Re: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended
Monrad, Please find the following answers regarding Taiwan BSMI's requirements concerning 1-6GHz. The answers are provided by the chief EMC engineer at BSMI. Regarding Taiwan BSMI, how will this 1-6GHz test requirement be implemented?? Currently, the DOCs and BSMI certificates just list the standard CNS13438:2006.? There is no mention of whether 1-6GHz was tested since currently Taiwan states that 1-6GHz testing is not required.? So ... how will someone know if the product was tested to 1-6GHz?? It will be shown on the new application certificate. BSMI will announce it when the new requirement is published. Will the 1-6GHz only be enforced as new products are submitted for BSMI approvals?? Would already approved products (without 1-6GHz) certificates/DOCs be good for the normal 3 years and just need to have a test with 1-6GHz when it is time to renew the BSMI certificate/DOC?? If the product is no any change, the original certificate could be still valid until its due date. As for the new application after the implemention date, it should follow the rew requirement. Has Taiwan BSMI published any of this information online?? Not yet. On 8/21/09, Monrad Monsen monrad.mon...@sun.com wrote: You can view the clean PDF of 2009/C 197/03 issued today at the following web address: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:197:0003:0003:EN:PDF Based on the 2009/C 197/03, it appears that manufacturers are granted an extra year before their products must meet the requirements of EN55022:2006+A1:2007 which requires testing in 1-6GHz with the 4dB tighter limits compared to FCC in the frequency range 1-3GHz. The new deadline is 1 October 2011. I haven't heard of any issues about floor-standing equipment. We have floor-standing equipment and the testing goes smoothly. However, every information technology manufacturer was under a lot of time pressure to test already released products to the new test methodology and limits -- especially if you have a big product line. With the limits at 1-3GHz being 4dB tighter than FCC, some products may require fixes or an accelerated End-of-Life (EOL) decision. This one year delay gives manufacturers more time to perform the testing and make those decisions. I have some related questions: 1. Will Japan VCCI delay its 1 October 2010 deadline to match Europe? 2. Will China CCC delay its 1 March 2011 deadline to still give an extra five months time after the Europe deadline to go through the in-country test and bureaucracy effort to update the CCC approvals? I would hope the 1-6GHz test requirement would be delayed to at least 1 March 2012. 3. Will China CCC delay its 1 September 2010 deadline to upgrade CCC approvals to include the testing of telecommunications ports? Unfortunately, if this deadline is not extended, we will still have to rush to send all our products to China for testing even if the 1-6GHz test requirement is delayed. Thanks. Monrad L. Monsen Worldwide Compliance Officer Sun Microsystems monrad.mon...@sun.com Spencer, David H wrote: I'm assuming this has is due to the huge issues with floor standing EUT's and testing 1GHz. Text From OJ. Aug 21, 2009 Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this directive) (2009/C 197/03) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 126 of 5 June 2009, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and
RE: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended
Grace, thanks for the update regarding the VCCI’s current position. Does anyone have an opinion on which of the EN 55022 versions that can be used between now and October 1st 2011? I would hope that there are three choices: EN 55022:1998 + A1 + A2 EN 55022:2006 EN 55022:2006 + A1 My concern is that the OJ standards listing, when next released, would be worded such that you use EN 55022:1998 + A1 + A2 OR EN 55022:2006 + A1 (i.e. would not allow the use of EN 55022:2006 without the amendment). If this is the case then products that meet EN 55022:2006 but do not meet A1 may need to be evaluated against the older standard (ferrites on cables leaving the test site during radiated emissions and the older version of LISN). Mark From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 4:18 AM To: Monrad Monsen Cc: Spencer, David H; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended Good Morning Monrad, The program manager at VCCI answered your first question: We are also aware of EU' one year delay. It will be a subject for us to discuss but at this moment, we have no intention to delay our deadline to match Europe. I hope this helps. Sincerely, Grace On 8/21/09, Monrad Monsen monrad.mon...@sun.com wrote: You can view the clean PDF of 2009/C 197/03 issued today at the following web address: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex riServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:197:0003:0003:EN:PDF Based on the 2009/C 197/03, it appears that manufacturers are granted an extra year before their products must meet the requirements of EN55022:2006+A1:2007 which requires testing in 1-6GHz with the 4dB tighter limits compared to FCC in the frequency range 1-3GHz. The new deadline is 1 October 2011. I haven't heard of any issues about floor-standing equipment. We have floor-standing equipment and the testing goes smoothly. However, every information technology manufacturer was under a lot of time pressure to test already released products to the new test methodology and limits -- especially if you have a big product line. With the limits at 1-3GHz being 4dB tighter than FCC, some products may require fixes or an accelerated End-of-Life (EOL) decision. This one year delay gives manufacturers more time to perform the testing and make those decisions. I have some related questions: 1. Will Japan VCCI delay its 1 October 2010 deadline to match Europe? 2. Will China CCC delay its 1 March 2011 deadline to still give an extra five months time after the Europe deadline to go through the in-country test and bureaucracy effort to update the CCC approvals? I would hope the 1-6GHz test requirement would be delayed to at least 1 March 2012. 3. Will China CCC delay its 1 September 2010 deadline to upgrade CCC approvals to include the testing of telecommunications ports? Unfortunately, if this deadline is not extended, we will still have to rush to send all our products to China for testing even if the 1-6GHz test requirement is delayed. Thanks. Monrad L. Monsen Worldwide Compliance Officer Sun Microsystems monrad.mon...@sun.com Spencer, David H wrote: I'm assuming this has is due to the huge issues with floor standing EUT's and testing 1GHz. Text From OJ. Aug 21, 2009 Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this directive) (2009/C 197/03) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 126 of 5 June 2009, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this Directive) (2009/C 197/04) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission
Re: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended
Good Morning Monrad, The program manager at VCCI answered your first question: We are also aware of EU' one year delay. It will be a subject for us to discuss but at this moment, we have no intention to delay our deadline to match Europe. I hope this helps. Sincerely, Grace On 8/21/09, Monrad Monsen monrad.mon...@sun.com wrote: You can view the clean PDF of 2009/C 197/03 issued today at the following web address: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Le UriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:197:0003:0003:EN:PDF Based on the 2009/C 197/03, it appears that manufacturers are granted an extra year before their products must meet the requirements of EN55022:2006+A1:2007 which requires testing in 1-6GHz with the 4dB tighter limits compared to FCC in the frequency range 1-3GHz. The new deadline is 1 October 2011. I haven't heard of any issues about floor-standing equipment. We have floor-standing equipment and the testing goes smoothly. However, every information technology manufacturer was under a lot of time pressure to test already released products to the new test methodology and limits -- especially if you have a big product line. With the limits at 1-3GHz being 4dB tighter than FCC, some products may require fixes or an accelerated End-of-Life (EOL) decision. This one year delay gives manufacturers more time to perform the testing and make those decisions. I have some related questions: 1. Will Japan VCCI delay its 1 October 2010 deadline to match Europe? 2. Will China CCC delay its 1 March 2011 deadline to still give an extra five months time after the Europe deadline to go through the in-country test and bureaucracy effort to update the CCC approvals? I would hope the 1-6GHz test requirement would be delayed to at least 1 March 2012. 3. Will China CCC delay its 1 September 2010 deadline to upgrade CCC approvals to include the testing of telecommunications ports? Unfortunately, if this deadline is not extended, we will still have to rush to send all our products to China for testing even if the 1-6GHz test requirement is delayed. Thanks. Monrad L. Monsen Worldwide Compliance Officer Sun Microsystems monrad.mon...@sun.com Spencer, David H wrote: I'm assuming this has is due to the huge issues with floor standing EUT's and testing 1GHz. Text From OJ. Aug 21, 2009 Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this directive) (2009/C 197/03) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 126 of 5 June 2009, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this Directive) (2009/C 197/04) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 280 of 4 November 2008, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Regards, David Spencer EMC Engineer Xerox Corp - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at
RE: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended
I am assuming this means that the Date of cessation of presumption of conformity of the superseded standard for both EN 55022:2006 and EN 55022:2006 A1:207 have been pushed back to 1/10/2011 to allow use of EN 55022:1998 + A1:2000 + A2 :2003 until October 2011. Anyone have any idea as to why they didn’t just extend the date for implementation of EN 55022 A1:2007, leaving EN 55022:2006 as the interim standard? Mark From: monrad.mon...@sun.com [mailto:monrad.mon...@sun.com] Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 2:39 PM To: Spencer, David H Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended You can view the clean PDF of 2009/C 197/03 issued today at the following web address: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:197:0003:000 3:EN:PDF Based on the 2009/C 197/03, it appears that manufacturers are granted an extra year before their products must meet the requirements of EN55022:2006+A1:2007 which requires testing in 1-6GHz with the 4dB tighter limits compared to FCC in the frequency range 1-3GHz. The new deadline is 1 October 2011. I haven't heard of any issues about floor-standing equipment. We have floor-standing equipment and the testing goes smoothly. However, every information technology manufacturer was under a lot of time pressure to test already released products to the new test methodology and limits -- especially if you have a big product line. With the limits at 1-3GHz being 4dB tighter than FCC, some products may require fixes or an accelerated End-of-Life (EOL) decision. This one year delay gives manufacturers more time to perform the testing and make those decisions. I have some related questions: 1. Will Japan VCCI delay its 1 October 2010 deadline to match Europe? 2. Will China CCC delay its 1 March 2011 deadline to still give an extra five months time after the Europe deadline to go through the in-country test and bureaucracy effort to update the CCC approvals? I would hope the 1-6GHz test requirement would be delayed to at least 1 March 2012. 3. Will China CCC delay its 1 September 2010 deadline to upgrade CCC approvals to include the testing of telecommunications ports? Unfortunately, if this deadline is not extended, we will still have to rush to send all our products to China for testing even if the 1-6GHz test requirement is delayed. Thanks. Monrad L. Monsen Worldwide Compliance Officer Sun Microsystems monrad.mon...@sun.com Spencer, David H wrote: I'm assuming this has is due to the huge issues with floor standing EUT's and testing 1GHz. Text From OJ. Aug 21, 2009 Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this directive) (2009/C 197/03) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 126 of 5 June 2009, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this Directive) (2009/C 197/04) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 280 of 4 November 2008, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Regards, David Spencer EMC Engineer Xerox Corp - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators
RE: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended
Monrad, The floor standing issue come about from an EUT where the radiating element (slot or antenna) is below the absorber material. It's not possible or practical in many cases to raise a large EUT above the absorber material. Earlier this year I read a position paper that explained there may be up to 18dB of error with large floor standing systems. The absorber material blocks or absorbs the direct wave from the EUT. Additionally with large floor standing EUT's (for example a 6 meter X 2 meter rectangle) the test will have to be performed much like a radiated immunity test; that is, rather than rotating the turntable, the antenna must be moved. For each measurement position, based on the beam-width of the antenna, the antenna will have to be moved in both the X and Y axis to maximize the emission. An emissions test which took a few hours now would take well over a day to perform. Regards, David Spencer EMC Engineer Xerox Corp From: monrad.mon...@sun.com [mailto:monrad.mon...@sun.com] Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 2:39 PM To: Spencer, David H Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended You can view the clean PDF of 2009/C 197/03 issued today at the following web address: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Le UriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:197:0003:0003:EN:PDF Based on the 2009/C 197/03, it appears that manufacturers are granted an extra year before their products must meet the requirements of EN55022:2006+A1:2007 which requires testing in 1-6GHz with the 4dB tighter limits compared to FCC in the frequency range 1-3GHz. The new deadline is 1 October 2011. I haven't heard of any issues about floor-standing equipment. We have floor-standing equipment and the testing goes smoothly. However, every information technology manufacturer was under a lot of time pressure to test already released products to the new test methodology and limits -- especially if you have a big product line. With the limits at 1-3GHz being 4dB tighter than FCC, some products may require fixes or an accelerated End-of-Life (EOL) decision. This one year delay gives manufacturers more time to perform the testing and make those decisions. I have some related questions: 1. Will Japan VCCI delay its 1 October 2010 deadline to match Europe? 2. Will China CCC delay its 1 March 2011 deadline to still give an extra five months time after the Europe deadline to go through the in-country test and bureaucracy effort to update the CCC approvals? I would hope the 1-6GHz test requirement would be delayed to at least 1 March 2012. 3. Will China CCC delay its 1 September 2010 deadline to upgrade CCC approvals to include the testing of telecommunications ports? Unfortunately, if this deadline is not extended, we will still have to rush to send all our products to China for testing even if the 1-6GHz test requirement is delayed. Thanks. Monrad L. Monsen Worldwide Compliance Officer Sun Microsystems monrad.mon...@sun.com Spencer, David H wrote: I'm assuming this has is due to the huge issues with floor standing EUT's and testing 1GHz. Text From OJ. Aug 21, 2009 Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this directive) (2009/C 197/03) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 126 of 5 June 2009, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this Directive) (2009/C 197/04) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio
Re: EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended
You can view the clean PDF of 2009/C 197/03 issued today at the following web address: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex riServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:197:0003:0003:EN:PDF Based on the 2009/C 197/03, it appears that manufacturers are granted an extra year before their products must meet the requirements of EN55022:2006+A1:2007 which requires testing in 1-6GHz with the 4dB tighter limits compared to FCC in the frequency range 1-3GHz. The new deadline is 1 October 2011. I haven't heard of any issues about floor-standing equipment. We have floor-standing equipment and the testing goes smoothly. However, every information technology manufacturer was under a lot of time pressure to test already released products to the new test methodology and limits -- especially if you have a big product line. With the limits at 1-3GHz being 4dB tighter than FCC, some products may require fixes or an accelerated End-of-Life (EOL) decision. This one year delay gives manufacturers more time to perform the testing and make those decisions. I have some related questions: 1. Will Japan VCCI delay its 1 October 2010 deadline to match Europe? 2. Will China CCC delay its 1 March 2011 deadline to still give an extra five months time after the Europe deadline to go through the in-country test and bureaucracy effort to update the CCC approvals? I would hope the 1-6GHz test requirement would be delayed to at least 1 March 2012. 3. Will China CCC delay its 1 September 2010 deadline to upgrade CCC approvals to include the testing of telecommunications ports? Unfortunately, if this deadline is not extended, we will still have to rush to send all our products to China for testing even if the 1-6GHz test requirement is delayed. Thanks. Monrad L. Monsen Worldwide Compliance Officer Sun Microsystems monrad.mon...@sun.com Spencer, David H wrote: I'm assuming this has is due to the huge issues with floor standing EUT's and testing 1GHz. Text From OJ. Aug 21, 2009 Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this directive) (2009/C 197/03) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 126 of 5 June 2009, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this Directive) (2009/C 197/04) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 280 of 4 November 2008, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Regards, David Spencer EMC Engineer Xerox Corp - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org
EN55022:1998, +A1:2000, +A2:2003 Extended
I'm assuming this has is due to the huge issues with floor standing EUT's and testing 1GHz. Text From OJ. Aug 21, 2009 Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this directive) (2009/C 197/03) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 126 of 5 June 2009, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (Text with EEA relevance) (Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under this Directive) (2009/C 197/04) The date of cessation of presumption of conformity for ‘EN 55022:1998 Information technology equipment — Radio disturbance characteristics — Limits and methods of measurement (CISPR 22:1997 (Modified))’ and its amendments ‘A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A1:2000)’ and ‘A2:2003 to EN 55022:1998 (CISPR 22:1997/A2:2002)’ which was set out in the Commission communication published in the Official Journal of the European Union C 280 of 4 November 2008, is postponed until 1 October 2011. Regards, David Spencer EMC Engineer Xerox Corp - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@socal.rr.com Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald dhe...@gmail.com
Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
I read in !emc-pstc that drcuthbert drcuthb...@micron.com wrote (in cfefa50c9bcad21197470001fa7eba6b14121...@ntexchange05.micron.com) about 'EN55022:1998 + A1:2000' on Fri, 31 Jan 2003: How can a ferrite clamp be called a CMAD Common Mode Absorption Device? It reduces EM radiation by reducing the current through the antenna, not by absorbing RF. It could, however, be called a CMAD Common Mode Attenuation Device. It is *meant* to absorb the energy in a lossy filter. However, it has been incredibly badly specified by CISPR/F, AIUI. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Dave Cuthbert wrote The nick name for MFJ is Mighty Fine Junk. Yes it is -- or has been. But I'll jump in here to add that while I've in the past often been underwhelmed by the quality of some MFJ equipment, I was favorably impressed with my MFJ-259B. And it is quite useful. I have one of the Autek devices as well, but I prefer the MFJ 259 for test use. This may be because my Autek is the low-end model, lacking some capabilities the MFJ has. Autek does make a more functional model, and their analyzers are MUCH smaller and lighter than MFJ's. Cortland This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
The MFJ-259B is available from MFJ Enterprises, a ham radio accessory company. The nick name for MFJ is Mighty Fine Junk. Autek also makes a similar device although I haven't tried one. The MFJ-259B SWR analyzer is basically a handheld impedance meter. It's also good for checking the input Z of Bicons and such. The MFJ-269 provides a look at 470 MHz. http://www.mfjenterprises.com/index.php Dave Cuthbert From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:14 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 I read in !emc-pstc that drcuthbert drcuthb...@micron.com wrote (in cfefa50c9bcad21197470001fa7eba6b14121...@ntexchange05.micron.com) about 'EN55022:1998 + A1:2000' on Wed, 29 Jan 2003: And I have used an MFJ-259B (only $260) to measure ferrites from 1.7 to 170 MHz. What is an MFJ-259B and where can I buy one? -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
How can a ferrite clamp be called a CMAD Common Mode Absorption Device? It reduces EM radiation by reducing the current through the antenna, not by absorbing RF. It could, however, be called a CMAD Common Mode Attenuation Device. Dave Cuthbert From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:12 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 I read in !emc-pstc that Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote (in oleokfnbajjejfkplbbmoeelchaa.g.grem...@cetest.nl) about 'EN55022:1998 + A1:2000' on Thu, 30 Jan 2003: The official name is CMAD Common Mode Absorption Device. (before John makes one himself ;)) You mean me? And do you mean before I make a name for the device or before I make a DIY device itself? I don't plan to do that at present, but you never know. The discussion in the UK committee leads me to think that the 'MAD' part is apt. (;-) -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
I read in !emc-pstc that Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote (in oleokfnbajjejfkplbbmoeelchaa.g.grem...@cetest.nl) about 'EN55022:1998 + A1:2000' on Thu, 30 Jan 2003: The official name is CMAD Common Mode Absorption Device. (before John makes one himself ;)) You mean me? And do you mean before I make a name for the device or before I make a DIY device itself? I don't plan to do that at present, but you never know. The discussion in the UK committee leads me to think that the 'MAD' part is apt. (;-) -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
I read in !emc-pstc that drcuthbert drcuthb...@micron.com wrote (in cfefa50c9bcad21197470001fa7eba6b14121...@ntexchange05.micron.com) about 'EN55022:1998 + A1:2000' on Wed, 29 Jan 2003: And I have used an MFJ-259B (only $260) to measure ferrites from 1.7 to 170 MHz. What is an MFJ-259B and where can I buy one? -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
All A suggestion for a ferrite clamping method: You could use the ferrite tiles ( like on a chamber) in a stacked configuration. They have a hole in the middle of them you could use to run a wire through. More or less tiles and you vary attenuation. Tile cost last time I heard was about $10.00 a tile. Dan Anchondo From: Gert Gremmen [mailto:g.grem...@cetest.nl] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:17 PM To: Chris Maxwell; Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Clamp attenuation calibration. The calibration proposed in CISPR16 amd to meet the attenuation is peformed using a jig construction of the required lengthe and 2 connectors and a wire trough the clamp. All 50 ohm. The test wire is 4mm diameter and floats at 90 mm above the jig bottom. This way all type of clamps can be tested. Connectors are N-type. The length can be adjusted to the clamp. The jig flanges are 100 x 120 mm For accurate measurement use 2 attentuators of 10 dB at each end. The proposition number is Cispr A 424/CD Attenuation must be better then 15 dB (30 - 1000 MHz) The author forgot to specify in which direction but bidirectional is assumed. The official name is CMAD Common Mode Absorption Device. (before John makes one himself ;)) Regards, Gert Gremmen ce-test, qualified testing Rotterdam, The Netherlands http://www.ce-test.nl From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Chris Maxwell Sent: woensdag 29 januari 2003 21:14 To: Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Indeed, a very good point! I wonder what is meant by the 50 Ohm system does that mean a function generator with 50 Ohm output impedance, 50 Ohm cable and a 50 Ohm load? (This could be simulated nicely by connecting a function generator to a 50 Ohm spectrum analyzer input using 50 Ohm cable) If that were the case, then calibration would be relatively easy. If that were the case, then my initial calculation would also have to be adjusted to take into account the total non-ferrite impedance which would be closer to 150 Ohms...Yielding a calculated Zf of 693 Ohms. I previously assumed that a 50Ohm system had a total pre-ferrite impedance of 50 Ohms, which gave me a Zf of 231 Ohms. Of course, the standard says 15dB minimum... so you could just use 1000 Ohms (at all frequencies, remember) and be done with it! It probably still wouldn't cost $300. Before anybody goes out and buys ferrites ala carte, remember; I'm not on any CISPR commitees; I'm just throwing out a little bit of Math and some assumptions and suggesting that this could be done. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:09 PM To: Chris Maxwell; Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Chris, You can indeed make your own, but my bet is that A2LA or NIST NVLAP inspectors will want to see calibration data, not calculations. Now, if we just had a published calibration technique... Ghery This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Clamp attenuation calibration. The calibration proposed in CISPR16 amd to meet the attenuation is peformed using a jig construction of the required lengthe and 2 connectors and a wire trough the clamp. All 50 ohm. The test wire is 4mm diameter and floats at 90 mm above the jig bottom. This way all type of clamps can be tested. Connectors are N-type. The length can be adjusted to the clamp. The jig flanges are 100 x 120 mm For accurate measurement use 2 attentuators of 10 dB at each end. The proposition number is Cispr A 424/CD Attenuation must be better then 15 dB (30 - 1000 MHz) The author forgot to specify in which direction but bidirectional is assumed. The official name is CMAD Common Mode Absorption Device. (before John makes one himself ;)) Regards, Gert Gremmen ce-test, qualified testing Rotterdam, The Netherlands http://www.ce-test.nl From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Chris Maxwell Sent: woensdag 29 januari 2003 21:14 To: Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Indeed, a very good point! I wonder what is meant by the 50 Ohm system does that mean a function generator with 50 Ohm output impedance, 50 Ohm cable and a 50 Ohm load? (This could be simulated nicely by connecting a function generator to a 50 Ohm spectrum analyzer input using 50 Ohm cable) If that were the case, then calibration would be relatively easy. If that were the case, then my initial calculation would also have to be adjusted to take into account the total non-ferrite impedance which would be closer to 150 Ohms...Yielding a calculated Zf of 693 Ohms. I previously assumed that a 50Ohm system had a total pre-ferrite impedance of 50 Ohms, which gave me a Zf of 231 Ohms. Of course, the standard says 15dB minimum... so you could just use 1000 Ohms (at all frequencies, remember) and be done with it! It probably still wouldn't cost $300. Before anybody goes out and buys ferrites ala carte, remember; I'm not on any CISPR commitees; I'm just throwing out a little bit of Math and some assumptions and suggesting that this could be done. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:09 PM To: Chris Maxwell; Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Chris, You can indeed make your own, but my bet is that A2LA or NIST NVLAP inspectors will want to see calibration data, not calculations. Now, if we just had a published calibration technique... Ghery This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Dave Cuthbert write the point at which ferrites are placed will not always have a common mode impedance of 50 ohms. Here's An example: a large DUT has a 1 meter long cable that connects Not always; make that rarely. Comments about the 150 ohm impedance are on target. That might be difficult to hold to. I can see the entry needing to be a bump of not more than 15 ohms at the high frequency end, and increasing per unit length attenuation with distance from the entry. Cortland This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Chris' Maxwell equations look correct. But the point at which ferrites are placed will not always have a common mode impedance of 50 ohms. Here's An example: a large DUT has a 1 meter long cable that connects to the ground plane. At 75 MHz the common mode impedance of the cable, at the DUT, is about 3k ohms. Adding a 1k +j1k ferrite at the DUT knocks down the radiation by 10 dB. But the radiation is not reduced mainly by losses but by detuning the antenna. The resonant frequency has shifted from 76 MHz to 60 MHz. Now 60 MHz could be a problem. I noticed this type of thing while trying ferrites to reduce emissions from a digital device that had a DUT cable (not grounded at the end). I could fix one frequency with ferrites but it would just tune the cable/system to resonance at another frequency. The person I was working with didn't believe this theory so I ADDED wire to the end of the DUT cable to make it 1/2 wavelength, rather than 1/4 wavelength at the offending frequency and dropped the signal by 20 dB. If anyone has any changes to the model or a what-if, I can simulate it and send you the simulated data. Dave Cuthbert Micron Technology From: Pettit, Ghery [mailto:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 12:09 PM To: 'Chris Maxwell'; Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Chris, You can indeed make your own, but my bet is that A2LA or NIST NVLAP inspectors will want to see calibration data, not calculations. Now, if we just had a published calibration technique... Ghery From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:57 AM To: Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Ghery, If the standard is assuming a 50 Ohm system, doesn't this breakdown to a simple calculation? Insertion Loss = IL = 20 x log((50 + Zf) / 50)where Zf is the ferrite impedance This could easily be solved for Zf if you assume IL to be 15dB (in this case the dB are truely dimensionless; as you are calculating a pure loss from an arbitrary level). I would think that you would just have to: 1. Solve the above for Zf. By the way, I get 231.2 Ohms. Can someone check this? 2. Gather up a box of doughnuts such that the total Zf is above the answer for step 1 at all frequencies from 30Mhz to 1Ghz 3. Color code the doughnuts (or whatever) and write a procedure that says something like clamp three blue doughnuts and two red doughnuts over each cable ... Have I over simplified this??? Wouldn't this be proof enough for any accreditation body? I know that $300 may not seem like alot to some; but it adds up after a few cables. Besides; we went to college to learn all of that math; why not use some of it? I don't mind paying for stuff that I can't make; but this one seems possible to me. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:59 AM To: 'neve...@attbi.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Amendment 1 to CISPR 22:1997 (Amendment A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998) requires that the clamps provide at least 15 dB of loss in a 50 ohm system over the frequency range of 30 MHz to 1000 MHz. The use of extension cords is prohibited. Can you guarantee that your bucket of doughnuts will meet this requirement? How will you demonstrate that to your lab's accrediting body? Fischer's clamps are around $300 each. Compared with what we had to choose from prior to their product, these are not big bucks. Ghery Pettit Intel This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
The EM radiation from wires with and without ferrite cores can be simulated with NEC. The required parameters are: length of wire, physical orientation, how the end is terminated (floating? To ground?, frequency, the RL model of the ferrite). Then one can move the ferrite around to see what happens. There are situations where a single ferrite does virtually nothing. This why I am wary of just throwing on a ferrite and calling it good (although I have been known to do this). The complex impedance of a ferrite can be measured on a VNA. If a VNA isn't available an RF source, and a spectrum analyzer will give the scalar impedance. Or lately I have used a pulse generator and an oscilloscope to characterize ferrites for the design of wide-band time domain transmission line transformers. And I have used an MFJ-259B (only $260) to measure ferrites from 1.7 to 170 MHz. Dave Cuthbert Micron Technology From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:57 AM To: Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Ghery, If the standard is assuming a 50 Ohm system, doesn't this breakdown to a simple calculation? Insertion Loss = IL = 20 x log((50 + Zf) / 50)where Zf is the ferrite impedance This could easily be solved for Zf if you assume IL to be 15dB (in this case the dB are truely dimensionless; as you are calculating a pure loss from an arbitrary level). I would think that you would just have to: 1. Solve the above for Zf. By the way, I get 231.2 Ohms. Can someone check this? 2. Gather up a box of doughnuts such that the total Zf is above the answer for step 1 at all frequencies from 30Mhz to 1Ghz 3. Color code the doughnuts (or whatever) and write a procedure that says something like clamp three blue doughnuts and two red doughnuts over each cable ... Have I over simplified this??? Wouldn't this be proof enough for any accreditation body? I know that $300 may not seem like alot to some; but it adds up after a few cables. Besides; we went to college to learn all of that math; why not use some of it? I don't mind paying for stuff that I can't make; but this one seems possible to me. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:59 AM To: 'neve...@attbi.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Amendment 1 to CISPR 22:1997 (Amendment A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998) requires that the clamps provide at least 15 dB of loss in a 50 ohm system over the frequency range of 30 MHz to 1000 MHz. The use of extension cords is prohibited. Can you guarantee that your bucket of doughnuts will meet this requirement? How will you demonstrate that to your lab's accrediting body? Fischer's clamps are around $300 each. Compared with what we had to choose from prior to their product, these are not big bucks. Ghery Pettit Intel This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
I believe that selecting the right combination of ferrites once, by testing them to provide at least 15 dB S21 should do it. Then it should be a matter of keeping it documented and used in a test-procedure, to ensure that every time one uses the same arrangement. Regrading the proposal that it must provide at least 15 dB attenuation AND 150 Ohm input impedance at the same time, that sounds somewhat trickier. Neven Chris, You can indeed make your own, but my bet is that A2LA or NIST NVLAP inspectors will want to see calibration data, not calculations. Now, if we just had a published calibration technique... Ghery -Original Message- From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:57 AM To: Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Ghery, If the standard is assuming a 50 Ohm system, doesn't this breakdown to a simple calculation? Insertion Loss = IL = 20 x log((50 + Zf) / 50)where Zf is the ferrite impedance This could easily be solved for Zf if you assume IL to be 15dB (in this case the dB are truely dimensionless; as you are calculating a pure loss from an arbitrary level). I would think that you would just have to: 1. Solve the above for Zf. By the way, I get 231.2 Ohms. Can someone check this? 2. Gather up a box of doughnuts such that the total Zf is above the answer for step 1 at all frequencies from 30Mhz to 1Ghz 3. Color code the doughnuts (or whatever) and write a procedure that says something like clamp three blue doughnuts and two red doughnuts over each cable ... Have I over simplified this??? Wouldn't this be proof enough for any accreditation body? I know that $300 may not seem like alot to some; but it adds up after a few cables. Besides; we went to college to learn all of that math; why not use some of it? I don't mind paying for stuff that I can't make; but this one seems possible to me. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:59 AM To: 'neve...@attbi.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Amendment 1 to CISPR 22:1997 (Amendment A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998) requires that the clamps provide at least 15 dB of loss in a 50 ohm system over the frequency range of 30 MHz to 1000 MHz. The use of extension cords is prohibited. Can you guarantee that your bucket of doughnuts will meet this requirement? How will you demonstrate that to your lab's accrediting body? Fischer's clamps are around $300 each. Compared with what we had to choose from prior to their product, these are not big bucks. Ghery Pettit Intel --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Maxwell chris.maxw...@nettest.com wrote (in 83d652574e7af740873674f9fc12dbaaf7e...@utexh1w2.gnnettest.com) about 'EN55022:1998 + A1:2000' on Wed, 29 Jan 2003: If the standard is assuming a 50 Ohm system, doesn't this breakdown to a simple calculation? Quite possibly, but it *isn't* a 50 ohm system. The device should absorb the energy passing down the cable, not reflect it, so it should match the impedance of the cable/ground propagator well. This propagator has traditionally been assumed to have a characteristic impedance of 150 ohms. In an earlier post, I said that the transfer attenuation is 'irrelevant', and it escaped before I could correct it. It wouldn't be irrelevant if it were 3 dB, say, because that would mean that only half the energy was absorbed. So, it would be fairer to say that the attenuation is 'of secondary importance' compared with the input impedance, because if the impedance is far out, the energy never gets into the device, so can't be absorbed. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
I read in !emc-pstc that Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote (in mpeeiccjhhndekobpnnbmeegckaa.g.grem...@cetest.nl) about 'EN55022:1998 + A1:2000' on Wed, 29 Jan 2003: Proposals are on their way to specify both transfer attenuation (first) and input CM impedance of those clamps (later) The radiation properties of the exposed wire will vary widely depending on the CM load impedance. The attenuation characteristic is to isolate auxilary wire (and signal) from the test setup. When we discussed this in the UK committee, it was pointed out that this clamp is NOT a filter and its transfer attenuation is irrelevant. It is *intended* to absorb energy propagating down the cable, so it is the *input impedance* that matters. AIUI, even though that is so, because CISPR/I (G?) specified a transfer attenuation, CISPR 16-1 will continue to specify a value for this irrelevant property! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Ghery Pettit wrote: Chris, You can indeed make your own, but my bet is that A2LA or NIST NVLAP inspectors will want to see calibration data, not calculations. Now, if we just had a published calibration technique... This is still not rocket science. Using Z = 138*(log OD/ID) --- for an air dielectric -- a 2.3:1 ratio of inner conductor diameter to outer conductor's inner diameter gives a 50 ohm fixture. A fixture with this impedance may be constructed which will allow slipping beads on the center conductor and _measuring_ the resulting attenuation. The instruments we measure with ARE traceably calibrated to a primary standard. And since the attenuation requirement is a _minimum_, not a precise value, it is quite easy to insure that it is met. Cortland This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Indeed, a very good point! I wonder what is meant by the 50 Ohm system does that mean a function generator with 50 Ohm output impedance, 50 Ohm cable and a 50 Ohm load? (This could be simulated nicely by connecting a function generator to a 50 Ohm spectrum analyzer input using 50 Ohm cable) If that were the case, then calibration would be relatively easy. If that were the case, then my initial calculation would also have to be adjusted to take into account the total non-ferrite impedance which would be closer to 150 Ohms...Yielding a calculated Zf of 693 Ohms. I previously assumed that a 50Ohm system had a total pre-ferrite impedance of 50 Ohms, which gave me a Zf of 231 Ohms. Of course, the standard says 15dB minimum... so you could just use 1000 Ohms (at all frequencies, remember) and be done with it! It probably still wouldn't cost $300. Before anybody goes out and buys ferrites ala carte, remember; I'm not on any CISPR commitees; I'm just throwing out a little bit of Math and some assumptions and suggesting that this could be done. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:09 PM To: Chris Maxwell; Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Chris, You can indeed make your own, but my bet is that A2LA or NIST NVLAP inspectors will want to see calibration data, not calculations. Now, if we just had a published calibration technique... Ghery This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Chris, You can indeed make your own, but my bet is that A2LA or NIST NVLAP inspectors will want to see calibration data, not calculations. Now, if we just had a published calibration technique... Ghery From: Chris Maxwell [mailto:chris.maxw...@nettest.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:57 AM To: Pettit, Ghery; neve...@attbi.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Ghery, If the standard is assuming a 50 Ohm system, doesn't this breakdown to a simple calculation? Insertion Loss = IL = 20 x log((50 + Zf) / 50)where Zf is the ferrite impedance This could easily be solved for Zf if you assume IL to be 15dB (in this case the dB are truely dimensionless; as you are calculating a pure loss from an arbitrary level). I would think that you would just have to: 1. Solve the above for Zf. By the way, I get 231.2 Ohms. Can someone check this? 2. Gather up a box of doughnuts such that the total Zf is above the answer for step 1 at all frequencies from 30Mhz to 1Ghz 3. Color code the doughnuts (or whatever) and write a procedure that says something like clamp three blue doughnuts and two red doughnuts over each cable ... Have I over simplified this??? Wouldn't this be proof enough for any accreditation body? I know that $300 may not seem like alot to some; but it adds up after a few cables. Besides; we went to college to learn all of that math; why not use some of it? I don't mind paying for stuff that I can't make; but this one seems possible to me. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:59 AM To: 'neve...@attbi.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Amendment 1 to CISPR 22:1997 (Amendment A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998) requires that the clamps provide at least 15 dB of loss in a 50 ohm system over the frequency range of 30 MHz to 1000 MHz. The use of extension cords is prohibited. Can you guarantee that your bucket of doughnuts will meet this requirement? How will you demonstrate that to your lab's accrediting body? Fischer's clamps are around $300 each. Compared with what we had to choose from prior to their product, these are not big bucks. Ghery Pettit Intel This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Ghery, If the standard is assuming a 50 Ohm system, doesn't this breakdown to a simple calculation? Insertion Loss = IL = 20 x log((50 + Zf) / 50)where Zf is the ferrite impedance This could easily be solved for Zf if you assume IL to be 15dB (in this case the dB are truely dimensionless; as you are calculating a pure loss from an arbitrary level). I would think that you would just have to: 1. Solve the above for Zf. By the way, I get 231.2 Ohms. Can someone check this? 2. Gather up a box of doughnuts such that the total Zf is above the answer for step 1 at all frequencies from 30Mhz to 1Ghz 3. Color code the doughnuts (or whatever) and write a procedure that says something like clamp three blue doughnuts and two red doughnuts over each cable ... Have I over simplified this??? Wouldn't this be proof enough for any accreditation body? I know that $300 may not seem like alot to some; but it adds up after a few cables. Besides; we went to college to learn all of that math; why not use some of it? I don't mind paying for stuff that I can't make; but this one seems possible to me. Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | -Original Message- From: Pettit, Ghery [SMTP:ghery.pet...@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:59 AM To: 'neve...@attbi.com'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Amendment 1 to CISPR 22:1997 (Amendment A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998) requires that the clamps provide at least 15 dB of loss in a 50 ohm system over the frequency range of 30 MHz to 1000 MHz. The use of extension cords is prohibited. Can you guarantee that your bucket of doughnuts will meet this requirement? How will you demonstrate that to your lab's accrediting body? Fischer's clamps are around $300 each. Compared with what we had to choose from prior to their product, these are not big bucks. Ghery Pettit Intel This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Gert et al Can anyone provide a spec for the ferrite. For example, what is typically used in a CISPR 16 radiated power clamp? I am guessing when I say that I believe these were originally a Philips type ferrite ring. I have two of these clamps (Luthi MDS21 and Anritsu) and have found them to be quite different in terms of attenuation characteristics when used as loads in 61000-4-6 conducted immunity testing. A short tutorial on the characteristics of ferrites as used in these clamps would be nice. Is anyone aware of a source, eg in a particular standard? Best Regards John Cronin From: Gert Gremmen Reply-To: Gert Gremmen To: Gordon,Ian , Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:54:00 +0100 Hi Group, Proposals are on their way to specify both transfer attenuation (first) and input CM impedance of those clamps (later) The radiation properties of the exposed wire will vary widely depending on the CM load impedance. The attenuation characteristic is to isolate auxilary wire (and signal) from the test setup. Both will be published as an Amendment on CISPR 16 document. A controllable impedance clamp system can be constructed using a current clamp system with variable load . (like current clamp/transformer) The first 1-5 rings can be loaded with a screened wire that terminates into a variable ( or fixed) impedance. Target CM impedance will probably be 150 Ohm to be transferred to the load. This has best impact in the lower frequency range. High loss ferrite will do better as low loss ferrite. Attenuation is just a matter of quantity of rings. Regards, Gert Gremmen Manager Ce-test, Qualified Testing ce marking and more .. EMCD LVD RTTED MDD MD www.cetest.nl Electrical / Electronic Equipment -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Gordon,Ian Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:51 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 All I can see that my manager would prefer to use Neven's approach - it is probably much cheaper than buying clamps. However, does anybody have any practical experience of this? A reply from an accredited test house would be welcomed! Thanks Ian Gordon -Original Message- From: neve...@attbi.com [mailto:neve...@attbi.com] Sent: 29 January 2003 05:22 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Instead of paying big bucks for the clamps (I am not sure what the price is, but I'm sure it is too much anyway :), why not buying a bucket of ferrite doughnuts that can be used over cables. Or, when possible, building in-line adapters out of sections of cables (maybe 1m long) and lining them up with ferrites. I'd select a combination of ferrites to cover 30 MHz to about 300 MHz. The high frequencies will be radiated anyway by the segment of the cables close to the DUT. Taking a little more thorough approach, I'd check the impedance with the lineup fixed over a defined height above a GND plane. (Not sure if that would make a big practical difference.) Neven A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc --- 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
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Hi Group, Proposals are on their way to specify both transfer attenuation (first) and input CM impedance of those clamps (later) The radiation properties of the exposed wire will vary widely depending on the CM load impedance. The attenuation characteristic is to isolate auxilary wire (and signal) from the test setup. Both will be published as an Amendment on CISPR 16 document. A controllable impedance clamp system can be constructed using a current clamp system with variable load . (like current clamp/transformer) The first 1-5 rings can be loaded with a screened wire that terminates into a variable ( or fixed) impedance. Target CM impedance will probably be 150 Ohm to be transferred to the load. This has best impact in the lower frequency range. High loss ferrite will do better as low loss ferrite. Attenuation is just a matter of quantity of rings. Regards, Gert Gremmen Manager Ce-test, Qualified Testing ce marking and more .. EMCD LVD RTTED MDD MD www.cetest.nl Electrical / Electronic Equipment From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Gordon,Ian Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:51 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 All I can see that my manager would prefer to use Neven's approach - it is probably much cheaper than buying clamps. However, does anybody have any practical experience of this? A reply from an accredited test house would be welcomed! Thanks Ian Gordon From: neve...@attbi.com [mailto:neve...@attbi.com] Sent: 29 January 2003 05:22 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Instead of paying big bucks for the clamps (I am not sure what the price is, but I'm sure it is too much anyway :), why not buying a bucket of ferrite doughnuts that can be used over cables. Or, when possible, building in-line adapters out of sections of cables (maybe 1m long) and lining them up with ferrites. I'd select a combination of ferrites to cover 30 MHz to about 300 MHz. The high frequencies will be radiated anyway by the segment of the cables close to the DUT. Taking a little more thorough approach, I'd check the impedance with the lineup fixed over a defined height above a GND plane. (Not sure if that would make a big practical difference.) Neven A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Amendment 1 to CISPR 22:1997 (Amendment A1:2000 to EN 55022:1998) requires that the clamps provide at least 15 dB of loss in a 50 ohm system over the frequency range of 30 MHz to 1000 MHz. The use of extension cords is prohibited. Can you guarantee that your bucket of doughnuts will meet this requirement? How will you demonstrate that to your lab's accrediting body? Fischer's clamps are around $300 each. Compared with what we had to choose from prior to their product, these are not big bucks. Ghery Pettit Intel From: neve...@attbi.com [mailto:neve...@attbi.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:22 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Instead of paying big bucks for the clamps (I am not sure what the price is, but I'm sure it is too much anyway :), why not buying a bucket of ferrite doughnuts that can be used over cables. Or, when possible, building in-line adapters out of sections of cables (maybe 1m long) and lining them up with ferrites. I'd select a combination of ferrites to cover 30 MHz to about 300 MHz. The high frequencies will be radiated anyway by the segment of the cables close to the DUT. Taking a little more thorough approach, I'd check the impedance with the lineup fixed over a defined height above a GND plane. (Not sure if that would make a big practical difference.) Neven A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
All I can see that my manager would prefer to use Neven's approach - it is probably much cheaper than buying clamps. However, does anybody have any practical experience of this? A reply from an accredited test house would be welcomed! Thanks Ian Gordon From: neve...@attbi.com [mailto:neve...@attbi.com] Sent: 29 January 2003 05:22 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 Instead of paying big bucks for the clamps (I am not sure what the price is, but I'm sure it is too much anyway :), why not buying a bucket of ferrite doughnuts that can be used over cables. Or, when possible, building in-line adapters out of sections of cables (maybe 1m long) and lining them up with ferrites. I'd select a combination of ferrites to cover 30 MHz to about 300 MHz. The high frequencies will be radiated anyway by the segment of the cables close to the DUT. Taking a little more thorough approach, I'd check the impedance with the lineup fixed over a defined height above a GND plane. (Not sure if that would make a big practical difference.) Neven A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the WorldCom Internet Managed Scanning Service - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.worldcom.com This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Instead of paying big bucks for the clamps (I am not sure what the price is, but I'm sure it is too much anyway :), why not buying a bucket of ferrite doughnuts that can be used over cables. Or, when possible, building in-line adapters out of sections of cables (maybe 1m long) and lining them up with ferrites. I'd select a combination of ferrites to cover 30 MHz to about 300 MHz. The high frequencies will be radiated anyway by the segment of the cables close to the DUT. Taking a little more thorough approach, I'd check the impedance with the lineup fixed over a defined height above a GND plane. (Not sure if that would make a big practical difference.) Neven A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International --- 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 Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
In a message dated 1/28/03 6:32:49 PM Central Standard Time, drcuthb...@micron.com writes: A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Hi Richard, thanks for the chance to say that Schaffner also markets this type of decoupling clamp. It is different to the Clamp used for EN61000-4-6. Talk to John Parnell at 1-800-367-5566. Ext 225 Best Regards, Derek Walton
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
I don't have a copy of EN55022 to look at so I'll ask a question: How many ferrite clamps and what type are specified? And are they placed at various places, at one location only, or placed as with a Bicon balun? Dave Cuthbert Micron Technology From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 11:30 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: davehe...@attbi.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://ieeepstc.mindcruiser.com/ Click on browse and then emc-pstc mailing list
RE: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
Without looking at their web pages, I would suspect that Schaffner and Rohde Schwarz might be places to look. ETS-Lindgren, as well? Ghery Pettit Intel From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:30 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EN55022:1998 + A1:2000 A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International 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
EN55022:1998 + A1:2000
A1 to EN55022:1998 requires the use of ferrite clamps on all cables leaving the table-top EUT for a connection outside the test site. Are there any other manufacturers of these clamps other than Fischer Custom Communications? Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International 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
