RE: UL flammability marking

Hello Kim Boll: > I have been told that the UL marking on PCB (UR 94V-0 etc.) > can also be something like E4. Does anyone know if the > marking requirements have been changed and if so where I can > get more information. UL 796 specifies marking requirements for PCBs. Here is a quote from U

RE: Conversion between A/m and Gauss

Hi Ravinder: Can't do it. As you said, they are different magnetic properties. Gauss is a measure of magnetic flux density. Amperes/meter is a measure of magnetic field strength. Best regards, Rich -Original Message- From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-

RE: Conversion between A/m and Gauss

Ravinder 1 Gauss = 1000 mGauss = 100 microTesla = 79.6 A/m John McAuley www.cei.ie john.mcau...@cei.ie * DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail may be confidential and is intended

Conversion between A/m and Gauss

Hi Experts, I know it is Friday afternoon, but I was wondering if anyone can help me convert Gauss in to Amp/meter RMS. I understand these two represent different magnetic properties, but I have been testing our products in Gauss, and EN 61000-4-8 requires testing in Amp/meter. Thanks for the

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

In message <380-220081157185821...@earthlink.net>, dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, Cortland Richmond writes: >If connecting to an oscillator circuit with an oscilloscope violates >the EMC directive, we may all be out of business. In the early days of the 89 Directive, people did ask such questions.

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

Piotr Galka wrote: > 1MHz generator is standard in such systems. > AM and FM receivers are a kind of basic electronic in my opinion so I'd like > to allow for taking frequency characteristics of 465kHz and 10.7MHz filters, > and see AM and FM demodulators working. Ah, NOW I see your dilemma. Fo

RE: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

Piotr Under EMC directive 2004/108/EC, "apparatus" means any finished appliance or combination thereof made commercially available as a single functional unit, intended for the end user and liable to generate electromagnetic disturbance, or the performance of which is liable to be affected by such

RE: UL flammability marking

KBJ & PSNet, As you probably know the requirements for flammability of PWBs come down thru the chain of UL 94, UL 746 and UL 796. There are IEC equivalents for these requirements, but I don't have all the standard numbers at hand. To show conformity to requirements markings on the boar

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

- Original Message - From: "Cortland Richmond" > 1) Use less than 9 KHz for a clock. 1MHz generator is standard in such systems. AM and FM receivers are a kind of basic electronic in my opinion so I'd like to allow for taking frequency characteristics of 465kHz and 10.7MHz filters, a

RE: UL flammability marking

PCB flammability rating marks are specifically required when "...found that flammability classifications of different grades of base materials (previously identified by one printed-wiring type designation) are different..." I have never seen an "E4" flammability rating specified in UL94 or UL796.

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

- Original Message - From: "John Woodgate" >>I should be able to limit the emission just making square being not square >>and persuade the pupil that it is really square what they see ;-) > > Instead of work-arounds, there should be an EMC standard (or a pair, for > emissions and immu

Re: FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

In message , dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, John Harrington writes: >But where is this statement? If you need it, and the manufacturer hasn't supplied it, you have to ask for it. Some standards (such as EN 55103) are more explicit about this than others. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.de

RE: UL flammability marking

Strictly speaking, the flame rating does not need to be marked on the circuit board. The following is from the UL guide for category code ZPMV2 for Printed Wiring Boards. "Printed wiring boards Recognized under UL's Component Recognition Program are identified by significant markings consistin

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

IMO if you can show no problem with emissions and safety, ESD is not a big problem. 1) Use less than 9 KHz for a clock. 2) Note that the equipment is not complete (a breadboard isn't, after all) and so not subject to the standards for completed equipment. 3) Use a SELV power limited supply. Co

RE: UL 60950 preliminary inspection / design review

Perhaps the test house was confusing the requirement for components to be certified to a UL/CSA standard vs UL recognition of the component. >from UL60950-1 1.5.1 ...In this standard, certain IEC component standard requirements are replaced by the relevant requirements of component standards liste

RE: FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

>>So can that "finite degradation" exceed the "normal performance within >>specification limits" of the general criterion A degradation? >It depends what individual standards say: not all have exactly the same >wording for Criterion A. I think this is specific to EN 61326-1 and EN 61326-2-1 >I

Re: FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

In message , dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, John Harrington writes: >So can that "finite degradation" exceed the "normal performance within >specification limits" of the general criterion A degradation? It depends what individual standards say: not all have exactly the same wording for Criterion A.

RE: UL 60950 preliminary inspection / design review

Dear Perkins, Thanks for the valuable feedback, certainly it is very useful in many practical aspects. The condition prevailing in ITE industry today does not allow slips in schedule. I am sure that not only SCM every one is waking in a tight rope. If I tell my supply chain to start procurem

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

In message <8D6DAA21BC8A460FBCA6AE9A5229C9DA@MmPc21>, dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, Piotr Galka writes: >My main problem is how to make evident in papers that it is CE OK if >education circuits can be ESD damaged because I don't see any solution >to that. No possibility of prevention, indeed, so t

RE: Replacement of UK Statutory Instruments 1994 1768

Scott - see "current position" para near bottom of BERR page below and related documents on right side of page: http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/sectors sustainability/regulations/ecdirect/page12568.html Chris From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Scott

RE: FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

John >What does 'no degradation' mean? 0%, 1%, 0.001%, 10%? It can only mean >0%: zilch, nada, nowt! How can that possibly be tested? The 'except' >text allows the manufacturer to specify a finite degradation that is not >exceeded. So can that "finite degradation" exceed the "normal performa

UL flammability marking

Hi all I have been told that the UL marking on PCB (UR 94V-0 etc.) can also be something like E4. Does anyone know if the marking requirements have been changed and if so where I can get more information. Best regards, Mr. Kim Boll Jensen Bolls Rådgivning Ved Gadekæret 11F DK-3660 Stenløse Denm

RE: FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

Hi Bob I get your point but criterion A comes with some guidelines at least. I'd like peoples' opinion on whether this clause widens, negates or has no effect on those guidelines. Thanks John John Harrington From: rehel...@mmm.com [mailto:rehel...@mmm.com] Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 8:4

Replacement of UK Statutory Instruments 1994 1768

There was an consultation to replace SI 1994 1768 in 2006. Is there any progress in the replacement? Thanks and regards, Scott - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list.Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, sen

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

From: "John Woodgate" > And you seem to think that the emissions would be excessive anyway, so > it's doubtful that you would get a positive report from the Notified Body. My main problem is how to make evident in papers that it is CE OK if education circuits can be ESD damaged because I don'

Re: FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

In message , dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, John Harrington writes: >Hi Group > >  > >While we all have our copies of EN 61326 close at hand I?d like to see >what your consensus of opinion is on the meaning of paragraph 6.2.102 >of EN61326-2-1. > >  > >? 6.2.102  Tests with continuously present elec

Re: FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

John, one of the problems with defining "criteria" is that you cannot define criteria that will encompass all of the past, present, and future equipment in the world. Only the manufacturer (keeping in mind his customers and competitors) can definitively define what is or is not acceptable. Bob Hel

FW: Deviation of Performance Criteria

Hi Group While we all have our copies of EN 61326 close at hand I’d like to see what your consensus of opinion is on the meaning of paragraph 6.2.102 of EN61326-2-1. ‘ 6.2.102 Tests with continuously present electromagnetic phenomenon No visual degradation of parameters of the EUT i

Re: UL 60950 preliminary inspection / design review

In message , dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, kbalasubraman...@scmmicro.co.in writes: >For one product we went through TUV and found that for everything they >follow UL standards. They demand UL file number for all the critical >parts. A test-house isn't in a position to 'demand' anything. And it cert

Re: UL 60950 preliminary inspection / design review

Dear Peter, Thanks for the feedback. For one product we went through TUV and found that for everything they follow UL standards. They demand UL file number for all the critical parts. In that way we felt UL is the master and leading in defining the standard hence continuing with UL. Sincere

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

In message <074D7671D8D74339973279276937D262@MmPc21>, dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, Piotr Galka writes: >Do you know that way takes few weeks/months/years ? You asked 'how to have the problem solved once for always'. There is no other way than the one I described to do that. It may be that there is

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

From: "John Woodgate" > > You should take the problem to the Polish National Standards body and > ask the relevant committee to submit your case to CENELEC TC210 for an > official 'interpretation'. It may be that TC210 would also need to refer > your case to the Commission's 'EMC Working Part

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

In message , dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, Piotr Galka writes: >Where should I ask my questions to have the problem solved once for always? You should take the problem to the Polish National Standards body and ask the relevant committee to submit your case to CENELEC TC210 for an official 'interpr

Re: Deviation of Performance Criteria - other question.

- Original Message - From: "John Woodgate" > In the early days of the old Directive, it was considered that educational > products did not have to be tested but that Article 4 applied: if > interference occurred it must be prevented. > > I don't see anything about this in a quick scan

RE: UL 60950 preliminary inspection / design review

K. Balasubramanian & PSNet, It seems that because of the described trouble you are having with your certification supplier you are making the process more difficult for yourself by the way you approach the process. Working with the test house in steps opens the door for additional revie

Re: 13.56 MHz RFID for India

Not allowed but special permission may be granted by the WPC depending on the power levels. Each case is considered separately. Peter Merguerian --- On Mon, 11/3/08, rehel...@mmm.com wrote: From: rehel...@mmm.com Subject: 13.56 MHz RFID for India To: emc-p...@ieee.org

Re: UL 60950 preliminary inspection / design review

Dear Mr Balasubramanian, Looks like you need to try and use another National Recognized Test Laboratory (NRTL). Have you tried TUV Rheinland - the North American office is NRTL accredited by OSHA and Standards Council of Canada - Out of 19 countries in Asia, TUV Rheinland has 8 offices in India w