Re: [PSES] safety under single fault

[Mark Gandler]

Just a simple reminder, especially if anyone uses their employer or private 
business devices to use AI tools: the information used for questions 
immediately and forever becomes public property.

-Original Message-
From: Ralph McDiarmid 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 2:08 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] safety under single fault

Here's what ChatGPT 3.5 says about fault-tolerance and general aviation
aircraft:

Fault-tolerance systems in general aviation aircraft can enhance safety, but 
their inclusion is not mandatory for all such aircraft.  The need for 
fault-tolerance systems depends on several factors, including the type of 
aircraft, its complexity, and its intended use.

General aviation aircraft range from small, simple, single-engine planes to 
larger, more complex, and technologically advanced aircraft. The level of fault 
tolerance required often correlates with the complexity and mission profile of 
the aircraft.  Here are some considerations:

Simple Aircraft: Small, single-engine general aviation aircraft often have 
basic systems and controls. While they are not required to have elaborate 
fault-tolerance systems, safety measures such as redundant flight instruments 
and simple backup systems might be included.

Advanced Aircraft: More complex general aviation aircraft, such as multi-engine 
planes or those equipped with advanced avionics, might incorporate redundant 
systems or fail-safe features to improve safety. For example, they might have 
redundant power sources, dual avionics systems, or backup instruments.

Mission Profile: The intended use of the aircraft can also influence the need 
for fault-tolerance systems. Aircraft used for critical missions, like air 
ambulance or search and rescue, might have more robust safety features to 
ensure that they can operate in adverse conditions.

Regulations: Aviation authorities like the FAA in the United States set safety 
standards for various aircraft categories. These standards may dictate the 
inclusion of certain safety features, depending on the aircraft's size and use. 
For example, Part 23 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) in the U.S. 
specifies the airworthiness standards for general aviation aircraft.

In summary, while fault-tolerance systems can enhance the safety of general 
aviation aircraft, their inclusion is not a blanket requirement for all such 
aircraft. It depends on factors such as the aircraft's complexity, mission 
profile, and regulatory standards. Pilots and aircraft operators should adhere 
to relevant safety regulations and guidelines, which may vary from one country 
to another.


Ralph

-Original Message-
From: Richard Nute 
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 12:41 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] safety under single fault

Hello from Bend, Oregon:

On September 4, 2022, a plane carrying 10 people crashed into Puget Sound's 
Mutiny Bay near Whidbey Island.  The National Transportation Safety Board, 
which investigated the crash, said Thursday that a single component of a 
critical flight control system failed, causing an unrecoverable, near-vertical 
descent.

"The Mutiny Bay accident is an incredibly painful reminder that a single point 
of failure can lead to catastrophe in our skies," NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy 
said in a news release.

Nate Bingham, who is representing the Ludwigs' families, said the plane crashed 
because of "an antiquated design with a single point of failure."

Details:
https://apnews.com/article/seaplane-crash-puget-sound-san-juan-island-10-kil
led-531d4e5a2dfed65370294243b1a07157

This incident serves to remind us that in our field of product safety, we 
require the product to be safe even in the event of a failure of any single 
component.

Best regards,
Rich



Boats from the U.S. Coast Guard and Kitsap County Sheriff's Office search the 
area off Whidbey Island north of Seattle on Sept. 5, 2022, where a chartered 
floatplane crashed the day before, killing 10 people. Stephen Brashear/AP file






-

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:
https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/

Website:  https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/
Instructions:  https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe)
List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Sherman at: msherma...@comcast.net  Rick 
Linford at: linf...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> > 
_
To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link:

Re: [PSES] Timeframe for new FCC registration

[Mark Gandler]

Brian,

For the context, by "registration number", do you mean FCC/ISED ID numbers? I 
would estimate you are using TCB route? If yes, and if there are no major 
findings, like reports deficiencies which will require re-test, it takes an 
average of 2-3 weeks for TCB to review and to be able to submit to FCC and ISED 
databases.

Mark

From: Brian Gregory 
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 1:44 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] Timeframe for new FCC registration

 Hello,

I'd like to have all options fleshed out prior to committing to a fairly 
expensive quote for full FCC & ISED re-test and re-register our level 2 EV 
Charging unit for residential applications, which already has FCC and ISED 
registration numbers.   If we choose the option of not refreshing the 
registration for our current FCC / ISED, only completing the testing & 
reportage for Subpart C and spurious emissions in order to realize substantial 
savings, then we'd have to start a new FCC registration.

About how long is the process to get a new FCC and ISED registration, after all 
the testing and reports are complete?

Background
We have a quote for the full set of EMC testing to refresh our FCC and ISED 
registrations, based on several board changes.  In order to maintain our FCC 
registration, time has come for re-test and we've scoped out full Subpart B and 
Subpart C testing for BLE, BT classic and 802.11, even though our chip has it's 
own FCC ID.  We completed a Self-Declaration (SDoC) process for some minor 
changes completed in early summer, but the component changes continued so it's 
time to re-test and re-register.   The main circuits and WiFi chip 
implementation have not changed.

Thanks,
Colorado Brian




This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to All 
emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/

Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/
Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Sherman at: msherma...@comcast.net
Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org

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



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

-

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


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org/

Website:  https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/
Instructions:  https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to 
unsubscribe)
List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Sherman at: msherma...@comcast.net
Rick Linford at: linf...@ieee.org

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

Re: [PSES] 80/80 rule

[Mark Gandler]

John,

would be beneficial if you can share your earliest recollection of the dates, 
besides stating it dates back much further.

Mark

From: John Woodgate 
Organization: J M Woodgate and Associates
Reply-To: John Woodgate 
Date: Monday, November 18, 2019 at 11:18 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: [PSES] 80/80 rule


Thanks for your response, but the rule dates back much further.

Best wishes

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates 
www.woodjohn.uk

Rayleigh, Essex UK
On 2019-11-18 18:22, Larry K. Stillings wrote:
Hi John,

There is an IEEE presentation dated 1992, but you may already be aware of that? 
Unfortunately my IEEE account doesn’t have access to that document, it might 
have some useful references.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/168355

Larry K. Stillings
Compliance Worldwide, Inc.
Test Locally, Sell Globally and Launch Your Products Around the World!
FCC - Wireless - Telecom - CE Marking - International Approvals - Product Safety
357 Main Street
Sandown, NH 03873
(603) 887 3903 Fax 887-6445
www.complianceworldwide.com

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you 
are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of 
the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to 
anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the 
sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not 
consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and 
other information in this message that do not relate to the official business 
of my firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

From: John Woodgate
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 12:55 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] 80/80 rule


Can someone tell me when the 80/80 rule was introduced into CISPR standards and 
if possible, a bit more detail than just the date, please?

--

Best wishes

John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only

J M Woodgate and Associates 
www.woodjohn.uk

Rayleigh, Essex UK
-


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

[PSES] Compliance Engineer Opportunity at SpaceX

[Mark Gandler]

List Members,

Friend at SpaceX is looking to hire their first ever compliance engineer to 
help define strategy/standards for their first consumer product globally under 
their Starlink program. This is an opportunity to work for a game changing 
space and soon to be internet company.

Here is the job post. https://grnh.se/acfc73d22.

Please contact Jennifer Tran with all of the inquiries and responses. 
jennifer.t...@spacex.com<mailto:jennifer.t...@spacex.com>; P: 310.970.3507

Thank you,

Mark Gandler





-

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] Compliance/Safety Engineer Position at juniper

[Mark Gandler]

Hi,

Juniper Networks has an open position for Compliance/Safety Engineer at 
Sunnyvale location.

Major focus is on Product Safety: design, testing, report writing, planning. 
NEBS, Telecom and Wireless are desired.

Please see full description at:

https://careers.juniper.net/careers/careers/jobdescription.html?jid=939161

Please contact me directly at mgand...@juniper.net<mailto:mgand...@juniper.net>

Thank you,

Mark Gandler (Hiring Manager)

-

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] Looking for an experienced NEBS GR 63 engineer

[Mark Gandler]

Group,
Juniper is looking for an experienced NEBS GR63 (ETSI, IEC) staff engineer.
Below is the job description. Please forward this to anyone might be interested 
and guide them directly to me. 

Position is in Sunnyvale CA.

Thanks,
Mark Gandler
Juniper
About the Position: Compliance Engineer Staff
Critical and technical leadership role in designing and evaluating products for 
NEBS GR63 Compliance.
Responsibilities:   Manages NEBS deliverables   
Leads technical assessments Develops test plans 
Implements existing processes and develops new ones Guides NEBS 
team members through troubleshootingInterfaces with external 
customers, such as ATT and VerizonCollaborates with internal 
stakeholders, such as HW, Mechanical, Power to implement NEBS requirements into 
product design   Minimum Qualifications: BSEE or higher 

5 years of NEBS experience years in Telco industry
 
 
Preferred Qualifications:Equivalent Degree in Mechanical or Thermal Eng 
with acoustic design and testing
Ability
 to create test plans to address budget requests, prototype allocation 
and basic understanding of product development cycles
 
 
Other Information:  Relocation could be available for this 
position
Local travel to and from test labs, about 25% of the time
  
-

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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] Translation of EU Declaration

[Mark Gandler]

another factor to consider while analyzing the request for DoC translation. 
Some EU countries, for example France, have language laws, dictating all 
information available to the user to be translated to an official language. 
This by default will cover DoC. This is particularly important for consumer 
products. 
In my previous life I have to deal with French officials demanding DoC and 
entire manuals, not just install/setup guide to be translated into French. 
Mark 
 
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 22:09:54 +
From: patricia.knud...@teradata.com
Subject: Re: [PSES] Translation of EU Declaration
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG









The RoHS recast directive has the same requirement, which is now in effect.  We 
translated our DoCs into the five most common languages of the EU countries 
where we ship and made them available if anyone asks
 (an English version goes with the equipment).  So far no one has asked for a 
translated copy.
 
 
Patty Knudsen

Teradata

 
 


From: Jim Hulbert [mailto:jim.hulb...@pb.com]


Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 8:13 AM

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: [PSES] Translation of EU Declaration


 
The re-cast EMCD and LVD both state that the EU declaration must be translated 
into the language required by a member state into which the apparatus is to be 
made available.  Does that mean a product sold throughout the EU must have a 
declaration
 translated into all 20+ languages?
 
Jim Hulbert
Pitney Bowes
 



 
-


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

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

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

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/

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

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html


For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net

Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org

David Heald dhe...@gmail.com 




-



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


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


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



Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

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

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html


For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net

Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org


For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher  j.bac...@ieee.org

David Heald dhe...@gmail.com

  
-

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

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

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

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

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

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

Re: [PSES] Spark Gap PCB Layout on AC Mains

[mark gandler]

Brian,

The main safety considerations in using VDR/MOV or MOV and GDT in series in 
primary circuit  (at least per 60950) are outlined in  section 1.5.9 and Annex Q

 

One key factor is about to change in EN60950-1 A2 (currently released as 
IEC60950-1 ed2.2 and draft A2 for EN60950-1). Previous revisions allowed BASIC 
insulation to be bridged by MOV and GDT if met certain conditions (perm. 
Connected equipment, Pluggable Type B and perm. Connected earth) and GDT 
complying with FUNCTIONAL insulation requirements and spacing.

 

New A2 will require GDT bridging BASIC insulation to comply with BASIC 
insulation requirements and spacing. 

 

And it is not allowed to bridge Double, re-enforced or supplementary insulation 
by VDR.

 

mark

 

From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:31 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Spark Gap PCB Layout on AC Mains

 

What are the safety considerations using gas tubes on the AC mains? Do you have 
to fuse them or are they not likely to fail shorted? Can you use them between 
line and PE? Do you have to use multiple parts in series? I often see them in 
series with MOVs in a “T” configuration to protect against line to line and 
line to PE surges.

 

A few year back we had a product that had several surge suppression circuits 
located on different PC boards within (some assemblies were very expensive and 
we wanted to protect them). Well, at our customer site they experienced some 
kind of huge surge, transient or overvoltage (we do not know what exactly 
happened). Of all the equipment that was on-site including many of our 
competitors equipment, only our instrument was damaged. Our surge suppressors 
were blown up, charred, and/or vaporized.  The warranty repair cost was 
$10,000US but the hit to our reputation was probably worst. We believed that 
our equipment probably protected all the other equipment on-site but it is hard 
to get your customers to believe you. So now we want to better control our 
surge protection and if we see a huge surge we hope it to destroy something 
much less expensive to replace or at least minimize the damage. 

 

What we are currently thinking is to use over the counter Surge Suppressor 
modules, but they are only good to about 3KV – 4KV. Then we thought we would 
add a spark-gap in the board that would only kick in if our surge suppressors 
failed. Maybe we can add some very high voltage Gas Tubes also or instead of 
the spark-gap.  I’m not sure what more we can do. Many of the 
circuits/assemblies we are trying to protect are buy/sell components where we 
do not control spacings. 

 

Any comments?

 

Thanks to all.

 

The Other Brian

 

From: Anthony Thomson [mailto:ton...@europe.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 4:18 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Spark Gap PCB Layout on AC Mains

 

Hello Brian,

 

I've employed spark gaps, like you, not because you 'have' to but because it 
seemed good practice. It involved a control installation with cables strung 
externally.

 

My advice is to use propriatory discharge tubes. They're cheap and  their 
performance is more predictable than engineering your own air gap across PCB 
tracks or using pointy pins and are much less influenced physical and 
environmental conditions such as temperature and humidity, etc. And should they 
ever be needed, the consequences can be much less messy.

 

I found a good selection available and looked at PCB mounting tubes with 
breakdown voltages of between 3 and 12 kV. I finally used 4kV, 5kA/10kA (10/1 
discharges) devices having been influenced by what professional LAN  GPS 
installers were using which largely ranged between 3 and 6 kV.

 

Just my thoughts.

T

 

 

 

 

 

- Original Message -

From: Kunde, Brian

Sent: 09/06/13 04:56 PM

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: [PSES] Spark Gap PCB Layout on AC Mains

 

Our engineers are working on an AC Mains Distribution PCB. Like most electronic 
devices, we have seen the damage caused by lightning strikes. So we are 
increasing our creepage and clearance distances as wide as we can and still 
meet other requirements.

 

But no matter what spacing you design to, there is a lightning bolt out there 
that will exceed the design and it will arc somewhere. So the question came up 
to whether it makes sense to deliberately make a weak spot, or an area where 
the clearance is slightly smaller to control where a lightning/surge pulse will 
arc and/or discharge, like a Spark-Gap.

 

I have seen spark-gap lay outs on PC boards on I/O connectors; usually for ESD 
protection,  but not on AC Mains. Is this a bad bad idea or something worth 
doing?  Pros and Cons? Other suggestions??

 

Thanks to all for your help.

 

The Other Brian


  _  


LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential 
information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by 

Re: [PSES] Safety and Altitude and GDT

[mark gandler]

Thank you everyone for sending your feedbacks.
Asking any question at the same as spark gap question its like releasing your 
indie film on the same weekend as Spider-man 


Limited responses were ranging from never heard of anyone asking for more than 
2000m to different to 2500; 3048, 4000 and 5000
To you only need 5000m if applying for CCC

Let me try to spice up the discussion a bit. Below is the language from 
IEC60950-1 ed2.2 :

For all other equipment, it is permitted to bridge BASIC INSULATION by a VDR 
in series with a
GDT provided that:
− the VDR complies with the requirements of Annex Q; and
− the GDT complies with:
• the electric strength test for BASIC INSULATION; and
• the external CLEARANCE and CREEPAGE DISTANCE requirements for BASIC 
INSULATION.

We had a case applying power supply to CCC requiring Internal spacing of GDT to 
comply with clearances and creepages as well. 

Did anyone else have this or similar experiences and why would anyone care 
about GDT internal spacing? 
And just to confirm: GDT spacing requirements will have to be adjusted for 
altitude as well, correct? 


-Original Message-
From: Boštjan Glavič [mailto:bostjan.gla...@siq.si] 
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 10:42 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety and Altitude

Exactly, I only listed what we have tested for CB in general. I know that Peru 
has no national deviations but many cities are above 3000m.

Best regards,
Bostjan

-Original Message-
From: Paul Wang [mailto:paulw...@gmcompliance.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 7:34 AM
To: Boštjan Glavič; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: 答复: [PSES] Safety and Altitude

For China CCC, there is no 2500m, 3048m, only 2000m and 5000m.
So you have the choice to add the altitude symbol to show the using condition 
is below 2000m, or you can test the clearance distance to meet the higher 
altitude requirements.
If you are certifying a product with CCC certified power supply, the power 
supply need to be approved to the new GB4943 standard first. If the power 
supply can be used below 2000m only, the end product also need to declare the 
2000m altitude.

Paul Wang (王卫波)
GM Compliance,Inc.Beijing Office
Tel:86-10-58203318
Cell:86-13810026747

-邮件原件-
发件人: Boštjan Glavič [mailto:bostjan.gla...@siq.si] 
发送时间: 2013年9月6日 11:20
收件人: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
主题: Re: [PSES] Safety and Altitude

In addition to 5000m and 2000m we have also approved products up to 2500m, 
3048m and 4000m.

Best regards,

Bostjan Glavic
SIQ

On 6. sep. 2013, at 03:12, IBM Ken 
ibm...@gmail.commailto:ibm...@gmail.com wrote:

I've used a number of different altitudes beyond the 2000m default (scaling 
based on IEC 60664 as mentioned in annex G of '950).

You may know this, but I just want to point out- your product does not have to 
*function* at 5000m, it can shut down for OT or whatever, they just seem to 
want the spacings set for 5000m.

You also have the option of labelling with the no mountains graphic if you 
can't get 5000m spacings.
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Mark Gandler 
markgand...@hotmail.commailto:markgand...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi there,

Wanted to get some simple data point based on your experiences across different 
companies and industries: what are an altitude levels been used while 
evaluating 60950-1 isolation requirements? By default you get 2000m, how many 
of you used different levels?
This is driven by 5000m CCC requirement and some critical power supply 
component limitations.
If there will be enough responses, I’ll send back statistical breakdown.

Thank you for reading,
Mark
-


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 
LT;emc-p...@ieee.orgmailto:emc-p...@ieee.orgGT;

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

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

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas LT;emcp...@radiusnorth.netmailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.netGT;
Mike Cantwell LT;mcantw...@ieee.orgmailto:mcantw...@ieee.orgGT;

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher LT;j.bac...@ieee.orgmailto:j.bac...@ieee.orgGT;
David Heald LT;dhe...@gmail.commailto:dhe...@gmail.comGT;

-


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.orgmailto:emc-p...@ieee.org

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

[PSES] Safety and Altitude

[Mark Gandler]

Hi there,
 
Wanted to get some simple data point based on your experiences across different 
companies and industries: what are an altitude levels been used while 
evaluating 60950-1 isolation requirements? By default you get 2000m, how many 
of you used different levels? 
This is driven by 5000m CCC requirement and some critical power supply 
component limitations. 
If there will be enough responses, I’ll send back statistical breakdown. 
 
Thank you for reading,
Mark  
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

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

Re: [PSES] Retest because of supersded standard?

[mark gandler]

Lauren,

According to EU Directives all products to be placed on the market must
comply with current regulations and applicable standards. There are 2 major
sides to your question: did the product change? Did the requirements change?
You must evaluate and access your product vs new/updated standard. You can
easily come up to the conclusion what no re-test is required as there were
no changes in the standard affecting your unchanged product. This should be
documented somewhere as part of your technical assessment and DoC should be
updated to indicate new standard revision. 

Mark

 

From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Crane,
Lauren
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 1:05 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Retest because of supersded standard?

 

Dear Experts, 

 

A test lab is suggesting that because EN61000-6-4:2007 will be superseded in
2014, all conforming products must be retested to the new standard, even if
no changes have occurred in the product. 

 

Is this a fair claim?

 

Regards,

Lauren Crane

KLA-Tencor

 

-


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

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

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

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

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


-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

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

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

Re: [PSES] new EMC Directive

[mark gandler]

In the spirit of the changes and on a slim chance this was not brought up
before,

there will be updated LVD and new RE Directive, formerly known as RTTE
Directive coming to your neighborhood theater. 

RE is a new Radio Equipment directive, dropping Telecom and Terminal out of
it. 

Main idea is to streamline the directives, to address common concerns like
market placing, responsibilities, market surveillance, DoC format and
others.  

Mark

 

From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Crane,
Lauren
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 11:13 AM
To: Ted Eckert; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: new EMC Directive

 

Thanks for the links, Ted. 

 

Some context on the EU legislative process - The document Ted provided the
links to is the input proposal from the EU Commission to the Council and the
Parliament. As those two houses debate things, amendments to the
Commission proposal will be put forward and argued over. The output document
might look a little different from this input document. Also, I *think* it
is correct that the changes highlighted with grey are up for discussion
but those that are not greyed have to stay put. 

 

If you don't like what is proposed there is a chance to have your voice
heard, particularly if it is channeled through an industry organization with
representatives willing to travel to Brussels. 

 

 

Regards,

Lauren Crane

KLA-Tencor

 

From: Ted Eckert [mailto:ted.eck...@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 10:44 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] new EMC Directive

 

You will find information on the New Legislative Framework (NLF) alignment
for the EMC Directive at the following link.

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/electrical/emc/index_en.htm

 

If your e-mail accepts embedded links, you can find the draft here
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0765:FIN:EN:
PDF . This draft has the changes marked.

 

Regards,

Ted Eckert

Compliance Engineer

Microsoft Corporation

ted.eck...@microsoft.com

 

The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my
employer.

 

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Brian Oconnell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 10:24 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: new EMC Directive

 

They, a grouping of 'them', met in December. Here is a synopsis:

http://www.metlabs.com/blog/emc/proposed-emc-directive-revision-has-new-not

ified-body-requirements/

 

Perhaps the EMC experts of this august body can expound for the corps of
unwashed compliance engineers.

 

In a similar conspiracy, the FCC published a NPRM (FCC 13-39) for human
exposure requirements.

 

Brian

-Original Message-

From:  mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org [
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Knighten,
Jim L

Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 9:17 AM

To:  mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: new EMC Directive

 

 

I hear that there is a new EMC Directive being put forward.  (The current
directive is Directive EMC 2004/108/EC.)

 

Does anyone know what changes this proposed new EMC Directive implements.

 

Jim

 

__

 

James L. Knighten, Ph.D.

EMC Engineer

Teradata Corporation

17095 Via Del Campo

San Diego, CA 92127

 

858-485-2537 - phone

858-485-3788 - fax (unattended)

 

 

 

 

 

 

-



 

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are
archived and searchable on the web at:

 http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
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/
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/ http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas  mailto:emcp...@radiusnorth.net emcp...@radiusnorth.net

Mike Cantwell  mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher  mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org j.bac...@ieee.org

David Heald  mailto:dhe...@gmail.com dhe...@gmail.com 

 

-



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

 

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

 

Re: [PSES] FCC IC and Product Information

[Mark Gandler]

You can submit 180 days Short term request for confidentiality pretty much on 
most of the  information (phots, manuals, test setup) and later on ask for 90 
days extension.The longer the request higher the fee
There is also an option for permanent confidentiality request on some of the 
more critical info: block diagram, schematics. There is also a fee for that. 
Mark

From: edpr...@cox.net
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] FCC  IC and Product Information
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 21:27:46 -0800

Bill: Wow, I never knew about this source. This will keep me up all night! Ed 
PriceWB6WSNChula Vista, CA  USA From: Bill Owsley [mailto:wdows...@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:40 PM
To: Ed Price
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC  IC and Product Information 
http://transition.fcc.gov/oet/ea/fccid/
and explore from there... From: Ed Price edpr...@cox.net
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 10:05 PM
Subject: RE: [PSES] FCC  IC and Product Information
I didn't realize that the FCC releases any information to the public, other
than cross-referencing to your approval status. Do you mean something like
the information in your FRN (FCC Registration Number) that you have in order
to do business with the FCC?

BTW, I think it would be really great if I could access the test data
submitted to the FCC for things like Part 15 compliance. For one thing, as a
consumer, I could use that as a component of my purchasing decision. For
instance, if I were buying a DC to AC inverter, I could look at several and
be able to choose which one had the lowest emission signature, which is a
lot better than just the assurance that they all passed the limit.

Ed Price
WB6WSN
Chula Vista, CA  USA


-Original Message-
From: Peter Merguerian [mailto:pmerguerian2...@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 6:47 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC  IC and Product Information

Dear Members

How long can we prevent the FCC or IC from releasing any testing/product
information to the public?

Peter

Sent from my iPhone

Peter S. Merguerian
pe...@goglobalcompliance.com
Go Global Compliance Inc.
www.goglobalcompliance.com
(408) 931-3303

-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

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

-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

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

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


-



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

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

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


Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net

Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher  j.bac...@ieee.org

David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
  
-

This 

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

[Mark Gandler]

Charlie,current mandatory version is 1.7.1. Future (2015) is 1.8.1. Both 
harmonized. 
There is an application note in question which describes additional 
requirements. Only as of last month this Note became mandatory. Note in OJ from 
2009 was simply stating what actual tests been developed in draft 1.8.1. 
Should the note be treated as any other new version of the standard, allowing 
grace period? 
Better question: how does one challenge or ask for official clarification on 
the matter? 
Mark

From: char...@sulisconsultants.com
To: j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 08:48:55 +









I’ll write that correctly this time
J
 
UNLIKE many other Directives, the RTTE Directive REQUIRES the use of a 
Notified Body where Radio Spectrum Standards are NOT applied in full.
 
Harmonised Standards are, in effect, mandatory unless you use a NB – and even 
then, you can’t choose not to apply them because you don’t like them
 


From: Charlie
 Blackham 

Sent: 28 November 2012 08:47

To: 'John Woodgate'; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

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


 
UNLIKE many other Directives, the RTTE Directive REQUIRES the use of a 
Notified Body where Radio Spectrum Standards are applied in full.
 
Regards
Charlie
 
-Original Message-

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]


Sent: 28 November 2012 08:23

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
 
In message snt108-w4738469ded84b4fb7df60ad...@phx.gbl, dated Tue, 27 Nov 
2012, Mark Gandler markgand...@hotmail.com
 writes:
 
 I'm not sure how anyone can justify this makes any sense and seems

like going against the spirit of RTTE and any other EU Directives,

allowing grace period for any requirement to take place. Simple

mentioning of something been developed does not substitute a legal 
recruitment.
 
Agreed; this seems like an erosion of the protection of manufacturers against 
instant changes. Like other Directives, the RTTE Directive contains no 
mandatory requirement to apply harmonized standards and carry out tests (except 
in the
 case of Full Quality Control).
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. See 
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk The longer it takes to make a point, the more obtuse it 
proves to be.
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
 
-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org
 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
 
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
 
Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  
http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org
 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com



-



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

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

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


Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net

Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher  j.bac...@ieee.org

David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
  
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

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

[Mark Gandler]

Bill,if it would be only logical assessment, then yes, you are correct. But the 
writers of the aforementioned Note had a different idea and according to their 
interpretation in order to prove compliance with 1.8.1 you MUST test. Previous 
1.7.1 did not address this and Medium Access Protocol was not the same 
requirement as Adaptivity with defined interference signals and test 
procedures. below is all what 1.7.1 had on MAP, no test requirements:
4.3.5 Medium access protocol4.3.5.1 DefinitionA medium access protocol is a 
mechanism designed to facilitate spectrum sharing with other devices in a 
wirelessnetwork.4.3.5.2 RequirementA medium access protocol shall be 
implemented by the equipmentMark

 From: bstu...@dlsemc.com
 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 Subject: RE: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
 Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 19:36:49 +
 
 Please forgive my ignorance, but as am I wrong in assuming that a device 
 designed to operate meeting IEEE 802.11 standards would already meet the 
 requirements for adaptive equipment introduced in the ETSI standard?
 
 Bill
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] 
 Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 8:03 AM
 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
 
 Hello all,
 
 A mandatory requirement to have a Medium Access Protocol has existed in EN
 300 328 since V1.7.1, which was published in 2006, first introduced onto the
 Official Journal sometime soon after that.   (the oldest OJ I have on record
 is 2008 and it's on there).
 
 There were a lot of complaints that the section on Medium Access Protocol
 was not clear enough and people did not know what it meant.   Or, they knew
 what it meant but didn't know how thorough it needed to be.   We knew that
 IEEE 802.11 had it and we knew that Bluetooth hopped away from trouble.
 Zigbee was listed in the scope of the standard so we all felt happy about
 IEEE 802.15.4.   But what about everything else?
 
 Industry called out for a better explanation and more clarification, which
 is summarised as the text we are discussing below.
 So, it is simply a clarification of an existing requirement.   It's not some
 sudden new requirement.
 
 EN 300 328 V1.8.1 makes it even more clear and removes the requirement for
 clarifications in the OJ.
 
 As a final comment, yes, there are manufacturers involved in the ETSI group
 for EN 300 328. :-) 
 
 
 Thanks,   Michael.
 
 
 Michael Derby
 Regulatory Engineer
 ACB Europe
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 
 Sent: 27 November 2012 13:25
 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
 Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
 
 In message
 3f0347ac6ed9504191f91f07629fbb0c014f0...@thhsle14mbx2.hslive.net,
 dated Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Charlie Blackham char...@sulisconsultants.com
 writes:
 
 The reference has been in public domain for some years, and whilst the 
 ETSI website is not always the easiest thing to navigate, draft 
 standards are available, free of charge.
 
 Even to non-members? I tried to get a draft document and couldn't.
 --
 OOO - Own Opinions Only. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk The longer it takes to
 make a point, the more obtuse it proves to be.
 John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
 
 -
 
 This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
 discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
 emc-p...@ieee.org
 
 All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
 http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
 
 Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
 http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
 well-used formats), large files, etc.
 
 Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
 Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
 For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
 Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org
 
 For policy questions, send mail to:
 Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
 David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com
 
 -
 
 This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
 discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
 emc-p...@ieee.org
 
 All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
 http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
 
 Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
 http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
 formats), large files, etc.
 
 Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
 Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
 List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 

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

[Mark Gandler]

Charlie,this comment is not the same note as published now under RTTE 
harmonized section and it did not require testing under 1.8.1 as current Note 
does. it merely mentioned harmonized ways are been developed in draft 1.8.1. 
1.8.1 goes in effect in 2 years, requirement for testing according to 1.8.1 
goes in effect immediately. I'm not sure how anyone can justify this makes any 
sense and seems like going against the spirit of RTTE and any other EU 
Directives, allowing grace period for any requirement to take place. Simple 
mentioning of something been developed does not substitute a legal 
recruitment.Mark

From: char...@sulisconsultants.com
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 11:36:26 +









There has been a comment in the OJ regarding requirement for spectrum sharing 
since December 2009:
 
This version of the standard gives presumption of conformity with the 
requirements of Article 3(2) of Directive 1999/5/EC under the following 
condition: The equipment shall implement an adequate
 spectrum sharing mechanism, e.g. LBT (Listen Before Talk), DAA (Detect And 
Avoid), etc., in order to comply with the requirement specified in clause 4.3.5 
of this version. Such a mechanism shall facilitate sharing between the various 
technologies and applications
 which currently exist and in case of congestion, users will be ensured equal 
access (and as a consequence a graceful degradation of service to all users). 
Harmonised ways for assessing the efficiency of various sharing mechanisms are 
currently been developed
 by ETSI in draft EN 300328 version 1.8.1.
 
V1.8.1 has brought in some additional requirements, but the draft standard has 
been around for years and the published standard added to the OJ with a 26 
month transition period.
 
Regards
Charlie
 
 
-Original Message-

From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] 

Sent: 27 November 2012 08:42

To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG

Subject: Re: [PSES] EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
 
In message snt108-w48a92b45f82f55a03910b9ad...@phx.gbl, dated Mon, 26 Nov 
2012, Mark Gandler markgand...@hotmail.com
 writes:
 
Bill,being struggling with the same question. 1.8.1 goes in effect only

on 1.1.2015, but current 1.7.1 should be used with an adaptivity

requirement from 1.8.1.It is very unusual circumstances where the

requirement is pretty much dropped out of nowhere and looks like goes

in effect immediately.Our test lab posted this question to an alleged

author of the below note and his answer was yes, it applies and must

be tested. not sure how it all makes sense to etsi authors and RTTE

committee. what about currently shipping equipment which been evaluated

to 1.7.1 version, but before adaptivity note been posted?
 
It is indeed very unusual for a provision to come into effect without a 
transition period, and is normally not allowed. If it is allowed, there must be 
a safety or other over-riding issue to justify it and it must be explained 
publicly
 (at least according to many Directives).
 
Were manufacturer experts on the relevant ETSI standards committee unaware of 
this unusual development?
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. See 
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk The longer it takes to make a point, the more obtuse it 
proves to be.
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
 
-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org
 
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
 
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
 
Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  
http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org
 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com



-



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

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

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


Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org

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

[Mark Gandler]

Bill,being struggling with the same question. 1.8.1 goes in effect only on 
1.1.2015, but current 1.7.1 should be used with an adaptivity requirement from 
1.8.1.It is very unusual circumstances where the requirement is pretty much 
dropped out of nowhere and looks like goes in effect immediately.Our test lab 
posted this question to an alleged author of the below note and his answer was 
yes, it applies and must be tested. 
not sure how it all makes sense to etsi authors and RTTE committee. what about 
currently shipping equipment which been evaluated to 1.7.1 version, but before 
adaptivity note been posted? 
Mark
EN 300 328 V1.7.1Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters 
(ERM); Wideband transmission systems; Data transmission equipment operating in 
the 2,4 GHz ISM band and using wide band modulation techniques; Harmonized EN 
covering essential requirements under article 3.2 of the RTTE DirectiveEN 300 
328 V1.6.1

Note 2.1 Date expired
(30/06/2008) Article 3(2) This version of the standard gives presumption of 
conformity with the requirements of Article 3(2) of Directive 1999/5/EC under 
the following condition: The equipment shall implement an adequate spectrum 
sharing mechanism, e.g. LBT (Listen Before Talk), DAA (Detect And Avoid), etc., 
in order to comply with the requirement specified in clause 4.3.5 of this 
version. Such a mechanism shall facilitate sharing between the various 
technologies and applications which currently exist and in case of congestion, 
users will be ensured equal access (and as a consequence a graceful degradation 
of service to all users). The efficiency of the various sharing mechanisms can 
be assessed using the appropriate clauses of EN 300 328 version 1.8.1.ETSIEN 
300 328 V1.8.1 (new)Electromagnetic compatibility and Radio spectrum Matters 
(ERM); Wideband transmission systems; Data transmission equipment operating in 
the 2,4 GHz ISM band and using wide band modulation techniques; Harmonized EN 
covering the essential requirements of article 3.2 of the RTTE DirectiveEN 300 
328 V1.7.1

Note 2.1 31/12/2014 Article 3(2) 
From: bstu...@dlsemc.com
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: EN 300 328 V1.8.1 new Adaptive equipment requirements
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 16:08:18 +









Hello group,
ETSI 300 328 V1.8.1 adds a new set of requirements for adaptive radio 
equipment.  This will certainly put more of a burden on test labs, including 
additional
 test equipment needed to generate the “interference signal”.  Has anyone 
reviewed these new requirements that wishes to offer their opinion or guidance?
 
 
Bill Stumpf
D.L.S. Electronic Systems, Inc.
166 South Carter Street
Genoa City WI 53128
Ph: 262-279-0210
Email: bstu...@dlsemc.com
 



-



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

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

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


Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net

Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher  j.bac...@ieee.org

David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
  
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

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

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

Re: [PSES] database

[Mark Gandler]

James,there were a lot of good suggestions on how to utilize what you have 
(Product Documentation Management SW, like Agile) or any other hands-on 
resource.  I have actually came across a  company specializing in providing 
engineering services, and one of them is Compliance Management SW. Its in a 
demo stage, but could be something very useful. It has all of the features you 
have mentioned plus actual technical requirements for a lot of  countries, 
automated e-mail and text alerts, connecting to your PDM tools to import the 
information. Looks like they have extensive IT and Compliance support behind 
it.  Not sure if I suppose provide their name, so anyone who is interested, I 
can send you their info. I have nothing to with them, they just did the demo. 
If admin allows, I can send it to the list.  Mark
 Subject: database
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:15:38 -0400
From: jgoedd...@tycoint.com
To: emc-p...@ieee.org














Group,

 

We’ve been discussing getting a database that would
include all our products, and their status as pertains to safety, emc, etc.

 

The object is to be able to sort and see which products have
missing certifications, all certifications, etc. and can also store the
documents.

 

Can anyone suggest a program that is off the shelf for this
use?

 

Thank you.

 

James Goedderz

Sr. Principal Engineer-Product Safety

Sensormatic Electronics, LLC

561.912.6378

 






-



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

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

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


Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

Instructions:  http://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...@radiusnorth.net

Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher  j.bac...@ieee.org

David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
  
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

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

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

Re: [PSES] Compliance engineering contacts at Plextor and Netgear

[Mark Gandler]

Netgear: here here. Please take me off the February 21st most wanted list.
Ed, just spoke to your colleague, help is on the way, just sign the NDA. 
 
BTW, getting these type of requests for test reports and certs are pretty 
common. Usually doesn't involve Interpol search, simple phone call to the front 
desk does the trick. 
 

Mark Gandler
Netgear   
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

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

[PSES] TIA-968-A failure modes, notwithstanding...

[Mark Gandler]

Group,
trying to get to the bottom of the statement some of you saw many times over. 
Test is a power line surge, section 4.2.4 of TIA-968-A. This is a quote:
 

Failure Modes resulting from application of power line surge. Approved terminal
equipment and approved protective circuitry shall comply with all the criteria 
in this
standard, both prior to and after the application of the power line surge 
specified in
4.2.4, notwithstanding that this surge may result in partial or total 
destruction of the
equipment under test
 
The use of the word notwithstanding is quite common throughout this standard. 
Been somewhat late English language acquirer, I looked it up in Merriam-Webster 
and easiest one for me was in spite of.
 
There are many different types of surge test pass/failure criteria's throughout 
61000-4, GR1089 and others, from no traffic errors during the surge to it is ok 
if it falls apart, as long as it does not catch on fire and does not kill 
anyone. 
 
But these requirements are clearly defined in each standard. 
 
My question for TIA-968-A is: how can something be compliant with all the 
criteria in this standard in spite of been totally destructed? Does it mean 
it is ok if power adapter or power supply is dead or entire product, including 
voice port can be out? 
 
Test Lab did the 2.5kV test, power adapter stopped producing DC, but no arcing, 
burning or enclosure breach. Lab concluded the failure. 
 
I am probably missing something very obvious, so please be gentle. 
 
 
Thank you,
Mark

  
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

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

Re: [PSES] TIA-968-A failure modes, notwithstanding...

[Mark Gandler]

Dan,
Your equipment may fail or be completely destroyed but it cannot take the 
network with it
this was my understanding as well (regardless of how poorly and senseless the 
standard written), but clearly it is not the sam understanding across the labs. 
 
Are where any guidance, f.a.q's or interpretations documents, articles 
published anywhere regarding this subject? 
 
After the failure mode the applicable tests are repeated to make sure you 
product does not harm the network even if your product no longer operates.
if the product is completely destroyed, would it be there nothing left to 
repeat the tests with? 
Mark
 



From: dan.ro...@dialogic.com
To: markgand...@hotmail.com; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:24:16 -0500
Subject: RE: [PSES] TIA-968-A failure modes, notwithstanding...






Mark,
 
Your equipment may fail or be completely destroyed but it cannot take the 
network with it.  After the failure mode the applicable tests are repeated to 
make sure you product does not harm the network even if your product no longer 
operates.
 
Dan
 


From: Mark Gandler [mailto:markgand...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:48 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] TIA-968-A failure modes, notwithstanding...
 


Group,
trying to get to the bottom of the statement some of you saw many times over. 
Test is a power line surge, section 4.2.4 of TIA-968-A. This is a quote:
 
Failure Modes resulting from application of power line surge. Approved terminal
equipment and approved protective circuitry shall comply with all the criteria 
in this
standard, both prior to and after the application of the power line surge 
specified in
4.2.4, notwithstanding that this surge may result in partial or total 
destruction of the

equipment under test
 
The use of the word notwithstanding is quite common throughout this standard. 
Been somewhat late English language acquirer, I looked it up in Merriam-Webster 
and easiest one for me was in spite of.
 
There are many different types of surge test pass/failure criteria's throughout 
61000-4, GR1089 and others, from no traffic errors during the surge to it is ok 
if it falls apart, as long as it does not catch on fire and does not kill 
anyone. 
 
But these requirements are clearly defined in each standard. 

 

My question for TIA-968-A is: how can something be compliant with all the 
criteria in this standard in spite of been totally destructed? Does it mean 
it is ok if power adapter or power supply is dead or entire product, including 
voice port can be out? 

 

Test Lab did the 2.5kV test, power adapter stopped producing DC, but no arcing, 
burning or enclosure breach. Lab concluded the failure. 

 

I am probably missing something very obvious, so please be gentle. 
 
 
Thank you,
Mark

 
-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.com -


This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
emc-p...@ieee.org
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas emcp...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
-

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

[PSES] IEC61000-4-3: sensitive frequencies

[Mark Gandler]

Group,
what are the current test lab practices to evaluate sensitive frequencies as 
specified in 61000-4-3? It is fair to assume what some of the sensitive 
frequencies will be missed with 1% step, especially in higher range. 
Some of the big telco's have dedicated procedures on how to treat sensitive or 
frequencies of key interest (foki) with dedicated levels, dwell times, 50kHz 
steps and so on. But it feels like an uphill battle to convince the labs and to 
explain the procedure, which brings up the suspicion what there are not much of 
sensitive frequencies evaluations going on. 
This fits in ongoing discussion about field uniformity and calibration 
procedures. If you need to investigate individual frequencies, you should 
calibrate the field at these frequencies. 
How about 'external'  frequencies sources, such as LTE or any other mobile 
communications? should they not be tested separately or just hope they get 
addressed during the sweep? 
 
Any opinions on test methodologies, besides traditional sweep are welcome. 
 
Thanks,
Mark Gandler
Netgear   
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

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

[PSES] power plugs and outlets

[Mark Gandler]

Can you sell CEE 7/4 outlet in France? 
 

  
-

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

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

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

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://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...@radiusnorth.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org

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

RE: Connecting DC output to earth ground

[Mark Gandler]

Fred,
 
where was no telephone or -48DC system invloved, just a simple case of
100-240/48V AC/DC power adapter. 
 
We are actually got to the bottom of this after customer sent us his Ethernet
schematics.  
 


PD actually has 5 RJ-45s, only one of which is an EthernetPoE port.  The
others are non-standard ports that simple use RJ45 connectors.  The damaged
PDs were a result of the installer connecting  PoE port to one of other
non-EthernetPoE ports. These ports are not transformer coupled and thereby
provide a DC path directly from attached device to other signals, Digital_Gnd
being one of them.  This in itself is not enough to cause the damage.  They
then needed to connect an RS232 (diagnostic port) to their PD which closes the
ground loop. A voltage potential was then created across the PD ground
damaging some of its components.

 

Thanks to Fred and Joe for your comments.

 

Mark

 

 

 




List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:11:03 -0800
From: ftowns...@sbcglobal.net
To: j...@randolph-telecom.com
CC: markgand...@hotmail.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: Connecting DC output to earth ground

I'm wondering if something was missed here.  In the telephone world +48 is
grounded... NOT -48V. Mixing telephone systems with other systems where there
are negative grounds like POE could certainly lead to smoke. The fact you have
a resistor to ground is meaningless. What is the value of the resistor? Isn't
one side of all shunt loads connected to ground?

Fred Townsend

Joe Randolph wrote: 


On 11/10/2008, Mark Gandler wrote:



here is the case:
 
Switch powered by 100-230VAC/48DC-1A adapter with earthed plug. 
At 48V side,
Vcc- is connected through resistor directly to Earth ground.
 
This switch has PoE port, which is used to power external 
device (PD,
powered device), when there is a laptop connected through RS232 port to this
PD. Laptop has his own power adapter, I assume grounded as well.
 
In certain scenario, powered device in the middle, will get 
smoked. One
claims it is due to the ground loop, based on Vcc- of power adapter being
directly tied to chassis ground. 
Problem goes away after the connection is cut. 
 
Few questions: 

1.  are where any 60950 issues which could prevent tying 
DC(-) output to
earth ground? (adapter has UL, TUV/CB certificates) 
2.  assuming the answer to #1 is no, would this scenario 
require switch
adapter and laptop adapter to be connected to different grounds? in order to
create different potentials? and thus will make powered device in the middle
the weakest point in the system?


Hi Mark:

From your description, I'm not sure I quite understand the 
configuration you
describe, but I can offer a few comments that may help you sort this out:

1) The basic IEEE 802.3 Ethernet specification requires 1500 VRMS 
isolation
between the Ethernet cable lines and earth ground.  This is primarily a
functional requirement, not a safety requirement.  It prevents ground loops
that could otherwise occur if the equipment at the two ends of the cable run
(up 100 meters) has two different ground references.

2) When power over Ethernet (POE) was added in IEEE 802.3af, the 
requirement
for 1500 VRMS isolation was retained.  So, POE interfaces (both the power-s
ourcing PSE and the powered-device PD) are each still supposed to be isolated
from ground.  This is typically done with isolated DC/DC converters.  

3) The power supply for a laptop computer may or may not pass earth 
ground
from the AC mains outlet up to the laptop.  That choice is up to the
manufacturer.


So, there should not be any path to ground from any Ethernet port, 
whether it
be standard Ethernet, POE PSE, or POE PD.  For an RS-232 port on a laptop,
there may or may not be a connection to ground through the power supply.

The fact that the 48 VDC supply to the switch is grounded does not
necessarily mean that the power placed on the PSE Ethernet ports is also
grounded.  There might be (and should be) an isolated DC/DC converter inside
the equipment for powering the PSE Ethernet ports.  Even if the manufacturer
of the switch violated the 802.3af isolation requirement, you still couldn't
get a ground loop via the Ether net connection unless the manufacturer of the
PD also violated the 802.3af isolation requirement on the PD.  This seems
unlikely, unless the same errant manufacturer made both devices.

Regarding your question about 60950 issues, there are none that I am 
aware
of.  I believe that POE is typically treated as a SELV circuit

Connecting DC output to earth ground

[Mark Gandler]

Hi,
 
here is the case:
 
Switch powered by 100-230VAC/48DC-1A adapter with earthed plug. At 48V side,
Vcc- is connected through resistor directly to Earth ground.
 
This switch has PoE port, which is used to power external device (PD, powered
device), when there is a laptop connected through RS232 port to this PD.
Laptop has his own power adapter, I assume grounded as well.
 
In certain scenario, powered device in the middle, will get smoked. One claims
it is due to the ground loop, based on Vcc- of power adapter being directly
tied to chassis ground. 
Problem goes away after the connection is cut. 
 
Few questions:
 


1.  are where any 60950 issues which could prevent tying DC(-) output to 
earth
ground? (adapter has UL, TUV/CB certificates)
2.  assuming the answer to #1 is no, would this scenario require switch
adapter and laptop adapter to be connected to different grounds? in order to
create different potentials? and thus will make powered device in the middle
the weakest point in the system?

 
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
 
Mark
 
 
 
 


 

 

 

 
 
 
 






Color coding for safety: Windows Live Hotmail alerts you to suspicious email.
Sign up today. http://windowslive.com/
xplore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_safety_112008 

-



This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org 

Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net
Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org 

For policy questions, send mail to:

Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
David Heald: dhe...@gmail.com 

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

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

High level surge testing

[Mark Gandler]

Hi there,
Could someone point me to a test lab/s which can perform 20kV 1.2/50uS and 8kV
10/200uS surge test? 
Thanks,
Mark




Give to a good cause with every e-mail. Join the i’m Initiative from
Microsoft. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Join/Default.aspx?souce=EML_WL_
GoodCause 
-  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 

Taiwan EMC requirments.

[Mark Gandler]

 
 There are some information about Taiwan Government requirements.
 
 
 Please be informed that Taiwan Government is going to implement the 
 regulation of Electromagnetic Interference.
 The dates for implementing this regulation on respective products are 
 as follows:
 
 Jan. 1st 1997   Copiers
 Jul. 1st 1997   Fax
 Jul. 1st 1997   Computer peripheral(including printer, plotter,  
 scanner, ..)
 
 All the products above must be inspected by recognized lab. for 
 acquiring the certification of importation approval. Should the 
 product can not meet the requirement of Class B ITE, the importation 
 of the product will be prohibited upon the implement of the EMI 
 regulation.
 
 
 Does somebody know anymore about Taiwan regulation of EMI?
 
 
 Thanks,
 Mark Gandler
 EMC Engineer
 Scitex Corporation L.T.D
 Tel- 972-9-597240
 Fax- 972-9-597900