RE: CE marking/testing of military equipment

[rbusche]

It has been my experience that both the US and European Military have the 
option to waive commercial EMI and safety requirements. Additionally they have 
MIL-Stds, MOD (Ministry of Defense) and other military standards they may 
choose to require. For our products which are "COTS", (Commercial Off The 
Shelf) we have been fortunate that these military standards are not mandated. 
Using CISPR, FCC, CE or NRTL on commercial products to the military saves our 
military customers money and allow us to manufacture our products to a 
commercial standard. From my perspective it works well.

Feel free to contact me off line if you would like to discuss this in greater 
detail.

Rick Busche - Senior Regulatory Engineer
Evans & Sutherland
(801) 588-7185
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From: plaw...@west.net [mailto:plaw...@west.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:49 AM
To: EMC-PSTC
Subject: CE marking/testing of military equipment



I have a customer asking for CISPR 22 test results on a commercial power supply
intended for use in military equipment in Europe.

I've heard the UK excludes military equipment from CE marking.  Do other
countries also exclude military equipment from the EMC Directive?

If CISPR standards are not used for European military equipment, would
MIL-STD-461 be used?

Patrick Lawler
plaw...@west.net

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Recent Virus Attack Info

[rbusche]

For those of you who received the "e-card" a few days ago on this network, a 
news article has been posted on MSNBC that explains the problem. If you are 
interested here is the link.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/826033.asp?0na=x22149Z1-

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

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

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

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

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

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

ESD Footwear Question

[rbusche]

It never ceases to amaze me the "other duties" clause that lands in the laps of 
those of us in the regulatory disciplines. Anyway, such is the case with me. I 
now have ESD management responsibility for our manufacturing area.

The issue I am currently struggling with is the fact that my company complies 
with ANSI/ESD-S20.20-1999 for our production area. For years we have defined 
the requirement for all static dissipative shoes to be compliant with this 
specification. As I learn more about ESD shoes I find that another standard 
ANSI Z41-1999 "American Standard for Personal Protection - Protective Footwear" 
seems to defined by most of the ESD footwear manufacturers. Unfortunately the 
testing requirements between the two standards are different and my QA people 
are objecting to me mixing apples and oranges. From an auditing standpoint I am 
told that ANSI Z41 does not satisfy ANSI S2020 requirements.

I am looking for any help or suggestions with this question. I just ordered and 
received ANSI Z41-1999 and the paragraph relating to ESD footwear did not 
justify the $100.00 price tag.

Thanks in advance

Rick Busche
Sr. Product Regulations Engineer (now ESD manager)
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com
(801)588-7185

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

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

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

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

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

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

Surge & EFT effects?

[rbusche]

Speaking of surge and EFT I have been looking into the real life performance of 
equipment installed in the field. My equipment is three phase ITE and is 
typically in operation in a  "Heavy Industrial" environment previously defined 
in EN 50082-2. In particular this equipment appears to be affected by EFT 
within the facility, but has previously passed  EN 61000-4-4 tests at a 
recognized test site.

While I believe the problem to be EFT, I also want to understand the issue of 
Surge. Reading an on-line article on surge performance it states that there are 
two government definitions for surge, one being MODE 1 the other Mode 2. These 
are defined as follows:

Mode 1: Normal Mode (Line to Neutral suppression)
Mode 2: All Modes (L-n, L-G, N-G) (Also defined as common mode)

The article states that "ONLY mode one is a concern because modern equipment is 
inherently immune to common mode surges". Further it states that "placing MOVs 
in a Mode 2 application may actually cause harm to the equipment by forcing the 
spike on to ground. Modern power supplies simply ignore common mode surges".

That said, it was my understanding that MOVs (Mode 2) are the primary design 
element for Surge and EFT within a power supply. 

I took the opportunity to bench test a large 3000W 48V supply to EN 61000-4-5 
on the bench. Placing small load on the output I captured the pulse on the DC 
output. With a 1000V pulse on the input I see a  300V PP spike on the DC output.

So my questions are as follows:

1. Should the. design of the power supply (under a surge test scenario) 
attenuate the output voltage to essentially zero on the DC output? Is a 300V 
spike surprising to anyone?

2. Should MOVs be used in Mode 2 environments for EFT and Surge?

3. If EFT is the identified problem, and the power supplies are compliant with 
EN 61000-4-5 is the problem most likely grounding?

4. Lastly my power supply has documentation establishing compliance with ANSI 
C62.41. The parameters of this standard appear similar to those of EN 61000-4-4 
(EFT) Is there something I am missing here?


Thanks in advance


Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com
(801) 588-7185

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

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

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

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

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

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

RE: USB Immunity Specs??

[rbusche]

In the computer simulation business we are moving towards various PC solutions 
at the request of our customers. These PCs are used in environments that have 
been defined as "Heavy Industrial" by our customers and the test organizations 
that validate the systems in the field. 

This forces us to put commercial PCs into a 10V/m or 10V test environment. So 
what is the solution? I would be interested to see how the issues Brian Kunde 
identified are being addressed and what changes we will see if the future?

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From: david_ster...@ademco.com [mailto:david_ster...@ademco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 2:54 PM
To: brian_ku...@leco.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: USB Immunity Specs??



Brian -
USB on a PC is designed for residential environment;  stress levels should
be 3V/m for EN61000-4-3 and 3V for EN61000-4-6.  

We got similar results checking USB to EN50130-4 alarm system requirements
(which resemble industrial environment.  EFT needs fault-tolerant software
(acceptable performance loss).
Alarm P/F criteria are slightly different:  no false alarms or change of
state (armed to unarmed and vice-versa).  Fault tolerant software is not
acceptable for all alarm applications.

David

-Original Message-
From: brian_ku...@leco.com [mailto:brian_ku...@leco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 3:02 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: USB Immunity Specs??



Dear Group,

Our Engineering Department thinks that USB is the worlds best interface.
Though
it has a lot going for it, I'm not sure if is all that, but never the less,
I'm
seeing it used to control and interface with commercial and industrial
instrumentation requiring the more severe immunity testing for Europe; e.g.
10volt/meter Radiated Immunity, 10Vrms Conducted Immunity, and 2KV Fast
Transient Testing (1KV using Clamp).

To these higher levels, we have failed almost every USB system we have ever
encountered using USB cables longer than 2 meter in length.  I understand
that
USB is suppose to be able to goto 5 meter.  The failure shows itself as a
communication error that usually requires resetting the hardware.

Fairly recently we evaluated one of those "USB Hubs".  Someone realized that
if
you run a 5 meter USB cable into a HUB you can run it out another 5 meters.
Our
Immunity testing failed the HUB configuration in the most miserable ways.  A
detailed examination of the manual that came with the USB Hub proudly
displayed
a DOC and the CE marking, but gave no special conditions or mention of cable
lengths.

At home I  have a USB Flatbed scanner that came with a 2 meter USB cable
with
ferrite beads on BOTH ends.  What might I expect if I went to Best Buy and
bought a 5 meter USB cable and installed it on my scanner?  I guess I would
expect it NOT to comply with emissions requirements, who knows about
immunity,
but would it even function?  In any case, I don't think it is right that I
can
purchase a scanner and only when I get it home and open the box I find out
that
I can only use the provided 2 meter cable.  Being USB,  I expected to be
able to
put any 5 meter cable on it.  I hate surprises like that, don't you?

We have tested dozens of different USB cables, looking for a solution to the
Immunity Problems we are encountering (Even the Gold Plated 12MB/s versions
which tested no better than the cheep ones). We discovered that we could get
it
to pass Immunity if the impedance of the USB cable was improved.  We would
simulate this by going over a standard USB cable with a better, heavier
braided
shield and then soldering the shield to the backshells (connecting a ground
strap between the instrument and the computer would often give similar
results).
The problem with this approach is that no one makes a cable like this. I
understand that USB cables are constructed according to the USB standard
which
includes a DC cable shield impedance requirement which in my opinion should
be
lower and include impedance requirements for the entire frequency band.  

So, to all you USB Experts out there, please education me in the finer
points of
USB.

1. Does the USB specification take into account any Immunity Requirements?
If
so, to what levels?

2. Any recommendations to improve a USB systems performance during Immunity
Testing?

3. What are others doing?  I expect that they are testing with short USB
cables
then specifying (or not) the length in the user's manual.  

4. What changes can we expect to see in the future of USB? We know the
interface
is getting faster and faster.  Is functionality, cable length, Emissions,
and
Immunity being considered?  



Brian Kunde
LECO Corp.



---
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

Flexible cable reliability and testing

[rbusche]

I have been tasked with finding a standard and test procedure to validate the 
reliability of flexible cables over time. I have found a standard, EIA TP-41C 
(EIS-364-41C), but it focuses primarily on the electrical connectors rather 
than the cable. Another standard Mil-C-13777G is used by some of the wire and 
cable manufacturers, but searching the web I found a US Government site that 
indicated that this standard was "inactive for new design".  I can find no 
source for this standard. My application is for signal cables, but I assume 
other power cables would have some type of standard which they are tested to.

Are there other standards applicable to cables in a flex environment? Any help 
would be appreciated.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
SLC, Utah
rbus...@es.com
(801) 588-7185

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

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

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

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

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

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

PCI Brackets Problems

[rbusche]

I am fighting the age old problem of PCI brackets on various PC chassis not 
making adequate electrical contact. Aperture leaks, especially at high 
frequencies, is a continual problem, to say nothing about the flimsy 
construction of the brackets. Has anyone had any success with the clips, 
gaskets and other EMI solutions? If you have any suggestions on types, or 
manufacturers please let me know.

Thanks in advance...

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

RE: Compliance Primer

[rbusche]

For what its worth, it has been my experience over the years that management is 
"turned off" by hearing about threats and penalties. That is not to say that 
they don't care, and these should definitely be part of your presentation, but 
they are looking business building issues. I try to show how regulatory efforts 
improve product quality, how additional markets may be opened and how testing 
costs can best be managed. Showing them why regulatory issues are important 
should be the bulk of your presentation. Addressing the penalties and 
consequences should be mentioned but in my opinion should not be  focal point.

The issue that is always thrown back at me are the numerous accounts where 
company A shipped product without proper regulatory approval and nothing 
happened. We all know this has been problematic. Obviously the issue is whether 
or not their company is willing to take the risk. After all product regulations 
is in effect a "risk management" effort. We minimize the risk of hazards, 
minimize the risk of interference and minimize the risk that our companies 
could get into legal trouble.

Just my $.02

Rick
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From: Garry Hojan [mailto:gho...@regulatory-compliance.com]
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 9:10 AM
To: Scott Douglas; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Compliance Primer



Hi Scott,

I am in the process of writing just such an article, directed towards those
within an organization who have, what I would call, a periphery view of
regulatory compliance (directors, purchasing, sales and marketing) and how
it effects them and the company.

I am writing it with your situation in mind, but I would be interested in
the group's viewpoint on the value of such an article. Do you find yourself
explaining what rc is? Do you have to justify the fact that it has to be
done? How many times do you find yourself in a pressure situation where the
product is sold without the appropriate approvals and your under the gun to
get the approvals?

I would also be extremely appreciative if the group has some scenario's that
they would like covered in the article. I will also be covering penalties
and liability issues, which should hopefully open some eyes of those who
feel that it is "an acceptable business risk" to run with a less than
satisfactory compliance program.

In the article I will explain the process of how to determine which
standards apply for which country/product mix, and how difficult it can be
for some countries due to time zones, translations, unclear or differing
instructions from within the country, political issues, political and
business policy, unwritten caveats, etc., etc.

I look forward to hearing from the group.

Best regards,
Garry Hojan
CEO/ President
Strategic Compliance Services (SCS)
a Division of NRL, L.L.C.
11402 E Mariposa Rd.
Stockton, CA 95215
Tel: 209-465-0619
Fax: 209-812-1931
Mobile: 209-662-4322
Email: gho...@regulatory-compliance.com
Web: www.regulatory-compliance.com


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

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

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

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

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

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

Govt. launches cell phone site

[rbusche]

Attached is a link to MSNBC's news site. There is an article about a new site 
launched by the FCC and FDA which addresses safety and EMI concerns for cell 
phones. Thought you might be interested.

http://news.com.com/2100-1033-908671.html?legacy=cnet&tag=pt.msnbc.feed..ne_9874454

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

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

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

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

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

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

RE: Pollution Degree vs. Creapage Distance

[rbusche]

Thanks for the response and yes I was referring to EN60950. My apologies for 
not stating that in my message.

I guess I was thinking that solder mask might be considered "enclosed" . 
Obviously the solder mask would not qualify as hermetically sealed or an 
approved insulating compound. Just trying to understand the Pollution degree 1 
criteria. Am I to understand that only approved coatings constitutes "enclosed"?

Thanks


Rick

-Original Message-
From: Ron Pickard [mailto:rpick...@hypercom.com]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 9:22 AM
To: Rick Busche
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: Pollution Degree vs. Creapage Distance



Hi Rick,

I am assuming (ugh) that you are referring to EN60950 2nd Edition. If so, 
clause 2.9.6 clearly
addresses your question by requiring hermetic sealing or such enclosing to 
prevent the ingress of
dirt and/or moisture. IMHO, solder mask does not and cannot provide this type 
of protection and,
therefore, cannot be used as such.

And, as for your question, "Why are the secondary circuit spacing requirements 
based on a primary
input voltage?". Look into Annex ZB of the above standard and then to the  
reference clause 6.2.1.2.
Your answer is there as it relates to TNV circuits.

Again, this is assuming that you were referring to the above standard.

I hope this helps.

Best regards,

Ron Pickard
rpick...@hypercom.com






rbus...@es.com  

Sent by:   To: 
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org  
owner-emc-pstc@majordomcc:  

o.ieee.org Subject: Pollution 
Degree vs. Creapage Distance  




01/31/02 01:01 PM   

Please respond to   
        
rbusche 











I am wading through the creapage and clearance requirements for secondary 
circuits using the values
in tables 5 and 6. It becomes very apparent that the creapage distances become 
quite large when you
assume material group IIIb (CTI). For operational insulation, this might be 
2-3X the clearance
values. My question to the group is:

Does the application of a solder mask allow for a change from pollution degree 
2 to pollution degree
1?  I understand that conformal coating requires significant testing when used 
to reduce spacings
per table 7, but in this case I am only asking if solder mask can be used to 
improve the pollution
concern.

Assuming this is NOT the case, are there any other practical suggestions? 
Cutting slots in
multilayer cards is a bit tricky.  I can live with 0.7mm of clearance, but 2.5 
mm (operational) or
5.0 (reinforced) of creapage is a bit difficult on a densely populated power 
supply.

One last question. Why are the secondary circuit spacing requirements based on 
a primary input
voltage?

Thanks

Rick Busche
E&S
rbus...@es.com

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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





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

Visit our web site at:  http://www.ewh.

Pollution Degree vs. Creapage Distance

[rbusche]

I am wading through the creapage and clearance requirements for secondary 
circuits using the values in tables 5 and 6. It becomes very apparent that the 
creapage distances become quite large when you assume material group IIIb 
(CTI). For operational insulation, this might be 2-3X the clearance values. My 
question to the group is:

Does the application of a solder mask allow for a change from pollution degree 
2 to pollution degree 1?  I understand that conformal coating requires 
significant testing when used to reduce spacings per table 7, but in this case 
I am only asking if solder mask can be used to improve the pollution concern.

Assuming this is NOT the case, are there any other practical suggestions? 
Cutting slots in multilayer cards is a bit tricky.  I can live with 0.7mm of 
clearance, but 2.5 mm (operational) or 5.0 (reinforced) of creapage is a bit 
difficult on a densely populated power supply.

One last question. Why are the secondary circuit spacing requirements based on 
a primary input voltage? 

Thanks

Rick Busche
E&S
rbus...@es.com

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

RE: North America Voltage Ratings

[rbusche]

OK, I have to ask. Wouldn't it be acceptable to state 120V and with the +- 10% 
you would have an implied range of 108-132V?

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com
-Original Message-
From: geor...@lexmark.com [mailto:geor...@lexmark.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 2:42 PM
To: cecil.gitt...@kodak.com
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: North America Voltage Ratings





Cecil,

This site http://www.panelcomponents.com/guide.htm lists U.S. and
Canada as 120V and Mexico as 127V.

We normally rate our printers as 110-127V, if not going to Japan.
However, I have seen single value ratings of 115V and 120V on models
going to these countries without issues brought to my attention.
My suggestion is 110-127V.

George




cecil.gittens%kodak@interlock.lexmark.com on 01/04/2002 04:04:37 PM

Please respond to cecil.gittens%kodak@interlock.lexmark.com

To:   emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com
cc:(bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:


From: Cecil A. Gittens

Hi All,
 What is the correct voltage labeling for the US, Canada and Mexico on
product dataplate?
Is it 100-120V or 100-127V?




---
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.

Automotive EMC

[rbusche]

I was looking at some data from an email service and after following the
thread found this interesting article on automotive EMC. There is also a
link to the FORD EMI test specification. As I recall this was a topic of
discussion a few weeks back. .It is interesting to compare these
specifications to our ITE procedures and limits.

http://www.chipcenter.com/eexpert/mladuke/mladuke054.html

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

History of 60Hz (TV Nostalgia)

[rbusche]

In a recent response of "TV Nostalgia" Dale Svetanoff suggested a link to
the Antique Wireless Association 

 http://www.antiquewireless.org/

Looking through this link I was fascinated by some of the early issues
regarding electronic devices power with tubes. Additionally there was an
article that discussed the rational for 60Hz power in the U.S. as opposed to
50 Hz or other frequencies.  A fellow engineer provided me yet another link
that points to the politics of the issue. I found this to be very
informative and thought some of you might also be interested. Did you know
for example that we had 50Hz in the U.S. prior to WWII and other frequencies
such as 25 Hz and 133 Hz were also used?

http://www.enteract.com/~enf/afc/electricity

I hope that this posting is relevant to the goal and charter of this
discussion group. After all, we all deal with these power issues on a daily
basis. If not, please let me know.

Thanks


Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

RE: TV nostalgia

[rbusche]

Another thing you younger guys (and ladies) may not know is that Mad Man
Muntz was essentially responsible for the 4 track (anyone remember those)
and ultimately the 8 track stereos in cars. He was quite a marketer.

Rick

-Original Message-
From: Price, Ed [mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 8:28 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: TV nostalgia







>-Original Message-
>From: Rich Nute [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com]
>Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 3:36 PM
>To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>Subject: TV nostalgia
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Okay... more nostalgia and a bit on safety
>back in those days... so that we don't stray
>too far from the subject matter of this
>forum.
>

SNIP

>
>The one that won my respect was Muntz TV.
>It was CHEAP!  When you looked inside the
>chassis, there was nothing there compared to
>the other TVs.  They really knew how to take
>the cost out of the TV!  Amazingly enough,
>its picture was among the best, and its 
>reliability was indeed the best -- no parts
>to go bad!  The company was owned by "Mad
>Man Muntz," the classic Los Angeles used 
>car dealer.

SNIP

>
>
>Best regards,
>Rich
>


Here's the anecdotal story I heard about the "Man Man Muntz" design
technique.

Muntz would commission a TV design, from professional TV engineers, since he
was admittedly not a circuit designer. He would then attack the working
prototype, removing one part at a time. If the TV still worked, he would
remove another part. If he killed it, the part went back in, and he tried
another part. Eventually, he was down to a low parts count. (Well, if it
isn't true, it ought to be!)

This resulted in a drifty, low sensitivity, noisy TV. But in those days,
there were only a couple of VHF stations in any metro area. And the
receivers were used within 10 miles or so of the transmitters. For their
time, they were OK. But as people moved out to the suburbs, and more
channels were used in a region, Muntz receivers began to show their
problems.

I try to get designers to emulate the Muntz technique for EMI control. It's
a lot easier to have more EMI control components in your design, and remove
a few of them during testing, than it is to have to add control components
to your device.

BTW, I remember that, in the mid 50's in Chicago, Muntz was really big on
using skywriting advertising!


Regards,

Ed





Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA  USA
858-505-2780  (Voice)
858-505-1583  (Fax)
Military & Avionics EMC Services Is Our Specialty
Shake-Bake-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

RE: TV nostalgia

[rbusche]

How about the reported X-Ray emissions from the old high voltage regulators
and the 25-35KV anode voltages? Those old color sets were beasts. 
 
It is interesting to note that the process of keeping the CRT filaments
warm, (instant on) was the cause of numerous TV fires.
 
But you know, there's something pleasant (or nostalgic) about the smell of a
tube type radio or TV. Perhaps it's just my age. 
 
Rick Busche

-Original Message-
From: Ehler, Kyle [mailto:keh...@lsil.com]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 2:38 PM
To: 'Ralph Cameron'; 'EMC and Safety list'
Subject: RE: TV nostalgia


Which reminds me of other oddball video contraptions.
A few years back I had to dispose of a Heathkit GR-2000 25" TV w/onscreen
digital clock option.
Alas, it worked great, but the digital matrix tuner did not like CATV (ch.
2-13 only).
Its entire chassis was copper plated steel.  All pcb's were 94V0 and,
typical of Heath products,
documented more than thoroughly.  Very well made!
kyle

-Original Message-
From: Ralph Cameron [mailto:ral...@igs.net]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 2:41 PM
To: Ehler, Kyle; 'Rich Nute'; 'EMC and Safety list'
Subject: Re: TV nostalgia


And lest we forget the Hallicrafters electrostatic deflection systems. You
could sure get a poke off those. 
 
Ralph Cameron
 

- Original Message - 
From: Ehler, Kyle   
To: 'Rich Nute'   ; 'EMC and Safety list'
  
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 9:23 AM
Subject: RE: TV nostalgia


My experience was with the Packard-Bell transistorized models. 
I think the aversion I have was prejudiced by the fellow 
who mentored me.  I had little reason to doubt, but then 
the sets I worked on, had a callback history that may have 
been created by my mentor. 
-kyle 

-Original Message- 
From: Rich Nute [ mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com  ] 
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 5:36 PM 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org   
Subject: TV nostalgia 






Okay... more nostalgia and a bit on safety 
back in those days... so that we don't stray 
too far from the subject matter of this 
forum. 

My first TV was a Motorola 7-inch round in 
a Bakelite cabinet.  The speaker was the 
same size as the CRT. 

My second was the famous RCA 10-inch round 
chassis with 32 tubes.  I could pull out 
15 tubes and still have a usable picture. 

Kyle mentions Packard Bell, which I considered 
a straight-forward, good product.  It used the 
Standard Coil turret tuner. 

The one that won my respect was Muntz TV. 
It was CHEAP!  When you looked inside the 
chassis, there was nothing there compared to 
the other TVs.  They really knew how to take 
the cost out of the TV!  Amazingly enough, 
its picture was among the best, and its 
reliability was indeed the best -- no parts 
to go bad!  The company was owned by "Mad 
Man Muntz," the classic Los Angeles used 
car dealer. 

In the mid-fifties, GE came out with a 
transformerless 17-inch TV.  One side of 
the power line was tied to the chassis 
(2-wire plug back in those days).  The 
only protection was the plastic knob on 
the shafts of the various controls.  When 
servicing this TV, you quickly learned 
never to touch the chassis! 

The power supply was a simple full-wave 
rectified power line.  The tube heaters 
were connected in a series-parallel 
arrangement. 

These sets were the initiation of UL's 
investigation into antenna coupling 
capacitors.  These capacitors provided 
the isolation between the TV antenna 
terminals and the mains voltage. 

TV sets of those days consumed between 
400 and 600 watts.  When they were turned 
on, the cold filaments were a very low 
impedance, so the turn-on current was 
very high.  The off-on switch was often 
mounted on the back of the volume control.  
Eventually, the contact resistance of the 
switch would grow to the point where the 
I**2*R power would melt the solder and 
the power wires would come loose.  It was 
common to have a customer report that his 
TV was dead, and it was due to the lack 
of a good connection to the switch. 

At one company, we had metal bat-handle 
toggles blow out of the switch due to the 
cold filament load. 

Out of this experience, UL developed the 
requirements for the TV-rated switch, 
which had specially-designed contacts 
that would not overheat when used in a 
TV or similar application. 


Best regards, 
Rich 







--- 
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 Healddave

Dome Structure - Machinery Directive?

[rbusche]

My company designs and manufactures visual systems for use in simulation and
training. Aside from the computers, projectors and other electronic devices
used with these systems (which are CE marked), we also deliver these "visual
systems" with some type of visual environment such as a dome. This dome
serves as the screen surface as well as providing the structure for
installation and maintenance of this equipment.  I have a customer that has
requested a CE mark for the entire visual system including the dome
structure.  My first inclination was to look at the machinery directive, but
from my perspective, a dome does not seem to fit any of these categories. 

"an assembly of linked parts or components, at least one of which
moves, with the appropriate actuators, control and powercircuits,
etc. joined together for a specific application, in particular for
processing, treatment, moving, or packaging of amaterial."

or

"an assembly of machines, which in order to achieve the same end,
are arranged and controlled so that they function as an integral
whole."

or

"interchangeable equipment modifying the function of a machine,
which is placed on the market for the purpose of being  assembled with a
machine or series of machines or with a tractor by the operator himself
insofar as this equipment is nota spare part or a tool."

Given that there are safety concerns with a dome structure such as
flammability (fiberglass dome structure), ladders/platform hazards (falls,
servicing etc), emergency egress, lighting and overall structural integrity,
CE marking seems reasonable. The question is  to what standard(s)?

I would prefer to avoid the time and expense of turning this over to a
"Notified Body" for a dome evaluation, and would hope that there are
standards which would fit the various elements of this design. Any
suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
Salt Lake City, Utah

rbus...@es.com

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

RE: looking for used power supply

[rbusche]

Another option might be to use a variac (adjustable auto transformer) to
adjust the input.

-Original Message-
From: Kenneth McCormick [mailto:kmccormick...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 4:26 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: looking for used power supply



It sounds like Mike is looking for a power supply to provide power to test 
electrical devices (not a power supply to be installed in a product).

I Interpret Mikes E-mail to be:
The power supply should be able to supply 50-60Hz (when connected to a 60Hz 
supply, 3 phase supply (likely 120/208))
Single phase output variable over the range of 120-240V (Mike, I would 
suggest looking for something that can provide 90-260V)
16A Max (which would give you approximately 3KVA @ 240V (3840VA to be exact)

Mike, Have you tried Elgar, Pacific Power, TestMart, or TestEquity?  I have 
a 1.5KVA Elgar unit that I purchased used several years ago.  They are VERY 
Hard to come by used (And rather expensive if purchased new)  Are you set on

using something that is powered from the AC Mains, or would you be willing 
to consider a Diesel Generator?

Ken


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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

Lasing LEDs

[rbusche]

A few months back there was a discussion on this list regarding the
potential for LEDs to laze if overdriven. As I recall the issue pointed to
the IEC 825-1: LED Optical Safety standard and the concern for possible
testing all LEDs. The consensus was that "in general" LEDs did not pose much
of a risk. My question is, without testing for luminance (or lasing) can an
approximation be made which correlates to the maximum input current of an
LED and the potential for lasing? I have a unique application where I want
the LEDs as bright as possible but obviously want to avoid potential safety
risks.

Rick Busche.
Evans & Sutherland
Salt Lake City, Utah
rbus...@es.com


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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

AC Power Primer?

[rbusche]

I am in the process of assisting our publications group with documenting an
ac power configuration. As simple as this sounds, it turns out there are
varying opinions in our engineering group regarding the naming convention
for input power, in particular single phase verses two phase. 

We all probably agree that a phase to neutral connection is single phase and
devices that use all thee phases, whether they are 208V 60Hz or 400V 50Hz,
are truly three phase. The discussion heats up when you are talking about a
phase to phase connection on a three phase distribution (208 or 400V). Is
this called single phase or two phase? It has been suggested that in the
European community it is called two phase, while in the U.S. we call it
single phase.  I am looking for opinions or discussion on this issue. 

On a related note in the U.S. we have 240V 60Hz (two 120V drops) coming into
our into our homes. This is provided by a transformer with a center taped
winding. On the outside legs of the transformer we have 240V but between
either outside leg and neutral (center tap) we have 120V. I would call this
a single phase system with two additive (in phase) 120V windings. Again
others have called this two phase. 

My apologies to the group if this is a stupid question. Its just one of
those nagging questions.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
Salt Lake City, Utah

rbus...@es.com

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

Law Suits on Cell Phone safety?

[rbusche]

The following is a story posted today on MSNBC with regard to cellphone
safety &  lawsuits. FYI

http://www.msnbc.com/news/562131.asp

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

ETSI

[rbusche]

A friend has asked me about the relevant European standard(s) used for data
communication through existing, in-house, power wiring. I am inclined to
recommend the ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute). Is
this the correct and most applicable standards organization? Can someone
suggest a specific document number?

Thanks

Rick

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

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
 Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net

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

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

RE: RTTE & Placing in Service

[rbusche]

I had to alter the address slightly to access the site. I used
http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/legislati
on.htm and then selected the EN (PDF) file.

RIck

Thanks for the info...


-Original Message-
From: wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 6:31 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE & Placing in Service



The Commission's guide to the implementation of directives ("blue book")
indicates that a device placed into service for the manufacturer's own use
is not placed on the market. In the link below, see section 2.3.1 for
Placing on the Market and 2.3.2 for placing in service. Specifically note
the third bullet in section 2.3.2. 

http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/legislation/guide/document/
chap02.pdf
 

Richard Woods

--
From:  Kevin Harris [SMTP:harr...@dscltd.com]
Sent:  Wednesday, January 31, 2001 3:58 PM
To:  'wo...@sensormatic.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:  RE: RTTE & Placing in Service

You are right Richard. 

More directly to your point here is a quote taken from 

http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/rtte/interp.htm 

and then click on question 12

In the context of the new approach "placing on the market" is defined as: «
A product is placed on the Community market when it is made available for
the first time. This is considered to take place when a product is
transferred from the stage of manufacture with the intention of distribution
and/or use on the Community market . Moreover, the concept of placing on the
market refers to each individual product, not to a type of product, and
whether it was manufactured as an individual unit or in series".

Now the quote is in the middle of a fairly muddled analysis and perhaps
should be taken with a grain of salt  but what I get from that is it seems
like a sale need not take place to be taken into service and therefor you
would have to notify.


Best Regards,


Kevin Harris
Manager, Approval Services
Digital Security Controls
3301 Langstaff Road
Concord, Ontario
CANADA
L4K 4L2

Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
Fax +1 905 760 3020

Email: harr...@dscltd.com  

-Original Message-
From:   wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, January 31, 2001 2:04 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:RE: RTTE & Placing in Service


Thanks for that info Kevin. I think that publication only
affects needing a
Notified Body per Annex III. The -3  lists the essential
test suites, so it
is no longer necessary to ask a Notified Body to identify
them.

Richard Woods

--
From:  Kevin Harris [SMTP:harr...@dscltd.com]
Sent:  Wednesday, January 31, 2001 2:07 PM
To:  'wo...@sensormatic.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:  RE: RTTE & Placing in Service

Hi Richard,

I think it all becomes a moot point on Feb 7. I was looking
at the ETSI site
yesterday and they indicate there that EN 300-220-3 will be
published in the
OJ  for the R&TTE directive on that date. EN 300-220-3 is
the harmonised EN
covering the essential requirements under Article 3.2 of the
directive

 Best Regards,


Kevin Harris
Manager, Approval Services
Digital Security Controls
3301 Langstaff Road
Concord, Ontario
CANADA
L4K 4L2

Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
Fax +1 905 760 3020

Email: harr...@dscltd.com  

-Original Message-
From:   wo...@sensormatic.com
[mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, January 31, 2001 12:43 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:RTTE & Placing in Service


Consider a low power radio transmitter
subject to EN 300 220
that is to be
used only by the manufacturer's service
organization and
will not be placed
on the market for sale. EN 300 220 is a
harmonized standard,
but the
operating frequency is not harmonized.

It appears that the provisions in Article 6
do not apply
since the product
will not be placed on the market. Article

RE: consumer electronics used on board aircraft

[rbusche]

I may regret saying this, but isn't it conceivable that the FCC Rules that
make it illegal to use a cell phone in the air has more to do with the right
of the airline to sell expensive phone time, than the technical issues? :(

-Original Message-
From: Brent DeWitt [mailto:bdew...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 10:08 AM
To: Mike Hopkins; 'Colgan, Chris'; 'Emc-Pstc' (E-mail)
Subject: RE: consumer electronics used on board aircraft



My background is the pretty much the same as Mike's, which is probably why I
agree with his response.  I just wanted to add that the prohibition on cell
phone usage (in the US at least) is not FAA or airline driven, but mandated
by the FCC.  The architecture of the cellular system is rather carefully
planned.  The placement of antenna sites, coverage and hand-off algorithms
are based on the propagation from land based phones, which is quite
different from a phone in an airliner 25000' feet up.  The FCC has therefore
made it illegal to operate a cell phone after the wheels of the plane leave
the ground.

Regards,

Brent DeWitt

"Takeoffs are optional.  Landings are mandatory"

-Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf
Of Mike Hopkins
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 11:38 AM
To: 'Colgan, Chris'; 'Emc-Pstc' (E-mail)
Subject: RE: consumer electronics used on board aircraft



As a frequent flyer and private pilot with some knowledge of EMC, I'll throw
in a few comments:

It is clear to me that consumer electronics can interfere with aircraft
electronics, and I've probably heard all the same horror stories -- DC10
finds itself off course on landing, false engine warnings, interrupted
communications, etc... It isn't clear to me how prevalent this problem is or
if it happens often enough to be considered a problem. One instance of
electronic interference is enough to have everyone up in arms against the
use of ANY electronics in ANY airplane.

On a 747 flight to the Pacific, I'd bet there are as many as 30 to 40 lap
top computers operating together at some point during the flight.
Additionally, there are probably another 40 to 50 walkman tape players or CD
players in operation, plus the on-board entertainment systems and a few
in-flight telephones being used. On shorter flights, there may still be a
large number of laptops being used by business people plus tape/CD players
and air phones and the like in use during the flight. I don't think this is
a general problems for aircraft electronics.

HOWEVER; if radio or television receivers or cell phones were allowed, I
believe the level of interference could easily reach the level of being at
least disruptive to aircraft systems if not downright dangerous. I have
personally seen commercial scanners and FM broadcast receivers that will
interfere with voice comms -- 118MHz to 136MHz -- which means they could
certainly interfere with nav equipment operating between 108MHz and 118MHz
(VOR's and ILS's, specifically). I also have a Garmin hand held GPS system
that I cannot find anything that it will interfere with nor have I found
anything that interferes with it (except things getting in the way of the
antenna - Maybe I'm just lucky?).

My sense is the following: Interference with nav stuff is the most likely --
a VOR indicator off, or something like that. With GPS back-up (or getting to
be primary) in most aircraft, a faulty Nav indication would likely be caught
before it was a problem (NOT so if you're on an ILS approach in IMC
(Instrument meteorological conditions) where a faulty indication can run you
into terrain -- this is why no electronics should be operated on the
aircraft below 10,000 feet on take-off or approach).

I doubt a cell phone caused the Saab to crash -- most airplanes will still
fly even with all electronics blocked out (don't know if the Saab is fly by
wire or not, but I don't think so). Horizontal situation indicators and
gyro's are driven by vacuum and in larger airplanes, there's back-up vacuum,
red flashlights in the cockpit, etc... Upsetting autopilot controls might
cause the airplane to do something erratic, but that sort of thing should be
recoverable as long as someone in the cockpit is paying attention.

Enough of that -- need to get back to my real job

Mike Hopkins
KeyTek







-Original Message-
From: Colgan, Chris [mailto:chris.col...@tagmclarenaudio.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 6:15 AM
To: 'Emc-Pstc' (E-mail)
Subject: consumer electronics used on board aircraft



There is growing concern amongst professional aircrew about the use of
consumer electronics (CD players, mobile phones, hand held GPS etc) on board
aircraft.  Some claim that passenger electronics has definitely interfered
with navigation systems, primary flight displays or engine warning systems.
There are rumours that a mobile phone contributed to the demise of a
Crossair Saab 340 on 10 Jan 2000 killing all passengers and crew.  Some
pilots 

RE: Cell Phone Suit Will Get Its Day in Court

[rbusche]

The difference is that everyone knows that a car can be dangerous. IF cell
phones are proven hazardous, most people  would not be aware or understand
the risk. Im not saying that these aligations are valid, but it does make
sense to keep informed.
 
Rick Busche

-Original Message-
From: Mark Gill [mailto:gil...@nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 8:33 AM
To: peter.tar...@sanmina.com; 'PSTC - articles 1'
Subject: RE: Cell Phone Suit Will Get Its Day in Court



Funny thing - automobile manufacturers are making and selling cars with the
knowledge that they may be dangerous! 

 -Original Message- 
From:   Tarver, Peter [SC1:9031:EXCH]  
Sent:   Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:32 AM 
To: PSTC - articles 1 
Subject:Cell Phone Suit Will Get Its Day in Court 

From the Telecom Digest 

Monty Solomon wrote: 
> 
> Cell Phone Suit Will Get Its Day in Court 
> 
> NEW ORLEANS, La. - In ruling that could shake the cell phone industry, a
federal judge let stand a lawsuit that says companies are making and selling
cell phones with the knowledge that they may be dangerous.

> 
> http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,21540,00.html
  
> -- 
> The Telecom Digest is currently mostly robomoderated. Please mail 
> messages to edi...@telecom-digest.org. 

RE: EN55024

[rbusche]

Barry brings up a good point. The products manufactured by my company, Evans
& Sutherland, are typically high computer systems (flight simulators) used
in a Heavy Industrial environments. As such we routinely test to EN 55022
Class A (emissions) and EN 50082-2 (immunity). More recently we have also
added EN 55024 (ITE immunity) as well. Depending on the end use application,
some of our lower end image generators do not have heavy industrial immunity
but they are all Class A devices. These are not used in residential
applications but rather as light industrial products.

Rick

 -Original Message-
From:   Barry Ma [mailto:barry...@altavista.com] 
Sent:   Thursday, December 07, 2000 2:39 PM
To: chr...@gnlp.com
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:RE: EN55024


Hi Chris,

I agree with 99.9% of your convincing opinions with a tiny question. You
said:
"I believe its because the scope of EN 55024 is geared toward the
residential, commercial and light industrial environment. If I were
producing a piece of ITE equipment intended for a truly industrial
environment, I would consider Class A emissions (yes Class A) from EN 55022
(assuming it's ITE). I would then look for the best fit of an immunity
standard for industrial environments. Either a generic immunity standard
such as EN 50082-2 or another whose scope is directed at an industrial
environment." 

I respect the due diligence to find a best-fit immunity standard for
industrial environment, especially when customers want to do so. Please
allow me to ask a question when customer don't care:

Is there any conflict with written statement in relevant standards if we
simply follow EN55024 for ITE used in industrial environment? 



Thanks.
Best Regards,
Barry Ma
ANRITSUhttp://www.anritsu.com
Morgan Hill, CA 95037



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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

CSA C22.3 #42-99

[rbusche]

I had a question posed to me by a fellow engineer with regard to the design
of an electrical outlet to be used in ITE equipment. He is following the
requirements identified in CSA standard C22.2  #42-99 where each pole and
ground pin is individually subjected to a weighted pullout test. The
question was whether or not this is also part of the equivalent UL
requirements for electrical outlets. An engineer from a reputable power cord
manufacturer told him that UL did not require this test.  Unfortunately I
have no expertise with either standard and could not help. Could someone let
me know what the equivalent UL standard is and whether this is a true
statement.

If someone could contact me off line I would appreciate it.

Thanks in advance...

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Flammability of Foam Filters

[rbusche]

According to UL 1950, sub clause 4.4.3.6, foam air filters must meet the
flammability of Class V2 or better, or HF-2 or better. This rating in
accordance with UL 94. Recently one of our suppliers has suggested the use
of Class 2 filter material in accordance with UL 900 flammability.
Additionally I have been told that filters that comply with Class 2
requirements are considered to meet the requirements of sub clause 4.4.3.6.

My questions are:

1. Is Class 2 similar to V-2 or HF-2?
2. Can UL 900 Class 2 filters be used to satisfy sub clause 4.4.3.6?
3. Is  UL 900 "Performance of Air filters" applicable to ITE equipment per
UL 1950?


Thanks

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Neutral/Earth connections

[rbusche]

Another possibility is that the US equipment may have been designed for a
three phase "Y"  input with a neutral and was used on a European three phase
"delta" circuit. Someone could have then tied the neutral terminal to ground
creating a serious hazard as well as a voltage imbalance.

Just a thought...

Rick
 -Original Message-
From:   Rich Nute [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com] 
Sent:   Wednesday, October 11, 2000 3:38 PM
To: wo...@sensormatic.com; k3...@eurobell.co.uk
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Re: Neutral/Earth connections





Hi Richard and Dave:


In answer to Richard's comment:

>   The neutral is never to be tied to the chassis of equipment. It is not
>   allowed by any safety standard nor the National Electrical Code. The
neutral
>   is to be tied to earth at one and only one point and that is that the
>   service entrance or the electrical box fed by an on-premises
transformer. I
>   would have to seriously question if this product was designed to any
>   recognized safety standard. Even if it does not pop the breaker, is it
safe?

See IEC 60950, Sub-clause 1.2.12, Power Distribution,
and Sub-clause 1.2.12.1, TN-C system and Figure 3.

This reference describes a scheme by which accessible 
conductive parts are grounded via the neutral 
conductor of the power distribution system.

Also, see NEC 250-60, Frames of Ranges and Clothes
Dryers, and 250-61, Use of Grounded Circuit Conductor
for Grounding Equipment, and 250-61(b), Load Side
Equipment, Exceptions.  

In the USA, the frames of cooking ranges, wall-mounted
ovens, counter-mounted cooking units, and clothes 
dryers may be grounded via the neutral conductor (i.e.,
the TN-C scheme).

However, the TN-C grounding scheme is not permitted for 
the equipment mentioned in the original posting. 


In answer to Dave's question:

While there is no general rule regarding configuration
of exported equipment, there are specific rules for
some kinds of equipment (laser, x-ray, medical, etc.) 
that requires that the equipment must meet either USA 
safety standards or the safety standards of the 
destination country.

Personally, I find it hard to believe that a reputable
USA manufacturer would supply equipment where the 
neutral was connected to the chassis.  So, I wonder if
there is some sort of mix-up due to wiring the unit for
the U.K.?  

A USA 240-V unit is provided with three wires:

+120 V  (typically black)
-120 V  (typically red)
Ground/Chassis/PE   (green or green/yellow)

A USA 120-0-120 V unit is provided with four wires:

   +120 V   (typically black)
0  (neutral)(white or natural grey)
   -120 V   (typically red)
   Ground/Chassis/PE(green or green/yellow)

So, I wonder if the unit was a 240-V unit, but the
wires were identified as +120, -120, and 0/chassis?  
Then, I wonder if the use of a 120/120 marking implied 
a neutral?  I suspect that there is some confusion
because Dave describes connecting the unit to a U.K.
120-0-120 source.  I would expect that the unit could
be connected to a U.K. 240 V source (phase and neutral)
with the third wire connected to PE.

I suggest a further study of the unit or its schematic
to determine if the chassis is used as a current-
carrying conductor (i.e., neutral).


Best regards,
Rich






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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Ladders and work platforms

[rbusche]

I am still trying to locate a European starndard that would address the
issue of performing maintenace tasks from a ladder. The following message is
being reposted:


I am looking for suggestions for European standards with regard to ladders
and maintenance platforms. I have a copy of British Standard  BS 5395: Part
3: 1985. "Stairs, ladders and walkways" and was wondering if there might be
other applicable European standards.

Thanks in advance


Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Ladders and work platforms

[rbusche]

I am looking for suggestions for European standards with regard to ladders
and maintenance platforms. I have a copy of British Standard  BS 5395: Part
3: 1985. "Stairs, ladders and walkways" and was wondering if there might be
other applicable European standards.

Thanks in advance


Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Line/Neutral to Earth MOVS

[rbusche]

Somewhat related to this discussion is the opportunity I had last week to
perform surge testing on an off-the-shelf, rack mounted PC. The power supply
in question was from a reputable manufacturer and had safety, EMC and CE
markings. The system (power supply) passed the "Heavy Industrial" limits
when tested line to neutral but the computer would reset when tested L/N to
ground. My rationale for this anomaly was the lack of a suppression device
(MOV?) to ground.

Rich's argument makes sense, and apparently most PC supply manufacturers do
not provide this protection to ground. Why then would I see this problem and
what could I do to correct it?

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
. 
-Original Message-
From:   Rich Nute [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, June 13, 2000 1:16 PM
To: dan.kin...@heapg.com
Cc: c...@dolby.co.uk; pmerguer...@itl.co.il;
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Re: Line/Neutral to Earth MOVS





>   Why do you need the MOVs?  Why not just take the L & N
to ground via a gas
>   tube each?

Indeed!

Why, even, use any suppressors?

Supposedly, there is only insulation from L and N 
to ground (earth).  As such, it is easy to achieve
5 kV worth of insulation.  Without much effort, this
can go to 10 kV.

5 kV will easily withstand most mains transients.
If there is concern for transient suppression above
this value, simply use an air gap between a pair of
terminals in the circuit.  Use the minimum spacing
allowed by the safety standard.  Make sure the
terminals are robust and coated with solder.  This
way, there will be little or no degradation when an 
arc occurs.  (The solder may melt, but it will re-
form when it cools.)

We always test mains circuits to breakdown.  Most of
our mains circuits go to >5 kV simply by meeting the
standards' requirements for spacings and Y-caps.
Our typical >5 kV breakdowns occur between the terminals 
of the Y-caps (on the back side of the PWB, between the
Y-cap leads protruding on the back side).

I am often amused by the commercial "surge suppressors"
offered by computer stores and similar stores.  If a
product meets the various "surge" and safety standards, 
there is no need for such devices.  


Best regards,
Rich




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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Mains Color Codes

[rbusche]

And what would the recommendations be for three phase?

-Original Message-
From:   Lacey,Scott [mailto:sla...@foxboro.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, April 05, 2000 5:48 AM
To: 'Mavis, Robert'
Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject:RE: Mains Color Codes


Robert,
I have always found the European color codes (brown/light
blue/green
w/yellow) to be best for dual market use. UL and CSA seem to
have no problem
with the use of these. You will need to provide some kind of
legend plate or
tag explaining the color codes, as many U.S. electricians
are still not
familiar with these. 

Scott Lacey

-Original Message-
From:   Mavis, Robert [SMTP:rma...@pelco.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, April 04, 2000 5:33 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Mains Color Codes

I know this was kicked around a while back but here
we go again. 

What are the allowable color codes for pigtails that
come from a
permanently connected apparatus to be connected to mains for
US and Europe?
Is there a color code that is allowable for both?

Thanks in advance for any help.. 

 
Robert L. Mavis 
Agency Compliance Coordinator 
Engineering Department, 
Compliance Engineering Group 
Pelco 
300 W. Pontiac Way 
Clovis, CA 93612 

Phone:  (559) 292-1981 x2309 
Toll Free:  (800) 292-1981 x2309 
Fax:(559) 291-3775 
email:  rma...@pelco.com 
URL:http://www.pelco.com
  
- 


Note: If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, contact
administra...@pelco.com or call (559) 292-1981.  Information
contained may
be confidential.  Dissemination, distribution or copying of
this e-mail is
prohibited if you are not the intended recipient.


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Fires from Electric Fans

[rbusche]

It concerns me that a device such as this would have its safety dependent on
lubrication. One would expect that it may be infrequently serviced as a
result of being in an attic. Additionally, thermal cutouts for these
applications should be not be designed to allow them to be defeated. 

-Original Message-
From:   Lacey,Scott [mailto:sla...@foxboro.com]
Sent:   Thursday, March 30, 2000 11:48 AM
To: 'rbus...@es.com'
Cc: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject:RE: Fires from Electric Fans

Mr. Wiederhold,
About a year and a half ago, I installed a whole-house fan
for a relative.
The unit was clearly labeled "inspect and lubricate
annually". In addition,
there was a warning marked on the motor end bell about not
attempting to
defeat the thermal cutout . Most locked rotor situations
with fans occur
from a lubrication failure. I have actually seen people try
to wedge the
thermal cutout reset button to prevent operation while
troubleshooting. Not
a safe practice at all.

Scott Lacey
Test engineer



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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Fires from Electric Fans

[rbusche]

Posted on behalf of Mr. Wiederhold... 

-Original Message-
From:   eric wiederhold [mailto:ecwiederh...@hotmail.com]
 
Sent:   Thursday, March 30, 2000 8:22 AM
To: rbus...@es.com  
Subject:Fires from Electric Fans

Mr. Busche,

I am assisting others in doing research on the potential for a fractional
horsepower electric motor to catch fire after a locked rotor situation
occurs.
In the course of my internet research I came across the Virtual Conference
Hall live compliance talk that occured in early 1996, the web address being
(http://www.rcic.com/cnf/emc-pstc/1996/list401.htm)
 .  Some of the things
posed in that talk were of interest and in line with the research being
performed.
In general, we have a situation in which a fractional horsepower electric
motor was the driving force in a powered attic ventilator that was itself
manufactured in the early 1980's.  The PAV was installed within a
residential structure for a number of years, approximately 13-15.  We
believe that a locked rotor situation occured, caused the motor to overheat,
(during which time the thermal protective device was either bypassed or was
otherwise caused to fail), thus causing components within the motor and PAV
to achieve a state that ultimately began the fire.  The fire itself was
contained to the attic area of the residence in question but,unfortunately,
serious burn injuries were inflicted upon at least one individual as a
result of this fire scenario.
I would like to exchange with you further on the subject of the situation,
if you would be so kind. I am looking into any possible leads that could
help in our understanding of the possibilities. Any specific knowledge of a
substantially similar sitation would be of use.  If this in not something
that you can do but you know of another or others that could share advice,
please feel free to pass that information along also. It would be
appreciated if you would respond to this message.  My name is Eric.
Thank you for your time Mr. Busche.

__
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
 

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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

European Ergonomic Standard

[rbusche]

I am looking for the appropriate European Ergonomic standard that addresses
the issue of manual lifting in the workplace. The US equivalent standards
are the "NIOSH Work Practices Guide for Manual Lifting" , OSHA 1910, 
MIL-STD-1472 or MIL-HDBK-795. 

Its my understanding that there are standards available such as British
Standard 5827,  "Health & Safety at Work Etc Act", "Health & Safety at Work
Regulations", and "Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations", but I
assume that these are UK requirements which may or may not be accepted in
the European community.

I realize that this is not necessarily a "Product Safety" issue but I am
hoping that someone may be familiar with this. Any suggestions would be
appreciated.

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com


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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

RE: Correction factor for power supply cords.

[rbusche]

This "interpretation" is news to me. I thought that the derating was based
on requirements of the NEC and was specifically addressing the power plug
(plug cap) itself.  

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From:   jrbar...@lexmark.com [mailto:jrbar...@lexmark.com]
Sent:   Friday, March 10, 2000 8:59 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Re: Correction factor for power supply
cords.


Kelly,
UL 1950 has a D1 (more restrictive) deviation in clause
3.2.1:
"Where equipment is intended to be connected to a source of
supply by a power
supply cord, the attachment plug shall be rated no less than
125 percent of the
rated current of the equipment."

UL's interpretation of "attachment plug" includes not only
the plug that goes
into the wall outlet, but the entire path between the wall
outlet and your power
supply, including:
*  Wall plug.
*  Cordage.
*  IEC-320 plug.
*  IEC-320 appliance inlet.
  John Barnes
Advisory Engineer
  Lexmark
International




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

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

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
 Jim Bacher:  jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
 Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
 Richard Nute:   ri...@ieee.org

Lead free Solder

[rbusche]

For those interested there is an article (page 26) in the January 2000 issue
of Electronic Packaging and Production (EPP) that discusses the new lead
free requirements and alternatives for lead free solder.

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Replacment for solder

[rbusche]

For those interested there is an article (page 26) in the January 2000 issue
of Electronic Packaging and Production (EPP) that discusses the new lead
free requirements and alternatives for lead free solder.

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Proper Protective Earth Ground Symbol

[rbusche]

I agree with Kurt's summary of the ground marking and stack-up requirements,
but there is a point of clarification I would like to have. Years past, it
was explained to me that an appliance inlet ground must be first on the
stack-up against the chassis. The point was to ensure that any maintenance
action did not compromise the grounding of the enclosure. In the case of a
power cord, the opposite was true however. Since a power cord is by
definition frequently replaceable (hence the specific requirements for
strain relief's and terminal blocks) the ground wire must now be on top of
the stack-up. This facilitates easy replacement without jeopardizing the
ground.

What is the consensus on this?

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From:   Andrews, Kurt [mailto:kandr...@tracewell.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, January 18, 2000 8:26 AM
To: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com; Jackson; William;
'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject:RE: Proper Protective Earth Ground Symbol


Jim,

For the Protective Earth Terminal, that is the ground from
the power cord or
IEC Inlet that should be located just inside the equipment
needs to be IEC
417, No. 5019, the circle upside down tree. Also the
incoming ground MUST be
the first on a stud and secured by its own lockwasher and
nut. You may then
stack other grounds to other parts of the equipment on top
of this ground.
You may use a separate lockwasher and nut for each
additional ground or one
for all of the additional grounds. There may also be other
ground studs in
the unit if you don't want to run wires to the Protective
Earth Terminal.
This assumes an all metal construction, which is what we
use. We have used
both the upside down tree symbol, IEC 417 No. 5017, and the
Equipotentiality
symbol, IEC 417 No. 5021 for these additional grounds with
no problems. For
an additional ground on the outside of the equipment we have
used the same
symbol as for the Protective Earth Terminal. When we sent a
unit in once for
safety testing to UL we had the upside down tree without the
circle next to
an outside ground terminal and they told us it has to be the
one with the
circle around it. I would think that the frame ground
symbol, IEC 417 No.
5020 (pitchfork) would also be acceptable although we
haven't used it.

Hope this helps,
   
Kurt Andrews
Compliance Engineer
Tracewell Systems, Inc.
567 Enterprise Dr.
Westerville, OH 43081
Ph. 614-846-6175
Fax 614-846-7791
Email: kandr...@tracewell.com 



-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Cell Phone Hazards?

[rbusche]

Speaking of Microwaves, you may have read an account of a person, on
Christmas eve, keeping warm in front of a Microwave horn on the Darwin
Awards. If you would like to read this good, (albeit fictional) story go to
the following site and search on microwave. You can locate the story under
Urban Legends (1988).

Rick

http://official.darwinawards.com/  

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Cell Phone Hazards?

[rbusche]

Interestingly enough, today on one of the independent radio
networks, a commentator interviewed numerous persons associated with the
investigation of radiation on the human body from Cell phones. One professor
from the University of Washington (Seattle) claims to have evidence that
radiation in rats has been proven to alter chromosomes. 

Another claims that no one in the US would test Cell Phones
for power output and report on them by brand name. The phones were taken to
Europe for testing. 

Yet another claims that research money was granted to study
the issue and then withheld once the evidence started to point towards this
destructive chromosome problem. 

Another man whose wife spent 150 hrs a month on the cell
phone believes that her fatal brain tumor was a direct cause of the phone.
He claims that the tumor (CAT scan) when held near the antenna was a halo of
the antenna itself. He went on to say that the US government had evidence
for the risk of radiation published in Mil Hdbk 239. This document was
subsequently withdrawn and the replacement document no longer addresses that
risk.

Who knows... 

Just wanted to add more fuel to the discussion.




-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

EN 60950 Checklist

[rbusche]

I have been asked by my engineering department to create or locate a
checklist for EN 60950 (or IEC 950) to be used as a guideline. In the past,
I remember an ECMA document like this but that was years ago. Does anyone
have any recommendations or suggestions?

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Cell Phone Hazards?

[rbusche]

The following comment is being forwarded on behalf of a fellow engineer who
is not on this list

-Original Message-

I read a Science News article about using electric current pulses (conducted
or induced) in human tissues to promote healing.  Frequency and pulse shape
are critical.  Wrong frequency or shape is detrimental to healing.  This
technique is targeted to bone mostly and is used for arthritis and fracture
treatment - but Europe is using it for immune system treatment as well.
Another thought food.

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Virus alert, do not open the message from Jeffrey Collins

[rbusche]

According to the news this morning the new virus scheduled to activate today
is identical to this message which we all received from Jeffrey Collins. I
would advise you to delete without opening.

Rick

-Original Message-
From:   Collins, Jeffrey [mailto:jcoll...@ciena.com]
 
Sent:   Tuesday, November 30, 1999 5:38 PM
To: 'rbus...@es.com'
Subject:RE: Laser Standards

Hi !
I received your email and I shall send you a reply ASAP.  Till then, take a
look at the attached zipped docs.  bye.
<>

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Cell Phone Hazards?

[rbusche]

The following article was presented this morning on ZDNET with regard to the
safety of Cell phones. Thought some of you might be interested.


http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2401220,00.html
 


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: NRTL Acceptance

[rbusche]

The link didn't work for me but I did find it at this alternate
location.

http://www.osha-slc.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html
 

-Original Message-
From:   oover...@lexmark.com [mailto:oover...@lexmark.com]
Sent:   Monday, November 22, 1999 7:21 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Re: NRTL Acceptance



Try this website for current information on approved NRTLs.


"http://www.osha-slc.gov/dts/optsc/nrtl/index.html";


OO


-- Forwarded by Oscar
Overton/Lex/Lexmark on 11/22/99 08:46
AM ---


"George_Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK"@lexmta01.notes.lexmark.com on 11/22/99
08:10:59 AM

Please respond to

"George_Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK"@lexmta01.notes.lexmark.com

To:   emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com
cc:(bcc: Oscar Overton/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  RE: NRTL acceptance




Actually, the following NRTLs are approved by OSHA for
evaluation
to UL 1950:

UL, CSA, ITS (former ETL), TUV Rheinland, MET, and SGS.

There may be some I have overlooked.

George Alspaugh

-- Forwarded by George
Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark on 11/22/99
08:09 AM ---

vgorodetsky%canoga@interlock.lexmark.com on 11/19/99
04:57:29 PM

Please respond to
vgorodetsky%canoga@interlock.lexmark.com

To:   George_Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark@LEXMARK,
  emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee@interlock.lexmark.com
cc:(bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  RE: NRTL acceptance




Terry and George,

In this country of ours, there are three equally acceptable
safety marks:
UL, ETL and NRTL.  But, as we all know, some acceptable
marks are more equal
than others.

> -Original Message-
> From:   geor...@lexmark.com [SMTP:geor...@lexmark.com]
> Sent:   Friday, November 19, 1999 11:02 AM
> To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject: NRTL acceptance
>
>
> Terry,
>
> You have raised a very good question.  The problem is that
the U.S.
> had only one approved safety agency  for so long, that it
is
> difficult to wean non-laymen away from that one agency
mark.  This
> includes your (and my) management, marketing, customers,
etc.  Few
> of these understand the meaning of NRTL, with its variety
of agency
> approvals and marks.
>
> I did fight this battle over an off-the-shelf peripheral
we needed
> to market which did not have the "traditional" safety
mark, but an
> acceptable NRTL mark.  One of the positions I to confront
was that
> many Federal, state, or local "government" bids require
"the" mark.
>
> I referenced the Code of Federal Regulations, OSHA
sections, citing
> acceptable U.S. authorized NRTLs.  I pointed out that
compliance to
> UL 1950 was the needed requirement, not which agency did
the actual
> assessment.  One problem is that those who write the
specifications
> for government bids are not aware of this fact, and do
continue to
> list only one agency mark into the document.  In a way,
this is
> probably a violation of federal law, i.e. requiring
vendors to do
> "business" with a specified private company, thus stifling
any
> competition.  Isn't this what the goverment is accusing
Microsoft
> of doing?
>
> You are exactly right.  As PSE professionals, we should be
able to
> look for and use whatever options are legally available to
meet our
> employer's certification needs in the most timely and cost
effective
> manner.  Unfortunately, in the U.S. this requires a
significant
> amount of internal and external education as to the actual
legal
> options.
>
> George Alspaugh
> Lexmark International Inc.
>
> -- Forwarded by George
Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark on
> 11/19/99
> 01:41 PM ---

European Community Legislation Link

[rbusche]

Attached is a link to Eur-Lex which has a "search" for community legislation
in force in Europe. Not sure if this is valuable or not, but thought some of
you might want to be aware of it. I am IN NO WAY affiliated with this
company, just merely providing an interesting link.

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/search_lif_simple.html
 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Free Conversion Program

[rbusche]

For those of you interested, there is a free conversion program located at
the following address:

http://www.joshmadison.com/software  

After opening this site, go to CONVERT for a description. I have found this
program to be quite useful for conversion tasks between different units,
e.g. temperature, power, etc. Hopefully  you will find this useful as well.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Electronic unit panel sizes

[rbusche]

Brian
We manufacturer system where the components are routinely rack mounted. All
of our filler plates and assemblies as defined in "U"s, so yes it does (or
should) work here in the U.S.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From:   Brian Harlowe [mailto:bharl...@vgscientific.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, October 27, 1999 10:30 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Electronic unit panel sizes


Excuse me from drifting away from the main topics of this
forum. But 
can one of you whizzy american engineers help a poor
englishman out.

In the UK ( and Europe) front panels are measured in Us
where 1U 
equals 1.75 ins or 44.45 millimetres.

Does this system operate in the states? The reason I ask is
we have 
an American unit to accomodate that 11 inches high which
works out at 
6.29U!!!

Help

Brian Harlowe  
* opinions expressed here are personal and in no way reflect
the position of VG Scientific

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Laser Standards

[rbusche]

My company uses a 2 mw laser to align a reverse screen projector system. It
is my understanding that this "low power laser" falls under the
classification of Category 1 and is by definition, relatively safe. I
thought I would purchase a copy of EN 60825 to ensure that we have address
proper labeling and markings. Unfortunately this standard has 6 parts and
could cost upwards of $800-1000. Can someone suggest which section I should
order to identify the respective marking requirements.

Thanks in advance...

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Grounding Bond Test

[rbusche]

Rich
The obvious question I would have is... why couldn't you test at a higher
current for longer time meeting both requirements? For example 30A for two
minutes. I know the document indicates a maximum current, but does this make
sense?

OK I guess I know understand what you mean by Technical Requirement vs.
Technical Committee.

-Original Message-
From:   Rich Nute [mailto:ri...@sdd.hp.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, August 25, 1999 2:37 PM
To: carmen.fili...@leitch.com
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; fra...@csa.ca
Subject:Re: Grounding Bond Test




Hi Carmen:


You ask how to resolve the difference between two, 
different production-line (routine) test standards.

If your product is certified by CSA, then you test
to the 30-ampere value.

If your product is certified by a CB Certificate 
and Test Report, and the issuing body invokes 
EN 50116, then you test to the 25-ampere value.

If your product is certified by UL, then you test
to any current of your choosing. 

So, the answer to your question is:

   Whatever your certification house says.

In essence, the requirement is proprietary to the
certification house.  The certification house can
invoke any production-line test it feels is
necessary.  CSA uses 30 amps, 2 minutes.  A 
certification house that invokes EN 50116 uses
25 amps, 1 minute as a maximum test.  UL does not
require a high-current test.

The CSA 30-amp requirement derives from the fact
that a CSA circuit-breaker rated 15 amperes (the 
most common 120-volt circuit in Canada) is not
required to trip before 2 minutes at a current of
twice rating, 30 amperes.  So, the equipment
grounding circuit must withstand 30-amperes for
2 minutes.

The CENELEC 25-ampere requirement history is not
at all clear.  It has been in both European standards
and UL standards as a type test for many, many years.
It only appeared as a routine test when EN 50115 was
published a few years ago.

By the way, neither high-current test (as a 
production-line test) will identify continuity 
problems any better than a low-current test.

The presumption is that the high-current test will 
identify a manufacturing defect in the grounding 
circuit, while a low-current test will not.  

In actuality, the grounding circuit, in order to pass
the type test, had to be properly designed to handle
the high current, no matter whether 25 amps or 30 
amps.  So, for the production-line, we need to be
assured, by test, that the high-current circuit has
been assembled correctly and with no defects.

The high-current test WILL NOT identify loose screws
if the conductors are making contact!  The high-
current test WILL NOT identify cut strands of wire
if there are 3 or more strands in the circuit!  
(Feel free to duplicate these tests or any other
grounding circuit defects you can imagine; the 
circuit will pass the high-current test!)

The high-current test does not identify continuity
problems any better than a low-current test.

I did point this out to the EN 50116 committee when
they asked for comments before it was published.
Interesting that the committee ignored the data and
required the test anyway!  I guess the lesson is:
don't confuse a technical committee with technical
facts.


Rich



-
 Richard Nute  Product Safety Engineer
 Hewlett-Packard Company   Product Regulations Group

 AiO Division  Tel   :   +1 858 655 3329

 16399 West Bernardo Drive FAX   :   +1 858 655 4979

 San Diego, California 92127   e-mail:  ri...@sdd.hp.com


-



ps:  In high-volume production, both the 1-minute
 and the 2-minute tests are unacceptable to the
 manufacturer.  It seems that m

RE: Question on internal ESD testing

[rbusche]

Is it reasonable to say that internal ESD testing should be performed in
"casual access" areas as opposed to "user maintenance areas"?  With PCs (for
example) being designed for user service, one would have to expect these
"service persons" to follow ESD maintenance procedures. Adding RAM, or
functionality obviously reaches a point at which "user service"  would not
allow for ESD compliance. This could get a little gray in my opinion.

Rick Busche
Senior Engineer
Evans & Sutherland

-Original Message-
From:   Jim Hulbert [mailto:hulbe...@pb.com]
Sent:   Friday, August 13, 1999 12:55 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Question on internal ESD testing




Egregious?  Not necessarily.  For our products, we will
discharge to internal
parts that the user can come into contact with during normal
operation or
maintenance.  For example, if the user is expected to open a
cover to change an
ink cartridge, remove a paper jam, or perform some other
routine procedure, then
we would discharge to the areas exposed to the operator when
the cover is open.
However, we would NOT discharge to an internal area that is
not normally
accessed by the operator, such as a cover that is only
expected to be removed by
a qualified service or repair person.

Note that EN 55024 also states specifically that you are not
expected to
discharge to exposed connector pins.   I guess that would,
in fact, be
egregious.

Jim Hulbert
Senior Engineer - EMC
Pitney Bowes
-- Forwarded by Jim Hulbert/MSD/US/PBI
on 08/13/99 02:55 PM
---


"Grasso, Charles (Chaz)"  on
08/13/99 12:34:33 PM

Please respond to "Grasso, Charles (Chaz)"


To:   "'EMC Group'" 
cc:(bcc: Jim Hulbert/MSD/US/PBI)

Subject:  Question on internal ESD testing





Hello,

Does anyone in this august group apply ESD discharges
INTERNAL
to a product as required by EN55024.

I consider this just a tad egregious - don't you?

Thank you
Charles Grasso
Advisory Engineer
StorageTek
2270Sth 88th Street
Louisville CO 80027 M/S 4247.
Tel:303-673-2908
Fax:303-661-7115
email:gra...@louisville.stortek.com
Web Site:
http://www.ewh.ieee.org/r5/denver/rockymountainemc/




-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).







-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: EMF Test Data (Cancer and EMF)

[rbusche]

It was the latter, I was just trying to be polite and non judgmental. :-)

-Original Message-
From:   Gorodetsky, Vitaly [mailto:vgorodet...@canoga.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, July 28, 1999 5:08 PM
To: 'rbus...@es.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:RE: EMF Test Data (Cancer and EMF)

All compliance practitioners recognize the difference
between "improper
testing" and "data (expedient) misinterpretation".  What was
it?

> -Original Message-
> From: rbus...@es.com [SMTP:rbus...@es.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 2:22 PM
> To:   emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> Subject:  EMF Test Data (Cancer and EMF)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attached is a link to a recent MSNBC article concerning
improper testing
> with regard to cancer and EMF. Thought some of you might
be interested.
> 
> Rick
> 
> 
> http://www.msnbc.com/news/293056.asp
>  
> 
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to
majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
> 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: DC-1GHz probe construction plans

[rbusche]

Site link was in error and I took the liberty to correct it. If interested,
you might want to try this again.
Thanks for the posting Doug.

Rick

-Original Message-
From:   d...@dsmith.org [mailto:d...@dsmith.org]
Sent:   Tuesday, July 27, 1999 12:43 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:DC-1GHz probe construction plans


Hi All,

I just posted the construction plans for an easy to build
DC-1GHz scope probe on my website (http://www.emcesd.com/
 . Cost of materials is about $3.00. The plans are
linked under "Technical Goodies for Download." The document is about 270K It
includes six high resolution (for a website) jpeg pictures.
This is the same probe that was built by members of the
Rocky Mountain EMC Society during the probe building session   I moderated
last February.
I have also posted (early because of the upcoming IEEE EMC
Symposium) next months measurement "technical tidbit" question.
Doug

---
___  _   Doug Smith
 \  / )  P.O. Box 1457
  =  Los Gatos, CA 95031-1457
   _ / \ / \ _   TEL/FAX: 408-356-4186/358-3799
 /  /\  \ ] /  /\  \ Cell Phone: 408-858-4528
|  q-( )  |  o  |Email:
d...@dsmith.org  
\ _ /]\ _ / Website: http://www.dsmith.org
 
---

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
 
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com
 ,
jim_bac...@monarch.com  ,
ri...@sdd.hp.com  , or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com
  (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

EMF Test Data (Cancer and EMF)

[rbusche]

Attached is a link to a recent MSNBC article concerning improper testing
with regard to cancer and EMF. Thought some of you might be interested.

Rick


http://www.msnbc.com/news/293056.asp  

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

EN 55024 Question

[rbusche]

In the attached thread it indicates that the EN55024 will replace EN50082-1
for ITE applications. As I understand it, this is the "Light Industrial"
category. Does EN55024 (or any other ITE standard) also replace EN50082-2
"Heavy Industrial"?

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From:   Gorodetsky, Vitaly [mailto:vgorodet...@canoga.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, June 22, 1999 9:19 AM
To: 'Geoff Lister'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; Cal
Whiteley
Subject:RE: EN 61000-4-


To Jeff and everyone concerned:
EN55024 covers only ITE and, as such, it is not intended to
replace
EN50082-1 for other relevant categories of products.

> -Original Message-
> From: Geoff Lister [SMTP:geoff.lis...@motionmedia.co.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 3:59 AM
> To:   emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; Cal Whiteley
> Subject:  Re: EN 61000-4-
> 
> 
> Cal,
> EN55024:1998 is now replacing EN50082-1:1997, the final
date for the 
> transition being 1st July 2001. In the body of EN55024,
the 
> references are IEC 61000-4-x, but in Annex ZA (normative)
there is a 
> cross reference to the equivalent EN specs. They are
> EN61000-4-2:1995 ESD
> EN61000-4-3:1996 Radiated RF electromagnetic field
> EN61000-4-4:1995 Fast transient/burst
> EN61000-4-5:1995 Surge
> EN61000-4-6:1996 Conducted RF
> EN61000-4-8:1993 Power frequency magnetic field
> EN61000-4-11:1994 Voltage dips,short interruptions and
voltage 
> variations
> To the best of my knowledge the above information is
correct, but 
> given the nature of international specs they are always
subject to 
> change.
> 
> regards
> Geoff Lister
> 
> 
> > Date:  Mon, 21 Jun 1999 14:56:11 -0400
> > From:  Cal Whiteley 
> > To:emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> > Subject:   EN 61000-4-
> > Reply-to:  Cal Whiteley 
> 
> > 
> > Hello all - can anyone tell me which of the EN 61000-4-
(immunity)
> > documents apply to telecommunications terminal equipment
? Thanks in
> > advance for your help.
> > Cal Whiteley
> > Patton Electronics Co.
> > Gaithersburg, MD
> > 
> > 
> > -
> > This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion
list.
> > To cancel your subscription, send mail to
majord...@ieee.org
> > with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without
the
> > quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> > jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> > roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
> > 
> > 
> *Geoff Lister   email: geoff.lis...@motionmedia.co.uk
> *Motion Media Technology Ltd., Horton Hall, Horton,
Bristol, BS37 6QN, UK.
> *POTS : +44-(0)1454-313444 or +44-(0)1454-338561 (direct)
> *ISDN : +44-(0)1454-338555 or +44-(0)1454-338554 (direct)
> *FAX  : +44-(0)1454-313678 Home : +44-(0)1275-854025
> *WWW  :  http://www.motionmedia.co.uk/
> * The Videophone Company  -  Seeing is believing
> 
> -
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to
majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
> 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail 

60Hz in PC Monitor

[rbusche]

I have in my company, several people asking for help with swimming in their
monitors. There systems are connected to a half wall (windows on top, power
and heat on the bottom). The head is steam radiation via baseboard
radiators. These monitors are NOT next to any known magnetic fields. I have
verified that if the monitors are physically moved away from the wall/heater
the noise diminishes. In the row of multiple cubicles only selective people
have the problem (perhaps 3 out of 15 or so). The noise appears to be 60 Hz
in nature although no color purity problems were noted.

I'm assuming that I am now looking for magnetic fields, possibly from the
electrical feed line, or could it be the radiators? Is it possible for these
to be nodal or selective along a common wall?

Has anyone else had similar problems? Would it make sense to obtain a meter
to measure the magnetics?  Any suggestions appreciated.


Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: EMC Books

[rbusche]

In all fairness, I have this book and have also taken the class from Mr.
Mark Montrose. I found the class extremely interesting and very useful.

Rick Busche

-Original Message-
From:   Qu Pingyu [mailto:pin...@ime.org.sg]
Sent:   Thursday, May 06, 1999 6:49 PM
To: 'b...@namg.us.anritsu.com'
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:RE: EMC Books

Barry:

I don't think the 1996 version of Montrose's book is good.
Though there are
many useful design rules listed, the reason behind is not
explained very
clearly. I also attended a course on PCB EMC design
conducted by Mr.
Montrose himself and I have to say I was quite disappointed.

I second your recommendation for the second and third book
listed on the
wegb page (I havn't read the first one I would like to),
plus Paul's
Introduction to EMC.

Regards

Qu Pingyu

> -Original Message-
> From: b...@namg.us.anritsu.com
[SMTP:b...@namg.us.anritsu.com]
> Sent: Friday, 7 May 1999 0:20
> To:   "smtp@WILTRON7@Servers[\"Jon D. Curtis\"
> ]"@namg.us.anritsu.com
> Cc:   emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject:  Re: EMC Books
> 
> Jon,
> 
> I just visited your book store. Very pertinent comments on
each book 
> although brief. The first three books should be listed
"must read" for EMC
> 
> engineers. Suggestion for the book of "Printed Circuit
Board Design 
> Techniques for EMC Compliance", Mark I. Montrose, 1996:
The newest edition
> 
> seems to be 1998? The new edition added much more
materials on Signal 
> Integrity.
> 
> Barry
> 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Conductive Paint

[rbusche]

We have a product which uses conductive paint inside of the enclosure. From
a performance standpoint, it works quite well. The major problem being that
you need metal to metal (paint to paint) contact. We found that the abrasive
quality was pretty poor and as such we had to add material (conductive tape)
to improve the wear characteristic. Additionally, you have to remember to
"hold back" or "mask" the material to eliminate touching the surface.
Because it is paint (or plating) it cannot pass the ground test and as such,
cannot be defined as protective earth.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From:   JENKINS, JEFF [mailto:jeff.jenk...@aei.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, April 13, 1999 10:07 AM
To: 'emc-pstc'
Subject:Conductive Paint

Hello Group,

My company is proposing to use conductive paint on our
enclosures, and I
would like your input as to the acceptability of this
vis-a-vis protective
earth bonding of enclosure panels.  I am interested in the
perspective of
both European and North American requirements.

This should be a generic question, but if it helps, here are
the standards
we use:

EN 60950 / IEC 950 / UL 1950 / CSA 950
EN 50178
UL 1012
CSA C22.2 No. 107.1

Regards,

Jeff Jenkins
Senior Regulatory Compliance Engineer
Advanced Energy Industries, Inc.
Fort Collins, CO USA 80525

Opinions are my own and not necessarily shared by Advanced
Energy
Industries, Inc. or its affiliates. 

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Looking for a filter

[rbusche]

I have a low frequency control port that has a high frequency (300 MHz)
common mode harmonic noise on all three lines. This is on an existing card
with a limited amount of real-estate available. To compound the problems I
am driving a unique,  off-the-shelf, device with no provisions for proper
shielding. As such, I am looking for a filtered 3 pin mini-din connector, or
a filter assembly that would lend itself to surface mounting.

Any suggestions?

Thanks

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Seeking PCs that Pass CISPR

[rbusche]

Just for the record, I have been very pleased with the HP Kayak machine. The
cover was very easy to remove by just flipping two levers, and even after
numerous removals it remained reliable.

The gasketing was very good both around the cover and on the I/O panel. If
degradation of the gasket were to occur, it is very easy to restore the
fingers by simply pulling up on them a bit.

Just my $.02

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: FCC exemptions

[rbusche]

Several years ago my company exercised this exemption because our equipment
at that time was extremely large and somewhat difficult to stage. More
recently, we have elected to test and verify to FCC or CISPR regulations. 

One word of caution. The exemption by the FCC may still be valid, but as I
understand it, this merely eliminates the need for testing. It does not
eliminate the responsibly to correct subsequent EMI problems.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From:   mvald...@netvision.net.il
[mailto:mvald...@netvision.net.il]
Sent:   Wednesday, January 13, 1999 11:41 PM
To: 'mvald...@netvision.net.il'; emc-p...@ieee.org;
Luttrell, Lyle
Subject:RE: FCC exemptions 

Thanks Lyle and everyone,

The answer seems to be not in part 18 but in the detail of
the OET document.

It seems the intention was to exempt "maintenance, research,
evaluation, simulation, and other 
analytical or scientific applications". Whatever that might
mean. In some cases the same device 
(e.g. a scanner) could be for testing something or producing
something.

It is still something which may be open to argument, and
since FCC is a federal regulation, the 
argument could start when the device is introduced into the
US (customs?)

Did anyone experience such an argument versus FCC?

thanks again,
Moshe

Name: moshe valdman
E-mail: mvald...@netvision.net.il
Phone: 972-52-941200
Telefax: 972-3-5496369
Date: 13/1/99
Time: 22:40:49
You are most welcome to visit my homepage at:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/5233/



-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Re(2): Insulation on MOV's

[rbusche]

The other reason for putting tubing on MOV's is to direct (or contain) the
resulting explosion. Tubing helps direct the discharge away from other
circuits which may compromise spacings.

-Original Message-
From:   s_doug...@ecrm.com [mailto:s_doug...@ecrm.com]
Sent:   Monday, January 11, 1999 2:16 PM
To: jrbar...@lexmark.com
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Re(2): Insulation on MOV's

jrbar...@lexmark.com writes:

>The vendor
 
>who designed and built the power supply for us put
thick-wall heat-shrink
>tubing
 
>over the MOV to provide a safety barrier, since the dipped
epoxy coating
>was
 
>considered to be only operational insulation.
>
This reminds me of a product we made about 10 years ago. We
put MOV's on a
terminal block in the primary circuit to solve a problem.
Had no trouble
with that but I recall one of the agencies (UL, CSA, TUV)
made us put
heatshrink over the body of each MOV. Now I find out why.

Regards,
Scott
s_doug...@ecrm.com


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Product Alteration

[rbusche]

On a similar note to the current thread regarding changes in
company names, I am reminded that I have a related question. My company
plans to buy 
"off the shelf"  PCs, add logic cards, fans and perhaps even
an additional power supply. What are the implications? Obviously this
negates the original safety license and I would assume that the mark would
have to be removed. Again I understand that the circuitry added must remain
compliant with the respective EMI/EMC standards. But my question is this:

1.  What process is required to use a "approved" PC as a superset to my
product.  Can I submit a make from to a given safety agency, submitting the
original device with my modifications. Who then is the manufacturer?

Thanks in advance.


Best wishes to everyone at this Christmas season!

Rick

rbus...@es.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

NEC Question/Observation

[rbusche]

During a recent re-model at home I decided to replace the ceiling lamp in
the dining room. Reading the instructions for the new lamp it stated:

 " Warning, light fixture to be connected to wiring rated 80 degrees C. Most
home older than 1985 will have 60 degree C wiring. Consult a qualified
electrician".  

I was surprised that 1) I could buy a common light assembly and not have it
correctly rated for the application, 2) a "qualified electrician was
required" and 3) I question what changes would be necessary to properly use
the light. Obviously you could run a new 80 degree C line, but this seems to
be a bit of an overkill. Is this REALLY what they are suggesting? I would
think that adequate thermal insulation between the fixture and the existing
wiring would be all that is required The fixture itself would have 80 degree
c wires.

My apologies for submitting this national electrical code question, I
realize it is not generally applicable to the products generally discussed
on this list, but perhaps someone has some thoughts on it.

Rick 
rbus...@es.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Laser Pointers

[rbusche]

As a follow-up (and conclusion) I am submitting a link to Ebay where these
pens are marketed. This gives you an idea of the general misuse of these
devices.

This not meant as advertisement for Ebay and I hope that the posting of this
link is not inappropriate.  Just a pet peeve I guess.

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=41883410
 

-Original Message-
From:   s_doug...@ecrm.com [mailto:s_doug...@ecrm.com]
Sent:   Thursday, November 12, 1998 2:09 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Laser Pointers

This will be my last comment on this topic.
The following bulletin came from the CDRH web page: 
http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/radhlth/index.html

HHS NEWS

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 



P97-45 FOOD AND
DRUG
ADMINISTRATION
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Sharon Snider: 301-827-6242
December 18, 1997   Broadcast Media:
301-827-3434

Consumer Inquires:
800-532-4440


   FDA ISSUES WARNING ON MISUSE OF LASER POINTERS

The Food and Drug Administration is warning parents and
school officials
about the possibility of eye damage to children from
hand-held laser
pointers.

These products are generally safe when used as intended by
teachers and
lecturers to highlight areas on a chart or screen. However,
recent price
reductions have led to wider marketing, and FDA is concerned
about the
promotion and use of these products as children's toys.

The light energy that laser pointers can aim into the eye
can be more
damaging than staring directly into the sun. Federal law
requires a
warning on the product label about this potential hazard to
the eyes.

"These laser pointers are not toys. Parents should treat
them with the
appropriate care," said FDA Lead Deputy Commissioner Michael
A. Friedman,
M.D. "They are useful tools for adults that should be used
by children
only with adequate supervision."

FDA's warning is prompted by two anecdotal reports it has
received of eye
injury from laser pointers--one from a parent, the other
from an
ophthalmologist.

Momentary exposure from a laser pointer, such as might occur
from an
inadvertent sweep of the light across a person's eyes,
causes only
temporary flash blindness. However, even this can be
dangerous if the
exposed person is engaged in a
vision-critical activity such as driving.

 
   ATTENTION TV BROADCASTERS: Please use open
caption for the
hearing impaired.




-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Laser Pointers

[rbusche]

Scott
I agree with you for the most part. The other devices you mentioned as being
potentially hazardous have specific, technical uses. I would bet that the
majority of pointers are in the hands of juveniles who don't read warnings
and could care less. They are for the most part toys. The same could be said
for pagers in the high schools. They are status items, but fortunately the
technology is not directly harmful. So the question is whether this pointer
technology is appropriate for the masses. Perhaps we should survey the
markets. The most prudent response (in my opinion) would be to significantly
reduce the range for these pointers.

Just my $.02

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com
-Original Message-
From:   Lacey,Scott [mailto:sla...@foxboro.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, November 11, 1998 12:53 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:RE: Laser Pointers

RE: Laser Pointers

Laser pointers can indeed be dangerous. However, every one
that I have seen
offered for sale in the U.S. comes with prominent safety
warnings about
potential eye damage. The retina of the eye is very
sensitive to light in
the middle of the 600 nanometer range (bright red). The
damage is related to
exposure time vs. intensity at the surface of the retina.
Fortunately, beam
spread of the typical lower cost pointers provides some
protection at a
distance. The eye should NEVER be exposed to one of these
devices at close
range, such as arm length. Aiming one of these at another
person's eyes
would constitute assault, and would be prosecutable under
both criminal and
civil statutes.

I am very concerned by the modern tendency to ban new
technology in its
infancy due to potential or actual misuse by some
individuals. I am sure
that the majority of these handheld pointers are used
responsibly and
safely. There are many legitimate uses for a compact, low
cost, battery
operated laser source such as these. Some uses are yet to be
discovered.

By the way, all of the following devices have the potential
to cause eye
damage or vehicle or other accidents if misused:

Laser Pointers  LED Keychain Lights
(Hi-Intensity
Versions)
Cordless Spotlights Portable Flash Units
for Photography
Infrared RemotesInfrared
Illuminators for Night
Vision Equipment
Hi-Intensity FlashlightsAuxiliary
Vehicle Lighting
Hand Held Mirrors   Visible & Infrared
Fiber Optic
Transmitters

Infrared is especially dangerous, even at low power levels,
because we can
not see it. It is possible to look into an IR source for
hours without even
knowing it.

For what it's worth,

Scott Lacey
sla...@foxboro.com


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Laser pointers

[rbusche]

As a tie to this discussion, could someone clarify the Laser pointer
classes? Are all of them Class 3 or higher or are there Class 2 and below.
Interestingly enough, I took a group of scouts on an activity last week and
several kids pulled out Laser pointers and had "Light Battles" between
themselves. What is the consensus of the group on potential hazards from
misuse of these devices? Should Class 3 and higher be banned?

Thanks

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com  

-Original Message-
From:   jeanmarie.vandenbul...@barco.com
[mailto:jeanmarie.vandenbul...@barco.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, November 10, 1998 7:26 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Laser pointers 

Dear group, 

FYI: 

For reason of consumer protection, laser pointers of class 3
and higher,
according to EN60825-1, are banned for a period of one year
from the
Belgian market. Products already in commerce should be
removed from the
stores. This ruling was published on 16 September 1998 in
the official
"Belgisch Staatsblad - Moniteur Belge" by Ministrial Decree
No. 98-2461.


Are there any other countries that also have a ban on the
sales of laser
pointers of class 3 and higher? 
  
Jean-Marie Vandenbulcke
Snr. Product Safety and Compliance Engineer.

Barco NV   
Div Barco Projection Systems
Noordlaan 5  B-8520 Kuurne Belgium
Tel: + 32  56 36 83 31  Fax: + 32 56 36 83 55
E-mail: jeanmarie.vandenbul...@barco.com
Web: http://www.barco.com


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: CE+ CE = CE

[rbusche]

I think that Chris's response was logical and well thought out, and I tend
to agree with him. I am a bit frustrated however with the concept of PCs
being categorized has having no stand alone function. Obviously in the
regulatory field, we are sometimes caught in the middle between management's
desire to do very little testing and our desire to make sure that all
conceivable configurations are evaluated. 

In my opinion the correct answer lies somewhere in between. Obviously all of
the PC manufacturers (as a function of CE marking) perform the required
tests for emissions, and susceptibly on all ports per the relevant test
standards. So, for those of us using these PCs, why is it not reasonable to
"assume" that the systems perform as expected. If I have a system with the
typical printer, keyboard, mouse, CPU, etc, (all CE marked) with supporting
DoC data, it's reasonable to me, that CE + CE = CE based on the DoC. I think
our employers have every right to expect that we (the regulatory community)
adequately regulate our test procedures and test rational to support good
business decisions. Obviously what we want and what is mandated by the
individual directives may not always agree, but in the long run we are the
voice of our industry and have the ability (responsibility) to affect
change.

As a PC consumer, this marking may be the only vehicle we have to
individually ensure that our systems are compliant. We cannot afford to test
and retest it all.

Just my $.02

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com


-Original Message-
From:   Chris Dupres [mailto:chris_dup...@compuserve.com]
Sent:   Saturday, November 07, 1998 1:14 AM
To: CTL
Cc: emc-pstc
Subject:Re: CE+ CE = CE

Hi Pryor.

You wrote:
< do these products which make up the system require
re-testing to the EMC Directive and a DoC issued for the
system or are the
DoCs for the individual modules sufficient for importing and
sale in the
EU?
Can a system DoC be generated based upon the individual
module DoCs?>

There is an important divison of catgories in rack mounted
equipment.

1.  Equipment which comprises 'stand alone' components,
where the rack
is really not much more than a convenient and aesthetically
acceptable way
of putting it all in one box.  The implication is that these
components
don't iteract significantly, except maybe a few analogue
signals and that
the a.c. mains power supplies are common to all units.  The
removal or
addition of rack components would have no effect on the
others.   Such
equipment could be, as I've illustrated before: 
a)  Inverter type motor speed controls where the output
goes straight
out of the box to motors, no connections to adjacent
inverters.
b)  Instruments, where inputs from the outside world and
outputs to the
outside world are direct, and with little internal rack
connection between
instruments. 
I call these systems 'Independent' systems.

2.  Equipment which comprises components which have no
'stand alone'
functionality, where the rack is really the outside skin of
a unique piece
of equipment.  Such equipment is characterised by a
significant number of
connections between the rack components, and the inability
of these
components to operate without the others. Examples of such
equipment could
be:
a)  Industrial batch weighing systems, where each
function is carried
out by a seperate rack component.  e.g. scaling module,
amplifier module,
tare module, logger module, comparator module, display
module, relay
module, etc. etc.  These equipments are characterised by
very many internal
connections between the rack components modules, each
'module' being
critical to all other modules.
b)  Rack mounted PC systems, where the PC, keyboard,
monitor, printer,
etc/ are all mounted in a 19" rack - such as commonly used
in industrial
process environments, often in desk drawer type racks.
I call these systems 'dependent' systems.

3.  My feeling is that:
a)  Independent systems (1. above) can be declared
compliant if all the
individual rack mounted sub systems are themselves already
compliant,
INCLUDING the rack itself, with all it's power supply
distribution!
b)  Dependent systems (2. above) are new pieces of
equipment and w

RE: Three Phase Wiring

[rbusche]

I believe these colors to be correct. It is puzzling however that we
have one brown and two blacks representing all three phases. Some three
phase devices are phase sensitive (motors for example). Why not three
different colors, e.g. Brown, Black and ?

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com
-Original Message-
From:   dfitz...@apcc.com [mailto:dfitz...@apcc.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, November 04, 1998 9:53 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:Three Phase Wiring


I have the following information for wiring an
international three phase
unit;
Five wire-  4 conductors plus ground
 Line-  1 brown, 2 blacks
 Neutral - 1 light blue
 Ground - 1 green/yellow
Are these colors correct?
How do you differentiate between the two blacks?
Is there a standard that mandates colors for three phase
wiring?
Thank you for any information.



-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion
list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without
the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Cable Shielding

[rbusche]

My company manufacturers image generation equipment (large mainframe
computer) which is typically placed at a significant distance from the
display device. These may be as much as 50 to 150 feet apart.  In my EMC
tests, I have determined that due to common mode, harmonic noise, both
ends of this shielded cable must be terminated to the respective device
chassis. Unfortunately, this has the potential to create significant
ground loops which severely compromise the quality of the video signal.
To add insult to injury, the signals within the cable are twisted pairs,
differentially driven. This eliminates (as I understand it) the
possibility of terminating the signal return to chassis ground at the
point at which the cable exits the enclosure.  So, on the surface it
appears that I have the choice of meeting EMC regulations or meeting
equipment performance.


My questions are as follows;

1. Is it reasonable to provide single end termination of the overall
(outside) cable shield?
2. Can differentially driven signal grounds be successfully grounded to
chassis return? Should they be?
3. Is it reasonable to request or demand that both devices are sourced
from the same power AND/OR bonded to a common power grid?
4. Is it desirable for signal returns to terminate at the chassis ground
at the point at which the cable exits the device. 


Thanks in advance

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
rbus...@es.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Plugs for China

[rbusche]

Conversely, I would be interested in knowing WHY they considered them
unacceptable.

Rick

-Original Message-
From:   ed.pr...@cubic.com [mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, October 20, 1998 6:07 PM
To: EMC-PSTC; Millsaps Cindy-G14342
Subject:Re: Plugs for China




  From: Millsaps Cindy-G14342 
  Subject: Plugs for China
  Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 16:10:33 -0400 
  To: "'emc-p...@ieee.org'" 


> It seems that China now requires the plug blades to
have no holes in them.  Referring to the small round opening at the
upper area of a US plug.

> Thanks,
 
> Cindy Millsaps
> Product Safety Engineer
> Motorola Energy Systems Group
> (770) 338-3288
> FAX: (770) 338-3345

Sorry, Cindy, I'm of no help on your question. But, can
anyone tell me just what those little circular holes in the High and
Neutral plug blades are supposed to do?

Ed

--
Ed Price
ed.pr...@cubic.com
Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab
Cubic Defense Systems
San Diego, CA.  USA
619-505-2780
Date: 10/20/1998
Time: 16:06:44
--



-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion
list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without
the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

RE: Harmonized Wire

[rbusche]

Perhaps I am wrong, (and if so please correct me) but I understood that
only power cable/cordage needs to be harmonized. Hookup wire can be
essentially anything providing it meets the application.

Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com

-Original Message-
From:   Bill Somerfield [mailto:su...@telerama.com]
Sent:   Tuesday, October 13, 1998 9:30 AM
To: Emc-Pstc
Subject:Harmonized Wire

Could anyone provide some sources of CE Harmonized wire
other than OLFLEX?

Specifically looking for 22awg hookup wire, 22awg single
pair shielded,
22awg 3 cond shielded, 22awg 2 pair shielded. The
shielded should preferably
have a drain wire,

Thanks for any help.

Bill Somerfield
CE Coordinator
Elizabeth-Hata International
Banco Industrial Park
Irwin, PA 16542 USA
Phone: 724-864-6632
Fax: 724-864-6635
bi...@eliz.com
su...@telerama.com



-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion
list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without
the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

CHLORINE GAS SYSTEM

[rbusche]

Reply from Mr. Stuart - FYI


I have passed your question on to the SAFETY list I manage. If there are
any responses, I will forward them to Jaber Al-haji
You can review SAFETY traffic at
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/safety.html
 
Thanks for your interest in SAFETY!

Ralph Stuart
Environmental Safety Manager
University of Vermont
655 Spear St., PO Box 50570
Burlington, VT   05405

rstu...@esf.uvm.edu  
fax: (802)656-5407

Owner: SAFETY list (general discussion of environmental health and
safety)
LEPC list   (planning for hazardous materials
emergencies)
LAB-XL list (performance oriented environmental
regulation of
laboratories)



-Original Message-
From:   Haji, Jaber M [mailto:haj...@aramco.com.sa]
Sent:   Wednesday, September 23, 1998 12:13 PM
To: 'emc-p...@ieee.org'
Subject:CHLORINE GAS SYSTEM
Importance: High

It was brought up to our attention, that chlorine gas
system for swimming pool 
water treatment is no longer advisable, the trend now a
days is to use 
liquid system instead.  Any more input in this regard
will be appreciated.

Jaber Al-haji
S.Aramco
Loss Prevention Dept
haj...@aramco.com.sa


-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion
list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without
the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Power Supply Design Question

[rbusche]

My company manufactures systems which incorporate power supplies from
various manufactures. Typically these supplies have ratings such as 
100V-140V/200V-240V and are designed to operate on a single phase input.
Some of my customers have the US 208V 3 phase power distribution which
gives you 208V phase to phase or 120V phase to neutral. 

My question is directed towards  the power supply people on this list.

Can ANY supply intended for 200-240V single phase be used at 208V phase
to phase (double phase). Would components (EMI suppression for example)
be  placed between neutral and ground that would preclude the supply
from being used phase to phase?

Would the use of these supplies in a phase to phase mode negate the
EMI/EMC performance? 

Thanks

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

CB SCHEME

[rbusche]

After going looking at the site Rich Nute provided, I see no reference
to South American countries. Are South America countries part of the CB
scheme as well?

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list
administrators).

Recommendations for PCs

[rbusche]

We are in need of a PC to perform EMC testing in support of FCC and
CISPR limits. We are looking for the latest, state of the art, system
with at least 400 MHz processors. Can someone suggest to me (off line if
desired) a good candidate for this application? It is surprising to me
the number of quality systems that fail even BEFORE additional cards are
added.

Thanks in advance

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
Salt Lake City, Utah
rbus...@es.com

-
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.com
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.co (the list
administrators).

RE: Twisted Shielded Pair

[rbusche]

On a similar note, does anyone have a feel for what the approximate
attenuation differences are between a dual shield (foil and braid) and
one or the other as a stand alone shield? 


-Original Message-
From:   Brumbaugh, David [SMTP:david.brumba...@pss.boeing.com]
Sent:   Friday, July 31, 1998 2:47 PM
To: 'emc-pstc list server'; 'Knighten, Jim'; DiBene, Ted
Subject:RE: Twisted Shielded Pair

The original message sounded to me like Ted was looking for
changes in
the shielding effectiveness when going from 85% to 90% coverage.
However, the answer is the same, the change is not significant.

I have commonly seen 20 dB used as a "rule of thumb" shielding
effectiveness for a TSP. However, I am the first to admit that
this can
be overly simplistic, and that the correct approach is to
determine
transfer impedance of the shield to determine coupling to and
from the
protected circuit. There are lots of papers in the open
literature (IEEE
EMC transactions and EMC symposia) over the last 30 odd years
which
address transfer impedance.

DB

 

Ce versus FCC

[rbusche]

A test house explained to me that the FCC allows either CISPR or FCC
limits/procedures providing that one can determine "worst case".
Consequently, you have to test both ways (120 V 60Hz or 230V 50Hz) to
determine which way you should have tested. So, where are the time/money
savings? 

As a personal note, it seems to me that there will always be slight
differences whether it be, test sites, cables, input power, placement,
whatever. The objective should be to reduce levels to reasonable,
repeatable limits. Defining an acceptable standard or test procedure
should be adequate. We should not have to incur unnecessary testing just
to address a few dB one way or the other. 

Rick

-Original Message-
From:   hmellb...@aol.com [SMTP:hmellb...@aol.com]
Sent:   Monday, July 06, 1998 12:16 PM
To: dwight.hunnic...@vina-tech.com; emc-p...@ieee.org
Cc: eric.lif...@natinst.com
Subject:Re: Ce versus FCC

I have encountered certain European agencies requesting that not
only are the
conducted emissions required to be performed at 230V 50Hz but
radiated
emissions as well. I agree that for conducted emissions it may
make  a
difference but I have not seen radiated emissions change when
the power source
is changed from 60 to 50 Hz (while keeping Voltage the same). I
did, however,
see recently a product change emissions when the voltage was
changed from 120
to 230 V. And, it did not matter if it was 50 or 60 Hz, only the
voltage was
significant. Go figure!
Hans

Altitude

[rbusche]

This is not a safety or EMI question, but because this group has such
broad backgrounds and diversity I am hoping that someone can comment.

I have been asked by one of our customers to ensure that our equipment
is capable of being shipped in an un-pressurized aircraft for altitudes
of 30K to 40 K feet. This is a non operational requirement, but are
there other concerns I should be aware of? I recall hearing that some
commercial grade electrolytic could explode at high altitudes. 

Any comments or suggestions greatly appreciated.

Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
Salt Lake City, Utah
rbus...@es.com

A bit of humor

[rbusche]

This message was forwarded to me and I thought you might enjoy this as well.


After applying some simple algebra to some trite phrases and cliches
  a new understanding can be reached of the secret to wealth and
  success.

  Here it goes.

  Knowledge is Power
  Time is Money

  and as every engineer knows,

  Power is Work over Time.

  So, substituting algebraic equations for these time worn bits of
  wisdom,
  we get:
  K = P(1)
  T = M(2)
  P = W/T  (3)

  Now, do a few simple substitutions:

  Put W/T in for P in equation (1), which yields:
  K = W/T  (4)

  Put M in for T into equation (4), which yields:

  K = W/M  (5).

  Now we've got something.  Expanding back into English, we get:

 Knowledge equals Work over Money.

  What this MEANS is that:

 1. The More You Know, the More Work You Do, and
 2. The More You Know, the Less Money You Make.

  Solving for Money, we get:

 M = W/K  (6)
 Money equals Work Over Knowledge.

  From equation (6) we see that Money approaches infinity as Knowledge
  approaches 0, regardless of the Work done.

  What THIS MEANS is:

 The More you Make, the Less you Know.

  Solving for Work, we get

 W = M x K  (7)
 Work equals Money times Knowledge

From equation (7) we see that Work approaches 0 as Knowledge
approaches 0.

  What THIS MEANS is:

  The stupid rich do little or no work.

  Working out the socioeconomic implications of this breakthrough is
  left as an exercise for the reader.


 
Bruce F. Thatcher Developer
Spire Technologies,Inc.
311 North State Street
Orem, Utah 84058   
thac...@spire.com
(801) 226-3355

 
   By the time you swear you're his,
   Shivering and sighing,
   And he vows his passion is
   Infinite, undying--
   One of you is lying.
Dorothy Parker

EN 60065

[rbusche]

Recently one of our customers asked us if we comply with EN 60065. The title of 
this document is Safety Requirments for Mains Operated Electronic & Related 
Apparatus for Houshold and SIMI..

I hate to ask a dumb question, but has anyone else heard of this? Does it apply 
to ITE equipment compliant with EN 60950?

Thanks in advance


Rick Busche
Evans & Sutherland
SLC Utah
rbus...@es.com

Mexican Product Safety (NOM)

[rbusche]

Just a quick thought regarding Mexican product safety regulations. I find it
rather interesting that there even exists a Mexican regulation with regard to
ITE equipment. Having been in Mexico recently, I noticed that there appears
to be no regulations with regard to the electrical wiring. Street poles are
cluttered with wiring which looks like it was connected with lots of black
tape. Looking around the cities, you will find concrete fences with broken
bottles imbedded in the concreate to discourage trespassing. Construction
practices are marginal as materials are expensive and technology is obviously
lagging. An example of this is the destruction associated with recent
earthquakes. Anyway, don't get me wrong, Mexico is a beautiful place and I
love to visit there. The people are fantastic. I just find it odd that in a
country struggling to find safeness, that ITE is regulated to the degree that
it appears to be.

Just my $.02, Sorry for taking up the space.

FW: Hot Tub Safety

[rbusche]

You might find this interesting...
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Sat, Jun 8, 1996 3:04 AM
Subject: Re: Hot Tub Safety

>From a June 3 CPSC press release



  U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Office of Information and Public Affairs
20 Washington, D.C. 20207

For Immediate ReleaseContact: Rick Frost
June 3, 1996 (301) 504-0580 Ext. 1166
Release # 96-139

CPSC Issues Warning for Pools, Spas, and Hot Tubs

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC) is alerting consumers and public health officials to steps
they can take to reduce entrapment deaths and injuries associated
with pools, spas, and hot tubs.

 The main hazard from hot tubs and spas is the same as that from
pools - drowning.  Since 1980, CPSC has reports of more than 700 deaths in
spas and hot tubs. About one-third of those were drownings to
children under age five.

 Other hazards include body part entrapment and hair entanglement.

 Since 1980, CPSC knows of 18 incidents, including five deaths,
involving children between the ages of two and 14 who were injured
or died due to body part entrapment involving the drain of a
swimming pool, wading pool, or spa. In addition, last week, a
16-year-old New Jersey girl drowned when her body was sucked down
against a drain on the bottom of a spa. Her body apparently formed a
vacuum seal against an outlet for circulating water and she was
held underwater.

 Under normal conditions, pipes leading from a pool's drain, or
into the pool's pumps, draw water from the pool creating suction. If
something blocks the pool drain leading into this pipe, the
amount of suction will increase as the pump draws water past the
obstruction.  This increased suction can entrap parts of a person's
body, causing the person to be held underwater. In wading pools, if a
child sits on the drain outlet, the suction can cause
disembowelment.

 To reduce the risk of entrapment and drowning, current safety
standards require that each spa have two outlets for each pump, lessening the
amount of suction at any single outlet.

 Since 1978, CPSC has reports of 49 incidents (including 13
deaths) in which people's hair was sucked into the suction fitting of a spa,
hot
tub, or whirlpool, causing the victim's head to be held under
water. Hair entanglement occurs when a bather's hair becomes
entangled in a drain cover as the water and hair are drawn through
the drain. CPSC helped develop a voluntary standard for drain covers
that reduce the risk of hair entanglement.

 CPSC offers the following safety tips when using a hot tub, spa, or
whirlpool:

o Always use a locked safety cover when the spa is not in use and keep
young children away from spas or hot tubs unless there is constant
adult supervision.

o Make sure the spa has the dual drains and drain covers required by
current safety standards.

o Regularly have a professional check your spa or hot tub and make
sure it is in good, safe working condition, and that drain covers are in
place and not cracked or missing. Check the drain covers yourself
throughout the year.

o Know where the cut-off switch for your pump is so you can turn it
off in an emergency.

o Be aware that consuming alcohol while using a spa could lead to
drowning.

o Keep the temperature of the water in the spa at 104 degrees
Fahrenheit or below.


 The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission protects the public
 from the unreasonable risk of injury or death from 15,000 types of
consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. To report a
dangerous product or a product-related injury and for information on
CPSC's fax-on-demand service, call CPSC's hotline at (800) 638-2772
or CPSC's teletypewriter at (800) 638-8270. To order a press
release through fax-on-demand, call (301) 504-0051 from the handset of
your fax machine and enter the release number. Consumers can
obtain this release and recall information via Internet gopher
services at cpsc.gov or report product hazards to i...@cpsc.gov.
  




Jim Pulliam
Univ. of Tenn. @ Chatt.
Safety & Environmental Health
Phone 423-755-5209
Fax   423-785-2176
jpull...@utcaf01.admin.utc.edu

FW: EMF

[rbusche]

fyi
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Sun, Jun 9, 1996 5:39 PM
Subject: EMF

I am looking at safety hazrds associated with a 100 kw induction heater
operating at 130 khz.

 Aside from pacemakers does anyone have any ideas or references on
further hazards?
--
DAN WURSTER ,
P.O. Box 1883 ,   Stellarton , N.S. B0K 1S0
ph . (902) 755-0294 ,   fax  (902) 755-4171
e-mail  wur...@north.nsis.com

FW: Static

[rbusche]

This might be of interest.
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Wed, Jun 5, 1996 7:32 AM
Subject: Re: Static

This information seemed appropriate to the current thread.

Gas Can Filling
Chevron USA has issued a warning concerning filling metal gas cans while they
are resting on plastic surfaces.  Several fires have occurred while gas cans
were being filled in the back of pickup trucks with plastic bed liners.

It is essential to at least bond during transfer, bonding and grounding is
preferred.

For example, when fueling an aircraft, the aircraft and tank truck are both
grounded and then a bonding cable is connected between the aircraft and the
truck.

Craig Schroll, CSP
President
FIRECON
PO Box 231, East Earl, PA 17519  USA
717-354-2411  fax 717-354-7233
71101.3...@compuserve.com
Web page http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Craig_Schroll
reply
Right on target, Craig!

Further to this topic, our community was in total shock a few years ago when
six
(6) young people went out to do some wood cutting.  When it started to rain,
four (4) took refuge in the van they had come in,  ( fancy shaggin wagon with
fancy carpet), the other two (2) went and sat in the car next to the van,
windows open and talking.  One of the guys in the van decided to refill the
chainsaws while in the van, on account of the rain.  A chain saw, a plastic
jug,
on a rug, contact, BOOM!  The four (4) young people in the van never came
out.
The car parked beside the van was also destroyed by the fire, but the
occupants
got away with severe burns and were able to tell the tale.

I used a piece of wire with an alligator clip on one end that is long enouph
to
reach my lawn mower or chain saw and connected it to the plastic jug with a
pipe
clamp.  This is a permanent piece of wire that I use to bond the containers
prior to opening the containers and while pouring and until the containers
are
re-closed.  It's not a big deal.  Am I safe now?  Not necessarily.  If I drop
that wire across exposed battery terminals, that wire can do more harm than
good.  So assessment of the hazard is necessary - THIMK (snikker) and you
Might
get it RIGHT.

Immo

More on Competent Bodies

[rbusche]

For some reason, it is still unclear in my mind the role of a competent body
in the big picture. I have thrown out several topics for discussion on this,
yet, the answer still somewhat eludes me. Please bear with me as I ask this
question one last time.

If company A in Europe buys a product from company B in the US, and the
product is delivered with a CE Mark on the device(s). (Of course with the DoC
accompanying the mark). Shouldn't company A be allowed to determine if the
equipment suits them for their application AND shouldn't company A be able to
accept whatever equipment they want WITHOUT a competent body involved?  I
understand that if no standard exists or has been officially published in the
OJ, a competent body might be useful. But in my scenario, I am providing ITE
equipment to a larger system which is arguably in this gray area. 

Even here I have some concerns. The final application is a flight simulator
with hydraulic motion platforms, displays, and computer systems. It is not
obvious to me that this is justification for hiring a competent body to
evaluate EMC performance.

The issue of "light" industrial Vs "heavy" industrial in my mind is one of
ruggedization for the effects of EMC. Given that EN55022 defines the
environment for a Class A emission device, the generic immunity standard
EN50082-X should be a customers decision.

Please excuse me if this is a dumb question, but if someone can shed a bit
more light I promise to shut up on this issue.

Thanks in advance


Rick Busche
rbus...@es.com

FW: Other Safety Lists?

[rbusche]

You might find some of these interesting or useful.
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Sat, Jun 1, 1996 6:34 AM
Subject: Re: Other Safety Lists?

At 13:40 05/30/96 EDT, you wrote:
>Can anyone give me information on other similar SAFETY and/or Health
industry
>lists that I might join?  This is currently the only one I subscribe to and
it's
>great!  I know there are more out there and would like to join them also.  I
am
>particularly interested in Personal Protection, First Responders, or
anything
>pertaining to bloodborne pathogens.   Thanks for your help!

Here are a bunch you may find interesting. There are others out there...
Format of my listing here is

Name
list address
listserver address
comments (if any)

Radsafe Radiation Safety Listserver
rads...@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
lists...@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
This listserver maintained by the environmental health and safety group at
the University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign is the most active list devoted
to radiation safety issues with excellent support by members of the Health
Physics Society.

Medical Physics
medp...@cms.cc.wayne.edu
lists...@cms.cc.wayne.edu

Networked Resources for Fire Protection
nafe...@halcyon.com
majord...@halcyon.com
NAFED is a trade group of  over 1,200 fire equipment dealers, affiliates,
and associate, and manufacturing members. NAFED representatives currently
serve on over 30 NFPA Committees and the group itself is active in industry
problems as well as a national

Biosafety Discussion List
biosa...@mitvma.mit.edu
lists...@mitvma.mit.edu
Mailing list devoted to the recognition and control of biological hazards.

Chemical Information Sources Discussion List
chemin...@iubvm.ucs.indiana.edu
lists...@iubvm.ucs.indiana.edu

University Coordinators of Americans With Disabilities Act
ada...@iubvm.ucs.indiana.edu
lists...@iubvm.ucs.indiana.edu
Mail list devoted to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Emergency Services Discussion List
emer...@vm.marist.edu
lists...@vm.marist.edu
This is a very active mailing list with most of the message traffic on this
list deals with issues faced by Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics.

 St. John's University Repetitive Strain Injury List
 rsi-e...@sjuvm.stjohns.edu
 listse...@sjuvm.stjohns.edu
 St. John's University Repetitive Strain Injury List

 Electromagnetics in Medicine, Science & Comunications
 emfld...@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu
 lists...@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu

 Risk and Insurance Mailing List
 risk...@mcfeeley.cc.utexas.edu
 listp...@mcfeeley.cc.utexas.edu

 System Safety Mailing List
 system-saf...@listserv.gsfc.nasa.gov
 lists...@listserv.gsfc.nasa.gov

 U.S. EPA Immunotoxicology Listserver
 immuno...@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
 listser...@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
 Devoted to discussions on immunotoxicology.

 U.S. EPA FEDERAL REGISTER CONTENTS documents
 epafr-conte...@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
 listser...@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
 This is a one directional ListServer in the established to distribute the
table of contents for U.S. EPA Federal Register documents automatically on
the day of publication.

 Personal Protective Equipment List
 pp...@rmgate.pop.indiana.edu
 mai...@rmgate.pop.indiana.edu
 This is a discussion area for anyone who must deal with Personal Protective
Equipment.

 Health & Safety List
 health-and-saf...@mailbase.ac.uk
 mailb...@mailbase.ac.uk

 OUCH-List (Occupational Overuse Consumer Help)
 ouch-l...@comp.vuw.ac.nz
 majord...@comp.vuw.ac.nz
 The OOS Underdogs wanting better Chairs and Handrests mailing list devoted
to repetitive stress injuries and occupational overuse syndrome.

 Fire List
 fire-l...@halcyon.com
 majord...@halcyon.com

 Automatic Fire Alarm Association
 fire-al...@halcyon.com
 majord...@halcyon.com
 The Alarm Mailing list is devoted to the fire protection community. Its
mission is to facilitate communication among professionals in the fire
protection community: fire alarm equipment dealers, fire protection
engineers, fire inspectors, authorities hav

 Fire
 fir...@cornell.edu
 listp...@cornell.edu
 Fire-l is the place to discuss any firefighting related topic.

Emergency Medicine discussion list
eme...@itssrv1.ucsf.edu
majord...@itssrv1.ucsf.edu
EMED-L is a list for hospital based emergency medicine practitioners created
for discussions pertinent to the care of patients in emergency medicine.

 Occupational & Environmental Medicine Discussion for Clinicians & Public
Health  occ-env-me...@list.mc.duke.edu
 majord...@list.mc.duke.edu
 Designed for information exchange concerning clinical vignettes, synopses
of new regulatory issues and reports of interesting items from publications
elsewhere (both the medical and the non-medical journals).

 EMC-PSTC
 emc-p...@mail.ieee.org
 majord...@mail.ieee.org
 This list is devoted to national and international Product Safety
regulations and standards and providing a forum for the sharing of public,
but pos

FW: Electrical Safety

[rbusche]

FYI
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Tue, May 28, 1996 7:38 AM
Subject: Re: Electrical Safety

From: "ht11081" 
Organization: www.cedarnet.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 11:19:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Electrical Safety

>Electrical safety is not my strong suit.  Our agency receives donated
>electrical appliances which are then sold to the public.  We want to write
>some policy and procedures for testing the appliances.  Does anyone have any
>guidelines about testing for defects, the use of GFI's, and the need for a
>grounding rubber mat.
>Thanks.


usual disclaimers
There are two aspects that you need to look at. One aspect is the
safety of your employees via osha regulations. This would make rubber
mats a wise idea. Installing GFI would also alert the employee to the
fact he is working on a potentially hazardous piece of equiptment. I
would establish a procedure to check for direct shorts to the case of
the device with an ohmeter after a no power physical inspection.
If the product metered high resistance to ground/case using hi ohms on
the meter plugging your product into the GFI would alert your employee that a
ground fault current exists. Desktops should be insulated for
employee safety.  Repair of the equiptment with power on should be
avoided unless employees have been properly trained and adjustments
or repairs cannot be made with power off. Check the OSHA standards
for electrical repair with power on for this, training and proper
procedure are the primary determinants. I would recommend against
any power on repairs in a primary training environment.
The above paragraph was primarily for the safety of your
employees, naturally you will want to ensure your customers
recieve absolutely safe equiptment. Rotating equiptment such
as drills should have brushes checked, windings for physical
damage, and carbon dust blown out. (carbon dust can become a
very nice conductor in damp air and cause GFI trips).  Items with
heating elements should NOT have the elements spliced at breaks
but recieve new elements. All insulators should be mechanically tight
without cracks or breaks. As a rule EVERYTHING MUST PASS the GFI
test to ensure customer safety, if it can't pass the GFI throw it
out.!  You might check with the local IBEW in your area and see
if they would be willing to help you establish procedures and give
a little free advice...
   HT



Harold Tuchel   1040 Fleur Dr   Waterloo Ia 50701
NAFTA No American Factories Taking Applications

RE: Industrial Plug and Socket-outlet

[rbusche]

It is my opinion that the industrial plug and socket refered to in IEC 950 is
more the pin and sleeve variety defined by IEC 309. I don't think the twist
lock connectors are allowable for European applications. I could be wrong
however.
___
To: emc-p...@ieee.org; t...@superlink.net
From: Eric Petitpierre on Tue, May 28, 1996 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: Industrial Plug and Socket-outlet
RFC Header:Received: by smtpgw.sim.es.com with SMTP;28 May 1996 12:05:08
-0600
Received: by mail.ieee.org (8.7.3/8.7.3)
id MAA25563 for emc-pstc-list; Tue, 28 May 1996 12:47:22 -0400 (EDT)
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Tue, 28 May 96 12:42:05 EST
From: "Eric Petitpierre" 
Encoding: 30 Text
Message-Id: <9604288333.aa833312...@smtplink.pulse.com>
To: emc-p...@ieee.org, t...@superlink.net
Subject: Re: Industrial Plug and Socket-outlet
Sender: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Eric Petitpierre" 
X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients 
X-Listname: emc-pstc
X-List-Description: Product Safety Tech. Committee, EMC Society
X-Info: Help requests to  emc-pstc-requ...@majordomo.ieee.org
X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to  majord...@majordomo.ieee.org
X-Moderator-Address: emc-pstc-appro...@majordomo.ieee.org

 Tom,
 
 The definition I've heard for this is "big & twisty".  The current 
 rating is usually 30 A or more, the plug is twisted into the socket, 
 hence the name.  Usually applies to equipment that stays in place.

Eric Petitpierre
Pulsecom
Herndon, VA
er...@pulse.com
__ Reply Separator
_
Subject: Industrial Plug and Socket-outlet
Author:  t...@superlink.net at SMTP
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date:5/28/96 11:35 AM


Hello everyone,

I'm reading 1.2.5.1, 1.2.5.2 IEC-950. One thing which is not very 
clear to me is the industrial plug and socket-outlet. Anyone has a 
definition for them, or which standard specifies it? TIA

Tom Bao
t...@superlink.net


Courtesy of RCIC
http://uc.com/compliance_engineering/

FW: Lazer Safety

[rbusche]

Interesting info.
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Tue, May 28, 1996 7:45 AM
Subject: Re: Lazer Safety

Subject: Re: Lazer Safety
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Sat, 25 May 96 11:17:12 -0500
From: Bob Andres 


Steve -

There are a number of standards concerning the use of lasers. Here are a few
that I know of. You may wish to get copies of any of the following:

ANSI Z136.1 Laser Standard
ANSI B11.21 Laser Machine Tools Standard
IEC 825-1   Safety of Laser Products
ISO 11252   Lasers and laser related equipment
ISO/DIS 11145   Terminology, etc. for testing lasers
EN 165 and 166  Personal Eye Protection
ISO 11553 / prEN 31553  Laser Processing Machines
IEC 825-4   Laser Guards

All lasers must comply with 21CFR 1010.10 and 1040.11 - the Radiation
Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968. For more information on these
Federal Regulations, which are enforced by the FDA, call 301-443-4874, and
ask for the Office of Compliance and Surveillance.

I hope this is a bit more useful than merely learning that you spelled laser
wrong.

BOB ANDRES, CSP, CMfgE
os...@dreamscape.com

FW: Crock Pots

[rbusche]

The initial message
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Fri, May 24, 1996 12:22 AM
Subject: Crock Pots

Friends Of The Net:

A few days ago, one of our food service workers received an
electric shock when her hand touched a crock-pot while wiping
down a countertop.  Our investigation showed that the exposed
metal parts of the crock-pot were electrically hot - at a
potential of 115V. The countertop is stainless steel, and
provided the path to ground via the sink, etc.

The pot has a two prong polarized plug and the outlet has a
polarized socket.  Our testing showed that the outlet was
correctly wired.  If we reversed the crock-pot plug in the outlet
(using an adaptor), the potential on the crock-pot went to zero.
The snack bar has three brand new pots and all test the same.  In
addition, the 3 year old pot I have at home tests the same.

Correcting the problem here is not difficult - we plan to add an
equipment ground to the crock pot.  The crock pot is an off-the
shelf model by Rival, and is labeled "for household use only",
which seems to exempt it from any grounding requirement.  In any
event, most homes have formica or other non-conductive
countertops.  What concerns me here is that the polarized
plug/socket scheme is pretty useless if things aren't wired
correctly.  There are probably thousands of electrically hot
appliances sitting on people's countertops waitng for someone to
complete the circuit.

I'm considering contacting Rival and/or CPSC.  Anyone have any
other ideas?  Am I missing something?

Bill Turnbull, CSP
turnb...@emh.misawa.af.mil

FW: Electronics and Biohazards

[rbusche]

Thought you would find this interesting.
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Thu, May 23, 1996 12:28 PM
Subject: Electronics and Biohazards

 Question to the net.

 We operate a number of labs, some at biohazard level 3; and we are
 commissioning a level 4 facility presently.
 The discussions include ways to decontaminate electronic and other
 instruments without destroying them.  Possible solutions include
 autoclave, boiling, exposure to gas,  and soaking in liquid
 disinfectants.  Microwave won't get the bugs due to size, but
 radiation may be possible.
 Decontamination would have to be done prior to maintenance such as
 battery replacement or calibration of the instruments to protect
 people from exposure to nasty bugs hiding in the instrument, co-ax
 cables, etc.  Therefore we can't open the instruments prior to
 decontamination for full exposure, unless someone is working in a full
 suit with positive pressure breathing air.  And having played inside
 those suits myself I can attest to the heat and humidity problems, as
 well as restricted movement and visibility.
 It may be cheaper and/or safer to incinerate the lot each time.

 I would welcome ideas.  Thanks

 Immo

 Immo Tilgner, Safety Engineer
 Health Canada
 Tunneys Pasture 1701A
 Ottawa, Canada
 K1A 0L3
 immo_tilgner_at_ncot...@isdtcp3.hwc.ca
 Voice   613 957 8458
 Fax 613 957 8563

RE: FW: Electrical Safety

[rbusche]

This is a curious issue. If I were an appliance repairman or service person,
I would merely replace defective components, wiring or materials without
going through a "refurbishment" criteria. I would think that R&R (repair and
replace) is not a refurbishment per se. My initial thought was just to repair
these devices and let it go at that. As a safety professional however I might
be inclined to perform a hypot just to make sure.

_______
To: rbusche; PSTC group; john...@mint.net
From: tania.gr...@octel.com on Wed, May 22, 1996 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: FW: Electrical Safety
RFC Header:Received: by smtpgw.sim.es.com with SMTP;22 May 1996 19:41:37
-0600
Received: by mail.ieee.org (8.7.3/8.7.3)
id UAA09259 for emc-pstc-list; Wed, 22 May 1996 20:43:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: tania.gr...@octel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 17:35:59 -0700
Message-Id: <1a3b3b30.1...@corp.octel.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Electrical Safety
To: "PSTC group" , "rbusche" ,
john...@mint.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
Sender: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tania.gr...@octel.com
X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients 
X-Listname: emc-pstc
X-List-Description: Product Safety Tech. Committee, EMC Society
X-Info: Help requests to  emc-pstc-requ...@majordomo.ieee.org
X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to  majord...@majordomo.ieee.org
X-Moderator-Address: emc-pstc-appro...@majordomo.ieee.org

 Ouch!
 
 I am making the assumption that you are reselling in the U.S. and or
 Canada only, not in Europe.
 
 You are grossly afoul with UL (Underwriters Laboratories) or other 
 U.S. and Canadian safety agencies as well as with the NEC (National 
 Electrical Code) requirements that appliances that are fixed, 
 reconditioned, or otherwise refurbished and sold to the public, must 
 meet specifications as originally approved by the safety agencies.
 Canada (CSA) specifies that only the original manufacturer, or his
 designated agent or representative, may refurbish equipment.  
 Substitution of parts is not allowed.  UL specified, a long time ago,
 that only the original manufacturer could refurbish equipment.  By
 now they may have added the "designated representative".  Check with
 UL.  
 
 In order not to run afoul with UL or CSA, you could obliterate their
 safety marks on the equipment, but then you are in violation of NEC 
 and OSHA, which specify that only appliances approved and labeled by 
 designated Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories (UL, CSA, and 
 others) are permitted to be installed in buildings (NEC 110-2).  
 Plugging in an appliance is considered an electrical installation.  
 
 Additionally, you are sticking your neck out with respect to liability 
 should your repair result in a fire or shock hazard to the user.  
 (I can see the headlines right now:  "GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INVESTIGATED 
 FOR INCORRECT TOASTER REPAIR THAT RESULTS IN FIRE!")
 
 RECOMMENDATION:
 1.   Write to specific manufacturers asking them to designate Goodwill
  as their official repair/refurbishing agent.
 2.   Obtain all their specifications, parts bills, AND THE UL AND CSA
  PRODUCT REPORTS.
 3.   Contact UL and/or CSA to have yourself approved for refurbishing
  equipment.
 4.   Repair ONLY those products for which you have received the
  original manufacturer's and agency permission.
 
   Tania Grant, Octel Communications Corporation  
 


__ Reply Separator
_____
Subject: FW: Electrical Safety
Author:  "rbusche"  at P_Internet_mail
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date:5/22/96 7:37 AM


In case you have some recommendations for John. His address is
john...@mint.net
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Wed, May 22, 1996 5:14 AM
Subject: Electrical Safety

Electrical safety is not my strong suit.  Our agency receives donated
electrical appliances which are then sold to the public.  We want to write
some policy and procedures for testing the appliances.  Does anyone have any
guidelines about testing for defects, the use of GFI's, and the need for a
grounding rubber mat.
Thanks.


John Male
Goodwill Industries of Northern New England


usual disclaimers

FW: FW: Fire at Dusseldorf airport in Germany

[rbusche]

Some info, fyi
___
To: rbusche; Safety; Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Albert Baas on Wed, May 22, 1996 1:06 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Fire at Dusseldorf airport in Germany

> Date sent:  Tue, 21 May 1996 11:26:29 -0600
> Send reply to:  Safety 
> From:       rbusche 
> Subject:FW: Fire at Dusseldorf airport in Germany
> To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY 

> Please respond to Bob if you can provide any informationThanks
>
___
> To: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Cc: bris...@csse.enet.dec.com
> From: PS INCIDENT MGT. 223-8141 on Tue, May 21, 1996 11:20 AM
> Subject: re: Fire at Dusseldorf airport in Germany
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> 
> There was apparently a fire at the Dusseldorf airport in Germany a few
weeks
> back. What I understand is that some welding going on outside the terminal
> ignited cables in an air duct. Allegedly 40 people were overcome by fumes/
> smoke and the information I have indicates a couple deaths occurred.
> 
> Officials(not sure which ones) are now seeking information as to PVC,
> cadmium,
> and asbestos content of equipment. Interesting list of materials. I have no
> idea how many manufacturers have been asked to provide this information.
> 
> Anyway, the purpose for this note is to ask if anyone has heard of this
> incident and if someone might have some details about the incident. What
> little information I have has raised questions in my mind as to what really
> occurred and why. Are computer and electronics manufacturers the only ones
> being picked on or are manufacturers of other items one would find in an
> airport terminal also being asked to provide this type of information.
> 
> This is just my curiosity at work.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bob Brister
> Digital

During welding operations (not IN the air duct) a bundle (Is that the 
correct word ?) cables ignited. Because of the PVC insulation lots of 
toxic fumes were released. These toxic fumes  were transported trough 
the air ducts of the airconditioning system to the passengers 
terminal. 16 people died of the toxic fumes. and a lot of people 
where hospitalized.

Conclusions where:
Unsafe welding
Unsafe design of air ducts (no backflush/fire valves)
No flame proof cable insulation

Burning PVC releases hydrogenchloride, chlorinated hydrocarbons. 
I have not heard anything of cadmium, but cadmiumcompounds are 
sometimes used as pigments for yellow colour in plastics.
Hydrogencyanide may be released by burning thermal insulation 
material.

Albert Baas
Rijkshogeschool IJselland
Faculteit CMT
P.O.Box 357
7400 AJ Deventer
The Netherlands
Phone +31 570 663061
Fax   +31 570 663667
E-Mail  albert.b...@rhij.nl

FW: Infrared Viewers

[rbusche]

Has anyone had expierence with these?
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Tue, May 21, 1996 8:23 PM
Subject: Infrared Viewers

Howdy Safety Netters -

Does anyone have any information, experience, or leads on infrared
imaging and recording systems for use in detecting equipment hot sposts?
 I am thinking in terms of checking motors, pumps, electrical switch
gear, transformers, etc.  We have a temperature "gun" that we can read
surface temperatures, but it doesn't give the ability to detect or "see"
variations very easily.

Thanks For Your Help!

Regards,

Keith Land, CSP
kdl...@ix.netcom.com

FW: Electrical Safety

[rbusche]

In case you have some recommendations for John. His address is
john...@mint.net
___
To: Multiple recipients of list SAFETY
From: Safety on Wed, May 22, 1996 5:14 AM
Subject: Electrical Safety

Electrical safety is not my strong suit.  Our agency receives donated
electrical appliances which are then sold to the public.  We want to write
some policy and procedures for testing the appliances.  Does anyone have any
guidelines about testing for defects, the use of GFI's, and the need for a
grounding rubber mat.
Thanks.


John Male
Goodwill Industries of Northern New England


usual disclaimers

Screen Room

[rbusche]

Thanks to all of you for your interest and response with regard to the screen
room. Unfortunately (or fortunately) it has been sold.

Thanks

Screen Room

[rbusche]

Evans & Sutherland is selling an old copper screen room. It is approximately
10 foot by 16 foot by 8 foot. The room is comprized of 40" copper screen
panels so the room size could be altered. It is complete with the line
filters, 36 " door, internal lights, bench and power outlets. We need to move
the structure as soon as possible. If interested please send me E-Mail at
rbus...@es.com or contact Bruce Lyman at (801) 5881620 or Tom Roach at (801)
588-1618. It is located in Salt Lake City, Utah.