[Frivolous punchline coming, delete if not interested]
There's not difference, actually -- the violin player's head is just much
larger, making the relative size of the violin seem smaller to the observer.
In truth --
The viola is slightly larger, tuned differently (In 5ths? C-G-D-A?) and has
Your'e close. It is slightly larger than an violin and tuned 1/5 octave
lower.
-Original Message-
From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of
don_macart...@selinc.com
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 10:23 AM
To: Pettit, Ghery
Cc:
The Curtis-Straus Update is for November, 2001 is now available at:
http://www.conformity-update.com
The headlines are:
FCC: Lies Will Cost You $2.52 Million.
Commission Allocates More Spectrum For Advanced Wireless.
ACTA Slowly but Surely Taking Charge.
OSHA Levies More Fines In Workplace
Forum-
I was just informed (without any further details given) that warranty
periods for products shipped to Europe going to 24 months, mandated by law.
Does someone know the specifics of this, or maybe point me in the right
direction?
I started digging on the europa.eu.int website, but have
I saw a kid use his bassoon like a Louisville Slugger once.
The competition for first chair was vicious in the woodwind section...
I played the cornet. A really old silver plated one.
Funny thing was it always had a terrible hall-filling halitosis.
-maybe that is why the conductor was always
Hi all,
If a product transmit in a time period of 1 second pr hour, should it during
conformity testing be in this normal transmit mode, or should it be set in a
continuous transmitting mode which will be a kind of worst case situation,
but anyway not a realistic situation when installed out on
I read in !emc-pstc that J.Feldhaar j.feldh...@telejet.de wrote (in
3c0672ab.afbfd...@telejet.de) about 'EMI receiver desensitization and
amplitude overhead', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:
I am looking for a URL or graphic that shows the headroom necessary for
correct QP emi measurements using an EMI
On the CENELEC web they say regarding EN61000-6-1: Note:Supersedes EN
50082-1:1997. What you are telling John, I assume that they should have
written Note: Will superseed EN 50082-1:1997.
http://www.cenelec.org/BASIS/celis/free/project/DDW?W%3DPR_LSCCOMM+PH+LIKE+%
Forum-
We are currently retaining a paper copy of the manufacturing/QC checklist
(includes hi-pot/ground-bond data) for each serial number shipped.
I am curious to know how NRTL's view the use of an Hi-Pot OK ink stamp
on the product in lieu of keeping a paper record?
Or is this a common
I played upright bass professionally for 20 years, in big bands and jazz
groups, before and while becoming an engineer. Interest in acoustics led me
to electromagnetics, it was taught by the same teachers. I still play part
time and enjoy it more.
David
-Original Message-
From:
Dave,
Do you mean GR-1089-CORE? I searched the Store on www.telcordia.com and
could not find any reference to 1092.
Best regards,
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Dave Hutchins [mailto:hutch...@protek-tvs.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 5:59 PM
To:
I understand that a label is not required.
I asked in reference to a component (Telecom DC power cable) that we
make in-house. They aren't serialized, so we aren't going to keep a
test result database cross-referencing serial numbers ...as we would for
serialized products. We also aren't
Don,
Two options exist for demonstrating compliance with the essential
requirements of the EMC Directive. You can create a Technical Construction
File with a Competent Body or you can test to the harmonized requirements
applicable for the product you are selling. If you go the TCF file, you
Tuned differently?
Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com on 11/29/2001 08:34:10 AM
Please respond to Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com
To: Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com, 'John Woodgate'
j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk, 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Allen chris_al...@eur.3com.com wrote
(in 80256b13.004f5079...@notesmta.eur.3com.com) about 'Mains Cords in
the UK and the fuse rating', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:
For an IT product there is a restriction in the use of mains cords with a cross
sectional area of 0.75mm2 for
Chris,
As I understand it, there is no standards requirement on how or were or
if a OK hi-pot mark is required. An initial factory inspection for
a ITE product (UL, CSA, TUV,...) will usually require that the hi-pot
process in place ensures no walk-arounds, but does not require marking.
I read in !emc-pstc that Peters, Michael mpet...@analogic.com wrote
(in 61c1e83d9da9d311a871009027d617f001632...@peaexch1.analogic.com)
about 'LISN Calibration', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:
If you have not already done so, I would recommend an isolation transformer.
Many factories and office buildings
I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in D9223EB959A5D511A98F00508B68C20C0226B691@ORSMSX108) about 'Revised
EMC standards and CE Declarations.', on Thu, 29 Nov 2001:
That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.
My musical education is clearly sadly lacking. I
Hi all,
this is my first post to the list. Greetings to all!
I am looking for a URL or graphic that shows the headroom necessary for
correct QP emi measurements using an EMI receiver.
If my information is correct, there must be up to 43.5 dB in excess of
the measurement range for measuring
I also agree with the 4.4mm reinforced and 2.2mm basic/supp. calculation. I will assume that there is a creepage requirement also and would use pollution 1 in this application as long as the enclosure does not have openings.
Ed
From: vit...@aol.com
Reply-To: vit...@aol.com
To:
Interesting thread . . .
At the companies for which I managed the regulatory programs
over the last 20 years, it has always been engineering's responsibility to
release to
production a compliant product,and I have always been a member of the
engineering
department.
In the early days, before
I wonder how many of the engineers on here have been or currently musicians.
I play clarinet and saxiphone.
I figure the bastard that invented the saxaphone made it out of metal
because they were always burning the bassoons.
-Original Message-
From: Pettit, Ghery
Hi Joe,
I made a homemade LISN using a schematic from Clayton R Paul's book.
Our company also bought a pre-compliance LISN from Wayne Kerr. In my
experience, both are good enough for pre-compliance work.
My calibration is done by measuring products that were previously
tested at an outside
Oh, and as long as we're picking on instruments in the orchestra...
Do you know the difference between a Violin and a Viola?
.
.
.
.
The Viola burns longer. ;)
-Original Message-
From: Pettit, Ghery
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:14 AM
To: 'John
Hi All,
When I was with Xerox, Versatec Division, we were placed in the Engineering
Services Dept. with Drafting and Component
engineering. This worked very well and gave us input to the purchasing
specifications as well as design
considerations. Our relationship with Engineering was very good,
There is nothing to go bad in a LISN if it hasn't been physically damaged,
which should be obvious by inspection. If there is any concern, a spot
check or insertion loss sweep with a tracking generator or a sig gen is
perfectly okay for assessing LISN performance. And the analyzer/generator
John,
That quote refers to the Oboe, not the Bassoon.
Ghery
former Bassoonist ;)
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:15 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Revised EMC standards and CE Declarations.
Hi Chris,
I first would ask way do you need the label?
If it is to validate the process, then any label you purchase would be ok.
If it is proof that a required safety test was preformed on a product for
protection during litigation it is any entirely different matter.
Here at the Design
The only problem I see with not calibrating the LISN is you wouldn't
know if / or when it goes bad until you cross check it with a calibrated
LISN.
I would suggest you run your precompliance lab just like the real lab.
This way you'll get the same results as the accredited lab you test
with. No
Hi all,
Interesting discussion. Here is my 2 cents. Must be about $1.00 worth by
now.
I once came upon an interesting compromise as to the organization chart
position of compliance. They put it in test or quality, but funded it
through the engineering budget. Not perfect, but it
Joe,
For piece of mind. The LISN provides repeatable results for different line
impedances. Making sure that the LISN impedance is what it is supposed to
be and the insertion loss is satisfactory will give you a better comfort
level when going to the test house.
If you have not already done
I read in !emc-pstc that marti...@appliedbiosystems.com wrote (in
offb519b0f.d5302b2b-on88256b13.3...@pe-c.com) about 'LISN
Calibration', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance measurements
that calibration of the LISN is not required. However, do you
I read in !emc-pstc that Charles Grasso chasgra...@hotmail.com wrote
(in f32rklpgtfur2iz2mb100022...@hotmail.com) about 'FW: Quality
Assurance and Product Approvals - 2', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
My point is that IF the regulatory agencies
allow ( however inadvertantly) products on
the market place
Chris,
I think you have to generate your own labels or buy them to order. Size would
be an issue. Proper glue would be another issue depending upon the surface
material these labels are to be affixed (metal, plastic), since certain glues
do not adhere to certain plastics.These Hi-pot OK
My personal experience agrees with John. I prefer to work with Engineering
and reporting someplace in Engineering;-- it makes my job easier when
compliance is designed right from the very beginning rather than be
responsible later to get it past agencies. At that point, it suddenly became
Hi Dan,
No arguement here.
My point is that IF the regulatory agencies
allow ( however inadvertantly) products on
the market place that fail then the message
managers get is that it can't be that
important.
Incidentally it is my understanding that the
FCC Class B procedures have resulted in
I would say that if it came calibrated from the manufacturer and has not
suffered visible damage it should be okay. It is easy to check a few spot
frequencies or use a spectrum analyzer with tracking generator or separate
sweeping sig gen to check performance. Either way it is not a big deal.
Rich and Xing,
No arguments from me about the clearance of 4.4 mm for reinforced. The other
6.4 mm clearance requirement is probably a misapplication of the clarance rules
using the 840 v peak row of Table 3H.
I think the original question may also need to consider creepage requirements.
Hi Xing Weibing:
Here is my answer to the question.
Hi group I have a question regarding clearance and working voltage of
IEC60950. If I HAVE A AC ADAPTER(AC 100-240V 50/60Hz) ,THE WORKING
VOLTAGE MEASURED ARE AS FOLLOWS: Nominal supply voltage: AC240V PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY :
We are in the process of setting up a pre-compliance EMC lab. One of the
tests that we will be performing is pre-compliance conducted emissions per
EN 61326.
I realize that since we are only performing pre-compliance measurements
that calibration of the LISN is not required. However, do you
I read in !emc-pstc that jasonxmall...@netscape.net wrote (in
40555e2a.2ee8b103.73ea6...@netscape.net) about 'Revised EMC standards
and CE Declarations.', on Wed, 28 Nov 2001:
Two more questions
Newgroup Lingo?
In the following, IIRC means If I Recall Correctly
Yes.
41 matches
Mail list logo
