Has anyone successfully completed a centrifuge submittal under IEC 1010 (and
subparts)? I am particularly concerned on how the "aerosol" containment under
Part 13 was addressed. Do all centrifuges have to be aerosol tight or can the
manufacturer claim a product is not aerosol tight? Any hin
Hello, again.
The new DRAFT guidelines prepared by the European Commission on
application of the EMC Directive explain integration of individually
CE marked subsystems in section 6.3.2, titled "Systems assembled from
only CE marked apparatus". This section is quit
Somebody wrote in this forum:
"The LVD should be used for end-product systems, not components, and safety
critical components (like e-stop switches or PLCs) should meet the
requirements of their relevant component standards."
and brought to me an old question. If he was speaking about the EMC Dir
Please remove me from your e-mail listing.
Dwayne Blakemore
dblakem...@mdc.com or
dblakem...@mail.mdc.com
To all,
I am curious as to the impact of this version of the standard to the use
3 meter semi-anechoic chambers.
Regards.
--
From: Martin Garwood
To: DouglasScott
Cc: emc-pstc
Subject: Re: Distance of Measurements
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Friday, June 13, 1997 11:32AM
My thanks to all who responded.
Consensus was that the "Class C" referred to either FCC Part 15
concerning intentional radiators, or to the old VDE standard concerning
on-site measurements.
The product in question is an EPOS terminal, so my conclusion is
that a typo had crept into the document.
Haitong EMC Inc.
Tel : 82-339-376-4117
Fax : 82-339-376-4118
Email : hait...@soback.kornet.nm.kr
Ryan Kim / President of Haitong EMC Inc.
--
$)C
> :83= ;g6w: bharat_s...@logitech.com
> 9^4B ;g6w: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
> A&8q: Re : Mexico as well as Korea approval mark
> 3/B%
At a previous employer we had this discussion with a vendor of ours. We
contacted several compotent bodies (30+) in the United Kingdom and other
countries in the European Communittee. We came up with a full 66% that would
test products to CISPR 22 at ten meters. The other 33% would allow products
t
Bharat Shah
06/12/97 06:41 PM
Hello,
We manufacture computer peripherals. (Mouse, keyboards) For OEM customers,
since Mexico (NOM) mark is customer sensitive, I do not have an idea, how
to get NOM approval for such products where I do not know the customer.
Also, which customer number to place
Darrell,
This is my general understanding of the FCC Rules regarding keyboards.
A keyboard is considered a peripheral device under 15.3(r). As such it
is subject to, Declaration of Conformity or Certification under 15.101(a) .
This may or may not ap
At 10:36 AM 6/12/97 -0700, Randy Flanders wrote:
>
>Richard and Robert:
>
>I agree with Richard, although I would recommend the opposite. I would Test
>at 10 meters, and bring the antenna in to 3 meters if I come across
>frequencies where ambients are interfering. This provides most data at th
What follows are excerpts of a letter I received from Mr. David Brumfield
re: EMC Compliance in Australia. Mr. Brumfield is the Assistant Manager of
the Radiocommunications Standards section of the Australian Spectrum Management
Agency. I asked several questions and he responded to each in turn.
As Scott correctly quoted from EN55022 (and CISPR 22 1993 edition), "If
the field strength measurement at 10 m cannot be made because of high
ambient noise levels or for other reasons, measurement of Class B EUTs
may be made at a closer distance, for example 3m."
It does not mention, or include c
13 matches
Mail list logo
