Re: [PSES] Rejected Manufacturer Declarations

[ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen]

Nice piece of work Doug.
One addition for the EU...

Not all EN standards are harmonized. (as one may read from your log)
Approximately once a year for each directive list of harmonized EN standards
is published in the C version of the official EU journal.
Only those -referenced by date- allow for presumption
of compliance with the essential requirements of the directive


Follow google for EMC harmonized standards 

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/european-standards/harmonised-standards/electromagnetic-compatibility/index_en.htm

for an example (for emc).


Regards,

Ing.  Gert Gremmen, BSc



g.grem...@cetest.nl
www.cetest.nl

Kiotoweg 363
3047 BG Rotterdam
T 31(0)104152426
F 31(0)104154953

 Before printing, think about the environment. 



-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Douglas Nix [mailto:d...@mac.com] 
Verzonden: Thursday, November 21, 2013 12:10 AM
Aan: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Onderwerp: Re: [PSES] Rejected Manufacturer Declarations

Gentlemen,

Thanks for your excellent contributions to this discussion. I decided to take 
the total discussion and write a blog post that summarizes the requirements. 
I’ve acknowledged all of you. Here’s the link: 
http://machinerysafety101.com/2013/11/20/understanding-european-declarations-conformity-incorporation/

Thanks again!

Doug Nix

On 18-Nov-13, at 17:40, Douglas Nix  wrote:

> Thanks, Doug! Nice to have a more definitive answer with a solid legal basis.
> 
> Doug Nix
> 
> On 18-Nov-13, at 16:23, Doug Powell  wrote:
> 
>> All,
>> 
>> Differences between EEC, EC, and EU.
>> 
>> Upon the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, the EEC was 
>> renamed the European Community (EC) to reflect that it covered a wider range 
>> of policy. This was also when the three European Communities, including the 
>> EC, were collectively made to constitute the first of the three pillars of 
>> the European Union (EU), which the treaty also founded. The EC existed in 
>> this form until it was abolished by the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, which merged 
>> the EU's former pillars and provided that the EU would "replace and succeed 
>> the European Community."
>> 
>> 
>> thanks, –doug
>> 
>> Douglas E Powell
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message- From: John Woodgate
>> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 2:14 PM
>> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> Subject: Re: [PSES] Rejected Manufacturer Declarations
>> 
>> In message <510818a7-0c22-445a-907e-07cd5f5ff...@mac.com>, dated Mon, 
>> 18 Nov 2013, Douglas Nix  writes:
>> 
>>> I suspect (John Woodgate please correct me here), that either is accepted, 
>>> but “EU” is current and “more correct”.
>> 
>> Once again, a search for an 'official' answer' proved futile. 
>> However, I believe 'EU' is to be used.
>> --
>> OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk 
>> Nondum ex silvis sumus John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, 
>> Rayleigh, Essex UK
>> 
>> -
>> 
>> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society 
>> emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your 
>> e-mail to 
>> 
>> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>> 
>> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
>> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in 
>> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>> 
>> Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>> Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
>> unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>> 
>> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>> Scott Douglas  Mike Cantwell 
>> 
>> 
>> For policy questions, send mail to:
>> Jim Bacher:  
>> David Heald: 
>> -
>> 
>> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society 
>> emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your 
>> e-mail to 
>> 
>> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>> 
>> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
>> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in 
>> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>> 
>> Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>> Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
>> unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>> 
>> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>> Scott Douglas  Mike Cantwell 
>> 
>> 
>> For policy questions, send mail to:
>> Jim Bacher:  
>> David Heald: 
> 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and se

[PSES] FDA requirements for medical products containing wifi modules

[Boštjan Glavič]

Dear experts,

I was yesterday speaking with one client who is quite desperate. They are 
producing medical products which contain wifi modules. They have told me, that 
FDA currently does not accept any such product if no additional testing on wifi 
module inside the unit are performed. The problem is that I am not aware of 
what kind of additional tests are required. WIFI module itself is approved 
component and has necessary certificates.

Health Canada does not have such requirement. Also there are complication if 
product contains bluetooth module.

Is anyone familiar with such requirement? What additional rests need to be 
performed and which laboratory can perform such testing?

Thank you for your support.
Best regards,
Bostjan

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] EN 50581 part/range of parts

[Crane, Lauren]

Piotr,

This topic illustrates a concept that can be called the "supremacy of 
practicality".

I agree with you that the RoHS directive calls for "No ... (unique 
identification of the EEE):" in the DoC. What I have learned is that the EU 
legislation as a collective is not really sure what this means, exactly.

There appear to be two/three sides battling. Side 1 - people who think each 
product unit should have a unique number and that should be placed in a unique 
DoC for that particular unit. Side 2 - people who think only a general product 
descriptor (e.g., model name) should be required in the DoC. Side 3 - people 
who think a DoC can cover several unique units provided the unit number range 
(serial number range) is expressed in the DoC.

Currently both the Low Voltage Directive and the EMC Directive are being 
recast. You can observe parliament and the council struggling with this issue. 
Here, for example, is an excerpt from a current mid-process document for the 
EMC Directive recast regarding the requirements for the DoC.

Commission Proposal - " No ... (unique identification of the apparatus): "
Parliament Position - "No ... (identification of the apparatus):"
Council Position - "Product/Apparatus (product, batch, type or serial number )"
Expected compromise/outcome -> [Council Position]

As long as DoCs reasonably express the identification of covered products, I 
think in the current legislative environment, any practical solution will be 
acceptable. There is certainly enough evidence that 1 - there is a preference 
that one DoC be provided for all applicable directives (rather than a separate 
DoC for each applicable directive) and 2 - directives are not completely 
harmonized on how the covered product(s) must be identified.


50581 allows "supplier declarations, confirming that the restricted substance 
content of the material, part, or sub-assembly is within the permitted levels 
and identifying any exemptions that have been applied." - I think an invoice 
from a supplier stating the provided resistors could qualify as a such a 
declaration, provided they mention exemptions used, if any.


Regarding your carrots and fish I am sympathetic to your surprise. I think 
the EEE definition has some severe problems and in the "cold light of day" 
would include CDs and perhaps even paper manuals (which require light to be 
legible), but there are also legal principles that suggest laws, no matter how 
they are worded, must be interpreted reasonably. I think the FAQ has provided 
some good boundaries on reasonable interpretation with Q7.2.

Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor

From: Piotr Galka [mailto:piotr.ga...@micromade.pl]
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 10:02 AM
To: EMC-PSTC; Crane, Lauren
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 50581 part/range of parts

Lauren and others,

I have read (I believe carefully) this FAQ.

>From Q8.14 and Directive Article 7(g) I see that product identification can be 
>batch number. For my understanding it is not "unique identification" called in 
>Annex VI. But OK let it be, I don't care because my products have unique 
>numbers.

Q8.9 says that DoC would reference the product normally by the model number. I 
don't believe that ANNEX VI 1. "No(unique identification of EEE):" means 
model number, but I must all the time suppose that I don't understand English 
good enough.
Can someone tell me if unique identification of EEE can really be understand as 
model number ? I really don't believe!
If FAQ is in opposite to directive itself than I must remember of FAQ Preface: 
"These FAQ reflect the views of DG Environment and as such are not legally 
binding: binding interpretation of EU legislation is the exclusive competence 
of the Court of Justice of the European Union."
I still don't know if I have to issue separate DoC for each device (I have not 
batch numbers, but individual numbers).

Q8.10 and Q9.6 directs me to EN 50581 to get presumption of conformity so it 
still looks that I need the declaration for each 100pcs of resistors I will 
order. I don't think that order saying that I order ROHS2 compliant parts and 
invoice saying that they are ROHS2 can be understand as "signed contract" which 
would allow me not to have supplier declaration.
How high is in your opinion probability that if Court of Justice of European 
Union will have to decide if such order and such invoice can really be 
understand as signed contract than they will say "yes". It would help a lot if 
I could believe it is around 95%, but unfortunately (based on my understanding 
of English) I believe it is around 0%.

The most surprising for me is the Q7.2.
I knew that:
- carrot is the fruit,
- snail is the fish,
- Poland, Germany and some other countries have no access to the sea,
and it looks that I should add to that list that:
- light is not electromagnetic field.

Best Regards
Piotr Galka


- Original Message -
From: Crane, Lauren
To: Piotr Galka<

Re: [PSES] Rejected Manufacturer Declarations

[Douglas Nix]

Gentlemen,

Thanks for your excellent contributions to this discussion. I decided to take 
the total discussion and write a blog post that summarizes the requirements. 
I’ve acknowledged all of you. Here’s the link: 
http://machinerysafety101.com/2013/11/20/understanding-european-declarations-conformity-incorporation/

Thanks again!

Doug Nix

On 18-Nov-13, at 17:40, Douglas Nix  wrote:

> Thanks, Doug! Nice to have a more definitive answer with a solid legal basis.
> 
> Doug Nix
> 
> On 18-Nov-13, at 16:23, Doug Powell  wrote:
> 
>> All,
>> 
>> Differences between EEC, EC, and EU.
>> 
>> Upon the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, the EEC was 
>> renamed the European Community (EC) to reflect that it covered a wider range 
>> of policy. This was also when the three European Communities, including the 
>> EC, were collectively made to constitute the first of the three pillars of 
>> the European Union (EU), which the treaty also founded. The EC existed in 
>> this form until it was abolished by the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, which merged 
>> the EU's former pillars and provided that the EU would "replace and succeed 
>> the European Community."
>> 
>> 
>> thanks, –doug
>> 
>> Douglas E Powell
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message- From: John Woodgate
>> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 2:14 PM
>> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> Subject: Re: [PSES] Rejected Manufacturer Declarations
>> 
>> In message <510818a7-0c22-445a-907e-07cd5f5ff...@mac.com>, dated Mon, 18
>> Nov 2013, Douglas Nix  writes:
>> 
>>> I suspect (John Woodgate please correct me here), that either is accepted, 
>>> but “EU” is current and “more correct”.
>> 
>> Once again, a search for an 'official' answer' proved futile. However, I
>> believe 'EU' is to be used.
>> -- 
>> OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
>> Nondum ex silvis sumus
>> John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
>> 
>> -
>> 
>> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
>> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>> 
>> 
>> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>> 
>> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
>> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in 
>> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>> 
>> Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>> Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
>> unsubscribe)
>> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>> 
>> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>> Scott Douglas 
>> Mike Cantwell 
>> 
>> For policy questions, send mail to:
>> Jim Bacher:  
>> David Heald:  
>> -
>> 
>> This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
>> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
>> 
>> 
>> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>> http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
>> 
>> Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
>> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in 
>> well-used formats), large files, etc.
>> 
>> Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
>> Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
>> unsubscribe)
>> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>> 
>> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>> Scott Douglas 
>> Mike Cantwell 
>> 
>> For policy questions, send mail to:
>> Jim Bacher:  
>> David Heald: 
> 

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] Portable Electronic Devices Aboard Aircraft

[Ed Price]

Here's an infographic from the US FAA that tries to make it's rule changes
regarding portable electronic devices aboard aircraft a little more
understandable.

 

http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/ped/infographic/

 

Ed Price
WB6WSN
Chula Vista, CA USA



 


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

[PSES] Michael Taylor

[Derek Walton]

Hi All,


I'm trying to find an email for Michael Taylor who used to be with Hach in 
Colorado.


Can anyone send me his address preferably off-line.


Thanks,


Derek Walton
L F Research

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal?

[Neven Pischl]

Hello Jim, 
  
Thank you for the explanation. It appears to me that while there seems to be no 
formal requirement for the equipment rack/frame to be metal (unless anyone 
corrects me and knows where to find it), it is implied by the requirements put 
on it - as you listed below - that it is metal. 
  
I appreciate the comments you provided with the resoning for metal. 
  
Thanks, Neven  

- Original Message -

From: "JIM WIESE"  
To: neve...@comcast.net, EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:04:22 AM 
Subject: RE: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be 
metal? 



Hello, 

  

You wouldn’t find the frame requirements in GR-1089.  Those would be found in 
GR-63 and other GR’s.  It is also found in an ATIS standard about Universal 
frameworks that GR-63 is based on.  The ATIS standard was written essentially 
by Larry Wong, formerly of AT&T and was their earthquake expert.  It’s concepts 
align very closely with GR-63 and ETSI. 

  

There are basically 4 reasons metal frames are standard in the telecom industry 
and especially in the Telcordia world, and why plastic ones are not used: 

  

1.)     Grounding 

2.)     Resistance to fire – A non metal material that has flame retardants 
would be fairly brittle and per ATIS 00600307 and GR-63 would have to be UL 
945V which would really make it brittle due to all the flame retardants and 
antioxidants needed for the flame test 

3.)     Robustness to earthquake and stripping out of screw holes.  I seriously 
doubt a non-metal frame would survive the earthquake requirements in GR-63 and 
ATIS 0600329 

4.)     Plastics degrade over time as the anti-oxidants leave the material, and 
as such would not meet the life expectancies that service providers require.  
As C.O.’s get hotter, the rate of degradation of plastic frames increases. 

  

  

  


Jim 

  

Jim Wiese 

Senior Compliance Engineer 

ADTRAN, Inc. 

901 Explorer Blvd. 

Huntsville , AL 35806 

256-963-8431 

256-714-5882 (cell) 

256-963-6218 (fax) 

jim.wi...@adtran.com 

  



From: Neven Pischl [mailto:neve...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:07 PM 
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
Subject: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal? 


  


Hello All, 

Is there a formal requirement, by either Telcordia/NEBS or by the major telecom 
carriers that the equipment rack (i.e. not the cable rack) be metal, when 
testing radiated immunity per the GR1089? I understand it is the usual practice 
- I have only seen such tests with a metal rack -  but I am asking if there is 
such a requirement spelled out anywhere. I can't find it in GR1089. 

If any on this list knows of it, please can you forward the document, at least 
maybe a snapshot of the relevant paragraph along with the reference if the 
document can't be forwarded. 

Thank you, Neven 
- 
 


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to < 
emc-p...@ieee.org > 

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html 

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc. 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators: 
Scott Douglas < emcp...@radiusnorth.net > 
Mike Cantwell < mcantw...@ieee.org > 

For policy questions, send mail to: 
Jim Bacher < j.bac...@ieee.org > 
David Heald < dhe...@gmail.com > 


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Job Opening for EMC Engineer

[Ken Wyatt]

Hi Macy (and others trying to read this article),

Sorry, I guess that link was an internal one to LinkedIn (you may have had to 
be signed in to read?).

Try this:

Connect to the author’s LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jtodonnell

Then click on “Follow”. Her article will be right at the top of her full 
profile.

Note: you may have to already have a profile on LinkedIn before you can 
follow/read.

I tried clicking on her other web sites, but couldn’t find the same article…

Sorry about that, Ken

___
Ken Wyatt
Wyatt Technical Services LLC
k...@emc-seminars.com
www.emc-seminars.com
Phone: (719) 310-5418

On Nov 20, 2013, at 8:34 AM, Macy  wrote:

> "I also ran into an interesting article on LinkedIn ..."
> 
> high praise indeed!  ;)
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting the URL, but for me LinkedIn kept a blank screen for over 
> four minutes while monopolizing my system, so I had to give up. Your article 
> is text, right? ;)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- k...@emc-seminars.com wrote:
> 
> From: Ken Wyatt 
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] Job Opening for EMC Engineer
> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 07:40:37 -0700
> 
> Great advice Cortland!
> 
> I also ran into an interesting article on LinkedIn regarding how best to deal 
> with your manager when it comes to these issues, without getting fired. 
> Interesting reading…
> 
> http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20131119031719-7668018-speaking-up-without-getting-fired?trk=mta-lnk


-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal?

[JIM WIESE]

Hello,

You wouldn't find the frame requirements in GR-1089.  Those would be found in 
GR-63 and other GR's.  It is also found in an ATIS standard about Universal 
frameworks that GR-63 is based on.  The ATIS standard was written essentially 
by Larry Wong, formerly of AT&T and was their earthquake expert.  It's concepts 
align very closely with GR-63 and ETSI.

There are basically 4 reasons metal frames are standard in the telecom industry 
and especially in the Telcordia world, and why plastic ones are not used:

1.)Grounding
2.)Resistance to fire - A non metal material that has flame retardants 
would be fairly brittle and per ATIS 00600307 and GR-63 would have to be UL 
945V which would really make it brittle due to all the flame retardants and 
antioxidants needed for the flame test
3.)Robustness to earthquake and stripping out of screw holes.  I seriously 
doubt a non-metal frame would survive the earthquake requirements in GR-63 and 
ATIS 0600329
4.)Plastics degrade over time as the anti-oxidants leave the material, and 
as such would not meet the life expectancies that service providers require.  
As C.O.'s get hotter, the rate of degradation of plastic frames increases.



Jim

Jim Wiese
Senior Compliance Engineer
ADTRAN, Inc.
901 Explorer Blvd.
Huntsville, AL 35806
256-963-8431
256-714-5882 (cell)
256-963-6218 (fax)
jim.wi...@adtran.com


From: Neven Pischl [mailto:neve...@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:07 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Equipment rack for GR1089 testing - does it have to be metal?


Hello All,

Is there a formal requirement, by either Telcordia/NEBS or by the major telecom 
carriers that the equipment rack (i.e. not the cable rack) be metal, when 
testing radiated immunity per the GR1089? I understand it is the usual practice 
- I have only seen such tests with a metal rack -  but I am asking if there is 
such a requirement spelled out anywhere. I can't find it in GR1089.

If any on this list knows of it, please can you forward the document, at least 
maybe a snapshot of the relevant paragraph along with the reference if the 
document can't be forwarded.

Thank you, Neven

-


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org>>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net>>
Mike Cantwell mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org>>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org>>
David Heald mailto:dhe...@gmail.com>>

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 

Re: [PSES] Job Opening for EMC Engineer

[Ken Wyatt]

Great advice Cortland!

I also ran into an interesting article on LinkedIn regarding how best to deal 
with your manager when it comes to these issues, without getting fired. 
Interesting reading…

http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20131119031719-7668018-speaking-up-without-getting-fired?trk=mta-lnk

___
Ken Wyatt
Wyatt Technical Services LLC
k...@emc-seminars.com
www.emc-seminars.com
Phone: (719) 310-5418

On Nov 19, 2013, at 8:49 AM, CR  wrote:

> I suspect many of us came into EMC unconventionally. I certainly did. I 
> walked into a job in EMC at Wang Labs after retiring from an Army career that 
> had me in the Signal Corps and Transportation Corps in communications and 
> repairing Avionics (also supervising and instructing). I had been playing 
> with electronics since age 12, when I used a TV focus coil to build in my 
> bedroom what some might call a rail-gun. 
> 
> On retiring from the Army I was a single parent with a pension that only paid 
> the rent. I wanted work as an instructor, but without a degree, the only 
> people who made an an offer paid less than I'd gotten on Active Duty. 
> Luckily, my my brother passed a copy of my resume' to his neighbor, who 
> worked for a large computer firm now defunct, Wang Labs. I was able to show 
> them I knew how to use the equipment and already had a high enogh security 
> clearance for Tempest work, so I was in.
> 
> Having come up through the lab, I look for not merely theory, but a feel for 
> systems and problems. A couple of my later employers had me interviewing job 
> applicants and I got an (undeserved, IMO) reputation for being a difficult 
> interviewer, handing candidates a ferrite bead, for example, and asking, 
> "What is this? What does it do?" and "How?" or something like a PRD-219 and 
> asking, "What is this and how is it used?" (I own a couple.)
> 
> Most of the scrUwups I've seen were the result of engineers or managers (not 
> just in EMC):
> 1) Ignoring (or ignorance of) basic principles of EMC design; for example, as 
> Mother used to say (not really) "Cortland! Put that electron back before he 
> yells for his Dad!"
> 2) Neglecting to get all parties to producing a product to ATTEND design 
> reviews and point out what they can and can't do given the design and desired 
> results.
> 3) Ignoring (again BASIC) principles of shielding and grounding even in 
> testing (all too common).
> 4) Not talking directly to engineers and techs on projects outside their own 
> areas of expertise. Everything matters. Even firmware.
> 5) Not looking at systems a whole; test setups, platform or user 
> configurations, regulations and standard – everything that concerns emissions 
> and susceptibility in use. It took time and effort (and one actual RFI 
> complaint) to convince a manufacturer of telco equipment that if it was on or 
> near a residential property it had to meet FCC Class B.
> It has been the rare employer whose management was on board with EMC problem 
> prevention; perhaps surprisingly, one of my better ones was Tandy, whose 
> first venture into the IBM compatible computer market in the late 1980's was 
> not only yanked off the market by the FCC, but incurred a sizable fine for 
> not having been submitted for testing (it failed). That'll motivate you! It 
> did get a me a job there.
> 
> IMO, an organization needs both educated engineers and those who can hold 
> people to basic principles; if you do all the simple things right, you will 
> usually have done the complex ones too. WRT the EMC Cop role, I prefer the 
> missionary position (heh).  Really, convert them, don't yell at them. An 
> Outside Expert many of us, at least in the US, know, was called in to look at 
> a PWB design and his first words to the CAD layout guy were "Your board is a 
> piece of sh*t!" How not to influence people, etc. They did listen to my 
> simpler and less confrontational advice thereafter. 
> 
> I'd have LOVED to get a job applicant who could show what's wrong, what's 
> right, and explain why in plain English; colleagues not in EMC will often 
> want simple rules: X mils of clearance and Y mils of prepreg; Z mils of 
> copper between bypass caps and devices etc. Sometimes it's worthwhile to make 
> design rules simple just to get them followed... but one must know what the 
> rules do, and why, and be able to teach those who must follow them .
> 
> I was offered a job at DSC Communications (later Alcatel USA) as a test 
> engineer, and when I arrived, they gave me the choice of that or design. That 
> was no choice at all; I chose design for, as I answered when asked why, test 
> engineers have to fix the same problems over and over, but design engineers 
> can stop them from happening, By dint of constant, friendly and informal 
> oversight (I asked for and got read-only access to the schematics and layout 
> of every project from my own terminal) and collaboration with designers in 
> every group, I did that. I 

[PSES] Considering TUV Rheinland's Functional Safety Engineer Certification

[Douglas Nix]

Colleagues,

Does anyone have any personal experience with TUV Rheinland’s Functional Safety 
Engineer Certification Program? I am considering certification as more and more 
of my activity is in this area. I would like to hear from anyone with any 
personal experience with this program, either in North America or in Europe. 

If you’ve taken a different program with the essentially the same end, I would 
also like to hear from you.

Thanks in advance!

Doug Nix

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: