RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Gregg Kervill]

There is a problem with  "..the reader is guaranteed to get the latest
revision as stored in our Document Control system."  

The latest drawing has NO RELEVANCE WHATEVER to the CE Marking File. What we
are required to record is the "As Built Standard" of the product tested - in
terms of its Safety or EMC performance. 

It is for precisely this reason that UL/CSA/et al use specially written
Product Descriptions to allow manufacturing follow-up inspection. 

Evaluation for safety (and EMC) relates to ONE PRODUCT (the type-test model)
- if current production standard deviates significantly (in safety or emc
terms) from that original type-test model then re-evaluation is required to
limit potential corporate liability.


The EU Enforcement office does not need to know what the latest product is
supposed to look like - he will have the 'smoking gun' in his hand! 

If it has injured someone then (under EU Law) it will be classified as
unsafe. The issues following this may go something like this:

* Was this product properly tested?
* Is the product tested the 'same as' the one that caused the injury?
* Is this a random problem or are all products like this one?
* Do we need to recall all products?


If the product was not properly tested then there is a breach of EU and
National Law - this may involve actions involving Companies - Products and
People (individual prosecutions).

If the defect is not random - but due to a significant difference between
the TYPE TEST MODEL and the 'Smoking Gun' then it is likely (and I would
hope) that a RAPEX report (RAPid Exchange of information) would be filed to
Brussels so that all member states can be warned and further injury
prevented.



The advice I offer is "focus on the principles - reduce risk - reduce
liability - preserve evidence - aim for Quality don't design down to the
MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LIMIT".




Best regards

Gregg




-Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Chris Maxwell
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 1:49 PM
To: Gary McInturff; Nick Williams; Stephen Irving
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies


Gary,

I'm with you on this one.  I consider electronic availability to be equal
to, if not superior to, having the documents on "European Soil".  

My feeling is that: as long as the documentation explains what the CE mark
means; and points the user in the right direction for getting the files;
then files can be emailed at a moment's notice; and the reader is guaranteed
to get the latest revision as stored in our Document Control system. 

I don't think that you can make the equivalent statements about any method
of keeping paper copies at any location.

Of course, these are just my opinions and interpretations.  I haven't had to
tell them to a judge (does CENELEC have a judge?); but I believe that the
reasoning is sound.

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: Gary McInturff [SMTP:gary.mcintu...@worldwidepackets.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 10:38 AM
> To:   Nick Williams; Stephen Irving
> Cc:   emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies
>
>
>   Does electronic storage of the documents make any difference? The
DoC, the test reports, BOM's, drawings and Design verification tests are all
stored electronically and can be dumped from any printer in the world.
Obviously, they would have electronic signatures.
>   Gary
>  
>
>

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
<>

Re: Bendable circuit boards

[Doug McKean]

Do a search with www.google.com for "flex circuit". 
Worked with this type of thing over 15 years ago.  
This particular technology has a long mature history.  
Started with having to fold-up and pack circuits into 
tight spaces in missles. 

Regards, Doug McKean 


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

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

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

ETSI mechanical specs ETSI 300-019-2.3

[Gary McInturff]

I'm lost and looking for just a quick sanity check.  We normally don't 
need to comply with these specifications so I don't yet have the underlying 
standards IEC60068-2-14 method Nb, for example.
Table 5 of the ETSI test spec for air temperature says for air/air
Test Severity is -40/+30 and a 1C/min change. 
The duration says 5 cycles T1 = 3h
Assuming by cycle they mean up and back that only accounts for 140 
minutes out of the 210 minutes in the 3 hour test cycle. Are they trying to 
tell me that there is a dwell time and teach level, of about 35 minutes each. 
That at least accounts for the missing 70 minutes?
Gary


---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: High Voltage Relay HELP!!!

[Gregg Kervill]

How low is 'low'?

The simplest way is to make it a Limited Current Source then the relay is
not a safety critical component (and redundant)  can be purely functional
and the operator will not feel any pain if it fails.



Best regards

Gregg



-Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of brian_ku...@leco.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 3:34 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: High Voltage Relay HELP!!!


Happy Holidays Group,

Let me set the scene for you:

We have a piece of laboratory equipment that has a 10,000 volt low current
power
supply that puts a high potential onto a small metal sample as it is being
tested.  When the operator opens a door to remove the sample we have to turn
off
the high voltage to protect the operator.

We have been looking for a High Voltage Relay to do the job without luck.
We
have found several that are rated for 10,000 volts, but the creepage and
clearance spacing between the pins don't seem to match what the
IEC61010-1:2001
standard says.

If I am reading the standard correctly, the creepage is the big problem.
Table
7 calls for a spacing of 40mm on pc cards pollution degree 1.  This seems
like a
lot.  The clearance would be 30.3mm  -  31.6mm according to Table 5.  We
have
one relay that is rated 10,000 volts, but it only has 23mm between the
contact
and the coil pins.  How can this be?  Am I looking at something wrong here?

I can't find any high voltage relays with any kind of agency approvals.

1. Am I figuring out the creepage distance correctly or am I missing
something?

2. If I do have to meet the spacings listed above, does anyone know of a
good
source for a compliant relay?

3.  Anyone have tips and suggestions how to minimize spacings in high
voltage
circuits?

Thanks to all.
Brian Kunde
LECO Corp.

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"


---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Gregg Kervill]

The purpose was not to confuse the two issues but (obviously I failed) to
make it clear that:

1- the CE Marking REPORTS relate to the product tested.

2- where there is about doubt it is cheaper (in the long term) to take the
higher path.

The reasons for trying to make there points is that (from my personal
experience) there will be a number of individuals that will look for the
easiest - quickest and cheapest solution.

Whereas an experienced regulatory engineer can identify the most expedient
for individual situations it is most likely that a non-professional (in
regulatory terms) may use a solution out of context and get it horribly
wrong.

Hence I always (for the sake of clarity) try to go back to basics.

Best regards

Gregg

-Original Message-
From: Gary McInturff [mailto:gary.mcintu...@worldwidepackets.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 10:22 AM
To: gr...@test4safety.com; Chris Maxwell; Nick Williams; Stephen Irving
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

I'm not sure why you confuse information gathering and (maybe
particularly) quality with paper storage or electronic storage.
The reader will get exactly what they ask for whether or not it is
the current model. At a minimum products are marked with their part numbers
and date of manufacturer. If I haven't already stored the BOM when the
project was completed, a very simple search of the electronic data base
allows me to pull up the BOM's and drawings in effect, for the part in you
hand. Surely any minimal quality system insures that the product is built as
directed by the BOM's and drawings actually in effect at the time of
manufacture.
Once asked for a specific product you either go through some paper
heap in a file cabinet or you go through bits in an electronic file cabinet.
How does any of this equate to minimum acceptable limits - simple
seems efficient to me.
Gary



-Original Message-
From: Gregg Kervill [mailto:gr...@test4safety.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 6:58 AM
To: 'Chris Maxwell'; Gary McInturff; 'Nick Williams'; 'Stephen Irving'
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies


There is a problem with  "..the reader is guaranteed to get the latest
revision as stored in our Document Control system."

The advice I offer is "focus on the principles - reduce risk - reduce
liability - preserve evidence - aim for Quality don't design down to the
MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LIMIT".


---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: AV terminations

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Dan Pierce  wrote (in
<77181e93ba2ad41187650090279c18a002c00...@exchsrvr1.indy.escient.com>)
about 'AV terminations' on Wed, 11 Dec 2002:
>I was wondering what the typical load termination to use for audio and video
>RCA connections on a typical receiver, both in and out. 

Sources are 1 kohm to 2 kohm, inputs are 10 k to 22 k.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: TNV Test Generator

[John Allen]

Peter

Thanks for that - quite a different background to how it seemed to read to
me!

But in that case it does seem a bit of a "brutal" test to apply to guard
against a hazard caused solely by a telecomms-circuit source - surely a
relatively low power source would be appropriate?

Any idea why they did not more closely specify the equipment to be used?

Regards

Johh Allen


-Original Message-
From: Peter L. Tarver [mailto:peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com]
Sent: 12 December 2002 16:04
To: John Allen; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: TNV Test Generator


John, et al -

No this is not the power cross test, which is described in
Annex NAC of CSA/UL60950, third ed.  This test is intended
to simulate continuous ringing from the network, is akin the
an SELV reliability test and, IIRC, was added to the base
IEC 60950 standard at the behest of the French, due to
limitations in their ability to guarantee cadenced ringing
at all locations in their networks.

Don Boroski is correct about test setup, though I'd use a
variable autotransformer after an isolation transformer to
set the voltage, rather than just taking it off of the line.

As to real world power cross, on 15NON2000 I forwarded an
unedited copy of a usenet posting containing a link to the
Orange County on 15NOV2000, where power cross caused "some
small fires" and fire fighters evacuated several homes.
Because my post is not in the mindcruiser archive and the
link in it to the newspaper article is now broken, I've
placed a copy in the Info Pieces in the telecom general
topics category on the mindcruiser site.  The poster's
remarks are also very interesting.


Regards,

Peter L. Tarver, PE
Product Safety Manager
Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
San Jose, CA
peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com


_
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed
Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit
http://www.worldcom.com


*
Copyright ERA Technology Ltd. 2002. (www.era.co.uk). All rights reserved. 
The information supplied in this Commercial Communication should be treated
in confidence.
No liability whatsoever is accepted for any loss or damage 
suffered as a result of accessing this message or any attachments.

_
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed 
Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit 
http://www.worldcom.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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Importance of EMC

[Neil Helsby]

I would endorse other postings. One important additional note is to think what 
it would cost if the product was found to suffer, say, excess emissions.

A trip to a test-house would take one to two days to discover the 
problem. If the expertise of the test-house was then used to solve this 
problem and it takes three weeks to do that (for example, finding the 
source of emission for a clock based emission that could be from multiple 
locations) what is the cost? If the implementation then needs a 
significant change to a product, what is the cost of updating all the 
product in production and, if a subcontractor is involved, how many days 
delay would this create? Then, of course, those customers who are 
complaining may want their money back or an improved model and so it 
could go on. Such a situation does not have to arise from government 
authorities – just a group of angry customers who may make their 
dissatisfaction known via the media who love to make public such stories.

Just a few personal thoughts,

Neil 


**
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: AV terminations

[Colgan, Chris]

Correct for audio but video is usually 75ohms, input and output.

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


> I read in !emc-pstc that Dan Pierce  wrote (in
> <77181e93ba2ad41187650090279c18a002c00...@exchsrvr1.indy.escient.com>)
> about 'AV terminations' on Wed, 11 Dec 2002:
> >I was wondering what the typical load termination to use for audio and
> video
> >RCA connections on a typical receiver, both in and out. 
> 
> Sources are 1 kohm to 2 kohm, inputs are 10 k to 22 k.
> -- 
> 


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

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

Important Note: Any typographical, clerical or other error in this 
communication is subject to correction without any liability on 
the part of TAG McLaren Audio Limited. Any orders placed shall
be subject to acceptance by TAG McLaren Audio Limited on its 
standard terms and conditions of sale which shall govern the 
contract for the sale and purchase of the products ordered to the
exclusion of any other terms and conditions.

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

**  
   Please visit us at www.tagmclaren.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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Nick Williams 
wrote (in ) about 'Location of CE
DoCs - electronic copies' on Wed, 11 Dec 2002:
>"Whereas it is essential that, before issuing an EC declaration of 
>conformity, the manufacturer or his authorised representative 
>established in the Community should provide a technical construction 
>file; whereas it is not, however, essential that all documentation be
>permanently available in a material manner, but it must be made 
>available on demand; whereas it need not include detailed plans of the
>sub-assemblies used in manufacturing the machines, unless knowledge 
>of these is indispensable in order to ascertain conformity with 
>essential safety requirements;
>
>My reading of this is that so long as you can deliver the document on 
>paper when requested by the authorities, how you store it is up to 
>you.

It is desperately bad drafting to put *requirements* in the 'Whereas'
part of the document.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: TNV Test Generator

[Sam Davis]

In the US, aren't overhead power lines in the 10 kV range?  The power
companies send power down the lines in kV (with relatively low current), and
in the neighborhood of the customer, they have a large transformer which
brings the voltage down to the 120 V range, with 100s of amps for that short
run.  The reason for this transmission scheme is that power (and power loss)
is equal to I^2 R, so the higher the voltage, the lower the current
necessary, and thus lower power loss over miles of resistance.

Anyway, my point here is that the power line cross at the overhead poles
won't just put 120V on the phone lines, but 10kV, likely incinerating the
line.   I'm not sure where the power line cross test is simulating, but it's
not at the overhead poles.

Besides that, most telephone wiring is buried.  It is becoming increasingly
rare to have "telephone poles" holding telephone wires.  I'm not saying this
is a reason to remove this requirement, because as long as the condition may
exist in a normal or single fault (storm), there is a need to evaluate
and/or test for it.

Just my 2C,
Sam

-Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of John Allen
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:43 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: TNV Test Generator



Hi Folks

Is this not just the old UL/CSA (UL 1457/1950 etc) test to simulate a 120V
power line falling onto the external POTS (etc)cable?

In which case the test generator would be as per the relevant UL/CSA specs,
and from memory that is similar to what has been suggested by Ken Javor or
Don Borowski.

This test was carried out because in North Americal most telephone cables
and power cables are strung on poles - and the lines contact each other when
the poles get knocked down by the awful weather (and/or awful drivers in
some cases!) they often get in many states (Thank goodness I live in the UK
- we don't get as much weather like that!)

BTW, IMHO:
a) Instead of a default of 120V, the test should specify the default to be
application of the maximum nominal supply voltage of the equipment being
tested, since that is likely to represent more closely the supply voltage on
the power poles where the equipment is to be installed. [i.e. it would be
120V for N. America, but it would be 230V for Europe - and so on].

b) Even the latter does not address the problem that many overhead power
distribution cables are 3-phase - so the test voltage should be the maximum
phase-to-phase voltage in question.

However, it has to said that the above changes would not go down well with
suppliers of existing certified equipment - and I have no history to prove
that the existing test is anything but adequate.

Does anyone else know of "real world" problems that this test does not
cover?

John Allen
Technical Consultant
Electromagnetics, Safety and Reliability Group
ERA Technology Ltd
Cleeve Rd
Leatherhead
Surrey KT22 7SA
Tel:+44 (0) 1372-367025 (Direct)
+44 (0) 1372-367000 (Switchboard)
Fax:+44 (0) 1372-367102 (Fax)


-Original Message-
From: don_borow...@selinc.com [mailto:don_borow...@selinc.com]
Sent: 11 December 2002 22:19
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: TNV Test Generator




Am I missing something, or can you not just take a low impedance source of
120 VAC and simply add an external 1200 resistor in series with its output?

Don Borowski
Schweitzer Engineer Labs
Pullman, WA





FastWave @majordomo.ieee.org on 12/11/2002 12:55:45 PM

Please respond to FastWave 

Sent by:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org


To:"'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'" 
cc:
Subject:TNV Test Generator



Telecom - Product Safety Question:

I am looking for a "test generator" per clause 2.3.5 of IEC60950 = "a test
generator is used that provides 120 V +/- 2 VAC at 50 or 60 Hz and has an
internal impedance of 1200 ohms +/- 2%". Anybody have any input on a source
to buy or a method to build such a device. It's the internal impedance
aspect that's throwing me for a loop.

Thanks for your time and input,

Bill Bisenius
ED&D
bi...@productsafet.com 
North Carolina - the natural disaster capital of the U.S. - last week's ice
storm left us all without power, heat, or phones for several days (during
30
degree weather). Come to North Carolina and have your house smashed by
falling ice covered trees (or hurricanes in the summer).



---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri

RE: TNV Test Generator

[Peter L. Tarver]

John, et al -

No this is not the power cross test, which is described in
Annex NAC of CSA/UL60950, third ed.  This test is intended
to simulate continuous ringing from the network, is akin the
an SELV reliability test and, IIRC, was added to the base
IEC 60950 standard at the behest of the French, due to
limitations in their ability to guarantee cadenced ringing
at all locations in their networks.

Don Boroski is correct about test setup, though I'd use a
variable autotransformer after an isolation transformer to
set the voltage, rather than just taking it off of the line.

As to real world power cross, on 15NON2000 I forwarded an
unedited copy of a usenet posting containing a link to the
Orange County on 15NOV2000, where power cross caused "some
small fires" and fire fighters evacuated several homes.
Because my post is not in the mindcruiser archive and the
link in it to the newspaper article is now broken, I've
placed a copy in the Info Pieces in the telecom general
topics category on the mindcruiser site.  The poster's
remarks are also very interesting.


Regards,

Peter L. Tarver, PE
Product Safety Manager
Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
San Jose, CA
peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Chris Maxwell]

Gregg,

The problem that you mention below does not have anything to do with the 
argument of paper vs electronic storage; where you keep your DoC or even 
whether you use the latest copy of documentation.  The problem that you bring 
up, which is valid, lies in how the documentation is created and revised.

Test reports have to be revised so that historical information is not lost.  

Our latest compliance test plans include a list of major subassemblies, by 
revision, of the test sample used for testing.  If there is retesting, that 
list isn't destroyed during the revision.  A new list is added to account for 
the changes.

So, in the best case, the user is guaranteed to get the latest, current 
revision from our document control which INCLUDES all testing ever done on the 
product and a snapshot of the product taken at each point in testing.

Now consider the paper case.  Can you guarantee that any one paper copy will 
have all of that information?  Are you suggesting that a separate, new paper 
copy be created and stored for each and every revision of a product; or each 
and every re-test?  I can guarantee that it just isn't the case. 

 Many NRTL reports, in paper, consist of an original report plus amendments and 
revisions.  The amendments and revisions consist of either changed sheets, 
inserted sheets, additional appendices...Our office has taken over 
custodial responsibility for these reports created by other companies that were 
merged with us.  I can tell you, first hand, that these paper reports are a 
MESS.  They come to me in a &%*$ box with no page numbering scheme or any other 
way of knowing if you have the whole report or just a part.

Some of the companies that were merged with us had electronic reports.  They 
gave me a disk or server address with all of the test data on it.  Job done.  
The electronic reports consist of a directory with all files stored and named 
by date, and/or report number.  

By the way.  Our electronic files are backed up regularly and stored offsite in 
a fireproof container.  Can anyone say the same about their paper copies?  

Consider the thought experiment that follows: 

Put an electronic copy of test data on a company's document control server with 
regular backup.  The electronic backup is kept offsite just in case the factory 
has a fire, earthquake, plague of paper eating locusts, whatever.  Then 
consider a paper copy in someone's office in Europe.  Which one would you 
trust?  Which one do you think will be around in ten years?

All your points are well taken; but they are solvable in electronic format.  My 
experience is that electronic wins out in: integrity of copy, availability, 
storage safety, ease of update, coherence of storage and just about any other 
category that I can think of.The only time paper wins out over electronic 
is during a power outage.

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: Gregg Kervill [SMTP:gr...@test4safety.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 9:58 AM
> To:   Chris Maxwell; 'Gary McInturff'; 'Nick Williams'; 'Stephen Irving'
> Cc:   emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies
> 
> There is a problem with  "..the reader is guaranteed to get the latest 
> revision as stored in our Document Control system."  
> 
> The latest drawing has NO RELEVANCE WHATEVER to the CE Marking File. What we 
> are required to record is the "As Built Standard" of the product tested - in 
> terms of its Safety or EMC performance. 
> 
> It is for precisely this reason that UL/CSA/et al use specially written 
> Product Descriptions to allow manufacturing follow-up inspection. > 
> 
> Evaluation for safety (and EMC) relates to ONE PRODUCT (the type-test model) 
> - if current production standard deviates significantly (in safety or emc 
> terms) from that original type-test model then re-evaluation is required to 
> limit potential corporate liability.
> 
> 
> The EU Enforcement office does not need to know what the latest product is 
> supposed to look like - he will have the 'smoking gun' in his hand! 
> 
> If it has injured someone then (under EU Law) it will be classified as 
> unsafe. The issues following this may go something like this:
> 
> * Was this product properly tested?
> * Is the product tested the 'same as' the one that caused the injury?
> * Is this a random problem or are all products like this one?
> * Do we need to recall all products?
> 
> 
> If the product was not properly tested then there is a breach of EU and 
> National Law - this may involve actions involving Companies - Products and 
> People (individual prosecutions).
> 
> If the defect is not random - but due to a significant difference between the 
> TYPE TEST MODEL and the 'Smoking Gun' then

RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Gary McInturff]

I'm not sure why you confuse information gathering and (maybe 
particularly) quality with paper storage or electronic storage. 
The reader will get exactly what they ask for whether or not it is the 
current model. At a minimum products are marked with their part numbers and 
date of manufacturer. If I haven't already stored the BOM when the project was 
completed, a very simple search of the electronic data base allows me to pull 
up the BOM's and drawings in effect, for the part in you hand. Surely any 
minimal quality system insures that the product is built as directed by the 
BOM's and drawings actually in effect at the time of manufacture.
Once asked for a specific product you either go through some paper heap 
in a file cabinet or you go through bits in an electronic file cabinet.
How does any of this equate to minimum acceptable limits - simple seems 
efficient to me.
Gary



-Original Message-
From: Gregg Kervill [mailto:gr...@test4safety.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 6:58 AM
To: 'Chris Maxwell'; Gary McInturff; 'Nick Williams'; 'Stephen Irving'
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies


There is a problem with  "..the reader is guaranteed to get the latest revision 
as stored in our Document Control system." 
 
The advice I offer is "focus on the principles - reduce risk - reduce liability 
- preserve evidence - aim for Quality don't design down to the MINIMUM 
ACCEPTABLE LIMIT".

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Importance of EMC

[Dan Kwok]

Ken,

I had one of these amps too. I think it was called the M-400. This little
cube put out an amazing 200 W/ch and weighed just over a pound.

I remembered seeing the lights in the house dim and flash whenever a good
bass transient came along. The unit employed a power transformer with
multiple taps that are quickly switched in and out depending on signal power
requirements.


-
Dan Kwok,  P.Eng.
Principal Engineer
Electromagnetic Compatibility
Intetron Consulting,  Inc.
Ph  (604) 432-9874
E-mail dk...@intetron.com
Internet  http://www.intetron.com


- Original Message -
From: "Ken Javor" 
To: "Doug McKean" ; "EMC-PSTC Discussion Group"

Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 8:36 PM
Subject: Re: Importance of EMC


>
> Many years ago, I had a Carver Cube 200 Watt per channel amplifier.  It
> performed some kind of switching.  When I turned it on, I had no AM
> reception whatsoever.
>



---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Bendable circuit boards

[Brodie Pedersen]

I did some more digging into this particular implementation.  We already
use flexible capton circuits too, this is a capton embedded in a FR4
type layered board then it is routered over were it is to be bent and
then permanently bent(broken).  They chose this method over mounting two
boards together via a capton flex circuit.  I am not sure if that has
any effect on the reliability or manufacturability. 
I suspect our main area of concern will need to be the bend radius where
the board is cracked and bent up to 90 degrees.
Thanks again 
Brodie Pedersen
Nonin Medical Inc.





I have a design team looking at using a bendable circuit board in order
for a certain fit in a plastic housing.  Do any of you have information
on reliablity, pitfalls, experiences with this type of circuit board
implementation. Your help and suggestion will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance

Brodie Pedersen
QA Engineer 
Nonin Medical Inc.


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

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

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Chris Maxwell]

Gregg,

Your email, attached at the end, brings up an excellent point regarding how 
compliance engineers track what was tested versus what we build.  But 4 quality 
engineers and a 1.25M budget!!?

I handle this by putting a table in my test plan which lists the part number 
and revision of major parts and assemblies in the actual test sample.One 
man, one sheet of paper,  one day's work.  Can I get paid 1.25M for that?

Of course, I can't take all of the credit.  I have to rely on our existing 
production system, which tracks Bills of Material and part revisions.   This 
allowed me to create a snapshot of the test sample, as tested by only creating 
the list of assembly numbers and revisions.  So, I'll only charge 0.5M.  Come 
on! It's a bargain :-)

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: Gregg Kervill [SMTP:gr...@test4safety.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 5:25 PM
> To:   emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies
> 
> 
> Electronic copies versus electronic copies.
> 
> As I see it the issues are
> ONE-
> 
> If you scan the document and store them on CDROM then there is no problem
> restoring them. EXCELLENT IDEA.
> 
> But if the data is linked to a LIVE drawing system than this could rapidly
> become a configuration control nightmare. This way lays Hell!
> 
> 
> In configuration management terms we might typically have:
> 1 The Design Standard (What we intended to make - i.e. drawings plus changes
> not embodies in drawings)
> 2 The Manufactured Standard (The Design Standard plus local manufacturing
> changes - e.g. alternative components)
> 3 The As-Built Standard (The Manufactured Standard - plus various
> concessions - extra holes and other errors.)
> 
> So HOW do we link define the configuration of the Type Test Model in terms
> of the above Moving Feast?
> 
> The last time I did it I have a team of 4 Quality engineers - a relational
> Database and a budget of $1.25M.
> 
> 

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: TNV Test Generator

[John Allen]

Hi Folks

Is this not just the old UL/CSA (UL 1457/1950 etc) test to simulate a 120V
power line falling onto the external POTS (etc)cable? 

In which case the test generator would be as per the relevant UL/CSA specs,
and from memory that is similar to what has been suggested by Ken Javor or
Don Borowski.

This test was carried out because in North Americal most telephone cables
and power cables are strung on poles - and the lines contact each other when
the poles get knocked down by the awful weather (and/or awful drivers in
some cases!) they often get in many states (Thank goodness I live in the UK
- we don't get as much weather like that!)

BTW, IMHO: 
a) Instead of a default of 120V, the test should specify the default to be
application of the maximum nominal supply voltage of the equipment being
tested, since that is likely to represent more closely the supply voltage on
the power poles where the equipment is to be installed. [i.e. it would be
120V for N. America, but it would be 230V for Europe - and so on].

b) Even the latter does not address the problem that many overhead power
distribution cables are 3-phase - so the test voltage should be the maximum
phase-to-phase voltage in question.

However, it has to said that the above changes would not go down well with
suppliers of existing certified equipment - and I have no history to prove
that the existing test is anything but adequate.

Does anyone else know of "real world" problems that this test does not
cover?

John Allen
Technical Consultant
Electromagnetics, Safety and Reliability Group
ERA Technology Ltd
Cleeve Rd
Leatherhead
Surrey KT22 7SA
Tel:+44 (0) 1372-367025 (Direct)
+44 (0) 1372-367000 (Switchboard)
Fax:+44 (0) 1372-367102 (Fax)


-Original Message-
From: don_borow...@selinc.com [mailto:don_borow...@selinc.com]
Sent: 11 December 2002 22:19
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: TNV Test Generator




Am I missing something, or can you not just take a low impedance source of
120 VAC and simply add an external 1200 resistor in series with its output?

Don Borowski
Schweitzer Engineer Labs
Pullman, WA





FastWave @majordomo.ieee.org on 12/11/2002 12:55:45 PM

Please respond to FastWave 

Sent by:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org


To:"'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'" 
cc:
Subject:TNV Test Generator



Telecom - Product Safety Question:

I am looking for a "test generator" per clause 2.3.5 of IEC60950 = "a test
generator is used that provides 120 V +/- 2 VAC at 50 or 60 Hz and has an
internal impedance of 1200 ohms +/- 2%". Anybody have any input on a source
to buy or a method to build such a device. It's the internal impedance
aspect that's throwing me for a loop.

Thanks for your time and input,

Bill Bisenius
ED&D
bi...@productsafet.com 
North Carolina - the natural disaster capital of the U.S. - last week's ice
storm left us all without power, heat, or phones for several days (during
30
degree weather). Come to North Carolina and have your house smashed by
falling ice covered trees (or hurricanes in the summer).



---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
 Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"





---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

_
This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed
Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit
http://www.worldcom.com


*
Copyright ERA Technology Ltd.

Re: AV terminations... dropping the other shoe

[Fred Townsend]

With 1 K sources you would leave them unterminated.

Fred Townsend

John Woodgate wrote:

> I read in !emc-pstc that Dan Pierce  wrote (in
> <77181e93ba2ad41187650090279c18a002c00...@exchsrvr1.indy.escient.com>)
> about 'AV terminations' on Wed, 11 Dec 2002:
> >I was wondering what the typical load termination to use for audio and video
> >RCA connections on a typical receiver, both in and out.
>
> Sources are 1 kohm to 2 kohm, inputs are 10 k to 22 k.
> --
> Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
> Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
> http://www.isce.org.uk
> PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
>
> ---
> 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:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
>
> 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:
> http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
> Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"



---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Nick Williams]

The Machinery Directive says:

"Whereas it is essential that, before issuing an EC declaration of 
conformity, the manufacturer or his authorised representative 
established in the Community should provide a technical construction 
file; whereas it is not, however, essential that all documentation be
permanently available in a material manner, but it must be made 
available on demand; whereas it need not include detailed plans of the
sub-assemblies used in manufacturing the machines, unless knowledge 
of these is indispensable in order to ascertain conformity with 
essential safety requirements;


My reading of this is that so long as you can deliver the document on 
paper when requested by the authorities, how you store it is up to 
you.


Rgds

Nick.



At 7:37 am -0800 11/12/02, Gary McInturff wrote:
	Does electronic storage of the documents make any difference? 
The DoC, the test reports, BOM's, drawings and Design verification 
tests are all stored electronically and can be dumped from any 
printer in the world. Obviously, they would have electronic 
signatures.

Gary




---
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:
Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
   http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
   Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Richard Hughes 
wrote (in <6b78f2524cd7d5118a0402204840075b02795...@zhard0jc.europe.nort
el.com>) about 'Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies' on Wed, 11 Dec
2002:
>and guess what, neither
>CENELEC, CEN or ETSI play any part in it. 

The bodies as such don't, but the same people may well.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Gregg Kervill  wrote (in
<000601c2a164$21f45f20$7100a8c0@MENHADEN>) about 'Location of CE DoCs -
electronic copies' on Wed, 11 Dec 2002:

>What happens to the responsible person who is under a legal obligation to
>make the test data and evidence upon which CE Marking was made if there are
>no reliable records. CDROM or HARD COPY.

It probably varies from country to country. In Italy, you could say, 'It
was destroyed by the volcano/earthquake/flood' and who can say nay?
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: TNV Test Generator

[Don_Borowski]

Am I missing something, or can you not just take a low impedance source of
120 VAC and simply add an external 1200 resistor in series with its output?

Don Borowski
Schweitzer Engineer Labs
Pullman, WA





FastWave @majordomo.ieee.org on 12/11/2002 12:55:45 PM

Please respond to FastWave 

Sent by:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org


To:"'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'" 
cc:
Subject:TNV Test Generator



Telecom - Product Safety Question:

I am looking for a "test generator" per clause 2.3.5 of IEC60950 = "a test
generator is used that provides 120 V +/- 2 VAC at 50 or 60 Hz and has an
internal impedance of 1200 ohms +/- 2%". Anybody have any input on a source
to buy or a method to build such a device. It's the internal impedance
aspect that's throwing me for a loop.

Thanks for your time and input,

Bill Bisenius
ED&D
bi...@productsafet.com 
North Carolina - the natural disaster capital of the U.S. - last week's ice
storm left us all without power, heat, or phones for several days (during
30
degree weather). Come to North Carolina and have your house smashed by
falling ice covered trees (or hurricanes in the summer).



---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
 Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"





---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Importance of EMC

[tkrzesaj]

Hi All,

I would like to have some of your experiences to help me to explain to my
boss what is the importance of EMC and why it is interresting to develop an
EMC/EMI area...
To explain a little, we are a small R&D institute of technology and
consumer electronics (principally Audio and multimedia) for the Brasilian
market...
I work here for one year (I'm french and come from a different horizon:
Telecom and RF) and try to develop a small EMC area to improve the quality
of our projects... For 2003 I would like to buy some stufs to start a
prototype/pre-qualification lab and I made a budjet... Now I need to
explain and convince the liders !!!

Can I have some advices ?

Thanks a lot...

Thomas K.




---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Location of CE DoCs

[Nick Williams]

I take your point Richard, but I did not make mine very clearly and 
so you have missed it.


Irrespective of the wording of some of the Directives and the 
guidance, since there is no absolute requirement (except in the 
medical devices directives) to appoint an Authorised Representative 
within the EU, any 'requirement' to keep the documentation on EU soil 
is both nonsensical and unenforceable. If the manufacturer is outside 
the Community and there is no Authorised Representative, who is going 
to hold the file, and how will any enforcement action be taken?


I know the pat answer is 'the person responsible for importing the 
product into the EU' but what if they are also outside the EU? In 
many cases the only person located within the EU is the end user and 
you can't seriously tell me that the authorities expect that every 
time a manufacturer ships to a new end user in the EU they are going 
to have to supply a copy of their Technical File with the goods!


The Directives are in a bit of a mess on this topic but frankly it 
probably isn't in anyone's interests to sort it out since the current 
fudge allows everyone involved to do their own thing without having 
to obviously break any rules. I can't see the WTO liking a move by 
the Europeans to force non-EU manufacturers to formally appoint an 
Authorised Representative, even if such a move were the answer to the 
problem, and actually (for reasons which are explained on my web site 
at http://www.conformance.co.uk/CE_MARKING/reps.html) I don't 
actually think it is the answer anyway.


Regards

Nick.

At 10:23 am + 11/12/02, Richard Hughes wrote:

Nick,

Unfortunately, regarding the last para, you have not followed your 
own good advice of checking with the specific EU Directives 
concerned. 


Annex IV section 2 of the LVD requires:

"The manufacturer must establish the technical documentation 
described in point 3 and he or his authorized representative 
established within the Community must keep it on Community territory 
at the disposal of the relevant national authorities for inspection 
purposes for a period ending at least 10 years after the last 
product has been manufactured."


Not surprisingly, the Commission's Guide to the LVD (2001 edition) states:

"This technical documentation must be kept within the Community."


On the other hand, the R&TTED does not state that the technical 
documentation must be kept within the Community.  The corresponding 
para to the above (Annex II section 2) requires that:


"The manufacturer must establish the technical documentation 
described in point 4 and he or his authorised representative 
established within the Community must keep it for a period ending at 
least 10 years after the last product has been manufactured at the 
disposal of the relevant national authorities of any Member State 
for inspection purposes."


Note that the part requiring that the technical documentation be 
kept "on Community territory" is absent.



Equally, the LVD and the R&TTED have different requirements 
regarding the provision of a DoC.  See Article 6(3) of the R&TTED.



Own opinions as always,

Richard Hughes



-Original Message-
From: Nick Williams 
[mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk]

Sent: 11 December 2002 00:12
To: Stephen Irving
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Location of CE DoCs

These are indeed rumors. Different Directives have different
requirements in this regard, and although the general rules of thumb
that documentation should be kept in the EU and a copy of the DofC
should be supplied with the product provide a good working basis for
compliance with the Directives, they are by no means mandatory for
all equipment under all New Approach directives. If it really matters
to you, you should read the text of the specific directives which
apply to your products in order to find out what is required.

As examples, neither the LVD nor the EMC Directives require a copy of
the EC declaration to be shipped with the product, although the
Machinery Directive does. None of these three directives require the
appointment of an Authorised Representative (only the medical devices
directives do this) and ergo there is no requirement for the
technical file to be 'kept on EU soil'.

Regards

Nick.



---
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:
Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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 

RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Gregg Kervill]

Electronic copies versus electronic copies.

As I see it the issues are
ONE-

If you scan the document and store them on CDROM then there is no problem
restoring them. EXCELLENT IDEA.

But if the data is linked to a LIVE drawing system than this could rapidly
become a configuration control nightmare. This way lays Hell!


In configuration management terms we might typically have:
1 The Design Standard (What we intended to make - i.e. drawings plus changes
not embodies in drawings)
2 The Manufactured Standard (The Design Standard plus local manufacturing
changes - e.g. alternative components)
3 The As-Built Standard (The Manufactured Standard - plus various
concessions - extra holes and other errors.)

So HOW do we link define the configuration of the Type Test Model in terms
of the above Moving Feast?

The last time I did it I have a team of 4 Quality engineers - a relational
Database and a budget of $1.25M.


The Burning data onto a CDROM sounds great - but please let's be careful
about loosing sight of our objectives.

The risk is that someone will see this as a way of saving a few hundred
dollars and loosing all control and records.


Been then (picking up the pieces) - got the tee shirt - don't want to go
there again.


TWO-
What happens to the responsible person who is under a legal obligation to
make the test data and evidence upon which CE Marking was made if there are
no reliable records. CDROM or HARD COPY.


Best regards

Gregg




---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Importance of EMC

[Ken Javor]

Many years ago, I had a Carver Cube 200 Watt per channel amplifier.  It 
performed some kind of switching.  When I turned it on, I had no AM
reception whatsoever.

--
>From: "Doug McKean" 
>To: "EMC-PSTC Discussion Group" 
>Subject: Re: Importance of EMC
>Date: Wed, Dec 11, 2002, 9:11 PM
>

>
> Certainly good quality audio depends upon being the
> equipment being robust enough to repel interference.
> Likewise, one wouldn't want audio equipment which
> is self-interfering.
>
> Just as some people forget that good quality emc work
> on a data system can improve the data integrity of the
> final product for its customers. It makes it almost
> necessary in product development even if you aren't
> selling into countries requiring immunity testing,
> as far as I'm concerned.
>
> My opinions only ...
>
> Regards, Doug McKean
>
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
>
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
>
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
>
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
>
> 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:
> http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
> Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"
> 

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Receiver Requirements in ETSI 300 220

[Gert Gremmen]

Hi Kirk

This is indeed the case, though I would also look
at version 1.2.1 and 1.3.1 of EN 301 489-03 that will
replace EN 300 683 in august and october next year,
to prevent you of doing some double work.
Version 1.2.2 will be valid for 2 months only.

Etsi EN 301 489 -03 refers to part 1 for tables
and test methods. You will need that too.

This standard refers to the product type of standard (her EN 300 220 -3)
for EMC aspects of "antenna port" and "enclosure port" only.

This standard adresses all other ports of the equipment
such as mains, signal and data and includes emission
and immunity aspects as they are wellknown for not-radio equipment.

All ETSI standards including the one mentioned here are downloadable
for free at ETSI.org after registration.



Regards,

Gert Gremmen
ce-test, qualified testing
Rotterdam, The Netherlands

http://www.ce-test.nl

-Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Kirk Thomas
Sent: woensdag 11 december 2002 19:25
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Receiver Requirements in ETSI 300 220



In the title of ETSI 300 220 it states "Harmonized EN covering essential
requirements under article 3.2 of the R&TTE Directive".  Article 3.2 is only
concerned that the device effectively uses the allocated spectrum, but
within the standard it has a battery of receiver immunity tests.  I thought
that by completing ETSI 300 683 Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) standard
for short range devices that we had shown compliance with the requirements
of the EMC Directive.

My question is this;  Do I show compliance with the EMC Directive and the
R&TTE Directive by complying to ETSI 300 683 and ETSI 300 220 (less the
Receiver tests of ETSI 300 220)?

Your comments would be greatly appreciated.

Kirk Thomas


---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"




---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Location of CE DoCs

[LCrane]

 Fortunately there is the so-called "blue guide" on the new approach
directives that makes it clear the intended gramatical parsing of that
sentence. Read through the downloadable pdf document at 

http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/legislati
on.htm


-Lauren Crane
-Original Message-
From: Hans Mellberg
To: Richard Hughes; 'Nick Williams'; Stephen Irving
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Sent: 12/11/2002 12:20 PM
Subject: RE: Location of CE DoCs


But if you analyze the grammatical construction of :

"and he or his authorised representative established within the
Community"

That can be interpreted as follows:

"he" is established within the community and in that absense, "his
authorized
representative" is established within the community.

Therefore it can be implied defacto that either the manufacturer OR the
representative reside within the EU and kkep the information within the
EU.

--- Richard Hughes  wrote:
> Nick,
> 
> Unfortunately, regarding the last para, you have not followed your own
good
> advice of checking with the specific EU Directives concerned.  
> 
> Annex IV section 2 of the LVD requires:
> 
> "The manufacturer must establish the technical documentation described
in
> point 3 and he or his authorized representative established within the
> Community must keep it on Community territory at the disposal of the
> relevant national authorities for inspection purposes for a period
ending at
> least 10 years after the last product has been manufactured."
> 
> Not surprisingly, the Commission's Guide to the LVD (2001 edition)
states: 
> 
> "This technical documentation must be kept within the Community."
> 
> 
> On the other hand, the R&TTED does not state that the technical
> documentation must be kept within the Community.  The corresponding
para to
> the above (Annex II section 2) requires that: 
> 
> "The manufacturer must establish the technical documentation described
in
> point 4 and he or his authorised representative established within the
> Community must keep it for a period ending at least 10 years after the
last
> product has been manufactured at the disposal of the relevant national
> authorities of any Member State for inspection purposes."
> 
> Note that the part requiring that the technical documentation be kept
"on
> Community territory" is absent.
> 
> 
> Equally, the LVD and the R&TTED have different requirements regarding
the
> provision of a DoC.  See Article 6(3) of the R&TTED.
> 
> 
> Own opinions as always,
> 
> Richard Hughes
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk]
> Sent: 11 December 2002 00:12
> To: Stephen Irving
> Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: Location of CE DoCs
> 
> These are indeed rumors. Different Directives have different 
> requirements in this regard, and although the general rules of thumb 
> that documentation should be kept in the EU and a copy of the DofC 
> should be supplied with the product provide a good working basis for 
> compliance with the Directives, they are by no means mandatory for 
> all equipment under all New Approach directives. If it really matters 
> to you, you should read the text of the specific directives which 
> apply to your products in order to find out what is required.
> 
> As examples, neither the LVD nor the EMC Directives require a copy of 
> the EC declaration to be shipped with the product, although the 
> Machinery Directive does. None of these three directives require the 
> appointment of an Authorised Representative (only the medical devices 
> directives do this) and ergo there is no requirement for the 
> technical file to be 'kept on EU soil'.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Nick.
> 
> 


=
Best Regards
Hans T. Mellberg, Consultant
Regulatory, High Speed, EMC and Power Design Services
By the Pacific Coast next to Silicon Valley, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
office:831-454-9450, cell:408-507-9694, fax:831-454-0755
BSEE, NARTE Certified Engineer, IEEE, AIAA, dB
2004 IEEE EMC Symposium Program Chair, IEEE EMC SCV ADCOM

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Importance of EMC

[Doug McKean]

Certainly good quality audio depends upon being the 
equipment being robust enough to repel interference. 
Likewise, one wouldn't want audio equipment which 
is self-interfering. 

Just as some people forget that good quality emc work 
on a data system can improve the data integrity of the 
final product for its customers. It makes it almost 
necessary in product development even if you aren't 
selling into countries requiring immunity testing, 
as far as I'm concerned.  

My opinions only ... 

Regards, Doug McKean 

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

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

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies

[Richard Hughes]

Chris,

Firstly I provided on what the LVD and the associated Guidance document
says.  So don't shoot the messenger.

Secondly, the fanciest electronic means of documentation available isn't
worth a bean if it cannot be accessed in the EU.  Perhaps you are thinking
of a means whereby your technical documentation is available on-line,
probably stored in multiple locations so that if one server goes down then
one or more others can take over: in such cases it may be that you could
always pull the technical file over, print it out in the EU, and the
surveillance authorities would never know any difference.  In such cases it
would be pretty surprising if the said surveillance authority were to
complain that the paperwork hadn't  actually been sitting on some shelf in
the EU gathering dust.  Nevertheless, the LVD still says what the LVD says.

Thirdly, a problem with technical files is having the required software to
read it or turn it into paper.  Of course, having the technical file
available as a PDF helps, but there is still a requirement to have the
technical file available "for a period ending at least 10 years after the
last product has been manufactured."  Some companies certainly do have the
means to maintain and access electronic files for the requisite 10+ years
(e.g. 20 years for a product with a 10 year production life): others,
however, do not.

Finally, please do not get confused between standardisation and regulations.
CENELEC is a standards body (like ANSI) and they do not tell the law makers
and enforcement bodies (read Capitol Hill, OSHA/FDA) what to do.  Each
Member State in the EU has its own way of enforcing the national legislation
that approximates EU directives.  However, there is a mechanism for sharing
information between Member States and the Commission on products that have
been taken off the market on safety grounds - and guess what, neither
CENELEC, CEN or ETSI play any part in it. 

Regards,

Richard Hughes


-Original Message-
From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com]
Sent: 11 December 2002 18:49
To: Gary McInturff; Nick Williams; Stephen Irving
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies



Gary,

I'm with you on this one.  I consider electronic availability to be equal
to, if not superior to, having the documents on "European Soil".   

My feeling is that: as long as the documentation explains what the CE mark
means; and points the user in the right direction for getting the files;
then files can be emailed at a moment's notice; and the reader is guaranteed
to get the latest revision as stored in our Document Control system.  

I don't think that you can make the equivalent statements about any method
of keeping paper copies at any location.

Of course, these are just my opinions and interpretations.  I haven't had to
tell them to a judge (does CENELEC have a judge?); but I believe that the
reasoning is sound.

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: Gary McInturff [SMTP:gary.mcintu...@worldwidepackets.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 10:38 AM
> To:   Nick Williams; Stephen Irving
> Cc:   emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: Location of CE DoCs - electronic copies
> 
> 
>   Does electronic storage of the documents make any difference? The
DoC, the test reports, BOM's, drawings and Design verification tests are all
stored electronically and can be dumped from any printer in the world.
Obviously, they would have electronic signatures.
>   Gary
>   
> 
> 

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: ITE / AV Equipment with Ethernet

[David_Sterner]

Dan,

Emissions
Ethernet test repeatability is improved by a loopback program that
broadcasts continual data.  Be sure the loopback perimeter includes the
cable (beyond the driver chip).  Terminate the Ethernet TP cable into a
Class B hub; it is easier to explain than a 100-ohm dummy load.  Although
continual data transfer is 'real world' the measurement is not real world,
you measure AE emission 50% of the time.

Immunity
Continual data transfer is best.  Use at least 2 nodes in AE to prevent
Ethernet from auto-negotiating to full-duplex, a collision-free domain.
Full duplex is not worst case - it trivially passes immunity because
'collision-detect' is inhibited.

TV wiring is not critical, impedance match is a given.  Document the wiring
and AE.

David

-Original Message-
From: Dan Pierce [mailto:dpie...@escient.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 12:18 PM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: ITE / AV Equipment with Ethernet



Dear Group,

I currently have a device that is a cross between ITE and AV (a typical set
top box) which has Ethernet.  I am wondering how to terminate the line for
testing both emissions and immunity.  In addition, should I have this
Ethernet setting so that I transmit data in a 1 meter loop back cable?
Would a connection to a hub with no other lines to/from be legal?

Any responses are greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, 

-Dan Pierce

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

---
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:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com

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:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"