenatry (567 V peak)

So, the total clearance is:

4.4 mm reinforced
2.2 mm basic/supplementary.

Arguments?  Another view or interpretation?


Best regards,
Rich




---
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.

LISN Calibration

[MartinJP]

We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab.  One of the
tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions per
EN 61326.

I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance measurements
that calibration of the LISN is not required.  However, do you recommend
calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements?  If so, why?

Your responses are appreciated

Regards

Joe Martin
Applied Biosystems




---
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: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that jasonxmall...@netscape.net wrote (in
40555e2a.2ee8b103.73ea6...@netscape.net) about 'Revised EMC standards
and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Two more questions

Newgroup Lingo?

In the following, IIRC means If I Recall Correctly

Yes.

Declaring to Essential Requirements
=
If I have been declaring to the essential requirements of the EMC Directive 
using a Competent Bodies test plan and oversight, does the revision of 
standards 
that may have been used in whole or in part require re-evaluation by the 
Competent Body?

You have to ask the Competent Body in such a case. 
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. 

---
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.