RE: Company close down due to EMC phenomena
Guys, I don't think we want to forget that just one of these units will be in use. What would a whole country full of these units do to a mains network? I'd guess it to be very noisy indeed! Michael Sundstrom NOKIA TCC Dallas / EMC ofc: (972) 374-1462 cell: (817) 917-5021 amateur call: KB5UKT -Original Message- From: ext Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 6:19 AM To: am...@westin-emission.no; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Company close down due to EMC phenomena It sounds as though... The instantaneous emissions aren't as high as an EFT burst or other type of transient phenomenon. So, this product causing a hard upset of electronics is probably not a problem. When the conducted emissions limits were set, they were mostly dealing with whether the product would interfere with radio or TV. As a matter of fact, the quasi-peak and average detectors are used in order to simulate the response of the human ear. I'm curious. If you set this product right next to a radio. Would a human being even be able to perceive the 25millisecond burst? 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 | -Original Message- From: am...@westin-emission.no [SMTP:am...@westin-emission.no] Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 3:17 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Company close down due to EMC phenomena Well, this might be the reality in a case I have been introduced to lately. Case: A company are manufacturing PowerLine Communication products. They communicate via the power lines and a typical link is between a consumer residence and the nearest power station. The products can of course also communicate inside the consumers residence. The communication protocol is called CEBus http://www.cebus.org/which and make use of the frequency band 100kHz-400kHz and the amplitude is approximate 2-5V. A typical length of a transmission is 25ms and occurs approximate one time pr hour. First of all, AFAIK PowerLine Communication and PowerLine Transmission (broadband 1.6MHz-30MHz) are now coming will full force in EU and CENELEC/ETSI are working together regulate this type of transmission path and also coming up with standards. The problem for the manufacturer is the conducted emission requirements in EU. According to the EN55022B levels the maximum quasi-peak emission is 66dBuV@150kHz, and a typical PLC (under transmission) which has been measured, showed the value of 120dBuV (peak). With no transmission it had a margin of 10dB (quasi-peak) and 30dB (average). The radiated emission had a margin of 10dB. Well, conducted emission is the problem when transmitting. But, as I said, the transmission occurs only 25ms/hour. The national authority will not allowed this product to be placed into the marked because it do not fulfil the EN55022B limits (100kHz-400kHz) under transmission mode. No way. Other national authorities have other approaches on this case, they say as long as you do not disturb other equipment, install it. If you do disturb, we will come and remove it. They also say install it even if it does not fulfil EN550022B, but we will remove it if it disturb others. Two completely different approaches as you see. Questions: 1. Is it possible to have different approaches within EU ? 2. Since PLC/PLT is quite new technology and since we do not have any EU product standard (no standard for whose who are using 100kHz-400kHz band), I like the approach as long as you do not disturb other equipment, install it. If you do disturb, we will come and remove it. What is your opinion about this? 3. The transmission occurs very seldom. 25ms/hour, that is 7e-6 and approximate 0,001% transmission rate. Can this seldom transmission rate be an argument to not test the PLC product under continuous transmission ? I would say yes, but which rate is acceptable / reasonable ? So, why should the company close down ? Because if the national authority gets what they want, there will be one sale. Logical, but is it a correct prohibition the authority call? 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: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute:
RE: LISN Calibration
The only problem I see with not calibrating the LISN is you wouldn't know if / or when it goes bad until you cross check it with a calibrated LISN. I would suggest you run your precompliance lab just like the real lab. This way you'll get the same results as the accredited lab you test with. No surprises this way. Michael Sundstrom NOKIA TCC Dallas / EMC ofc: (972) 374-1462 cell: (817) 917-5021 amateur call: KB5UKT -Original Message- From: ext Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 9:06 PM To: marti...@appliedbiosystems.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: LISN Calibration I would say that if it came calibrated from the manufacturer and has not suffered visible damage it should be okay. It is easy to check a few spot frequencies or use a spectrum analyzer with tracking generator or separate sweeping sig gen to check performance. Either way it is not a big deal. on 11/28/01 4:15 PM, marti...@appliedbiosystems.com at marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote: We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab. One of the tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions per EN 61326. I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance measurements that calibration of the LISN is not required. However, do you recommend calibrating the LISN for pre-compliance measurements? If so, why? Your responses are appreciated Regards Joe Martin Applied Biosystems --- 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. --- 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: EMC test table construction plans
We use a styrofoam table here at our lab, it is a round plug of styrofoam 80cm tall and 1m across. This has worked the best for us, and it has the least reflections at any frequency we can reliably test at. I would guess that some form of hard material on top of this type of table would support 200lBs. Michael Sundstrom NOKIA TCC Dallas / EMC ofc: (972) 374-1462 cell: (817) 917-5021 amateur call: KB5UKT -Original Message- From: ext Pommerenke, David [mailto:davi...@ece.umr.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:16 PM To: 'POWELL, DOUG'; EMC-PSTC (E-mail) Subject: RE: EMC test table construction plans Doug, For emissions and immunity you should not use any wood in the table. It will significantly (+/-2 dB up to 1 GHz for emissions , more above, +/-10 dB for immunity up to 1 GHz) change the test result. My experience has shown that Styrofoam is basicly the best material. There are a couple of published papers on this issue. As surface material the following worked out fine: - Foamed PVC (rather stiff, low dielectric constant due to the foamed nature), maybe 4 mm thick. - PE sheet, maybe 2 mm thick. David Pommerenke -Original Message- From: POWELL, DOUG [mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 11:38 AM To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail) Subject: EMC test table construction plans Hello all, I plan to construct my own insulated EMC test table for a 5 meter chamber. Seems simple enough to do and I could easily come up with something. I thought I might first ask for input from those of you in the discussion group who have experience or maybe even construction plans. Here are some features I want: 1) I will be testing products that weight up to 200 Lbs (91 kg). 2) I want to minimize metalic fastners. 3) I would like to make it a pivoting table (not motorized). 4) Height is 80 cm. 5) The surface should be replacable if it gets badly worn or scarred. I'm thinking of using hardboard. 6) Suggestions on length width? -doug --- Douglas E. Powell, Compliance Engineer Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. Mail stop: 203024 1626 Sharp Point Drive Ft. Collins, CO 80525 970.407.6410 (phone) 970-407.5410 (fax) mailto:doug.pow...@aei.com --- _ This message, including any attachments, may contain information that is confidential and proprietary information of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. The dissemination, distribution, use or copying of this message or any of its attachments is strictly prohibited without the express written consent of Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. --- This message is from the IEEE 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. --- 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
RE: Difference between SA and Receiver
Most analyzers are not CISPR 16 compliant. Receivers are always easer to read QP and Avg. directly. If you can pass the CISPR limits with a peak reading (analyzer), you can most definitely pass the QP / Avg. limits with a receiver. For official testing a compliant (CISPR 16) device is always needed to measure with. Michael Sundstrom NOKIA TCC Dallas / EMC ofc: (972) 374-1462 cell: (817) 917-5021 amateur call: KB5UKT -Original Message- From: ext Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:21 AM To: Muriel Bittencourt de Liz; EMC-PSTC List Subject: Re: Difference between SA and Receiver Assuming 50/60 Hz power and CE measurements made at a CISPR 16 LISN EMI port, the only possible difference I can think of is increased probability of 50/60 Hz overload with a spectrum analyzer capable of measurements that low. If your spectrum analyzer doesn't tune below 9 kHz, that shouldn't be a problem. In any case, the CE limits are such that you can easily afford to put a 20 dB pad on the LISN port and that should stop any overload effect. An EMI receiver provides several features different than an analyzer: increased sensitivity, front end filtering (preselection), and (typically) a variety of detection modes, although spectrum analyzers are catching up in this regards. If you need to make average measurements, this is more easily accomplished with an EMI receiver. -- From: Muriel Bittencourt de Liz mur...@eel.ufsc.br To: EMC-PSTC List emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Difference between SA and Receiver Date: Thu, Nov 1, 2001, 8:15 AM Hello Group, What are the differences that result using: 1. A Spectrum Analyzer (SA) or 2. A Receiver When I make measurements of conducted emissions of an equipment?? Best Regards Muriel --- 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. --- 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.
