Contract Avail.

[Scott Douglas]

Forwarded to the list by Scott Douglas, EMC-PSTC Admin. Please make all 
contacts off-line directly to the agent.

Davis, CA
3 months
 
I need a contractor with a very specific skill to help out one of my 
clients for a few months.  The manager is looking for some that that has 
worked with IEC 61508/SIL (safety integrity level) requirements.  If you 
have experience with that and have interest, let me know.  Thanks
**

__

*Jason Laferriere*

*Segment Manager*

*Software/Hardware Consulting Services*

*Oxford International*

**
6825 West Galveston Street Suite 7

Chandler, AZ 85226

 

877.916.5420 x1110 Office

480.763.9771 FAX

jason_laferri...@oxfordcorp.com 

 

www.oxfordcorp.com 

Oxford Europe 

*
^ *

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Ken Javor]

None of the below.  61000-4-3 specified rf source impedance is 150 Ohms,
calibrated into 150 Ohms load impedance. The 1, 3, and 10 Volt levels are
open-circuit quantities, thus the potential developed in the matched load is
one-half the limit.  The current flowing on a cable under test will depend on
the cable impedance, which is not controlled, except on the AE side, because
the injection device is designed to insert a high common mode impedance on the
AE side of the cable (high relative to 150 Ohms).  As far as I know, you do
not measure injected current doing the test this way.  There is an alternative
current injection test when a suitable coupling device is not available, but
then you inject and measure current, not rf potential.  The current limit is
the short circuit current available from the open circuit potential limit
divided by the 150 Ohm source impedance, even though you will not have a 150
Ohm source impedance when injecting current.
 
Ken Javor

Phone: (256) 650-5261





From: Daniel Roman 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:53:59 -0400
To: Ken Javor , Untitled 
Conversation: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

While slightly off-topic, this discussion got me thinking about the
measurement of the voltage on the cable.  If done with a RF cable current
clamp, do you have to do a conversion of some sort if the cable is assumed to
be 150 ohms?
 
For a 50 ohm system, a 3V level measured with a clamp would be 96 dBuA minus
the transfer impedance in dB ohms.  If the cable is 150 ohms though does that
mean you are measuring the equivalent of 1V from the clamp instead of 3V
because the clamp is measuring current?  Stated another way, assuming the
transfer impedance of the current clamp is zero to simply things, for an
assumed 150 ohm cable should you be reading 96 dBuV on a spectrum analyzer
hooked up to the probe or something less that than equivalent to 1V?
 
Never worked with this stuff so I’m curious.
 
Dan
 

From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:14 AM
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

Comment (e) is unrealistic.  Assuming 61000-4-6 was applied, the amount of
power required to directly inject 1, 3 or 10 Volts oc into 150 Ohms is well
above the radiated power from an rf id device. 
Ken Javor

Phone: (256) 650-5261




From: "Conway, Patrick R (Houston)" 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:17:00 +
To: Gert Gremmen , "Rudd, Adam"
, "emc-p...@ieee.org" 
Conversation: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

Gert-
You mention one possible reason for the test results is that the EUT's
have immunity deficits.
  I agree, that is one possibility.  

  here are a few other possibilities:   
(BTW- not affiliated in any way with medical devices nor with, all
comments OOO )

 
b)Could it be a systemic testing error?
Was a shield room used?   
Were the ambients controlled and eliminated?
Were the devices connected to a patient simulator?
Did the test engineer have his personal GSM phone "OFF"?  etc. 
(...crazier things have happened.)

 
c)Maybe the EUT are old.
Through outdated design specs perhaps RFID proximity was not a
consideration during their design.
  And yet, in today's hospitals, the two types of devices may be in
close proximity.
  If this is the case then the study has done a great service to the
community by uncovering a problem that was unknown.

 
d)Maybe the EUT are old (not a repeat) 
  Through many years of use perhaps once immune equipment has lost
some of their designed immunity?
  Again- if this is the case this study may have uncovered a
previously unknown problem.


e)Is it possible for an RF ID device to overwhelm the immunity levels of
the EUT?
If a medical device is tested at 10 V/m and an RFID device TXout is in
the mW range- is it possible for a RFID mW transmitter to generate 10 V/m?
Perhaps.
For instance- since an RFID device operating at 125 kHz in not
transmitting in the classic sense, then there may be near-field resonant
effects that are not previously understood in the medical device immunity
requirements?
   

 
  It seems that we, as professionals in this field, have the unique ability to
analyze these reports like no other community can.  I wonder if we will find
the answers to the large number of questions raised by the article.  

 
 
All comments OOO.
Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

  




From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:administra.

RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Daniel Roman]

While slightly off-topic, this discussion got me thinking about the
measurement of the voltage on the cable.  If done with a RF cable current
clamp, do you have to do a conversion of some sort if the cable is assumed to
be 150 ohms?

 

For a 50 ohm system, a 3V level measured with a clamp would be 96 dBuA minus
the transfer impedance in dB ohms.  If the cable is 150 ohms though does that
mean you are measuring the equivalent of 1V from the clamp instead of 3V
because the clamp is measuring current?  Stated another way, assuming the
transfer impedance of the current clamp is zero to simply things, for an
assumed 150 ohm cable should you be reading 96 dBuV on a spectrum analyzer
hooked up to the probe or something less that than equivalent to 1V?

 

Never worked with this stuff so I’m curious.

 

Dan

 

From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:14 AM
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

 

Comment (e) is unrealistic.  Assuming 61000-4-6 was applied, the amount of
power required to directly inject 1, 3 or 10 Volts oc into 150 Ohms is well
above the radiated power from an rf id device. 
Ken Javor

Phone: (256) 650-5261





From: "Conway, Patrick R (Houston)" 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:17:00 +
To: Gert Gremmen , "Rudd, Adam"
, "emc-p...@ieee.org" 
Conversation: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

Gert-
You mention one possible reason for the test results is that the EUT's
have immunity deficits.
   I agree, that is one possibility.  

   here are a few other possibilities:   
(BTW- not affiliated in any way with medical devices nor with, all
comments OOO )

 
b)Could it be a systemic testing error?
Was a shield room used?   
Were the ambients controlled and eliminated?
Were the devices connected to a patient simulator?
Did the test engineer have his personal GSM phone "OFF"?  etc. 
(...crazier things have happened.)

 
c)Maybe the EUT are old.
Through outdated design specs perhaps RFID proximity was not a
consideration during their design.
   And yet, in today's hospitals, the two types of devices may be in
close proximity.
   If this is the case then the study has done a great service to the
community by uncovering a problem that was unknown.

 
d)Maybe the EUT are old (not a repeat) 
   Through many years of use perhaps once immune equipment has lost
some of their designed immunity?
   Again- if this is the case this study may have uncovered a
previously unknown problem.


e)Is it possible for an RF ID device to overwhelm the immunity levels of
the EUT?
If a medical device is tested at 10 V/m and an RFID device TXout is in
the mW range- is it possible for a RFID mW transmitter to generate 10 V/m?
Perhaps.
For instance- since an RFID device operating at 125 kHz in not
transmitting in the classic sense, then there may be near-field resonant
effects that are not previously understood in the medical device immunity
requirements?
   

 
   It seems that we, as professionals in this field, have the unique ability
to analyze these reports like no other community can.  I wonder if we will
find the answers to the large number of questions raised by the article.  

 
 
All comments OOO.
Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 



From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:administra...@ce-test.info] 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:57 AM
To: Conway, Patrick R (Houston); Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization
(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context
markten&content=markt_persbericht&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2

  )
 
and some results are available here:
 
http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266
 
Manufacturers name and equipment type included.
 
Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,
so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.
 
 
It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car drivers) 
is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )
as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.
Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.
where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.
 
Cars are to be sold at low prices (relatively) , medical equipment
at sky-high costs.  It seems that emc quality is the inverse of the
costs of equipment. Where much atte

Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[E. Robert Bonsen]

Published in the Journal of the American Medical Association:

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/299/24/2884

$15 to download the article.


 From the summary, no real info on the test process:

*Design and Setting * Without a patient being connected,^ EMI by 2 RFID 
systems (active 125 kHz and passive 868 MHz) was^ assessed under 
controlled conditions during May 2006, in the^ proximity of 41 medical 
devices (in 17 categories, 22 different^ manufacturers) at the Academic 
Medical Centre, University of^ Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 
Assessment took place^ according to an international test protocol. 
Incidents of EMI^ were classified according to a critical care adverse 
events^ scale as hazardous, significant, or light.


Regards
--Robert

E.Robert Bonsen
Sr. Engineer
Orion Scientific

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Calibration Administration Services

[Powell, Doug]

All,

I am shopping for a service that provides administration of calibrations.  I 
need this because I cannot spend the resources to administrate this myself.  I 
would like to get opinions from anyone who uses these services so I can 
establish their track record.  I realize that the scope each lab has is limited 
so I expect them to be able to work with other labs for special services and 
manage all the logistics.  Although I don't think any single lab can provide 
all, here is my wishlist:

* Located in North America (U.S.A. preferred).

* Calibrations for: Voltage (up to 40kV - hipot), current probes (up to 2000A; 
0.3%), current shunts (up to 2000A; 0.1%), temperature, humidity, pressure, 
torque, caliper, mass, EMC instruments, test/inspection pins, feeler gauges, 
acoustic, and others.

* Accreditation to ISO 17025 and able to provide fully accredited instrument 
calibrations with data and uncertainties included.

* Automatic calibration recall notices provided.

* On certain pieces of equipment, I need turn around times of 5 days, using 
overnight shipments and pre-scheduling of calibrations.  

* Ability to pay a premium expedite fee if needed to obtain quick turns.

* Dock-to-Dock shipping for sensitive equipment, no routing from lab to lab to 
lab.

* My existing corporate discounts passed through the invoicing process.

* An online database with certificate downloads.

Thanks, -doug

Douglas E. Powell
Engineering Manager
Corporate Product Compliance
Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
 


This message, including any attachments, may contain 
information that is confidential and proprietary information 
of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.  The dissemination,
distribution, use or copying of this message or any of its
attachments is strictly prohibited without the express 
written consent of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: IEC61000-3-5 and -3-11 (Flicker)

[John Woodgate]

In message 
, dated 
Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Ralph McDiarmid  writes:


>These two standards appear to be identical, at least in scope with both 
>applying to equipment rated 75A and below.  Does anyone know why this 
>is so?

3-5 is a Report, which DOESN'T stop at 75 A/phase. 3-11 is a standard 
that supersedes it for below 75 A/phase. A second edition of 3-5 is 
under way:

Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) - Part 3: Limits - Section 5: 
Limitation of voltage fluctuations and flicker in low-voltage power 
supply systems for equipment with rated current greater than 75 A
-- 
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it,
or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose!
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: IEC61000-3-5 and -3-11 (Flicker)

[Spencer, David H]

Ralph,

IEC 61000-3-5 is an older technical report giving direction for making
flicker measurement on products greater than 16A. 
 
Whereas IEC/EN 61000-3-11 is a current standard and is a requirement
(for the EU market place) for products rated greater than 16A.  


Regards,
David Spencer
EMC Engineer
Xerox Corp.


From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ralph
McDiarmid
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 1:12 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: IEC61000-3-5 and -3-11 (Flicker)

These two standards appear to be identical, at least in scope with both
applying to equipment rated 75A and below.  Does anyone know why this is
so? 


Ralph McDiarmid, AScT 
Compliance Engineering Group 
Xantrex Technology Inc.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: IEC61000-3-5 and -3-11 (Flicker)

[Ralph McDiarmid]

These two standards appear to be identical, at least in scope with both
applying to equipment rated 75A and below.  Does anyone know why this is
so? 


Ralph McDiarmid, AScT 
Compliance Engineering Group 
Xantrex Technology Inc.

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[John Woodgate]

In message 
, 
dated Thu, 26 Jun 2008, pat.law...@slpower.com writes:


>Unfortunately, the printed report doesn't seem to be available at that 
>address.  I was hoping to read a computerized translation of the 
>report, as poor as that might be.

Go to the URL and towards the right,  at the top of the page, there is a 
link 'Nederlands'. Click on that.

Good luck with your computer translation: it's liable to be Double 
Dutch. What clearly aren't there are the magic symbols 'dB(μV/m)'.
-- 
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it,
or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose!
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

[SPAM] RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Grasso, Charles]

Patricks point is well taken with regard to old equipment. However, if the
medical equipment is functioning as designed
then this throws the entire Medical Device Directive ( and all of its
associated immunity
testing) into question does it not?

 

After all when we test a unit for immunity the levels are typically orders of
magnitude
higher than any *emitted* noise.

 

Interesting!

 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Conway,
Patrick R (Houston)
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 8:17 AM
To: Gert Gremmen; Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

 

Gert-

You mention one possible reason for the test results is that the EUT's
have immunity deficits.

I agree, that is one possibility.  

 

here are a few other possibilities:   

(BTW- not affiliated in any way with medical devices nor with, all
comments OOO )

 

 

b)Could it be a systemic testing error?

Was a shield room used?   

Were the ambients controlled and eliminated?

Were the devices connected to a patient simulator?

Did the test engineer have his personal GSM phone "OFF"?  etc. 
(...crazier things have happened.)

 

 

c)Maybe the EUT are old.

Through outdated design specs perhaps RFID proximity was not a
consideration during their design.

And yet, in today's hospitals, the two types of devices may be in
close proximity.

If this is the case then the study has done a great service to the
community by uncovering a problem that was unknown.

 

 

d)Maybe the EUT are old (not a repeat) 

Through many years of use perhaps once immune equipment has lost
some of their designed immunity?

Again- if this is the case this study may have uncovered a
previously unknown problem.

 



e)Is it possible for an RF ID device to overwhelm the immunity levels of
the EUT?

If a medical device is tested at 10 V/m and an RFID device TXout is in
the mW range- is it possible for a RFID mW transmitter to generate 10 V/m?

Perhaps.

For instance- since an RFID device operating at 125 kHz in not
transmitting in the classic sense, then there may be near-field resonant
effects that are not previously understood in the medical device immunity
requirements?

   

 

 

It seems that we, as professionals in this field, have the unique ability
to analyze these reports like no other community can.  I wonder if we will
find the answers to the large number of questions raised by the article.  

 

 

 

All comments OOO.

Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 

 



From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:administra...@ce-test.info] 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:57 AM
To: Conway, Patrick R (Houston); Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization

(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context
markten&content=markt_persbericht&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2)

 

and some results are available here:

 

http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266

 

Manufacturers name and equipment type included.

 

Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,

so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.

 

 

It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car drivers) 

is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )

as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.

Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.

where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.

 

Cars are to be sold at low prices (relatively) , medical equipment

at sky-high costs.  It seems that emc quality is the inverse of the

costs of equipment. Where much attention is given to

reliability and electrical safety of medical equipment,

emc is still  neglected. 

Note that this investigation was made in a Dutch

University Hospital;

On  European soil , where immunity requirements have been 

virtually law since 1996 

 

The lack of EMC care might be related to the fact that

medical accidents are easy to cover up, (more easy then car accidents)

and liability of medical staff is difficult to prove, let alone

the liability of a medical equipment manufacturer.

See the discussion on the Therac-25.

 

Gert Gremmen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Conway, Patrick R
(Houston)
Verzonden: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:08 PM
Aan: Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

 

...and if you put four of them in a circle, you can pop corn.  :)

 

 

 

Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 

 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Rudd, Adam
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:19 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee

Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[pat.lawler]

Hi John: 

Unfortunately, the printed report doesn't seem to be available at that
address.  I was hoping to read a computerized translation of the report, as
poor as that might be. 
If anyone can find the report (or a link to it), I'm interested in it.  It
certainly seems to have stirred up interest! 

Pat Lawler
EMC Engineer
SL Power Electronics Corp.

John Woodgate  wrote on 06/26/2008 03:07:11 AM:
> In message ,
> dated Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Gert Gremmen 
> writes:
> 
> >The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization
> >
> >(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context=markten&content=markt_persberich
> >t&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2) 
> Only available in Dutch.
> >
> > 
> >and some results are available here:
> >http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266

> No indication of field strengths!
> >
> >Manufacturers name and equipment type included.
> >
> >Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,
> >
> >so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.

> But maybe the immunity requirements of the EMC standard aren't violated.
> >
> >It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car
> >drivers)
> >
> >is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )
> >
> >as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.
> >
> >Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.
> >
> >where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.

> When cars failed due to high field strengths from broadcast
> transmitters, there was a very public outcry. I didn't hear of any
> outcry about medical equipment problems, presumably because the public
> almost never get to hear of them.

> There was a case in UK a few years ago about faulty oxygen equipment
> (not an electronics problem) causing several deaths, but such cases are
> very rarely reported.
> --

> OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
> Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop
it,
> or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You
choose!
> John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK 
-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 

[SPAM] RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Honkala, Ari (Espoo)]

There’s a possibility, depending the cables and interface types in EUT, that
the 61000-4-6 test did not apply much current to the device.

 

Ari Honkala

SGS Fimko Oy

Finland

 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken Javor
Sent: 26. kesäkuuta 2008 18:14
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

 

Comment (e) is unrealistic.  Assuming 61000-4-6 was applied, the amount of
power required to directly inject 1, 3 or 10 Volts oc into 150 Ohms is well
above the radiated power from an rf id device. 
Ken Javor

Phone: (256) 650-5261





From: "Conway, Patrick R (Houston)" 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:17:00 +
To: Gert Gremmen , "Rudd, Adam"
, "emc-p...@ieee.org" 
Conversation: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

Gert-
You mention one possible reason for the test results is that the EUT's
have immunity deficits.
   I agree, that is one possibility.  

   here are a few other possibilities:   
(BTW- not affiliated in any way with medical devices nor with, all
comments OOO )

 
b)Could it be a systemic testing error?
Was a shield room used?   
Were the ambients controlled and eliminated?
Were the devices connected to a patient simulator?
Did the test engineer have his personal GSM phone "OFF"?  etc. 
(...crazier things have happened.)

 
c)Maybe the EUT are old.
Through outdated design specs perhaps RFID proximity was not a
consideration during their design.
   And yet, in today's hospitals, the two types of devices may be in
close proximity.
   If this is the case then the study has done a great service to the
community by uncovering a problem that was unknown.

 
d)Maybe the EUT are old (not a repeat) 
   Through many years of use perhaps once immune equipment has lost
some of their designed immunity?
   Again- if this is the case this study may have uncovered a
previously unknown problem.


e)Is it possible for an RF ID device to overwhelm the immunity levels of
the EUT?
If a medical device is tested at 10 V/m and an RFID device TXout is in
the mW range- is it possible for a RFID mW transmitter to generate 10 V/m?
Perhaps.
For instance- since an RFID device operating at 125 kHz in not
transmitting in the classic sense, then there may be near-field resonant
effects that are not previously understood in the medical device immunity
requirements?
   

 
   It seems that we, as professionals in this field, have the unique ability
to analyze these reports like no other community can.  I wonder if we will
find the answers to the large number of questions raised by the article.  

 
 
All comments OOO.
Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 



From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:administra...@ce-test.info]
  
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:57 AM
To: Conway, Patrick R (Houston); Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization
(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context
markten&content=markt_persbericht&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2

  )
 
and some results are available here:
 
http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266
 
Manufacturers name and equipment type included.
 
Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,
so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.
 
 
It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car drivers) 
is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )
as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.
Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.
where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.
 
Cars are to be sold at low prices (relatively) , medical equipment
at sky-high costs.  It seems that emc quality is the inverse of the
costs of equipment. Where much attention is given to
reliability and electrical safety of medical equipment,
emc is still  neglected. 
Note that this investigation was made in a Dutch
University Hospital;
On  European soil , where immunity requirements have been 
virtually law since 1996 
 
The lack of EMC care might be related to the fact that
medical accidents are easy to cover up, (more easy then car accidents)
and liability of medical staff is difficult to prove, let alone
the liability of a medical equipment manufacturer.
See the discussion on the Therac-25.
 
Gert Gremmen
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

V

[SPAM] Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Ken Javor]

Comment (e) is unrealistic.  Assuming 61000-4-6 was applied, the amount of
power required to directly inject 1, 3 or 10 Volts oc into 150 Ohms is well
above the radiated power from an rf id device. 
Ken Javor

Phone: (256) 650-5261





From: "Conway, Patrick R (Houston)" 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:17:00 +
To: Gert Gremmen , "Rudd, Adam"
, "emc-p...@ieee.org" 
Conversation: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

Gert-
You mention one possible reason for the test results is that the EUT's
have immunity deficits.
   I agree, that is one possibility.  

   here are a few other possibilities:   
(BTW- not affiliated in any way with medical devices nor with, all
comments OOO )

 
b)Could it be a systemic testing error?
Was a shield room used?   
Were the ambients controlled and eliminated?
Were the devices connected to a patient simulator?
Did the test engineer have his personal GSM phone "OFF"?  etc. 
(...crazier things have happened.)

 
c)Maybe the EUT are old.
Through outdated design specs perhaps RFID proximity was not a
consideration during their design.
   And yet, in today's hospitals, the two types of devices may be in
close proximity.
   If this is the case then the study has done a great service to the
community by uncovering a problem that was unknown.

 
d)Maybe the EUT are old (not a repeat) 
   Through many years of use perhaps once immune equipment has lost
some of their designed immunity?
   Again- if this is the case this study may have uncovered a
previously unknown problem.


e)Is it possible for an RF ID device to overwhelm the immunity levels of
the EUT?
If a medical device is tested at 10 V/m and an RFID device TXout is in
the mW range- is it possible for a RFID mW transmitter to generate 10 V/m?
Perhaps.
For instance- since an RFID device operating at 125 kHz in not
transmitting in the classic sense, then there may be near-field resonant
effects that are not previously understood in the medical device immunity
requirements?
   

 
   It seems that we, as professionals in this field, have the unique ability
to analyze these reports like no other community can.  I wonder if we will
find the answers to the large number of questions raised by the article.  

 
 
All comments OOO.
Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 




From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:administra...@ce-test.info] 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:57 AM
To: Conway, Patrick R (Houston); Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization
(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context
markten&content=markt_persbericht&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2

  )
 
and some results are available here:
 
http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266
 
Manufacturers name and equipment type included.
 
Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,
so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.
 
 
It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car drivers) 
is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )
as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.
Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.
where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.
 
Cars are to be sold at low prices (relatively) , medical equipment
at sky-high costs.  It seems that emc quality is the inverse of the
costs of equipment. Where much attention is given to
reliability and electrical safety of medical equipment,
emc is still  neglected. 
Note that this investigation was made in a Dutch
University Hospital;
On  European soil , where immunity requirements have been 
virtually law since 1996 
 
The lack of EMC care might be related to the fact that
medical accidents are easy to cover up, (more easy then car accidents)
and liability of medical staff is difficult to prove, let alone
the liability of a medical equipment manufacturer.
See the discussion on the Therac-25.
 
Gert Gremmen
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Conway, Patrick R
(Houston)
Verzonden: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:08 PM
Aan: Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

...and if you put four of them in a circle, you can pop corn.  :)

 

 

Best Regards, 
Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 
  




From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On

Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Ken Javor]

The major difference between medical and automotive equipment is volume.  The
engineering to build in immunity is spread across a huge volume in the
automotive industry; not so for medical equipment, where volumes are much
smaller.  Next, hospitals have a controlled rf environment; automobiles may go
anywhere.  Finally, the automotive solution to 200 V/m is typically not to
operate through, but to gracefully degrade. For instance, ABS defaults to
normal non-electronic braking.  That isn’t possible with medical equipment
performing its sole function. 

Mr. Woodgate correctly points out that an rf source of a few milliwatts can
generate a field on the order of immunity requirements close in, and note that
rf id typically works at frequencies below the 61000-4-3 frequency range. 
This may be a “hole” in the 61000-4-3 requirement: the break between
61000-4-6 and 61000-4-3 is based on coupling to cables dominating coupling to
equipment internal circuitry at low frequencies; this may not always be the
case with plastic enclosures and sensitive low-level measurements.
 
Ken Javor

Phone: (256) 650-5261





From: Gert Gremmen 
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:57:07 +0200
To: "Conway, Patrick R (Houston)" , "Rudd, Adam"
, 
Conversation: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization
(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context
markten&content=markt_persbericht&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2

  )
 
and some results are available here:
 
http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266
 
Manufacturers name and equipment type included.
 
Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,
so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.
 
 
It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car drivers) 
is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )
as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.
Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.
where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.
 
Cars are to be sold at low prices (relatively) , medical equipment
at sky-high costs.  It seems that emc quality is the inverse of the
costs of equipment. Where much attention is given to
reliability and electrical safety of medical equipment,
emc is still  neglected. 
Note that this investigation was made in a Dutch
University Hospital;
On  European soil , where immunity requirements have been 
virtually law since 1996 
 
The lack of EMC care might be related to the fact that
medical accidents are easy to cover up, (more easy then car accidents)
and liability of medical staff is difficult to prove, let alone
the liability of a medical equipment manufacturer.
See the discussion on the Therac-25.
 
Gert Gremmen
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Conway, Patrick R
(Houston)
Verzonden: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:08 PM
Aan: Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

...and if you put four of them in a circle, you can pop corn. :)

 

 

Best Regards, 
Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 
  




From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Rudd, Adam
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:19 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical
“The latest research, conducted at Vrije University in Amsterdam, tested the
effect of holding both "passive" and powered RFIDs close to 41 medical
devices, including ventilators, syringe pumps, dialysis machines and
pacemakers.

A total of 123 tests, three on each machine, were carried out, and 34 produced
an "incident" in which the RFID appeared to have an effect - 24 of which were
deemed either "significant" or "hazardous".

In some tests, RFIDs either switched off or changed the settings on mechanical
ventilators, completely stopped the working of syringe pumps, caused external
pacemakers to malfunction, and halted dialysis machines.

The device did not have to be held right up to the machine to make this happen
- some "hazardous" incidents happened when the RFID was more than 10 inches
away.”

--http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7471008.stm

  

Best Regards,

Adam Rudd

Electrical Engineer (EMC)

NCR Corporation, RHSS

Duluth, GA

(770) 495-2825

-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 
To post a message to

[SPAM] RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Conway, Patrick R (Houston)]

Gert-
You mention one possible reason for the test results is that the EUT's
have immunity deficits.
I agree, that is one possibility.  
 
here are a few other possibilities:   
(BTW- not affiliated in any way with medical devices nor with, all
comments OOO )
 
 
b)Could it be a systemic testing error?
Was a shield room used?   
Were the ambients controlled and eliminated?
Were the devices connected to a patient simulator?
Did the test engineer have his personal GSM phone "OFF"?  etc. 
(...crazier things have happened.)
 
 
c)Maybe the EUT are old.
Through outdated design specs perhaps RFID proximity was not a
consideration during their design.
And yet, in today's hospitals, the two types of devices may be in
close proximity.
If this is the case then the study has done a great service to the
community by uncovering a problem that was unknown.
 
 
d)Maybe the EUT are old (not a repeat) 
Through many years of use perhaps once immune equipment has lost
some of their designed immunity?
Again- if this is the case this study may have uncovered a
previously unknown problem.
 

e)Is it possible for an RF ID device to overwhelm the immunity levels of
the EUT?
If a medical device is tested at 10 V/m and an RFID device TXout is in
the mW range- is it possible for a RFID mW transmitter to generate 10 V/m?
Perhaps.
For instance- since an RFID device operating at 125 kHz in not
transmitting in the classic sense, then there may be near-field resonant
effects that are not previously understood in the medical device immunity
requirements?
   
 
 
It seems that we, as professionals in this field, have the unique ability
to analyze these reports like no other community can.  I wonder if we will
find the answers to the large number of questions raised by the article.  
 
 
 
All comments OOO.

Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 



From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:administra...@ce-test.info] 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:57 AM
To: Conway, Patrick R (Houston); Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical



The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization

(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context
markten&content=markt_persbericht&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2)

 

and some results are available here:

 

http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266

 

Manufacturers name and equipment type included.

 

Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,

so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.

 

 

It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car drivers) 

is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )

as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.

Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.

where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.

 

Cars are to be sold at low prices (relatively) , medical equipment

at sky-high costs.  It seems that emc quality is the inverse of the

costs of equipment. Where much attention is given to

reliability and electrical safety of medical equipment,

emc is still  neglected. 

Note that this investigation was made in a Dutch

University Hospital;

On  European soil , where immunity requirements have been 

virtually law since 1996 

 

The lack of EMC care might be related to the fact that

medical accidents are easy to cover up, (more easy then car accidents)

and liability of medical staff is difficult to prove, let alone

the liability of a medical equipment manufacturer.

See the discussion on the Therac-25.

 

Gert Gremmen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Conway, Patrick R
(Houston)
Verzonden: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:08 PM
Aan: Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

 

...and if you put four of them in a circle, you can pop corn.  :)

 

 

 

Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 

 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Rudd, Adam
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:19 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

“The latest research, conducted at Vrije University in Amsterdam, tested the
effect of holding both "passive" and powered RFIDs close to 41 medical
devices, including ventilators, syringe pumps, dialysis machines and
pacemakers.

A total of 123 tests, three on each machine, were carried out, and 34 produced
an "incident" in which the RFID appeared to have an effect - 24 of which were
deemed either "significant" or "hazardous".

In some tests, RFIDs either switched off or changed the settings on mechanical
ventilators, completely stopped the working of syringe pumps, caused external
pacemakers to malfunction, and halted dialysis machines

IEEE Product Compliance Symposium sponsored by the Product Safety Engineering Society

[Daniel Roman]

Dear List Member,    
 

The IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society will hold its 2008 Symposium in
Austin Texas on October 20-22.  The program is full with a diverse range of
topics and is now 2-1/2 days.  Refer to the Symposium web page
  for a partial list of papers
  and abstracts
 .

Online registration   is available now with
early-bird discounts (until 5-Sep) and discounts for IEEE members.  If you'd
rather fax or mail your registration use the offline registration form
  (.xls).  See the
web site for hotel reservation information.

Not an IEEE member?  Join as an IEEE and PSES member at the half-year rate
(before 15-Aug) and the cost of attending the Symposium is the same as the
non-member cost.  It is like getting a half-year membership in PSES and the
IEEE for free!  See the membership form
  for details.

Best regards,

Dan Roman, N.C.E.
Communications Vice President
IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
http://www.ieee-pses.org  

-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 

Re: Wall warts for UK use

[John Woodgate]

In message 
, dated Thu, 26 Jun 2008, david.cole...@selex-comms.com writes:


>Am I alone in finding the number of wall warts supplied for the UK 
>market that have the plug part of the design upside down, irritating?
>
>The cable entry is then often at the top causing the wall wart to lean 
>out from the socket and any logo and labelling is also up the wrong 
>way.

I think there is no official definition of 'upside down' in this 
context. But it's true that plug-transformers with the cable exit from 
the face adjacent to the earth pin are a relatively recent phenomenon. I 
wonder why they are designed that way. They can't be used with some 2- 
and 3-way plug adapters, but of course they are not normally a problem 
if used with extension boards.

Maybe they are adapted, without sufficient thought, from designs using 
the reversible Schuko plug.
-- 
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it,
or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose!
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Re: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[John Woodgate]

In message , 
dated Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Gert Gremmen  
writes:


>The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization
>
>(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context=markten&content=markt_persberich
>t&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2)

Only available in Dutch.
>
> 
>
>and some results are available here:
>
> 
>
>http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266

No indication of field strengths!
>
> 
>
>Manufacturers name and equipment type included.
>
> 
>
>Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,
>
>so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.


But maybe the immunity requirements of the EMC standard aren't violated.
>
> 
>
> 
>
>It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car 
>drivers)
>
>is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )
>
>as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.
>
>Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.
>
>where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.

When cars failed due to high field strengths from broadcast 
transmitters, there was a very public outcry. I didn't hear of any 
outcry about medical equipment problems, presumably because the public 
almost never get to hear of them.

There was a case in UK a few years ago about faulty oxygen equipment 
(not an electronics problem) causing several deaths, but such cases are 
very rarely reported.
-- 
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk
Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it,
or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose!
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

 Scott Douglas   emcp...@ptcnh.net
 Mike Cantwell   mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Fw: Wall warts for UK use

[david.coleman]

Unfortunately it's not just the cable entry that's often at the top, but the
mass of the electronics, which with linear wall warts can be quite
substantial, causing the wall wart to pull away from the socket, which would
not happen if it was up the correct way (that the manufacturer probably
intended, or believed)
Best Regards,
Dave Coleman AIIRSM 




"James, Chris"  

26/06/2008 10:27
To
,  
cc
Subject
RE: Wall warts for UK use






The 13A UK wall socket is always earth pin uppermost as I’m sure you know
when fitted to a wall – extension leads laying on the floor and floor boxes
are another matter. 
  
The intent with the warts with cable coming out the top is that the cable is
going to run upwards to a desktop/work surface. So it’s a functionality
issue and one that in the majority of applications I find appropriate. What
does it matter the label is upside down – how often do you look at the
label?? 
  
The only issue I have is when a wart has to go into a recessed floor box when
there is often insufficient space to accommodate the cable strain relief
exiting the top. 
  
Chris AIIRSM 




From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of
david.cole...@selex-comms.com
Sent: 26 June 2008 09:35
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Wall warts for UK use 
  

Am I alone in finding the number of wall warts supplied for the UK market that
have the plug part of the design upside down, irritating? 

The cable entry is then often at the top causing the wall wart to lean out
>from the socket and any logo and labelling is also up the wrong way. 

Not just small manufacturers either, but the big guys too (I have Motorola
phones, Netgear routers, all upside down!) 

Don't the manufacturers check? Is there a widely circulated representation of
the UK sockets that has the diagram inverted? 

A minor thing I know, but it irks!!
Best Regards,
Dave Coleman AIIRSM 

This email and any attached files contains company confidential information
which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the person(s) or
entity to which it is addressed and solely for the purposes set forth therein.
If you are not the intended recipient or have received this email in error
please notify the sender by return, delete it from your system and destroy any
local copies. It is strictly forbidden to use the information in this email
including any attachment or part thereof including copying, disclosing,
distributing, amending or using for any other purpose.

In addition the sender excludes all liabilities (whether tortious or common
law) for damage or breach arising or related to this email including but not
limited to viruses and libel.
SELEX Communications Limited is a Private Limited Company registered in
England and Wales under Company Number 964533 and whose Registered Office is
Lambda House, Christopher Martin Rd, Basildon, SS14 3EL. England.
-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 



This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended
recipient, delete this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking any action based on this message
is strictly prohibited. 



This email and any attached files contains company confidential information
which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the person(s) or
entity to which it is addressed and solely for the purposes set forth therein.
If you are not the intended recipient or have received this email in error
please notify the sender by return, delete it from your system and destroy any
local copies. It is strictly forbidden to use the information in this email
including any attachment or part thereof including copying, disclosing,
distributing, amending or using for any other purpose.

In addition the sender excludes all liabilities (whether tortious or common
law) for damage or bre ach arising or related to this email including but not
limited to viruses and libel.
SELEX Communications Limited is a Private Limited Company registered in
England and Wales under Company Number 964533 and whose Registered Office is
Lambda House, Christopher Martin Rd, Basildon, SS14 3EL. England.
- --

RE: Wall warts for UK use

[James, Chris]

The 13A UK wall socket is always earth pin uppermost as I’m sure you know
when fitted to a wall – extension leads laying on the floor and floor boxes
are another matter. 

 

The intent with the warts with cable coming out the top is that the cable is
going to run upwards to a desktop/work surface. So it’s a functionality
issue and one that in the majority of applications I find appropriate. What
does it matter the label is upside down – how often do you look at the
label??

 

The only issue I have is when a wart has to go into a recessed floor box when
there is often insufficient space to accommodate the cable strain relief
exiting the top. 

 

Chris AIIRSM



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of
david.cole...@selex-comms.com
Sent: 26 June 2008 09:35
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Wall warts for UK use

 


Am I alone in finding the number of wall warts supplied for the UK market that
have the plug part of the design upside down, irritating? 

The cable entry is then often at the top causing the wall wart to lean out
>from the socket and any logo and labelling is also up the wrong way. 

Not just small manufacturers either, but the big guys too (I have Motorola
phones, Netgear routers, all upside down!) 

Don't the manufacturers check? Is there a widely circulated representation of
the UK sockets that has the diagram inverted? 

A minor thing I know, but it irks!!
Best Regards,
Dave Coleman AIIRSM 

This email and any attached files contains company confidential information
which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the person(s) or
entity to which it is addressed and solely for the purposes set forth therein.
If you are not the intended recipient or have received this email in error
please notify the sender by return, delete it from your system and destroy any
local copies. It is strictly forbidden to use the information in this email
including any attachment or part thereof including copying, disclosing,
distributing, amending or using for any other purpose.

In addition the sender excludes all liabilities (whether tortious or common
law) for damage or breach arising or related to this email including but not
limited to viruses and libel.
SELEX Communications Limited is a Private Limited Company registered in
England and Wales under Company Number 964533 and whose Registered Office is
Lambda House, Christopher Martin Rd, Basildon, SS14 3EL. England.
-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc



This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended
recipient, delete this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking any action based on this message
is strictly prohibited. 

-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 

Wall warts for UK use

[david.coleman]

Am I alone in finding the number of wall warts supplied for the UK market that
have the plug part of the design upside down, irritating? 

The cable entry is then often at the top causing the wall wart to lean out
>from the socket and any logo and labelling is also up the wrong way. 

Not just small manufacturers either, but the big guys too (I have Motorola
phones, Netgear routers, all upside down!) 

Don't the manufacturers check? Is there a widely circulated representation of
the UK sockets that has the diagram inverted? 

A minor thing I know, but it irks!!
Best Regards,
Dave Coleman AIIRSM 

This email and any attached files contains company confidential information
which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the person(s) or
entity to which it is addressed and solely for the purposes set forth therein.
If you are not the intended recipient or have received this email in error
please notify the sender by return, delete it from your system and destroy any
local copies. It is strictly forbidden to use the information in this email
including any attachment or part thereof including copying, disclosing,
distributing, amending or using for any other purpose.

In addition the sender excludes all liabilities (whether tortious or common
law) for damage or bre ach arising or related to this email including but not
limited to viruses and libel.
SELEX Communications Limited is a Private Limited Company registered in
England and Wales under Company Number 964533 and whose Registered Office is
Lambda House, Christopher Martin Rd, Basildon, SS14 3EL. England.
-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 

RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

[Gert Gremmen]

The report was produced by TNO, a Dutch private organization

(http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?&context
markten&content=markt_persbericht&laag1=189&item_id=200806250026&Taal=2)

 

and some results are available here:

 

http://www.amc.nl/?pid=5266

 

Manufacturers name and equipment type included.

 

Please note that the energy levels of RFID are in the milliwatt range,

so all problems are to be categorized as immunity deficits.

 

 

It is astonishing that the security of healthy persons (like car drivers) 

is taken much more seriously (by car manufacturers for example )

as the security  of people with bad health like in hospitals.

Most medical equipment is tested  at 10 V/meter or less.

where critical car parts must  be tested up to 200V/m.

 

Cars are to be sold at low prices (relatively) , medical equipment

at sky-high costs.  It seems that emc quality is the inverse of the

costs of equipment. Where much attention is given to

reliability and electrical safety of medical equipment,

emc is still  neglected. 

Note that this investigation was made in a Dutch

University Hospital;

On  European soil , where immunity requirements have been 

virtually law since 1996 

 

The lack of EMC care might be related to the fact that

medical accidents are easy to cover up, (more easy then car accidents)

and liability of medical staff is difficult to prove, let alone

the liability of a medical equipment manufacturer.

See the discussion on the Therac-25.

 

Gert Gremmen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Conway, Patrick R
(Houston)
Verzonden: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:08 PM
Aan: Rudd, Adam; emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: RE: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

 

...and if you put four of them in a circle, you can pop corn.  :)

 

 

 

Best Regards, 

Patrick. 
p.con...@hp.com 

 

 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Rudd, Adam
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:19 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: EMC in the news: RFID & Medical

“The latest research, conducted at Vrije University in Amsterdam, tested the
effect of holding both "passive" and powered RFIDs close to 41 medical
devices, including ventilators, syringe pumps, dialysis machines and
pacemakers.

A total of 123 tests, three on each machine, were carried out, and 34 produced
an "incident" in which the RFID appeared to have an effect - 24 of which were
deemed either "significant" or "hazardous".

In some tests, RFIDs either switched off or changed the settings on mechanical
ventilators, completely stopped the working of syringe pumps, caused external
pacemakers to malfunction, and halted dialysis machines.

The device did not have to be held right up to the machine to make this happen
- some "hazardous" incidents happened when the RFID was more than 10 inches
away.”

--http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7471008.stm
 

Best Regards,

Adam Rudd

Electrical Engineer (EMC)

NCR Corporation, RHSS

Duluth, GA

(770) 495-2825

-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to: 

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 

http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 

-  This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Ca