Re: [PSES] Question reguarding EN 50131-5-3:2017

[Kevin J Harris]

Hi Scott

The text is correct but not well written or explained

The paragraph before the text you quoted states

The tests consist of subjecting the receiver to a continuous interference 
signal introduced from a signal
generator. This signal shall cover at least the entire assigned band (not 
affecting other used bands). For that,
a frequency-modulated signal shall be used, with a deviation greater than the 
assigned band and the
modulating signal shall be a 15kHz ramp (see details in Annex B).

Note the highlighted text. Only one band at a time is blocked.  Although not 
explicitly  stated, practically this means you need to use more than one band 
to transmit signals to pass the test. This is a test for higher grades (3&4) 
only and would not apply to something for residential use

Kind regards

Kevin

From: S Drysdale [mailto:sdd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 2:01 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Question reguarding EN 50131-5-3:2017

Hi All,

I was hoping someone here could help be better understand EN 51031-5-3 for 
Alarm systems - Intrusion systems.

Section 5.5.4 states:
2) The level of interference generated by the interfering transmitting 
equipment shall be increased until 2 or more alarm messages out of 5 generated 
by the standard transmitting equipment, are not received by
the receiving equipment. This level of the interference signal of the 
interfering transmitting equipment, measured on the spectrum analyser, is 
called level IL.
3) Increase that level by 3 dB.
4) 20 messages are sent by the transmitting device used for test purposes.
5) Repeat this procedure (steps 2 to 5) for all used bands.
Pass/Fail criterion: The EUT Rx/Tx has passed the test if it has correctly 
processed all messages sent by the
transmitting device used for test purposes and if no failure or tamper message 
is generated.

Do I read correctly that you would raise the interference signal until 40% or 
greater of messages are not received, then double the power for the 
interference signal, and the pass/fail requirement after this is that all 
messages must be received.

Hopefully someone can help my misunderstanding because this does not seem to 
make sense.

Best Regards,
Scott Drysdale
OOO - Own Opinions Only
-


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

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

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

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

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

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

-

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


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable 

[PSES] ISO/IEC 17025:2017 Documentation Templates

[Kevin J Harris]

Dear Colleagues,

We are about to start the process of switching  our safety lab accreditation 
basis from ISO/IEC 17025:2005 to ISO/IEC 17025:2017. We thought we would take 
that opportunity to completely refresh our quality manual, procedures and SDs.

Rather than start completely from scratch, we found several companies on the 
web that offer templates to get us going. Has anyone interacted with such a 
company and would they recommend them?

Kind regards

Kevin



-

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


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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] Source for Nameplate Rating Nomenclature

[Kevin J Harris]

There is a 2001 EN version is also available for purchase

https://www.evs.ee/products/evs-en-61293-2001


From: Lesmeister, Glenn [mailto:glenn.lesmeis...@hpe.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 3:02 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Source for Nameplate Rating Nomenclature

There is an IEC standard, IEC 61293 that covers this.

https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/5151


Regards,
Glenn Lesmeister
Product Regulatory Compliance
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
11445 Compaq Center Dr W
M/S 510101
Houston,  TX 77070
Tel: 1 (512) 319-0591
glenn.lesmeis...@hpe.com

From: IBM Ken [mailto:ibm...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 1:54 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Source for Nameplate Rating Nomenclature

To pile on to Brian's question, is there guidance on how to indicate Delta or 
Wye connection types on a label (that are universally recognizable)?   I think 
using "3W +PE" or "4W +PE" might not be descriptive in all cases, especially if 
your equipment connects to fewer than three phases of a three-phase 
distribution system...

-Ken

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 2:44 PM Kunde, Brian 
mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com>> wrote:
What is the Source Document for the Nameplate Voltage, Current, etc. Rating 
Nomenclature (if there is one)?

Examples one might find on a typical electronic equipment;

115/230V~  50/60Hz  8/4A
100-120/220-240V~ 50/60Hz 8/4A

We try to match this information in our User’s Manual. However, our Technical 
Writers are telling me that according to International Writing blah blah blah, 
we can no longer use dashes (replace with the work “to”),  and that we have to 
have a space between numbers and the unit indicator.

So here is what they want in the manual;

100 to 120 / 220 to 240 V~  50 / 60 Hz  8 / 4 A


I have no objections to these new rules in the manual, but as far as the 
Nameplate label goes, we are always tighting for space and as you can see the 
“new way” uses up a lot more space than the old way.

So my question is, is there a document, standard, etc. that dictates exactly 
how the Rating should appear on a Nameplate Label/plate?   Is there anything 
wrong or confusing about the Old Way.

Thanks very much for any assistance.

The Other Brian (I hope I don’t get kicked off for spoof emails again).

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


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

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

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

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

[PSES] Product Safety Specialist required near Toronto

[Kevin J Harris]

Dear Colleagues

In our Concord (suburb north of Toronto, Canada) location we have an opening 
for a product safety specialist for our small A2LA accredited product safety 
laboratory.

We are looking not only for someone who is familiar with testing to EN/IEC 
60950 and IEC 62368 but equally important, someone who is familiar with 
maintaining accreditation and acting as the audit lead in a 17025 laboratory 
environment.

Interested applicants can go to http://k.rfer.us/JOHNSONCTRLxnqJNV for more 
information and to make an application

Sorry, but at this time, relocation packages or visa assistance packages are 
not being considered.

Kind regards

Kevin


-

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


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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-4-5 Surge Testing Single plug vs. multiple plug system

[Kevin J Harris]

My test method for this test has always been that each port that exits the EUT 
gets an individual test.

If in this case the “system” has multiple power cords exiting the cabinet, then 
the number of ports to be tested equals the number of cords. If they are 
combined within the system and only one cord exits the cabinet then only one 
test is required.

This opinion is in part based on my interpretation of the text found in the  
informative Annex B section B.5

There are caveats to this of course.


· If there are multiple power cords exiting the EUT but some or all of 
these cords power identical devices then only one of the identical devices need 
be tested


· If any of the devices within the system are sold separately (and they 
have an intrinsic function ) or if the system can exist in various 
configurations  of devices then the devices must pass on their own.


· If the system is just a collection of devices set up to perform a 
function without a some sort of cabinet or rack to hold them, then that is not 
a true system and the individual devices must pass on their own

Quite apart from this though, experience has taught me that ignoring a known 
weakness found at the design stage will often bite you in the field.


Kind regards
Kevin


From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2019 2:14 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-4-5 Surge Testing Single plug vs. multiple plug 
system


I feel sure that
"When testing line to ground, the lines are tested singly in sequence, if there 
is no other
specification."

is about 3-phase supplies, not multiple mains leads.

Best wishes

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates 
www.woodjohn.uk

Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2019-01-03 01:15, John Howe wrote:
IEC 61000-4-5 (2005) does cover this and implies in section 8.3 (page 38 in my 
copy):
"In the case of several identical circuits, representative measurements 
(plural) on a selected number
of circuits may be sufficient. "
and further down:
"When testing line to ground, the lines are tested singly in sequence, if there 
is no other
specification."

From testing experience the only out we had for a client to test them all 
together (usually because they did not want to pay for individual testing) was 
if they were designed to be plugged into the same circuit breaker - which kind 
of defeats the purpose of having multiple cords. If you think about it if the 
cords are plugged into different circuits then the surge path to the individual 
cords can be different and you should not model it as equal on all cords - it 
could be out of phase as much as 180 degrees giving twice the surge across 2 
cords. So keeping the other plugs at normal while the one cord is tested seems 
to be good practice.

My opinions only and not necessarily those of the company I work for



On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 3:35 PM John Woodgate 
mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk>> wrote:

Should you be testing a 'system' as a whole anyway? My take on this is that if 
several pieces of equipment are invoiced together with a single price for the 
lot, that is a system and all must be tested together. But if the pieces are 
invoiced separately (so that other equipment might be substituted for some in 
another instance), that is not a system and the pieces should be tested 
separately.

The authors of 61000-4-5 and 61326-x might well not have addressed the case of 
multiple power cords. The test house 'advice' seems reasonable, but it is not 
official and another test house might offer other advice.

Best wishes

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates 
www.woodjohn.uk

Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2019-01-02 22:15, Larry K. Stillings wrote:
All,

I received the following email from a customer today via their customer 
addressing our application of surge testing. We are testing laboratory 
equipment per IEC/EN 61326-1 and IEC/EN 61326-2-6 and specifically are having 
failures with respect to surge on a system that has multiple power cords. We 
are testing one power cord at a time. Here are their comments

we have never tested a system comprised of multiple instruments in this way 
before. i.e. applying surge to one unit at a time – we have always, with 
agreement from our customers, applied surge (and in fact all tests) to all of 
the units plugged into e.g. a mains distribution b

Re: [PSES] Safety Test Templates Question

[Kevin J Harris]

Hi Doug

The testing templates were for tests found in either IEC 60950 or IEC 62368.

Kevin



From: Doug Powell [mailto:doug...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2018 1:27 PM
To: Kevin J Harris 
Cc: EMC-PSTC 
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety Test Templates Question

Interesting question/

Can you be more specific on the type of test or the standards involved.  Most 
IEC-based test report forms I use have P, F, NA

Thx, Doug

Douglas E Powell
Laporte, Colorado USA
doug...@gmail.com<mailto:doug...@gmail.com>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdougp01&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cd5f7f9454de21aeb08d5f89d3157%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C63668827638677&sdata=F1yGeOvyb2%2F32VT%2FSeqOxZq4n1w%2FiQtgOf7KeO%2BMt48%3D&reserved=0>

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 11:21 AM Kevin J Harris 
mailto:kevin.3.har...@jci.com>> wrote:
Hello

On test templates from several laboratories I have noticed where they indicate 
whether or not a particular test was successful or not, that there is an 
arrangement of text such as this

Conforms:Y □N  □
Non-Conforms:  Y □N  □

Is there a technical or legal reason behind this sort of double statement?


Thanks

Kevin

-


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

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Femc-pstc.html&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cd5f7f9454de21aeb08d5f89d3157%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C63668827638677&sdata=E1NBRrd7wOw%2BVvG0CEQf5jz92zyFSbt%2B6mJOlJOdKyo%3D&reserved=0>

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fproduct-compliance.oc.ieee.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cd5f7f9454de21aeb08d5f89d3157%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C63668827638677&sdata=Ec3Izrz63jHb9xM5LOodt%2FF8i2AGN1jcBM2t7y%2FBLYA%3D&reserved=0>
 can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cd5f7f9454de21aeb08d5f89d3157%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C63668827638677&sdata=n9MjmtF46fMCAm6LoUcJV4LY9eDkLjsw1e2S%2BbCnszE%3D&reserved=0>
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flist.html&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cd5f7f9454de21aeb08d5f89d3157%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C63668827638677&sdata=8G3iglnsKr%2BzisP3oSFo2LjJRfaV1grJX%2FVKNddQ3gw%3D&reserved=0>
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flistrules.html&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cd5f7f9454de21aeb08d5f89d3157%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C63668827638677&sdata=m1M3sJ84pRy96FMIutrlf3yHNbX%2BkUs0UQtU%2FItt8N8%3D&reserved=0>

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

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


--

Douglas E Powell

doug...@gmail.com<mailto:doug...@gmail.com>
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdougp01&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cd5f7f9454de21aeb08d5f89d3157%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C63668827638677&sdata=F1yGeOvyb2%2F32VT%2FSeqOxZq4n1w%2FiQtgOf7KeO%2BMt48%3D&reserved=0>

-

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


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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-p

[PSES] Safety Test Templates Question

[Kevin J Harris]

Hello

On test templates from several laboratories I have noticed where they indicate 
whether or not a particular test was successful or not, that there is an 
arrangement of text such as this

Conforms:Y □N  □
Non-Conforms:  Y □N  □

Is there a technical or legal reason behind this sort of double statement?


Thanks

Kevin


-

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


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

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

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

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

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

[PSES] Product Safety Testing and Evaluation training.

[Kevin J Harris]

Hello

I am looking recommendations for companies (preferably in North America) that 
can provide training in product safety testing and evaluation to engineers who 
are beginning their career.
Ideally the training would concentrate on IEC 62368-1


Kind regards

Kevin


-

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


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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] EN50131-1 Battery spec vs. Environmental class

[Kevin J Harris]

Hello Amund

Sorry for the late reply on this

Not to rain on your parade any further but the upper operating temperature  for 
Class II is 55 C not 40 C. The note for Clause 7.2 in EN 50131-1 is not 
correct.  Not sure why that has never been fixed but it might be because notes 
cannot contain requirements.  In any case EN 50131-1 points to EN 50130-5 for 
the actual test conditions. EN 50130-5 Tables 1 and 3 give the high and low 
test temperatures per environmental class In this case, perhaps Class I would 
better suit your needs giving an operating range of +5C  to 40 C

Requirements for temperature range are independent of security grade. 

Kevin

-Original Message-
From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 12:54 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] EN50131-1 Battery spec vs. Environmental class

Depends on Security Grade requirements and where the battery is stored.

Li batteries can be used in discharge mode to -20C.  Have only done one project 
for this, where the battery temperature was monitored by the charger, and shut 
down charge current when outside rated temperature range, but allowed discharge 
to -20C.

Brian


From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 11:42 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] EN50131-1 Battery spec vs. Environmental class

EN50131-1: Alarm systems - Intrusion and hold-up systems -- Part 1: System 
requirements

>From the standard:
Environmental Class II: Indoor General (-10º to +40º)


Li-Ion batteries may have this spec:
Charging: 0º C to 45º C
Discharge/standby: -20ºC to +50º C:

As I understand the Li-Ion tech, the batteries should not be charged when 
temperature is below 0º C and that means it's not possible to qualify for 
Environmental Class II (-10º to +40º) Indoor General.
Unless you monitor the temperature and prevents charging when temperature is 
under 0º C, but that may lead you into other trouble if temperature remains low 
over a long period.
Any others who has considered the same case and agree?

Best regards
Amund 

-

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


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Femc-pstc.html&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cc0a39794c03b470fc91808d5a483eafc%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C636595808842425913&sdata=65cQQRJHzQshZzuatB2%2Fj6lETF4ER%2BjnYO2cHX0APgo%3D&reserved=0

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fproduct-compliance.oc.ieee.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cc0a39794c03b470fc91808d5a483eafc%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C636595808842425913&sdata=MZ8TV0OZPFlVykiMyVARYmWpE5y5i8UDbseX%2BYfMug4%3D&reserved=0
 can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website:  
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cc0a39794c03b470fc91808d5a483eafc%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C636595808842425913&sdata=v4ddC5%2FhidyqnotTSsHlJrQM20RJ9rICdNbo8PBLwWE%3D&reserved=0
Instructions:  
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flist.html&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cc0a39794c03b470fc91808d5a483eafc%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C636595808842425913&sdata=NvdSP%2FGMdFRyVmHShKs58ZpUAO9yIanAAVbXmG8nYx0%3D&reserved=0
 (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee-pses.org%2Flistrules.html&data=02%7C01%7Ckevin.3.harris%40jci.com%7Cc0a39794c03b470fc91808d5a483eafc%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C636595808842425913&sdata=1tiEukKNR1jIkJUQu5Gjs5CHomI4AhOy2l7K3YkWEcI%3D&reserved=0

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

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

-

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


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

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

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

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