Re: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and humidity measurements

[Jim Ericson]

Kevin:

I would recommend that you discuss this with your accreditation agency
up-front.  In our case, we are allowed to do such an "in-house" calibration
providing that:  (a)  the certificate meets ALL of the 17025 calibration
report requirements; (b) we calculate [and report on the cal cert] the
measurement uncertainty associated with the calibration; (c) we have a
WRITTEN in-house calibration procedure for the instrument; and; (d) that we
have DOCUMENTED training (or experience) records demonstrating the
competency of the individual performing the calibration.

Give me a call if you have questions.

Regards,

Jim Ericson
Quality System Manager/Senior EMC Engineer
Acme Testing Company
j...@acmetesting.com



From: "Kevin Harris" 
To: "EMC-PSTC (E-mail)" 
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 10:50 AM
Subject: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and humidity
measurements


>
> Hello Group,
>
> We are in the process of seeking formal accreditation of our in house lab.
> One of our difficulties is the requirement to get a calibration of our
> environmental chamber  (temperature and humidity) from a calibrating
service
> that is 17025 accredited to make those measurements at a customer
location.
> (i.e. our chamber is not moveable). We have been unable to find a company
in
> Canada with those credentials. Does anybody know of one? Alternatively
does
> anybody know of one in the Eastern US (the closer to Toronto the better
:))
> ?
>
> Thanks
>
>  Regards,
>
>
> Kevin Harris
> Approvals Manager
> Digital Security Controls
> 3301 Langstaff Road
> Concord, Ontario
> CANADA
> L4K 4L2
>
> Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
> Fax +1 905 760 3020
>
> Email: kevinharr...@dsc.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: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14

[Price, Ed]

>-Original Message-
>From: pat.law...@verizon.net [mailto:pat.law...@verizon.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 10:59 AM
>To: EMC-PSTC
>Subject: Re: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14
>
>
>
>On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 08:28:19 -0700, ed.pr...@cubic.com wrote:
>>>-Original Message-
>>>From: Rich Nute [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com]
>>>Sent: Friday, April 18, 2003 11:49 AM
>>>To: richhug...@aol.com
>>>Cc: peperkin...@cs.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>>>Subject: Re: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14
>>>
>>>Hi Richard:
>>>
   You said "We in the product safety industry must be very 
>>>careful that we use
   symbols in strict accordance with their definitions".

SNIP

>>Allow me a couple of observations on safety, from my 
>viewpoint as a consumer
>>rather than a safety specialist.
>>
>>I find the universal alert symbol (the exclamation point 
>within a triangle)
>>to be rather useless at best and even distractive. It's the 
>equivalent to
>>shouting "Hey!", with no hint of what the true danger is. 
>Sure, it puts you
>>on guard, but while you are looking for the sharp edge to 
>avoid, do you
>>instead get burned from a hot surface?  I would much rather 
>have a specific
>>hazard depicted so I know right away what the hazard is.
>>
>>Further, I think symbols should have a hierarchy of warning. 
>There's only a
>>few ways that the human body reacts to nasty outside stimuli 
>(i.e., you
>>bleed, burn, freeze, have pieces fall off). The top-level 
>safety symbol
>>should express the major danger category. Then, for people 
>who haven't yet
>>fled the area, you can have all kinds of very graphic 
>depictions of trauma
>>(superheated radioactive acidic steam).

SNIP

>>Regards,
>>Ed Price
>>ed.pr...@cubic.com
>
>Hi Ed (and group):
>
>Maybe these labels are what you have in mind? I think the top half of
>the page are ISO symbols.
>Are they too 'busy'? Would they get the message across to the majority
>of product users?
>
>http://www.bay-labels.com/safety_symbols.htm
>
>Pat
>
>---

Pat:


Yes, those labels at http://www.bay-labels.com/safety_symbols.htm are a good
example.

#1 just shouts at you, but doesn't tell you anything. Your reaction is "Huh!
What, where, slippery floor or high voltage?"

#2, #11, #13 & #18 are really good specific hazard symbols; to me, they
clearly define an immediate threat.

I wish I could say that #7 & #25 were good symbols, but I understand them by
training only. #7 might mean "bright light" and #25 might mean "no bare
hands" to someone else.

#31, #32 & #33 are all nice symbols, but the hazard is quite similar. It's
nice to be specific, but do you really care if the symbol differentiates a
cog wheel from a pulley from a gear?

#5 almost looks like a bullet hole at first.

Finally, #3 is my choice for a truly improper warning symbol, and should not
be included with any set of hazard symbols. A fuse advisory, of all things!
Honestly, without the text, did anyone guess this one?

CAUTION: My personal impressions only .


Regards,

Ed


Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
NARTE Certified EMC Engineer & Technician
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA  USA
858-505-2780  (Voice)
858-505-1583  (Fax)
Military & Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty


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: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and humidity measurements

[Dave Clement]

At my last position we had several chambers, both reach in and walk in. We
either used a separate temperature recorder that was calibrated or removed
the recorder/controller from the oven and sent it in for calibration. We
were ISO17025 accredited and never considered having a cal house come in to
do the chambers.

Dave Clement


From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Kevin Harris
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:51 PM
To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Subject: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and
humidity measurements



Hello Group,

We are in the process of seeking formal accreditation of our in house lab.
One of our difficulties is the requirement to get a calibration of our
environmental chamber  (temperature and humidity) from a calibrating service
that is 17025 accredited to make those measurements at a customer location.
(i.e. our chamber is not moveable). We have been unable to find a company in
Canada with those credentials. Does anybody know of one? Alternatively does
anybody know of one in the Eastern US (the closer to Toronto the better :))
?

Thanks

 Regards,


Kevin Harris
Approvals Manager
Digital Security Controls
3301 Langstaff Road
Concord, Ontario
CANADA
L4K 4L2

Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
Fax +1 905 760 3020

Email: kevinharr...@dsc.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: Russian (GOST) equivalent standards.

[Vit Gorod]

David, John, and others,
 
I am afraid you have diverted from the original subject, namely, Russian
equivalent standards.  To my knowledge, Russians identify standards
applicability by using two different systems, parallel but not identical to
European approach.  I would suggest to contact a certification body which
helped you get GOST-R approval;  they would advise you on applicability of EN
standards to GOST approval.  It may surprise you.
 
Best Regards

David Sproul  wrote:


Hello John,
I find your response to Neil's comments to be most interesting. In my
original posting I said that I had used the generics to cover the emc
requirements. I had guessed these from memory, but when I actually checked
I found that we had in fact used the EN 55103 standards that Neil had
referred to. I also noticed that section G.2.2.4 (Entertainment lighting
control apparatus:) was highlighted in the my copy of the standard.

After an endless period of head scratching, I began to recall the lengthy
debates we had at the time with, our client and the test house.

There are 2 standards for EMC that generally cover lighting products, namely
EN 55015 for emissions and EN61547 for immunity. EN 61547 also includes in
it's scope entertainment lighting control equipment for professional
purpose.

On the other hand there are the EN 55103! standards which are specifically
named "Product family standard for audio, video, audio-visual and
entertainment lighting control apparatus for professional use." Since our
client made lighting control equipment for use in theatres, we saw the
latter standards as being the most appropriate ones to use.

EN 55015 did not seem to be the most appropriate standard for us. Our
client's units have an on-board processor running at several MHz, which
monitors load currents and voltages, dimmer temperature and control
instructions for the 96 channels being run simultaneously. With load cables
several 10's of metres long, we saw there was a high likelihood of radiated
emissions, which are not covered by EN55015. This again is why we opted
for the EN55103 standards which do specify radiated emissions measurements
up to 1GHz.

As I stated earlier, we did also notice this peculiar clause in the
informative Annex G within EN55103-1 (Produc! t family standard for
...entertainment lighting control! apparat us for professional use) which
seemed to excluded professional lighting control equipment from the
professional lighting control equipment standard.

Perhaps incorrectly, as you would argue, we interpreted that clause in a way
that suited our case.

It says that the standard applies to "control desks (but not dimmers or
luminaires, to which EN 55014 or EN 55015 applies)"
If it had said " to which EN 55014 or EN 55015 apply", that would have said
to me that dimmers or luminaires are covered exclusively by these 2
standards. But because it said "applies" we chose to read that as "EN55103
does not apply to dimmers for which the scope of EN 55015 fully covers all
their EMC emissions protection requirements." As far as we could see, EN
55015 did not address all the particular protection requirements for
emissions from our clients' equipment.

Nevertheless. In the light of (no pun intended) the recent prosecution of a
hairdryer! manufacturer for not ensuring their equipment was compliant with
all the EMC requirements for the intend working environment, we have
recommended to our client that they carry out Conducted Emission tests
between 9kHz and 150kHz, as required by EN55015, but excluded from
EN55103-1.

In this way we are now confident that our clients equipment now meets the
protection requirements for the environment in which it is designed to work.

I look forward (I think) to your comments,

Best regards,
David Sproul.



From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of John Woodgate
Sent: 15 April 2003 08:31
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Russian (GOST) equivalent standards.



I read in !emc-pstc that Barker, Neil 
wrote (in <4f826f960057d4118ec3009027e2453808a52...@whl17.eev.uk>) about
'! Russian (GOST) equivalent standards.' on Mon, 14 Apr 2003:
! >Alth ough the technical requirements are somewhat similar, you should be
>using EN 55103-1 & EN 55103-2 for EMC as they are the product specific
>standards for audio, video, and lighting control apparatus for professional
>use. I would make sure that you meet these first. I don't agree with
earlier
>advice to us EN 55015 as this applies to the luminaires rather than the
>control equipment.

Well, I'm afraid you are wrong in respect of dimmers, as you would know
if you had read clause G.2.2.4 of EN 55103-1. The OP's 'dimmer/control
equipment' suggested to me that the control was integrated in the dimmer
rack, in which case EN 55015 applies to the whole box.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution

Re: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14

[pat.law...@verizon.net]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 08:28:19 -0700, ed.pr...@cubic.com wrote:
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Rich Nute [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com]
>>Sent: Friday, April 18, 2003 11:49 AM
>>To: richhug...@aol.com
>>Cc: peperkin...@cs.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>>Subject: Re: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14
>>
>>Hi Richard:
>>
>>>   You said "We in the product safety industry must be very 
>>careful that we use
>>>   symbols in strict accordance with their definitions".  No 
>>issue with you
>>>   there.  However, the paper states that some of these misuses were
>>>   perpetrated by people not even connected with electrical 
>>engineering, let
>>>   alone safety.  
>>
>>Indeed.
>>
>>We need to keep such people from learning about
>>our safety symbols (except when we use them in 
>>the proper venue and context).  :-)
>>
>>>   This brings me to another of your statements "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."  Perhaps this is true, 
>>let's assume it
>>>   is for the moment.  What then are the options available to 
>>us?  Either we
>>>   have to find a way of policing the use safety symbols or 
>>we have to face the
>>>   possibility that every symbol described in IEC 60417 could 
>>become unusable
>>>   due to misuse. Any suggestions on how to police 
>>(internationally, of course)
>>>   the incorrect use of IEC and ISO symbols?
>>
>>We need to first make sure our house is in order.
>>
>>First, do we have clear, unambiguous definitions
>>for our safety symbols?  Based on the very short
>>definitions in 417, I think not.  I believe we
>>need much more work on the definitions.
>>
>>Second, we need to make sure we only use the 
>>symbols in accordance with the definition.  We
>>can "police" ourselves through our traditional
>>third-party safety certification of products.
>>
>>>   So what do we do as regards written words?  We look at the 
>>context in which
>>>   the word is used.  If I were to pronounce that an object 
>>is "cool" then the
>>>   chances are that I would mean that it is below room 
>>temperature - but if my
>>>   daughter were to pronounce an object "cool" then the 
>>chances are that it
>>>   would be the latest 'in thing'. Confusing? In theory 
>>maybe, in practice not
>>>   really.   Of course, the standards for word definitions 
>>(which, for the sake
>>>   of simplicity, I'll call dictionaries) do describe 
>>multiple common uses of
>>>   individual words (including examples of their contextual 
>>usage, if they're
>>>   any good). 
>>
>>The preceding is a very good statement of the
>>problem of multiple definitions for both words 
>>and symbols.
>>
>>Let's back up a step and ask the purpose of the
>>symbol (or even the set of words).  
>>
>>I submit that the purpose is to invoke an action 
>>on the part of the reader.  If the symbol/words
>>is in regard of safety, then I submit that the
>>action invoked is because of lack of a suitable
>>safeguard.
>>
>>Products should be designed so that no safety 
>>symbols/words are required (at least for the
>>user/operator).  
>>
>>If you look at your monitor, keyboard, and
>>computer, you probably will see no symbols or
>>words relating to safety.  So, products CAN be
>>designed without the need for safety symbols.
>>
>>You ask "So what do we do as regards written 
>>words?"  My response is design the product so
>>that no words or symbols are needed insofar as
>>safety is concerned.
>>
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Rich
>>
>
>Rich:
>
>Allow me a couple of observations on safety, from my viewpoint as a consumer
>rather than a safety specialist.
>
>I find the universal alert symbol (the exclamation point within a triangle)
>to be rather useless at best and even distractive. It's the equivalent to
>shouting "Hey!", with no hint of what the true danger is. Sure, it puts you
>on guard, but while you are looking for the sharp edge to avoid, do you
>instead get burned from a hot surface?  I would much rather have a specific
>hazard depicted so I know right away what the hazard is.
>
>Further, I think symbols should have a hierarchy of warning. There's only a
>few ways that the human body reacts to nasty outside stimuli (i.e., you
>bleed, burn, freeze, have pieces fall off). The top-level safety symbol
>should express the major danger category. Then, for people who haven't yet
>fled the area, you can have all kinds of very graphic depictions of trauma
>(superheated radioactive acidic steam).
>
>Now, about keyboards. How about "CAUTION: May induce repetitive stress
>injury"? That symbol is gonna take some hard thought!
>
>Remarkably, on something truly dangerous (razor blades), I have never seen a
>warning etched on each blade. Is there some product category for them,
>something like Generally Recognized As Doggone Dangerous (GRADD)?
>
>
>Regards,
>Ed Price
>ed.pr...@cubic.com

Hi Ed (and group):

Maybe these labels are what you have in mind?

RE: Certification process for 802.11B Singapore, and New Zealand?

[k.macl...@aprel.com]

Dear Alejandro - 

FYI, our clients have been asked by the Singaporean authorities to provide
SAR test reports, not just declarations - this is why they have requested
testing from us.  This has been for devices such as laptops, handhelds,
etc., etc.  

Obviously, for wireless devices which do not operate in the reactive
near-field (eg. access points which are over 20 cm away, etc.), SAR would
not normally be applicable (MPE applies instead).

Kind regards,
Kate


Kathy M. MacLean
President, APREL Laboratories
-EMC-RF Safety-Antenna Design/Test-SAR/MPE-SAR/Near-Field
Tools-Acoustics-Wireless- 
51 Spectrum Way, Nepean, Ontario K2R 1E6
(613) 820-2730 fax (613) 820-4161 
cell (613) 791-3777
Web site:  http://www.aprel.com - watch for our new web site coming soon!






From: Alejandro Torrecilla Torregrosa [mailto:atorreci...@cetecom.es]
Sent: April 22, 2003 1:23 PM
To: k.macl...@aprel.com; rlinf...@sonicwall.com;
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Certification process for 802.11B Singapore, and New
Zealand?


Hi Rick,

just one clarification to Kate's email: it is needed to declare compliance
with one of the following standards:

a) Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, ANSI/IEEE
C95.1-1999/FCC OET No. 65:1997
b) International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP
1998) Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying EMFs in the frequency
range up to 300 GHz.
c) Department of Health and Welfare Canada, Safety Code 6 (1999) / Canada -
RSS-102: 1999 (Industry Canada)
d) Australia - Radiocommunications (Electromagnetic Radiation - Human
Exposure) Standard 1999, including amendment No. 1: 2000/ACA AS/NZS 2772.1
e) EU Countries - CENELEC ES59005 (1998)
f) Verband Deutscher Elektrolngenieure (VDE) DIN-0848
g) National Radiological Protection Board of the United Kingdom DOCS.NRPB,
4, No. 5 (1993).

which does not necessarily means SAR testing.

Regards,

Alejandro


De: k.macl...@aprel.com [mailto:k.macl...@aprel.com]
Enviado el: martes, 22 de abril de 2003 17:08
Para: rlinf...@sonicwall.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Asunto: RE: Certification process for 802.11B Singapore, and New
Zealand?



Rick, 

I am sure you will get a very complete reply from our colleagues, but one
important point for Singapore is that SAR (Specific Absorbtion Rate) testing
is required even for very, very low power (mW in the single digits).  The
standard is IDA-TS-SSS.  Feel free to contact me offline if you need more
details.

Kindest regards,
Kate


Kathy M. MacLean
President, APREL Laboratories
-EMC-RF Safety-Antenna Design/Test-SAR/Near-Field
Tools-Acoustics-Wireless-SAR/MPE-
51 Spectrum Way, Nepean, Ontario K2R 1E6
(613) 820-2730 fax (613) 820-4161 
cell (613) 791-3777
Web site:  http://www.aprel.com - watch for our new web site coming soon!






From: rlinf...@sonicwall.com [mailto:rlinf...@sonicwall.com]
Sent: April 17, 2003 8:36 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Certification process for 802.11B Singapore, and New Zealand?



Hello World Wide Regulatory Knowledge Base,

What are the regulatory/certification requirements if any for Wireless LAN
(2.4 GHz) 802.11B in New Zealand and Singapore?

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


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, sen

RE: Out of Office AutoReplies

[Cortland Richmond]

Sorry if I gave the impression the ad was on the list; it was merely
waiting for me (along with emc-pstc messages) in my Compuserve mail.

However, when I reply to an emc-pstc message, shouldn't I receive
out-of-office _only_ from the addressee? 

Cortland


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: Thermocouple glue

[Luttrell, Lyle]

Hi Ned,

We have been using Loctite 382 with Tak-Pak accelerator with good results.

Regards,
Lyle

Lyle F. Luttrell, PE
PeAk Storage Solutions, Div of MaxOptix
lluttr...@peakstor.com




From: Ned Devine [mailto:ndev...@entela.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 7:11 AM
To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety)
Subject: Thermocouple glue


Hi,

In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples.  I
just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued.   

Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement?

Thanks

Ned Devine
Entela, Inc.
3033 Madison Ave. SE
Grand Rapids, MI  49548

Phone: 616 248 9671
Fax: 616 574 9752
e-mail: ndev...@entela.com
www.entela.com 
Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 




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: Thermocouple glue

[Duncan Hobbs]

Ned (and group),

We have have found that Loctite 382 adhesive and Loctite 7455 activator
is quite useful for attaching thermocouples. We buy the two together in
a 'Tak pak' as its called by Loctite, which is a kit of the adhesive and
activator which is primarily intended for wire tacking and component
mounting.

I believe that this is a Cyanoacrylate adhesive. When used with the
activator it sets very quickly - ideal when you are attaching lots of
thermocouples.

Hope this helps..
Regards,
Duncan.

Duncan Hobbs, Senior Compliance Engineer
Xyratex Product Compliance Lab.
Havant, Hants, U.K.
tel: 02392 496444
fax: 02392 496014
duncan_ho...@xyratex.com
 
 


From: Ned Devine [mailto:ndev...@entela.com] 
Sent: 16 April 2003 14:11
To: IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety)
Subject: Thermocouple glue


Hi,

In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples.  I
just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued.   

Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement?

Thanks

Ned Devine
Entela, Inc.
3033 Madison Ave. SE
Grand Rapids, MI  49548

Phone: 616 248 9671
Fax: 616 574 9752
e-mail: ndev...@entela.com
www.entela.com 
Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 




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: Low signal switching

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that djumbdenst...@tycoint.com wrote (in <846BF526A2
05F84BA2B6045BBF7E9A6A0532B3DB@flbocexu05>) about 'Low signal switching'
on Tue, 22 Apr 2003:
>It had not occurred to me that electronic switches might do the job.  I
>don't know if isolation will be an issue, but contact resistance is out of
>the picture, and I can live with a couple of dB of insertion loss.  Thanks
>for the idea.

There are special diodes (not PIN diodes) made for switching at UHF, in
TV tuners for example. 
-- 
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

RE: Low signal switching

[drcuthbert]

Some of these attenuators use wiping contacts- self cleaning. If there are any
microwave switches like that they will last longer during "dry" switching.
There is one SA I know of that has an attenuator exercise cycle. When the unit
is powered up it runs the attenuator through several cycles to clean the gold
contacts. 

  Dave Cuthbert


From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 5:20 PM
To: drcuthbert; 'djumbdenst...@tycoint.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Low signal switching


I can certainly suggest a solution, although it would take a bit of research
to totally determine the answer.  There are any number of spectrum analyzers
and EMI receivers out there with switchable front-end attenuators.  An HP
8566 has a noise floor of -135 dBm with a 10 Hz bandwidth and full video
filtering. An NM-37/57 has a much lower noise floor and these things have
been around for close to forty years, with no problems that I know of with
the attenuator switches fouling.

So any of the manufacturers of EMI receivers spectrum analyzers should know
what swtiches to buy.

I checked out Mini-Circuits:

http://www.minicircuits.com/

and the only amplitude related specs there were insertion loss and vswr.

> From: drcuthbert 
> Reply-To: drcuthbert 
> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 14:58:57 -0600
> To: "'djumbdenst...@tycoint.com'" ,
> emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: RE: Low signal switching
> 
> 
> Don,
> 
> I have encountered this problem with low-level signals. It seems to vary
> greatly from manufacturer to manufacturer (the company we had the best
results
> with went out of business). When the contact(s) became dirty I would run a DC
> current and clean it. The problem would quickly return and the only real fix
> was to replace the relay. One to two years of life was typical. I also would
> like to know a good solution.
> 
> Dave Cuthbert
> Micron Technology
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: djumbdenst...@tycoint.com [mailto:djumbdenst...@tycoint.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 11:28 AM
> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: Low signal switching
> 
> 
> 
> Hello Friends,
> 
> I have an application in which I would like to switch system signals on coax
> cables. One system is 80 to 1000 MHz, the other is 1-2 GHz.  I have found
> coax switches by Narda, DB Products and Dow Key. Dow Key indicates that the
> signals should be above -20 dBm to ensure that contact resistance doesn't
> cause a problem.  The others do not spec or address low signal issues. My
> branches operate at -35 dBm, 0 dBm and 50 dBm.  The 2 higher values are not
> a problem, just the -35 dBm.  Are there other companies that you are aware
> of that make 50 ohm coax switches that are specified to operate at low
> signal levels?  Other ideas?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Don Umbdenstock
> Sensormatic
> 
> ---
> 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
> 


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:

RE: Certification process for 802.11B Singapore, and New Zealand?

[k.macl...@aprel.com]

Rick, 

I am sure you will get a very complete reply from our colleagues, but one
important point for Singapore is that SAR (Specific Absorbtion Rate) testing
is required even for very, very low power (mW in the single digits).  The
standard is IDA-TS-SSS.  Feel free to contact me offline if you need more
details.

Kindest regards,
Kate


Kathy M. MacLean
President, APREL Laboratories
-EMC-RF Safety-Antenna Design/Test-SAR/Near-Field
Tools-Acoustics-Wireless-SAR/MPE-
51 Spectrum Way, Nepean, Ontario K2R 1E6
(613) 820-2730 fax (613) 820-4161 
cell (613) 791-3777
Web site:  http://www.aprel.com - watch for our new web site coming soon!






From: rlinf...@sonicwall.com [mailto:rlinf...@sonicwall.com]
Sent: April 17, 2003 8:36 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Certification process for 802.11B Singapore, and New Zealand?



Hello World Wide Regulatory Knowledge Base,

What are the regulatory/certification requirements if any for Wireless LAN
(2.4 GHz) 802.11B in New Zealand and Singapore?

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


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: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and humid ity measurements

[k.macl...@aprel.com]

Kevin - 

I may be incorrect about this, but you should be able to do your own
calibration on the chamber, if you have traceable calibrated temperature and
humidity standards with the necessary accuracy.  

Regards,
Kate

Kathy M. MacLean
President, APREL Laboratories
-EMC-RF Safety-Antenna Design/Test-SAR/MPE-SAR/Near-Field
Tools-Acoustics-Wireless- 
51 Spectrum Way, Nepean, Ontario K2R 1E6
(613) 820-2730 fax (613) 820-4161 
cell (613) 791-3777
Web site:  http://www.aprel.com - watch for our new web site coming soon!






From: Kevin Harris [mailto:kevinharr...@dsc.com]
Sent: April 17, 2003 1:51 PM
To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Subject: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and
humidity measurements



Hello Group,

We are in the process of seeking formal accreditation of our in house lab.
One of our difficulties is the requirement to get a calibration of our
environmental chamber  (temperature and humidity) from a calibrating service
that is 17025 accredited to make those measurements at a customer location.
(i.e. our chamber is not moveable). We have been unable to find a company in
Canada with those credentials. Does anybody know of one? Alternatively does
anybody know of one in the Eastern US (the closer to Toronto the better :))
?

Thanks

 Regards,


Kevin Harris
Approvals Manager 
Digital Security Controls
3301 Langstaff Road
Concord, Ontario
CANADA
L4K 4L2

Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
Fax +1 905 760 3020

Email: kevinharr...@dsc.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: EN55022:2003

[Carpentier Kristiaan]

Rich, 

Some additional information that may be of interest: 
Actually, there is a CENELEC document TC210/Sec0296/DC on the DOW of
EN55022:1994. 
The deadline for national comments was today, April 22nd. 
I have not the actual figures yet, but a further delay of the DOW with at
least 2 years is one of the possibilities. 
A further discussion will be held in May at TC210 meeting and a decision can
be expected by CENELEC BT in July. 

Regards, 
Kris 

-Original Message- 
From: richwo...@tycoint.com [ mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] 
Sent: maandag 21 april 2003 21:27 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Subject: EN55022:2003 



Voting ended on 21 March, but the results are not published on the CENELEC 
site. Was it approved? Are there any common modifications concerning 
emissions from telecom ports? 

Richard Woods 
Sensormatic Electronics 
Tyco International 


--- 
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: Fiber and AC mains wire runs

[richhug...@aol.com]

Richard,
 
As I mentioned in my original reply, the building wiring rules vary from one
country within the EU to another.  While it is true that the UK Wiring
Regulations (BSI 7671) are based on the CENELEC Harmonised Document HD384,
which is itself based on the IEC 60364 series of standards, it would be
wrong of someone to think that if they purchased a copy of BS 7671 and then
based their whole European installation strategy on this UK document that
they would be certain not to have difficulties elsewhere in Europe.
 
Of course, if someone wanted to know what the requirements are in the UK and
thereby get a 'flavour' of the requirements elsewhere, then that would be a
different matter and BS 7671 (also known as the IEE Wiring Regulations)
would be a good place to start.  They may also wish to look at the IEE web
site (www.iee.org) for books that provide aditional guidance when applying
the IEE Wiring Regulations.
 
Regards,
 
Richard Hughes.


From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] 
Sent: 22 April 2003 13:57
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Fiber and AC mains wire runs





The EU wiring rules are based upon HD384 which is based upon IEC 60364. You
can purchase a single part copy as BSI 7671.

Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International



From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 5:26 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Fiber and AC mains wire runs



I read in !emc-pstc that Cereceres, David  wrote
(in )
about 'Fiber and AC mains wire runs' on Wed, 16 Apr 2003:

>Is there a European equivalent of the NEC that I could possibly reference?

An *international* standard, IEC 60364, a huge multi-part standard.
-- 
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


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: Bulk current injection method for CS101

[Ken Javor]

Mr. Parker, who founded Solar in 1960 and ran it up to his death just a few
years ago, was indeed a very talented engineer, and a gentleman.  His
catalog was much more than a sales device, it was full of helpful
application notes on how to run tests, and he wrote it himself, no ad dept.
or agency at Solar!

I had occasion many years ago to try to run CS01 on a high current EUT.  The
EUT drew 40 Amps per phase on three phase 400 cycle power.  Although the 50
Amp CS01 transformer should have worked, it inserted enough line voltage
drop relative to the other phases to upset the EUT.  We didn't have two
other identical transformers available, so we had to use a 100 Amp
transformer.  I don't recall if the test in question here is single or three
phase.  I would hope it was single phase, but then I would expect a 150 Amp
single phase load would have been designed to be a 50 Amp three phase load,
so I'm not sure.

> From: "Price, Ed" 
> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 19:38:46 -0700
> To: "'Ken Javor'" , "'EMC-PSTC
> List'"
> Cc: "'Low, Aaron S'" 
> Subject: RE: Bulk current injection method for CS101
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
>> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 1:10 PM
>> To: Price, Ed; 'EMC-PSTC List'
>> Cc: 'Low, Aaron S'
>> Subject: Re: Bulk current injection method for CS101
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The reason Mr. Low can't use the -461E figure Ed suggested is
>> that Solar's
>> highest current capacity CS101 transformer handles 100, not
>> the required 150
>> Amps.  As I said in an earlier posting, such a high current
>> load would get
>> an almost direct feed from the generator, which would eliminate any
>> significant ripple in the frequency range where IR drop
>> dominates IZ drop.
>> I would say that would be from at least 1 kHz and below, but
>> depending on
>> how short that common path is, it may extend to an even higher
>> frequency.
>> When verification requires unobtainable test equipment, it behooves
>> engineering to consider why that might be.
> 
> 
> Ken:
> 
> I agree with your explanation about the probability of a dedicated power
> source. (I would also question the nice, "roundness" of the 150 Amp value;
> is this rated or the REAL current draw?)
> 
> However, a 50% current overload on a Solar injection transformer is not a
> major problem. If you keep that shorting bar on the secondary at all times
> other than when you are actually generating the AF injection power, you can
> minimize transformer heating. And, a tip of the hat goes to the designers of
> that old Solar stuff; they designed in a big safety margin. Test quickly,
> although thoroughly, and get a really big fan. And if that can't keep the
> thermal rise down, then get a big tank of CO2. BTDT , anybody smell
> smoke?
> 
> Ed
> 
> Ed Price
> ed.pr...@cubic.com
> Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
> Cubic Defense Systems
> San Diego, CA  USA
> 858-505-2780  (Voice)
> 858-505-1583  (Fax)
> Military & Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty
> Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
> 



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: Thermocouple glue

[Carmen.Filimon]

Hi Ned,

I use  Output 384 Thermally Conductive Adhesive repairable, Kit ODC-free,
item no. 21087 made by Loctite, (ordered from Electrosonic Canada). It comes
in a kit with the adhesive glue and the activator. 

http://www.e-sonic.com/electrosonic/home.asp

Regards,

Carmen Filimon
Leitch Technology Int'l Inc.


> -Original Message-
> From: Ned Devine [SMTP:ndev...@entela.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 9:11 AM
> To:   IEEE EMC/Product Safety (IEEE, EMC/Product Safety)
> Subject:  Thermocouple glue
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples.  I
> just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued.   
> 
> Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Ned Devine
> Entela, Inc.
> 3033 Madison Ave. SE
> Grand Rapids, MI  49548
> 
> Phone: 616 248 9671
> Fax: 616 574 9752
> e-mail: ndev...@entela.com
> www.entela.com 
> Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> 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: Is notified body needed?

[richwo...@tycoint.com]

The relevant standards have been published in the OJ, so you do no need a
Notified Body if you apply the standards.

Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International



From: sh...@samsung.co.kr [mailto:sh...@samsung.co.kr]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 10:06 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Is notified body needed?



Hi group,

Does anyone know the current situation for 2.4GHz WLAN products 
and whether a Notified Body MUST be used under the RTTE in Europe?  
In the RTTE directive, Annex III states that selecting the test suites 
considered essential is the responsibility of a notified body... except
where 
test suites are defined in the harmonised standards.  
The OJ lists EN 301 489-17 and EN 300 328-2 which as far as I can see 
are applicable to these products.  So, I think that if we can use Annex III,

we should not need to have a notified body involved, though we would 
need to know about any country specific requirements.  Am I right?

Stephen Colclough
SEQAL


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: Fiber and AC mains wire runs

[richwo...@tycoint.com]

The EU wiring rules are based upon HD384 which is based upon IEC 60364. You
can purchase a single part copy as BSI 7671.

Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International



From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 5:26 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Fiber and AC mains wire runs



I read in !emc-pstc that Cereceres, David  wrote
(in )
about 'Fiber and AC mains wire runs' on Wed, 16 Apr 2003:

>Is there a European equivalent of the NEC that I could possibly reference?

An *international* standard, IEC 60364, a huge multi-part standard.
-- 
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


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: Low signal switching

[djumbdenst...@tycoint.com]

Ken,

It had not occurred to me that electronic switches might do the job.  I
don't know if isolation will be an issue, but contact resistance is out of
the picture, and I can live with a couple of dB of insertion loss.  Thanks
for the idea.

Best regards,

Don



From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 7:20 PM
To: drcuthbert; 'djumbdenst...@tycoint.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Low signal switching



I can certainly suggest a solution, although it would take a bit of research
to totally determine the answer.  There are any number of spectrum analyzers
and EMI receivers out there with switchable front-end attenuators.  An HP
8566 has a noise floor of -135 dBm with a 10 Hz bandwidth and full video
filtering. An NM-37/57 has a much lower noise floor and these things have
been around for close to forty years, with no problems that I know of with
the attenuator switches fouling.

So any of the manufacturers of EMI receivers spectrum analyzers should know
what swtiches to buy.

I checked out Mini-Circuits:

http://www.minicircuits.com/

and the only amplitude related specs there were insertion loss and vswr.

> From: drcuthbert 
> Reply-To: drcuthbert 
> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 14:58:57 -0600
> To: "'djumbdenst...@tycoint.com'" ,
> emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: RE: Low signal switching
> 
> 
> Don,
> 
> I have encountered this problem with low-level signals. It seems to vary
> greatly from manufacturer to manufacturer (the company we had the best
results
> with went out of business). When the contact(s) became dirty I would run a
DC
> current and clean it. The problem would quickly return and the only real
fix
> was to replace the relay. One to two years of life was typical. I also
would
> like to know a good solution.
> 
> Dave Cuthbert
> Micron Technology
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: djumbdenst...@tycoint.com [mailto:djumbdenst...@tycoint.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 11:28 AM
> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: Low signal switching
> 
> 
> 
> Hello Friends,
> 
> I have an application in which I would like to switch system signals on
coax
> cables. One system is 80 to 1000 MHz, the other is 1-2 GHz.  I have found
> coax switches by Narda, DB Products and Dow Key. Dow Key indicates that
the
> signals should be above -20 dBm to ensure that contact resistance doesn't
> cause a problem.  The others do not spec or address low signal issues. My
> branches operate at -35 dBm, 0 dBm and 50 dBm.  The 2 higher values are
not
> a problem, just the -35 dBm.  Are there other companies that you are aware
> of that make 50 ohm coax switches that are specified to operate at low
> signal levels?  Other ideas?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Don Umbdenstock
> Sensormatic
> 
> ---
> 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
> 



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 w

Thermocouple glue

[Ned Devine]

Hi,

In the past I have used Henkel Sicomet 77 to adhere thermocouples.  I
just tried to reorder some and was told it has been discontinued.   

Does anyone have a recommendation on a replacement?

Thanks

Ned Devine
Entela, Inc.
3033 Madison Ave. SE
Grand Rapids, MI  49548

Phone: 616 248 9671
Fax: 616 574 9752
e-mail: ndev...@entela.com
www.entela.com 
Entela, Inc. A Certified Woman Owned Business 




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

EN55022:2003

[richwo...@tycoint.com]

Voting ended on 21 March, but the results are not published on the CENELEC
site. Was it approved? Are there any common modifications concerning
emissions from telecom ports?

Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International



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: Sensitivity of PCS phones

[Bill Morse]

RSSI for some network certifications very it might be  -104dBm for one network
while others it can be -98dBm. Some radios will go down to -107dBm. The
numbers are measured at the antenna jack of the radio; so antenna gain and
other physical parameters effect the overall RSSI.

Someone correct me if I am wrong here, the GSM network certifications
governing documents are PTCRB and GCF, these documents list what test need to
be preformed and reference the governing GSM document on what the pass/fail
criteria and how to do the test. In this case it's GSM 11.10 section II.4.2.

If you are on a CDMA network the RSSI is the same.

Bill

 -Original Message-
From:   djumbdenst...@tycoint.com [mailto:djumbdenst...@tycoint.com] 
Sent:   Thursday, April 17, 2003 11:29 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Sensitivity of PCS phones


Hello Forum,

Can anyone tell me how I would go about finding information on the receiver
sensitivity of pcs phones?  My son is in college and we stay in touch with
Sprint pcs phones.  This worked fine until someone broke into his car and
stole his phone.  Then we found out, to no real surprise, all phones are not
created equal -- his replacement phone does not work from his residence.
The original model is no longer available.  Unfortunately, I can't seem to
find any web sites or technical support people who can provide any
information on the sensitivity of the various brands of phones offered by
Sprint.  Do any of you know where this type of information can be found?

Best regards,

Don Umbdenstock
Sensormatic


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: Fiber and AC mains wire runs

[Evangeline Cometa]

David:
The Insulated Conductors Committee of the IEEE has a fiber optic cables
working group that has come up with a document called "P1428 - IEEE Guide
for Installation Methods for Fiber Optic Cables in Electric Power Generating
Stations and in Industrial Facilities".
You can also check the fiber optic section of the IEEE ICC web site:
http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/pes/icc/ for more information as to whether this
guide has been published.

In power cable engineering, the term high voltage is used for cables rated
above 69 kV and above. Those cables employ a semiconductive jacket over the
insulation for installations that are in proximity to communications cables.
Not sure what the practice is for low voltage (115-230V ac)but the ICC
working group on fiber optic cables should be able to give you some
guidelines.

Hope it helps.

Evangeline Cometa
CSA International
Tel. 416-727-2671
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Cereceres, David [mailto:dcerece...@pelco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 4:11 PM
> To: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Cc: Toste, David
> Subject: Fiber and AC mains wire runs 
> 
> 
> 
> Hello Group,
> Does anyone know of any European or North American 
> restrictions against
> running 
> fiber and high voltage (115-230v ac) through the same conduit 
> entry of a
> product? 
> I am aware of certain standards that allow running high and 
> low voltage
> wiring together, 
> provided the wiring has sufficient insulation.  I am also 
> aware that fiber
> jacketing is 
> electrically non-conductive. So would it follow that there are no
> restrictions running high 
> voltage wiring and fiber optics together through the same 
> conduit entry? 
> 
> I have reviewed the NEC but have been unable to come to a definitive
> conclusion. 
> Is there a European equivalent of the NEC that I could 
> possibly reference?
> 
> Once again, your expert advice is greatly appreciated,
> David R. Cereceres
> Safety Engineer
> Pelco
> 800-289-9100x3493
> 559-292-1981x3493
> dcerece...@pelco.com  
> www.Pelco.com  
> 
> 





--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

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

[Carpentier Kristiaan]

Marko, 

ITU-T K.20, K.21, K.45, etc... are (international !) protection standards. 
European Telco's as well as many outside Europe are requesting compliance to
these requirements. 
Most countries, like Europe, do not work with Telcordia standards. 
Regards, 
Kris 

-Original Message- 
From: Marko Radojicic [ mailto:mar...@turnstone.com] 
Sent: maandag 21 april 2003 23:48 
To: 'j...@aol.com'; t...@world.std.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Subject: RE: Lightning coordination in K.20 (2000) versus GR-1089 



Joe, 

I don't have much technical to add but was wondering why you are looking 
into this standard. Have you customers that are asking for this requirement 
to be met or is it simply a planning exercise? If it's customer-driven, 
could you share what type of customer (ILEC, PTT, North America, European, 
Asian, etc.)? 

I haven't seen this standard being used at all but I'm presently focussed on 
North America Service Provider requirements. 

BTW I agree with the comments that GR-1089 compliant products have proven to 
be extremely robust in the real-world. 

Cheers, 
Marko 

-Original Message- 
From: j...@aol.com [ mailto:j...@aol.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 12:54 PM 
To: t...@world.std.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Subject: Lightning coordination in K.20 (2000) versus GR-1089 


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

Certification process for 802.11B Singapore, and New Zealand?

[rlinf...@sonicwall.com]

Hello World Wide Regulatory Knowledge Base,

What are the regulatory/certification requirements if any for Wireless LAN
(2.4 GHz) 802.11B in New Zealand and Singapore?

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: Russian (GOST) equivalent standards.

[David Sproul]

Hello John,
I find your response to Neil's comments to be most interesting.  In my
original posting I said that I had used the generics to cover the emc
requirements.  I had guessed these from memory, but when I actually checked
I found that we had in fact used the EN 55103 standards that Neil had
referred to.  I also noticed that section G.2.2.4 (Entertainment lighting
control apparatus:) was highlighted in the my copy of the standard.

After an endless period of head scratching, I began to recall the lengthy
debates we had at the time with, our client and the test house.

There are 2 standards for EMC that generally cover lighting products, namely
EN 55015 for emissions and EN61547 for immunity. EN 61547 also includes in
it's scope entertainment lighting control equipment for professional
purpose.

On the other hand there are the EN 55103 standards which are specifically
named "Product family standard for audio, video, audio-visual and
entertainment lighting control apparatus for professional use."  Since our
client made lighting control equipment for use in theatres, we saw the
latter standards as being the most appropriate ones to use.

EN 55015 did not seem to be the most appropriate standard for us.  Our
client's units have an on-board processor running at several MHz, which
monitors load currents and voltages, dimmer temperature and control
instructions for the 96 channels being run simultaneously.  With load cables
several 10's of metres long, we saw there was a high likelihood of radiated
emissions, which are not covered by EN55015.   This again is why we opted
for the EN55103 standards which do specify radiated emissions measurements
up to 1GHz.

As I stated earlier, we did also notice this peculiar clause in the
informative Annex G within EN55103-1 (Product family standard for
...entertainment lighting control apparatus for professional use) which
seemed to excluded professional lighting control equipment from the
professional lighting control equipment standard.

Perhaps incorrectly, as you would argue, we interpreted that clause in a way
that suited our case.

It says that the standard applies to "control desks (but not dimmers or
luminaires, to which EN 55014 or EN 55015 applies)"
If it had said " to which EN 55014 or EN 55015 apply",  that would have said
to me  that dimmers or luminaires are covered exclusively by these 2
standards.  But because it said "applies" we chose to read that as "EN55103
does not apply to dimmers for which the scope of EN 55015 fully covers all
their EMC emissions protection requirements."   As far as we could see, EN
55015 did not address all the particular protection requirements for
emissions from our clients' equipment.

Nevertheless.  In the light of (no pun intended) the recent prosecution of a
hairdryer manufacturer for not ensuring their equipment was compliant with
all the EMC requirements for the intend working environment, we have
recommended to our client that they carry out Conducted Emission tests
between 9kHz and 150kHz, as required by EN55015, but excluded from
EN55103-1.

In this way we are now confident that our clients equipment now meets the
protection requirements for the environment in which it is designed to work.

I look forward (I think) to your comments,

Best regards,
David Sproul.



From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of John Woodgate
Sent: 15 April 2003 08:31
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Russian (GOST) equivalent standards.



I read in !emc-pstc that Barker, Neil 
wrote (in <4f826f960057d4118ec3009027e2453808a52...@whl17.eev.uk>) about
'Russian (GOST) equivalent standards.' on Mon, 14 Apr 2003:
>Although the technical requirements are somewhat similar, you should be
>using EN 55103-1 & EN 55103-2 for EMC as they are the product specific
>standards for audio, video, and lighting control apparatus for professional
>use. I would make sure that you meet these first. I don't agree with
earlier
>advice to us EN 55015 as this applies to the luminaires rather than the
>control equipment.

Well, I'm afraid you are wrong in respect of dimmers, as you would know
if you had read clause G.2.2.4 of EN 55103-1. The OP's 'dimmer/control
equipment' suggested to me that the control was integrated in the dimmer
rack, in which case EN 55015 applies to the whole box.
--
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 H

Re: Fiber and AC mains wire runs

[John Woodgate]

I read in !emc-pstc that Cereceres, David  wrote
(in )
about 'Fiber and AC mains wire runs' on Wed, 16 Apr 2003:

>Is there a European equivalent of the NEC that I could possibly reference?

An *international* standard, IEC 60364, a huge multi-part standard.
-- 
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

RE: Is notified body needed?

[Mark Render]

I agree that there is no requirement for a Notified Body in this case.

For radio equipment (transmitters) Annex III may be used to demonstrate
compliance with the RTTE provided the harmonised standard is used where it
exists. Where the harmonised standard identifies essential radio test
suites, a Notified Body is not required under Annex III to identify the
tests.  The Official Journal lists EN 300 328-2 V1.2.1 for 2.4GHz WLAN.
This version of the standard lists essential radio test suites in Clause
5.3.  Compliance with the RTTE may be demonstrated without the use of a NB
provided this is complied with.  Compliance with the EMC requirements (RTTE
Article 3.1(b)) may be demonstrated using EN 301 489-17 and there is no
requirement for a NB.  The RTTED should not be modified as it is implemented

into law by EU mamber states.

Regards

Mark Render
EMC & Radio Group Manager


From: sh...@samsung.co.kr [mailto:sh...@samsung.co.kr]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 3:06 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Is notified body needed?



Hi group,

Does anyone know the current situation for 2.4GHz WLAN products 
and whether a Notified Body MUST be used under the RTTE in Europe?  
In the RTTE directive, Annex III states that selecting the test suites 
considered essential is the responsibility of a notified body... except
where 
test suites are defined in the harmonised standards.  
The OJ lists EN 301 489-17 and EN 300 328-2 which as far as I can see 
are applicable to these products.  So, I think that if we can use Annex III,

we should not need to have a notified body involved, though we would 
need to know about any country specific requirements.  Am I right?

Stephen Colclough
SEQAL


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
KTL
Saxon Way
Priory Park West
Hull HU13 9PB

Tel: +44 (0) 1482 801801
Fax: +44 (0) 1482 801806

To receive our free regular newsletter send a blank email to subscr...@ktl.com

The information contained in this message is private and confidential.
It is intended only for the use of the named Email addressee. If you
are not the named Email addressee please Email or telephone us 
immediately with your confirmation that you have destroyed it. 

In no event should you disclose the contents of this Email to any 
other person nor copy, use, print, distribute or disseminate it or any 
information contained in it. 

Laboratory Accreditation Services Ltd t/a KTL cannot accept liability 
for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and 
not expressly made on behalf of KTL. 

We cannot accept any liability for any loss or damage sustained 
as a result of software viruses. It is your responsibility to carry out 
such virus checking as is necessary before opening any attachment. 

Laboratory Accreditation Services Ltd t/a KTL. 
Registered No. 4407692. 
Registered Office: KTL, Saxon Way, Priory Park West, Hull, HU13 9PB, UK. 
Tel (01482) 801801  Fax (01482) 801806 Email: i...@ktl.com  Website Address
www.ktl.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: Sensitivity of PCS phones

[Lothar Schmidt]

Hello Don

It depends what kind of PCS phone your son have. Is it a CDMA, TDMA or GSM
phone, GSM for example specify a minimum receiver sensitivity.  However this
is specified as a parameter measured conducted at the antenna port. 

The antenna itself is not specified. So you can find phones with the same
sensitivity but very different behavior in the field due to the different
antenna parameter.

I f you need more information give me a call.

Best Regards

Lothar Schmidt
Technical Manager EMC/Radio/SAR
BQB

CETECOM Inc.
411 Dixon Landing Road
Milpitas, CA 95035

phone ?+1 (408) 586 6214
fax  +1 (408) 586 6299

 -Original Message-
From:   djumbdenst...@tycoint.com [mailto:djumbdenst...@tycoint.com] 
Sent:   Thursday, April 17, 2003 10:29 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Sensitivity of PCS phones


Hello Forum,

Can anyone tell me how I would go about finding information on the receiver
sensitivity of pcs phones?  My son is in college and we stay in touch with
Sprint pcs phones.  This worked fine until someone broke into his car and
stole his phone.  Then we found out, to no real surprise, all phones are not
created equal -- his replacement phone does not work from his residence.
The original model is no longer available.  Unfortunately, I can't seem to
find any web sites or technical support people who can provide any
information on the sensitivity of the various brands of phones offered by
Sprint.  Do any of you know where this type of information can be found?

Best regards,

Don Umbdenstock
Sensormatic


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

Competent Authority Registration

[Joe P Martin]

Greetings,

The In-Vitro Diagnostics Directive requires that any manufacturer who
places a device on the market notify the competent authorities of the
Member State(s) in which he has his registered place of business.  I have a
couple of questions in regards to this requirement.

1.   Does this mean that we have to register with every regulatory
authority in all Member States, or is registration with one Member State
sufficient?  The product  is not manufactured in the EU, yet we do have
places of business in several Member States.

2.   For General IVD devices, how does a U.S. manufacturer register their
product in Europe?

3.   Does anyone have a list of the regulatory authorities for all Member
States?

As always, your responses are greatly appreciated.

Regards

Joe Martin
Applied Biosystems
marti...@appliedbiosystems.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: Exemption from CE for products intended for military or police purposes

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

Art 1 of Machinery Directive, 98/37/EC is another example of exclusion, "
-machines specially designed and constructed for military or police
purposes".

But see also Richard's comments.

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
Fax  (847)562-0688
email ggars...@us.tuv.com
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

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: Low signal switching

[Price, Ed]

>-Original Message-
>From: djumbdenst...@tycoint.com [mailto:djumbdenst...@tycoint.com]
>Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 10:28 AM
>To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>Subject: Low signal switching
>
>
>
>Hello Friends,
>
>I have an application in which I would like to switch system 
>signals on coax
>cables. One system is 80 to 1000 MHz, the other is 1-2 GHz.  I 
>have found
>coax switches by Narda, DB Products and Dow Key. Dow Key 
>indicates that the
>signals should be above -20 dBm to ensure that contact 
>resistance doesn't
>cause a problem.  The others do not spec or address low signal 
>issues. My
>branches operate at -35 dBm, 0 dBm and 50 dBm.  The 2 higher 
>values are not
>a problem, just the -35 dBm.  Are there other companies that 
>you are aware
>of that make 50 ohm coax switches that are specified to operate at low
>signal levels?  Other ideas?
>
>Best regards,
>
>Don Umbdenstock
>Sensormatic


Don:

The only ones I trust are the HP (now Agilent) coax relays. As for low-level
reliability, this is what is used in my HP automated data acquisition
system, and I have also seen them used in Watkins Johnson receivers. Both
applications are small-signal (-110 dBm), low-loss, high isolation, high
reliability applications. Did I mention that they're expensive?

Ed

Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA  USA
858-505-2780  (Voice)
858-505-1583  (Fax)
Military & Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis



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

[Pettit, Ghery]

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

 

 

AW: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and humid ity measurements

[Lehmann, Mario (Mario)]

Hi Kevin,

you just need to have calibrated equipment to measure temperatur and humidity
and making the calibration by yourself. It seems that would be the cheapest
solution for you.

Kind regards
Mario Lehmann
Lucent Technologies Network Systems GmbH
European Compliance Laboratory (ECL)
DMTS/EMC Compliance Engineer
Thurn-und-Taxis-Strasse 10
D-90411 Nuernberg

Tel.: +49 (0) 911 526-4310
Fax: +49 (0) 911 526-2391
mailto:mlehm...@lucent.com
http://www.lucent.de/ecl





Von: Kevin Harris [mailto:kevinharr...@dsc.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. April 2003 19:51
An: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
Betreff: Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and
humidity measurements



Hello Group,

We are in the process of seeking formal accreditation of our in house lab.
One of our difficulties is the requirement to get a calibration of our
environmental chamber  (temperature and humidity) from a calibrating service
that is 17025 accredited to make those measurements at a customer location.
(i.e. our chamber is not moveable). We have been unable to find a company in
Canada with those credentials. Does anybody know of one? Alternatively does
anybody know of one in the Eastern US (the closer to Toronto the better :))
?

Thanks

 Regards,


Kevin Harris
Approvals Manager 
Digital Security Controls
3301 Langstaff Road
Concord, Ontario
CANADA
L4K 4L2

Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
Fax +1 905 760 3020

Email: kevinharr...@dsc.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

Is notified body needed?

[sh...@samsung.co.kr]

Hi group,

Does anyone know the current situation for 2.4GHz WLAN products 
and whether a Notified Body MUST be used under the RTTE in Europe?  
In the RTTE directive, Annex III states that selecting the test suites 
considered essential is the responsibility of a notified body... except where 
test suites are defined in the harmonised standards.  
The OJ lists EN 301 489-17 and EN 300 328-2 which as far as I can see 
are applicable to these products.  So, I think that if we can use Annex III, 
we should not need to have a notified body involved, though we would 
need to know about any country specific requirements.  Am I right?

Stephen Colclough
SEQAL


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

Calibration Lab Accredited to 17025 for Temperature and humidity measurements

[Kevin Harris]

Hello Group,

We are in the process of seeking formal accreditation of our in house lab.
One of our difficulties is the requirement to get a calibration of our
environmental chamber  (temperature and humidity) from a calibrating service
that is 17025 accredited to make those measurements at a customer location.
(i.e. our chamber is not moveable). We have been unable to find a company in
Canada with those credentials. Does anybody know of one? Alternatively does
anybody know of one in the Eastern US (the closer to Toronto the better :))
?

Thanks

 Regards,


Kevin Harris
Approvals Manager 
Digital Security Controls
3301 Langstaff Road
Concord, Ontario
CANADA
L4K 4L2

Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
Fax +1 905 760 3020

Email: kevinharr...@dsc.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: Bulk current injection method for CS101

[Ken Javor]

The reason Mr. Low can't use the -461E figure Ed suggested is that Solar's
highest current capacity CS101 transformer handles 100, not the required 150
Amps.  As I said in an earlier posting, such a high current load would get
an almost direct feed from the generator, which would eliminate any
significant ripple in the frequency range where IR drop dominates IZ drop.
I would say that would be from at least 1 kHz and below, but depending on
how short that common path is, it may extend to an even higher frequency.
When verification requires unobtainable test equipment, it behooves
engineering to consider why that might be.

> From: "Price, Ed" 
> Reply-To: "Price, Ed" 
> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:53:37 -0700
> To: "'EMC-PSTC List'" 
> Cc: "'Low, Aaron S'" 
> Subject: RE: Bulk current injection method for CS101
> 
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Low, Aaron S [mailto:aaron.s@lmco.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:24 PM
>> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>> Subject: Bulk current injection method for CS101
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> Aaron:
> 
> 
> A current probe is a very inefficient coupler at the very low frequencies
> that CS101 covers. I don't think it's possible to use a current probe to do
> this.
> 
> Using the technique described in Figure A-5 of 50.7 of MIL-STD-461E, you
> only need two transformers and ONE dummy load. I don't understand why you
> say you "cannot" do this.
> 
> One further thing you could do is use an older, vacuum tube amplifier. These
> amplifiers tolerate load-impressed voltages better than newer, solid-state
> amplifiers. I'm not sure about how much a given amplifier will tolerate,
> but, as a benchmark, I have done CS101 on 80 Amp, 400 Hz powerline using a
> single Solar 6220 transformer and a McIntosh MC-60 (tube) amplifier. I have
> also done 50 Amp 400 Hz lines with a McIntosh MC-100 (solid-state)
> amplifier. I suggest you get a few more opinions; contact Solar Electronics
> and maybe Fischer Custom Components.
> 
> Watch out for on/off transients; you may want to put a shorting bar across
> the injection transformer secondary winding terminals during turn-on &
> turn-off.
> 
> You could try to design a high-pass filter for the circuit between the
> amplifier output and the injection transformer. I'm assuming that your power
> is 400 Hz, so the CS101 test starts at 800 Hz. That might be a very
> interesting filter design, but anything would help.
> 
> Finally, try brute force! Get a variable speed motor generator, and adjust
> the frequency by generator RPM. This method might carry you up to several
> kHz, where you could then switch over to an electronic generator protected
> by a more reasonable high-pass filter.
> 
> Wow; what a science project!
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> Ed Price
> ed.pr...@cubic.com
> Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
> Cubic Defense Systems
> San Diego, CA  USA
> 858-505-2780  (Voice)
> 858-505-1583  (Fax)
> Military & Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty
> Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
> 
> ---
> 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

Re: Low signal switching

[robert Macy]

Don,

It is my understanding that physical switch contacts are
"cleaned" with current - and use.  

It is probably ok at the lower signal levels since from
time to time you're running the higher levels through the
switches.  

Is there someway you can switch and then verify contact?

   - Robert -

   Robert A. Macy, PEm...@california.com
   408 286 3985  fx 408 297 9121
   AJM International Electronics Consultants
   101 E San Fernando, Suite 402
   San Jose, CA  95112


On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 13:27:38 -0400
 djumbdenst...@tycoint.com wrote:
> 
> Hello Friends,
> 
> I have an application in which I would like to switch
> system signals on coax
> cables. One system is 80 to 1000 MHz, the other is 1-2
> GHz.  I have found
> coax switches by Narda, DB Products and Dow Key. Dow Key
> indicates that the
> signals should be above -20 dBm to ensure that contact
> resistance doesn't
> cause a problem.  The others do not spec or address low
> signal issues. My
> branches operate at -35 dBm, 0 dBm and 50 dBm.  The 2
> higher values are not
> a problem, just the -35 dBm.  Are there other companies
> that you are aware
> of that make 50 ohm coax switches that are specified to
> operate at low
> signal levels?  Other ideas?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Don Umbdenstock
> Sensormatic
> 
>


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

[JIM WIESE]

Joe,

You are correct on all accounts.  Unfortunately there has been a lot of work
by a manufacturer of PTC's that is trying to drive interface design on telecom
products such that these parts must be utilized.  The problem is that current
PTC technology is not really adequate for reliable telecom
circuits (in my opinion).  In analog circuits, the longitudinal balance can be
significantly affected and in DSL circuits, the impedance is too great,
especially for extended periods of time after a lightning strike.  For
instance we have seen PTC's that increase impedance from 5 to 70 ohms or more
for 15 minutes and sometimes longer as a result of GR-1089 surges.  This could
take down a DSL circuits for long periods of time on long loops and drive
crafts persons crazy trying to troubleshoot these circuits.  There is not a
requirement in GR-1089 or ITU that requires the product to work within
a given period of time after the surges, yet in the real world this can be a
significant issue.  In my opinion the intent is that immediately after the
surge the product should return to its original functional condition (not 15
minutes, 2 hours, or maybe never).  The new GR-1089 issue 3 does now
require that performance be checked at near the maximum rated loop length
after surges and as such requires the circuit to return to normal performance
at some point(although it technically could be minutes, hours, days).  There
are also other tests such as first level power faults 7, 8, 9 they may
impact the ability to utilize PTC's in carrier class equipment.  PTC's also
tend to explode like roman candles if hit by a 600V power fault on multiple
occasions or due to contact bounce.  A close look at the data sheets will
uncover a small note that states they are not intended for greater than a
3 amp surge current.  ITU, UL, and GR-1089 call out power faults much greater
than that, but only require a single surge.  So during the lab testing
process, the manufacturer can replace the PTC and do the next test.  In the
real world the PTC resets, the same PTC could be hit multiple times.

The thought with the GR-1089-CORE revision was that the product should not
need to functionally survive a surge level greater than a primary protector is
required to survive.  The Telcordia primary protector spec is GR-974-CORE and
only requires a primary protector to function after 10x1000uS,
1000V, 100 amp, lightning strikes.  Therefore, if the product does not force
the primary protector to fire yet can handle the 1000V or 100 amps at 10x1000
uS, it is as robust as the primary protector and coordination is not
necessary.  

If larger surges occur, then either the primary protector or the product is
probably going to fail anyway and a truck would need to be rolled.  Since for
all practical purposes, the product will have overcurrent protection such as
fuses, a large strike would blow the fuses, and then the primary
protector would fire and handle all the energy from the larger strike.  At
least that was our thought process.

The reality is that until an impedance product can be developed that can truly
meet GR-1089-CORE (especially the new issue 3)and also the real world demands
of telecom circuits, I believe it is unwise to write spec's that require
certain performance like that in ITU K.20 and K.21 2000.  What is sad
is that in order to meet the 2000 K.20 and K.21 criteria, the options are very
limited, with PTC's being one of the few options.  As a result, manufacturers
will generally need to make the product work at shorter distances, reduce the
reliability, and increase trouble call rates in order to simply
meet the test requirements. 

As an FYI, we see very few instances of damage on our carrier class products
due to lightning events.  As such I doubt the coordination issue is really
that significant.  What seems to be the root cause in many or most instances
of lightning damage is improper grounding of the telecom equipment.
This is becoming a much bigger issue as the installers are tending to use more
and more sub-contractors with limited interest or knowledge in proper
installation and bonding/grounding practices.



Please note that these are only my opinions and not necessarily that of my
employer!

Good Luck,

Jim 

Jim Wiese 
NEBS Project Manager/Senior Compliance Engineer 
ADTRAN, INC. 
901 Explorer Blvd. 
P.O. Box 14 
Huntsville, AL 35814-4000 
256-963-8431 
256-963-8250 fax 
jim.wi...@adtran.com 




From: j...@aol.com [mailto:j...@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 2:54 PM
To: t...@world.std.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Lightning coordination in K.20 (2000) versus GR-1089



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 

JOB - WA State - PCB Layout

[Mike Cantwell]

All,

I have been speaking to a recruiter that has a current need for 2 PCB
designers in the WA state area. He is looking for experience with medical
products. If anyone is interested or knows of some board designers that
would interested, this contract could last about 18 mos. I don't have any
more details than this.

Forward your resume to me and I'll pass it on to the recruiter, who so far
has had a good track record of responding. Why am I helping a recruiter? I'm
hoping to find something for myself in the Dallas area.

Thanks,
Mike Cantwell, PE, NCE
Tel: (214) 547-1666
Cell: (469) 831-8701
mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org or
mailto:mcantw...@leapfroginet.com
AOL Instant Messenger: CantwellEMC



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: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14

[Price, Ed]

>-Original Message-
>From: Rich Nute [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com]
>Sent: Friday, April 18, 2003 11:49 AM
>To: richhug...@aol.com
>Cc: peperkin...@cs.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: Symbols vs. text - was EN61010-1, Symbol 14
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Hi Richard:
>
>
>>   You said "We in the product safety industry must be very 
>careful that we use
>>   symbols in strict accordance with their definitions".  No 
>issue with you
>>   there.  However, the paper states that some of these misuses were
>>   perpetrated by people not even connected with electrical 
>engineering, let
>>   alone safety.  
>
>Indeed.
>
>We need to keep such people from learning about
>our safety symbols (except when we use them in 
>the proper venue and context).  :-)
>
>>   This brings me to another of your statements "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."  Perhaps this is true, 
>let's assume it
>>   is for the moment.  What then are the options available to 
>us?  Either we
>>   have to find a way of policing the use safety symbols or 
>we have to face the
>>   possibility that every symbol described in IEC 60417 could 
>become unusable
>>   due to misuse. Any suggestions on how to police 
>(internationally, of course)
>>   the incorrect use of IEC and ISO symbols?
>
>We need to first make sure our house is in order.
>
>First, do we have clear, unambiguous definitions
>for our safety symbols?  Based on the very short
>definitions in 417, I think not.  I believe we
>need much more work on the definitions.
>
>Second, we need to make sure we only use the 
>symbols in accordance with the definition.  We
>can "police" ourselves through our traditional
>third-party safety certification of products.
>
>>   So what do we do as regards written words?  We look at the 
>context in which
>>   the word is used.  If I were to pronounce that an object 
>is "cool" then the
>>   chances are that I would mean that it is below room 
>temperature - but if my
>>   daughter were to pronounce an object "cool" then the 
>chances are that it
>>   would be the latest 'in thing'. Confusing? In theory 
>maybe, in practice not
>>   really.   Of course, the standards for word definitions 
>(which, for the sake
>>   of simplicity, I'll call dictionaries) do describe 
>multiple common uses of
>>   individual words (including examples of their contextual 
>usage, if they're
>>   any good). 
>
>The preceding is a very good statement of the
>problem of multiple definitions for both words 
>and symbols.
>
>Let's back up a step and ask the purpose of the
>symbol (or even the set of words).  
>
>I submit that the purpose is to invoke an action 
>on the part of the reader.  If the symbol/words
>is in regard of safety, then I submit that the
>action invoked is because of lack of a suitable
>safeguard.
>
>Products should be designed so that no safety 
>symbols/words are required (at least for the
>user/operator).  
>
>If you look at your monitor, keyboard, and
>computer, you probably will see no symbols or
>words relating to safety.  So, products CAN be
>designed without the need for safety symbols.
>
>You ask "So what do we do as regards written 
>words?"  My response is design the product so
>that no words or symbols are needed insofar as
>safety is concerned.
>
>
>Best regards,
>Rich
>

Rich:

Allow me a couple of observations on safety, from my viewpoint as a consumer
rather than a safety specialist.

I find the universal alert symbol (the exclamation point within a triangle)
to be rather useless at best and even distractive. It's the equivalent to
shouting "Hey!", with no hint of what the true danger is. Sure, it puts you
on guard, but while you are looking for the sharp edge to avoid, do you
instead get burned from a hot surface?  I would much rather have a specific
hazard depicted so I know right away what the hazard is.

Further, I think symbols should have a hierarchy of warning. There's only a
few ways that the human body reacts to nasty outside stimuli (i.e., you
bleed, burn, freeze, have pieces fall off). The top-level safety symbol
should express the major danger category. Then, for people who haven't yet
fled the area, you can have all kinds of very graphic depictions of trauma
(superheated radioactive acidic steam).

Now, about keyboards. How about "CAUTION: May induce repetitive stress
injury"? That symbol is gonna take some hard thought!

Remarkably, on something truly dangerous (razor blades), I have never seen a
warning etched on each blade. Is there some product category for them,
something like Generally Recognized As Doggone Dangerous (GRADD)?


Regards,

Ed

Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA  USA
858-505-2780  (Voice)
858-505-1583  (Fax)
Military & Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis


This message is from the IEEE 

Sensitivity of PCS phones

[djumbdenst...@tycoint.com]

Hello Forum,

Can anyone tell me how I would go about finding information on the receiver
sensitivity of pcs phones?  My son is in college and we stay in touch with
Sprint pcs phones.  This worked fine until someone broke into his car and
stole his phone.  Then we found out, to no real surprise, all phones are not
created equal -- his replacement phone does not work from his residence.
The original model is no longer available.  Unfortunately, I can't seem to
find any web sites or technical support people who can provide any
information on the sensitivity of the various brands of phones offered by
Sprint.  Do any of you know where this type of information can be found?

Best regards,

Don Umbdenstock
Sensormatic


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: Bulk current injection method for CS101

[Price, Ed]

>-Original Message-
>From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
>Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 1:10 PM
>To: Price, Ed; 'EMC-PSTC List'
>Cc: 'Low, Aaron S'
>Subject: Re: Bulk current injection method for CS101
>
>
>
>The reason Mr. Low can't use the -461E figure Ed suggested is 
>that Solar's
>highest current capacity CS101 transformer handles 100, not 
>the required 150
>Amps.  As I said in an earlier posting, such a high current 
>load would get
>an almost direct feed from the generator, which would eliminate any
>significant ripple in the frequency range where IR drop 
>dominates IZ drop.
>I would say that would be from at least 1 kHz and below, but 
>depending on
>how short that common path is, it may extend to an even higher 
>frequency.
>When verification requires unobtainable test equipment, it behooves
>engineering to consider why that might be.


Ken:

I agree with your explanation about the probability of a dedicated power
source. (I would also question the nice, "roundness" of the 150 Amp value;
is this rated or the REAL current draw?)

However, a 50% current overload on a Solar injection transformer is not a
major problem. If you keep that shorting bar on the secondary at all times
other than when you are actually generating the AF injection power, you can
minimize transformer heating. And, a tip of the hat goes to the designers of
that old Solar stuff; they designed in a big safety margin. Test quickly,
although thoroughly, and get a really big fan. And if that can't keep the
thermal rise down, then get a big tank of CO2. BTDT , anybody smell
smoke?

Ed

Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA  USA
858-505-2780  (Voice)
858-505-1583  (Fax)
Military & Avionics EMC Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis


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: Out of Office AutoReply: Low signal switching

[Cortland Richmond]

I couldn't resist. After a whole string of "I'm out of the office" reply
messages on emc-pstc, what shows up in the mail queue?

"Where Have They Gone? Who Are They Now?
Click Here: http://( deleted)"

Ad for a Search firm.

I LOVE it!  Still chuckling, ten minutes later.

Cortland


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