[PSES] CISPR 35 FDIS

2016-05-27 Thread John Woodgate
The final voting document (FDIS) for CISPR 35 has just been circulated to national Committees, with a closing date for voting of July 8 2016. It is dual-voted in CENELEC as well, but it might pass in IEC but not in CENELEC, so the future of the EN clone, EN 55035, is still somewhat uncertain. With

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-1-2 Ed.4 (2014) Table 9

2016-05-27 Thread T.Sato
On Fri, 27 May 2016 22:15:16 + (UTC), MARINA PEYZNER wrote: > Yes, sure -  60601-1-2. > So, place antenna at 3 (or 1) m and create field according to Table 9. Right? > But why the Table gives 0.3 m distance? > If I have to eliminate a small area or the EUT is pretty small - may I use > 0.

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-1-2 Ed.4 (2014) Table 9

2016-05-27 Thread MARINA PEYZNER
Yes, sure -  60601-1-2. So, place antenna at 3 (or 1) m and create field according to Table 9. Right? But why the Table gives 0.3 m distance? If I have to eliminate a small area or the EUT is pretty small - may I use 0.3 m distance? Thanks,Eugene On Friday, May 27, 2016 2:59 PM, T.Sato wro

Re: [PSES] IEC 61000-1-2 Ed.4 (2014) Table 9

2016-05-27 Thread T.Sato
On Fri, 27 May 2016 21:37:01 +, MARINA PEYZNER wrote: > I am confused with Note below the Table 9 in IEC 61000-1-2 Ed. 4 standard. > I am under impression that we have to create Immunity test levels given in > this Table with placing antenna at a distance of 0.3 m but this is in > contrar

[PSES] IEC 61000-1-2 Ed.4 (2014) Table 9

2016-05-27 Thread MARINA PEYZNER
Dear friends, I am confused with Note below the Table 9 in IEC 61000-1-2 Ed. 4 standard. I am under impression that we have to create Immunity test levels given in this Table with placing antenna at a distance of 0.3 m but this is in contrary with this Note. So, what should be the distance betwe