Measurment and Intrepretation of Chip/Package Noise
Hi All, I just finished this month's Technical Tidbit article over the weekend. It deals with characterizing noise in chip packages and includes new information and data since my IEEE paper on the subject was written. Abstract: Voltage drops in chip packages can cause significant signal integrity and EMC problems. The good news is that in many cases these voltages can be measured through mutual inductance. Measured results and their interpretation are discussed. The key here is interpretation of the scope waveforms. Two specific cases are studied in the article. The URL of the site is: http://emcesd.com Page down to the article link (picture of a probe on a chip package at the bottom of the page). Doug -- ___ _ Doug Smith \ / ) P.O. Box 1457 = Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457 _ / \ / \ _ TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799 / /\ \ ] / /\ \ Mobile: 408-858-4528 | q-( ) | o |Email: d...@dsmith.org \ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
New list of harmonized standards for LVD published in OJEC, 14 March
Publications in the Official Journal: Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Council Directive 73/23/EEC - OJ C 60 of 2003-03-14 (this list replaces all the previous lists published in the Official Journal of the European Union) http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ne approach/standardization/harmstds/reflist/lvd.html best regards, glyn TUV Rheinland of North America, Inc. Product Safety -Quality Industrial Machinery Division (Chicago Office) Glyn R. Garside Senior Engineer 1945 Techny Rd, Unit 4 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062-5357, USA Tel (847)562-9888 ext 25 http://www.us.tuv.com PS: I apologize in advance if a possibly-commercial corporate message is added below this line; sometimes it is, and I can't turn it off! [END] 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
G5-4 Harmonics Emissions Limits for Industrial Apparatus.
Dear group, Has anyone heard of G5-4 which is apparently a new standard or amendment to an existing standard within Europe, dealing with the Harmonic Current limits for industrial equipment, presumably meaning equipment rated at more than 16A per phase. I would like to know when is it due to come into force, or when it was ratified, and what exactly it applies to. I thank you in advance for your responses. Best regards, David Sproul, Business Development Manager, Alexander Lynn Approvals Management Services,
RE: IEC60950 (1992) 2nd edition
Amund - I forgot to mention: or against the requirements in CSA22.2 No 60950-1-03/UL60950-1 (publication dated 1APR2003). This should be your preferred standard for Canada and the US, going forward. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Product Safety Manager Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services 2000 Ringwood Ave. San Jose, CA 95131-1749 V: 408-904-2081 F: 408-904-2095 M: 408-234-3529 peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com -Original Message- From: Peter L. Tarver Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 10:51 AM Amund - Neither CSA nor UL will accept new product certifications using CSA 22.2 No 950-95/UL1950, 3rd ed, as of 1APR2003. You will need to submit against CSA 22.2 No. 60950-00/UL60950, 3rd ed. The implication is that any reports you may have for the power supply are probably inadequate in and of themselves and . On the bright side, there were not very many changes to either IEC60950 or the CSA/UL standard that would negatively effect a power supply, so chances are good that it will comply, provided the individual safety critical components meet the mandatory requirements in Annex P.1. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE Product Safety Manager Sanmina-SCI Homologation Services San Jose, CA peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com -Original Message- From: Amund Westin Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:17 PM If you have a Power supply unit tested according to IEC60950 (1992) 2nd edition, will it fulfil UL 1950 3rd ed ? In other words, is IEC60950 (1992) 2nd edition still valid for UL approval ? Amund Oslo / Norway This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Non-Compliant Products
Hi Rich, EN 60598-1:2000, Section 10.3, Leakage current for fixed and portable class 1 luminaires. At 08:11 01/04/2003 -0800, Rich Nute wrote: Hi Enci: Only this morning have I just tested a competitive product from a manufacturer in Germany, which failed miserably (+40dB) on conducted emissions testing and earth leakage, to be fair only 2mA, but the standard clearly states 1mA!. What standard specifies 1 mA? The irony is that leakage current is largely due to Y capacitors in the EMC filter. Higher leakage current suggests higher value Y capacitors. Higher value Y capacitors implies lower conducted emissions. Best regards, Rich ps: IEC 60950 is the applicable standard for IT equipment. The leakage current limit values in IEC 60950 are: 0.25 mA for parts and circuits that are not connected to protective earth, and 3.5 mA (0.75 mA for handheld equipment) for parts and circuits that are connected to protective earth. 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Non-Compliant Products
Hi Enci: Only this morning have I just tested a competitive product from a manufacturer in Germany, which failed miserably (+40dB) on conducted emissions testing and earth leakage, to be fair only 2mA, but the standard clearly states 1mA!. What standard specifies 1 mA? The irony is that leakage current is largely due to Y capacitors in the EMC filter. Higher leakage current suggests higher value Y capacitors. Higher value Y capacitors implies lower conducted emissions. Best regards, Rich ps: IEC 60950 is the applicable standard for IT equipment. The leakage current limit values in IEC 60950 are: 0.25 mA for parts and circuits that are not connected to protective earth, and 3.5 mA (0.75 mA for handheld equipment) for parts and circuits that are connected to protective earth. 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Non-Compliant Products
Hi Enci: How about as a consumer, buying a PC, then 6 months later (with no modifications) finds it is non-compliant (highly likeyl!!).. Can the consumer return it/demand correction/!?!? The consumer can always attempt to return a product or demand correction of a non-compliant product. The real question is whether the store or the manufacturer will agree to refund or correct the product. Best regards, Rich This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: Administrative message: allegations of non-compliance
In a message dated 4/1/2003 3:05:32 AM Central Standard Time, alex.mcn...@ingenicofortronic.com writes: As you said we do not want to continue this thread but as a final word I feel I must state that I totally agree with your email. So the problem continues to be unresolved? I do not agree about the naming names policy, but will honor it since the list rules require it. Derek.
Non-Compliant Products
Only this morning have I just tested a competitive product from a manufacturer in Germany, which failed miserably (+40dB) on conducted emissions testing and earth leakage, to be fair only 2mA, but the standard clearly states 1mA!. As a designer/manufacturer myself this makes me really annoyed. I have spent countless hours iterating the design process to ensure compliance from the first engineering samples down to every unit rolling off the production line. My experience with UK trading standards ( I am in the UK!) was interesting. I mentioned in passing about non compliant products during his un-announced visit on me to drop in and see how we are doing with compliance. He wasnt interested and the last time I checked the products were still on the market. So as with this product I have tested this morning, I'll just leave it until I next see them at a trade show and asked them if they have fixed it yet. As a manufacturer I am more concerned to supply products to specification (the usual stipulation in contract is conformity to relevant directives etc), because if we dont we get the equipment returned or we spend any profit on getting them right. So in a sense is compliance down to self regulation? How about as a consumer, buying a PC, then 6 months later (with no modifications) finds it is non-compliant (highly likeyl!!).. Can the consumer return it/demand correction/!?!? Enci I can live with a couple of dB failure that is in the minutia. What I am talking about is a signature that can be broad band in nature and having a class B product fail class A miserably. This is just a blatant disregard for the standards. Mark J. Kirincic mkirin...@houston.rr.com - Original Message - From: Stone, Richard A mailto:rsto...@lucent.com (Richard) To: 'drcuthbert' mailto:drcuthb...@micron.com ; 'Mark Kirincic' mailto:mkirin...@houston.rr.com ; Stone, Richard A (Richard) mailto:rsto...@lucent.com ; lfresea...@aol.com ; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:03 AM Subject: RE: OK, what's going on? There has been an enormous amount of feedback from Dereks email this week. Including mine. I am beginning to get the notion this is all brand new to most of the people here.. it isn't..going on for years... were not going to change evolution, we can gripe and complain best thing to do is our own diligence on our product,..not censor someone elses... what do you do to the company that passes site A oats,then fails site B...go to site C?...best 2 out of 3? think bill gates would care if he sold PC's? and not just software...People who rely on word/excel and other programs would care less about failing by a few db. the FCC is in place they run itwe try our best Richard, -Original Message- From: drcuthbert [ mailto:drcuthb...@micron.com] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:54 AM To: 'Mark Kirincic'; Stone, Richard A (Richard); lfresea...@aol.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: OK, what's going on? What would NARTE say about certified EMC engineers and technicians signing off on equipment that does not make the grade? It would be great if everyone and every company handled the issue of EMC ethically. But since the world does not always work this way...I favor the idea of a fine for every unit that is shipped from a lot that statistically fails. I.E. mandatory sampling (of boxed and shipped units) and only a certain percentage are allowed to fail, etc. Companies would then weigh the cost of compliance against the cost of non-compliance. Devils advocate speaking now: But from the viewpoint of economics this would of course add cost to every unit shipped. Is the additional manufacturing cost to the public offset by any savings due to lower emissions and lower susceptibility? Would society truly benefit from better EMC enforcement or does this serve only the EMC community? Dave Cuthbert Micron Technology
