Re: Korean EMC Standards - where can I purchase?

[David Heald]

Jim,
  From practical experience, if you meet the EU standards, you should
meet the Korean standards.  We found that if we made it through our EU
testing, we'd almost always make it through the Korean tests.  I do
remember looking into the actual standards at least once, and the
content was very similar to the EU standards (the international
alignment here is great).

The one difference that is worth noting is that the Korean labs were
often much more dilligent in ensuring that products were fully
exercised.  I remember that once or twice in the last few years we had
some issues stemming from this (though they were quickly resolved).

Of course, it never hurts to be sure, particularly if your products
don't fall in one of the more generic product categories.

Best Regards,
-Dave



On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Umbdenstock, Don
 wrote:
> The site referenced below has various links that will take one to different
> regulations and decrees; I am not sure about standards (haven't looked
> recently).  A caution, those documents that are offered in English are
> usually 1-2 revisions behind what is available in Korean.
>
>
>
> The site is useful but has limitations.
>
> Don
> 561 912  6440
>
> 
>
> From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Bill Stumpf
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 9:53 AM
> To: Knighten, Jim L; emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject: RE: Korean EMC Standards - where can I purchase?
>
>
>
> 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 -
>  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 Safe

Regulatory Engineer seeking employment.

[David Heald]

Greetings all,

  After five years and a few months of hectic but rewarding work, I again find
myself seeking new employment.  

 

Fortunately for anyone who is seeking a senior level Regulatory Engineer or
Regulatory Team Leader, I have some great qualifications.  For the last five
years, I've spent my time in two pursuits:

1) Developing my ability to manage global approvals projects (often 90+
countries) for converged mobile devices.  These products were as complex as
co-located handheld and body-worn GSM / Wi-Fi / Bluetooth / GPS products, and
as simple as the radio modules inside them or the power supplies and cradles
that kept them operating.  This experience is spread between internal projects
and fully outsourced projects through Asia-Pacific ODMs, with total global
regulatory project budgets spanning the range between $5k to $1M+ USD.

2) Obtaining my MBA, which I have already started using via major process
redesigns (for those of you who use them or know what they are, I conceived
the idea for and led the design & implementation of an Agile PLM & SAP based
process to automate sales availability based on Regulatory approvals status
with the added bonus of country - based and revision controlled approvals
documentation and certificate storage).  

 

I got my start as an EMC engineer, but over my career I've also built
competencies serving as a Subject Matter Expert for Bluetooth SIG listings,
NEBS, PCI (Secure PIN entry for payment devices), and for a short time
Reliability & Availability.  

Also, despite not being an official SME, I've developed a working familiarity
with global RF, EMC, and Safety approvals requirements, including the
following:  HAC, DFS/TPC, SAR, PTCRB/CTIA, IEEE1725, GCF, RFID, China CCC /
SRRC / MII NAL, Korea MIC / RRL, Taiwan BSMI / DGT, Japan VCCI / MIC, Brazil
ITE & Mobile Phone approvals requirements, and much more...

 

I think I'll cut it there to keep in compliance with the list rules that I
remember having to enforce from time to time.  

 

If anyone knows of an opening or is interested in talking with me, I would be
very happy to hear from you.  

I can be reached at:

Tel: 631.513.3015

or via email by replying here.  (please be sure to reply only to me, not to
the entire group!)
 
I am presently located on Long Island, NY, but the culture here is not for me
so I will gladly consider relocation (including opportunities outside the USA,
if the opportunity seems right).  

 

Thanks and Best Regards,

-David Heald

-  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 

Fwd: avaliable EMC position in Southern California

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Paul Mohr.  Please reply only to Paul Mohr as described below.
Best Regards,
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin


GREETINGS TO ALL!

An EMC lab in San Diego County is looking for a self motivated engineer (B. S.
degree required) with at least 3 years experience to specific EMC regulations.
Must have experience in low and high power radio testing. Some examples of
required test experience: FCC, Part 2, 15, 22, 24, 90 & 95 and Industry
Canada. FCC requirements for wireless, cell phones and all report writing
skills. Familiarity with measurement uncertainty. Must have proven skills
operating test equipment utilized to obtain worldwide EMC regulatory
certifications.

Interested parties should contact me at 760-436-3351, FAX at 760-753-7367,
email at paul.m...@att.net 

Best regards,

Paul Mohr


This email has been scanned for computer viruses.



This email has been scanned for computer viruses.



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

802.11a/h/i : 5GHz RLAN Re:

[David Heald]

Jan,
  802.11h is in the works which will share some of the 5GHz band with military
radar and be a somewhat worldwide standard.  I believe that 802.11i will
shortly follow with added security enhancements.  I have a presentation on
this somewhere but can't locate it for more details at the moment

I don't know if this answers your question but it could provide you with a way
to refine your search.

-Dave


>>> "Jan Heffken"  09/23/03 12:23PM >>>

Does anyone know if there are any R&TTE Harmonized Standards for a 5 
GHz RLAN product?

Thanks,

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 email has been scanned for computer viruses.



This email has been scanned for computer viruses.



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

Looking for anechoic chamber

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
  I'm looking for a ferrite lined 30-1000MHz anechoic chamber to take away or
purchase for cheap.  I know a year or two ago there seemed to be a bunch of
surplus chambers and I'm hoping that there are one or two left.  We're only
looking for a precompliance chamber for fixed antenna height measurements so a
smaller chamber is not a problem (and a larger chamber would be ok if we could
scale it down).  The ferrite lining is key, though due to space
considerations.  I think that cones would make the chamber too large.

If anyone has a surplus chamber or knows of any, could you contact me off list?

Thanks,
Dave Heald
EMC Engineer
Symbol Technologies
631.738.5373



This email has been scanned for computer viruses.



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: GR1089 4.5.9 Intrabuilding Lightning Strike Telecom Ports

[David Heald]

Jeff,
  I think the difference may be in the distributed ground arrangement
in the CBN.  In a surge event, the CBN would distribute the energy from
a lightning event and common mode voltage differences within the CBN
would minimal (hence the exemption).

In an IBN (shielded w/isolated ground), the differences in ground
potentials could be severe and the test would be necessary.  Unshielded
cables could obtain coupled energy from the building (the classic
intrabuilding example) and also make the test necessary.

Since most if not all North American telecom providers (those that use
the NEBS standards) do NOT want to install IBN equipment, you should be
able to stick with your shielded cable exemption if you want to.  If EMI
considerations aren't an issue and you want to test for the unshielded
intrabuilding, I'd go for it because I have always had the impression
that carriers don't like to run STP (cost & labor objections if nothing
else). 

BTW, about a year ago I looked into the floating one end of the shield
thing (well, for coaxial DS3/E3 anyway) and found out that no one
requires isolation any more.  There were a few countries that held out
longer than others but the isolation is no longer required anywhere in
the world (I think the EMC issues outweighed the ground loop problem). 
Anyone out there feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I spent quite
a bit of time researching this.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

>>> "Collins, Jeffrey"  06/13/03 08:07AM >>>

All,

We have taken the waiver to this requirement by using shielded cables
that were grounded on both ends. Since it is common for carriers to
float
one end of their grounds we are planning to perform this test on our
telecom ports. Looking at the levels of the surge in table 4-4, I'm not
confident that a grounded shielded telcom cable would make the
difference in passing this test. ( Surges are at 800V and 1500V)
( Ports / Cables are T1, E1, Ethernet, and RS232)

My plan is to run this test with both unshielded ungrounded cables and
shielded grounded cables.

Does anyone have any experience in passing this test where the
shielded/grounded cable made the difference?
Anyone have a theoretical opinion/prediction on this? 

Thanks in advance,

Jeffrey Collins 
Sr. HW Engineering Manager 
EMC/ NEBS/ Reliability/ Safety
CIENA  Corporation
5965 Silver Creek Valley Rd. 
San Jose, CA. 95138
(408) 571-3002, Fax (408) 965-2705
jcoll...@ciena.com 
http://www.ciena.com 



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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com 
 Dave Heald:   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 email has been scanned for computer viruses.


This email has been scanned for computer viruses.


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: FDA registration of laser

[David Heald]

Kim,
  You DO need to register.  Testing may not be required, but is
strongly encouraged regardless (technically you can refer to the laser
component manufacturer's results).

Note: This is assuming that you aren't just putting an off the shelf
enclosed CD/DVD ROM drive in a system, which shouldn't require any
testing or submission.  

Best Regards,
Dave Heald


>>> Kim Boll Jensen  06/11/03 04:54AM >>>
Hi all good people

Just a simple question.

When using a CD or DVD driver in a product (PC or audio product) and
the
driver is FDA registered, do I need to register the final product at
FDA
too. I can't find a paragraph in 21 CFR which tells me when not to
register.

(The drives are Class I but includes a higher laser internally as fare
as I know)


Best regards,


Kim Boll Jensen
Bolls Raadgivning
Denmark



This email has been scanned for computer viruses.


This email has been scanned for computer viruses.


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: Surge Suppressors on a UPS

[David Heald]

Most UPS's use a stepped approximation of a sine wave when in battery
mode.  While most switching supplies don't care (and are the intended
loads for these UPS's), surge suppressors can cause real issues - It has
something to do with capacitive overload of the output circuits.  

And for the second question - there are huge variances in the output
wave quality.  The brand I am familiar with has both stepped
approximation and true sine wave output models - the sine models being
the expensive ones.  The stepped approximation models are ideal for
switching supplies, while the sine output models can handle all kinds of
loads including motors (but a quick check says that they still can't use
surge supressors - this one has me puzzled!)

The UPS EMC standard is 50091-2 (or was it 92-1?), but I'm not sure how
much help it may offer.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

>>> "Price, Ed"  06/02/03 11:18AM >>>
Hi Group!


Last Friday, I got ambushed in a meeting. I hate it when that happens!

A question was asked about whether it's OK to put a surge suppressor on
the
output of a UPS that is supplying power to some expensive equipment. I
opined that I didn't think it should be necessary, but that it also
shouldn't hurt anything either. So then somebody asks me why all the
UPS
manufacturer's sites say not to use a surge suppressor. I expertly
reply
that gosh, I don't know, but I'll take a look.

The next question nails me again. "Are there any standards for UPS
output
power quality?" Uh, well, I'll look into that too.

Now, the market is light industrial, USA, but are there any applicable
EN
standards also?

Just for some background, here's a typical entry from Tripp-Lite's FAQ
list
for UPS's (not to pick on Tripp-Lite; they just said it most succinctly
of
several sites I looked at):

http://www.tripplite.com/support/faq/tech_ups.cfm 
Can I plug a surge suppressor or extension cord into my UPS?
No. Using an extension cord will void your equipment coverage warranty,
as
all equipment must be plugged directly into the UPS. Tripp Lite does
not
recommend plugging a surge protector into a battery backup outlet of a
UPS
either as this can overload it. Also, when some UPS systems switch to
battery power they will output a waveform that a surge suppressor may
see as
a surge and short-circuit the UPS. Again, this setup will void the
equipment
coverage warranty.

Now this is getting to be a big can of worms! What do they mean by
"some
UPS"? Is there one kind that does, and another kind that doesn't; and
how do
you know which is which? And if some UPS will create a voltage
transient (is
that what they mean?) sufficient to trigger a surge suppressor, then
why is
it OK to let the UPS apply that transient to my "protected" equipment?
All
this talk about uninterrupted power isn't worth anything if the UPS
kills my
equipment when it switches to battery power mode.

And who's fault is this? I mean, a surge suppressor is pretty dumb; it
just
sits there waiting for the voltage to go over a certain level and then
it
conducts. What's this about the surge suppressor "may see" something as
a
surge? That's saying the surge suppressor could mis-interpret the
waveform
it sees. If the surge suppressor is conducting, then I think the UPS
has
just done something very naughty.

I also don't understand the prohibition of an extension cord. Maybe
this is
a legal issue, as I can't see any valid safety or regulation issues
here. We
regularly put a UPS in the bottom of a rack system, and then wire a
stripline outlet set for the height of the rack. Isn't that the
electrical
equivalent of an extension cord? What am I missing?

Thanks in advance!

Ed


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




This email has been scanned for computer viruses.


This email has been scanned for computer viruses.


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: EMC standards for UPS supplies

[David Heald]

Try 50091-2.  That's the Euro one and it includes EMI & immunity and 
covers the different operating modes.  For domestic products (assuming 
you're in the US, that is) the normal FCC rules apply - just be sure to 
test all the operating modes (to cover all the bases, 0%, 50%, and 100% 
load in both AC and battery operation should be a good place to start - 
and will probably suffice for the report).  A hint from experience - any 
narrowband emissions will probably stay the same between modes - it is 
the broadband switching noise (for radiated, probably 30-250 MHz or so) 
that will vary between modes.  This should help during the 100% load 
battery scans that need to be completed in a matter of minutes - just be 
sure to test to make sure that this is indeed the case.

One other comment - in the case of 3 phase systems, you may want to 
check to see if the manufacturer has 50091-2 approvals for the EU 
version.  3 phase systems vary here and in the EU and I know of at least 
one manufacturer who specialized the compliance tests to reflect the 
countries in which the product could be installed.  In other words, 
their US version of the product was only labeled for the FCC, while 
their EU version was tested to 50091-2 (and maybe FCC as well??).  A 
domestic sample would most likely have been the FCC only type, but an EU 
version may well be already approved.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald


Garnier, David S (MED) wrote:
> Gentlemen,
> 
> I need to bone up EMC standards applicable to UPS supplies,
> (3 phase - 10 to 20 kVa is the range I am looking at.)  
> 
> We have a  vendor that has labeled his product stating that it 
> complies with FCC rules for a Class A computing device standards,
> (I think it's a little more complicated than that...)   Could someone
> please suggest a couple standards that I could look up?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> dave garnier 
> 
> 
>   David Garnier
>   e GE Medical Systems
>   ___
>   David S. Garnier
>   Senior Technician
>   PET Engineering
>   3000 N. Grandview Ave - M/S W-1250
>   Waukesha, Wi. 53188
>   Tel: 262.312.7246
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 



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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: C.O. Battery Voltages - EVERYWHERE

[David Heald]

I believe that DT is the only carrier that uses -60Vdc CO's, but I think 
that it is only present in their older CO's.

It's not that hard to meet the requirements though - just maintain 1mm 
(40th) creepage & clearance between TNV-2 and SELV, GND, etc (up to your 
DC/DC's/opto-isolators/bridging caps) and make sure any bridging 
capacitors are physically large enough to have 1mm between the pads (Y 
rating is not required but anything smaller than a 1206 SMT cap is too 
small to maintain spacings).  Voltage rating on the caps is important 
too, I guess - pick according to proper NEBS reliability derating.

-And you may have to ensure that your DC/DC's are rated properly.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

  - Original Message -
  From: "Joe Finlayson" 
  To: "'EMC PSTC'" ; "'NEBS Newsgroup'"
  
  Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 2:39 PM
  Subject: C.O. Battery Voltages - EVERYWHERE



>I'm interested in obtaining information on the percentage of C.O.'s
>worldwide that are utilizing -60VDC as their battery voltage.  It is my
>understanding that a majority use -48VDC although some still use -60VDC.
>Any and all information/references would be helpful.  If there are
>references that are country specific or carrier specific, that would be
>valuable information as well.  Any charts/spreadsheets out there similar
>to the mains supply charts I've seen would be excellent.
>
>Thx,
>
>
>Joe
>
>*
>Joe Finlayson
>Manager, Compliance Engineering
>Telica, Inc.
>734 Forest Street, Bldg. G, Suite 100
>Marlboro, MA 01752
>Tel: (508) 804-8212
>Fax: (508) 480-0922
>Email: jfinlay...@telica.com
>



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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: CCC - is this a current description of IT equipment

[David Heald]

Gary, All,
   Office networking equipment (ethernet/network hubs, switches, 
Ethernet PCI Cards, etc) are included in the definition.

I attended a US Dept. of Commerce seminar with a delegation from the 
CNCA and that was one of the questions raised and answered - so it's 
strainght out of the horses mouth, so to speak.

On the other hand, Central Office type equipment does not need approval 
under the CCC - but it does need a Network License so you still have to 
go through all the testing anyway, just with a different agency.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

Gary McInturff wrote:
> Information Technology Equipment (IT) (12 categories)
> Personal computers (PC), Portable personal computers, Display units
connected with computer, Printers connected with computer, Multiplying printer
& coping machines, Scanners, Switching power supply units for computer and
adapters, Chargers, Computer game players, Learning machine, Duplicators,
Servers, Finance and trade settlement equipment. 
> And if inappropriately listed under Telecommunications Equipment
> Data Terminal: 
> Storing/Transmitting Fax/Voice card, POS terminal, Interface Transformer,
Network Hub, Other Data Terminal. 
> I don't necessarily see LAN equipment under either - although Network Hub
could be, depending on the full definition.
> Is Ethernet/LAN equipment required under the current CCC list to be
evaluated?
>   Thanks
>   Gary



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

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

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

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

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

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

Fwd: requirements for lab use (primarily) equipment

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Neven Pischl...  Please respond to Neven (cc'ed on this 
message).
- Dave


Dear group members, I would appreciate if anyone can shed some light on the
following:

What would be the MINIMUM LEGAL Safety and EMC requirements (i.e. tests,
reports, certifications, labeling) in the following two scenarios?

1) A company designs printed circuit boards that are used by their 
customers
for evaluation. The evaluation boards have no enclosure, and are meant 
to be
powered by some sort of a DC power supply (not a part of the evaluation 
board).

2) “Reference designs” are built, which look more like the end-products 
that
potential customers may design. The reference designs have enclosures 
and power
supplies (AC/DC and/or DC/DC, bought from some of the power-supply
vendors/manufacturers). The idea is to let the customer more-less copy the
reference design if they wish so.


Both of these are:

a) Manufactured in very limited quantities, available just for evaluation.

b) May contain LAN and WAN interfaces of many different flavors, fiberoptic
transceivers (laser) and telco 48V (isolated) power.

c) Mainly used in the customers’ labs, but the reference designs may be 
also
temporarily deployed in a real-life environment for more testing (mostly 
not in
a central office though - which would be a different subject).

d) SOLD to the customers worldwide (but probably not “placed on the 
marked”, as
they are sold directly and in very limited quantities, not for any 
resale etc.).

Side-note - the customers usually open the reference designs (may 
contain AC
power !!) and leave them open.


Thank you very much, Neven



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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: CCC mark China

[David Heald]

Jan,
   I can answer the first part of your question.  In October 2002, I 
attended a presentation given by representatives of China's CNCA.  At 
that time, plans existed to eventually certify labs outside of China, 
but it was not expected to occur in the foreseeable future.  Note that 
this was an official government delegation so the answer was straight 
>from the horse's mouth.

Having said that, there are many agencies outside of China who will 
escort your product through the process (in China) and can apparently do 
so fairly quickly.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

PS - ADMIN NOTE - replies offering services of this nature should be 
sent to the intended recipient only and should not be copied to the list.





Jan Vercammen wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have some questions concerning the CCC mark in China with respect to EMC
> and radio
> spectrum matters.
> 
> -1- I receive contradicting information about EMC compliance in China. On
> one hand I have
> information which asserts that China recognizes EMC laboratories outside
> China. For Belgium these
> are CEBEC recognised laboratories. On the other hand I also have
> information that this is not correct
> and that products need to be retested by CCC recognised lab's, which are
> located in the
> Asian area (China region - I have a list of lab's). What is correct?
> 
> -2- I have checked  the CCC classification. It does not look complete
> (yet). It could be that our
> product does not fit the classification list (yet).
> 
> -3- We have a product tested according to IEC 60601-1-1 (safety)  and IEC
> 60601-1-2 (EMC).
>  Can anyone explain what one should do to obtain the CCC mark in simple
> terms.
> 
> -4- The product also includes a short range device (SRD) operating at
> 13.56MHz. It has been
> tested according to ETSI 300330 (radio parameters) and ETSI 301 489-3
> (radio EMC)  and FCC
> part 15. The same question as in -3-, what one should do to obtain the CCC
> mark. It does not
> get easier!
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Jan Vercammen
> Agfa-Gevaert NV, Belgium
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 



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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: IEC 61010 requirements

[David Heald]

   I think the spurious emissions would be a big problem.  You would be 
amazed at the levels of EMI emitted by phones when they are in certain 
modes.  While looking at some dual & tri-mode digital phones from 3 
different manufacturers (while placing digital calls in the 1800± MHz 
range?? or maybe the upper 800's range - I forget), I have seen 
emissions that were regularly 20-30+ dB above Class A from 40MHz all the 
way up to 1GHz (narrowband spurious, but distributed seemingly randomly 
all over the place).

These emissions were from the phone itself on a turntable - no cables, 
just the phone taped to a cardboard box.  Anecdotally, think of your PC 
speakers - I know a lot of people who know that a TDMA call is coming in 
when their speakers click.

I must admit I haven't looked, but maybe the mall stores sell sterile 
faceplates? :)

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

John Shinn wrote:
> If he had a LOW EMI Phone, how was he able to transmit out of the
> OR? It is not the incidental radiation that is the problem, it is the
> transmitter.  Also, how was he able to "answer" the phone and  maintain
> sterilization?
> 
> John Shinn
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of drcuthbert
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:32 PM
> To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: RE: IEC 61010 requirements
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe he had a special low EMI cell phone? But seriously, a useful product
> would be a "cell phone detector" with an audible alarm, or a silent alarm to
> alert security.
> 
> Dave Cuthbert
> -Original Message-
> From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 1:05 AM
> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: IEC 61010 requirements
> 
> 
> 
> I read in !emc-pstc that peter merguerian 
> wrote (in <20030221231714.74613.qm...@web14806.mail.yahoo.com>) about
> 'IEC 61010 requirements' on Fri, 21 Feb 2003:
> 
>>   The other day, I called a surgeon and he happened to be in the
>>   operating room with his cellphone performing an operation. Does
>>   that make his cellular comply with IEC 601-1?
> 
> 
> Maybe not, but there are VERY serious EMC issues. No cell-phone should
> be switched on in an OR.
> --
> Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
> Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
> http://www.isce.org.uk
> PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.iee

Re: best screw/washer choices for attaching PCB to Chassis?

[David Heald]

Kim,
   Here's how I would do it.  Note that I'm assuming that we're dealing 
with SELV circuits here and your concern is SI/EMC on circuit packs for 
a shelf system.  Safety grounding is another issue entirely.

First screws:
   I'd use split washers with flat beneath (if lock washers at all) to 
protect your surface.  Screw/washer materials selection should be 
anti-corrosive and compatible with the surface finish of your PCB. 
Loctite or equivalent should be available applied to the screw tips from 
the screw supplier - this will ensure you don't get loctite on any of 
your contact surfaces.

Now the hard to explain part - pads

I would recommend flexibility on the pad end.  In my earlier days at a 
test lab, I saw way too many products fail when either *all of the 
standoffs* or *one/none/few of the standoffs* (take your pick) were 
connected to digital ground.  When we cut traces/removed mounting 
screws/made ground connections to nearby caps/etc..., the EMC problems 
would often go away.  BUT then a respin was in order - and then 
manufacturing test - and then DVT - and then a compliance retest - and 
what if it made something else worse?  At any rate, you're a month off 
schedule (minimum).

Instead I would recommend surface layer pads and unplated holes for your 
standoffs with one or more DNI (or installed if that's your thing) 
components bridging the pads to digital ground.  Pad size should be 
slightly larger than the mating surface diameter.  This is a common 
practice these days in the telecom arena and will allow flexibility 
without respinning your board.  If a problem is found in the lab that 
can be attributed to a grounding issue, it is simple to change the 
population of the DNI components to achieve a passing result that also 
has acceptable signal integrity (hopefully you're using differential 
signalling anyway for anything really fast).  The best part about this 
method is that it is easy to convince your designers (who will 
undoubtedly be devoted to a certain grounding practice) to take this 
approach since the default population can reflect their current 
grounding ideology.

For implementation of the above, I would stick with fairly wide SMT 
resistors - I found that 1812 zero ohm resistors and low value 
capacitors (220-2000pF range) are readily available.  Remember to use 
VERY SHORT and relatively wide (3W rule) traces on the pad/component 
trace.  For the digital ground end of the component, I would have more 
than one via (to dgnd) attached to the pad to minimize inductance to ground.

Get creative to address card insertion ESD drain.

And here is what it all comes down to:  The worst thing that could 
happen is that manufacturing would have to change the component 
population for new production and retrofit the existing products.  This 
gets particularly rewarding when a whole bunch of product is already 
made and you can just change components instead of scrapping the whole 
lot.  (OK, it's not the worst thing)

I think I explained this clearly (?)  If you have questions, feel free 
to ask.  Keep in mind this is just my view on a topic where opinions and 
practices vary wildly (and are often accompanied by good results from 
all sides)

Best Regards,
Dave Heald
(currently an unemployed victim of the telecom market but looking)



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

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

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

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

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

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

Apology to Agilent Technologies and Hewlett-Packard

[David Heald]

To:  Agilent Technologies and Hewlett-Packard:


  The administrators of the IEEE emc-pstc listserver
  apologize to Agilent Technologies and Hewlett-Packard
  for the derogatory remarks recently posted to this
  listserver.

  We take every effort to maintain a high level of
  professionalism in postings.  Because of our high-
  level expectations, we do not moderate the postings.
  Occasionally, some inappropriate content is posted,
  and we immediately notify our subscribers and seek
  to quench any further inappropriate content.

  We did notify our subscribers.  Unfortunately, a
  number of inappropriate remarks were posted before
  our notice was fully distributed.

  On this occasion, as in other similar occastions,
  some of our subscribers send us private responses
  supporting our action.  While we wish these actions
  were not necessary, we do find that these actions
  generally help to improve the level of professionalism.

  We believe the remarks were personal opinions and
  did not represent employers' views.

  We will amend our rules, sent to each new subscriber,
  to clarify that such remarks are out of order.

  If any subscriber wishes to discuss this matter
  further, please do so via private e-mail to the
  administrators.


  On behalf of all administrators,
  Dave Heald
  co-Administrator, IEEE emc-pstc listserver



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

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

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

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

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

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

Admin Comment: Agilent 8482 Thread

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
   Rich, Jim, Ron and I ask that this thread be closed.  We do not feel 
that this forum is the place for your complaints to be voiced as this is 
technically off-topic and appears as noise to many of the subscribers. 
   Also, bashing a company is really no different than bashing an 
individual insofar as the listserver is concerned.  If individuals wish 
to continue this commiseration, we ask that it be done off-list.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin



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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: Labelling requirements components

[David Heald]

Andre,
   I think that in section 1.7.12 (the section you referenced in the 
60950 family) there is also a provision that for service personnel, the 
language on safety related info can be English. (except in Germany, 
where it must also be in German).  I would take this to mean that 
component safety information can be in a different language (English or 
German) than would normally be present on the outside of the product. 
This seems to follow common sense as well (not that that gets you very 
far when evaluating to safety standards :).

Also look in 1.7.14 to see if this applies in your case.  (Replacement 
of the differently labeled/sourced/revision component can't cause the 
removal or alteration of product level safety labeling.)

I'd check this to make sure that what I remember is up to date but I 
don't think you need to worry about the labeling language on the 
component (so long as it is approved for its end use and you meet 1.7.14).

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

Andre Boons wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> If a manufacturer is required to put information on the label of his 
> product, it must be in a language that is acceptable for the user in the 
> country where the product is put on the market.
> 
> If the above product consists of a certain part that can be replaced 
> during service operations locally and there are special precautions to 
> be taken care of when replacements takes place, should the label on that 
> part also be in the language of the country where the final product is 
> marketed.
> An example could be a CRT of a VDU that needs replacement by exactly the 
> same type.
> 
> Regards,
> Andre
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
> majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
> unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
> Dave Heald:   davehe...@attbi.com
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
> Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line.
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
>http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> 



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

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

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

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

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

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

Admin Comment - Virus discussions

[David Heald]

All,
  Please remember that postings about viruses (no matter how well meaning -
and even about those that appear on the listserver) are strongly discouraged
on this forum.  Such postings add to the noise on the forum and can greatly
slow email access times for those with dial-up connections.  

Please reference the last section of paragraph 5 in the Charter and
Guidelines that was sent to every one of you when you joined the list.  If
you do not still have this message, the guidelines can be obtained by
sending a message to majord...@majordomo.ieee.org with no subject and the
two folloing lines in the body of the message

info emc-pstc
end

If you have virus concerns that directly effect the list, please address
them to the list admins directly.  (our email addresses are at the bottom of
every post).

Best Regards,
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Laser safety questions

[David Heald]

Well, 
  In response to question 1, you may want to try for Class 1M.  The new
measurement geometries allow many class 3B lasers to be reclassified as 1M.
I would assume (although I have no direct experience here) that the visible
spectrum lasers would also benefit from the new geometries (BTW, the Class
1M spectrum is 302.5 to 4000nm).  Wouldn't it be wonderful to have all Class
1(M) lasers?!!

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: Gandler, Mark [mailto:mgand...@ciena.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 1:47 PM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: Laser safety questions



Hello Group,

 According to the new revision of IEC 60825-1 (2001-08) , there are 
following laser products classes: 1, 1M, 2, 2M , 3R , 3B and 4, instead of
1, 2 , 3A, 3B and 4 per previous revision.

Question # 1 : should we change the labeling, let's say from 3A to 3R? Is it
any timetable for implementation?

The latest revision that I have for IEC 60825-2 is 2000-05 and
classification there still 1,2,3A ,k 3A, 3B and 4.

Question # 2 : is it any newer version of 60825-2 available? and if yes,
what are the classes in it?

Is it correct to assume that if somebody asking for laser power density , so
I need to look for maximum permissible exposure (MPE)?

If not , what it could be? 

If yes, what is the easiest (or only) way to calculate it? 
Let say the wavelength is 1550 nm, located on PCB , than after 10 mm or so
is a connector, exposure is 100s. Any ideas?

The MPE in the IEC table is 1000W/m2.

Thank you in advance, 

Mark Gandler
Ciena


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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Circuit pack ESD drain

[David Heald]

Cool.  Ok, say about 14x14 inches square planar.  And I should mention that
the intended dissipation point would be on initial insertion and would be
through a 10Mohm resistor or so.  The pin is the last resort just in case
the other drain methods don't work due to some strange proliferation of an
insulative coating :).  

Thanks again,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: Pommerenke, David [mailto:davi...@umr.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:50 PM
To: David Heald; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Circuit pack ESD drain


Dave,

If you can give me the dimensions we can numerically calculate or
analytically estimate the waveform.

David Pommerenke


-Original Message-
From: David Heald [mailto:dhe...@tellium.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 4:58 PM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: Circuit pack ESD drain


All,
  Does anyone know of a sample waveform or general characteristics for
worst
case V&I on an ESD drain pin when a circuit pack is inserted into an
equipment shelf?  This is an odd question I know, but my management
asked
for the info and I really have no idea (and it "shouldn't" happen anyway
;o)

I guess even a typical maximum charge that can be expected to be on a
circuit pack would be sufficient information.

Thanks in advance!

Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Circuit pack ESD drain

[David Heald]

All,
  Does anyone know of a sample waveform or general characteristics for worst
case V&I on an ESD drain pin when a circuit pack is inserted into an
equipment shelf?  This is an odd question I know, but my management asked
for the info and I really have no idea (and it "shouldn't" happen anyway ;o)

I guess even a typical maximum charge that can be expected to be on a
circuit pack would be sufficient information.

Thanks in advance!

Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: EN61000-3-3 & -3-11 off topic a bit!

[David Heald]

But when was the last time you saw a plug rated (just a random example) 250V
3(phase)Y 75A when it means 25A per phase?  the 75A rating is definately
'per phase'.

-Original Message-
From: Spencer, David H [mailto:david.spen...@usa.xerox.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 8:16 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: EN61000-3-3 & -3-11 off topic a bit!



I've just looked at all the draft copies of this standard(that I have), and
the older version TR IEC 1000-3-5.  Still only says 75amps.  Again no "per
phase".

I would have to say if TC77A wanted it to say "<75A per phase", it would be
in there.


Regards
Dave Spencer



-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 3:07 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: EN61000-3-3 & -3-11 off topic a bit!



I read in !emc-pstc that Spencer, David H 
wrote (in <052106A55179D611B34300096BB02E3F8B93@USAMCMS4>) about
'EN61000-3-3 & -3-11  off topic a bit!' on Wed, 30 Oct 2002:
>Having looked into EN61000-3-11, there is a big difference from
EN61000-3-3.
>The scope of 3-3 refers to products rated 16 amps or less  "per phase".
>There is no per phase specification in EN61000-3-11.  Only this in the
>title:  equipment with rated current <75 A.  Further, the scope does not
>specify that as a per phase rating.
>
>I would say that the standard does not apply to any product with a total
>rating >75A.  That would allow 3 phase products rated greater than 25A per
>phase to fall outside the scope of EN61000-3-11!  

That certainly needs to be clarified. I'll set the wheels in motion
immediately. It SHOULD say 'per phase'.
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk

Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to 
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: China Switch Approval

[David Heald]

John,
  I recently attended a workshop with CNCA delegates and found out that
central office equipment is exempt from the CCC.  However, central office
equipment is still required to obtain a Network Access License from the MII
(Ministry of Information Industry) which includes Safety, EMC, and
Interoperability tests.  

For everyone else (non CO equipment makers), the CCC mark is targeted at
consumer products or products that normal people could have contact with.
MII approval is only (I think?) required for equipment that performs
telecommunications functions, and if you have an end-user telecommunications
product, you could end up being required to meet both the CCC and MII
requirements.  The good news is that any tests that are required for both
the CCC and the MII must only be performed once - not multiple times like in
the old system.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: John Smith [mailto:regulatoryrequireme...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:28 AM
To: PSTC
Subject: China Switch Approval



I am new to the group. 

I am consulting with a company that is making a CO
switch. They are planning to market the product in
China. As I understand the process, I have to get MII
and CNCA approvals. Is there anything else that I need
to do for China?

About how long does it take to get these approvals?

Thank You,
J. Smith


=
Best Regards,
John Smith
Regulatory Consulting

__
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: NEBS questions

[David Heald]

Rich,
  I believe that the reason CO's are exempted from many of the building
codes is the amount of work we put in to ensure that the products are safe
and reliable.  The sprinkler exemption comes from the fire spread
requirement in GR-63.  Basically, if the fire has been demonstrated to be
completely contained by the individual systems, there is no need for
building fire protection devices.  The use of 48V systems has the benefit of
being SELV (in addition to the ability to have battery backups), so licensed
electricians are not required (or something to that extent).  And so on and
so forth...  

It basically all stems from the fact that the NEBS requirements greatly
exceed normal building and safety requirements - thus allowing the
exemptions from many building codes.

Regards,
Dave Heald


-Original Message-
From: richard.pa...@exgate.tek.com [mailto:richard.pa...@exgate.tek.com]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:29 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: NEBS questions



Hello Group:

I am glad to see the recent NEBS related discussions. I find them
interesting and relevant. So while I am thinking about NEBS, I thought I'd
ask a couple of questions.

I would like to understand more clearly the relationship between Central
Offices and local building codes.

I understand that the NEC basically exempts CO's.  And that would mean that
any local AHJ adopting the NEC unchanged would have the same exemption.

But I am wondering how the CO's themselves view the local building codes.
Maybe they just ignore them, but perhaps they voluntarily try to meet them ?
Of course there's a lot of the actual requirements that are covered by the
NEBS requirements, but it would seem like some things (mains service
entrance ?) may not be covered.

Also, where exactly is the line that divides the exempt CO area from where
the local codes are applicable ?


As I think about it now, I don't recall the specific wording of the NEC's
exemption, but It would seem that it would include any requirement for using
"Listed" equipment or components.  Although GR1089 does seem to require
Listing for AC mains connected equipment, do some companies require Listing
for equipment connected to the CO DC supply ?

The benefit of your experience and thoughtful comments will be appreciated.

Thanks

Richard Payne
Tektronix, Inc.
Product Safety Engineering
Tel:  503 627-1820
Fax: 503 627-3838
email:  richard.pa...@tektronix.com 





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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: 48/60 Vdc Centralized Office Equipment

[David Heald]

Peter,
  As someone who rates their products the same (well, without the
label/manual discrepancy), I can say with confidence that the product is
TNV-2 due to input supply deviations (60V ± a few).  This isn't really as
bad as it sounds, though, as the only real issue you will have is
maintaining 1mm spacing around the TNV-2 circuits.   Bridging components
must also be of sufficient (Basic, I think, but I didn't check just now)
insulation ratings, but even if they fail, the only requirement is that no
more than TNV-2 voltages be present on secondary circuits or ground.  

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il]
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 11:22 AM
To: "EMC-PSTC (E-mail)" <
Subject: 48/60 Vdc Centralized Office Equipment



Dear All,

I have a client who insists on a 48/60 Vdc (slash) rating and wishes to
consider the input to be SELV. He states in the manual the operating voltage
tolerance 36-60 Vdc.

In this case that the manufacturer specifies the tolerance in their manual,
will the CO operators consider the 48/60 Vdc rating a SELV input; or a TNV-2
input because the float voltages on the nominal 60 Vdc supply can reach 72
Vdc - ie disregarding the specs in the manual?


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.






PETER S. MERGUERIAN
Technical Director
I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd.
26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211
Or Yehuda 60251, Israel
Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022  Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019
Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175
http://www.itl.co.il
http://www.i-spec.com





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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

grounding schemes & EMI

[David Heald]

All,
  I'm trying to convince a few people here that completely separating the
digital and chassis grounding on our product is not always the best way to
go.  Unfortunately, a lot of the people I'm dealing with are ex Bellcore
engineers who worked a lot with isolated grounds and are convinced that
isolated grounds are the only way to go.  Now we're dealing with optical
interfaces and speeds well in excess of 100MHz, so I really want to see the
grounds tied together as much as possible.  

While I know that combining the digital and chassis grounds is for the most
part better once you get above a few hundred MHz, putting together concrete
arguments is proving to be a bit elusive.  I luckily have some high level
backing that will let me push my views, but I am one person up against a
team of industry vets.

If anyone has been in this boat before and won, could you share some of the
tactics or arguments that you used?  I know this issue has been discussed in
the past, but a fresh discussion of the relative benefits of isolating the D
and Cgnds would probably be beneficial to the group as well.  See below for
my views on the issue.

Thanks
Dave


My views for telecom equipment with a backplane and plug in circuit packs
(and a good tight chassis around it all):
(Note that Analog grounds are outside of the scope of this statement - I'm
focusing on Digital grounds and Chassis ground)
The benefits of separating Dgnd and Cgnd have to do with defining your
signal impedances and SI in general.  When you place this system inside a
Cgnd "balloon", all should be well but maybe there is some extra noise due
to RF being trapped within the balloon.

However, if the Cgnd and Dgnd are tied together throughout the system, the
effect should be similar to "heat shrinking" your conductive chassis Cgnd
ballon onto your Dgnd.  The single ended signal return currents should still
follow their original paths and things should essentially remain unchanged.
I could see some possibility (I'll avoid use of the word potential here :o)
) for RF currents on the circuit pack card grounds due to RF fields
contained within the faraday cage, but I think these could be mitigated by
clever bonding of the grounds on circuit packs.  I think that isolating the
faceplate from the Dgnd on the circuit packs but stitching the bottom edge
(faceplate to backplane) Cgnd ESD guard band to Dgnd could alleviate stray
currents on the cards and keep them relatively clean - all while still
maintaining the bonding of the Cgnd and Dgnd on a system level.  The idea
(as my brain developed it) is to keep the stray currents at the periphery of
the card by limiting the through connections on the circuit packs and
forcing stray currents to flow near the edge of the card.  The backplane
should for the most part have Dgnd and Cgnd be one and the same.

Does this raise any red flags for anyone?  I'm expecting at least a few, but
this is the best scheme that I can come up with right now.

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Central Office Wiring - Conducted Emissions

[David Heald]

Dude,

The CO will wire your power inputs with two separate power pairs feeding
from two different sources.  This way, if there is some fault in the
'primary' centralized distributed DC source, the redundant source can take
over without the product losing power.

I think the test method depends on how your product chooses which feed to
draw from.  

If your product diode-OR's the inputs, only the feed with the higher voltage
will actually power the entire product.  If this is the case, I would
recommend using two supplies and differing the voltages on your supplies so
that one supply is a few volts higher than the other.  Take your readings on
both the higher voltage (loaded) feed as well as the lower voltage
(unloaded) feed.  Just be certain to recheck your voltages at the input to
your product to make sure that there is still a few volts of difference
between the feeds after the inductors are placed in front of the loaded
LISNs (assuming this is the test you're doing).

OK, now that I think about it - this method should work well for just about
any redundant power scheme.

Quiet DC supplies are also enormously important if filters are not present
on the output of the secondary DC source.  You don't need a lot of ampacity
on the secondary supply if you set up the voltages correctly.  (CS linears
run at 52± when unloaded)

Dave


-Original Message-
From: Plante, Dereck Raymond (Dereck) [mailto:drpla...@lucent.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 1:23 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Central Office Wiring - Conducted Emissions




Does a CO wire up to a redundant cabinet with 2 wires, so jumpered at the
cabinet, or 4 wires (any theory on percentages)??? And if it is 4 wires, do
the two Feeds go to two completely seperate sources, or are they jumpered
sources (so in parallel)?  

How do people typically test there cabinet for Conducted Emissions???  We
were testing with the 
cabinet jumpered and going throught the LISNs to one Source.  We had a
passing system with mods, and so we tried to only connect the LISN to one
feed and power the other feed with a seperate DC source,
then we got failing results with or without mods.  Interesting.  We are
thinking we are getting some crazy current loops. 

Does anyone have an opinion as to their best recommended test setup for
conducted emissions that will best represent the true wiring in a central
office?   
 
We are thinking, but have not yet tried, to test 4 wires coming out of the
cabinet, going through 4 different LISNs and then going to one DC power
source.  Any comments??? 



Dereck R. Plante
Compliance Engineer
Lucent Technologies
Switching Solutions Group, OPENet Solutions
255 Independence Drive
Hyannis, MA 02601-1854
(508) 862-3302




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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: DSL Modems

[David Heald]

I remember working on such a filter a few years ago and from what I remember
there were no isolation type components - it was more of a high pass/low
pass filter rather than an isolation type device.  This is just my memory
though, so I could be wrong.  

If you think about it though, there is really not much need for an isolation
type device within such a filter (& it would add cost) ...and the loss from
an isolation component would further effect the already critical distance
requirements for DSL, so I doubt that these filters would have an isolation
component. 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Roman, Dan [mailto:dan.ro...@intel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 8:56 AM
To: 'Peter Merguerian'; 'Rob Keller'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: DSL Modems



All,

When Verizon installed my ADSL service a couple years back they put in what
they called a whole house filter, but it is actually a splitter/filter.  I
don't recall any Listing marks of any kind on the device.  It was installed
on the network side of the gray box on the side of my house, not on the
customer premise side so Listing may not apply.  I took the device with me
when I moved but DSL was not available in my new location.  It is potted so
I have no hope of determining the construction, guess I could apply ring
voltage to it in the lab and hi-pot it and see what happens!  I suspect
though that it is TNV-3 in and TNV-3 out.

Shortly after my DSL was installed (I was one of the first in my area) they
stopped installing the whole house splitter and required the user to put a
filter on every phone (yuk) except for the DSL modem.  So even if splitters
are available that do a TNV-3 to TNV-1 or even TNV-3 to SELV connection, at
least in the Verizon NJ customer area DSL modems are TNV-3 all the time.

Dan

-Original Message-
From: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguer...@itl.co.il]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 9:24 AM
To: 'Rob Keller'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: DSL Modems



Rob Hi!

I assume that the "ADSL" modem is connected to the phone line through an
external splitter. If you find an approved splitter having the required
TNV-3 to TNV-1 insulation, and you specify the specific splitter in your
manual, I gather that your interface can be TNV-1. If no such splitter is
specified, then the interface should be classified TNV-3.

Now a question to the group - is anyone familiar with external
Listed/Certified splitters that have the TNV-3 - TNV-1 insulation? 


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.




PETER S. MERGUERIAN
Technical Director
I.T.L. (Product Testing) Ltd.
26 Hacharoshet St., POB 211
Or Yehuda 60251, Israel
Tel: + 972-(0)3-5339022  Fax: + 972-(0)3-5339019
Mobile: + 972-(0)54-838175
http://www.itl.co.il
http://www.i-spec.com





-Original Message-
From: Rob Keller [mailto:r...@cclab.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:38 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: DSL Modems



Greetings all,

Question regarding the classification of DSL modems.  DSL modems connect
to the standard telecom network yet they do not require a ring signal or
go on/off hook,  therefore the classification would be TNV-1. Yet there
are ring signals still present on the telecom lines for the the other
equipment.  So, because of the ring signals, which would exceed the
limits of SELV,  connecting to the input the modem, should the
classification be TNV-3.  Any insight would be greatly appreciated.


Rob Keller
Product Safety Engineer
Communication Certification Laboratory
r...@cclab.com


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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

---
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

RE: NEBS - Bonding and Grounding

[David Heald]

Dan,
  Read on below R9-20 and the requirement is clarified significantly.  The
requirements are DEFINITELY applicable to the outputs of your DC/DC
converters (a.k.a. "embedded DC power supplies"):

If your 48V feeds into a power supply circuit pack/module which then
supplies the 3.3, 5, 12, etc... V to the other circuit packs, you must first
short the outputs of each individual DC/DC converter (within the common
power circuit pack/module) and then (provided you have a passing result from
the first test) place shorts on each type of circuit pack that is powered
from the common power supply circuit pack/module.  (Think of a Compact PCI
chassis for an example of this scenario).  You must perform the test on each
output.  

If you have your DC/DC converters on each individual circuit pack (most
complex telecom type boxes), You must first directly short the outputs of
each DC/DC Converter and then move the shorts out to a remote location on
the board (Replace a power cap with a short in somewhere on the far corner
of the board).  This must be done for every type of and each output on the
DC/DC modules.

Also, if you have DC/DC's of greater than 150W, the outputs are required to
be referenced to chassis (R9-9), so you will also need to short the
non-referenced side of the outputs to chassis.  This test checks the bonding
path to ensure that it is sufficient to carry any resulting fault current.
The reference path must not be damaged.

It should be noted that (contrary to R9-20) many RBOCs do allow damage
(damage free is effectively an 'Objective').  They have applied the "fire,
fragmentation, or electrical safety hazard" performance criteria to the
short circuit test.  The product does not necessarily have to function after
the test, it just can't catch the cheesecloth on fire or smoke too much
(although I've never actually seen a product catch fire, so I haven't looked
into this last cheesecloth/smoke bit too much).

I hope this helps,
Dave Heald


-Original Message-
From: Roman, Dan [mailto:dan.ro...@intel.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 8:24 AM
To: EMC-pstc List
Subject: NEBS - Bonding and Grounding



NEBS Gurus,

Do the 1089 bonding and grounding DC short circuit tests apply down to the
component level in a system or are they limited to the power supply or some
other demarcation point?  If it applies anywhere in the system it seems to
me that you'd never finish testing.  You'd have to test the power supply,
backplane, mother board, daughter cards, IC dies...sort of like doing the UL
15W test for home entertainment equipment.

Reading through section 9 and specifically 9.8 it seems they are keying on
the power supplied directly from the CBN and not that power indirectly
derived from the CBN after DC to DC converters.  Where is the demarcation
point if there is one?  Do labs that test to NEBS handle this consistently?

Thanks in advance.

Dan Roman
Compliance Engineer
Intel

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Adding A/C Power to DC Telecom Gear

[David Heald]

But they do ask for an AC convenience outlet location in the bottom of every
rack (granted I've never actually seen a CO installation so I don't know if
they actually install the AC convenience outlets).

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond
To: christine...@aol.com; ieee pstc list
Sent: 9/10/02 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: Adding A/C Power to DC Telecom Gear


Chris,

You SURE you want to do this? I believe CO's strictly isolate AC powered
gear. They have this "thing" about AC hum, you know...


Cortland

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

WEEE directive and halogen (PVC) wire insulation

[David Heald]

Folks,
  I've been searching all afternoon for recent news on halogen flame
retardent regulation in the EU.  I'm beginning to think that other than
brominated flame retardents, there really is not much current concern and
the risks involved with accelerated fire spread (over that with halogenated
flame retardents) outweigh the environmental concerns from chemical release
during burning or recycling.  (I'm trying to make a decision on wire
insulation specificaitons)

Does anyone know where the WEEE and/or EEE is headed in this regard?  The
last official info I could find was April 2000.

Thanks,
Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

IEC 60068-2-30 Condensation cycle time

[David Heald]

Greetings all,

Does anyone know the time length of the condensation cycles in IEC
60068-2-30 (EN 300 019 states that the condensation test lasts 2 cycles and
references 60068-2-30 as the test method).  

Thanks in advance!

Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Halogen free cables for the EU

[David Heald]

Does anyone know where the halogen restrictions for wire insulation in the
EU come from?  I remember dealing with this issue sometime in the last few
years, but now I can't remember where the actual requirement came from.
Also, does anyone know if the Halogen restrictions only apply to, say, power
wiring - with low voltage intrasystem wiring exempt?  

Thanks,
Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Are There Any Standards that Apply to Digital Cameras

[David Heald]

The 'standard' standards - UL 1950 (60950) and the harmonized 60950
EU/global standards.  It probably has batteries, maybe a high voltage
backlight converter and some other components that would make an
investigation mandatory.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 8:17 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Are There Any Standards that Apply to Digital Cameras





Everyone,

Does anyone know of any product safety standards that apply to digital
cameras?
The simple, personal, "AA" battery powered type of digital cameras.

Thank you.

Oscar Overton
Ph: 859-232-2284





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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Thermal breakers vs magnetic breakers for telecom

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
  In the spirit of the continual quest for cost reduction, I have been asked
to look into the use of thermal circuit breakers instead of magnetic ones.
It seems like we rejected thermal breakers before for some reason, but now
no one can remember why.  

Does anyone know of any telecom (or general) reasons why thermal circuit
breakers may be unacceptable for telecom products?

Thanks and Best Regards,
Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: China approvals - CCC

[David Heald]

After looking through the "Circular Relevant to the Implementation of the
Compulsory Product Certification System", I found the following in section
2.5:

Starting from May 1, 2002, with regard to products for which the Old
Certificate and the Old Mark was compulsory but no longer covered by the
Catalogue this time, the Old Certificate and the Old Mark will not be
required when they are marketed or imported.

So this says that the old mark no longer needs to be applied to products not
covered in the Catalogue.  By extension, it sounds as if we could argue that
this indicates that the new CCC mark doesn't apply either.(?)

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: am...@westin-emission.no [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 4:39 AM
To: Emc-Pstc Group (E-mail)
Subject: China approvals - CCC



Hi all,

Rules and Procedures for Compulsory Product Certification were implemented
on May 1, 2002. The certification mark is referred to as "China Compulsory
Certification (CCC)". The first Catalogue of Products Subject to Compulsory
Certification is now released.

Question:
If my product is not listed in the catalogue, does it mean what I do not
have to document compliance to the EMC or electrical safety requirements ?
no need for Chinese certification ?

I have be told so via "competent" sources. I would like to check the
discussion form for other views.

Best regards
Amund Westin, Oslo/Norway



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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil

[David Heald]

(Going theoretical here - and off the top of my head at that so please don't
just accept this argument.  Corrections would be appreciated if applicable)

I am unsure if the critical property is the reflective surface or the
conductive properties (to prevent part of the field from making it "through"
the ground plane).  Think of the latter as the surface of the earth trying
to function as a faraday cage.  If there is a nonconductive or
semi-conductive section around the OATS ground plane (dry sand?), part of
the energy from waves that hit the ground plane may be able to make it
through (around?) the ground plane to the other side.  This energy will
certainly be attenuated rapidly by the soil under the ground plane, but some
of the energy is nontheless lost from the point of view of the 'system'
above the ground plane.

On the other hand with moist soil and/or ground plane extension well into
the soil, the conductive properties of the earth around the OATS ground
plane will serve more effectively as an extension of that ground plane
(enormous Faraday cage or infinite ground plane effect) and reduce the
chances of the 'lost' energy from above'.  So from that point of view the
lake-OATS is ideal if the water level stays fairly constant and the ground
plane dips into the water all the way around the periphery.  

Plus, testing on a lake  sounds good to me!  Do they have a driving
range too?  :-)

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: michael.sundst...@nokia.com [mailto:michael.sundst...@nokia.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 3:31 PM
To: dhe...@tellium.com; emc-p...@ieee.org; richwo...@tycoint.com
Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil


I have heard of an OATS built over a fresh water ground plane, ( a pond /
lake?). I imagine a slight breeze would upset the characteristics of the
site?

Michael Sundstrom
 NOKIA 
  TCC Dallas / EMC
   ofc: (972) 374-1462
cell: (817) 917-5021
 amateur call: KB5UKT


-----Original Message-
From: ext David Heald [mailto:dhe...@tellium.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:50 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org; 'richwo...@tycoint.com'
Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil



I can't offer quantitative experience, but I can offer some theory that has
always made sense to me (and my results were usually quite repeatable at my
last job where we employed these practices):
While the measurement site itself probably has a defined ground plane for at
least most of the ellipse, the surrounding earth also plays an important
factor.  For the best repeatability, an effective infinite ground plane is
desirable.  I remember we 'extended' our ground planes out and down into the
ground around the sites.  Due to our location over a town aquifer and the
high water table (annoyingly high at times!), the effect was a good
approximation of an infinite ground plane with very little fluctuation over
time.

I could theorize that in Florida with sandy soil that would drain water/dry
out more quickly, there would be more uncertainty due to the infinite ground
plane property variations (does that phrase make sense?:).  When it rained,
the top surface would be a 'better' ground plane approximation and your site
characteristics would change.  When the top foot or so of sand dried out, it
would cease to be a good infinite ground plane (- or at least change to a
lossy one) and your site characteristics would change again.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 8:11 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS 



We have noticed a change in our OATS characteristics depending upon the
dampness of the area. It is especially noticeable this time of year when we
get a lot of rain in Florida. Does anyone else experience this phenomena?

More to your question Mat, the major contributors to the measurement
uncertainty would be the repeatability of the setup of the EUT and test
equipment (e.g., distance from EUT to antenna) and the stability/drift of
the EUT and test equipment. Half of these parameters are human based (setup)
and should vary less if the same person performs all of the tests. I have
not seen a paper on this subject. Unually these variations are lighly
covered in texts on measurement uncertainty.


Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International


-Original Message-
From: Aschenberg, Mat [mailto:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com]
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 10:49 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Measurement Consistency of OATS 



Hello,  
Have any of you seen a paper written on the measurement consistency of an
OATS?
If I were to have a product repeatedly measured at an OATS, how close should
I expect the measurements to be? 
For sake of this example, there are no cables. All measurements are
perfo

RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS / soil

[David Heald]

I can't offer quantitative experience, but I can offer some theory that has
always made sense to me (and my results were usually quite repeatable at my
last job where we employed these practices):
While the measurement site itself probably has a defined ground plane for at
least most of the ellipse, the surrounding earth also plays an important
factor.  For the best repeatability, an effective infinite ground plane is
desirable.  I remember we 'extended' our ground planes out and down into the
ground around the sites.  Due to our location over a town aquifer and the
high water table (annoyingly high at times!), the effect was a good
approximation of an infinite ground plane with very little fluctuation over
time.

I could theorize that in Florida with sandy soil that would drain water/dry
out more quickly, there would be more uncertainty due to the infinite ground
plane property variations (does that phrase make sense?:).  When it rained,
the top surface would be a 'better' ground plane approximation and your site
characteristics would change.  When the top foot or so of sand dried out, it
would cease to be a good infinite ground plane (- or at least change to a
lossy one) and your site characteristics would change again.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

-Original Message-
From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 8:11 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Measurement Consistency of OATS 



We have noticed a change in our OATS characteristics depending upon the
dampness of the area. It is especially noticeable this time of year when we
get a lot of rain in Florida. Does anyone else experience this phenomena?

More to your question Mat, the major contributors to the measurement
uncertainty would be the repeatability of the setup of the EUT and test
equipment (e.g., distance from EUT to antenna) and the stability/drift of
the EUT and test equipment. Half of these parameters are human based (setup)
and should vary less if the same person performs all of the tests. I have
not seen a paper on this subject. Unually these variations are lighly
covered in texts on measurement uncertainty.


Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International


-Original Message-
From: Aschenberg, Mat [mailto:matt.aschenb...@echostar.com]
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 10:49 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Measurement Consistency of OATS 



Hello,  
Have any of you seen a paper written on the measurement consistency of an
OATS?
If I were to have a product repeatedly measured at an OATS, how close should
I expect the measurements to be? 
For sake of this example, there are no cables. All measurements are
performed at the same OATS. The EUT is assumed not to change between tests.

Mat









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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: Pencil erasers for pre-EMI cleaning?

[David Heald]

Thanks everyone for your input.  And let me put everyone's fears at ease
by saying that this particular sample has been thoroughly abused in
environmental testing (including several unintentional & unfortunate
CONDENSING temp & humidity runs - ever look into a chamber and see what
looks like your product sitting in a cloud? Not fun).  Months and tests
later, the dirt or grime is easily visible on a lot of the mating
surfaces and is not at all present on new samples.  Unfortunately, an
entire new sample costs over $1M, so let's just say I'm not getting a
new one.
  And for the steel / Al concerns, the different metals are in different
sections so mating is not an issue, just the risk of corrosion if I
remove the protective coatings.

  So, I am simply trying to restore the sample to its original condition
(or as close as I can get to it).  I would never advocate sprucing up a
test sample just to pass a test.

  And it turns out we use nickel plate which should be quite durable. 
Again, any comments from experience would be welcome, but my guys say
that I shouldn't have problems.

Thanks again!
Dave Heald



David Heald wrote:
> 
> All,
>   I'm preparing for an emissions test and I had started cleaning some of
> my chassis mating surfaces with a pen/pencil eraser then alcohol to
> ensure the surface to surface contact was good.  A friend then told me
> that using an eraser would also remove the anti-corrosive coating that
> was on the metal (Thanks Paul!).  So I would end up with a very short
> term benefit, then rust.  What I am trying to determine is if maybe
> light rubbing with a pencil eraser might only remove surface
> contaminants and leave the metal and coatings intact. (the pencil eraser
> is much less abrasive than the pen side)
> 
> So the real question is... Does anyone have direct good or bad
> experience with the aftereffects of using a pencil eraser to clean
> mating edges (card faceplates in a telco box for example)?  I have both
> steel and aluminum surfaces to worry about so info for either type is
> welcome.  (and don't worry the different metal types are not adjacent).
> 
> Any feedback would be greatly appreciated as the system is really dirty
> right now.
> 
> Thanks and Best Regards,
> Dave Heald
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Ron Pickard:  emc-p...@hypercom.com
>  Dave Heald:   davehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
> Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Pencil erasers for pre-EMI cleaning?

[David Heald]

All,
  I'm preparing for an emissions test and I had started cleaning some of
my chassis mating surfaces with a pen/pencil eraser then alcohol to
ensure the surface to surface contact was good.  A friend then told me
that using an eraser would also remove the anti-corrosive coating that
was on the metal (Thanks Paul!).  So I would end up with a very short
term benefit, then rust.  What I am trying to determine is if maybe
light rubbing with a pencil eraser might only remove surface
contaminants and leave the metal and coatings intact. (the pencil eraser
is much less abrasive than the pen side)

So the real question is... Does anyone have direct good or bad
experience with the aftereffects of using a pencil eraser to clean
mating edges (card faceplates in a telco box for example)?  I have both
steel and aluminum surfaces to worry about so info for either type is
welcome.  (and don't worry the different metal types are not adjacent).

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated as the system is really dirty
right now.

Thanks and Best Regards,
Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

[Fwd: Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting on Wednesday, February 27]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Matt Campanella

 Original Message 
Subject: Northeast Product Safety Society Meeting on Wednesday, February
27
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 19:14:16 +
From: matt.campane...@att.net
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org


There will be a Northeast Product Safety Society meeting 
on Wednesday, February 27, at EMC Corporation's Customer 
Briefing Center in Hopkinton, MA.  A social hour with 
light refreshments will begin at 7:00 PM and the 
technical meeting will start at 7:30 PM.   Jon Curtis, 
Founder and Director of Engineering of Curtis-Straus 
LLC, will be presenting this month's technical topic 
concerning Laser Safety Issues in Optical Fiber 
Communication Systems.

For further information about this meeting and Mr. 
Curtis, please see the NPSS website at 
http://www.nepss.org/call/next-mtgFeb27.html.

The 2002 NPSS meeting schedule is available on the NPSS 
website at http://www.nepss.org/about/npss2002kf.html.  

The January President's message is now available on the 
NPSS website at 
http://www.nepss.org/messagepres_011802.htm.


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

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


Matt Campanella
   NPSS Secretary

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

[Fwd: RE: TUV NRTL]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Patty Knudsen 

 Original Message 
Subject: RE: TUV NRTL
   Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 11:11:12 -0600
   From: "Patricia Knudsen (EWU)" 
 To: "'Doug McKean'" ,EMC-PSTC Discussion
 Group



There is a difference between the TUVs and UL's branch offices.  The
TUVs are all different companies, not franchises of the same company.
TUV Rheinland is a completely different entity than TUV Product Service
or TUV America.  It's more like the relationship between UL, ETL, MET,
FM, CSA, etc.  All are NRTLs but different companies.

Patty Knudsen
(former TUV-R employee)
Ericsson Wireless Communications
patricia.knud...@ericsson.com

-Original Message-
From: Doug McKean [mailto:dmck...@corp.auspex.com]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:45 PM
To: EMC-PSTC Discussion Group
Subject: Re: TUV NRTL


It's been my understanding that the various branches of
TUV reside and oversee product safety in specific regions
within Germany.  And that being in a sense franchises,
they compete directly with each other outside of Germany.

It's also been my understanding that in a similar way
though more subtle, the various branches of UL within
the US also compete with each other. In other words,
even though the Santa Clara facility is conviently right
down the road from me, I could send product off to
Melville. Any profits made by Melville aren't really
benefited by Santa Clara.

The difference between TUV and UL is that in some
cases, and I'm going out on a limb, TUV Rheinland
might not accept results from TUV Product Services
although that would have to be some extreme case
IMO.  UL branches on the other hand accept each
others results.

Corrections anyone?

- Doug McKean


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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"


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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

Re: Clean class B test bed

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
  In my days at an EMC test house, we used Dell Dimension series P1 -133
to 200's and PII 233-300's with great success.  I think Micron may have
used the same case as well.  The dells were opened daily but kept their
excellent shielding for at least 2-3 years.  Good luck finding one, but
if you can find someone still using one of  these at their desk, I'm
sure you convince them to upgrade.
  The cases were plastic looking on the exterior with one side that slid
off.  The insides of 5 sides of the case were a metal chassis inside and
the removable side panel had a thin metal panel resembling a huge
springfinger panel.  I think they refreshed the plastic on the outside
when they came out with PIII's, but the inside was still pretty much the
same.  

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

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

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

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

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

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/
Click on "browse" and then "emc-pstc mailing list"

[Fwd: Compliance Engineer seeking position]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for John Roche.  Please direct all replies directly to John
(do not 'reply all')  Thanks.

Best Regards,
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin

 Original Message 
Subject: Compliance Engineer seeking position
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 09:11:11 -0500
From: John Roche 
CC: "emc-p...@ieee.org" , TREG 

Dear All

I am not sure if this message made it out last week so at the risk of
boring everyone here it is again.

We have a former client contact located in the San Francisco / San Jose
/
Bay Area who is currently seeking a position as a Compliance
Engineer/Manager in the SF Bay area.

This gentleman is a knowledgable and reliable Compliance
Engineer/Manager,
competent in all three sciences (Safety, EMC & Telecom).

The areas covered at his latest employer include projects for all the
usual
major EU and Pac-Rim target countries for Safety, EMC and Telephony
projects; TBR 4 and ETS 300 nnn series PBX telephony testing. This is
over
and above previous company experience as a POTS Compliance Manager and
Safety/EMC engineer.

I would ask that if anyone can help or has any suggestions, would they
please contact me in the first instance and I will act as postman. If
any
of the other Consultancies out there have any clients who need such an
engineer on their staff please let me know.

Many thanks

Best regards,

John Roche

Patton & Associates (UK) Ltd.
The Forge, Nepcote Lane,
FINDON, West Sussex.
BN14 0SE.  UK GB.

TEL:  +44 1903 877 327.
FAX:  +44 1903 877 023
INTERNET: ro...@patton-assoc.com
Web Page: http//www.patton-assoc.com

Telecommunications Consulting, Design and Type Approval/Certification 
for Europe, North America and the Pacific Rim

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: TNV-2 to Earth requirement

[David Heald]

Does your equipment plug into a primary (AC) circuit?  Any TNV circuit
is considered a secondary circuit and if any and all power is derived
from the TNV network, the notes you referenced would not apply as a
primary circuit is not present.  

Best Regards,
Dave Heald

Ed Eszlari wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> I have a DC to DC "filter" which is rated 32 - 72 VDC input and output
> which I am considering to be TNV-2 according to EN60950/IEC60950 2nd
> edition.
> 
> This filter has a metal chassis which is earthed, and it will be
> installed in a service access area only by qualified service
> personnel. It is not permanently connected or pluggable type B, and
> does not have a provision for a permanently connected earthing
> conductor. With all this considered, it seems that Norway and Sweden
> are the only Countries that require Supplemental insulation for a
> primary circuit between this TNV-2 circuit and earth.
> Is there any way around this requirement due to this filter operating
> at 72VDC and not being directly connected to mains?
> 
> Any help would be appreciated.
> 
> Ed
> 
> --
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: Click
> Here
> --- 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: Michael
> Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net
> For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim
> Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and
> searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is
> brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

RE: New China Compulsory Certification

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Alain Samlai  due to strange
internet phenomena.
Enjoy
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin


Cecil 

the CCIB has a page relating to CCC, but in its Chinese section only. 
http://www.cqc.com.cn/ccc.htm 
just click the links to open the PDF files and view the new CCC mark. 
  
as far as I understand this new scheme, major points are: 
1- the old certification scheme stay valid until 1st May 2003 
2- the first batch of equipment subject to the new certicification 
scheme (CCC) includes 19 types of items (for a total of 132 products - 
according to the CCIB documents) 
3- for the equipment listed in this first batch, application for CCC 
mark are accepted starting 1st May 2002. 
4- after 1st May 2003, equipment listed and without CCC approval will 
not be allowed for sale, export or import. 
5- this first batch includes household products, micro-computer, etc... 
and is close to the second batch of product subject to CCIB/CCEE 
certification. 
6- CCC labels have to be purchased from authorized printers. 

Alain Sam-Lai 
Gigabyte Technology 
Safety Dpt. 
mailto:alain.sam...@gigabyte.com.tw

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

[Fwd: Who or what is W letter in a circle]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Paul Smith.  Please CC:paul_j_sm...@teradyne.com on any
relpies.

Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin

 Original Message 
Subject: Who or what is W letter in a circle
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:29 -0500
From: paul_j_sm...@teradyne.com
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

Folks,

Is anyone familiar with Who or what is W symbol in a circle?
Your commnets would be appreciated.

Paul J Smith, Teradyne, Boston

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

[Fwd: clearance and working voltage]

[David Heald]

Forwarded to the list for xingwb .
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin


 Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY : 364V(RMS), 540V(PEAK) MEASURED clearance: 5.3mm I HAVE
READ SOME CB TEST REPORT FOR THIS THIS SITUATION: SOME REQUIRE: MINIMUM
CLEARANCE 4.0+0.4mmother require: minimium clearance 6.4mm which is
correct for this situation?  regards Xingwbbtiep2001-11-28


---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Frame Surge Test applicability

[David Heald]

Mark,
  Is this section applicable to your product?  Section 9.10 only applies
to equipment that was formerly installed in an IBN system (now in a
CBN), and newer products rarely fall into this category.  At my last
job, I performed a lot of GR-1089 evaluations and >95% of the products
were exempt from 9.10.  The only products I saw that fell into this
category was some old 80's era boxes that had new cards to allow updated
functionality (almost impossible to get them EMI compliant due to the
initial design for LOW bandwidth & isolated shield grounds, but we got
it.)  

Best Regards,
Dave

Mark Pascarelli wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I am trying to re-design our current power supply to meet GR-1089-Core
> Specification.
> The Power Supply has a -48V input and 5VDC/100W, 5VDC/100W and 12VDC/150W
> Output.
> 
> Based on current testing, we did not comply with Section 9.10.6 Frame Surge
> Test.
> This test applies a surge current as defined in IEEE C62.41.  The filter
> capacitor was destroyed during this test. The capacitor is rated at 100V.  I
> think this capacitor should be replaced with a higher voltage X or Y
> capacitor.  Possibly a GDT or TVS is required.
> 
> If anyone can help, I will email a portion of the schematic in PDF format.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Mark Pascarelli
> Electrical Engineer
> Carlo Gavazzi, Inc.
> 
> ---
> 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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
> messages are imported into the new server.

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

80/80 rule for euro compliance?

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
  I remember hearing somewhere (& it seems that I found the answer
somewhere but I can't remember) that there is a stipulation for European
compliance that one should have 80% certainty that 80% of one's products
are compliant.  I have no idea where this idea originally came from or
what standards it may apply to. 

Can anyone out there help me out?

Dave

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

[Fwd: User Warning Signal Words]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Nick Martin.  Please 'Reply All' and/or CC:
ni...@tsd.serco.com when replying.
Dave Heald
EMC-PSTC Admin

 Original Message 
Subject: User Warning Signal Words
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 13:33:48 +
From: "Nick Martin" 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

Hi List

Can anyone help with the following regarding warnings to users and
signal words

User warnings normally use one of three signal words CAUTION, WARNING,
DANGER. I believe that each of these increases the severity of the
warning. Can anyone define any specific criteria for when a "caution"
becomes a "warning" and ideally point to an IEC or other specification
that provides guidelines on the use of these words? Or is my belief
incorrect and the words are inter-changeable?

thanks in advance for any answers

Nick Martin
Serco Test Systems

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: HiPot testing of DC mains powered products

[David Heald]

Chris,
  Greetings!  You may not even need to perform production line hipot if
the unit is a fiber only product.  Since the mains are SELV (unless you
are shipping to certain Euro Telco's) the only time you should need
production line hipot is if you have wired (TNV-2 or TNV-3) interfaces,
assuming no other connections to hazardous circuits.  

Granted my advice may be flawed as I am used to permanently connected,
stationary, restricted access location products that are a far cry from
portable equipment as far as safety standards go.  

Best Regards,
Dave Heald


Chris Maxwell wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have a question.
> 
> I have a 48VDC powered product which will be hipot and ground continuity
> tested off of the production line in order to maintain agency
> certification.
> 
> The product uses D-shaped three pin power connector.   (Same size as a
> DB15, but has three large power pins instead of 15 signal pins).
> 
> When we sell the unit, we pack it with an accessory kit which includes a
> 15' cable assembly terminated with the mate to the product's power
> connector.  So, essentially, we sell the unit with a "DC mains" cable
> that we make.
> 
> Now,  where should the hipot test be performed?
> 
> Should I make a test cable assembly for the hipot/ground bond tester
> which is terminated with the proper connector so that the tester can
> plug directly into the chassis?  This would essentially test the chassis
> only. (because we would use this same test cable for every unit)
> 
> Or
> 
> Should I take each unit and connect the DC mains cable to be shipped
> with it, then apply the hipot/ground bond probes to the other end of the
> DC mains cable?  This would test the entire system including the chassis
> and the cable.
> 
> In my mind, this question comes up because we are making a custom mains
> cable for this DC product.
> 
> It is different than AC products; because, with AC products, we can test
> the chassis by itself and assume that the mains cable is OK because we
> buy mains cables that have been previously hipot/ground bond tested by
> their manufacturers.
> 
> Any words of wisdom?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division
> email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797
> 8024
> 
> NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA
> web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 |
> 
> ---
> 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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
> messages are imported into the new server.

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: IEC 60950-1 released

[David Heald]

Is this equivalent to UL 60950?  If so, the differences may be
substantial.

Dave Heald

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

[Fwd: PC cameras]

[David Heald]

forwarded for Gaby Abboud.  Please reply all or send replies directly to
gabb...@zoom.com

 Original Message 
Subject: PC cameras
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 08:49:23 -0400
From: Gaby Abboud 
To: "IEEE (E-mail)" 

Hello Group,

A friend had asked me if there is any requirements for a PC camera to
have
any compliance approvals.  Such as FCC, CE UL or anything else?  the
reason,
he had seen a product on the market without any marking what so ever. 
His
claim was that the product is being sold at a final cost of $10.00.

any information would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Gaby

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Thailand, country matrix available

[David Heald]

Greetings, all
  I have a quick question about exporting to Thailand.  On my country
matrix Thailand is listed as requiring CISPR22 only (no safety, etc). 
Does anyone know if this is actually the case.  

BTW, I have finally determined that my country matrix is not company
proprietary info, so anyone who wants a copy can have one - just email
me.  I am unsure of how up to date it is, though.

And thanks for all the responses on Australia!  Everything is moving
right along for me.

Best regards,
Dave Heald

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

[Fwd: Re: RTI on Plastics]

[David Heald]

forwarded for Steve Williams.

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: RTI on Plastics
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 10:56:00 -0400
From: steve.willi...@apcc.com
To: tony.reyno...@pb.com
CC: emc-p...@ieee.org, owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org


Tony, some background
UL sets the world standards on plastic and they look at alot more than
just
flammability. So, the RTI issue is a UL 1950 issue. Now, I took a two
day
seminar to learn all of UL's crazy plastic requirements (very boring but
useful). Here is how RTI ratings work. The actual temperature of the
plastic part in question has to be measured. The RTI has to be greater
than
or equal to the temp measured during test. Now, here is the tough thing.
Your plastic has an RTI of 60. What this means is that it has never been
tested (UL assigns a generic rating of 60C to ABS and my guess is that
you
are using an ABS). What you need to do is ask the lab if you can do an
end
product test. In this case mold stress relief at 85C for 7 hours would
be
appropriate (Max Temp plus 10).
Now, in terms of Ball pressure that only applies if you are using this
plastic piece for direct support of live parts. If you are then the test
needs to be done.
I didn't think that UL1950 looked at things like RTI (I build products
to
UL 1950, 1778, 1449 etc. and I deal with RTI daily but I have never had
to
for UL 1950). My guess is that the test lab will have a hard time
understanding your arguments and you may need to call UL's plastic
division
in Melville, NY USA.
Good Luck
Steve



   
   
tony.reyno...@pb.com
   
Sent by:   To:
emc-p...@ieee.org   
owner-emc-pstc@majordom   
cc: 
o.ieee.org Subject: RTI on
Plastics

   

   
10/02/2001 08:45
AM  
  
Please respond
to  

   
Tony.Reynolds   
   

   

   





All,

I am having some fun with a lab over RTI ratings on plastics. Basically
we
have a plastic moulding with a component mounted directly on it.  The
RTI
of the plastic is 60C and the component is getting to around 75C
actual.  I
have always looked at the flammability of plastics 5V, V-0, V-1, etc but
never the RTI.  Is this a just a UL1950 requirement or is it in EN60950
as
well.  We have done the thermal stress at 70C and all is OK.  They are
suggesting doing the ball pressure test at 125C, however, I have only
used
this for qualifying mains transformer bobbins, etc.

Regards

Tony Reynolds
Pitney Bowes
+44 (0) 1279 449479
+44 (0) 1279 449118
tony.reyno...@pb.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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy que

[Fwd: RE: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Ron Allen 

 Original Message 
Subject: RE: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals
   Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:51:19 -0400
   From: ral...@tuvam.com
 To: j.schan...@worldnet.att.net,
 wo...@sensormatic.com,emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org



Richard,

 As the International Compliance Manager for TUV America, I concur with
many of Jacob's points. I believe that the primary ket to gaining
approvals is to make sure the first time, which countries you want to
enter and why. If you do not have local reps in the targeted countries
and you deceide you are going to process the approvals internally, don't
waste your time if you do not have a local rep.

In many cases, the local rep may not have the experience to deal with
the various regulatoty isues that arise, not to mention the technical
issues. In these cases, you may want to seek an alternatative method.

If your team is not familiar with the regulatory requirements for each
country you want to enter, it may be too much for you to expect your
reps to understand all the in's& out's. If you don't and they don't, the
time, frustration, and cost can quickly mount up.

Ron Allen
TUV America

-Original Message-
From: Jacob Schanker [mailto:j.schan...@worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:37 PM
To: wo...@sensormatic.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals


Richard:

Radio approval requirements still remain largely unharmonized. It really
is
a country by country thing, but there are some guidelines that you can
follow to reduce the amount of work and grief. I speak from first hand
experience.

1) Have Marketing define which countries are your target markets, and
have
them list them in order of priority. You cannot reasonably be expected
to
get approval for the whole world That doesn't mean that they won't want
you
to, however, so you have to push back.

2) Make copies of your FCC test report and of the test report for ETS
300
328 and whatever other EU testing you did. Have each copy notarized as a

true and complete copy (or get multiple originals from the test labs).
These
will be useful in gaining approvals in South America, New Zealand,
Australia, and other areas such as Eastern Europe and Africa.

3) Work closely with your local in-country people, distributors or
agents to
identify requirements. If they expect to make money off the sale of the
product, they should be helping in getting approvals. You need them
because
regulations and applications are generally in the local language, and
because many countries (Mexico, for instance) require a local entity to
make
the actual application and hold the approval.

By the way, don't believe that 2.45 GHz is legal to use unlicensed
everywhere. It isn't. Just check out the rules and allocation in Canada
for
an eye-opener.

Good luck.

Jack

Jacob Z. Schanker, P.E.
65 Crandon Way
Rochester, NY 14618
Phone: 716 442 3909
Fax: 716 442 2182
j.schan...@ieee.org



- Original Message -
From: 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 1:47 PM
Subject: Low-Power Transmitter Approvals

>
> We are currently developing a low-power, short range, transmitter for
use
in
> the 2.45 GHz band. We know how to handle the testing, certifications
and
> licensing in Europe and North America, but we need to determine the
most
> cost effect method of testing to obtain licenses in other countries.
> Obviously, we don't want to re-test in each target country if we don't

have
> to; but we are unaware of any "CB" type scheme for radio testing and
> approvals. What methods have you found to be most cost effective?
>
> ---
> 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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> No longer online until our new server is brought online and the
old
messages are imported into the new server.

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

For policy questions, send mail to:
 

[Fwd: RE: LVD testing suite for ITE devices]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Eric Meunier

 Original Message 
Subject: RE: LVD testing suite for ITE devices
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 18:08:34 -0400
From: "Meunier, Éric"
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

For Ethernet ports you may also want to consider the high-voltage
isolation
requirement specified in the IEEE-802.3 Ethernet specification. I found
that
Ethernet isolation is usually not required as part of the EN60950
certification process but it may be a good safety feature to consider
and
can improve product reliability as well.

===

Éric Meunier
Hardware Architect

E-mail: mailto:emeun...@teknor.com  

Kontron Communication Inc. (Teknor)
616, rue Curé-Boivin
Boisbriand, Québec
Canada, J7G 2A7

Tel: 1-450-437-4661 ext. 2419
Fax: 1-450-437-8053

Web: http://www.teknor.com  



-Original Message-
From:   Stuart Lopata [SMTP:stu...@timcoengr.com]
Sent:   Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:35 PM
To: emc
Subject:LVD testing suite for ITE devices

Can anyone point me to specific tests and standards applicable for
safety testing for ITE devices?  Specifically, we are looking to meet
the
low voltage directive for computers and computer  peripherals ( such as
hardware that plugs into the bus slots and wireless networking equipment
that connects to pcmia or ethernet ports).
 
Sincerely,
 
Stuart Lopata

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old 
messages are imported into the new server.

Re: ESD - time between successive discharges

[David Heald]

Greetings,
Let me add something to Joe's position (which I agree with entirely)
based upon my experience at a former job.  Some products with no ground
or not so great grounds will need time (one sec or sometimes more)
between discharges to ensure that there is no build up of charge on the
system.  Not only does charge buildup reduce the effect of same polarity
discharges, but just think of the discharge level when a unit with a few
kV of charge suddenly gets hit with a -XkV event after the polarity
change.  The effective net discharge is way over the spec and can often
cause perceived failures. 
  For the case of no ground (say a handheld battery powered device), a
high impedance drain should be used to remove the charge.  Ever pick up
a handheld device charged to around 8kV?

Best regards
Dave Heald

Joe Finlayson wrote:
> 
> Amund,
> 
> My experience has been that the labs would prefer to perform the ESD
> tests at a rate of 1 pulse/second (pps) for the sake of efficiency.  If the
> product passes then it was completed in the least amount of time and
> everyone's happy.  If the product fails at 1 pps, then you are allowed to
> decrease the pulse rate until the product passes.  If it still fails at
> lower rates (say 0.1 pps - one ESD event every 10 seconds), then you
> probably have problems.  I've had products fail at 1 pps and pass at 0.5
> pps.  It took longer to run the test, but it passed and met the requirements
> of the standard(s).  My interpretation of the requirements is that there is
> no maximum limit between ESD discharges.
> 
> Thx,
> 
> Joe
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: am...@westin.org [mailto:am...@westin.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 4:07 PM
> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: ESD - time between successive discharges
> 
> Dear members,
> 
> >From IEC61000-4-2 and several EN-product standards, they specify the time
> between successive discharges to be at least 1 second.
> 
> But what is the maximum time between each pulse ? I can not see that it is
> stated in any standards. I guess the test labs use 1 pulse pr second.
> 
> I feel that the pulse rate can have influences on the EUT performance, so 1
> second compared to 3-5 seconds might be the difference between PASS and
> FAIL.
> 
> Any suggestions ?
> 
> Best regards
> Amund Westin
> Oslo, Norway
> 
> --
> Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su
> 
> ---
> 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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"
> 
> ---
> 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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Re: LCD Monitors etc.

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
At a former job, I actually performed many scans of LCD monitors from
many 'unnamed' manufacturers and found them to be "different" from
normal CRT's for emissions purposes.  The LCD's would incorporate fast
(for monitors) clocks for processing.  I have seen clocks anywhere from
65 to 140MHz in these monitors.  Needless to say with the cost-cutting
involved with mass-production, these production monitors were almost
always very close to if not over the Class B limits.  (Keep in mind I
was not performing the scans for the initial manufacturers, so I doubt
anything changed because of my results).  The emissions peaks were
narrowband harmonics of the clock instead of the more random seeming
Scrolling H's noise that is typical for CRT monitors.

For that matter, I NEVER saw a CRT monitor that passed class B with
H's scrolling at a high resolution (BTW, the scrolling H's pegs the
PC processor as well).  As these monitors were almost always support
equipment, the typical "fix" was to run the scrolling H's in a DOS
window and then ALT-TAB to a full-screen dos window.  This greatly
reduced the resolution, refresh rates, etc sufficiently to make the
monitors very quiet. 

Hope this helps (and that my memory is correct)
Dave

George Stults wrote:
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> I have theorized that a Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) monitors should have
> less radiated emission than a comparabe CRT (same viewing area) since there
> is no high voltage tube and high powered oscillators, etc.  I am wondering
> if anyone can confirm or deny this rumor based on actual testing.   Also If
> there are folks in the crowd who sell LCD monitors, I would like to hear
> from you offline.

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Re: Pre-amps for EMC Use

[David Heald]

I have used Miteq or Mini-Circuits preamps with a custom box (Al project
box) and a 15Vdc regulator.  These had around 20dB of gain which was
sufficient at 3 or 1 meter for most frequencies between 1 - 18 GHz.  The
exact model that we used has been discontinued though and I am unsure if
a replacement has been designed.  I believe the cost for these preamps
was between $1k - $3k, so they were pretty cheap if you are handy enough
to build your own box to protect/power it.

Regards,
Dave Heald

andrew.p.pr...@baesystems.com wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone
> 
> Can anyone help, I am trying to identify a per-amplifier low noise gain 29dB
> to 36dB to cover frequency range 1GHz to 18GHz for Emission testing. I know
> HP do a couple but usual problem expensive and I only have a limited budget.
> 
> Has anyone used a DBS Microwave amplifier type DBS-0119N410? Are they
> suitable for emission testing?
> 
> Any help would be gratefully received.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Andy Price
> BAE SYSTEMS Avionics
> 
> email 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Re: Cable layout per GR1089

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
  I just peeked at GR-63 and it appears that a 9-10' height for cabling
trays is normal (Figure 2-4).  You are correct that GR-1089 is very
vague on the requirement (something like "line of sight??").  Due to the
final installation config, I would go with a 9' cable crossbar height
and I have always seen at least a 6' cable crossbar length.  Also, I
would ensure that your crossbar and supports are nonconductive.  2" -
2.5" PVC Piping works well and is easy to work with. (plus, you can get
it at the Home Depot).  I have a great collapsible design that I
developed at my last job; if anyone is interested, contact me off list
and I can describe it to you.

Best Regards,
Dave

Paolo Roncone wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> anyone can get me clarifications on the cable layout for radiated
> immunity and emissions testing per GR1089 with overhead cable trays
> (ref. fig.3-13 ) ?
> In fig.3.13 + sections 3.4.6 and 3.5.5 of GR1089 I don't see any
> specified length of the horizontal section projecting out of the EUT
> boundaries.
> Also I don't see any indication thereof in ANSI C63.4 (fig.10), while
> CISPR22/EN55022 (fig.13) specifies MINIMUM 20 cm of horizontal length.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC?]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Dan Irish 

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC?
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 19:14:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dan Irish - Sun BOS Hardware 
Reply-To: Dan Irish - Sun BOS Hardware 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org, croni...@hotmail.com

John,

See 47CFR2.909, Responsible party:

The following parties are responsible for compliance of
radio frequency equipment with the applicable standards:

[snip]

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

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

I just downloaded this section to verify that it hasn't
changed.

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/index.html#page1

Use the search terms: 47cfr2 and 909

I hope this helps.

Regards,
Dan

> X-Originating-IP: [159.134.229.84]
> From: "John Cronin" 
> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: FCC + FCC = FCC?
> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 22:24:35 -
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jun 2001 22:24:35.0260 (UTC) 
FILETIME=[9EA13FC0:01C0F90E]
> X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients 
> X-Listname: emc-pstc
> X-Info: Help requests to  emc-pstc-requ...@majordomo.ieee.org
> X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to  majord...@majordomo.ieee.org
> X-Moderator-Address: emc-pstc-appro...@majordomo.ieee.org
> 

Hi Group

This is a question regarding a plug in PC card that has been stated as
FCC 
compliant which is inserted in a PC that is also stated
to be FCC compliant and the emissions are found to actually exceed the
FCC 
limits.  

What is the responsibility of the manufacturer who is intending to place
this on 
the market as a functional unit?  Are they liable
for the overall unit or can they sell on the basis that it comprises FCC 
compliant sub assemblies, albeit evidently originally
tested in different configurations.  

If they are liable, how can anyone sell any PC/PC card combination
considering 
that the card could have originally been tested
in a so called golden PC.

Many thanks

John Cronin

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: Amendment of Spanish Channels]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Gaby Abboud.  Please CC: Gaby 
To: "'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'" 

Hello Group,


Has anyone heard about the Spanish channel limitation if they are going
to
be amended in the near future? 

Presently the channels are:

> N. America has 11 Channels, Japan 14 Channels, Europe (ETSI) 13 Channels,
> Spain 2 Channels, France 4 Channels
> 
> 
> I do thank you in advance,
> 
>  
> Gaby F. Abboud
> Senior Compliance Engineer
> 
> Zoom Telephonics Inc.
> 207 South Street
> Boston, MA 02111
> 
> Tel #  617-753-0046 (Direct)
> Main # 617-423-1702 x 3046
> Fax #  617-542-8276
> E-mail gabb...@zoom.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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: Re: Laser Safety]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Bert Planting.

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: Laser Safety
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 06:59:41 +0200
From: Bert Planting 
Organization: ASML
To: Matt Kilkenny 
CC: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
References: <0954d2e4fe26d411909100b0d022a345191...@mail.opthos.com>

Matt,

Because you are using a microprocessor limitating it this is not seen as
sufficient safe solution for reduction of the output by "safety" people
(based on my experience with US third parties). 
Reduction should only be done by hardware and not by fault sensitive
microprocessor.

In this case you should use an interlock.

regards,

Bert Planting
Prodct safety ASML




Matt Kilkenny wrote:
> 
> I have a question on lasers for ITE concerning IEC-825 and FDA requirements.
> According to IEC, class 3b lasers have to have safety doors (interlocks).
> Can automatic power reduction be used if you are not pumping the laser to a
> 3b class level of power.  In other words, can we not put interlocks on the
> system if the 3b laser power has been reduced to a 3a or class 1 level
> through microprocessor limitating it?  Or is their single fault concerns if
> the microprocessor fails?
> 
> Thanks for any help,
> 
> Matt Kilkenny
> mkilke...@opthos.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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Re:

[David Heald]

Cyril, everyone,

In a past job at a test/consulting lab, I used modulated clocks with
great success.  They do not require respins and the differences in
timing are typically (esp. at 66MHz) acceptable.  This became one of the
"quick & easy" fixes that we loved.  These are not a solve-all solution
though - if you have a failure margin of more than say 6dB you will
probably have to do some board/sheilding work also to gain compliance. 
This technique is fairly widespread - my PC motherboard at home uses it
(but like you mentioned, it is selectable in BIOS).

Con's? None that I can think of, but...I have seen somewhere (maybe
here??) that the EU is considering new regulations for modulated clocks,
but this is in the early stages, so use them now while you can get the
most benefit from them.

Regards,
Dave Heald

"Binnom, Cyril A" wrote:
> 
> Group,
> 
> I am experiencing a EMI failure during testing and it has been isolated to
> the processor board in which the fundamental frequency is 66.6 MHz the 3rd
> harmonic that is our failure frequency is 199.8 MHz. We consulted the
> manufacturer of the board and they have come up with a "spectrum spreading"
> application for me to try. As I understand it, these type of applications
> work by essentially jittering the clock frequency in order to spread the
> energy over a wider band of frequencies. Thus the level at any particular
> frequency is reduced even though the overall amount of energy radiated is
> the same. The file they are sending me is a test application. If it works
> well enough to get the unit to pass test, they have the ability to enable
> the same application in the BIOS so it is always running.
> 
> Does anyone have any experience using this type of application? Any opinions
> on its validity? To those that can attest to its validity, any pros or cons
> to the use of this application?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Cyril A. Binnom Jr.
> EMI/EMC Approvals Engineer
> LXE, Inc.
> (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3240
> (770) 447-6928 Fax
> binno...@lxe.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:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Re: EN55022 Radiated Test Set up

[David Heald]

Greetings everyone,
  I just chatted with one of the authors of ANSI C63.4 (1992) where the
procedure for radiated emissions is defined.  I found out that it was
the committee's intent that the distance be measured from a radius set
by the furthest point of the EUT during rotation.  Of course the setup
must still comply with the C63.4, so no fair stretching a 10' cable out
and measuring from that radius :o).  The intent was based on a "simple
and repeatable" setup that could be easily duplicated.  

  My take:  At 10 meters, the difference is negligible anyway - in 99.9%
of the cases it would be less than 1 dB.  At 3 or 1 meter, things change
and it is probably left up to the lab/client to determine if they should
deviate from the standard (for large oblong products, etc).  Keep in
mind that any deviation from the standard and will probably result in
less repeatability between labs (very anti-standardish).  There are also
other limitations such as antenna beam width that you may (or may not ;)
want to address at closer radii.

Also, it is my personal belief that the limits set in standards must
reflect some margin set in place for just this type of situation. (may
or may not be the case, but they thought of everything else).

Best regards, 
Dave Heald

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: Field wiring terminal size]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Susanne Delisle.  Please cc Susanne
(sdeli...@unispherenetworks.com) on any replies

 Original Message 
Subject: Field wiring terminal size
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 10:09:11 -0400
From: "Delisle, Susanne" 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org


Group,

I'm in the process of specifying field wiring terminals for a -48Vdc
product
that's rated 100A.  Table 3E in 60950 only specifies sizes up to 63 A. 
Does
anyone know how I go about sizing a terminal for the higher current?

Susanne Delisle
Product Safety Engineer
Unishpere Networks
10 Technology Park Drive
Westford, MA 01886
(978) 589-0349
(978) 589-0800 fax
sdeli...@unispherenetworks.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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: RE: ESD Question]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Mike Hopkins.

 Original Message 
Subject: RE: ESD Question
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:06:48 -0400
From: Mike  Hopkins 
To: "'Chris Maxwell'" ,"'Sandy
Mazzola'", emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

There is an amendment to IEC 61000-4-2 in process that is intended to
clarify the issue of connector pins. I basically states that for
connectors
with metal shells, a contact mode discharge is performed to the shell.
For
plastic connectors, an air discharge is done in the vicinity of the
connector -- if a break-down to a pin occurs in either case, tough luck.
There was never any intention that discharges be done to individual pins
in
a connector.

Some other specific exclusions include ESD sensitive connectors -- scope
inputs, etc... that are marked as ESD sensitive and there is reference
to
that in the product documentation. Also excluded are battery contacts
which
might be contacted when the batteries are changed but are not accessed
during operation of the product.

Hope this is helpful..

Best Regards,

Mike Hopkins
KeyTek
(member IEC SC77B WG9, which is the working group responsible for IEC
61000-4-2)

-Original Message-
From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 2:07 PM
To: 'Sandy Mazzola'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: ESD Question



Hi Sandy,

Have you seen the sunshine in your end of New York?  If you have, send
it
back!!

Personally, I have never seen a product that required air or contact ESD
testing on the individual pins of connectors.  I can only speak for
products
tested to EN 50082-1(Generic Immunity), EN 50082-1(Generic
Immunity/Heavy
Industrial), ETS 300-386-1(Telcom EMC) and EN 61326-1 (Test ,
Measurement
and Control Equipment EMC).

The basic standard which covers ESD testing itself (for the product and
product family standards mentioned above) is EN 61000-4-2.  EN 61000-4-2
is
also the basic standard which EN 55024 references for ESD testing.   EN
61000-4-2 gives no definite example or statement regarding discharge to
individual connector pins.  It just says to discharge to all locations
normally accessible by the customer (paraphrased).  So, this can be
rationalized either way.Apparantly, the authors of EN 55024 have
already
done the rationalization for you.  

What I have typically seen  and performed is ESD testing whereby direct
contact discharges are made to the shells of connectors (i.e. D-subs
)
but not to the individual pins.

Since EN 61000-4-2 gives no exact direction, I think that there has been
a
"general consensus of interpretation" (my own words) that ESD is not
required on individual pins.  I have heard some myth/horror stories that
say
otherwise from people selling ESD hardened connectors, IC's  but
they
turned out to be exaggerations.   

Having said that, I must add the caveat that there may be standards and
products that are an exception, especially in the military, aerospace or
medical fields.  I just haven't seen any. 

!PLEASE NOTE THE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS
Chris Maxwell
Design Engineer
NetTest
6 Rhoads Drive, Building 4
Utica,NY 13502
email: chris.maxw...@nettest.com
phone:  315-266-5128
fax: 315-797-8024
  

> -Original Message-
> From: Sandy Mazzola [SMTP:mazzo...@symbol.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 9:30 AM
> To:   emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  ESD Question
> 
> Hi all,
>   
>In EN 55024: 1998  Page 9 Paragraph 4.2.1,  I found the following
> statement:  "The  application of electrostatic discharges to the contacts
> of open connectors is not required by this publication"
> 
>  My question is  twofold has everybody interpreted this to mean that
> no air discharges or contact discharges are required to the connector or
> pins of the open connector.
> And secondly  if the answer to the above is no discharges  of any type are
> required, what other publications would require  either air or contact
> discharges to open connectors.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Sandy Mazzola  
> 
> Santo Mazzola
> Regulatory Engineer
> Symbol Technologies Inc
> 1 Symbol Plaza
> Holtsville, N. Y. 11742-1300
> Phone:  (631) 738-5373
> Fax:  (631) 738-3318
> E-mail: mazzo...@symbol.com
> 
>  << File: Sandy Mazzola.vcf >> 

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/ 

[Fwd: Search for a Gtem Cell]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for John Kehs (jk...@witusa.com).  Please direct all responses
to John.
Regards,
David Heald

 Original Message 
Subject: Search for a Gtem Cell
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 07:18:40 -0400
From: "Kehs, John" 
To: "'emc-p...@ieee.org'" 

I am looking to purchase a Gtem cell that will handle an EUT up to 18"
square.  If you have one or know of one please let me know.  Thanks.


John P. Kehs Jr.
Manager, Windermere Calibration & Repair Center  (WCRC)
401 Defense Hwy.  Annapolis, MD 21401
410-266-1880Fax 410-266-1751
www.witscrc.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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: ESD Gun recommendations?]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Daniel Biggs .  Please include
Daniel in any replies.
-Dave Heald

 Original Message 
Subject: ESD Gun recommendations?
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:04:23 -0400
From: "Biggs, Daniel (IndSys, GEFanuc, NA)" 
To: "'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'" 

Greetings,

Looking to replace our old ESD guns and would appreciate any
recommendations
on who makes a good product and what features are most important.  Also,
when it comes to EMC test equipment which companies offer better
services
and technical support.

Thanks,
DB


___
GE Fanuc Automation

Daniel Biggs
Test Engineer
Hardware Design Services

ph: 804-978-6946
fax:  804-978-5588
e-mail:  daniel.bi...@cho.ge.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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Environmental test labs

[David Heald]

Greetings all,
  I am looking for recommendations for a NEBS environmental test lab
that has an operational temp/humidity chamber of significant size and
with tremendous cooling capacity (8kW or more).  I have a large
(6+'wide, 7+'tall) telecom product that consumes about 8kW of energy
during operation and I am having trouble finding environmental labs with
chambers that can handle this without a liquid nitrogen feed.  I am
based in the Boston area and am talking to a few local labs, but my next
product will be bigger and use more power.  I am willing to expand the
search outside of the Boston area since no one I know will likely be
able to handle it.
  All you lab sales guys out there - I am actually asking for you to
contact me on this one (OFF LIST, private email, of course).  

Thanks in advance,

Dave Heald

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Re: Capacitor Discharge Test

[David Heald]

Greetings Joe and everyone,
  I can't speak for lab equipment, but I know that for UL 1950 (EN
60950/ IEC 950) my former employer  (a recent NRTL who works/worked
closely with the biggest) would always test with the mains switch both
on and off.  If you think about it, it makes sense to test with the
mains switch off.  Are you more likely to unplug a product that is on,
or are you going to turn it off first?  As you noticed, the mains
capacitors do take longer to decay when the power switch is off.  For
this reason, I would have to side with the NRTL Engineer in question
here - even if I am now working on the industry side of things.  

Dave Heald



marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote:
> 
> We evaluate our laboratory equipment to UL 3101-1, CSA 1010.1 and EN
> 61010-1.
> 
> Section 6.10.3  of UL 3101-1 states "If plug pins of cord-connected
> equipment receive a charge from an internal capacitor, the pins shall not
> be HAZARDOUS LIVE 5s after disconnection of the supply".  We have always
> performed this test with the power switch in the ON position and would have
> the unit running then unplug the power cord and take our reading on the
> oscilloscope.  We have never measured any voltages above the HAZARDOUS LIVE
> limits of 30Vrms, 42.4V peak or 60Vdc.
> Our new NRTL Engineer has now also requested us to perform this test with
> the power switch in the OFF position.  With the switch in the off position
> our voltages after 5 seconds are close to line voltage.  The NRTL is
> considering this a failure.
> 
> However, UL 3101-1 also states in Section 6.10.3 "For plugs receiving a
> charge from an internal capacitor, the measurements of 6.3 are made to
> establish that the levels of 6.3.1.3 are not exceeded."  6.3.1.3 requires
> measuring the overall capacitance from the unit.  Our NRTL states that
> there is no method available to measure the overall capacitance of the
> unit.
> 
>  Has anyone else in the group had any experience with this issue?  Does
> your NRTL require testing with the switch in the OFF position?  Do your
> units fail with the switch in the OFF position?  Is it a failure just
> because the voltage limits are exceeded, or is it only a failure if the
> current and capacitance limits are exceeded. (Similar to the Permissible
> Limits Requirements).  Have you had any experience with NRTL's not being
> able to measure the overall capacitance?
> 
> All responses are greatly appreciated.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Joe Martin
> Applied Biosystems
> marti...@appliedbiosystems.com
> 
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
> 
> Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
> 
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
>  majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line:
>  unsubscribe emc-pstc
> 
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>  Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
> 
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
>  Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
> 
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
> http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Re: looking for used power supply

[David Heald]

How about the good old HP Harmonic Flicker Test Sysytem that Agilent was
thinking about discontinuing support on? (remember that thread a while
ago?)  I don't know about the current (it seems like I remember 9-10A
max), but I know you could dial in any voltage and frequency
(DC-500Hz??) and it would produce it!  If Agilent did discontinue
support, you could probably get a great deal!  

Dave

> Mike Stone wrote:
> 
> Good Day,
> I am looking into purchasing a used power supply.
> Minimum requirements are:
> 
> 3 phase input, single phase output
> variable frequency, 50/60 Hz
> variable voltage, 120VAC, 230 VAC
> 3 KVA
> 16 Amps
> 
> I have tried a number of resellers, with not much luck.
> Thank you in advance for your help.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Michael Stone
> L. S. Compliance
> W66 N220 Commerce Court
> Cedarburg, WI  53012
> V   262-375-4400
> F   262-375-4248

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: Romania certifications]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Gaby Abboud.  Please CC Mr. Abboud  on
any replies.
David Heald

 Original Message 
Subject: Romania certifications
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 14:28:34 -0400
From: Gaby Abboud 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I received this from one of our sales people today.  Does anyone know
what
is the process to have  the following product certified for Romania. Is
there a standard or a directive that will help me research their
concerns.



{{Now I need for authorization process in Romania of 11Mbps PCI wireless
products some measuring bulletins for noise and interferences made
according
normatives from European Community standard 300/350.}} 



Thank you in advance.


Gaby F. Abboud
Senior Compliance Engineer

Zoom Telephonics Inc.
207 South Street
Boston, MA 02111

Tel #  617-753-0046 (Direct)
Main # 617-423-1702 x 3046
Fax #  617-542-8276
E-mail gabb...@zoom.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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

ETSI telecom acoustic power test (fan noise, etc...)

[David Heald]

Greetings everyone,
   I was wondering if anyone has already worked this out.  The test
under question measures the sound power level generated by fan trays or
other noise producing structures in Central Office type telecom
equipment.
ETS 300 753 Acoustic noise test calls for the test to be carried out
under 23+-2 deg C ambient conditions.  Apparently the results from this
test are the "official" results from which one would derive a rating for
the product.  The standard then asks that the test be repeated at the
maximum operating temperature (i.e. 50 deg C).
  Is this second test at elevated ambient for informational purposes
only or does it factor into the rated sound power level for the
product?  

Thanks in advance for any help
Dave Heald

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: Re: Product Safety - Japan]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Jun Nakamura.  Please include Mr. Nakamura
(nakamur...@naka.melco.co.jp) on any replies 
Dave Heald


 Original Message 
Subject: Re: Product Safety - Japan
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 23:10:05 +0900
From: nakamur...@naka.melco.co.jp
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
References: <200105041727.naa21...@interlock2.lexmark.com>

George, John, Mark and group members:

Please see below.

geor...@lexmark.com wrote:
 
> The new Japan DENAN requirements are not completely clear,

I quite agree. I have got many information about DENAN requirements
because I work at a Japanese manufacturer but DENAN confuse and disgust
me. 

> and I know of no on-line source in English to clear up certain aspects.

You can see "KANPOH" dated on March 19 2001 which is Official journal of
the Japanese government but I don't know whether there is Enlgish
translated "KANPOH".
 
> For example, in the past, AC/DC adapters have required certification
> and the application of the Dentori-T mark with cert. number.  However,
> there was no mandatory Japan certification for most ITE end products,
> e.g. the laser and inkjet printers we market.

For most ITE end products like laser and inkjet printers,as you say,
the Dentori-T mark didn't need to be affixed to these products but
most electrical products sold in Japan including ITE end products
had to conform to DENTORI requirements,that is,most ITE end products
belonged to Category B(Self-Declaration and no Dentori-T mark)
under DENTORI law.
 
> The attached MS Word file refers to "specified products" (SP) and
> "non-specified products" (NSP), and lists 19 product "categories".
> However, it does not reveal if ITE might be included in categories 17
> (electronic appliances) or 18 (other electronic apparatuses), or even
> incuded at all as an SP or NSP product requiring certification.
>
> George

I'm not sure but I think most ITE end products belong to NSP because
I have heard that almost all in Category B under DENTORI law
were changed to NSP under DENAN law, therefore,for instance,
affixing PSE mark(PSE in a circle) and maintaining product inspection
records are needed.

JET which is one of conformity assessment bodies can judge
whether a product is in SP or NSP.
If you can see Japanese visiting http://www.jet.or.jp will probably be
a great help. If you can't then fax your question in English
to the number shown in the web page.   

Jun Nakamura
nakamur...@naka.melco.co.jp
MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

[Fwd: FW: Field trial requirements]

[David Heald]

Forwarded for Joel Mandel.  Please select reply all when responding or
include Joel in your CC line .

Dave Heald


> -Original Message-
> From: Mandel, Joel 
> Sent: á îøõ 19 2001 10:33
> To:   'emc-p...@ieee.org'
> Subject:  Field trial requirements
> 
> Hi All
>  Does anybody now  if their are any NEBS requirements for field trials? Is
> their any difference between CLECS ,ILECS,RBOCS?
> 
> Have a great day to all,
> 
> Joel Mandel
> Compliance
> ADC Israel
>

---
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:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/  click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"

Periphery ESD ground rings on high speed interface cards

[David Heald]

Greetings all.
  I have a general question about the use of isolated ground rings at 
the periphery of rack type optical interface cards (so maybe it's 
specific).  My understanding is that isolated (fully moated) ground 
rings are often placed around the edges of high speed interface cards in 
an attempt to keep ESD out of critical areas on the board (or to hold in 
edge radiation is another more suspect reason I have heard).  This just 
seems like a bad idea to me, but I must admit that I am not on the 
design end of things.  I ran this by a microwave specialist I know and 
he shared my opinion.  There just seem to be too many opportunities for 
arc-over or induced voltages that could cause the same or more damage to 
the board.
  My question is this:  does anyone have a concrete reason why such a 
ground ring would be a good idea?  I would like to keep this discussion 
in the 1+GHz range, but anyone with experience please feel free to chip 
in. 
Thanks in advance


David Heald
Senior EMC Engineer/
Product Safety Engineer

Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL
Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom
Voice:978.486.8880x254   Fax:978.486.8828
www.curtis-straus.com


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

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:
Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Re: Site Correlation

[David Heald]

Greetings again.
  I received some questions about this off list and there has been more 
discussion in this direction, so I thought I would throw my other two 
cents in. 
  For small fully anechoic chambers with little room for antenna height 
adjustment, you should be able to have uncertainty of about 6dB or so 
(10dB is much safer realistically) when you apply correction factors for 
a 10m site.  The reason for this is, as John Barnes pointed out, the 
absence of reflected waves being received in addition to the direct 
waves.  The key importance to a fully lined chamber (including the 
floor) is that destructive waves are not present.  With a reflective 
floor, destructive waves can lower your readings by more than 30dB.  Add 
this to the 6 dB or so of uncertainty for additive waves and your total 
error could be enormous.  With an absorber lined floor, the influence of 
the destructive waves is eliminated or reduced, so a correlation of 6dB 
(again 10dB is safer) should be achievable (this simply accounts for the 
absence of constructive interference). 
  Another important factor to ensure you don't have any surprises when 
moving from precompliance to a compliance run is to manipulate the 
cables during testing (oh, how much easier our job would be without 
cables).  Large signal strength changes can be achieved just by moving 
cables a few inches.
  I also have to agree with Gert's and Ken's comments on far field 
measurements.  I mentioned this in my original message, but didn't 
elaborate at all.  These are very important considerations that can 
greatly affect any expected correlation to a 10m OATS.


--
David Heald
Senior EMC Engineer/
Product Safety Engineer

Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL
Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom
Voice:978.486.8880x254   Fax:978.486.8828
www.curtis-straus.com


Tudor, Allen wrote:


Greetings:

What's the best way to correlate a pre-compliance chamber (smaller than a 3m
chamber) to a 10m anechoic chamber?  Should I use a signal generator and
antenna or should I use a comb generator?

Would the answer be different if I were correlating the pre-compliance
chamber to an OATS?

Thanks in advance.


Allen Tudor, Compliance Engineer
ADC DSL Systems Inc.
6531 Meridien Dr. 
Raleigh, NC  27616

phone: 919.875.3382
email: allen_tu...@adc.com


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

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:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org








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

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:
Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Re: Site Correlation

[David Heald]

Hello all
    There are a few variables that need to be addressed to answer this question. 
The first is the nature of the chamber.  My reply will assume that this is
a fully anechoic chamber (walls, floor, and ceiling all lined
with absorber material).  Otherwise, all bets are off due to the unpredictable
reflections from the surfaces in the chamber.  In a chamber this size, I
will also assume that the antenna height is fixed, or at least not very adjustable. 
Given a fully anechoic room and a fixed antenna height, theoretically you
should be able to extrapolate (about 10 dB from 1 to 3 meters antenna distance
and another 10 dB from 3 to 10 meters) with only about 6 dB of uncertainty. 
In practice this is usually accurate but real world conditions have slightly
more uncertainty so 10 dB is a fairly safe margin to use.  
    A few things to keep in mind:  if the chamber is only semi-anechoic (walls
and ceiling lined) you will have more uncertainty due to possible cancellation
due to floor reflections.  At this point, relative change or frequency identification
is about the only thing the chamber is good for.  Also, near field readings
can be significantly different from far-field readings.  If you come up with
marginal near field readings, be prepared for the worst when you take 10m
readings.  Finally, be sure to check BOTH antenna polarities.

I hope this helps

Usual employer disclaimer . . .David Heald
Senior EMC Engineer/
Product Safety Engineer

Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL
Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom
Voice:978.486.8880x254   Fax:978.486.8828
www.curtis-straus.com


Tudor, Allen wrote:
Greetings:What's the best way to correlate a pre-compliance chamber (smaller than a 3mchamber) to a 10m anechoic chamber?  Should I use a signal generator andantenna or should I use a comb generator?Would the answer be different if I were correlating the pre-compliancechamber to an OATS?Thanks in advance.Allen Tudor, Compliance EngineerADC DSL Systems Inc.6531 Meridien Dr. Raleigh, NC  27616phone: 919.875.3382email: allen_tu...@adc.com---This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product SafetyTechnical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org!
with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstcFor help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.orgFor policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
  
  
  
  



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

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:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Re: Surge (immunity) requirement for equipment in telecommunication c

[David Heald]

Hello all.
  One related NEBS interpretation is based on the occurrence of the 
building housing the equipment being hit by lightning.  If the frame of 
the building is carrying this large current spike, on the longer cables 
that are run through the building (likely over 10m) enough energy could 
be coupled onto the cables to create a hazard.  By extension, shorter 
cables would probably be confined to within one equipment room and would 
not be long enough or near enough the current carrying building members 
to have dangerous amounts of energy coupled onto them.  Hope this helps.


Dave

Usual views of employer disclaimer , etc. . .

Zohar Zosmanovich wrote:


Hi,

The EN 300 386 (EMC requirements for telecommunication network equipment)
require to perform a surge of 1.2/50 Tr/Th us, 0,5 kV to ports for indoor
signal lines (in telecommunication centers), when cables longer than 10 m
are connected !
Can some one explain my the rational of divided up to 10 m and more than 10
m, anyway all cable is in the building (indoors) ?

Zohar (Jana) Zosmanovich 
Compliance Engineer, RADWIN ltd. 
34 Habarzel St., Tel Aviv 69710, Israel 
Tel.: 972-3-7666735 ; Fax: 972-3-7657535 
Email: <mailto:zohar_zosmanov...@radwin.com> 





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

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:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org






--
David Heald
Senior EMC Engineer/
Product Safety Engineer

Curtis-Straus LLC NRTL
Laboratory for NEBS, EMC, Safety, and Telecom
Voice:978.486.8880x254   Fax:978.486.8828
www.curtis-straus.com


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

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:
Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Re: CISPR 24 and telecom ports

[David Heald]

Hello,

For Emisssions, I think the standard you may want to look at is
EN55022(1998) which defines telecommunicaiotns ports as those connected to
telecommunications networks(POTS, ISDN, ETC)  and  Local Area Networks.  As for
the Surge tests, there is a subnote under 55024 that applies surge tests to only
those cables that leave the building.  I hope this helps.

David Heald

Guy Story wrote:

> I am looking to see what the general conception is on I/O port conducted
> emissions and surge immunity is.  The company I work for manufactures
> various types of network cards.  Some of these tie to the outside word
> (public network) and others are LAN based.  I can see performing the testing
> on ISDN and other style devices but not to a device, say and Ethernet card
> or a device, that does not access the public network directly.  I have not
> read over the CISPR 24 document yet but based on what I have been told, the
> spec is vague on the areas of I/O ports and the outside world.
>
> Regards,
>
> Guy Story, KC5GOI
> Compliance Technician
> Interphase Corporation
> Dallas Texas
> phone: 214.654.5161
> fax: 214.654.5406
>
> ---
> This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
> Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
>
> 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:
>  Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
>  Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
>  Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org
<>