RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Gary McInturff]

I too was surprised to hear about crosstalk on fiber, but according to 
at
least one vendor it was photon crossover that is then converted to electrons
after the photon to electron interface (the optics module receiver). Still not
sure how that happens but that is my very minimal understanding.
Over to you Don
Gary


From: Dorin [mailto:dorin.op...@alcatel.com]
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 12:49 PM
To: don_borow...@selinc.com
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?


I enjoy it so please go ahead ...
How can be physically explained the cross talk between the fibers (photon vs.
electronic)?

Thanks,
Dorin


don_borow...@selinc.com wrote:

> -- Forwarded by Don Borowski/SEL on 01/10/2003 10:37 AM
> ---
>
> Don Borowski
> 01/10/2003 10:35 AM
>
> To:"Chris Maxwell" 
> cc:
> Subject:RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?  (Document
>link: Database 'Don Borowski', View '($Sent)')
>
> OK, some comments.
>
> The radiated and conducted emissions of concern are there due to the
> possibility of the modulation signal sent to the light source getting
> coupled onto the metalic coating of the fiber.
>
> There are seperate standards covering light leakage that are there for eye
> protection.
>
> We conventionally think about current flow in a pair of wires carrying
> energy. The energy is indeed guided by the wires, but is carried by the
> transverse electromagnetic (TEM) field around the wires. The energy is not
> flowing in the conductors, but in the space around the conductors.
>
> Even at DC where there is electron flow through the bulk of a
> (non-superconductor) material, the energy is transmitted in the electric
> and magnetic field outside the wires. There is indeed a magnetic field
> inside the wire. However, the only electric field inside the wire is along
> the direction of electron flow, and is due to resistance. If you do the
> Poynting vector E×H, the direction of the vector is radial into the wire.
> There is energy flow into the wire, which causes the wire to produce heat.
> This heat production is better known as I²R loss.
>
> Light certainly can be guided by metal, just as lower frequencies. Take a
> cylinder with a nice shiney mirrored surface on the inside, and shine light
> into it. You will see light come out at the other end, even if there is a
> bend so that there is not a straight shot through.
>
> It is possible to guide light with two conductors in TEM mode, though it is
> quite lossy. Fiber is nice because of its low loss.
>
> There certainly can be light emissions from fiber -  a sharp bend can cause
> it. Conversely, bend a fiber sharply and shine a light on the bend, and the
> light will go into the fiber. So there is possible emission and
> susceptibility. But put a jacket over the fiber, or a metalic coating, and
> this problem is solved for any practical source or victim.
>
> A system with a light source and light receiver is certainly still subject
> to problems with RF emissions and RF susceptibility, even if the fiber
> itself is not for all practical purposes. The optical components are good
> enought the there is no significant susceptibility to or emissions of
> light, assuming nothing is broken. Similarly, a GPS receiver may be
> susceptible to or radiated emissions that are not at the GPS frequency.
>
> There are certainly photons at 1 GHz. However, due to the low frequency
> (compared to light), an individual photon does not carry much energy - not
> enough energy to free an electron as can be done by a single light photon
> on a sensitive surface (and then usually multiplied using an electron
> multiplier). Due to the difficulty in detecting single photons at 1 GHz,
> photons are not part of the normal vocabulary  when discussing RF.
>
> Enough cranial smoke yet?
>
> Don Borowski
> Schweitzer Engineering Labs
> Pullman, WA
>
> "Chris Maxwell" @majordomo.ieee.org on
> 01/10/2003 07:23:40 AM
>
> Please respond to "Chris Maxwell" 
>
> Sent by:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>
> To:
> cc:
> Subject:RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?
>
> OK,
>
> Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get
> paid for).  How about a hypothetical question...
>
> Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced
> by the acceleration of electrons.  When electrons accelerate back and forth
> at a given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that
> frequency.  At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors.  The
> electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives
> off an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another
> conductor placed some distance away (the measurement antenna).  Notice that
> in this case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have
> free electrons flowing and ac

Re: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Ken Javor]

I had forgotten the terminology, and what  Mr. Tarver related about the 
classes is true, but it is not true that electric or magnetic fields should
theoretically be able to interact with a stream of photons.


>From: "Peter L. Tarver" 
>To: "PSTC" 
>Subject: RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?
>Date: Fri, Jan 10, 2003, 3:53 PM
>

>
> You're partially correct, Ken.  However, the photon (in
> quantum mechanics) is the particle that mediates the
> electromagnetic force; photon also the name given to the
> particle that is a quantum of electromagnetic energy.  Thus,
> photons are involved as the particle analog to an
> electromagnetic wave.  Also, an electron beam is not
> identical to an electromagnetic wave in the sense you are
> trying to characterize them.
>
> The primary difference between bosons (photons are bosons)
> and fermions (which leptons are classified as; electrons are
> leptons) is boson have integer spins, while fermions have
> fractional spins (spin is a classification of "intrinsic
> angular momentum") and bosons are not constrained by the
> Pauli Exclusion Principle, whereas fermions are.
>
> This does not address why an electromagnetic wave of longer
> wavelength may be redirected by the presence of an external
> magnetic or electric field, while light is less affected.
>
> More properly, it is not an electron that creates an
> electromagnetic wave, it's charge; electrons just happen to
> possess a quantum of electric charge.  An electric charge at
> rest radiates an electric field.  An electric charge in
> motion creates a magnetic field, irrespective of
> acceleration.
>
> Theoretically, it should be possible to magnetically or
> electrically redirect light.
>
> By definition, light is visible and exists only between the
> wavelengths of 700 nm-400 nm.  "Light" and "optical
> radiation" has been extended to other wavelengths (ir and
> uv) in the common vernacular mostly because of "lasers"
> being used at those wavelengths.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter L. Tarver, PE
> Product Safety Manager
> Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
> peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com
>
>
>> From: Ken Javor
>> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 9:24 AM
>>
>> The answer is independent of frequency, it is the
>> nature of the particle
>> (electron vs. photon) that is key.  I have
>> forgotten the terminology, but
>> one type  of particle is called a boson, and per
>> my (quite possibly faulty)
>> recollection, bosons do not interact with
>> electromagnetic fields.  For
>> example, you can use either an electric or
>> magnetic field to deflect and
>> point an electron beam, but you cannot do so with
>> a beam of light.
>>
>
>
> ---
> 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: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Chris Maxwell]

John,

I don't think that your assumption is dangerous at all.  I believe that the
argument regarding whether the standards require any measurements specific to
fiber optic cables has already been answered.The answer is no.  There are
no tests in EN 55022:1998 designed to measure signal line conducted emissions
>from fiber optic cables.  

My email was based  that your assumption was already true; I was then trying
to get deeper into the subject to get back to the basic physics that would
tell you why a fiber optic cable doesn't emit or react to EMI.

Chris
> -Original Message-
> From: Juhasz, John (IndSys, GE Interlogix) [SMTP:john.juh...@ge.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 2:07 PM
> To:   drcuthbert; Chris Maxwell; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?
> 
> 
> While there are VERY good points here, I believe the original
> issue was the use of the terminology 'telecommunications' port/cable.
> 
> Although a fiber optic port/cable can be used for telecommunications,
> I am going to go out on a limb here and assume ( a dangerous
> word, indeed) that intent was for wire-line telecom not fiber.
> 
> Of course one should take into consideration, as astutley noted in
> Dave Cuthbert's message, whether or not the use of fiber with a metal
> sheath is typically used in the product's installation. In that case there
> could indeed be measurable emissions.
> 
> Is there anyone subscribed to this forum who is on 
> the EN 55022 committee who could possibly shed light on this?
> 
> John A. Juhasz
> 
> GE Interlogix
> Fiber Options Div.
> Bohemia, NY 
> 
> 
> 
> 


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"

Switzerland PS

[Ted Rook]

that was supposed to read mountain paradise.

And, have you ever wondered why so many 'international' organizations have
headquarters in GENEVA Switzerland. 

Quality of life that's why, damn the expense, someone else is paying ie you
and I the taxpayers.

Geneva is at the western end of Lake...Geneva in the bit where they speak
mostly French

This must be baffling to Americans who can go from the Pacific to the Atlantic
Canada to Mexico speaking 'one language.




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: European 3 Phase

[ggars...@us.tuv.com]

> The only thing it lacks (which is almost inevitable, and is virtually
> impossible to keep up to date) is a town-by-town (etc.) listing like you
> used to find in the US Department of Commerce "Electricity Supplies
Abroad"
> booklet. This booklet had a red cover (if I remember correctly)and was
around
> in the 1970's. However, if anyone still has an old copy, then it would
> probably be some sort of guide to the areas which might be the
> "odd-balls" - it certainly did mention the 127/220V 3-phase situation in
> Belgium and some other parts of Europe.

The 1997 edition (revised Jan 2001) no longer has a red cover, sad to say,
but it IS on the internet:
http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/machinery/ecabroad/

It is called "ELECTRIC CURRENT ABROAD" (odd, because it has more to say
about voltage and frequency than current!)
Published by the Office of Machinery, part of the  US Department of
Commerce's International Trade Administration. "The Office of Machinery
(OM) assists U.S. businesses in the exportation of production machinery and
general components."

PS: I would agree that it is impossible to keep this kind of stuff up to
date. It may or may not be that the BSI document is better, I do not have a
copy. The DoC (Dept of Commerce, in this case) document is free. (To
paraphrase Ted Rook and the Peoples Front of Judea, "When was the last time
the government did something for me?")  I guess I would like to have both,
and see if there was a consensus.

best regards, glyn
TUV Rheinland of North America, Inc.
Glyn R. Garside
Tel  (847)562-9888 ext 25
http://www.us.tuv.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: Switzerland Compliance & Homologation Requirements

[Ted Rook]

If you were an island paradise at the top of Europe with hydroelectric power
up the wazoo, control of the road and rail passes from N to S Europe, had a
gazillion in foreign currency cash stored in your banks, were a republic of
six million people divided into twelve self governing cantons in an area the
size of New Jersey would you want to open your doors to the huddled unwashed
masses of Europe?

Swiss accept all currency as a matter of principal, the exchange rate may not
always be the most competitive.

If I could chose where I lived it would be the Swiss canton called Ticino in
the South and Italian section of the country. Closest I've come to paradise on
Earth.

What was the question ;-) ?


Best Regards

Ted Rook, Console Engineering, ext 4659

Please note our new location and phone numbers:

Crest Audio Inc, 16-00 Pollitt Drive
Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 USA

201 475 4600 telephone receptionist, 8.30 - 5 pm EST.
201 475 4659 direct line w/voice mail, 24 hrs.
201 475 4677 fax, 24 hrs.




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: Switzerland Compliance & Homologation Requirements

[Evangeline Cometa]

On why Switzerland is not a member of the EU: They have always maintained
the concept of a neutral and independent country. One of the purposes of the
formation of the EU (which is to prevent another war by integrating their
economies) does not apply to them. Preservation of sovereignty is another
reason. Joining the EU has far-ranging implications and would mean
integrating their laws, from economic, political, technical etc. but the
debate is ongoing - they have also recently elected a pro-EU Federal
Parliament.

By the way, Switzerland is an EFTA member but they are not a member of the
monetary union. 


From: Collins, Jeffrey [mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com]
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 1:29 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Switzerland Compliance & Homologation Requirements



Hi Group,

Does anyone have any current information on telecom requirements in
Switzerland? Mine is a little out dated.
Specifically I'm looking into:

* CO gear requirements

* Network Access permits or licenses

* Networking gear requirements with residential line access

On a side note: Does anyone know the story on why Switzerland is not a
member of the EU, EEA or EFTA?  In my previous experiences they accepted CE
mark data based on the applicable harmonized standards. Also, do they accept
the EURO for currency?


Thanks,

Jeffrey Collins 
Sr. HW Engineering Manager 
EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety
CIENA  Core Networking Division
5965 Silver Creek Valley Road
(408) 571-3002, Fax (408) 965-2705
jcoll...@ciena.com
http://www.ciena.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"





--IMPORTANT NOTICE-- 
This message is intended only for the use of the person or organization to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or responsible for delivering
the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately by email or telephone and delete the original message
immediately.  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:
 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: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Peter L. Tarver]

You're partially correct, Ken.  However, the photon (in
quantum mechanics) is the particle that mediates the
electromagnetic force; photon also the name given to the
particle that is a quantum of electromagnetic energy.  Thus,
photons are involved as the particle analog to an
electromagnetic wave.  Also, an electron beam is not
identical to an electromagnetic wave in the sense you are
trying to characterize them.

The primary difference between bosons (photons are bosons)
and fermions (which leptons are classified as; electrons are
leptons) is boson have integer spins, while fermions have
fractional spins (spin is a classification of "intrinsic
angular momentum") and bosons are not constrained by the
Pauli Exclusion Principle, whereas fermions are.

This does not address why an electromagnetic wave of longer
wavelength may be redirected by the presence of an external
magnetic or electric field, while light is less affected.

More properly, it is not an electron that creates an
electromagnetic wave, it's charge; electrons just happen to
possess a quantum of electric charge.  An electric charge at
rest radiates an electric field.  An electric charge in
motion creates a magnetic field, irrespective of
acceleration.

Theoretically, it should be possible to magnetically or
electrically redirect light.

By definition, light is visible and exists only between the
wavelengths of 700 nm-400 nm.  "Light" and "optical
radiation" has been extended to other wavelengths (ir and
uv) in the common vernacular mostly because of "lasers"
being used at those wavelengths.



Regards,

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


> From: Ken Javor
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 9:24 AM
>
> The answer is independent of frequency, it is the
> nature of the particle
> (electron vs. photon) that is key.  I have
> forgotten the terminology, but
> one type  of particle is called a boson, and per
> my (quite possibly faulty)
> recollection, bosons do not interact with
> electromagnetic fields.  For
> example, you can use either an electric or
> magnetic field to deflect and
> point an electron beam, but you cannot do so with
> a beam of light.
>



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: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Dorin]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
I enjoy it so please go ahead ...
How can be physically explained the cross talk between the fibers (photon vs.
electronic)?

Thanks,
Dorin


don_borow...@selinc.com wrote:

> -- Forwarded by Don Borowski/SEL on 01/10/2003 10:37 AM
> ---
>
> Don Borowski
> 01/10/2003 10:35 AM
>
> To:"Chris Maxwell" 
> cc:
> Subject:RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?  (Document
>link: Database 'Don Borowski', View '($Sent)')
>
> OK, some comments.
>
> The radiated and conducted emissions of concern are there due to the
> possibility of the modulation signal sent to the light source getting
> coupled onto the metalic coating of the fiber.
>
> There are seperate standards covering light leakage that are there for eye
> protection.
>
> We conventionally think about current flow in a pair of wires carrying
> energy. The energy is indeed guided by the wires, but is carried by the
> transverse electromagnetic (TEM) field around the wires. The energy is not
> flowing in the conductors, but in the space around the conductors.
>
> Even at DC where there is electron flow through the bulk of a
> (non-superconductor) material, the energy is transmitted in the electric
> and magnetic field outside the wires. There is indeed a magnetic field
> inside the wire. However, the only electric field inside the wire is along
> the direction of electron flow, and is due to resistance. If you do the
> Poynting vector E×H, the direction of the vector is radial into the wire.
> There is energy flow into the wire, which causes the wire to produce heat.
> This heat production is better known as I²R loss.
>
> Light certainly can be guided by metal, just as lower frequencies. Take a
> cylinder with a nice shiney mirrored surface on the inside, and shine light
> into it. You will see light come out at the other end, even if there is a
> bend so that there is not a straight shot through.
>
> It is possible to guide light with two conductors in TEM mode, though it is
> quite lossy. Fiber is nice because of its low loss.
>
> There certainly can be light emissions from fiber -  a sharp bend can cause
> it. Conversely, bend a fiber sharply and shine a light on the bend, and the
> light will go into the fiber. So there is possible emission and
> susceptibility. But put a jacket over the fiber, or a metalic coating, and
> this problem is solved for any practical source or victim.
>
> A system with a light source and light receiver is certainly still subject
> to problems with RF emissions and RF susceptibility, even if the fiber
> itself is not for all practical purposes. The optical components are good
> enought the there is no significant susceptibility to or emissions of
> light, assuming nothing is broken. Similarly, a GPS receiver may be
> susceptible to or radiated emissions that are not at the GPS frequency.
>
> There are certainly photons at 1 GHz. However, due to the low frequency
> (compared to light), an individual photon does not carry much energy - not
> enough energy to free an electron as can be done by a single light photon
> on a sensitive surface (and then usually multiplied using an electron
> multiplier). Due to the difficulty in detecting single photons at 1 GHz,
> photons are not part of the normal vocabulary  when discussing RF.
>
> Enough cranial smoke yet?
>
> Don Borowski
> Schweitzer Engineering Labs
> Pullman, WA
>
> "Chris Maxwell" @majordomo.ieee.org on
> 01/10/2003 07:23:40 AM
>
> Please respond to "Chris Maxwell" 
>
> Sent by:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>
> To:
> cc:
> Subject:RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?
>
> OK,
>
> Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get
> paid for).  How about a hypothetical question...
>
> Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced
> by the acceleration of electrons.  When electrons accelerate back and forth
> at a given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that
> frequency.  At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors.  The
> electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives
> off an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another
> conductor placed some distance away (the measurement antenna).  Notice that
> in this case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have
> free electrons flowing and accelerating.
>
> Fiber optic cables carry light, which is modeled as photons produced by
> electrons changing energy states.  We still can model this with similar
> wave equations as used for any old EM radiation; but here we have radiation
> flow in an insulator.  We also throw in the concept of "photons" whereby we
> try to quantize the radiation.   Light won't (appreciably) flow at all in a
> conductor.   So, we don't consider fiber optic cables to be susceptable to
> "EMI"; and we don't consider them to g

RE: European 3 Phase

[amichael]

Hello John, Peter, et al,

BSI's "World Electricity Supplies, An International Survey", also
available from (and in stock at) Int'l Product Safety Bookshop;  
Updated & Revised May 2001, Copyright 2001

See 

Regards, Art Michael

Int'l Product Safety Bookshop
A.E. Michael, Manager
P.O. Box 1561 
166 Congdon St. East
Middletown CT 06457 U.S.A.

Phone  :  (860) 344-1651
Fax:  (860) 346-9066
Email  :  i...@safetylink.com
Website:  http://www.safetylink.com
ISSN   :  1040-7529



On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, John Allen wrote:

> 
> Hi Folks
> 
> I think you might find that a more comprehensive list of electricity
> supplies is given in the BSI "World Electricity Supplies" guide which
> available from BSI at
> http://www.bsi-global.com/Corporate/News+Room/electricity-supplies.xalter
> 
> The latest version is 1999 - but I helped compile several earlier versions
> during my time at BSI, and we went to a lot of time and trouble to compile
> and confirm the data, so I am reasonably sure that the information is quite
> good!
> 
> The only thing it lacks (which is almost inevitable, and is virtually
> impossible to keep up to date) is a town-by-town (etc.) listing like you
> used to find in the US Department of Commerce "Electricity Supplies Abroad"
> bookle. This booklet had a red cover (if I remember correctly)and was around
> in the 1970's. However, if anyone still has an old copy, then it would
> probably be some sort of guide to the the areas which might be the
> "odd-balls" - it certainly did mention the 127/220V 3-phase situation in
> Belgium and some other parts of Europe.
> 
> 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: Peter L. Tarver [mailto:peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com]
> Sent: 09 January 2003 14:31
> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: RE: European 3 Phase
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that the 130V mentioned for Belgium doesn't
> appear in the list for the below link.  Makes me wonder how
> many other voltage systems are out there that aren't
> identified, even though the country is in the list.
> 
> FWIW, I've read (perhaps on this list or on usenet) of 25 Hz
> systems supposedly still in use for electric trains, though
> I can't remember where they're located.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Peter L. Tarver, PE
> Product Safety Manager
> Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
> San Jose, CA
> peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: drcuthbert
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 8:41 AM
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> > here is a website with good info on this subject:
> > http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/machinery/ecabroad/
> >
> > This link came from this site
> > http://users.metro2000.net/~purwinc/seec2_2.htm
> >
> > which has some more links.
> >
> >Dave Cuthbert
> 
> 
> ---
> 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. 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 m

RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Juhasz, John (IndSys, GE Interlogix)]

While there are VERY good points here, I believe the original
issue was the use of the terminology 'telecommunications' port/cable.

Although a fiber optic port/cable can be used for telecommunications,
I am going to go out on a limb here and assume ( a dangerous
word, indeed) that intent was for wire-line telecom not fiber.

Of course one should take into consideration, as astutley noted in
Dave Cuthbert's message, whether or not the use of fiber with a metal
sheath is typically used in the product's installation. In that case there
could indeed be measurable emissions.

Is there anyone subscribed to this forum who is on 
the EN 55022 committee who could possibly shed light on this?

John A. Juhasz

GE Interlogix
Fiber Options Div.
Bohemia, NY 




From: drcuthbert [mailto:drcuthb...@micron.com]
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 12:12 PM
To: 'Chris Maxwell'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?



Chris,
some excellent points! My take on this is that a fiber optical cable has a
cutoff frequency that is way above the "RF" frequencies we are concerned
with. It just won't act as a waveguide for what we consider RF wavelengths.
However, I think the optical cable certainly does leak a bit at light
wavelengths. It seems like one could perform light emissions and
susceptibility testing. Now most of our light wave communications use
cables. Sort of like if all RF communications was done in copper. With
nothing intentionally radiated, and with the cables operating as very poor
antennas, we might have no need for emission and susceptibility testing. On
the other hand, the FCC does not regulate radiated optical communications.
Maybe it's time to do so. With laser range finders, optical radar, IR remote
control, and other primitive devices we are accumulating pollution of this
part of the EM spectrum. Reminds me of spark transmitters spewing RF over a
wide frequency range.

Shouldn't an optical cable with a metal sheath be treated just like any
other cable? Hook it up during EMC testing?

And as you point out, where is the transition from RF to light? RF
generation methods (such as gyrotrons, seem to peter out at wavelengths of
1000 microns while visible light begins at 0.7 microns. There seems to be a
huge no man's land in the EM spectrum. 


  Dave Cuthbert
  Micron Technology


From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com]
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 8:24 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?



OK,

Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get
paid for).  How about a hypothetical question...

Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced by
the acceleration of electrons.  When electrons accelerate back and forth at
a given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that
frequency.  At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors.  The
electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives
off an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another
conductor placed some distance away (the measurement antenna).  Notice that
in this case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have
free electrons flowing and accelerating.  

Fiber optic cables carry light, which is modeled as photons produced by
electrons changing energy states.  We still can model this with similar wave
equations as used for any old EM radiation; but here we have radiation flow
in an insulator.  We also throw in the concept of "photons" whereby we try
to quantize the radiation.   Light won't (appreciably) flow at all in a
conductor.   So, we don't consider fiber optic cables to be susceptable to
"EMI"; and we don't consider them to give off "EMI".  I think that we all
agree that trying to measure the "conducted" or "radiated" emisions from
fiber optic cables is not required by any standard.   They do "conduct"
light; but it is a conduction of photons; not the conduction of free
electrons that the standards try to measure.

However, I can think of some lower frequencies (lower than light, that is)
that use dielectric waveguides similar to fiber optics; yet they produce and
are susceptable to EMI.  For example, many GPS antennas us dielectric
waveguides at the GPS frequency (about 1.5GHz, if I recall correctly)

So where is the "crossover point"?  Does it have to do with skin depth?
Maybe the photoelectric effect?  Why don't we talk about photons at 1Ghz?
Is it just because we don't have a material with the correct band gap to
produce a 1Ghz photon?   On the other hand, can free electrons be
"conducted" at light frequencies; or isn't there a material with enough of a
skin depth at such frequencies?   Anybody want to take a stab at
enlightening(no pun intended) us all on this one?  I guess I'm just too lazy
to brush up on my quantum mechanics.  It's too bad that Einstein died before
we came up with listservers.  

Re: Switzerland Compliance & Homologation Requirements

[j...@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/10/2003, Jeffrey Collins writes:



Does anyone have any current information on telecom requirements in
Switzerland? 




Hi Jeffrey:

Last time I looked into this (about a year ago), Switzerland had incorporated
the provisions of the RTTE directive into their national law.  As you know,
they are not legally obligated to follow the RTTE directive because they are
not a member of the EU, but as a practical matter the requirements are the
same.

Even before the RTTE directive, the Swiss requirements were pretty
straightforward.  For analog PSTN requirements they took TBR 21 and made a few
minor revisions.  You will have to watch out for 12 KHz meter pulses, though,
because these are still widespread on the Swiss network.


Joe Randolph
Telecom Design Consultant
Randolph Telecom, Inc.
781-721-2848
http://www.randolph-telecom.com

RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[don_borow...@selinc.com]

-- Forwarded by Don Borowski/SEL on 01/10/2003 10:37 AM



Don Borowski
01/10/2003 10:35 AM

To:"Chris Maxwell" 
cc:
Subject:RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?  (Document
   link: Database 'Don Borowski', View '($Sent)')

OK, some comments.

The radiated and conducted emissions of concern are there due to the
possibility of the modulation signal sent to the light source getting
coupled onto the metalic coating of the fiber.

There are seperate standards covering light leakage that are there for eye
protection.

We conventionally think about current flow in a pair of wires carrying
energy. The energy is indeed guided by the wires, but is carried by the
transverse electromagnetic (TEM) field around the wires. The energy is not
flowing in the conductors, but in the space around the conductors.

Even at DC where there is electron flow through the bulk of a
(non-superconductor) material, the energy is transmitted in the electric
and magnetic field outside the wires. There is indeed a magnetic field
inside the wire. However, the only electric field inside the wire is along
the direction of electron flow, and is due to resistance. If you do the
Poynting vector E×H, the direction of the vector is radial into the wire.
There is energy flow into the wire, which causes the wire to produce heat.
This heat production is better known as I²R loss.

Light certainly can be guided by metal, just as lower frequencies. Take a
cylinder with a nice shiney mirrored surface on the inside, and shine light
into it. You will see light come out at the other end, even if there is a
bend so that there is not a straight shot through.

It is possible to guide light with two conductors in TEM mode, though it is
quite lossy. Fiber is nice because of its low loss.

There certainly can be light emissions from fiber -  a sharp bend can cause
it. Conversely, bend a fiber sharply and shine a light on the bend, and the
light will go into the fiber. So there is possible emission and
susceptibility. But put a jacket over the fiber, or a metalic coating, and
this problem is solved for any practical source or victim.

A system with a light source and light receiver is certainly still subject
to problems with RF emissions and RF susceptibility, even if the fiber
itself is not for all practical purposes. The optical components are good
enought the there is no significant susceptibility to or emissions of
light, assuming nothing is broken. Similarly, a GPS receiver may be
susceptible to or radiated emissions that are not at the GPS frequency.

There are certainly photons at 1 GHz. However, due to the low frequency
(compared to light), an individual photon does not carry much energy - not
enough energy to free an electron as can be done by a single light photon
on a sensitive surface (and then usually multiplied using an electron
multiplier). Due to the difficulty in detecting single photons at 1 GHz,
photons are not part of the normal vocabulary  when discussing RF.

Enough cranial smoke yet?

Don Borowski
Schweitzer Engineering Labs
Pullman, WA





"Chris Maxwell" @majordomo.ieee.org on
01/10/2003 07:23:40 AM

Please respond to "Chris Maxwell" 

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


To:
cc:
Subject:RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?



OK,

Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get
paid for).  How about a hypothetical question...

Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced
by the acceleration of electrons.  When electrons accelerate back and forth
at a given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that
frequency.  At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors.  The
electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives
off an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another
conductor placed some distance away (the measurement antenna).  Notice that
in this case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have
free electrons flowing and accelerating.

Fiber optic cables carry light, which is modeled as photons produced by
electrons changing energy states.  We still can model this with similar
wave equations as used for any old EM radiation; but here we have radiation
flow in an insulator.  We also throw in the concept of "photons" whereby we
try to quantize the radiation.   Light won't (appreciably) flow at all in a
conductor.   So, we don't consider fiber optic cables to be susceptable to
"EMI"; and we don't consider them to give off "EMI".  I think that we all
agree that trying to measure the "conducted" or "radiated" emisions from
fiber optic cables is not required by any standard.   They do "conduct"
light; but it is a conduction of photons; not the conduction of free
electrons that the standards try to measure.

However, I can think of some lower frequencies (lower than light, that is)
that use dielectric waveguides similar to fib

Switzerland Compliance & Homologation Requirements

[Collins, Jeffrey]

Hi Group,

Does anyone have any current information on telecom requirements in
Switzerland? Mine is a little out dated.
Specifically I'm looking into:

* CO gear requirements

* Network Access permits or licenses

* Networking gear requirements with residential line access

On a side note: Does anyone know the story on why Switzerland is not a
member of the EU, EEA or EFTA?  In my previous experiences they accepted CE
mark data based on the applicable harmonized standards. Also, do they accept
the EURO for currency?


Thanks,

Jeffrey Collins 
Sr. HW Engineering Manager 
EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety
CIENA  Core Networking Division
5965 Silver Creek Valley Road
(408) 571-3002, Fax (408) 965-2705
jcoll...@ciena.com
http://www.ciena.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: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Ken Javor]

The answer is independent of frequency, it is the nature of the particle 
(electron vs. photon) that is key.  I have forgotten the terminology, but
one type  of particle is called a boson, and per my (quite possibly faulty)
recollection, bosons do not interact with electromagnetic fields.  For
example, you can use either an electric or magnetic field to deflect and
point an electron beam, but you cannot do so with a beam of light.


>From: "Chris Maxwell" 
>To: 
>Subject: RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?
>Date: Fri, Jan 10, 2003, 9:23 AM
>

>
> OK,
>
> Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get
> paid for).  How about a hypothetical question...
>
> Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced
> by the acceleration of electrons.  When electrons accelerate back and forth
> at a given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that
> frequency.  At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors.  The
> electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives
> off an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another
> conductor placed some distance away (the measurement antenna).  Notice that
> in this case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have
> free electrons flowing and accelerating.
>
> Fiber optic cables carry light, which is modeled as photons produced by
> electrons changing energy states.  We still can model this with similar
> wave equations as used for any old EM radiation; but here we have radiation
> flow in an insulator.  We also throw in the concept of "photons" whereby we
> try to quantize the radiation.   Light won't (appreciably) flow at all in a
> conductor.   So, we don't consider fiber optic cables to be susceptable to
> "EMI"; and we don't consider them to give off "EMI".  I think that we all
> agree that trying to measure the "conducted" or "radiated" emisions from
> fiber optic cables is not required by any standard.   They do "conduct"
> light; but it is a conduction of photons; not the conduction of free
> electrons that the standards try to measure.
>
> However, I can think of some lower frequencies (lower than light, that is)
> that use dielectric waveguides similar to fiber optics; yet they produce
> and are susceptable to EMI.  For example, many GPS antennas us dielectric
> waveguides at the GPS frequency (about 1.5GHz, if I recall correctly)
>
> So where is the "crossover point"?  Does it have to do with skin depth?
> Maybe the photoelectric effect?  Why don't we talk about photons at 1Ghz?
> Is it just because we don't have a material with the correct band gap to
> produce a 1Ghz photon?   On the other hand, can free electrons be
> "conducted" at light frequencies; or isn't there a material with enough of
> a skin depth at such frequencies?   Anybody want to take a stab at
> enlightening(no pun intended) us all on this one?  I guess I'm just too
> lazy to brush up on my quantum mechanics.  It's too bad that Einstein died
> before we came up with listservers.  I have about a million questions for
> him.  He probably would have taken a job as an EMC guy just to pay the
> bills while he was working on relativity.
>
> Sure, its a hypothetical question; but it may provide a deeper
> understanding of why we don't throw fiber optic cables in the coupling clamp.
>
> I can smell the collective cranial smoke from the group already.  That's
good.
>
> Inquizzitively and antagonistically,
>
> 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:
>  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...@att

For Auction: Slaughter Hi-Pot tester model 106-2.5BUW

[Kurt M. Marden]

No reserve auction.  Appears to work fine. See auction listing for details.
Please contact me with any questions offline at kurt...@netscape.net
Thanks,
Kurt

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=25423&item=3106687535

-- 
Kurt M. Marden
Environmental Simulation Manager

Curtis-Straus LLC   kmar...@curtis-straus.com
Laboratory for EMC,Safety   Environmental Simulation Lab
NEBS,SEMI-S2 and Telecom168 Ayer Rd.
527 Great Road  Littleton,  MA   01460
Littleton, MA 01460 voice (978) 486-8880
http://www.curtis-straus.comfax   (978) 486-0806




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: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[drcuthbert]

Chris,
some excellent points! My take on this is that a fiber optical cable has a
cutoff frequency that is way above the "RF" frequencies we are concerned
with. It just won't act as a waveguide for what we consider RF wavelengths.
However, I think the optical cable certainly does leak a bit at light
wavelengths. It seems like one could perform light emissions and
susceptibility testing. Now most of our light wave communications use
cables. Sort of like if all RF communications was done in copper. With
nothing intentionally radiated, and with the cables operating as very poor
antennas, we might have no need for emission and susceptibility testing. On
the other hand, the FCC does not regulate radiated optical communications.
Maybe it's time to do so. With laser range finders, optical radar, IR remote
control, and other primitive devices we are accumulating pollution of this
part of the EM spectrum. Reminds me of spark transmitters spewing RF over a
wide frequency range.

Shouldn't an optical cable with a metal sheath be treated just like any
other cable? Hook it up during EMC testing?

And as you point out, where is the transition from RF to light? RF
generation methods (such as gyrotrons, seem to peter out at wavelengths of
1000 microns while visible light begins at 0.7 microns. There seems to be a
huge no man's land in the EM spectrum. 


  Dave Cuthbert
  Micron Technology


From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com]
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 8:24 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?



OK,

Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get
paid for).  How about a hypothetical question...

Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced by
the acceleration of electrons.  When electrons accelerate back and forth at
a given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that
frequency.  At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors.  The
electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives
off an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another
conductor placed some distance away (the measurement antenna).  Notice that
in this case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have
free electrons flowing and accelerating.  

Fiber optic cables carry light, which is modeled as photons produced by
electrons changing energy states.  We still can model this with similar wave
equations as used for any old EM radiation; but here we have radiation flow
in an insulator.  We also throw in the concept of "photons" whereby we try
to quantize the radiation.   Light won't (appreciably) flow at all in a
conductor.   So, we don't consider fiber optic cables to be susceptable to
"EMI"; and we don't consider them to give off "EMI".  I think that we all
agree that trying to measure the "conducted" or "radiated" emisions from
fiber optic cables is not required by any standard.   They do "conduct"
light; but it is a conduction of photons; not the conduction of free
electrons that the standards try to measure.

However, I can think of some lower frequencies (lower than light, that is)
that use dielectric waveguides similar to fiber optics; yet they produce and
are susceptable to EMI.  For example, many GPS antennas us dielectric
waveguides at the GPS frequency (about 1.5GHz, if I recall correctly)

So where is the "crossover point"?  Does it have to do with skin depth?
Maybe the photoelectric effect?  Why don't we talk about photons at 1Ghz?
Is it just because we don't have a material with the correct band gap to
produce a 1Ghz photon?   On the other hand, can free electrons be
"conducted" at light frequencies; or isn't there a material with enough of a
skin depth at such frequencies?   Anybody want to take a stab at
enlightening(no pun intended) us all on this one?  I guess I'm just too lazy
to brush up on my quantum mechanics.  It's too bad that Einstein died before
we came up with listservers.  I have about a million questions for him.  He
probably would have taken a job as an EMC guy just to pay the bills while he
was working on relativity.

Sure, its a hypothetical question; but it may provide a deeper understanding
of why we don't throw fiber optic cables in the coupling clamp.

I can smell the collective cranial smoke from the group already.  That's
good.

Inquizzitively and antagonistically,

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 admin

EMC-PSTC Admin seeks employment EMC/Product Safety/Environmental/Reliability/Signal Integrity

[Dave Heald]

Greetings all,
  Due to a recent restructuring (a 41% layoff), I am for the moment
unemployed.  Naturally I'd like to remedy the situation, so here is a
brief overview of my qualifications:

  I am an EMC, Product Safety, and Environmental compliance engineer who
has for the last few years been a one person compliance department at
Tellium, Inc.  After assuming the compliance responsibilities at
Tellium, I was able to initiate mandatory compliance design reviews,
worked closely with the design team to ensure that all aspects of
compliance were addressed in new designs before the first prototypes
were built, drafted presentations to make the design team aware of and
current with the constantly changing regulatory standards, and managed
/supported our products as they swiftly made their way through the
compliance laboratories.  I also assumed the Reliability and
Availability duties and was part of a very small team that brought
Signal Integrity reviews into the design process.
  Before Tellium, I had 4 years experience at Curtis-Straus, LLC where I
was the Senior EMC Engineer and a Product Safety Engineer.  During this
time I became familiar with all of the "generic" EMC and Product Safety
standards plus the FCC transmitter approval process, Military EMC
requirements, and FDA EMC requirements.

  If you would like my resume, please contact me OFFLIST at
davehe...@attbi.com or 978.618.6973.  I would prefer to stay in the
Boston area but I could perhaps be persuaded to pursue a career
elsewhere.

Best Regards,
David Heald


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"

IEC vs. EN

[Sam Wismer]

When IEC standards are called for in Generic or Product specific EU standards,
is it inappropriate to use EN standards?  If so, does the transition period
for a superseded EN standard apply to the IEC standard or is the IEC presumed
to be effective immediately if the IEC standard does not publish a DoW for
existing IEC standards?
 
Case in point:  EN 61000-4-4 Amd. 2 DoW for the superseded standard is 7/04
however EN55024 calls out IEC 61000-4-4.  Is IEC 61000-4-4 amd. 2 in force now
and should it be used now when EN55024 is the applied standard? 
 
 
 
Kind Regards,
 
 
Sam Wismer
Engineering Manager
ACS, Inc.
 
*Tel: (770) 831-8048
*Fax: (770) 831-8598
*Web:  www.acstestlab.com
* <**> swis...@acstestlab.com
 
 

RE: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[Chris Maxwell]

OK,

Enough of this regulatory blah, blah, blah...(although that's what we get paid
for).  How about a hypothetical question...

Typical radiated emissions measure a time varying electric field produced by
the acceleration of electrons.  When electrons accelerate back and forth at a
given frequency; then you get EM (ElectroMagnetic) radiation at that
frequency.  At these frequencies, we have electron flow in conductors.  The
electron acceleration in one conductor (say your computer backplane) gives off
an EM field which will cause a similar electron flow in another conductor
placed some distance away (the measurement antenna).  Notice that in this
case, we don't have electrons changing energy states, we just have free
electrons flowing and accelerating.  

Fiber optic cables carry light, which is modeled as photons produced by
electrons changing energy states.  We still can model this with similar wave
equations as used for any old EM radiation; but here we have radiation flow in
an insulator.  We also throw in the concept of "photons" whereby we try to
quantize the radiation.   Light won't (appreciably) flow at all in a
conductor.   So, we don't consider fiber optic cables to be susceptable to
"EMI"; and we don't consider them to give off "EMI".  I think that we all
agree that trying to measure the "conducted" or "radiated" emisions from fiber
optic cables is not required by any standard.   They do "conduct" light; but
it is a conduction of photons; not the conduction of free electrons that the
standards try to measure.

However, I can think of some lower frequencies (lower than light, that is) 
that use dielectric waveguides similar to fiber optics; yet they produce and
are susceptable to EMI.  For example, many GPS antennas us dielectric
waveguides at the GPS frequency (about 1.5GHz, if I recall correctly)

So where is the "crossover point"?  Does it have to do with skin depth?  Maybe
the photoelectric effect?  Why don't we talk about photons at 1Ghz?   Is it
just because we don't have a material with the correct band gap to produce a
1Ghz photon?   On the other hand, can free electrons be "conducted" at light
frequencies; or isn't there a material with enough of a skin depth at such
frequencies?   Anybody want to take a stab at enlightening(no pun intended) us
all on this one?  I guess I'm just too lazy to brush up on my quantum
mechanics.  It's too bad that Einstein died before we came up with
listservers.  I have about a million questions for him.  He probably would
have taken a job as an EMC guy just to pay the bills while he was working on
relativity.

Sure, its a hypothetical question; but it may provide a deeper understanding
of why we don't throw fiber optic cables in the coupling clamp.

I can smell the collective cranial smoke from the group already.  That's good.

Inquizzitively and antagonistically,

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:
 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"

CCC Certification

[Evangeline Cometa]

This is in response to a recent posting by Christian Marti on certification
for China:
"We are a US company manufacturer of TVSS:Transient Voltage Surge
Suppressors (SPDs: Surge Protection Devices).

We are selling these products in China, and if I am not wrong  the
deadline to get the CCC certification mark is May 2003.

I wanted to know:

1) Is the CCC mark applicable to the TVSSs?
2) Which is the mark we should apply for (CCC EMC) or (CCC S&E)?
So as it seems similar to the CE mark it seems we should apply for the
CCC mark including safety and also EMC could anyone confirm that?
3) I tried to enter into the web pages www.aqsiq.gov.cn (all the
information was in chinese) and in the www.cemc.org.cn this was only
related to EMC.
4) What should be the initial steps and where to get some contact
information?"

Indeed, China has a new Compulsory Product Certifcation System. Your product
must bear the CCC (Safety & EMC) mark by May 1, 2003 before it can be sold
or marketed in China. Holders of the previous CCIB and CCEE mark
certification must also apply for CCC conversion by May 1, 2003. There's a
backlog of applications in China right now, as can be expected. There's also
initial factory inspection. Please respond off-line or contact me directly
so I can provide further details and pertinent bulletins.

Regards,
Evangeline Cometa
Engineering Project Specialist
Assistance to Exporters
CSA International
Tel. 416-747-2671
Fax: 416-401-6893





--IMPORTANT NOTICE-- 
This message is intended only for the use of the person or organization to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or responsible for delivering
the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately by email or telephone and delete the original message
immediately.  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:
 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: 60950-1 DoP

[Gregg Kervill]

Does anyone know how much it costs?

Beat regards

Gregg


From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Richard Meyette
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 1:28 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: 60950-1 DoP


Brian,

There is a CB scheme Test Report Form for EN 60950-1 and IEC 60950-1
(Form No. IECEN60950_1A) created by SGS Fimko Ltd that is available from
the IEC Web Store.

http://webstore.iec.ch/

However, I don't know if IEC 60950-1:2001 has been adopted by all of the
member
countries of the CB scheme to date.

Regards,

Richard Meyette


At 04:47 PM 1/8/03 -0800, you wrote:

>Brian -
>
>EN60950-1 has been published in the ECOJ for the RTTE
>Directive, so yes, it can be used for agency certifications
>in the EEA.
>
>Whether or not IEC60950-1 may be used depends on whether or
>not the lead agency creating the CB Scheme Test Report form
>has completed that task.  It used to be FIMKO was the lead
>agency, but that may have changed.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Peter L. Tarver, PE
>Product Safety Manager
>Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services
>San Jose, CA
>peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: boconn...@t-yuden.com
>Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 2:01 PM
>
>Good People of PSTC
>Can EN60950-1:2001 be used agency reports and certificates?
>Can IEC60950-1, 1st ed be used for CB reports?
>R/S,
>Brian O'Connell
>Taiyo Yuden (USA), 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"



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: Testing Sun beds in the UK.

[David Sproul]

Dear Mr Woodgate, you would be surprised where people chose to use sun beds
these days.
Just kidding. you're right, I should have typed 55015 instead of 50015.

Best regards,
David Sproul

From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of John Woodgate
Sent: 09 January 2003 21:32
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Testing Sun beds in the UK.



I read in !emc-pstc that David Sproul 
wrote (in ) about 'Testing Sun beds in the UK.' on Thu, 9 Jan 2003:
>Hello group,
>I am looking for a test house in the UK that can test a sun bed to
EN50015

That can't be the right standard:

Pub Id :
BS EN 50015:1998

Status :
Current

Title :
Electrical apparatus for potentially explosive atmospheres. Oil
immersion "o"

Description :
Requirements for construction and testing of oil-immersed electrical
apparatus, oil-immersed parts of electrical apparatus and Ex components
in the type of protection 'o'. To be read in conjunction with BS EN
50014:1998

Int Relationships :
EN 50015:1998 IDT

Replaces :
BS EN 50015:1994

Replaces Notes :
Replaces BS EN 50015:1994 which remains current.


--
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: Fiber optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Hans Mellberg  wrote
(in <20030110005915.73808.qm...@web40903.mail.yahoo.com>) about 'Fiber
optic cable testing per EN 55022:1998 ?' on Thu, 9 Jan 2003:
>As a matter of fact the local SCV EMC society paper next week is about EM 
>radiation
>from fiber optics. No, not from the glass or plastic itself!, but from the 
>metalized
>reflector coating and also from the proximity of the Tx diode next to the 
>connector.
>Actually measurable radiation!

But these emissions are measured as part of the emissions from the
enclosure. I can't see any need to introduce any NEW tests involving the
fibre-optic cables.
-- 
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: Testing Sun beds in the UK. (Humor)

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Maxwell  wrote
(in <83d652574e7af740873674f9fc12dbaaf7e...@utexh1w2.gnnettest.com>)
about 'Testing Sun beds in the UK. (Humor)' on Thu, 9 Jan 2003:
>It gets pretty dark and cold here in central NY about this time of year. 
I'll 
>test that sun bed for you.  Make sure that you send a fully equipped test
sample 
>to include:  magazine, parasol, a pail of sand, a conch shell, two coronas, a 
>beach towel and some Bain de Solei :-)  Oh, almost forgot,  a line cord would
be 
>helpful.

You forgot the six female test loads as 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"