From: Peter Tarver
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:54 PM
Ooops! I should have said IEEE EMC-PSTC Forum. Neither IEEE nor PSES
membership are requisite to register for the site.
Any way, point being that by placing that information somewhere else
that is publicly accessible, I
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 1:25 PM
Tarver, Peter writes
Ooops! I should have said IEEE EMC-PSTC Forum. Neither
IEEE nor PSES
membership are requisite to register for the site.
That's where we are, isn't it?
--
Perhaps it's a matter of semantics. The web
Ted -
The query was limited to GFCI devices, but it seems reasonable to
include any AFCI devices. The key issues are the wireless telephony
products interfering. SMPSs are not involved in this query, unless
incorporated into a wireless telephony product.
If data for GFCIs and AFCIs are
The majority of AC-DC power supplies for lab use are done to the various
versions of 61010-1, as they are considered test and measurement
equipment, and use of 61010-1 gives everyone a harmonized approach for
most countries.
There is an IEC 61204 series that includes a -7 safety standard that has
I'm trying to get up to speed, and I've seen lots of stuff saying March
1, 2007 is the deadline, but isn't that just for phase 1 (disclosure)?
What is the deadline for phase 2 (restriction)?
Jim Eichner, P.Eng.
Compliance Engineering Manager
Xantrex Technology Inc.
e-mail: jim.eich...@xantrex.com
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 14:37:43 +0100,
M. Loerzer-Mobile (GLOBALNORM) loerzer_mob...@globalnorm.de wrote:
We register very often such mistakes in the OJEU (Toys Directive,
Machinery, EMC, Low Voltage, Medical, etc.). Therefore we announce
these mistakes in our standards database GLOBALNORM.
Does the TIA have any interest in Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters (AFCIs)?
These devices have the potential to become more numerous than GFCIs in the
United States. Proposals for the 2008 National Electrical Code would
require AFCIs for a significant portion of the circuits in residential
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:20 PM
or you may refer to the Note I added to the PSES web site today.
I'm not a PSES member, so I can't see it.
Ooops! I should have said IEEE EMC-PSTC Forum. Neither IEEE nor PSES
membership are requisite to register for the site.
In message
be3336be85968d49be01e66d6e365b1e018c6...@sjc1amfpew01.am.sanm.corp,
dated Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Tarver, Peter peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com
writes
I then point those concerned about the baggage corporate lawyers have
IT automatically add to all out-going e-mails, to either ignore those
note that almost all products will exceed the limit for lead even if
they are EU RoHS compliant. This is due to the exempt high temp solders
in many IC's.
Regards,
Chris
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Gartman,
Richard
Sent: 25 January 2007 19:08
To: Brian
The below is now also posted in the discussions are of the PSES Forum
web site.
The TIA (Telecommunication Industry Association) is looking for any
information on incidents of wireless phones (cordless, cell, etc.)
interfering with ground fault circuit interrupters (GFCIs). If anyone
has any
I then point those concerned about the baggage corporate lawyers have IT
automatically add to all out-going e-mails, to either ignore those
disclaimers or you may refer to the Note I added to the PSES web site
today.
(I added it to the Note section, because I'm inept at posting to the
discussions
If you meet the requirements; the circle e ...
If you exceed the RoHS MCV will be the circle with a number on the
useful life of the product before it begins to contaminate the
environment. You also get to include in your documentation a description
of what components in your product exceed these
Good People,
Several questions.
For phase 1 - what markings are required if some limits exceeded ?
For phase 2 - if all limits met, what marks are required ?
Thanks much,
Brian
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:
In message
be3336be85968d49be01e66d6e365b1e018c6...@sjc1amfpew01.am.sanm.corp,
dated Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Tarver, Peter peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com
writes
The TIA (Telecommunication Industry Association) is looking for any
information on incidents of wireless phones (cordless, cell, etc.)
Dear First Responders of the Forum,
many thanks to you all for extremely efficient and professional responses. I
definitely support Mike's opinion what this forum is all about learning
experience and excelent one at that.
Now I will chew on all of this great amount of information,
The TIA (Telecommunication Industry Association) is looking for any
information on incidents of wireless phones (cordless, cell, etc.)
interfering with ground fault circuit interrupters (GFCIs). If anyone
has any information relating to this, please let me know and I will
forward information to
Good morning all,
I have studied some documents about China RoHS and the
packaging requirements and one point is not very
clear. Does each individual packaging need to be
marked or can the outer box be mark to represent the
complete packaging requirements. E.g. if a product is
put in a polythene
Good day all,
I'm in the market for a new AC?DC power source for my lab. I'm coming across
differing CE mark testing performed on the DoC's and I'm a little confused as
to what the latest and greatest requirements are.
Is there a harmonised standard for lab AC/DC powers supplies?
Thanks,
Derek
Hello Michael,
When we added these exemptions from the intra-building lightning testing
as part of the GR-1089 revision, our concern was really not the cable
length itself, but the distance between equipment. This correlated with
the potential distance a cable could exposed in the overhead
We register very often such mistakes in the OJEU (Toys Directive, Machinery,
EMC, Low Voltage, Medical, etc.). Therefore we announce these mistakes in our
standards database GLOBALNORM.
The quoted amendments don't belong there:
A1:2000 and A2:2003 are amendments to EN 55022:1998 not to EN
Tom
My understanding is that these two amendments were added to the 1994 version
in error although I do not have official confirmation of that as of yet.
If it is agreed that they are in error a corrigendum will be issued fairly
soon.
John
John McAuley
Compliance Engineering Ireland Ltd
Hi Tom,
This is a mistake. There will be an amendment to the EMC OJ on 27th
January, or so I'm told...
Jon Larkin
Cranage EMC Safety
- Original Message -
From: T.Sato vef00...@nifty.ne.jp
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: EN 55022:1998
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 14:38:42 -0800,
Samuel Lifshutz slifsh...@mrv.com wrote:
In December 2006 a new List of EMC Harmonized Standards was published in
OJEU:
...
The newly published list of EMC Directive harmonized standards has
extended implementation date for these Amendment 1:2000 and
Dear All,
The 10GBASE-CX4 interface permits a maximum cable length of 15m
(49feet).
As the transmission speed per lane is 3.125Gbit/s, the use of protection
devices is prohibited. GR-1089 Issue 4 section 4.6.9 contains the
following
clause(s):
{quote}
Intra-building tests are not required if
25 matches
Mail list logo
