Re: [PSES] Question for FCC Part 18 RE test?

[Bill Stumpf]

Refer to FCC MP-5 for information regarding testing at distances other than 
what is specified in FCC Part 18.

https://www.fcc.gov/general/equipment-authorization-measurement-procedures


Bill Stumpf
Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
847-537-6400 x281
[cid:image001.jpg@01D9685D.A09D4950]




From: Youngsik Kim 
Reply-To: Youngsik Kim 
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 11:32:20 +0900
To: 
Subject: [PSES] Question for FCC Part 18 RE test?

Hi Experts

According to FCC part 18.305 FIELD STRENGTH LIMITS, a test article of Any type 
unless otherwise specified has a measurement distance of 300 meters, but I want 
to measure it at a distance of 3 meters because I need to measure it in a 
chamber.
In this case, what is the limit at 3 meters?

If we use Any non-ISM frequency, the measurement distance is 300 meters and the 
limit value is 15 uV/m, We have a limit of 63.5 dBuV/m when measuring at 3 
meters.
However, other laboratories apply a limit of 103.5 dBuV/m.
Depending on the RF power of the test device, can I use a 40 log instead of a 
20 log conversion?
Is the conversion different depending on the power of the test device?

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator<http://www.DeepL.com/Translator> 
<http://www.DeepL.com/Translator>  (free version)

Best Regards



-


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

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

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

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


 To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: 
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1
-


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
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>>



To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: 
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1

-

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

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:
Mike Cantwell 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  
David Heald: 
_
To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link: 
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1

Re: [PSES] FCC Emissions on Industrial Equipment

[Bill Stumpf]

Brian,
Industrial equipment is not exempt from FCC Part 15 regulations.  The common 
belief that it is exempt is based on a misinterpretation of Part 15 Section 
15.103(c) which states as exempt "A digital device used exclusively as 
industrial, commercial, or medical test equipment.".  I sent an inquiry to the 
FCC some time ago and their response was: “It is an exemption for demonstrating 
compliance for the digital logic contained in test equipment exclusively used 
in commercial, medical and industrial situations, not commercial equipment.”
Therefore, unless the industrial equipment is test equipment, it is not exempt. 
 Note however that even exempt equipment is subject to the general conditions 
of operation contained in Section 15.5 and 15.29 that the operator of the 
exempted device shall be required to stop operating the device upon a finding 
by the Commission or its representative that the device is causing harmful 
interference. Operation shall not resume until the condition causing the 
harmful interference has been corrected. Although not mandatory, it is strongly 
recommended that the manufacturer of an exempted device endeavor to have the 
device meet the specific technical standards in this part.
Basically, the procedure for the equipment authorizations is verifying that the 
device is within limits for unintentionally radiating unwanted emissions as 
good quality engineering.

Refer also to FCC KDB 772105 
D01<https://apps.fcc.gov/kdb/GetAttachment.html?id=aPHDD74GRH5N2s050fBjxA%3D%3D&desc=772105%20D01%20Exempt%20Devices%20v01r01&tracking_number=33062>

Bill Stumpf - Lab/Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City, WI 53128
262-279-0210




From: Brian Kunde [mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 11:22 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC Emissions on Industrial Equipment

I am working on the first Industrial Machine of my career so I could use some 
advice and clarification regarding the requirements for FCC emissions.

I have been told by many that in North America, Industrial Equipment does not 
have to be tested, verified, or anything for FCC by the manufacturer of the 
equipment.  Is this true?  I was told that interference is unlikely, even if 
the equipment exceeds the FCC emissions limits.   Meeting the FCC limits is 
recommended, and voluntary, but not required.  True?


On the other hand,  Europe is not so.  If EE equipment goes to Europe, it has 
to pass the EN 55011 emissions test as well as the immunity tests.   Is that 
correct?


Any additional information that would be helpful to me would be appreciated.

The Other Brian


-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] Question regarding use of un certified radios.

[Bill Stumpf]

Charles,
For your answer please refer to FCC 47 CRF Part 2 (see section I): 
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=7062fb7892b0ce0fd3b2af0524fc6308&mc=true&n=pt47.1.2&r=PART&ty=HTML


Bill Stumpf – Lab/Technical manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
Genoa City, WI 53128 (USA)



From: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] 
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 12:14 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Question regarding use of un certified radios.

Hello all,

Thanks for the followup questions! You all of course realize I am asking for a 
friend 😊

I am referring to the WiFi radios in the US market. So for example if company A 
designs a piece
of test gear with WiFi radios (this question could also apply to 
RF4CE/Bluetooth etc) can
that piece of test gear be used outside of company A’s premises without 
certified radios?


[Working From Home]
Charles Grasso
Dish Technologies
(c) 303-204-2974
(h) 303-317-5530
(e ) charles.gra...@dish.com<mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com>
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com<mailto:chasgra...@gmail.com>



From: micha...@acbcert.com<mailto:micha...@acbcert.com> 
mailto:micha...@acbcert.com>>
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 10:37 AM
To: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] 
mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: RE: [PSES] Question regarding use of un certified radios.


 This message originated outside of DISH and was sent by: 
micha...@acbcert.com<mailto:micha...@acbcert.com>
Hi Charles,

Any idea which country you’re thinking about?   USA?   Canada?   EU?   Japan?

In all the cases I can think of, I agree that  “err, what?  No!”  is the 
correct answer.


Michael.


From: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] 
mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com>>
Sent: 29 June 2020 17:28
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] Question regarding use of un certified radios.

Hello EMC standards gurus!!!

I am being told  that the use of uncertified radios (think WIFi)  in the field 
is permitted
as long as there are no commercial transactions involved.

This makes no sense to me. Am I wrong?

[Working From Home]
Charles Grasso
Dish Technologies
(c) 303-204-2974
(h) 303-317-5530
(e ) charles.gra...@dish.com<mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com>
(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com<mailto:chasgra...@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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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/
Instruc

[PSES] Rohde & Schwarz EMI receiver repairs

[Bill Stumpf]

We've been told by Rohde & Schwarz that our ESIB receivers are obsolete and 
they can't perform repairs on them anymore because of parts unavailability.  
Does anyone know of a company that will repair these?

Thank you in advance,


Bill Stumpf, Lab/Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City, WI 53128







CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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] Big Boot from List Server

[Bill Stumpf]

I also have been booted.

From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 10:16 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Big Boot from List Server

I received the same systematic notification last night as everyone else and 
have not done anything with it.  I am receiving email today but I don’t think 
my post from earlier this morning went through.  So we’ll see if this reply 
goes through or not.

-Dave

From: Brian Kunde [mailto:bkundew...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2019 11:05 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Big Boot from List Server

Since the first of the year, I have been having trouble maintaining my 
subscription to this List Server. According to those who administrate this, the 
problems are all at our end but our eMail Administrator looked into it and said 
the problem that is being reported is outside our control (Phishing).

So in early April, I switched to my Gmail account thinking that this move 
should resolve all the issues. Nope. Today I was booted again for 2 
undeliverable emails.

The problem is not my posts because I haven't posted since my last 
re-subscription.  I don't know what else to try.

Is anyone else having similar troubles? Any suggestions other than just 
re-subscribing every few weeks?

I appreciate your input.

The Other Brian
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] Question re: Measuring a signal in a noisy environment

[Bill Stumpf]

ab lets the client take his 
equipment home with the assumption that the equipment has failed, then the 
longer it goes on, the greater the testing lab’s error and financial 
responsibility becomes. Perhaps the testing lab never noticed the problem on 
their own? That would have been a pretty serious indication that the testing 
lab just wasn’t ready to deliver professional quality testing services.

Another interesting comment was that there was difficulty in “setting up” the 
test specimen and its support equipment. A good test lab will know what a 
customer needs to supply long before the test date. Time should be budgeted for 
the setup and trouble-shooting of ancillary devices, and the customer should be 
warned that home-brew support equipment may cause EMI issues all on their own. 
A good test lab will make some suggestions about best practices, but alert the 
customer that it may be necessary to ameliorate support equipment problems 
before EUT testing can begin, and this may entail additional time and materials 
needed to make the support equipment quiet or immune enough to allow testing. 
Further, a good test lab should always expect some set-up problems, and be 
ready to surmount these with a plentiful junkbox of rolls of aluminum foil, 
conductive tape, bond straps, shielded boxes, knitted wire mesh, capacitors, 
inductors, ferrite beads, isolation transformers, sheet metal and a decent 
assortment of common hand tools. In short, if your customer says his gadget 
needs an external water chiller, the test lab should have already thought about 
ground loops, how to get water in and out of the chamber, and have considered 
what problems a water chiller might induce in the lab’s electrical environment. 
The test lab’s customer should not feel that the test lab was unprepared to 
receive him or that the test lab was anything less than expert in integrating 
the test specimen and support equipment into the test chamber.

It would appear that the selected test lab was just not ready for prime time.


Ed Price
WB6WSN
Chula Vista, CA USA

From: DEREK WALTON [mailto:00734758d943-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ieee.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 12:08 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Question re: Measuring a signal in a noisy environment

Interesting discussion, not surprising I have a little empathy, and a whole 
slew of disagreement with both Ken and Ghery ( both Chaps I have a lot of 
respect for ) on this one.

How best to respond is the question?

Cheers,

Derek Walton.



On Apr 17, 2019, at 1:12 PM, Bill Stumpf 
mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com>> wrote:

Absolutely agree with Ken.

Bill Stumpf
Lab/Technical Manager
D.L.S. Elecronic Systems, Inc.



From: Kenneth Wyatt [mailto:emc.g...@emc-seminars.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 12:21 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Question re: Measuring a signal in a noisy environment

Boy, I have heard all sorts of horror stories from clients with knowledgeable 
EMC backgrounds who have witnessed sloppy, or just plain wrong, procedures used 
in commercial EMC test labs. In a lot of cases, the technicians operating these 
tests have limited background in EM theory and poor knowledge of the actual 
tests they are running and standards the tests are based on.

Just because a test lab is assessed per IEC 17025, doesn’t mean much unless 
they show evidence the documented procedures are actually being followed.

Many test labs fail to perform frequent verification tests to confirm the 
measurement system is accurate and is repeatable from one day to the next. When 
I worked for HP, we did a daily verification test using an RF generator 
connected to the antenna cable to ensure the back-end system measured the same 
as the day before. We also ran comb generator tests frequently.

I always suggest to my clients to make their preferred test lab measure a 
client-owned comb generator prior to any testing in order to ensure the chamber 
continues to be reasonably consistent before real measurements are taken.

It’s also very important to understand the test standards and EUT 
configurations well enough to ensure the test technician is setting up things 
correctly. I know of one case where the EUT cabling was configured wrong and 
their client repeatedly had emissions failures over weeks of retesting until 
the correct configuration was pointed out in the standard.

Taking photos of the test setup is very important for day to day test 
consistency. A difference in one cable position can completely throw off 
repeatability and thus, mislead any troubleshooting efforts.

What about ESD simulators? When was it verified last? Does the test lab even 
have the means to verify the correct tip voltage and pulse characteristics?

Is all the measurement equipment calibrated and cal tags current?

I could go on…

My colleague, Ghery Pettit wrote a r

Re: [PSES] Question re: Measuring a signal in a noisy environment

[Bill Stumpf]

Absolutely agree with Ken.

Bill Stumpf
Lab/Technical Manager
D.L.S. Elecronic Systems, Inc.



From: Kenneth Wyatt [mailto:emc.g...@emc-seminars.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 12:21 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Question re: Measuring a signal in a noisy environment

Boy, I have heard all sorts of horror stories from clients with knowledgeable 
EMC backgrounds who have witnessed sloppy, or just plain wrong, procedures used 
in commercial EMC test labs. In a lot of cases, the technicians operating these 
tests have limited background in EM theory and poor knowledge of the actual 
tests they are running and standards the tests are based on.

Just because a test lab is assessed per IEC 17025, doesn’t mean much unless 
they show evidence the documented procedures are actually being followed.

Many test labs fail to perform frequent verification tests to confirm the 
measurement system is accurate and is repeatable from one day to the next. When 
I worked for HP, we did a daily verification test using an RF generator 
connected to the antenna cable to ensure the back-end system measured the same 
as the day before. We also ran comb generator tests frequently.

I always suggest to my clients to make their preferred test lab measure a 
client-owned comb generator prior to any testing in order to ensure the chamber 
continues to be reasonably consistent before real measurements are taken.

It’s also very important to understand the test standards and EUT 
configurations well enough to ensure the test technician is setting up things 
correctly. I know of one case where the EUT cabling was configured wrong and 
their client repeatedly had emissions failures over weeks of retesting until 
the correct configuration was pointed out in the standard.

Taking photos of the test setup is very important for day to day test 
consistency. A difference in one cable position can completely throw off 
repeatability and thus, mislead any troubleshooting efforts.

What about ESD simulators? When was it verified last? Does the test lab even 
have the means to verify the correct tip voltage and pulse characteristics?

Is all the measurement equipment calibrated and cal tags current?

I could go on…

My colleague, Ghery Pettit wrote a recent blog on the subject for Interference 
Technology: 
https://interferencetechnology.com/emc-laboratory-selection-audit-items/

Cheers, Ken

___

I'm here to help you succeed! Feel free to call or email with any questions 
related to EMC or EMI troubleshooting - at no obligation. I'm always happy to 
help!

Kenneth Wyatt
Wyatt Technical Services LLC
56 Aspen Dr.
Woodland Park, CO 80863

Phone: (719) 310-5418

Web Site<http://www.emc-seminars.com> | Blog<https://design-4-emc.com>
The EMC Blog (EDN)<https://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/4376432/The-EMC-Blog>
Subscribe to Newsletter<http://www.emc-seminars.com/Newsletter/Newsletter.html>
Connect with me on LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/in/kennethwyatt/>


On Apr 17, 2019, at 10:46 AM, Grasso, Charles 
mailto:charles.gra...@dish.com>> wrote:

To those wondering what the background and conclusion to that question was:

Background:   Our testing was performed in a newly minted chamber so proper
EMC installation of our product was challenging.
Effect:   Ingress of high levels of external bb noise.
Result:  Proper install eliminated the external noise and now 
the system passed.

Concern: While I accept that proper installation and operation of our system is 
our
responsibility, I had expected that the tester would point to the excessive 
ambient
and indicate that our data may not be valid. An inexperienced customer would
have  left thinking that their product had failed.

Am I wrong?


Thanks!

Charles Grasso
W: 303-706-5467

-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 Prod

[PSES] CISPR 11 microwave oven test procedure

[Bill Stumpf]

Dear esteemed colleagues,
CISPR 11 test procedures for making radiate emissions measurements at 
frequencies above 1GHz dictates that measurements are performed only at 30 
degree intervals around the microwave appliance.  From my own experience, this 
does not capture the highest emissions from the microwave oven, and often will 
allow it to “pass” the emissions test when there are emissions that are higher 
than the specified limit at angles from the EUT that is not recorded using this 
methodology.

I expect the procedure was written to save time in testing, but how can I, in 
good conscience, write a passing test report when I know the EUT fails to meet 
the limit for radiated emissions at angles other than the 30 degree increments 
recorded?

Can anyone give me some background on why this test method was written into the 
standard?

Am I miss-interpreting the procedure?


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.



-

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] FCC: Subpart B applicable/mandatory for a commercial dishwasher?

[Bill Stumpf]

Michael,
Some appliances are exempt from FCC authorization procedures (the exemption 
applies only to the digital electronics necessary for the basic function of the 
appliance), but all appliances are subject to the general conditions of 
operation in 47CFR Part 15.5, which imply that such devices can only operate on 
a non-interference basis, 15.29 concerning inspection by the FCC.  So even if 
the appliance is technically exempt from FCC authorization procedures, the FCC 
strongly encourages that all efforts be made to have the product meet FCC 
technical regulations and that the manufacturer follow regulatory procedures.

See the following helpful links.

FCC Part 15: 
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=9ba2fde95f4bd15f357f7a288f6a89c3&mc=true&node=pt47.1.15&rgn=div5

FCC KDB – Exempted Appliances: 
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=33062&switch=P


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronics
Genoa City, WI




From: Michael Loerzer [mailto:loerzer_mob...@globalnorm.de]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 3:05 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC: Subpart B applicable/mandatory for a commercial dishwasher?

Hi all,

is a commercial dishwasher (in acc. to UL 921) with digital logic


  *   an INCIDENTAL RADIATOR in acc. to subpart A of Part 15 oder
  *   an UNINTENTIONAL RADIATOR and shall be qualified in acc. to § 15.101 or
  *   is a commercial dishwasher generally expempted by § 15.103 (d)?

Thanks in advance for any useful information/guidance.

In the EU the EMCD is mandatory for such products. What is the legal situation 
in the US regarding FCC?

Best regards,

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Michael Loerzer
__  __  __  __

Regulatory Affairs Specialist
Managing Director
GLOBALNORM
Fon +49 30 3229027-51
Fax +49 30 3229027-59
michael.loer...@globalnorm.de<mailto:michael.loer...@globalnorm.de>
» globalnorm.de<https://www.globalnorm.de/?pk_campaign=Signatur&pk_content=Link>
__  GLOBALNORM ACADEMY _

Lehrgang zum Product Compliance Officer
vom 05. bis 08. März 2019 in Berlin
» Jetzt anmelden und Handlungssicherheit 
gewinnen!<https://academy.globalnorm.de/product-compliance-veranstaltung/events/lehrgang-product-compliance-officer-pco-gemaess-isoiec-17024.html?pk_campaign=Signatur&pk_content=unten>

Globalnorm GmbH | Place: Kurfuerstenstraße 112, 10787 Berlin, Germany | 
Managing Director: Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Michael Loerzer | Court: 
Berlin-Charlottenburg HRB 105204 B | VAT-ID-Number: DE251654448



-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] FCC Appliance Exemptions

[Bill Stumpf]

While Part 15 only uses the term "appliances", the FCC KDB 772105 instructs the 
reader to the exemption for digital circuitry necessary for the basic operation 
of certain household appliances.   To the best of my knowledge this exemption 
does not carry over into commercial appliances.

Refer also to FCC 15.5 General conditions of operation.  While some digital 
circuitry in certain household appliances may be "exempt", the appliance is not 
free to create harmful interference.  So essentially all appliances inherently 
capable of creating RF interference should be tested for FCC Part 15 compliance.

Also note that ISED Canada will be publishing a emissions standard next year 
(ISED-007) that specifically will deal with compliance of appliances, 
electrical tools, toys and similar devices.  Although I've heard nothing, I 
have to wonder if the FCC will consider similar actions...

Bill

From: Rob Oglesbee [mailto:rob.ogles...@rheem.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 2:21 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC Appliance Exemptions

This may be a stupid question, but in Part 15.103(d), does "appliance" refer to 
household appliances only?  Or does it also include commercial appliances?  It 
doesn't say in either the definitions section or in the exemptions section.  
The only relevant OET knowledge base publication I could find is #772105, and 
it is based on a question about household appliances.

An example might be a clothes washer.  Obviously the clothes washer in a house 
is exempt (ignoring any IoT rabbitholes), but what about a hotel clothes washer?

Any guidance to a ruling I might have missed, or discussion of the topic in a 
trade paper would be helpful.

Thank you in advance,
Rob
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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] eMail caution

[Bill Stumpf]

And contact your local authorities.  This is a felony.

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 3:03 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] eMail caution


This is a very prevalent scam. It usually says it has evidence that you look at 
porn sites.  Just ignore it but change your compromised password and any more 
critical ones, e.g. about banking and credit/debit cards.

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk

Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2018-11-14 18:04, IEEE eNotice wrote:
If you are having trouble reading this message, click 
here
 for the web version. 
[http://images.magnetmail.net/images/clients/IEEE_MGAIM/enotice_header_800.png]

All:  Do not respond or reply to this message.

I received the threat message below, and want to be sure that anyone in my 
communications systems is alerted.

Do not believe anything coming from me in the near future unless you confirm 
with me independently.

Sorry for this bother but, this is the only way I know of to be able to extend 
at least a cautionary warning to everyone.

**

k.williams - emc555iso 1 message

Emmalynn Wales 

Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 6:25 PM To: 
"k.willi...@ieee.org" 


Gu e ss wha t, I kno w the sne a ky se cre ts o f yo u r li fe . I wo n't e 
xpla i n yo u e xa ctly wha t I kno w, I've go t a ll the de ta i ls wi th me . 
To de mo nstra te my po i nt, ple a se le t myse lf te ll yo u tha t o ne o f 
yo u r pa sswo rds i s a ctu a lly emc555iso. Se nd me $6000 vi a Bi tco i n to 
the a ddre ss 1GvHFShTJ8GxEnwmTG6HUjjdXrZPkK8ZfB wi thi n the ne xt 40 hrs. I 
wi ll ma ke o ne i mpo rta nt thi ng ve ry cle a r, tha t I wi ll da ma ge yo u 
r li fe co mple te ly i f I do no t ge t the pa yme nt. Whe n I ge t the pa yme 
nt, I'll re mo ve e a ch i nfo I ha ve wi th me , a nd I wi ll di sa ppe a r co 
mple te ly a nd yo u 'll do no t he a r a nythi ng fro m myse lf. Thi s i s a 
ctu a lly the fi rst a nd a lso la st e -ma i l fro m me a s we ll a s the o 
ffe r i s no n ne go ti a ble s, thu s do no t re spo nd to thi s e -ma i l.


Southeastern Michigan Section : 
http://www.ieee-sem.org/
IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Society : 
http://ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/

Manage your IEEE Communications 
Preferences
[http://images.magnetmail.net/images/clients/IEEE_MGAIM/enotice_footer_800.png]
[http://www.mmsend10.com/spacer.cfm?tracking_id=41965082828&jid=42638189]
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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:
Sco

Re: [PSES] HP 8546A EMI Receiver - Looking for calibration facility

[Bill Stumpf]

Bob,
You might try Trescal

Bill

From: Sykes, Bob [mailto:bob.sy...@gilbarco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 10:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] HP 8546A EMI Receiver - Looking for calibration facility

Worldly Experts,

I just learned that Keysight has unceremoniously dropped calibration and repair 
support for the 8546A EMI receiver.
It's an old beast, but we like it and use it a lot.  Does anyone still use one 
of these and know of a facility (preferably U.S.) that can calibrate them?

adTHANKSvance,
Bob Sykes





Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If you 
are not the intended recipient, please notify us by email by replying to the 
sender and delete this message. The sender disclaims that the content of this 
email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any agreement; 
provided that the foregoing does not invalidate the binding effect of any 
digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included 
in any attachment.
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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 EMI Issue

[Bill Stumpf]

Equipment subject to Part 15 regulations must operate on a non-interference 
basis, so if the compliant product is interfering with licensed wireless 
communications the FCC may ask you to remedy the particular instance of 
interference.

Refer to FCC CFR 47 Part 15 (section 15.5 – General conditions of operation).


Bill Stumpf, Lab/Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City, WI 53128






From: Moeller, Robert T. [mailto:robert.moel...@banctec.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 8:41 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Equipment EMI Issue

Hello,
Maybe someone can help with this question:  We have had one of our systems 
installed and operating at a customer site in the US, and now suddenly a local 
Cell Ph Company has made complaint that we have an unintentional signal 
radiating at 780 MHz which is interfering with their Cell Tower.  Our equipment 
is EMC tested to CISPR Class A for business only use, and at 780 Mhz our 
radiated Level at 3Meters is under the Class A limit of 57 dB at 780 Mhz.  
Question is, can the complaining company legally demand that we drop the signal 
further, they may be looking at a necessary reduction of current level by 20 dB 
lower.

Thank You



-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] application of CISPR 32 to EUTs with integrated radio transmitters

[Bill Stumpf]

Notch filters are a good option if you can find one for your application. 
However you do need to "calibrate" them to get attenuation factors well above 
and below the notch frequency. You will find that they usually have significant 
attenuation at harmonics of the notch frequency of the filter.  We will often 
use a notch filter near the fundamental of the transmitter, and then high-pass 
filter once beyond that.  Custom designed filters are sometimes necessary.

Bill


-Original Message-
From: James Pawson (U3C) [mailto:ja...@unit3compliance.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 2:13 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] application of CISPR 32 to EUTs with integrated radio 
transmitters

Hi Balmukund,

A good point. I've certainly used notch filters in the past for removing the 
intentional radiator to prove that the second harmonic is in fact an artefact 
of the measuring instrument. I've also done this by increasing the attenuation 
on the input to the analyser until the second harmonic suddenly reduces by more 
than the amount of attenuation inserted - I'm sure I read about that technique 
on this forum.

I guess if you took into account the loss vs frequency characteristics of the 
filter in your measurement factors then I can't immediately see a reason why 
you couldn't use one.

Would be interested to hear other opinions on the topic.

James Pawson
Unit 3 Compliance


-Original Message-
From: Balmukund Vyas [mailto:balmukund.v...@ymllabs.com]
Sent: 26 July 2017 05:11
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] application of CISPR 32 to EUTs with integrated radio 
transmitters

Is it possible to use notch filters and measure rest of the frequencies?

-Original Message-
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.com]
Sent: 25 July 2017 17:41
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] application of CISPR 32 to EUTs with integrated radio 
transmitters

Hello members,

Thanks all who responded.

I hope CISPR makes this topic clear in near future.

Regards,
Tom

--
Tomonori Sato  
URL: http://t-sato.in.coocan.jp


On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 03:10:27 +0900,
  "T.Sato"  wrote:

> Hello members,
>
> I want to hear of your opinion - while emission measurement for CISPR 
> 32,
integrated radio transmitters must transmitting?
>
>
> Although the standard is not clear whether radio transmitter can be 
> set
off in emission measurement, I believed we can set radio transmitter off,
as:
>
> - CISPR 32 said "The radiated emission requirements in this standard 
> are
not intended to be applicable to the intentional transmissions from a radio 
transmitter as defined by the ITU, nor to any spurious emissions related to 
these intentional transmissions."
>
> - If non-transmitter function of the equipment (such as CPU clock and
harmonics) generates emissions in the frequency band of the intentional 
transmission of the transmitter (such as 2.4 to 2.5 GHz), I think we should 
apply the emission limits as the emissions are not related to the intentional 
transmissions. However, it is difficult to measure such emissions in presence 
of the intentional transmission.
>
> - The standard says "Compliance can be shown by measuring the EUT's
emissions when operating its functions simultaneously, individually in turn, or 
any combination thereof." So, even if emissions from the transmitter function 
must also be considered in the standard, it should permissible to test 
non-transmitter function of the equipment while transmitter is set off.
>
> - Then, if the transmitter function of the equipment is tested while 
> all
the other functions are set off, all the emissions measured are those caused by 
the transmitter.
>
>
> However, I heard of strong opinions that the emission measurement must 
> be
run while the integrated radio transmitter is transmitting, and all the 
emissions in the frequency bands of intended transmissions and those harmonics 
should be simply ignored.
>
>
> What do you think about this?
>
> Regards,
> Tom
>
> --
> Tomonori Sato  
> URL: http://t-sato.in.coocan.jp
>
> -
> 
> 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] USB dongle connector shield filtered grounding

[Bill Stumpf]

Truly outstanding analogies Ken, Ralph & Bill.  I too cringe every time I hear 
the term "ground" bandied about in EMI circles.  It's a widely misunderstood 
term that the non-initiated envision as some sort of EMI black hole that's by 
some means able to soak up all that excess RF energy.  I'm sure we all could 
tell some stories from the lab.


Bill


From: Ken Wyatt [mailto:k...@emc-seminars.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 1:29 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] USB dongle connector shield filtered grounding

Like they say in some movies…”follow the money”. In the case of EMC issues, 
it’s usually “follow the current”. Both differential and common mode currents 
want to return to their sources in the most expedient (low-impedance) route. If 
designers fail to define a return path, invariably, some of that RF current 
radiates. Once the noise source(s) are identified, then what’s the return path? 
There will always be a return path…just not always the one you want.

Cheers, Ken

___

I'm here to help you succeed! Feel free to call or email with any questions 
related to EMC or EMI troubleshooting - at no obligation. I'm always happy to 
help!

Kenneth Wyatt
Wyatt Technical Services LLC
56 Aspen Dr.
Woodland Park, CO 80863

Phone: (719) 310-5418

Email Me! | Web Site 
| Blog
The EMC Blog (EDN)
Subscribe to Newsletter
Connect with me on LinkedIn

On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:35 AM, Ralph McDiarmid 
mailto:ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com>>
 wrote:

Rather than 'ground', perhaps 'RF return' or 'counterpoise' might be better 
terms?

I think the thing that makes EMC mysterious is that the complete RF circuit is 
unseen and difficult to accurately define, given all the parasitic elements.  
The experience of 'inside' verses 'outside' the chassis envelope a prime 
example, something I encountered some years ago, but never fully understood.

Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric


-Original Message-
From: Bill Owsley [mailto:00f5a03f18eb-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 8:33 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] USB dongle connector shield filtered grounding

Ancient EMC mythology, well proven to be wrong and so abandoned decades ago.
And still it pops on occasion and often with new twists to revive the 
mythology.So it gets ignored as those new to the stories, such that they cannot 
figure it out, will need the lessons of 'on the job training'.
ps. the proper terminology needed to clearly enunciate the concepts is not 
settled.
The physics is plain and simple but to describe it takes a lot words due to a 
lack of commonly understood terminology.
For example 'ground' serves as the catchall term, for shielding, signal return, 
power return, zero reference, analog return, digital return, chassis, circuit, 
logic, cable,  AND for Safety as in earth ground.
Now Maxwell's law's (made up by a mad Scotman back in the 1800's) dictate that 
a so-called signal must be accompanied by its return signal, and further more 
that return signal will couple as close as possible to the original so-called 
signal.  The two parts are inextricably intertwined and cannot be considered 
separately, without great risk to ones grasp of reality.  Just as the alleged 
E-field and H-field are two aspects of the same thing, which conveniently might 
be called the Poynting Vector, and are related by the Impedance, the ratio of 
the two fields, which in free space, well away from any conducting structures, 
is approximately 377 ohms.

Now conducting structures, ones like a circuit 'ground', a chassis 'ground', a 
shielding 'ground' and signal returns often called 'ground' and the concept of 
'inside' verses 'outside' which seems to ignore Maxwell, are all going to make 
for a rich realm of mythology which is not well defined and so, all sorts of 
imaginings are created to fill all the constructed voids from using all these 
artificial concepts, when one simple concept is necessary and sufficient to 
complete the structure.

Aside:  If that secret, the simple one, was to be 'leaked' to common knowledge, 
we all would be out of a job in managing EMC since even the simple digital guys 
could understand it.  So we keep it under-wraps and obscure by using mysterious 
language so that the neophytes and uninitiated think that they understand 
and/or have no clue as to what is going on.

Always the correct answer: "It depends!"- Bill




__
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
__

-
---

Re: [PSES] RED ZigBee 6 GHz Immunity Testing: Technical Risk?

[Bill Stumpf]

This is not a simple answer and to an extent is up to the manufacturer 
integrating the radio product.   I think most would find the guidance in ETSI 
EG 203 
367<http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_eg/203300_203399/203367/01.01.01_60/eg_203367v010101p.pdf>
 valuable.  ETSI also has two standards in draft (EN 303 446-1 & EN 303 446-2) 
"ElectroMagnetic Compatibility (EMC) standard for combined and/or integrated 
radio and non-radio equipment".  These can be downloaded from the ETSI website 
also.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210



From: Chester Summers [mailto:csummers@CHARLESMACHINE.WORKS]
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 12:29 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RED ZigBee 6 GHz Immunity Testing: Technical Risk?

Dear group,
did anyone ever answer Mike’s question for his ZigBee device?  I’ve got the 
same question, but I’m using a Bluetooth radio.

Is a completed radio product required by the RED to be tested for radiated 
immunity to 6 GHz?  In other words, must the finished product match RI 
considerations of the radio?  Is this “in addition to” the product family 
standard, which may only prescribe RI to 3GHz?

Thank you,
Chet Summers

From: Mike Sherman - Original Message - [mailto:msherma...@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 9:20 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] RED ZigBee 6 GHz Immunity Testing: Technical Risk?

Esteemed colleagues:
I've got what I'm told is a fully RED compliant ZigBee module that goes into 
equipment that I'm told now must be immunity tested to 6 GHz the RED (the chip 
reportedly already passes). Connections to my equipment are data and power. We 
have no experience immunity testing the equipment from 3 to 6 Ghz. I'm trying 
to assess my risk as I wait for lab time to open up.

QUESTION: has anyone had immunity problems in other than radio modules in the 
3-6 GHz range? How common? Were they found in certain constructions or 
components?

thanks again to all,
Mike Sherman
Graco Inc.
-


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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_emc-2Dpstc.html&d=DwMCaQ&c=G4BpsyPyB19LB50bn2swXw&r=uQYjlohUH2VwYVcMCZDVOGnwYsWulCG18FqsT19OrFM&m=gZJI_Sb9n9-EjKHVIsw59ejpe3YGhL0PkefUt0fWWiY&s=QUehDUFBUx9wCCDVQZpPp-EB19cNuSHkJVhDz5WXKyw&e=>

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__product-2Dcompliance.oc.ieee.org_&d=DwMCaQ&c=G4BpsyPyB19LB50bn2swXw&r=uQYjlohUH2VwYVcMCZDVOGnwYsWulCG18FqsT19OrFM&m=gZJI_Sb9n9-EjKHVIsw59ejpe3YGhL0PkefUt0fWWiY&s=_j8VdCHl4r9SUpq0YayR5ezj6qkvdNkO3OYTr6QD7fY&e=>
 can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_&d=DwMCaQ&c=G4BpsyPyB19LB50bn2swXw&r=uQYjlohUH2VwYVcMCZDVOGnwYsWulCG18FqsT19OrFM&m=gZJI_Sb9n9-EjKHVIsw59ejpe3YGhL0PkefUt0fWWiY&s=UIG5VBMfwYLCZP_OhbnQsDioO0A2oZmJBgy3QGYm-tQ&e=>
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_list.html&d=DwMCaQ&c=G4BpsyPyB19LB50bn2swXw&r=uQYjlohUH2VwYVcMCZDVOGnwYsWulCG18FqsT19OrFM&m=gZJI_Sb9n9-EjKHVIsw59ejpe3YGhL0PkefUt0fWWiY&s=Z6G0SpvV3U6MmfD_MCQRrRfNnK4cT-KRpCIW_ih8Lu8&e=>
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_listrules.html&d=DwMCaQ&c=G4BpsyPyB19LB50bn2swXw&r=uQYjlohUH2VwYVcMCZDVOGnwYsWulCG18FqsT19OrFM&m=gZJI_Sb9n9-EjKHVIsw59ejpe3YGhL0PkefUt0fWWiY&s=VtyYRMldjMm0COyiMzWDCGQMxeRW3-p5nhjX_9NXz94&e=>

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 email and any files transmitted with it from Charles Machine Works are 
confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to 
which they are addressed.
-


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

Re: [PSES] FCC part 18

[Bill Stumpf]

Dieter,
The statement in 15.103 refers to Industrial test equipment, Commercial test 
equipment, and Medical test equipment.  I am confident of this because I sent 
the very same question in an inquiry to the FCC in November of 2015.

FCC inquiry response: "It is an exemption for demonstrating compliance for the 
digital logic contained in test equipment exclusively used in commercial, 
medical and industrial situations, not commercial equipment."

Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210



From: Paasche, Dieter [mailto:dieter.paas...@christiedigital.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 3:50 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC part 18

Dear group,

In FCC part 15.103 does the term "test equipment" refer to the medical 
equipment only or to the industrial and commercial equipment as well.

(c) A digital device used exclusively as industrial, commercial, or medical 
test equipment

Means if I have an industrial or commercial digital device (e.g cash register 
or industrial computer?) that is not for testing, would it have to comply with 
FCC part 15?.


Sincerely,

Dieter Paasche
Senior Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, ON N2G 4Y7
Phone: 519-744-8005 ext.7211
www.christiedigital.com<http://www.christiedigital.com/>

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is confidential.  Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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] No Postings?? [General Use]

[Bill Stumpf]

Just a thought – it may be that many members (like me) are at the FCC TCB 
conference this week getting our fill of regulations?

Bill

From: Dan Roman [mailto:danp...@verizon.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2017 5:34 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] No Postings?? [General Use]

It is. The list just has been unusually quiet for a bit.



--
Dan Roman
IEEE Senior Member
PSES/EMCS/CES
dan.ro...@ieee.org




 Original message 
From: John Woodgate mailto:jmw1...@btinternet.com>>
Date: 5/3/17 4:13 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] No Postings?? [General Use]

Basildon has finally been ejected from Plant Earth. (;-)

Seriously, the Moderators can check if your email address is still in the
database.

With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO - Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates 
Rayleigh England

Sylvae in aeternum manent.

-Original Message-
From: Price, Andrew (Leonardo, UK)
[mailto:andrew.p.pr...@leonardocompany.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 03 May 2017 08:45
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] No Postings?? [General Use]

Hi there Group

For some reason it appears that I am not getting any postings from the
forum?
Does anyone know why this as occurred?

Regards
Andy




 Andrew Price
 Land & Naval Defence Electronics Division
 Prinicpal Environmental Engineer (EMC)

 Leonardo MW Ltd
 Sigma House, Christopher Martin Rd, Basildon SS14 3EL, UK
 Tel  EMC LAB : +44 (0)1268 883308
 Mobile: +44 (0)7507 854888

andrew.p.pr...@leonardocompany.com
>
 leonardocomapany.com
HELICOPTERS / AERONAUTICS / ELECTRONICS, DEFENCE AND SECURITY SYSTEMS /
SPACE

* Please consider the environment before printing this email.




Leonardo MW Ltd
Registered Office: Sigma House, Christopher Martin Road, Basildon, Essex
SS14 3EL A company registered in England & Wales.  Company no. 02426132

This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient
and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please
delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute
its contents to any other person.


-

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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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

Re: [PSES] Access to draft ETSI EN standards for RED?

[Bill Stumpf]

Mike,
There are some drafts available from ETSI.  Also given is the current status of 
ETSI standards.

Link: ETSI webapp 
portal

Bill

From: Mike Sherman - Original Message - [mailto:msherma...@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 3:05 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Access to draft ETSI EN standards for RED?

Esteemed colleagues --
Do you know of a way to gain access to the draft ETSI EN standards for the 
Radio Equipment Directive without paying 6000 euros to join ETSI?
Thanks
Mike Sherman
Graco Inc.

Sent from Xfinity Connect Mobile App
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] EMC co-location distance question

[Bill Stumpf]

Regan,
I think the EMC community can agree that just because a device label indicates 
it is compliant doesn't mean it really is. We see that in the lab very often.

ANSI C63.4 does offer quite a bit of detail regarding EUT setup & operation, 
connection of EUT ports and peripheral and accessory devices, simulators, 
interconnected cabling, etc.  Too much detail in fact for anyone to try to 
explain in an email.  If I may put in a little plug for the ASC-C63(r) 
standards committee, there is a monumental effort put forth by these brave and 
knowlegable volunteers who write and continually update the ANSI C63 standards. 
 I think you will find all your answers there in the standard.  If you still 
have questions interpreting a section of the standard, you might find the 
answer on the "interpretations" web page provided by ASC-C63(r): 
http://www.c63.org/documents/misc/posting/new_interpretations.htm.

In general, it is understood that you can't test every combination of connected 
devices, so you test a typical setup that you can justify as presenting 
"worst-case" for emissions.  As for daisy-chained equipment under test, you 
really have to look at how it is use in actual applications. If multiple pieces 
of equipment can be daisy chained together and used in a small local area, i.e. 
rack or table for example, they should be tested together. If it can be shown 
that at some point adding additional daisy-chained devices does not add to the 
emissions profile, then you can stop adding at that point. In the end the 
system under test should represent worst-case of what actually might be seen in 
an actual application, while keeping the test setup within the realm of 
reasonable possibility.  Just be sure to detail it all in your test report.

Best of fortune to you.  If you use a good accredited test lab, they deal with 
this daily and should be able to guide you through the whole process.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
EMC Testing, Certification & Consulting
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 11:50 AM
To: Bill Stumpf mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: RE: EMC co-location distance question

Hi Bill. Thanks for this great info! Much appreciated.

The second part of my original email was merely philosophical discussion 
points. Let me clarify. I would love to hear what people think:


1. How many different types of ancillary equipment shall you test with your 
main EUT? i.e. PCs or laptops with HDMI & USB ports..the sky's the limit as 
to the myriad of devices that now can be connected. Where does one 'stop'?

a. Also, not all devices (that claim to be Class B) are noise free. I've 
personally experienced extremely noisy devices using a reputable brand name 
(yes, FCC logo on the device), but had to exchange it for their competitor to 
ensure no unintentional emissions, so my main EUT passes. (Moral of the 
storydon't believe everything you read on the label - lol)


2. Another related question: what about identical devices that can be daisy 
chained? i.e. some devices allow a daisy chain of up to 12 or more. (i.e. 
telecom trunk card). Does one use the chamber table as the determination for 
the quantity of daisy chained samples to test? Or does one compile all the max 
# of daisy chained devices on the table despite the congestion of I/O & power 
cables (not recommended)? Or is there a rule of thumb that one shall prove that 
there will not be an increase in emissions past a certain number of devices? 
(The latter is my preference).

Thoughts?

From: Bill Stumpf [mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 6:54 AM
To: Regan Arndt mailto:re...@empowermicro.com>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: RE: EMC co-location distance question

Regan,
I'm not sure I understand your question correctly, but I will try to provide an 
answer.  ANSI C63.4 is used when testing for FCC part 15 subpart B compliance 
for unintentional radiators. When testing a table-top system, the collocated 
equipment should be spaced at 10cm, unless this is not typical of normal 
operation. If so, then the EUT and its accessories/peripheral devices should be 
placed as they would be in typical applications.  It is important to read the 
text of the ANSI standard, as it goes into great detail on how to set up and 
select accessories for testing.  The drawings are for general reference only 
and the text always takes precedence. As for EN/CISPR standards, they mostly 
accept similar setup conditions to ANSI C63.4, but you will have to verify the 
specific requirements in each standard.   The <20cm you refer to was at one 
time unofficially (FCC) con

Re: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

[Bill Stumpf]

Right - ANSI C63.4 still makes reference to the "2dB rule"

Bill

From: Adam Dixon [mailto:lanterna.viri...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 1:03 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

It's been awhile, but at the time when wanting to understand modular test 
requirements, the 2dB asymptote/leveling off  was a reference in FCC Part 15 
Section 15.31 (a) (3)  pointing to ANSI C63.4-2003.
Regards,
Adam in Atlanta

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Sundstrom, Mike 
mailto:mike.sundst...@garmin.com>> wrote:
Regan,
In regards to the daisy chaining:
Hook up equipment (daisy chaining) until such a time as you don’t get a 2 dB 
increase of any unwanted signals. I think this is in ANSI or CISPR?
Everyone,
What am I remembering partly here?


Thanks,

Michael Sundstrom
Garmin Compliance Engineer
2-2606
(913) 440-1540
KB5UKT

"We call it theory when we know much about something but nothing works,
and practice when everything works but nobody knows why."  -- Albert 
Einstein

From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com<mailto:re...@empowermicro.com>]
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 11:50 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

Hi Bill. Thanks for this great info! Much appreciated.

The second part of my original email was merely philosophical discussion 
points. Let me clarify. I would love to hear what people think:


1. How many different types of ancillary equipment shall you test with your 
main EUT? i.e. PCs or laptops with HDMI & USB ports……the sky’s the limit as to 
the myriad of devices that now can be connected. Where does one ‘stop’?

a. Also, not all devices (that claim to be Class B) are noise free. I’ve 
personally experienced extremely noisy devices using a reputable brand name 
(yes, FCC logo on the device), but had to exchange it for their competitor to 
ensure no unintentional emissions, so my main EUT passes. (Moral of the 
story….don’t believe everything you read on the label – lol)


2. Another related question: what about identical devices that can be daisy 
chained? i.e. some devices allow a daisy chain of up to 12 or more. (i.e. 
telecom trunk card). Does one use the chamber table as the determination for 
the quantity of daisy chained samples to test? Or does one compile all the max 
# of daisy chained devices on the table despite the congestion of I/O & power 
cables (not recommended)? Or is there a rule of thumb that one shall prove that 
there will not be an increase in emissions past a certain number of devices? 
(The latter is my preference).

Thoughts?

From: Bill Stumpf [mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 6:54 AM
To: Regan Arndt mailto:re...@empowermicro.com>>; 
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: RE: EMC co-location distance question

Regan,
I'm not sure I understand your question correctly, but I will try to provide an 
answer.  ANSI C63.4 is used when testing for FCC part 15 subpart B compliance 
for unintentional radiators. When testing a table-top system, the collocated 
equipment should be spaced at 10cm, unless this is not typical of normal 
operation. If so, then the EUT and its accessories/peripheral devices should be 
placed as they would be in typical applications.  It is important to read the 
text of the ANSI standard, as it goes into great detail on how to set up and 
select accessories for testing.  The drawings are for general reference only 
and the text always takes precedence. As for EN/CISPR standards, they mostly 
accept similar setup conditions to ANSI C63.4, but you will have to verify the 
specific requirements in each standard.   The <20cm you refer to was at one 
time unofficially (FCC) considered the distance for collocation of transmitter 
antennas, but this is no longer the case.  The FCC considers that two 
transmitters/antennas are collocated if they are in the same product / 
enclosure.  I hope this helps.

Bill

From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 1:50 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

Greetings members,

Can anyone shed any light on what ANSI defines as the max distance/limit of a 
‘co-located’ piece of ancillary equipment or other support equipment (on the 
table) to the main EUT being tested for FCC Part 15 class B for ‘unintentional 
radiators’. I seem to recall 20 cm but I think this was referring to 
‘intentional’ radiators.

Is there a similar requirement in the EMC directive and/or EN/CISPR standards? 
Or is this really dictated on your recommended set-up? Shall that device be 
removed from the test bed if typical installation indicates that it will be 
greater than 20cm from the main EUT?

I believe that the set-up in ANSI

Re: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

[Bill Stumpf]

Regan,
I'm not sure I understand your question correctly, but I will try to provide an 
answer.  ANSI C63.4 is used when testing for FCC part 15 subpart B compliance 
for unintentional radiators. When testing a table-top system, the collocated 
equipment should be spaced at 10cm, unless this is not typical of normal 
operation. If so, then the EUT and its accessories/peripheral devices should be 
placed as they would be in typical applications.  It is important to read the 
text of the ANSI standard, as it goes into great detail on how to set up and 
select accessories for testing.  The drawings are for general reference only 
and the text always takes precedence. As for EN/CISPR standards, they mostly 
accept similar setup conditions to ANSI C63.4, but you will have to verify the 
specific requirements in each standard.   The <20cm you refer to was at one 
time unofficially (FCC) considered the distance for collocation of transmitter 
antennas, but this is no longer the case.  The FCC considers that two 
transmitters/antennas are collocated if they are in the same product / 
enclosure.  I hope this helps.

Bill

From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 1:50 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EMC co-location distance question

Greetings members,

Can anyone shed any light on what ANSI defines as the max distance/limit of a 
'co-located' piece of ancillary equipment or other support equipment (on the 
table) to the main EUT being tested for FCC Part 15 class B for 'unintentional 
radiators'. I seem to recall 20 cm but I think this was referring to 
'intentional' radiators.

Is there a similar requirement in the EMC directive and/or EN/CISPR standards? 
Or is this really dictated on your recommended set-up? Shall that device be 
removed from the test bed if typical installation indicates that it will be 
greater than 20cm from the main EUT?

I believe that the set-up in ANSI only showed the PC, printer, mouse, keyboard 
& monitor but that's it. There are so many other/different electronic devices 
that connect to a laptop/PC/other, etc. (i.e. smart phone) these days, it is 
not viable for anyone to test all devices/configurations. I understand that one 
must use good judgment and exercise due diligence but there must be a limit. 
Agree? Some of these electronic devices state compliance to Class B, it may 
still have interference with another closely co-located device because they did 
not test it fully to the myriad of other electronic devices out there that it 
could be connected to. There is no guarantee per se.

Can anyone comment? Thanks in advance.

Regan

-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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 we

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

[Bill Stumpf]

I don't have any conclusively documented evidence from the FCC.  This 
supposition is taken from recent FCC presentations, current KDB's and 
conversations with trusted "co-inhabitants" in this industry.  An example of 
this indication is provided below. It is from an April 2015 FCC TCB Council 
presentation regarding KDB 551693 DR01.



Real purpose of no-collocation condition
– Not to restrict device usage options
– Instead is to require compliance of multi-radio simultaneous transmission 
operations within a single end product
• In cases where that is not already evaluated in the applications, or
• For use outside parameters/scope for which the device was already evaluated






I know in the past we've referenced 20cm as the minimum distance between 
antennas at which the FCC considered two simultaneously transmitting 
transmitters to be collocated.  Even that was unwritten though.  It would be 
nice to have a more clearly defined answer to what is considered collocation 
for requiring FCC multi-transmitter product procedures.  Perhaps I will submit 
a KDB inquiry to the FCC...

Bill



From: msherma...@comcast.net [mailto:msherma...@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 11:33 AM
To: Bill Stumpf 
Cc: EMC-PSTC 
Subject: Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Bill --

This "in the same enclosure" interpretation sounds new and drastic to me. Do 
you have any official document/link on this interpretation?

thanks

Mike Sherman
Graco Inc.

____
From: "Bill Stumpf" mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com>>
To: "EMC-PSTC" mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 7:34:19 AM
Subject: Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

The latest chatter I gathered on this topic is that the FCC considers 
collocated as "in the same enclosure".  Indications are that any reference to 
<20cm being considered collocated has been set aside.

Bill

From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:18 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Hi Stephen,

One thing to remember is that “must not be co-located” really just means “must 
not be co-located without some additional effort”

For example, co-locating two modules and then calculating the new combined RF 
Exposure MPE value to verify that the product still meets the requirements, 
would be acceptable.   It does not necessarily mean a C2PC is needed, for 
example.

I think you’re right that 20 cm is ‘good guidance’ with regard to RF Exposure.  
 But if your modules are 20.5cm apart, you might still want to consider the 
overall compliance of that final product… and a co-located MPE calculation is 
not too hard.


Thanks,

Michael.



From: Stephen Whalen [mailto:scwha...@bellsouth.net]
Sent: 14 February 2017 23:34
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] Co-located modules

All,
For a module that has "must not be co-located" restriction on FCC grant.
What is the minimum separation distance allowed for another transmitter?  I 
recall 20cm but can't find where it is documented.

Regards,
Stephen
-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: ht

Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

[Bill Stumpf]

The latest chatter I gathered on this topic is that the FCC considers 
collocated as "in the same enclosure".  Indications are that any reference to 
<20cm being considered collocated has been set aside.

Bill

From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:18 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Co-located modules

Hi Stephen,

One thing to remember is that “must not be co-located” really just means “must 
not be co-located without some additional effort”

For example, co-locating two modules and then calculating the new combined RF 
Exposure MPE value to verify that the product still meets the requirements, 
would be acceptable.   It does not necessarily mean a C2PC is needed, for 
example.

I think you’re right that 20 cm is ‘good guidance’ with regard to RF Exposure.  
 But if your modules are 20.5cm apart, you might still want to consider the 
overall compliance of that final product… and a co-located MPE calculation is 
not too hard.


Thanks,

Michael.



From: Stephen Whalen [mailto:scwha...@bellsouth.net]
Sent: 14 February 2017 23:34
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Co-located modules

All,
For a module that has "must not be co-located" restriction on FCC grant.
What is the minimum separation distance allowed for another transmitter?  I 
recall 20cm but can't find where it is documented.

Regards,
Stephen
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] US EMC req. for EN 61010-1/EN 61326-1 equipment

[Bill Stumpf]

Carl, you are correct - thank you for bringing that up.  I may have 
misunderstood, but I don't believe Mr. Loerzer's equipment falls into that 
category.

Bill

From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 11:30 AM
To: Bill Stumpf ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] US EMC req. for EN 61010-1/EN 61326-1 equipment

Take a look at 15.103b).  There is an exemption for electronic control 
equipment used within an industrial plant:

(b) A digital device used exclusively as an electronic control or power system 
utilized by a public utility or in an industrial plant. The term public utility 
includes equipment only to the extent that it is in a dedicated building or 
large room owned or leased by the utility and does not extend to equipment 
installed in a subscriber’s facility.

Carl
On 11/28/2016 9:31 AM, Bill Stumpf wrote:
For the USA, FCC Part 15 Subpart B, Class A is appropriate.  Since the product 
is not industrial test equipment, it is not exempt from FCC authorization 
(Verification) procedures.

Bill

From: Michael Loerzer [mailto:loerzer_mob...@globalnorm.de]
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 4:45 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] US EMC req. for EN 61010-1/EN 61326-1 equipment


Hi,

is for a modular 19'' draw-out unit system with a power supply and control unit 
to control LED modules for industrial application in the laboratory environment 
(EU: EN 61010-1, EN 61326-1 for LVD and EMCD) the FCC requirements mandatory?

In my point of view the answer is “yes”.

And I have recommended my customer to apply the FCC Part 15 method 
“verification”. Is that totally wrong?

Michael Loerzer

Globalnorm GmbH






-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] US EMC req. for EN 61010-1/EN 61326-1 equipment

[Bill Stumpf]

For the USA, FCC Part 15 Subpart B, Class A is appropriate.  Since the product 
is not industrial test equipment, it is not exempt from FCC authorization 
(Verification) procedures.

Bill

From: Michael Loerzer [mailto:loerzer_mob...@globalnorm.de]
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 4:45 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] US EMC req. for EN 61010-1/EN 61326-1 equipment


Hi,

is for a modular 19'' draw-out unit system with a power supply and control unit 
to control LED modules for industrial application in the laboratory environment 
(EU: EN 61010-1, EN 61326-1 for LVD and EMCD) the FCC requirements mandatory?

In my point of view the answer is “yes”.

And I have recommended my customer to apply the FCC Part 15 method 
“verification”. Is that totally wrong?

Michael Loerzer

Globalnorm GmbH






-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] Incidental Radiators per FCC Part 15

[Bill Stumpf]

Emissions from incidental radiators (ex. DC brush motors) may be disregarded 
when testing to show compliance with the emission standards.  By definition an 
incidental radiator is subject to the general requirements of FCC Part 15 
regulations (15.5 & 15.13). If the motor is driven by digital circuitry, then 
it is not an incidental radiator and must meet the Part 15 technical 
requirements.

Refer to https://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/rfdevice , KDB 324861 and KDB 129354.


Bill



From: McCallum, Andy [mailto:andy.mccal...@mottmac.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 9:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Incidental Radiators per FCC Part 15

Grace

No a compliant report should not be issued.

You will need to investigate the problem with the DC motor and resolve the 
issue.

Regards

Andy

From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Sent: 22 November 2016 14:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Incidental Radiators per FCC Part 15

Dear Members,

Could you please comment how incidental radiators be handled in a test report?

FCC 15.3 defines "Incidental radiator" as "A device that generates radio 
frequency energy during the course of its operation although the device is not 
intentionally designed to generate or emit radio frequency energy. Examples of 
incidental radiators are dc motors, mechanical light switches, etc."

FCC 15.3 (Incidental radiators) states "Manufacturers of these devices shall 
employ good engineering practices to minimize the risk of harmful interference."

Take a paper dispenser as an example.  Test data with the DC motor running did 
not comply with the Class A/B limits.  Test data without the DC motor running 
complies with the Class B limits.  Should a compliant test report be issued?

Thank you very much for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Grace Lin
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] RED

[Bill Stumpf]

It's a big concern for manufacturers, test labs, and Notified Bodies.  It looks 
like any possibility of extending the RED transition period is out of the 
question.  The last information I saw leads me to believe that there will be 
about 60 ETSI standards published in the RED OJ by June 2017, which is well 
short of the 219 ETSI standards work items.  It also appears that there will be 
an insufficient number or RED Notified Bodies to efficiently handle the 
potential surge of Type Examination Certificate requests due to the lack of HS 
published in the RED OJ.  My current opinion is that it looks to be a rough 
period of time.

Bill


From: Pearson, John [mailto:john.pear...@polycom.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 9:35 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RED

Hi All

So let me see if I have this right please guys.

RED is being fully implemented in June 2017.  In this radio receiver 
requirements are now essential requirements.  So come June 2017, focusing on 
technical performance only for now, to supply to the EEA we need product to 
meet these additional requirements.  However to date only 25 specs or so have 
been written and published as Harmonized Standards under the RED and those of 
course include radio receiver performance.  The other required HS’s are in 
draft form in various levels of preparation.

My question is what does the European Commission expect us to do with products 
not covered by these RED Harmonized Standards and if standards do suddenly 
emerge in the next few weeks how are we meant to meet them with 6 months or so 
notice?  One answer of course is to use a Notified Body but is that all we are 
being left with?

Does anyone else feel this is a mess?

Thanks

John
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] Operating Frequency for an UHF Transceiver in Europe

[Bill Stumpf]

Grace,
The 915 - 921MHz band is only implemented for SRD's & RFID in a handful of EU 
Member States.  Refer to ERC RECOMMENDATION (70-03).


Bill


From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 1:49 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Operating Frequency for an UHF Transceiver in Europe

Dear Members,

Is 915-921 MHz accepted in Europe for an UHF Transceiver such as the one 
available at http://www.semtech.com/images/datasheet/sx1232.pdf?

The general description states:
"The SX1232 is a fully integrated ISM band transceiver optimized for us in the 
(EN 300 220-1) 868 MHz band in Europe and the (FCC Part 15) 915 MHz band in the 
US with a minimum of external composnetns."

My questions is: if 915-921 MHz is accepted in Europe, why does the description 
state 868 MHz band in Europe and 915 MHz band in the US?

Thank you very much and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Grace Lin
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

[Bill Stumpf]

EN 55032 and EN 55022 are harmonized Standards which can be tested to in order 
for presumption of conformity to the EMC Directive.  Once EN 55022 is withdrawn 
you will need to update your DOC to indicate compliance with EN 55032, assuming 
you continue to use the Harmonized Standard route to compliance.  EN 55032 adds 
several types of equipment to the scope of the standard, along with appropriate 
test procedures.  Basic radiated and conducted testing of ITE remains close to 
the same with the exception of how the EUT periphery is measured with respect 
to the distance to the measurement antenna.  You may find from a review of the 
testing done on your product for EN 55022 compliance that continued compliance 
with EN 55032 can be shown.  In that case you may not need to perform any 
re-test to the new standard.  If so, then keep your formal review as part of 
your technical file and update your DOC.

Bill



From: Rajneesh Raveendran [mailto:08500acb6cd4-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: 18 October 2016 17:46
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Working towards compliance as per the EN 55032

Hi All

For all our new programs, we would be testing for compliance as per the EN 
55032 standard. But i have one question about some legacy products that we 
would continue to ship to our customers post March 2017. All these products 
have been tested as per the EN 55022 and if i am not wrong, there is no 
"grandfather clause" that provides any exemption. My question relates to 
whether all those products would now need to be tested as per EN 55032?

Regards,
Rajneesh
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] CISPR 35 is published!

[Bill Stumpf]

Many thanks and congratulations to the CISPR SC I committee.

Bill

From: Ghery S. Pettit [mailto:n6...@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 9:50 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] CISPR 35 is published!

After 15 years of work in CISPR SC I, the IEC Central Office published CISPR 35 
Edition 1.0 on Tuesday, August 16, 2016.  The IEC webstore link is 
https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/25667.  ANSI has not made a copy available 
on their website as of this morning (Friday, August 19).  You may now purchase 
a copy of the standard to see what the requirements are.   What is the same as 
CISPR 24?  What has changed?  What is new?
The full title of the standard is, "CISPR 35:2016  Electromagnetic 
compatibility of multimedia equipment - Immunity requirements"  The abstract, 
off the IEC webstore page is,
"CISPR 35:2016 applies to multimedia equipment (MME) having a rated AC or DC 
supply voltage not exceeding 600 V. The objectives of this document are:
- to establish requirements which provide an adequate level of intrinsic 
immunity so that the MME will operate as intended in its environment in the 
frequency range 0 kHz to 400 GHz; and
- to specify procedures to ensure the reproducibility of tests and the 
repeatability of results."
The price shown on the IEC webstore is CHF 290, which, when I was in Geneva the 
beginning of June, is about $290 (the two currencies being about equal at that 
time).  I don't know what the price will be on the ANSI site when they make it 
available.
Happy reading!


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7752 / Virus Database: 4647/12838 - Release Date: 08/19/16
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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] Antenna gain measurement standard

[Bill Stumpf]

I think perhaps Stephen is referring to the 3-dimensional radiating pattern of 
the antenna, meaning recording all of the antenna radials in the sphere as a 3 
dimensional pattern.  That being said, there should likely only be one radial 
of maximum emission.

Bill

From: Ed Price [mailto:edpr...@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 3:06 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Antenna gain measurement standard

Stephen:

I will have to defer to someone who knows what 2D & 3D means, because I don’t. 
I have also not heard of “maximum” gain. Gain is usually defined along the 
radial of maximum emission, and despite most antennas being rather obvious 
which direction that is, the best way is actual measurement.

Perhaps you know this already, but you can visualize radiation as the power 
radiating through an imaginary transparent sphere enclosing the antenna. An 
antenna will usually create a main lobe and many lesser sidelobes. Identifying 
the axis of the main lobe can be time intensive, especially if you have a 
complex antenna structure and no initial idea of how it will perform. The 
antenna gain will be a combination of antenna efficiency and directional gain 
(think of how a flashlight may have internal losses and a very narrow emission 
beamwidth). If you have a high directional gain, the beamwidth may be only a 
half-degree in both the azimuth and altitude axes, and finding the center of 
this invisible beam may take hours of scanning (as you have to scan every 
radial around the sphere). Accurate jigging is a must, followed by methodical 
investigation.

Ed Price
WB6WSN
Chula Vista, CA USA

From: Stephen Whalen [mailto:scwha...@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:17 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Antenna gain measurement standard

Ed,
Thanks for the response.
I am looking to measure the gain of an antenna in order to calculate EIRP of a 
product.
As far as the 2D vs. 3D, I don't have any values.  I was hoping some one who 
has made measurements using both 2D and 3D would be able to comment how much 
better 3D is over 2D when considering peak gain.

I appreciate your feedback, thanks.

Stephen

On Friday, July 1, 2016 3:00 PM, Ed Price 
mailto:edpr...@cox.net>> wrote:

Stephen:

There are a number of ways to measure gain, with the basic one being a 
comparison to a theoretical isotropic radiator (yielding a gain number in dBi). 
However, the antennas used for EMI and compliance testing are usually used in 
the near field, where the standard you are testing to defines the acceptable 
measurement distance and styles of antennas. Thus, there is often a preferred 
gain measurement technique defined by the standard you are working to.

In regard to what you told us, what is 2D & 3D (dimension) gain? And what is 
peak gain? What standard is defining these terms?

Ed Price
WB6WSN
Chula Vista, CA USA

From: Stephen Whalen [mailto:scwha...@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 8:01 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Antenna gain measurement standard

Greetings,
Does anyone know which standard is used for measuring antenna gain?
Are 3D antenna gain measurements typically different than 2D with regards to 
peak gain?  If so, what's typical delta, 0.5dB or less?

Regards,
Stephen
-

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
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas 

Re: [PSES] Latest OJEU

[Bill Stumpf]

I understand Charlie's response and it does make sense to me, but if you look 
at the current radio equipment OJ linked page it does include both Directive 
1999/5/EC & Directive 2014/53/EU.  This would seem to indicate that the current 
OJ Harmonized Standards list can be used for both versions of the Directive.  
However, when you download the OJ it references only the R&TTE Directive.  This 
is the same for the EMC Directive also.

http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/european-standards/harmonised-standards/rtte/index_en.htm

Bill




From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com]
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 2:09 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Latest OJEU


The RED is different to the other changing directives in that its scope and 
technical content are also changed from R&TTE.



The 2014 versions of LVD and EMC state that HS lists for previous directives 
may be used and will provide a presumption of conformity - reference/citation 
on page 12 of  :  Guidance document on the Low Voltage Directive transition 
from 2006/95/EC to 
2014/35/EU



For the RED, only HS listed for RED provide a presumption of conformity, and if 
the applicable article 3.2 one is not listed when you want to apply it then you 
will have to wait or use an NB. That might be "not acceptable" to some people, 
but currently that is the situation and one that may not change.



There is only one NB currently listed for the RED, but this is viewed as a 
mistake as the commission should have listed all (those that are accredited) at 
the same time. In any case, no RED NB opinions can be issued until 13th June.



Since the RED guidance is not yet available as a draft, I would advise sticking 
with R&TTE (or LVD/EMC) for a while longer.



Regards

Charlie



-Original Message-
From: Carpentier Kristiaan [mailto:kristiaan.carpent...@technicolor.com]
Sent: 29 April 2016 21:07
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Latest OJEU



Hi Monrad,



Not sure if my message was clear and this web-site is indeed misleading: Listed 
HS can only be used for the R&TTE, these are not listed for the RED.



Actually many standards are not ready to address all essential requirements 
(spectrum) of the RED.

2 possibilities:

- Either continue to use the R&TTE during the transition period.

Or

- Use the RED. For the essential requirements of the "spectrum", either use a 
harmonized standard - but actually none are published - or go to a NB that has 
been appointed under the RED (at the moment only 1 where I learned it should 
not have been published before June 13, 2016).



If you look into the scheduled publication as HS in the OJ, then at least 1 
radio standard easily passes the June 2017 transition period as well.



Best regards

Kris Carpentier,





-Original Message-

From: Monrad Monsen [mailto:monrad.mon...@oracle.com]

Sent: vrijdag 29 april 2016 20:43

To: Carpentier Kristiaan 
mailto:kristiaan.carpent...@technicolor.com>>

Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: RE: [PSES] Latest OJEU



Hi Kris,

I understand your point, but please look at the European Union web page I 
pointed everyone to for the Radio Equipment Directive 2014/53/EU.  This page is 
for "Radio Equipment" (see the title), it provides the link to the RED itself, 
and it provides the latest listing of harmonized standards.  Yes, these 
harmonized standards are applicable to the R&TTE as well.  And yes, I am 
confident that the harmonized standards will be significantly revised (many TTE 
only related standards removed) once the R&TTE Directive 1999/5/EC expires.  
But this page provides the latest from Europe for Radio Equipment and the RED.



Hope this helps.

Monrad Monsen



-Original Message-

From: Carpentier Kristiaan [mailto:kristiaan.carpent...@technicolor.com]

Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 11:56 AM

To: Monrad Monsen; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: RE: [PSES] Latest OJEU



Hi Monrad,



There are no Harmonised standards listed yet for RED, only for R&TTE.

See text: < Summary list of titles and references harmonised standards under 
Directive 1999/5/EC for R & TTE and the Mutual Recognition of their Conformity 
>.



All Harmonised radio standards for RED are in revision stage for inclusion of 
receiver parameters.



Best regards

Kris Carpentier,



-Original Message-

From: Monrad Monsen [mailto:monrad.mon...@oracle.com]

Sent: vrijdag 29 april 2016 19:38

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: Re: [PSES] Latest OJEU



To make things easy, below are the links to the latest harmonized standards 
listings in the OJEU.



LVD:  
http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/european-standards/harmonised-standards/low-voltage/index_en.htm



EMC: 

Re: [PSES] EC Blue Guide

[Bill Stumpf]

Unfortunately, even though Nick has provided the correct link it does not work. 
 Try this one instead: http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/16210?locale=en



Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 3:29 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EC Blue Guide

A new edition of the Commission’s Blue Guide has been published:

http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/16210

Nick.
-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] Radiated Emissions testing of Emergency Luminaire with 2.4GHz transceiver

[Bill Stumpf]

Elliott,
Refer to Normative Annex C of ETSI EN 301 489-1 where it indicates that for 
combined equipment whose functions can operate independently, you should apply 
the product family standard to the non-radio function of the product.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




From: Elliott Martinson [mailto:elliott.martin...@etcconnect.com]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 9:54 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Radiated Emissions testing of Emergency Luminaire with 2.4GHz 
transceiver

Hi all,

I have a product family to run pre-compliance measurements on. They are 
lighting fixtures, so normally they'd fall under the scope of EMCD and IEC/EN 
55015. However, these particular fixtures have a wireless transmitter and 
receiver, so my (limited) understanding is that these would fall under R&TTE. 
In EN 301 489-1 
(http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301400_301499/30148901/01.09.02_60/en_30148901v010902p.pdf
 ), the row for radiated emissions in the table in 7.1 (EMC emission) 
references 8.2, which says to test to 55022 class B. However, the same table 
row lists the application as "enclosure of ancillary equipment". According to 
the definition of ancillary equipment as specified in the European standards, 
the fixture is not ancillary equipment, as it can function on its own without 
the transmitter/receiver. So what emission limits apply? FCC testing is easier, 
because as long as one uses an already-certified transmitter component in a 
product, the normal radiated emissions testing applies as if the transmitter 
wasn't in the product.

Elliott Martinson
Product Assurance Specialist I
Electronic Theatre Controls
3031 N PLEASANT VIEW RD
MIDDLETON WI 53562-4809
Work: 608.824.5696 / Cell: 608.209.9897
elliott.martin...@etcconnect.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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

[Bill Stumpf]

I've always found the way that exemption is written as ambiguous.  The text 
below from OET 62 "Digital devices that are exempt from FCC technical 
standards" seems to be a little more informative.

Digital devices used EXCLUSIVELY as industrial, commercial or medical test 
equipment. "Test equipment" includes devices used for maintenance, research, 
evaluation, simulation and other analytical or scientific applications in areas 
such as industrial plants, public utilities, hospitals, universities, 
laboratories, automotive service centers and electronic repair shops. Devices 
designed for home use, such as consumer blood pressure meters, bathroom scales 
and digital thermometers, do not fall under this exemption.

Bill


From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 1:58 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory 
for an industrial personal computer?

This is an interesting point.   My interpretation has always been that “test” 
only applies to “medical” and that the exemption applied to all industrial and 
commercial equipment.  Oh the joys of the English language.  If we wrote 
software like this we’d likely end up with planes crashing into the ocean☺

So what is the correct interpretation?

-Dave

From: Bill Stumpf [mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 12:13 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory 
for an industrial personal computer?

Dennis is 100% right. The exemption applies exclusively to products which are 
industrial, commercial, or medical test equipment.  The "test equipment" 
classification applies to all of these categories, not only medical devices - 
at least this is my interpretation.  So if the digital device is not test 
equipment, the exemption does not apply.  If the exemption applies, it only 
pertains to the technical requirements of Part 15.  The general operation 
requirements of 15.5 always apply. As to the Class A/B application, you have to 
look at how the device is marketed. If it is not marketed to the consumer and 
is not intended to be used in the home, then Class A applies.

Bill Stumpf


From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 11:06 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory 
for an industrial personal computer?

In addition to the previous comment I made, it is noted that the FCC defines 
ISM equipment as “Equipment or appliances designed to generate and use locally 
RF energy for industrial, scientific, medical, domestic or similar purposes, 
excluding applications in the field of telecommunication.”  So, unless a 
digital device meets the exemption requirements 15.103 and if it is not a piece 
of test equipment, it is subject to Part 15.  Now then you must look to see if 
it is Class A or Class B.

​
Dennis Ward
This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST 
Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the 
recipient(s) named above.  It may contain information that is confidential 
and/or legally privileged.  Any unauthorized use that may compromise that 
confidentiality via distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  Please notify 
the sender immediately if you receive this communication in error, and delete 
it from your computer system.  Usage of PCTEST email addresses for non-business 
related activities is strictly prohibited.  No warranty is made that the e-mail 
or attachments(s) are free from computer virus or other defect.  Thank you.

From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 8:46 AM
To: 'Ted Eckert' mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com>>; 
'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' 
mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>>
Subject: RE: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory 
for an industrial personal computer?

Several issues.  First, 15.123 is not the clause exempting devices it is a 
clause referring to labeling of digital ready devices.

Clause 15.103 is for exemption of devices.  So, while it may say exempt, 
unintentional radiator devices are still subject to 15.5 and 15.29 with 
‘strong’ recommendation to comply to part 15.  (NOTE: 15.5b states “Operation 
of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is subject to the 
conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that interference must be 
accepted that may be caused by the operation of an authorized radio station, by 
another intentional or unintentional radiator, by industrial, scientific and 
medical (ISM) equipment, or by an incidental radiator.”   15.103 main paragraph 
states, “Although not mandatory, it is strongly recommended th

Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory for an industrial personal computer?

[Bill Stumpf]

Dennis is 100% right. The exemption applies exclusively to products which are 
industrial, commercial, or medical test equipment.  The "test equipment" 
classification applies to all of these categories, not only medical devices - 
at least this is my interpretation.  So if the digital device is not test 
equipment, the exemption does not apply.  If the exemption applies, it only 
pertains to the technical requirements of Part 15.  The general operation 
requirements of 15.5 always apply. As to the Class A/B application, you have to 
look at how the device is marketed. If it is not marketed to the consumer and 
is not intended to be used in the home, then Class A applies.

Bill Stumpf


From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 11:06 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory 
for an industrial personal computer?

In addition to the previous comment I made, it is noted that the FCC defines 
ISM equipment as “Equipment or appliances designed to generate and use locally 
RF energy for industrial, scientific, medical, domestic or similar purposes, 
excluding applications in the field of telecommunication.”  So, unless a 
digital device meets the exemption requirements 15.103 and if it is not a piece 
of test equipment, it is subject to Part 15.  Now then you must look to see if 
it is Class A or Class B.

​
Dennis Ward
This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST 
Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the 
recipient(s) named above.  It may contain information that is confidential 
and/or legally privileged.  Any unauthorized use that may compromise that 
confidentiality via distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  Please notify 
the sender immediately if you receive this communication in error, and delete 
it from your computer system.  Usage of PCTEST email addresses for non-business 
related activities is strictly prohibited.  No warranty is made that the e-mail 
or attachments(s) are free from computer virus or other defect.  Thank you.

From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 8:46 AM
To: 'Ted Eckert' mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com>>; 
'EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG' 
mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>>
Subject: RE: [PSES] 47 CFR Part 15 Subpart B / ICES-003 applicable/mandatory 
for an industrial personal computer?

Several issues.  First, 15.123 is not the clause exempting devices it is a 
clause referring to labeling of digital ready devices.

Clause 15.103 is for exemption of devices.  So, while it may say exempt, 
unintentional radiator devices are still subject to 15.5 and 15.29 with 
‘strong’ recommendation to comply to part 15.  (NOTE: 15.5b states “Operation 
of an intentional, unintentional, or incidental radiator is subject to the 
conditions that no harmful interference is caused and that interference must be 
accepted that may be caused by the operation of an authorized radio station, by 
another intentional or unintentional radiator, by industrial, scientific and 
medical (ISM) equipment, or by an incidental radiator.”   15.103 main paragraph 
states, “Although not mandatory, it is strongly recommended that the 
manufacturer of an exempted device endeavor to have the device meet the 
specific technical standards in this part.”  So to say there are no mandatory 
EMC requirements is not accurate, as, while being exempt from any specific 
technical requirement, they are required NOT to interfere etc.

It should also be noted that this exemption is ONLY for test equipment, not all 
digital equipment.  NOTE: 15.103c says “​A digital device used exclusively 
as industrial, commercial, or medical test equipment.”   It is not saying a 
piece of medical test equipment and all other industrial or commercial 
equipment.  It is saying industrial test equipment, commercial test equipment 
or medical test equipment.

Also, be careful with the concept of fixed in regards exclusive use in these 
areas to exemption under 15.103.  Exclusive does not mean fixed, it simply 
means that it is the ONLY area in which it is used, it means it cannot be taken 
out of the industrial, commercial or medical environment.  I would think that 
test equipment would not be fixed and since the exemption for digital devices 
in these areas is for test equipment, I doubt if it means fixed.

Thanks
Dennis Ward
This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST 
Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the 
recipient(s) named above.  It may contain information that is confidential 
and/or legally privileged.  Any unauthorized use that may compromise that 
confidentiality via distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  Please notify 
the sender immediately if you receive this communication in error, and delete 
it from your computer system

Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] AU CISPR 22 Class B Interpretation

[Bill Stumpf]

Mr. Newton asked for opinions, so for what it's worth, here is mine.  I hope 
you will all excuse my rant.   Many will interpret the "exclusions" based on 
their viewpoint.  Not being associated with a manufacturer, my interpretation 
may be different than others.   The FCC excludes devices used exclusively in 
transportation vehicles from the technical requirements of part 15, but not the 
general requirements "thou shall not interfere".  This FCC exemption also does 
not apply to devices that could be used removed from a vehicle.  An example 
would be a device that connects to a vehicle USB or cigarette lighter power 
outlet.  I have to believe that the exemption exists because the FCC considers 
devices installed "hard-wired" in transportation vehicles as covered by other 
EMC requirements.  Canada's exemption (ICES-003) specifically states that it is 
only for devices that are factory installed in the vehicle.  Similarly then, 
for EU compliance I would look at this the same way and!
  agree with Mr. McInturff.  Laptop & tablet PC's are Class B.  Therefore as a 
Class B PC peripheral (auxiliary) device, it seems logical to apply Class B to 
the docking station.

Bill




-Original Message-
From: Jim Hulbert [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:33 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] AU CISPR 22 Class B Interpretation

The FCC also exempts a digital device utilized exclusively in an appliance, 
e.g., microwave oven, dishwasher, clothes dryer, air conditioner (central or 
window),  from the its Part 15 technical requirements, so being rational 
doesn't always make sense.

Jim Hulbert

-Original Message-
From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 2:04 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] [EXTERNAL] [PSES] AU CISPR 22 Class B Interpretation

Gary,

With regard to auto EMC compliance, that is taken care of already.  This 
hardware is being subjected to AU/NZS CISPR 22 simply to satisfy AU ACMA 
requirements.  I appreciate your comments concerning the residential zone, but 
I don't agree that simply because a vehicle may travel within that zone that 
Class B is warranted.  I would still expect the vehicle to be no closer to 
homes than 10m in typical scenarios.

 From a pure EMC rationale point of view, consider that in the USA the FCC 
exempts auto hardware from Part 15 rules.

Thanks,

Carl


On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:02:33 -0500, Gary McInturff 
 wrote:

> These vehicles travel between residential and commercial zones on a 
> regular basis, so on that alone I would agree with the class B 
> assessment, but I'm wondering if you don't have lots of other EMC 
> issues to deal with - automotive immunity etc.
>
> The only time I've personally seen an exemption for Class A in a 
> residential zone was for telecommunications equipment installed into a 
> room or facility owned by a telecom company. Doesn't mean there aren't 
> other exemptions it just means I am unaware of them. So I think you 
> stuck with Class B IMHO
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 9:10 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] AU CISPR 22 Class B Interpretation
>
> Group,
>
> My customer builds vehicular laptop and tablet docking stations 
> intended for hard mounted use within emergency vehicles such as police 
> and ambulance, as well as work trucks and forklifts.  The vehicular 
> power supply narrowly missed CISPR 22 radiated Class B limits.  Then 
> their AU Responsible Party told us they called the ACMA and they 
> "insisted" this is a Class B device.  I then sent my own request to 
> ACMA and received the reply below.
>
> In my opinion the ACMA individual is clearly biased toward the Class B 
> rating, but the fact that he leaves the door open to the Class A 
> rating is enough proof for me that he agrees that it is a Class A device.
> However, my customer is looking for safety in numbers.  The author 
> raises a valid note of caution concerning receivers within vehicles, 
> but these systems are already compliant with CISPR 25 and are widely 
> used within North America and Europe with no interference problems so 
> we're not concerned with that warning.
>
> I would appreciate it if some of you would review this information and 
> provide your professional opinion as to whether vehicle mounted ITE 
> qualifies as Class A or Class B:
>
> +++
>
> Dear Mr Newton
>
> Clause 4.1 of AS/NZS CISPR 22 (which is identical to CISPR 22, Ed. 6.0
> (2008)) includes the following;
>
> Class B ITE is intended primarily for use in the domestic environment 
> and may include:
>
> -  Personal computers and auxiliary equipment.
>
> Note: The domestic environment is an environment where the use of 
> broadcast and television receivers may be expected within distances of
> 10 m of the apparatus concerned.
>
> Given

Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

[Bill Stumpf]

There is a general misconception that only the highest clock rate determines 
the frequency range of test.  The definitions in the standards are not specific 
to clock frequencies, but rather to the frequencies generated or used.

FCC: "Highest frequency generated or used in the device or on which the device 
operates or tunes (MHz)"

CISPR 32: highest fundamental frequency generated or used within the EUT or 
highest frequency at which it operates
NOTE - This includes frequencies which are solely used within an integrated 
circuit.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210



From: Rodney Davis [mailto:rodney.da...@mitel.com]
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 8:18 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.


Highest clock!  not data rate.


Rodney Davis



From: Robert Dunkerley 
mailto:robert.dunker...@s-a-m.com>>
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 8:56 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

How would you treat a piece of IT equipment that had say a 10Gbit/s Ethernet 
port? Do you just treat this as 10GHz, and use that as the highest clock?

Rob.

-Original Message-
From: Bill Stumpf [mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com]
Sent: 29 January 2016 13:48
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

I posed that question to the FCC many years ago and got the answer that the 
transmitter operating frequency now becomes a frequency of the host device. 
Therefore a device that operates at, say 50 mHz but has a Wi-Fi transmitter 
installed shall be tested to the frequency specified in 15.33 based on the 
2.4GHz radio.

Bill Stumpf




-Original Message-
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com]
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 3:05 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

> Hmm. An on-board WiFi device "uses" (non-clock) GHz range frequencies
-- internally.

That would be an intentional transmitter though and covered by different FCC 
rule part / EU standards

Charlie

-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond [mailto:k...@earthlink.net]
Sent: 29 January 2016 08:57
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

On 1/28/2016 2:42 PM, Chuck McDowell wrote:
>
> To quote from BS EN 55032:2012 with 2014 update
>
> 3.1.19
>
> highest internal frequency
>
> Fx
>
> highest fundamental frequency generated or used within the EUT or
> highest frequency at which it operates
>
> NOTE This includes frequencies which are solely used within an
> integrated circuit.
>

Hmm. An on-board WiFi device "uses" (non-clock) GHz range frequencies
-- internally.

Running for cover ...

Cortland Richmond

-

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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
Mike

Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

[Bill Stumpf]

I posed that question to the FCC many years ago and got the answer that the 
transmitter operating frequency now becomes a frequency of the host device.  
Therefore a device that operates at, say 50 mHz but has a Wi-Fi transmitter 
installed shall be tested to the frequency specified in 15.33 based on the 
2.4GHz radio.

Bill Stumpf




-Original Message-
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 3:05 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

> Hmm.  An on-board WiFi device "uses" (non-clock) GHz range frequencies
-- internally.

That would be an intentional transmitter though and covered by different FCC 
rule part / EU standards

Charlie

-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond [mailto:k...@earthlink.net]
Sent: 29 January 2016 08:57
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Highest clock frequency in a device.

On 1/28/2016 2:42 PM, Chuck McDowell wrote:
>
> To quote from BS EN 55032:2012 with 2014 update
>
> 3.1.19
>
> highest internal frequency
>
> Fx
>
> highest fundamental frequency generated or used within the EUT or 
> highest frequency at which it operates
>
> NOTE This includes frequencies which are solely used within an 
> integrated circuit.
>

Hmm.  An on-board WiFi device "uses" (non-clock) GHz range frequencies
-- internally.

Running for cover ...

Cortland Richmond

-

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: 

Re: [PSES] Test Standards for a Wax Warmer per EU

[Bill Stumpf]

Grace,
Here is my opinion.  Base your decision on the primary function of the device.  
For emissions, assuming it is an appliance, I'd suggest EN 55014-1 along with 
EN 61000-3-2 & -3.  For immunity, apply EN 55014-2.  It is not a lighting 
device, and even if it was, application of EN 55105 in addition to EN 55014-1 
would be excessive.  Testing to EN 55014 with a statement in the test report 
that the lighting device was in operation during the testing and EMC compliance 
was taken into account would be sufficient.  Of course devices with no 
timing/clock/processor frequencies in the frequency range of 9 kHz to 400 GHz 
are not within the scope of EN 55014-1.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission.



From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 9:59 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Test Standards for a Wax Warmer per EU

Dear Members,

Could you please comment EU test standards for a wax warmer, using light bulbs 
(such as 
http://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/store/product/full-size-wax-warmer-25-watt-replacement-bulbs-set-of-2/1041252949?skuId=41252949&mcid=PS_googlepla_nonbrand_homedecor_&adpos=1o3&creative=43742652349&device=c&matchtype=&network=g&gclid=CODW3bfMpMoCFYIfHwod19IMIA)?

Do test standards for lighting equipment (EN 55015, EN 61547, etc.) apply to a 
wax warmer using light bulbs?  It is basically a lighting device.  However, the 
application is not for lighting.

For a product with clock/operating frequency less than 9 kHz, is it exempted 
from regulatory requirements, such as EN 55015?

Thank you very much for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
Grace Lin
-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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] EN 55035/CISPR35

[Bill Stumpf]

There are differences in KN32 & KN35 from their CISPR cousins.  The standards 
are available for download on their website - in Korean.  Translation is a bit 
tough due to their being technical documents.  I don't have a summary of all of 
the changes unfortunately.  One of the key variances in KN32 that continues 
from KN22 is that radiated emissions from 30MHz to 1,000MHz must be performed 
at a 10 meter test distance.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210



From: Gary McInturff [mailto:gary.mcintu...@esterline.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 10:04 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 55035/CISPR35

I certainly wouldn't assume that. Korea already wanders pretty much to its own 
drum. The test voltage for example requires testing at their specified voltages 
that don't match up with the rest of the world even though it is within the 
tolerance bands. (if I remember correctly)

The last time I did a emc test requiring Korea approval along with the rest of 
the world I had to run many of the tests three times, US, EU, and Korea.
From: itl-emc user group [mailto:itl...@itl.co.il]
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 8:43 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PSES] EN 55035/CISPR35

Hello All
I received a notice that starting in 2016, Korea will only accept test reports 
to KN32 and KN35.
I assume that these are the equivalents of CISPR 32/EN 55032 and CISPR 
35/EN55035.
>From searching on the internet, I have not been able to find  CISPR 35/EN 
>55035 in final form.
Has CISPR 35/EN55035 been published as a standard in final form (not draft).
Thanks in advance
Season's Greetings

Regards,
David Shidlowsky | Technical Reviewer
Address 1 Bat-Sheva St. POB 87, LOD 71100 Israel
Tel 972-8-9186113 Fax 972-8-9153101
Mail dav...@itl.co.il<mailto:dav...@itl.co.il>/e...@itl.co.il  Web 
www.itl.co.il<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.itl.co.il_&d=CwMFAg&c=0hKVUfnuoBozYN8UvxPA-w&r=RJLDFgHJo89sjFN46b74hFXEuxvz4Z1iAx-glaOgP0k&m=LBqimMt0TyxgLdBEoAJyUW3FjsGP5tLMUJ6A-yWPRtA&s=KOwqvLCpjtOYPZzt1bY0mJucfXUt0mcdZ6WDYLSGq4U&e=>

Fill out Customer Satisfaction 
Survey<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__app.sqm.co.il_SitePages_Questionnaire.aspx&d=CwMFAg&c=0hKVUfnuoBozYN8UvxPA-w&r=RJLDFgHJo89sjFN46b74hFXEuxvz4Z1iAx-glaOgP0k&m=LBqimMt0TyxgLdBEoAJyUW3FjsGP5tLMUJ6A-yWPRtA&s=iO8aolnntIGzWlN1BPCgDkXDurI8HSik9z9SEqV-rUM&e=>
Global Certifications You Can Trust
This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information.
If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, 
distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you 
received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message 
and its attachments to the sender.




-


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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_emc-2Dpstc.html&d=CwMFAg&c=0hKVUfnuoBozYN8UvxPA-w&r=RJLDFgHJo89sjFN46b74hFXEuxvz4Z1iAx-glaOgP0k&m=LBqimMt0TyxgLdBEoAJyUW3FjsGP5tLMUJ6A-yWPRtA&s=jN7Rzw8oA3JbwpnwWOKJyN2xEf1tyg7vbp9aeSyDGiM&e=>

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__product-2Dcompliance.oc.ieee.org_&d=CwMFAg&c=0hKVUfnuoBozYN8UvxPA-w&r=RJLDFgHJo89sjFN46b74hFXEuxvz4Z1iAx-glaOgP0k&m=LBqimMt0TyxgLdBEoAJyUW3FjsGP5tLMUJ6A-yWPRtA&s=4lfPySJ7U0RfJzYT-MYK3U92sjaGlUQupVE6mfaleyg&e=>
 can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_&d=CwMFAg&c=0hKVUfnuoBozYN8UvxPA-w&r=RJLDFgHJo89sjFN46b74hFXEuxvz4Z1iAx-glaOgP0k&m=LBqimMt0TyxgLdBEoAJyUW3FjsGP5tLMUJ6A-yWPRtA&s=8YER19-XMgTNJLyHNRL-7G3u93XGd-7Odm9iDZ4Xssc&e=>
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_list.html&d=CwMFAg&c=0hKVUfnuoBozYN8UvxPA-w&r=RJLDFgHJo89sjFN46b74hFXEuxvz4Z1iAx-glaOgP0k&m=LBqimMt0TyxgLdBEoAJyUW3FjsGP5tLMUJ6A-yWPRtA&s=MlA0hcnAMaQr8zG_kcjYoKz4K2ydgA9wv6xHIBSLPN0&e=>
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ieee-2Dpses.org_listrules.html&d=C

Re: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment

[Bill Stumpf]

Ian,

There is no definition of "residential" environment in the standard or the EMC 
Guide.  For reference, the FCC classifies products into consumer (Class B) and 
non-consumer (Class A) categories.  In Europe the manufacturer has a similar 
responsibility to make a product that meets the EMC requirements appropriate 
for the intended use of the product. For some products it is more or less up to 
the end user to determine if a Class A or Class B compliant product is 
appropriate.

You will find the Class A warning statement in the EN 55032 standard, Clause 7.

Class A equipment shall have the following warning in the instructions for use, 
to inform the
user of the risk of operating this equipment in a residential environment:

W arning: This equipment is compliant with Class A of CISPR 32. In a residential
environment this equipment may cause radio interference.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210


From: McBurney, Ian [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:55 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EN55032 definition of residential environment

Dear colleagues

In the 2015 edition of EN 55032 an interesting statement in clause 4. 
"Equipment intended primarily for use in a residential environment shall meet 
the class B limits. All other equipment shall comply with the Class A limits."
I am unable to locate a definition for residential environment in the standard. 
Does anyone know of an official definition? Would sports stadia, theatres, 
hospitals, commercial industrial estates located in residential housing be 
included in residential environments?
If the product is Class A, is the warning notice still required? "Warning. This 
is a Class A product. In a domestic environment this product may cause radio 
interference in which case the user may be required to take adequate measures." 
This used to be a requirement in EN 55022.

Many thanks in advance.

Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.

Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com<mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com>


Allen & Heath Ltd is a registered business in England and Wales, Company 
number: 4163451. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual 
and not necessarily those of the company.
-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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

Re: [PSES] EMC in Canada

[Bill Stumpf]

Amund,
Industry Canada has a couple of immunity Advisory bulletins published: 

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/emcab1.pdf/$FILE/emcab1.pdf

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf01005.html


EMCAB-1 is no longer found listed on their website, but the link still works.  
Although over 21 years old they may be of some value.


Bill Stumpf - Lab / Technical Manager
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210






-Original Message-
From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 11:42 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC in Canada

Cannot make 'blanket' statement that there are "no immunity requirements in 
Canada". Some ISM stuff does have immunity/susceptibility requirements, where 
(at least) the generic immunity standards are referenced. But there is no 
CAN/CSA 61326-1, and there is no CAN/CSA CISPR24, and there is no CAN/CSA 
CISPR14-2.

But they do try to speak French in Quebec, but cannot know effects of Canadian 
French on product immunity. Eh.

Brian

-Original Message-
From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 10:23 PM
To: Brian O'Connell; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: SV: [PSES] EMC in Canada

It's a video and audio recorder.
Yes, we make use of EN55103-2 for CE marking.

But generally, still no immunity requirements in Canada?


#Amund
  


-Opprinnelig melding-
Fra: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com]
Sendt: 5. oktober 2015 22:15
Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Emne: Re: [PSES] EMC in Canada

'Professional' stuff would reference 55103-2, but not a Canada requirement.
Do not know what your box does, but note that for A/V stuff for use with 
medical equipment, CSA 60601-1-2 does reference 55103-2.

Brian

From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 12:00 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EMC in Canada

Emission testing ITE: ICES-003
Immunity testing ITE: No requirements

Is it the same approach for professional A/V products? Only emission testing?

Best regards
Amund

-

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: 


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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 postin

Re: [PSES] FCC Exemption Question

[Bill Stumpf]

Rick,
I believe that the FCC publication liked here will provide insight.

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=33062&switch=P


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




From: Rick Busche [mailto:rick.bus...@qnergy.com]
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 9:40 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC Exemption Question

My company manufactures a mCHP (complete heat and power) device that is 
essentially  is a combined water heater and generator. Initially this device 
was powered from the mains but is now battery powered.  Looking at Title 47 
CFR, subpart B paragraph 1.103 - Exempted Devices the following paragraphs may 
be applicable.

(d) A digital device utilized exclusively in an appliance, e.g., microwave 
oven, dishwasher, clothes dryer, air conditioner (central or window), etc.

(h) Digital devices in which both the highest frequency generated and the 
highest frequency used are less than 1.705 MHz and which do not operate from 
the AC power lines or contain provisions for operation while connected to the 
AC power lines. Digital devices that include, or make provision for the use of, 
battery eliminators, AC adaptors or battery chargers which permit operation 
while charging or that connect to the AC power lines indirectly, obtaining 
their power through another device which is connected to the AC power lines, do 
not fall under this exemption.

(i) Responsible parties should note that equipment containing more than one 
device is not exempt from the technical standards in this part unless all of 
the devices in the equipment meet the criteria for exemption. If only one of 
the included devices qualifies for exemption, the remainder of the equipment 
must comply with any applicable regulations. If a device performs more than one 
function and all of those functions do not meet the criteria for exemption, the 
device does not qualify for inclusion under the exemptions.

So as a water heater we may be exempt as an appliance. As a generator are still 
an exempt appliance?

With frequencies over 1.704 MHz but not connected to the AC power (input) are 
we exempt?

Of course the introductory statement makes sense:

Although not mandatory, it is strongly recommended that the manufacturer of an 
exempted device endeavor to have the device meet the specific technical 
standards in this part.

The question remains are we required to have the system validated for radiated 
emissions.

Thanks

Rick Busche


-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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/

Re: [PSES] FCC 14-208, ET Docket No. 13-44

[Bill Stumpf]

Ghery is correct.  We're told to expect it soon, with text very close to the 
R&O.

Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




From: Ghery S. Pettit [mailto:n6...@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 6:00 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC 14-208, ET Docket No. 13-44

Jim,

To my knowledge this has not yet been published in the Federal Register, so the 
clock has not started.

Ghery S. Pettit
President, Pettit EMC Consulting LLC
gh...@pettitemcconsulting.com<mailto:gh...@pettitemcconsulting.com>

From: Knighten, Jim L [mailto:jim.knigh...@teradata.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 1:12 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] FCC 14-208, ET Docket No. 13-44

Has FCC 14-208, ET Docket No. 13-44, REPORT AND ORDER released 12/30/2014
In the Matter of
Amendment of Parts 0, 1, 2, and 15 of the Commission's Rules regarding 
Authorization of Radiofrequency Equipment and  Amendment of Part 68 regarding 
Approval of Terminal Equipment by Telecommunications Certification Bodies

Been published yet in the Federal Register?  I have not seen it, but am not 
skilled at looking for it.

Jim

__

James L. Knighten, Ph.D.
EMC Engineer
Teradata Corporation
17095 Via Del Campo
San Diego, CA 92127

858-485-2537 - phone
858-485-3788 - fax (unattended)






-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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 rul

Re: [PSES] Professional Audio and EN 55032: 2012

[Bill Stumpf]

That is correct and is a departure from CISPR 22/CISPR 13.

* Class A: Non-Residential environment installations.

* Class B: Residential environment installations. All Broadcast 
Equipment are Class B
The standard includes text for a required user information warning statement 
for Class A equipment.

Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210


From: Chuck McDowell [mailto:chu...@meyersound.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 4:59 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Professional Audio and EN 55032: 2012

I am writing to ask if I am reading EN 55032: 2012 wrong, because I believe it 
states that non-residential Professional Audio Equipment the limits are Class A.

"Equipment intended primarily for use in a residential environment shall meet 
the Class B limits. All other equipment shall comply with the Class A limits."

Comments?

Chuck McDowell






NOTICE: This email may contain confidential information. Please see 
http://www.meyersound.com/confidential/ for our complete policy.   
-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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>>

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the person 
or organization to which it is addressed or was intended to be addressed, and 
may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the 
intended recipient, or responsible for delivering the message to the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and 
delete the original message immediately . The sender, its subsidiaries and 
affiliates, do not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption or 
virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result 
of e-mail transmission. Thank you.

-

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] R&S FSP Spectrum Analyzer

[Bill Stumpf]

Grace,
What you may find is that an older SA may not have the capabilities to perform 
some tests required by newer standards/technologies.  Ken & Ed are right to 
suggest what was meant by the statement.  I'm not familiar with the ESA, but 
could be what is meant by "not good for your purposes".

Bill


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




From: Ken Wyatt [mailto:k...@emc-seminars.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 8:48 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] R&S FSP Spectrum Analyzer

Hi grace, I agree with Ed. You rally ought to find out specifically why your 
present analyzer is not “good for your purposes”.

If all you’re needing is to perform pre-compliance testing, then most good 
analyzers should work OK. Where most spectrum analyzers have trouble meeting 
CISPR 16 is for low-rate pulsed signals. I guess if you’re characterizing GSM, 
maybe that would be an issue. However, a low-cost “real-time” analyzer like the 
Tektronix RSA306 or Signal Hound BB60C will likely be just the thing for most 
communications protocols, with the Tek unit better suited for the specific 
protocols.

You might want to check out my reviews on both these products on The EMC Blog 
at EDN.com<http://EDN.com>.

Cheers, Ken

___
Kenneth Wyatt
Wyatt Technical Services, Inc.
56 Aspen Dr.
Woodland Park, CO

Phone: (719) 310-5418

Email Me!<mailto:k...@emc-seminars.com> | Web Site<http://www.emc-seminars.com> 
| Blog<http://design-4-emc.com/>
The EMC Blog (EDN)<http://www.edn.com/blog/The-EMC-Blog>
Subscribe to Newsletter<http://www.emc-seminars.com/Newsletter/Newsletter.html>
Connect with me on LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/kennethwyatt>

On Feb 17, 2015, at 7:24 AM, Ed Price mailto:edpr...@cox.net>> 
wrote:

Grace:

I would think that the fastest answer should have been asking your friend “why” 
regarding his assertion. Was he basing his advice on the FSP model 
specifically, or on spectrum analyzers in general?

Ed Price
WB6WSN
Chula Vista, CA USA

-Original Message-
From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 1:02 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] R&S FSP Spectrum Analyzer

Dear Members,

Is anyone familiar with the R&S FSP spectrum analyzer
(http://www.rohde-schwarz.com/en/product/fsp-products_63492-8043.html)
and would like to share comments/experience?

A friend advises me that this is not good for my purpose (taking data for 
regulatory compliance of wireless devices).  I am looking/searching for 
justifications to request a new one.

Thank you very much.

Best regards,
Grace Lin

>
-


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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 lis

Re: [PSES] R&S FSP Spectrum Analyzer

[Bill Stumpf]

Grace,
CISPR 16 / ANSI requirements must be met for performing FCC measurements.  I do 
not believe that R&S analyzers are CISPR 16 compliant, so you would have to 
move up to the ESU receiver, or look elsewhere.  It is a difficult task 
nowadays having in-house the test equipment that can make the measurements 
required by standards that are ever changing to keep up with wireless 
technology, and the personnel qualified to operate the equipment and perform 
the testing.  Naturally all of this must be done on a lab's shoestring budget.

Bill



-Original Message-
From: Grace Lin [mailto:graceli...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 3:02 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] R&S FSP Spectrum Analyzer

Dear Members,

Is anyone familiar with the R&S FSP spectrum analyzer
(http://www.rohde-schwarz.com/en/product/fsp-products_63492-8043.html)
and would like to share comments/experience?

A friend advises me that this is not good for my purpose (taking data for 
regulatory compliance of wireless devices).  I am looking/searching for 
justifications to request a new one.

Thank you very much.

Best regards,
Grace Lin

-

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: 

Re: [PSES] EMC on Industrial Cut-Off Saws

[Bill Stumpf]

Based on inquiries I've made to the FCC & IC regarding digitally controlled 
power tools, the FCC currently exempts these devices from Part 15 technical 
regulations.  Industry Canada compliance testing should be done to ICES-001 
requirements.


Bill

From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhemail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 10:51 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EMC on Industrial Cut-Off Saws

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 47 Telecommunication Chapter 1 
Subchapter A Part 15
15.103 Exempted devices.
(c) A digital device used exclusively as industrial, commercial, or medical 
test equipment.

Sounds like it would be FCC part 15 exempt providing the user stops operating 
the device upon a finding by the Commission or its representative that the 
device is causing harmful interference.

Don't know about Canada yet but they usually follow the US.

-Dave


From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 5:12 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EMC on Industrial Cut-Off Saws

I am not at all familiar with this category of products so please excuse my 
ignorance which is an industrial cut-off saw with a 5hp electric motor for 
cutting steel rods, and such.

Most of these basic model saws have no high frequency devices and brushless AC 
motors so they do not generate EMI. However, the more expensive models have 
Inverters (Frequency Drives) to slow start/stop the motor and act as a break.

We evaluated a saw from a company who says they do not require EMC testing on 
their saws even when they use the Inverter, as long as they follow the 
installation instructions from the inverter manufacturer (yea, I just about 
fell out of my chair). We tested one of these saws and failed CISPR 11 Class A 
Conducted Emissions by 50db (if was a prototype saw not on the market).  How do 
these people sleep at night?

So here is my question. Does the US and Canada require Emissions testing on 
Industrial Saws?  Same question for Europe. I assume EN 55011 Class A is 
mandatory in Europe on such a devices.

Please confirm (sanity check).

Thanks,
The Other Brian



LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential 
information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by 
mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you.
-


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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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 
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:sdoug...@ieee.org>>
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.

Re: [PSES] FCC and immunity

[Bill Stumpf]

That is correct. The FCC does not regulate immunity of equipment.  The FCC's 
function is to regulate interstate and international communications and promote 
the effective and efficient use of the frequency spectrum in US territories 
(and of course enforce FCC regulations!).


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210





-Original Message-
From: Paasche, Dieter [mailto:dieter.paas...@christiedigital.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 10:33 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC and immunity

It is my impression that FCC's would leave the immunity as a self-regulated 
requirement between manufacturer and user and just mentioned that the device 
must accept harmful interference.

Sincerely, 

Dieter Paasche
Advanced Product Developer, Electrical
CHRISTIE
809 Wellington Street North
Kitchener, Ontario  N2G 4Y7
Phone: +1 519-744-8005 Ext 7211
www.christiedigital.com

This e-mail message (including attachments, if any), is confidential. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or disclosure is prohibited.  If you have 
received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail 
or telephone and delete it and any attachments from your computer system and 
records.

From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 7:22 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC and immunity

Still no EMC immunity requirements within FCC Part 15, right?
Is immunity on the agenda or does it seems that only radiated and conducted 
emission will be the tests for the nearest future?

Thanks.

#Amund

-

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: 

-

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] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you sell wireless devices into Europe

[Bill Stumpf]

Very interesting topic.  I am of the opinion that until the NB is NANDO listed, 
they could not offer a NB Type Examination Certificate against the RED.  He/she 
may offer an opinion as a consultant - for what it may be worth. 

I agree with Michael's comments with regard to waning confidence in labs, TCB's 
and NB's.  Fortunately the members of this forum are not likely the ones to be 
concerned about, as they are likely the ones who make an attempt at 
understanding their responsibilities by staying involved in relevant groups, 
committees and activities.

Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128




-Original Message-
From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 6:41 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you 
sell wireless devices into Europe

Hi John,

What would the disclaimer be in this case?

"Disclaimer:   We are not a Notified Body to the RE Directive and this
document is legally invalid as a Notified Body certificate"   ?

It doesn't sound like a very useful certificate.


Michael.


Michael Derby
Senior Regulatory Engineer
Director
ACB Europe


-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 30 October 2014 11:26
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] New Radio Equipment Directive (RED) - please read if you 
sell wireless devices into Europe

In message
<2655b21dc209421abdc4eeb95de1a...@bn1pr04mb309.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
, dated Thu, 30 Oct 2014, "Hooper, Nick"  writes:

>So a R&TTE NB has no appointment (NANDO database listing) to issue a NB 
>EU type examination Certificate for the RED, they are, at best, 
>misleading their customers, they cannot give such a certificate.

True, of course, but they can issue a certificate with a suitable disclaimer, 
so as not to mislead.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Quid 
faciamus nisi sit?
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: 

Re: [PSES] FCC EMI Test and Ferrites on Cables

[Bill Stumpf]

Tom,
You are correct.  Refer to Part 15.27 for the answer.  Special accessories 
needed for compliance must be supplied with the product, or must ensure that 
the accessories are provided in another way at no cost to the end user.


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




-Original Message-
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.ne.jp] 
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 7:17 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC EMI Test and Ferrites on Cables

On Wed, 3 Sep 2014 23:31:27 -0700,
  Scott Douglas  wrote:

> Now, my old brain thinks the above is not acceptable and that the FCC 
> says that anything special needed to pass FCC testing must be provided 
> with the product. And I am thinking that ferrites are special as you 
> can't get them at Walmart or Radio Shack or Ace Hardware. And not all 
> ferrites are the same.
> 
> Can anyone confirm my memory and maybe give a pointer to the part of 
> the FCC Rules that clarify this? Or have the rules changed over the 
> years and I just missed that part?

47 CFR 15.27 (Special accessories) ?
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=960d31aad1bb305a1b56abf757c3bb2c&node=pt47.1.15&rgn=div5#se47.1.15_127

Regards,
Tom

--
Tomonori Sato  
URL: http://homepage3.nifty.com/tsato/

-

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: 

Re: [PSES] USA & Canada rf emission test standards

[Bill Stumpf]

The FCC will accept testing using ANSI C63.4:2009 also.  See FCC DA-09-2478.

Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210




From: Ian McBurney [mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:35 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] USA & Canada rf emission test standards

Dear Colleagues;

I am trying to combine FCC 47 CFR part 15 and Canadian ICES-003:2012 radiated 
rf emission testing for a digital device that is an unintentional radiator.
However; looking into the test standards for each country I am getting 
perplexed.

It appears that for 47 CFR part 15 sub part B, the test standard for compliance 
is ANSI UL C63.4 2003 whereas for Canada it is the latest edition that is 
acceptable which I believe is the ANSI UL C63.4 2009.
Similarly; if I was to apply the CISPR 22 method then CFR47 part 15 recognises 
the third edition of CISPR 22 and Canada applies the 6 edition 2008.

Is there a common set of standards that can be applied for radiated & conducted 
rf emission measurements that is acceptable in both the USA & Canada?

I am carrying out measurements from 30MHz to 2GHz to class B limits.

Many thanks in advance.

Ian McBurney
Design & Compliance Engineer.

Allen & Heath Ltd.
Kernick Industrial Estate,
Penryn, Cornwall. TR10 9LU. UK
T: 01326 372070
E: ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.com<mailto:ian.mcbur...@allen-heath.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 
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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
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] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements

[Bill Stumpf]

Please forgive my ignorance, but as am I wrong in assuming that a device 
designed to operate meeting IEEE 802.11 standards would already meet the 
requirements for adaptive equipment introduced in the ETSI standard?

Bill



-Original Message-
From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 8:03 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements

Hello all,

A mandatory requirement to have a Medium Access Protocol has existed in EN
300 328 since V1.7.1, which was published in 2006, first introduced onto the
Official Journal sometime soon after that.   (the oldest OJ I have on record
is 2008 and it's on there).

There were a lot of complaints that the section on Medium Access Protocol
was not clear enough and people did not know what it meant.   Or, they knew
what it meant but didn't know how thorough it needed to be.   We knew that
IEEE 802.11 had it and we knew that Bluetooth hopped away from trouble.
Zigbee was listed in the scope of the standard so we all felt happy about
IEEE 802.15.4.   But what about everything else?

Industry called out for a better explanation and more clarification, which
is summarised as the text we are discussing below.
So, it is simply a clarification of an existing requirement.   It's not some
sudden new requirement.

EN 300 328 V1.8.1 makes it even more clear and removes the requirement for
clarifications in the OJ.

As a final comment, yes, there are manufacturers involved in the ETSI group
for EN 300 328. :-) 


Thanks,   Michael.


Michael Derby
Regulatory Engineer
ACB Europe


-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
Sent: 27 November 2012 13:25
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements

In message
<3f0347ac6ed9504191f91f07629fbb0c014f0...@thhsle14mbx2.hslive.net>,
dated Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Charlie Blackham 
writes:

>The reference has been in public domain for some years, and whilst the 
>ETSI website is not always the easiest thing to navigate, draft 
>standards are available, free of charge.

Even to non-members? I tried to get a draft document and couldn't.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk The longer it takes to
make a point, the more obtuse it proves to be.
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://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 
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://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 
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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

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

[PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements

[Bill Stumpf]

Hello group,
ETSI 300 328 V1.8.1 adds a new set of requirements for adaptive radio 
equipment.  This will certainly put more of a burden on test labs, including 
additional test equipment needed to generate the “interference signal”.  Has 
anyone reviewed these new requirements that wishes to offer their opinion or 
guidance?


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210
Email: bstu...@dlsemc.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://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 
Mike Cantwell 

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

Re: [PSES] Biconilog antennas and ANSI C63.4:2009

[Bill Stumpf]

Brian,
Unfortunately not all hybrid antennas are equal, and studies done in the past 
and more recently have indicated rather large uncertainties in measurement when 
using some of these antennas.  ANSI C63.4:2009 does not currently include the 
hybrid designs in the list of acceptable antennas for NSA or final measurements.

The ANSI-ASC C63®  interpretation might be helpful: 
http://www.c63.org/documents/misc/interpretations/C63.5_Explanation_Hybrid_NSA_hybrid_Apr2011.pdf

Regards,
Bill

From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 10:02 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Biconilog antennas and ANSI C63.4:2009

This really begs the question, "Why?". Bicon-log antennas have been out for 
more than 20 years, have been and are currently being used by many labs for 
many years, are calibrated under the same test conditions that Bicon and Log 
antennas are, so what's the deal? Is there some major problem with them?  Or is 
this just another move on the accreditation authorities to have every lab do 
exactly the same thing?

When you say "not accepted for measurements in ANSI C63.4:2009", is the for 
emissions testing or only in regards to NSA?

The Other Brian

From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Martin E. 
Cormier
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 9:40 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: [PSES] Biconilog antennas and ANSI C63.4:2009

Thanks for this unequivocally clear answer.  We'll take appropriate measures 
while it is still time.

I can't help but hope that the committee starts accepting these "new" antennas 
in the near future.

Martin

On 2012-01-13 9:15 AM, Bill Stumpf wrote:
Martin,
There's a lot of study going on currently regarding the hybrid antenna designs, 
but currently the hybrid (bicon-log) antennas are not accepted for measurements 
in ANSI C63.4:2009.


Bill Stumpf - Member ASC C63tm committee
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210
Email: bstu...@dlsemc.com<mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com>


-Original Message-
From: Martin E. Cormier [mailto:mcorm...@matrox.com]
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 7:14 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] Biconilog antennas and ANSI C63.4:2009

Hello everyone,

I am relatively new to this mailing list, so this question may have been
posted before.  I did not find it when searching the archive.

It has come to my attention yesterday that some accreditors may give a
lab a hard time if it tries to get ANSI C63.4:2009 accreditation when
using biconilog broadband antennas for measurements from 30MHz to 1GHz.
Table 1 does not explicitely list combination antennas as allowed, but
both biconicals and bilogs are listed as OK for this frequency range.

Has anyone here been subjected to accreditation issues for using biconilogs?

Thanks,
Martin
(Sorry if my English is bad, second language for me)

-

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://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 <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>



--

___



Martin E. Cormier, ing.

Gestionnaire du Groupe Conformité (CEM, Métrologie)

Conformity Group Manager (EMC, Calibration)

MATROX ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS LTD.

1055 Boul. St-Régis

Dorval, Québec, Canada

H9P 2T4

Tel :(514) 822-6000 x7749

Fax :(514) 822-6275

___
-


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/
I

Re: [PSES] Wireless Chargers

[Bill Stumpf]

For FCC compliance refer to FCC KDB 680106: 
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?switch=P&id=41701
Compliance should consider Part 15, Part 18 and RF Exposure requirements.

EU requirements are similar. Simply stated, if the device communicates 
wirelessly the R&TTE Directive applies. If no wireless communication is 
present, the EMC Directive applies.  In all cases EMF must be considered as 
part of the compliance plan.

Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210
Email: bstu...@dlsemc.com


From: Moshe Henig [mailto:moshe.he...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 4:32 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Wireless Chargers

Dear group.


I am looking for

1.   FCC cerification requirement for Wireless Chargers.
2.  EU requirement for Wireless Chargers.
Regards

Moshe

*
-

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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.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 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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.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 
Mike Cantwell 

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

Re: [PSES] EN 55022 for iTE

[Bill Stumpf]

Scott,
Testing to 6GHz became mandatory on October 1, 2011.  You can comply with 
EN55022:2006 / A1:2007, or EN55022:2010.  Testing above 1GHz is conditional 
based on the clock /timing signals of the device being tested.

I would hope that labs are equipped and educated to test above 1GHz since it 
has been an FCC requirement for years.  Test sites (OATS of chambers) must also 
meet CISPR 16 requirements for Site VSWR above 1GHz.

Bill



Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210
Email: bstu...@dlsemc.com



-Original Message-
From: Scott Xe [mailto:scott...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2011 10:30 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EN 55022 for iTE

Dear All,

I have learnt that the latest version requires to test the products upto 6
GHz from 1 GHz.  When will it commence on which amendment? Have most of
public labs well equipped to conduct the test to the new requirements?

Thanks and regards,

Scott 

-

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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.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 
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://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.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 
Mike Cantwell 

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

RE: References for Three Phase Power Around the World

[Bill Stumpf]

The US Department of Commerce/ITA has a published document at:
http://ita.doc.gov/td/machinery/reports/current2002FINAL.pdf
 
Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
EMC Testing & Consulting
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI, 53128
262-279-0210
 


From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Momcilovic,
Nick (GE Healthcare)
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 12:43 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: References for Three Phase Power Around the World


Anyone have any good references for standard 3 phase power (voltage/frequency)
around the world.  I have seen several references (i.e., Interpower) that have
nice reference charts for single phase, but not 3 phase.  Right now I am
particularly interested in Korea.
 
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Kind regards,
Nick Momcilovic 
GE Healthcare 
Standards Compliance/Certification Lead Engineer, MR 

T  262.521.6426 
D  *320-6426 
C  262.527.1965 
F  262.521.6549 
E  nick.momcilo...@ge.com 
www.gehealthcare.com 

3200 N Grandview Blvd, W-827 
Waukesha, WI  53188-1693 

-

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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.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 
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.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. 

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.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 
Mike Cantwell  

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

RE: Radiated Emission Measurements above 1GHz

[Bill Stumpf]

While I agree that the advice in the TGN was somewhat ambiguous, one
could have easily justified the use of FCC limits, test methods, and
criteria for testing above 1GHz.  At the time nothing else was
available.

Bill



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John
Woodgate
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 9:33 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: Radiated Emission Measurements above 1GHz

In message <8A23BE5F815D41408CB01F1F4621F88E0395E879@S1.DLSEMC.local>,
dated Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Bill Stumpf  writes:


>Basically it states that if a product has the potential to interfere at

>frequencies above 1GHz, it should be checked using appropriate limits 
>and test methods.

WHAT 'test methods'? WHAT 'appropriate limits'? I think the advice is 
very unsatisfactory.
-- 
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:   dhe...@gmail.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:   dhe...@gmail.com

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

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

RE: Radiated Emission Measurements above 1GHz

[Bill Stumpf]

Way back in 2003 this issue was addressed in an ECACB (now ECANB)
Technical Guidance Note (TGN 9), which we've been using since then.
Basically it states that if a product has the potential to interfere at
frequencies above 1GHz, it should be checked using appropriate limits
and test methods.  It is important to remember that using harmonized
standards only gives the presumption of conformity.  

This TGN is available on the CIRCA website
[circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/enterprise/emccbnb/home]


Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
EMC Testing & Consulting
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI, 53128
262-279-0210
 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim
Hulbert
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 8:38 AM
To: Haynes, Tim (SELEX GALILEO, UK)
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Radiated Emission Measurements above 1GHz

Tim - true enough, and as Engineers we can't disagree from a technical
perspective. However, manufacturers are going to test only to what they
HAVE to test to, i.e. there is a presumption of conformity with the EMC
Directive if the manufacturer applies those standards published in the
OJ that apply to his product.  Apparently for EN 55022 that is still the
1 GHz max frequency for measurement.  For time-to-market and cost
reasons, they stop there.

Jim Hulbert, Group Leader
TSO Competitive & Compliance Engineering Pitney Bowes, 35 Waterview
Drive, Shelton, CT  06484
Tel: 203-924-3621 (Internal 442-3621)
Fax: 203-924-3352 (Internal 442-3352)



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Haynes,
Tim (SELEX GALILEO, UK)
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 8:30 AM
To: rehel...@mmm.com; Pettit, Ghery
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Radiated Emission Measurements above 1GHz

Ghery, Rob, all

Remember that when you apply a standard you are doing so on the basis
that the standard covers ALL the product EMC characteristics.

IF you design a PC with a 3GHz clock and only apply a standard with a
1GHz limit and then there is a problem with real interference at 3GHz,
the authorities may not believe that due diligence had been applied.

So I would start asking - what does the product do - and then find
standards that may be useful in making your EMC assessment.

Regards
Tim




Tim Haynes A1N10
Electromagnetic Engineering Specialist
SELEX Sensors and Airborne Systems
300 Capability Green
Luton LU1 3PG
Tel  : +44 (0)1582 886239
Fax : +44 (0)1582 795863
Mob: +44 (0)7703 559 310
* E-mail : tim.hay...@selexgalileo.com

Please consider the environment before printing this email.
There are 10 types of people in the world-those who understand binary
and those who don't. J. Paxman



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of
rehel...@mmm.com
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 6:57 AM
To: Pettit, Ghery
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Radiated Emission Measurements above 1GHz

  *** WARNING ***

This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an
external partner or the Global Internet.
 Keep this in mind if you answer this message.

So if I understand this, there is no testing  required for Europe above
a gigahertz for EN 55022 at this time?

Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel:  651- 778-6336
Fax:  651-778-6252
=




 "Pettit, Ghery"

 
To
   "rehel...@mmm.com"

 10/30/2008 04:47  

 PM
cc
   "emc-p...@ieee.org"

   


Subject
   RE: Radiated Emission
Measurements
   above 1GHz

















That is correct.  It was quickly withdrawn and reissued without the
limits above 1 GHz.  I'm still waiting for my updated copy from Global,
too.  :-)


From: rehel...@mmm.com [mailto:rehel...@mmm.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 1:54 AM
To: Pettit, Ghery
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Radiated Emission Measurements above 1GHz

Ghery, are you saying that the BS version has the error and was
withdrawn?
If so we were not notified of this action by British Standards. We get
their standards through their subscription service.

Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel:  651- 778-6336
Fax:  651-778-6252
===



 Robert E.
 Heller/US-Corpora
 te/3M/US
To
   "Pettit, Ghery"
 10/30/2008 03:45  
 AM
cc
   "emc-p...@ieee.org"
   

Subject
   RE: Radiated Emission
Measurements
   above 1GHz(Document link: Robert
E.

RE: Korean EMC Standards - where can I purchase?

[Bill Stumpf]

Standards can be obtained at the following link: 
http://www.rrl.go.kr/
 
English translations are not available that I am aware.
 
Bill Stumpf



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Knighten, Jim L
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 4:30 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Korean EMC Standards - where can I purchase?



Will someone kindly point me to a source where I can obtain the EMC standards
(KN ) for South Korea?  English is preferable, although I understand that
some standards may not have an official English translation.

Thanks,

Jim

__

James L. Knighten, Ph.D.

EMC Engineer

Teradata Corporation

17095 Via Del Campo

San Diego, CA 92127

858-485-2537 – phone

213-337-5432 – fax

-  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: Class A antenna distance

[Bill Stumpf]

Both answers are correct, but also the term Fully Anechoic Chamber raises a
flag.  The FCC does not allow the use of fully anechoic chambers for emissions
testing (30MHz - 1000MHz).  Reference ANSI C63.4(2003) Section 5.
 
CISPR 22 does not allow the use of fully anechoic chambers (Section 10.4) &
(CISPR 16.1.4) 
 
All test sites must meet vertical and horizontal theoretical Site Attenuation.
 
Bill Stumpf


From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Pettit, Ghery
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:06 PM
To: Rudd, Adam; emcp...@aol.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Class A antenna distance



Note that the allowance for shorter measurement distances in CISPR 22 is for
small devices, too.  And, as noted, is limited to Class B devices.  Plus, some
regulators do not allow this option to be used and insist on 10 meter data.

 

Ghery Pettit

 

 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Rudd, Adam
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:59 AM
To: emcp...@aol.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Class A antenna distance

 

47CFR 15.31(f)(1) allows measurements at distances other than specified and
details the extrapolation factor.

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/octqtr/47cfr15.31.htm

 

EN 55022 Section 10.2.1 has a note that specifically makes an allowance for
Class B devices to be measured at 3m.  I tend to think the detail of Class B
being included and Class A being omitted from the note has significance.

Best Regards, 

Adam Rudd 
Engineer (EMC) 
NCR Corporation, RHSS 
Duluth, GA 
(770) 495-2825 



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of emcp...@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:26 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: (no subject)

 

Dear members,

 

I have a question on the use of a 3 meter fully anechoic chamber.

 

Can this 3 meter chamber be used to qualify a product for FCC or CISPR class
A, since the required test distance is 10 meter?

 

Please provide any reference to paragraphs in the standards. Your responses
are appreciated.

 

Thanks,

 

Timothy A. Pierce

Tap Engineering, Inc.

 

 

 

 



Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy
Football today <http://www.fanhouse.com
fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr000520> .

-  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 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 administrator

RE: ICES -003 approval for FCC DoC product

[Bill Stumpf]

Currently, Industry Canada will accept FCC test data for devices subject to 
ICES-003. I'd have your test lab provide you a test report for ICES-003 based 
on the FCC data. Also, be sure that your labeling and information to the user 
meet IC requirements. You mentioned Declaration of Conformity. DOC and DOC 
labeling is only applicable to some types of ITE. 

Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
EMC Testing & Consulting
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI, 53128
262-279-0210
 

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole 
use of the intended recipient.  If you are not the intended recipient, please 
be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or 
any attachment is prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in error, 
please contact the sender and delete all copies. 

Thank you for your cooperation 




From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of rehel...@mmm.com
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 7:22 AM
To: kbalasubraman...@scmmicro.co.in
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: ICES -003 approval for FCC DoC product

No you don't. The latest version is ICES-003 2004 Issue 4.

Actually the FCC will accept test data done to CISPR 22 (see CFR 47, Part
15.109 (g)).

If the ITE device is an intentional radiator, then the testing site will have 
to be listed by the FCC and IC.

Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel:  651- 778-6336
Fax:  651-778-6252
===



   
 Kbalasubramanian@ 
 scmmicro.co.in
 Sent by:   To 
 emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org   
cc 
   
 06/09/2008 05:33  Subject 
 AMICES -003 approval for FCC DoC  
   product 
   
   
   
   
   
   




Dear Experts,
  We have tested our ITE device for FCC Part15 Class B compliance in an 
NVLAP accredited lab. In the same lab for the same device we conducted testing 
for CISPR22 Class B compliance also. Based on these 2 reports we have issued 
DoC for placing the device in US & EU market. Now the same device we plan to 
sell in Canada. Do we need another testing or can we issue a DoC based on the 
FCC & CISPR reports.

Sincerely   SCM 
Microsystems (India) Pvt. Ltd.
K. Balasubramanian       Modules 0506,
0507 & 0508, D - Block,
Manager - Hardware      South Wing, TIDEL 
Park, Tel : +91 44 22540020  Ext : 305     #4, Rajiv Gandhi 
Road,(formerly Canal Bank Road) Fax :+91 44 
22540029    Taramani, Chennai - 600113. 
India E-mail:kbalasubraman...@scmmicro.co.in  Web : http://scmmicro.com 
'This email and any attachment may contain confidential information and are 
intended solely for the use of the named recipient(s). If you have received 
this information in error, you are prohibited from reading, copying, 
distributing and using the information. If you are not a named addressee or 
otherwise an intended recipient you are requested to immediately notify the 
sender and to delete this email and all attachments from your system.'

-

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 Pr

RE: Intentional Emissions in Japan

[Bill Stumpf]

Charles,
Try this site: http://www.tele.soumu.go.jp/e/index.htm
 
Bill
 
Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
EMC Testing & Consulting
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI, 53128
262-279-0210
 


From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grasso, Charles
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 12:06 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Intentional Emissions in Japan



Hi folks,

 

Where can I find the permitted frequency ranges for RF remotes in Japan?

 

Best Regards

Charles Grasso

Compliance Engineer

Echostar Communications

(w) 303-706-5467

(c) 303-204-2974

(t) 3033022...@vtext.com

(e) charles.gra...@echostar.com

(e2) chasgra...@gmail.com

 

-  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 

Korea EMC standards

[Bill Stumpf]

Anyone know where I can find Korea EMC standards in English?
 
Thanks,
Bill Stumpf
-  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: 30m EMC Site

[Bill Stumpf]

Still required,
Bill 


From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim
Bacher
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 3:53 PM
To: 'Elliott Mac-FME001'; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: 30m EMC Site

Long time ago we certified some transmitters that were below 10MHz that
required a 30 meter site. I do not know if it is still reguired. 

Jim

Jim Bacher
Senior Engineer
Paxar Americas, Inc.
170 Monarch Lane
Miamisburg, Ohio 45342



From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Elliott
Mac-FME001
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 3:41 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: 30m EMC Site


Hello
 
Are there any FCC Regulatory requirements that anyone knows of for
making measurements at 30m? I can't seem to think of any definitive
requirements for measurements at 30m that can't be made at 10m [which we
have and use quite a bit].
 
We have a 30m site, but haven't used it for awhile and since I am still
fairly new here, I am wondering when we would ever be required to use
it, if ever...
 
Any feedback is appreciated. 
 
Best regards, 
 
Mac Elliott

-

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

Mil-Std 1686C question

[Bill Stumpf]

> I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with Mil-Std 1686C. It is
> an ESD standard that references IEEE C62.38, 1994, IEC 801-2 & ANSI
> C63.16, 1993. Specifically I am interested in knowing what RC networks are
> called out. Any help would be appreciated. Thank You.
> 
> Brian J. Mattson
> D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
> 1250 Peterson Dr.
> Wheeling, Il. 60090
> (847) 537-6400 Phone
> (847) 209-1316 Mobile
> (847) 537-6488 Fax
> bmatt...@dlsemc.com
> www.dlsemc.com
> 


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RS-103 help

[Bill Stumpf]

Hello all. I need help locating equipment for rent that can achieve the
following goals. RS-103 (MIL-STD-461E) testing from 18 GHz to 40 GHz @
200V/m. If anyone could point me in the right direction I would be most
grateful.

Bill Stumpf

William M Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: 47 CFR Part 90

[Bill Stumpf]

David,
I have it so I will send you a copy off line and save you a lot of trouble .
The latest version of 47CFR Part 90 available is from October 2002. The
October 2003 version should be available on-line soon, but will not be
published in hard copy until probably February of next year. Part 15 is the
easiest to download in total, the rest you often may have to download part by
part. In the future, start at one of the websites here 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/cfrassemble.cgi,
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfrhtml_00/Title_47/47tab_00.html or
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfrhtml_00/Title_47/47tab_00.html.  
 
Bill
William M Stumpf 
DLS Electronics 
166 South Carter St. 
Genoa City WI 53128 
ph: 262-279-0210 
fx: 262-279-3630 
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com 

 -Original Message-
From: Helge Knudsen [mailto:h.knud...@niros.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:30 AM
To: 'ITL-EMC User Group'; Emc-Pstc Group (E-mail)
Subject: SV: 47 CFR Part 90



Dear David,
As far as I know the latest version of 47 CFR Part 90 is from 1998, you can
download the PDF file from:
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/cfr/1998/
 
Newer parts from 47 CFR can be found at:
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/cfr/1999/
 
Best regards

Helge Knudsen 
Test & Approval 
Niros Telecommunication 
Hirsemarken 5 
DK-3520 Farum 
Tel +45 44 34 22 51 
Fax +45 44 99 28 08 
email h.knud...@niros.com 


Fra: ITL-EMC User Group [mailto:itl-...@itl.co.il]
Sendt: 28. oktober 2003 09:03
Til: Emc-Pstc Group (E-mail)
Emne: 47 CFR Part 90



Dear All, 
Does anyone know where I can download the latest version of FCC Rule 47 Part
90 (47CFR90) in pdf format? 
I would prefer to download the whole part in one file. 
Thanks to anyone who can assist. 
Regards 
David Shidlowsky 
Technical Writer 
EMC Laboratory 
ITL (Product Testing) Ltd. 
Kfar Bin Nun 
Israel 
Tel: +972-8-9797799 
Fax: +972-8-9797702 
Email: dav...@itl.co.il 
http://www.itl.co.il 
http://www.i-spec.com 
This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you
are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate,
distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you
received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message
and its attachments to the sender.

RE: Missing Emissions data from D of C?

[Bill Stumpf]

Derek,
This points out one of the weaknesses of the self-declaration (DOC). The
responsible party can self declare for whatever standards they feel suite
their needs. For instance, just because a product is CE marked, it doesn't
mean that it has been tested or passed to all the relevant standards. It may
just be safety. The only way to tell for sure is to look at the actual DOC,
which lists the standards the product has been tested to. In the case you
brought up, The product should have been tested for emissions to EN 55014 at
the very least. We would also recommend EN 55022, since the potential for
interference goes well beyond  the 300MHz called out in EN 55014.
 
William M Stumpf 
DLS Electronics 
166 South Carter St. 
Genoa City WI 53128 
ph: 262-279-0210 
fx: 262-279-3630 
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com 

 Original Message-
From: lfresea...@aol.com [mailto:lfresea...@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 1:02 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Missing Emissions data from D of C?



Hi all, 
 
while reviewing a clients competitors D of C, I was surprised to see that only
Immunity and Low voltage were address, there were no emissions requirements
called out.
 
The product is a professional arcade game. Is this product exempt? Any
thoughts why this could be allowed?
 
Cheers,
 
Derek N. Walton
Owner, L F Research EMI Design and Test Facility
Poplar Grove,
IL 61065

RE: ANSI C63.4:2001 typo?

[Bill Stumpf]

Yes, the typo was acknowledged and is being changed in the 2003 version of
ANSI C63.4. The correct height in table 2, third column should be 2 meters.
 
William M Stumpf 
DLS Electronics 
166 South Carter St. 
Genoa City WI 53128 
ph: 262-279-0210 
fx: 262-279-3630 
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com 


From: jim.hulb...@pb.com [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com]
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 4:08 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: ANSI C63.4:2001 typo?



I have a copy of ANSI C63.4:2001. Is the transmit antenna height (h1) for 10
meter measurement distance correct at 3 m? I believe it should be 2 m as it
was in the previous 1992 version of the standard. If this is a typo, is it
being corrected?

Jim Hulbert
Pitney Bowes.

RE: OATS NSA Measurements

[Bill Stumpf]

If you plan on doing any final emissions testing at 3 meters, then the answer
is yes.
Have fun.
 
Bill


From: jim.hulb...@pb.com [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 9:58 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: OATS NSA Measurements



If a weather-protected OATS complies with volumetric NSA criteria at the 10
meter measurement distance using broadband antennas, is it necessary to repeat
volumetric NSA measurements at the 3 meter distance?

Jim Hulbert
Pitney Bowes

RE: 508kHz Intentional Radiator FCC

[Bill Stumpf]

Eric,
Robert is correct. The FCC requires the use of a loop antenna for
measurements below 30MHz. The test distance required may put you in a bind,
so Part 15 says for frequencies below 30MHz you can use lesser test
distances and correct for the distance using a 40dB/decade conversion, as
opposed to a 20dB/decade correction for frequencies above 30MHz. In
addition, if by taking readings at a minimum of two different test distances
you can prove a fall off ratio other than 40dB/decade, that can be used if
documented in the report. The FCC does caution against making measurements
in the near field. See Part 15.31 for further guidance.

Bill Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com



From: robert.v.del...@us.ul.com [mailto:robert.v.del...@us.ul.com]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 6:44 AM
To: Eric Penne
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: 508kHz Intentional Radiator FCC



Eric,

The FCC will only allow the use of a loop antenna for E-field measurements
below 30MHz.

Hope this helps.


(Embedded image moved to file: pic18467.pcx)


 

"Eric Penne"

 To:
  
Sent by:  cc:

owner-emc-pstc@majordom   Subject: 508kHz
Intentional Radiator FCC   
o.ieee.org

 

 

09/05/2003 03:53 PM

Please respond to "Eric

Penne"

 

 






I'm trying to find the test equipment requirements for testing a 508kHz
intentional transmitter.  More specifically I'm trying to find out if the
FCC wants to use a loop or rod antenna.  This is a large unknown to me and
I am trying to research it right now.  I was hoping that some of list
members may be able to give me some more information and anything
"gotchas" that I should be looking for.

Thanks
Eric Penne
epe...@olug.org




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc




-- For more information about UL, its Marks, and its services for
EMC, quality registrations and product certifications for global
markets, please access our web sites at http://www.ul.com and
http://www.ulc.ca, or contact your local sales representative. --

*  Internet E-mail Confidentiality Disclaimer  **

This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential
information.  If you are not the intended recipient, you may not
disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this
message or attachment in any way.  If you received this e-mail
message in error, please return by forwarding the message and
its attachments to the sender.

Underwriters Laboratories Inc. and its affiliates do
not accept liability for any errors, omissions, corruption
or virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that
arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
*



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: FCC and Canada

[Bill Stumpf]

David,
Industry Canada will accept FCC data for EMC testing of ITE.
 
William M Stumpf 
DLS Electronics 
166 South Carter St. 
Genoa City WI 53128 
ph: 262-279-0210 
fx: 262-279-3630 
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com 


From: David Sproul [mailto:david.spr...@alexanderlynn.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 4:46 AM
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: FW: FCC and Canada


Dear Group,
I apologise to for sending this out twice, but the copy of my original message
arrived back with no text. 
 
I hope the text will be included this time.
 
Best regards,
David Sproul.

From: David Sproul [mailto:david.spr...@alexanderlynn.co.uk]
Sent: 20 August 2003 11:27
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: FCC and Canada


Dear Group,
Could some of somebody please remind me whether or not IT equipment compliant
with the FCC requirements for the US would also be eligible for sale to
Canada, or would we need to apply further CSA standards ?
 
(The safety assessment has been done by UL.)
 
Thanks to you all for your assistance,
 
Best regards,
David Sproul,
 

RE: Thanks to EMC-PSTC List!!

[Bill Stumpf]

Muriel,

I can't say that answered any of your questions, nor was I was
responsible for any of your success, but I will certainly extend my
congratulations to you. I admire your determination. Just in case you
are there, I will look for your name tag at the IEEE EMC Symposium next
week.

Best regards,

Bill Stumpf
DLS Electronics




From: Muriel Bittencourt de Liz [mailto:mur...@eel.ufsc.br]
Sent: August 11, 2003 3:20 PM
To: EMC-PSTC List
Subject: Thanks to EMC-PSTC List!!



Hello List-members,

I'm sending this e-mail this e-mail to thank you. Last friday, august,
8,
I've got my doctor degree in electrical enegineering, with a thesis
about
reduction of EMI in switched mode power supplies.

This thesis would not be the same without the contribution of the
members
>from this invaluable list. A lot of topics that were not clear to me at
the
beggining became clear with your help, through the list or private
e-mails
answering my "basic" questions.

Be sure that your comments were all referred in my bibliographic
references
chapter. I'd like to put some names that help me most, but I think that
I
could forget someone! ;-) and it would no be just...

Once again, I'd like to emphasize the importance and relevance of this
list
to my work and another works of research world-wide.

Best Regards,

Muriel Bittencourt de Liz
August, 11, 2003
Florianopolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil
Electrical Engineering Department
Federal University at Santa Catarina (UFSC)




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc








This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Mexico requirements

[Bill Stumpf]

To all,
If a manufacturer of an FCC Part 18 device (ISM) wants to sell in Mexico,
what are the procedures for meeting the Mexico standards? Is the MRA in
sight? I know of the Telecom NOM's, but not about ISM equipment procedures.
This is the first time we've had this inquiry, so any information would be
helpful.
Thanks to all.

Bill Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com










This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: cable maximization - do you or don't you??

[Bill Stumpf]

Charles,
I applaud your integrity! You are right to insist on maximization of
cable placement when performing emissions testing. The ANSI document
does indeed call this out, and the cable placement, as well as the
peripheral equipment placement, should be maximized, of course while
staying within the boundaries of the ANSI C63.4 definition and typical
installation/setup of the EUT. As you know, the idea is to investigate
the "worst case" emissions from the system (EUT) within the typical
parameters of use of the EUT. Some laboratories do not do this because
it may be difficult and time-consuming, but they are doing you a
disservice. Continue to insist that your lab/OEM supplier follows the
ANSI C63 test setup and procedures.

William M Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com



From: Charles Grasso [mailto:cgrassospri...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 3:54 PM
To: Emc-Pstc; charles.gra...@echostar.com
Subject: cable maximization - do you or don't you??



Hi all,

I have recently run into an issue with an OEM
supplier. The product that we are looking at
fails emissions after cable maximization.
In an informal study, I discovered that quite
a few labs don't seem to perform cable maximization
on a routine basis. ANSIC63 is quite clear on this
- the cables need to be maximized.

Is cable maximization a thing of the past - to
be written out - and test labs are maximizing
throughput rather than cables OR is is something
I should continue to insist on??

Comments will be gratefully accepted.
Charles Grasso
EchoStar Communicationa


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc








This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: Source of noise

[Bill Stumpf]

Derek,
All power supplies are supposed to be tested with a representative system.
They are primarily designed to filter the supply emissions, since line filters
typically do little filtering above 20 or 25 MHz. Also remember the old
saying, "CE plus CE does NOT equal CE"!
Bill
William M Stumpf 
DLS Electronics 
166 South Carter St. 
Genoa City WI 53128 
ph: 262-279-0210 
fx: 262-279-3630 
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com 


From: lfresea...@aol.com [mailto:lfresea...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:16 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: Source of noise


Hi All,


Thanks for the great replies!

looks like the PCI bus is the problem.. But here's the quandry..

Now we are adding the cards back in, they should add little to the profile,
correct? After all, they all have the CE mark on them, and some have the FCC
sticker too.

This is not happening, in fact some emissions are quire strong.. I've also
noticed that the Power supply is letting the PC noise out. I opened the power
supply ( bang goes the warrenty ), and there is the minimal of filters.. Are
the power supplies tested individually to carry the agency sticker?, with a
real PC? or just load resistors? Are they designed to suppress the PC noise?

Cheers,

Derek N. Walton
Owner L F Research EMC Design and Test Facility
Poplar Grove,
Illinois,  USA
www.lfresearch.com 

RE: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification

[Bill Stumpf]

Bob,
Go to the ERO website www.ero.dk and download ERC report 25. It's a big
help when determining frequency allocation/use in the EU.

Bill Stumpf
William M Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com



From: rehel...@mmm.com [mailto:rehel...@mmm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 9:05 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification



Out of curiosity...are there ANY harmonized frequencies in
Europe?
Is 13.56 MHz harmonized?

Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel:  651- 778-6336
Fax:  651-778-6252




This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc








This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification

[Bill Stumpf]

Richard Woods wrote: Gerald, please explain why a Notified Body number
is required? I thought that a harmonized ETSI standard exists.

A Notified Body number is not required unless a Notified Body (NB or
CAB) is consulted for the job. Since there are Harmonized standards that
can be used for this type of product, a NB/CAB is not required. The
manufacturer is responsible for compliance with the Essential
Requirements of the Directives, therefore they are responsible for
notifying the different Member States of the EU of their intent to
market the device in their country.

William M Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com
EU CAB for EMC and R&TTE


From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:32 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification



Gerald, please explain why a Notified Body number is required? I thought
that a harmonized ETSI standard exists.

Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International



From: Gerald Tammi [mailto:gera...@zoom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 12:52 PM
To: 'Jan Heffken'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification



I have gone through the process of a 802.11 WLAN.

France is not harmonized to the rest on the EU in the 2.4Ghz spread
spectrum.

Yes you will need a NOTIFIED BODY number to submit with the country
notifications

Yes you need to send notification to each country that you want to sell
into.

There is a 30 day waiting period for each country to reply before you
can
sell into that market.  {they may respond sooner that the 30 days}  They
may
reject especially if there is an external antenna.

If you are shipping out of the United States, and the product has an
embedded encryption engine; you need to file for an export license with
the
US BXA.  Also you need to comply with control of export to the T7
terrorist
countries ban.

Gerald Tammi
Zoom Telephonics.
Boston, MA



From: Jan Heffken [mailto:jheff...@core.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 10:04 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification



I am a little confused about paragraph 31 of the R&TTE Directive. I 
have copied it below. My understanding is that if our equipment (2.4GHz 
outdoor WLAN) operates in a non-harmonised frequency band, then we have 
to Notify Member States where it is not harmonised.

Where can I find answers to the following questions.

Is the 2,4GHz. spread spectum band harmonized through the EU?

Which Member States have not harmonized?

Do I have to go through a Notified Body to Notify?

Since paragraph 31 uses "should" and not "shall" do I have to do it all?

Paragraph 31 from the R&TTE Directive.
(31) Whereas manufacturers should notify Member States
of their intention to place radio equipment on the
market using frequency bands whose use is not
harmonised throughout the Community; whereas
Member States therefore need to put in place procedures
for such notification; whereas such procedures
should be proportionate and should not constitute a
conformity assessment procedure additional to those
provided for in Annexes IV or V; whereas it is desirable
that those notification procedures should be
harmonised and preferably implemented by electronic
means and one-stop-shopping;

Thanks in advance,

Jan Heffken
-- 
CoreComm Webmail. 
http://home.core.com



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc


This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc


This message is fro

R&TTE requirements

[Bill Stumpf]

To all,
A manufacturer of an ADSL modem/router needs to meet both the EMC and
R&TTE Directives. What standards are applicable to the device under the
R&TTE Directive as telecommunications terminal equipment? 

Thanks in advance,

Bill








This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

RE: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification

[Bill Stumpf]

Jan,
 You do not have to go through a notified body or U.S. CAB to notify.
Each Member State has its own form that can be downloaded for this
purpose, and yes , you do have to notify if the frequency is not
harmonized in that Member State. Go to www.ero.dk for frequency
allocation information.

William M Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com
EMC & R&TTE CAB  


From: Jan Heffken [mailto:jheff...@core.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 9:04 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: R&TTE Directive Member States Notification



I am a little confused about paragraph 31 of the R&TTE Directive. I 
have copied it below. My understanding is that if our equipment (2.4GHz 
outdoor WLAN) operates in a non-harmonised frequency band, then we have 
to Notify Member States where it is not harmonised.

Where can I find answers to the following questions.

Is the 2,4GHz. spread spectum band harmonized through the EU?

Which Member States have not harmonized?

Do I have to go through a Notified Body to Notify?

Since paragraph 31 uses "should" and not "shall" do I have to do it all?

Paragraph 31 from the R&TTE Directive.
(31) Whereas manufacturers should notify Member States
of their intention to place radio equipment on the
market using frequency bands whose use is not
harmonised throughout the Community; whereas
Member States therefore need to put in place procedures
for such notification; whereas such procedures
should be proportionate and should not constitute a
conformity assessment procedure additional to those
provided for in Annexes IV or V; whereas it is desirable
that those notification procedures should be
harmonised and preferably implemented by electronic
means and one-stop-shopping;

Thanks in advance,

Jan Heffken
-- 
CoreComm Webmail. 
http://home.core.com



This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc








This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
 majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
 unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
 Dave Heald:   emc_p...@symbol.com

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
 Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org

Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc