Certification process for 802.11B China, Chile and Brazil?

[rlinf...@sonicwall.com]

Hello (again) World Wide Regulatory Knowledge Base,

What are the regulatory/certification requirements if any for Wireless LAN
(2.4 GHz) 802.11B in China, Brazil and Chile?

RICK LINFORD 
rlinf...@sonicwall.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

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: EN61010-1, Symbol 14

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

:--)  Plus, isn't Chinese the most-spoken language in the world?
  [I am sure I will be corrected if wrong!]

;--) So having everyone else change to Chinese would inconvenience the
least number of people?

best regards, glyn




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: Brazil Telecom Homologations

[peter merguerian]

Jeffrey,
 
For South American Approvals or any International Approvals,  there are two
EXPERTS you can contact at TUV Rheinland in Pleasanton, as follows:
 
Ms. Joyce E. Nixon

International Approvals Coordinator

TUV Rheinland of North America

Telecom Division

1279 Quarry Lane, Suite A

Pleasanton, CA 94566

Ph 925-249-9123 x106

Fax 925-249-9124

jni...@us.tuv.com

www.tuv.com

 

OR

Eduardo Lucio Villalon

International Certification Specialist

Product Safety and Quality

Product Safety Division

1279 Quarry Lane, Suite A

Pleasanton, CA 94566

USA

Ph 925-249-9123 ext. 135

Fax: 925-249-9124

E-mail: elu...@us.tuv.com

Website: http://www.tuv.com

 

Best Regards, Peter

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


"Collins, Jeffrey"  wrote:


Group,
Are you aware of any changes in Brazil telecom requirements effective in
August of 2003, that will require: "Conducted Emissions on the Telecom
ports" ? I'm currently using Res. 237 Nov 2002 for Cat-3 Equipment. ( EMC
emissions and Conducted emissions on the Pwr Line)
Also, can anyone recommend a company / consultant that specializes in Latin
American & South American telecom approvals? Brazil requires in-country
testing for telecom products.
Thanks in advance,
Jeffrey Collins 
Sr. HW Engineering Manager 
EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety
CIENA Core Networking Division
5965 Silver Creek Valley Rd. 
San Jose, CA. 95138
(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 Commi! ttee 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




  _  

Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search   - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

RE: Q. on responsible party for FCC CLass B

[Grasso, Charles]

Thanks to all that replied.
One comment: I looked at a manual from
a similar product and in their manual
ONLY the Manf name and address is listed.
They did NOT include a person or a title.
 
I guess that was the thrust of my question.
I am trying to understand the details of the
requirement.
 
Is a persons name and title required?
 
 
Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Senior Compliance Engineer
Echostar Communications Corp.
Tel:  303-706-5467
Fax: 303-799-6222
Cell: 303-204-2974
Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com;    
Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org
 


From: Pettit, Ghery [mailto:ghery.pet...@intel.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 2:14 PM
To: Grasso, Charles; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Q. on responsible party for FCC CLass B



FCC Rules, Part 2.909, defines the "responsible party"

 

"§2.909  Responsible party. - The following parties are responsible for the
compliance of radio frequency equipment with the applicable standards:

 

(a)  In the case of equipment which requires the issuance by the
Commission of a grant of equipment authorization, he party to whom that grant
of authorization is issued (the grantee).  If the radio frequency equipment is
modified by any party other than the grantee and that party is not working
under the authorization of the grantee pursuant to §2.929(b), the party
performing the modification is responsible for compliance of the product with
the applicable administrative and technical provisions in this chapter.

 

(b)  In the case of equipment subject to authorization under the
verification procedure, the manufacturer or, in the case of imported
equipment, the importer.  If subsequent to manufacture and importation, the
radio frequency equipment is modified by any party not working under the
authority of the responsible party, the party performing the modification
becomes the new responsible party.

 

(c)  In the case of equipment subject to authorization under the
Declaration of Conformity procedure:

 

(1)   The manufacturer or, if the equipment is
assembled from individual component parts and the resulting system is subject
to authorization under a Declaration of Conformity, the assembler.

 

(2)  If the equipment, by itself, is subject to a
Declaration of Conformity and that equipment is imported, the importer.

 

(3)  Retailers or original equipment manufacturers may
enter into an agreement with the responsible party designated in paragraph
(c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section to assume the responsibilities to ensure
compliance of equipment and become the new responsible party.

 

(4)  If the radio frequency equipment is modified by
any party not working under the authority of the responsible party, the party
performing the modifications, if located within the U.S., or the importer, if
the equipment is imported subsequent to the modifications, becomes the new
responsible party.

 

(d) If, because of modifications performed subsequent to authorization, a
new party becomes responsible for ensuring that a product complies with the
technical standards and the new party does not obtain a new equipment
authorization, the equipment shall be labelled, following the specifications
in §2.925(d), with the following:  "This product has been modified by [insert
name, address and telephone number of the party performing the
modifications]." "

 

Could be you, if the company assigns you the responsibility and authority to
sign for them.

 

Ghery Pettit

 

 


From: Grasso, Charles [mailto:charles.gra...@echostar.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 10:11 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Q. on responsible party for FCC CLass B

 

Hi all,

 

The FCC requires the name and address for the 

responsible party. (akin to the EU signatory for

the DoC) . Who would that be??

 

Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Senior Compliance Engineer
Echostar Communications Corp.
Tel:  303-706-5467
Fax: 303-799-6222
Cell: 303-204-2974
Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com;    
Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org

 

 

Re: Q. on responsible party for FCC CLass B

[John Barnes]

Charles,
The FCC requires the "responsible party" for compliance to be located in
the US.  Thus the "responsible party" will be:
*  Responsible for every unit that is marketed.
*  The manufacturer, if they are located in the US.
*  An importer who brings the units into the US.
*  An assembler in the US who assembles units from component parts.
*  Anybody who modifies the units from their original configuration, 
   who is not under the authority of one of the above.
*  A retailer or original equipment manufacturer (OEM) who agrees to 
   take over this responsibility from the manufacturer/importer.

The "responsible party" must maintain all records concerning compliance,
and must provide test samples or test data to the FCC upon request.

See
*  http://www.necmitsubishi.com/css/Techlibrary/FCC.htm
*  http://www.hallikainen.com/cgi-bin/section.pl?section=68.3
*  http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/filing/ead/doc.html

John Barnes KS4GL, PE, NCE, ESDC Eng, SM IEEE
dBi Corporation
http://www.dbicorporation.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

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

Bulk current injection method for CS101

[Low, Aaron S]

I am wondering if any of you have had experience using a current probe to
inject current into a power line for a modified MIL-STD-461 CS101 test?

I am trying to envision how I am going to run CS101 on a 150 Amp system
without blowing up the test equipment amplifiers.  I cannot use two
identical transformers and two identical loads to help protect the
amplifiers.


Thanks
Aaron

  Aaron S. Low
  Systems Engineer
Naval Electronics and Surveillance Systems
EP5 D5  MD45  Syracuse, NY 13221-4840
Phone: (315) 456-1203Fax: (315) 456-0509


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: Q. on responsible party for FCC CLass B

[Jacob Schanker]

Charles:
 
When I was doing compliance for an employer, I always used my name, as
Director of Regulatory Compliance. That way, any FCC correspondence would come
to me instead of being lost on the desk of some executive who was clueless as
to what the correspondence meant.
 
Regards,
 
Jacob Z. Schanker, P.E.
Consulting Engineer
65 Crandon Way
Rochester, NY 14618
 
Tel: 585 442 3909
Fax: 585 442 2182
j.schan...@ieee.org


- Original Message - 
From: Grasso, Charles   
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:11 PM
Subject: Q. on responsible party for FCC CLass B

Hi all,
 
The FCC requires the name and address for the 
responsible party. (akin to the EU signatory for
the DoC) . Who would that be??
 
Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Senior Compliance Engineer
Echostar Communications Corp.
Tel:  303-706-5467
Fax: 303-799-6222
Cell: 303-204-2974
Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com;    
Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org
 
 

Lightning coordination in K.20 (2000) versus GR-1089

[j...@aol.com]

Hello All:

I have been studying the new 2000 edition of K.20, "Resistibility of 
Telecommunication Equipment Installed in a Telecommunication Centre to 
Overvoltages and Overcurrents."  There appears to be an important change from 
the previous edition that will have a big impact on line interface design.  I 
would like to get some feedback on whether I am understanding this properly.

The change that concerns me is that for test 2.1.2 (4000 volt surge on 
twisted pair phone lines), K.20 now requires that the primary protector 
*must* operate.  If there is any kind of secondary overvoltage protection 
internal to the equipment under test (EUT), requirement 2.1.2 pretty much 
forces the EUT to contain series resistors in front of the internal 
protection.  Otherwise, the internal protection will prevent the external 
primary protector from operating.

The requirement for the primary protector to operate can be waived if the 
protection internal to the EUT itself meets the requirements for a primary 
protector.  However, this includes passing the test of 2.1.5 with vaguely 
specified surges of 1000 amps per wire and (presumably) open circuit voltages 
of 4000 volts.

I note that in Telcordia GR-1089, the requirement to coordinate with the 
primary protector can be waived if the EUT can survive a 10x1000 uS, 100 amp 
surge (clause 4.6.7.1 of the 2002 edition).  This requirement is fairly easy 
to meet without using series resistors.

I find it interesting that series resistors have never been required for 
compliance with GR-1089, which itself is a pretty rigorous standard, nor were 
they required for previous editions of K.20.  Now, it appears that 
manufacturers must decide at the outset whether their GR-1089 compliant 
products might ever go into a market where K.20 compliance is required.  If 
so, the resistors have to go in the design.  

The series resistors needed to pass the new K.20 requirement are not ordinary 
resistors.  Typically, they are large, wirewound, surge tolerant, flameproof 
resistors with steady state ratings of several watts.  Two of these per port 
on a high density, multiport board is a big hit on board area.  Furthermore, 
the added resistance is very detrimental to some types of DSL transmission.  
In other words, this change in K.20 looks like it will have a big impact on 
line interface design.  My questions are as follows:

1) Is my understanding of the new coordination requirement in K.20 correct?

2) Is there a simpler way to comply with the requirement other than using 
series resistors?

3) Has there been any industry feedback to the ITU complaining about the 
coordination requirement as presently written?

4) Is there evidence that the 10x1000 uS, 100 amp waiver in GR-1089 is 
inadequate, justifying the much more stringent waiver requirement in K.20?


Any and all comments on the above would be most welcome.  I'm just trying to 
make sense out of the new requirements.


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

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: EN61010-1, Symbol 14

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Pete Perkins  wrote (in
<01c304f8$70d7d7a0$78d5c6ac@oemcomputer>) about 'EN61010-1, Symbol
14' on Thu, 17 Apr 2003:
> As an alternative, perhaps this group would work on the use of a
>universal, worldwide language (English, for instance) which would take care
>of this problem.

Japanese or Chinese is much better. You only need two Kanji characters
to convey a three-volume novel. (;-)
-- 
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

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

Q. on responsible party for FCC CLass B

[Grasso, Charles]

Hi all,
 
The FCC requires the name and address for the 
responsible party. (akin to the EU signatory for
the DoC) . Who would that be??
 
Best Regards
Charles Grasso
Senior Compliance Engineer
Echostar Communications Corp.
Tel:  303-706-5467
Fax: 303-799-6222
Cell: 303-204-2974
Email: charles.gra...@echostar.com;    
Email Alternate: chasgra...@ieee.org
 
 

Re: EN61010-1, Symbol 14

[Rich Nute]

Hi Richard:


>   As you say, this web site provides a discussion on the exclamation symbol.
>   However, the discussion is slanted in one direction that not everyone in
the
>   safety fraternity would necessarily subscribe to.  For instance, I have
seen
>   the 'high voltage flash' sign used as a symbol in an internet cafe' - among
>   other misuses.  I'm sure that others have examples of symbols defined in
IEC
>   60417 being misused: does this mean that they are no longer usable for
>   safety purposes?

The fact of misuse of symbols dilutes the meaning
of the symbol.  The more the misuse, the less 
valuable the symbol is for safety purposes.

Multiple uses (or misuses) implies multiple meanings.
Multiple meanings create confusion in the mind of the 
beholder.  

To quote the paper:

"The power of the safety alert symbol to highlight
a safety concern is diluted when the symbol is 
used for a myriad of lesser tasks.  Each non-safety
appearance of the symbol produces an "anti-teaching"
effect."

We in the product safety industry must be very careful
that we use symbols in strict accordance with their 
definitions.  

>   Perhaps you were not intending to endorse the viewpoint expressed?  Please
>   confirm.

My comment was:

>   For a history and discussion of this symbol, see:

This was nothing more than a reference.  I feel the
reference provides some interesting and useful 
information in regard of the symbol.  I would hope
that my statement did not imply endorsement of the
proposal presented in the document.

I feel the article provides some reasonable ideas for
general understanding of symbols along with specific
criticisms of the safety alert symbol.

I agree with some of the conclusions, but not all.

Conclusion 1:  Agree.
Conclusion 2:  Neutral, because the symbol is arbitrary.
Conclusion 3:  Not applicable; applies to lockout tags.
Conclusion 4:  Agree with first sentence; disagree with
   second sentence. 
Conclusion 5:  Emphatically agree.
Conslusion 6:  Agree.
Conclusion 7:  Neutral, because this is a proposal.
Conclusion 8:  Not applicable to endorsement.

I do not endorse the proposed international safety 
alert symbol presented in the paper.  I would guess
that few or none have endorsed the proposal as it is
2-1/2 years since publication of the paper and I have
seen no movement for adoption.

The characters (letters) that comprise this message 
are symbols.  We arrange these symbols into words.  
Each word has a definition; some words have more than 
one definition.  The more definitions a word has, the 
more chance for confusion as to which definition is 
applicable in a specific use.  Indeed, the definition 
of words is taken only in the context of a sentence 
(a group of words) or even a paragraph (a group of 
sentences).  Without a definition and a usage, a word 
is simply a group of letters.  (Stare at one of these
words for a few moments and you'll see what I mean.)

(Actually, letters and words represent sounds that we
utter.  Misspelling of words without loss of the 
sound does not lose the meaning of the words.  There
is a famous poem about a pea sea spell-checker that 
demonstrates this concept.  A symbol does not 
represent a sound that we utter; therefore, a symbol
is highly subject to misunderstanding.)

So, too, for safety and other non-word symbols.  Each
symbol has a definition.  As with words, many of us
simply don't look up the definition before we use the
symbol (or word).  Consequently, symbols are often
misused.  The more the misuse, the less useful the 
symbol (or word).

Symbols usually don't represent a single word, but
rather a phrase or even a complete sentence.  Abstract
and arbitrary symbols simply don't/can't have obvious 
definitions.  For this reason, we in the safety 
industry must be very careful to only use safety 
symbols in strict accordance with their definition.

A personal note:  Having lived in Spain for almost
two years, my wife and I had appliances with nothing
but symbols on them.  Not having grown up with these
symbols as would a local person, we found ourselves
quite confused by many of the symbols on our washing
machine, dryer, dishwasher, TV, and stereo.

Symbols are NOT a panacea for non-language conveyance 
of information.  Nor do the comprise an international 
language.


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 

RE: Brazil Telecom Homologations

[Pettit, Ghery]

Jeff,

One possible contact is:

Benjamim Da Silva Medeiros c. Galvao
EMC Manager
Integration and Testing Laboratory
Instituto Nacional De Pesquisas Espaciais
benja...@lit.inpe.br (e-mail)
(55) 12 3945-6275 (phone)
(55) 12 3941-1884 (fax)

The Brazilian space agency EMC lab doesn't test very many space craft each
year, so they also perform EMC and telecom testing for industry.  They are
located in Sao Jose dos Campos, about an hour drive outside Sao Paulo.  We
(members of the IEEE EMC Society Board of Directors) got a tour of their
facility last November when we were in Sao Paulo for a meeting.  The EMC
capabilities are an older 10 meter chamber, a shielded room plus the usual
stuff for the other tests.  They have a brand new 10 meter chamber under
construction that looks like it will be world class in all respects when
finished.  Multi-purpose, complete with dynamometer for testing automobiles.
Send Benjamim a message asking about their test services.  And, if you get a
chance to accompany the EUT and witness the tests, go!  The hospitality in
Brazil is fantastic.  Just leave plenty of time for getting your visa.  At
least you can drive up to SF to visit the consulate and handle the details.

While you're down there, try a caipirinha.
http://www.maria-brazil.org/caipirinha.htm for more information.  Any time I
smell limes I'm transported back to Brazil in a flash!

Ghery S. Pettit
Intel Corporation



From: Collins, Jeffrey [mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:30 AM
To: 'EMC-PSTC'
Subject: RE: Brazil Telecom Homologations


Group,
Are you aware of any changes in Brazil telecom requirements effective in
August of 2003, that will require: "Conducted Emissions on the Telecom
ports" ? I'm currently using Res. 237 Nov 2002 for Cat-3 Equipment. ( EMC
emissions and Conducted emissions on the Pwr Line)
Also, can anyone recommend a company / consultant that specializes in Latin
American & South American telecom approvals? Brazil requires in-country
testing for telecom products.
Thanks in advance,
Jeffrey Collins 
Sr. HW Engineering Manager 
EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety
CIENA Core Networking Division
5965 Silver Creek Valley Rd. 
San Jose, CA. 95138
(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

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


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: EN61010-1, Symbol 14

[Pete Perkins]

Richard, et al;

The use of 'universal' markings continues to be controversial.  In
order for markings to be universally accepted there needs to be considerable
training as to the correct interpretation as to what the symbol means. This
has been confirmed by several studies.  Adding any symbol to a symbol
library (e.g. IEC 60417, for example) is not sufficient training to get
widespread recognition and understanding.

Since I'm one of the guys who has pushed the Triodyne article as a
point of view that shows that these symbols are  not consistently used, I
support the article and would like to see less use of symbols alone until
there is a well trained, worldwide community of consumer users that
understand the significance of the symbols.  

I favor combining symbols with language markings until this
understanding is established.  I know that this is a frustration to
manufacturers but needs to be done.  

I know of several innovative ways to do this; it is not impossible.
The use of local language markings is not negative when it comes to the
consumer or user.  These folks feel that any manufacturer who goes to the
trouble to do such is really interested in their business.  

As an alternative, perhaps this group would work on the use of a
universal, worldwide language (English, for instance) which would take care
of this problem. 

Thanx to Rich N for pointing this out again.  

  br, Pete

  Peter E Perkins, PE
  Principal Product Safety Consultant
  Tigard, ORe 97281-3427
  503/452-1201 fone/fax
  p.perk...@ieee.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

re: EN61010-1, Symbol 14

[richhug...@aol.com]

Rich,
 
As you say, this web site provides a discussion on the exclamation symbol.
However, the discussion is slanted in one direction that not everyone in the
safety fraternity would necessarily subscribe to.  For instance, I have seen
the 'high voltage flash' sign used as a symbol in an internet cafe' - among
other misuses.  I'm sure that others have examples of symbols defined in IEC
60417 being misused: does this mean that they are no longer usable for
safety purposes?
 
For international products, the alternative to using safety symbols as
defined in IEC standards is text in multiple languages, and that in turn
means big labels or lots of country-specific variants.
 
Perhaps you were not intending to endorse the viewpoint expressed?  Please
confirm.
 
Richard Hughes
 
Safety Answers Limited.


From: ri...@sdd.hp.com [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com] 
Sent: 15 April 2003 00:01
To: bi...@fastwave.com
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: EN61010-1, Symbol 14









For a history and discussion of this symbol, see:

   http://www.triodyne.com/SAFETY~1/sb_v17n2.pdf


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
 






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

Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting Next Week on Wednesday, April 23

[Matt Campanella]

All,

There will be a Northeast Product Safety Society meeting next week on
Wednesday, April 23rd, at EMC Corporation's Customer Briefing Center at
42 South Street in Hopkinton, MA.  A social hour with light refreshments
will begin at 7:00 PM and the technical meeting will start at 7:30 PM.
This month’s topic, presented by Moe Lamothe, President of Lamothe &
Associates, concerns IEC/EN/UL/CSA 61010-1 changes between the first and
second editions.   Moe’s presentation will cover North American
deviations and compare spacing requirements of 61010-1 1st edition,
61010-1 2nd edition, and 60950-1 1st edition.

Moe is a registered Professional Engineer in Ontario, Canada and has
provided companies with a professional product safety approvals service
since founding Lamothe and Associates in 1979.  Lamothe and Associates
handle a variety of products with a heavy emphasis on Information
Technology Equipment, Telephone Equipment, Test and Measurement
Equipment, Medical Products, Signal Equipment & Power Supplies.  They
emphasize the consulting aspect of their service rather than the testing
side.   They are the only service that has portable test equipment
(which they designed and built) capable of performing the CSA/UL
Telephone Power Cross Test and is a particular advantage for large or
complex equipment that is best tested at the manufacturers facility.

Further information about Moe and Lamothe & Associates is available at
their web site at http://www.lamothe-approvals.com/CVMoe.htm.

The 2003 NPSS meeting schedule is available on the NPSS website at
http://www.nepss.org/meetings/NPSS2003Calendar.htm.

Further information about the Northeast Product Safety Society and how
to become a member is available at http://www.nepss.org.  You can also
contact one of the NPSS officers via links at
http://www.nepss.org/secretary/officers03.html.

Directions:
>From Route 495 North or South take exit 21B to South Street.
At the first traffic light, turn left (Note: This is on South direction
side of Route 495).
EMC Corporation is the second driveway on the right.


Matt Campanella
   NPSS Secretary

Compliance Engineer
Motorola, Inc.
Broadband Communications Sector
3 Highwood Drive East
Tewksbury, MA 01876

(978) 858-2303   Direct
(978) 858-2300   Main
(978) 858-2399   Fax

matthew.campane...@motorola.com  email







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: Brazil Telecom Homologations

[Collins, Jeffrey]

Group,
Are you aware of any changes in Brazil telecom requirements effective in
August of 2003, that will require: "Conducted Emissions on the Telecom
ports" ? I'm currently using Res. 237 Nov 2002 for Cat-3 Equipment. ( EMC
emissions and Conducted emissions on the Pwr Line)
Also, can anyone recommend a company / consultant that specializes in Latin
American & South American telecom approvals? Brazil requires in-country
testing for telecom products.
Thanks in advance,
Jeffrey Collins 
Sr. HW Engineering Manager 
EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety
CIENA Core Networking Division
5965 Silver Creek Valley Rd. 
San Jose, CA. 95138
(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

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