More moving on

This is also my last day at my present location, though I'll continue in the list from my Compuserve account while searching.

Re[2]: C-Tick mark

Thanks for the word, Dave. I will know not to rely on the printed material they supply, then. Sic transit tyrannosaurus, right? Cortland __ Reply Separator _ Subject: Re: C-Tick mark Author: Dave

Re: How the limits determined?

I will have to go back to my records, in which I have a copy of the FCC's NPRM setting up Class A and B limits, but as I recall, limits were established by reference to the response of radio and television users to known levels of radio noise. Also, impulses of known energy and PRF

Re: X-ray transparency info please

Heber, I have zero experience or training in X-ray technology (aside form what's in the physics books about Coolidge tubes) but I'd think you could quantify transparency as 10 log P1/P2 where P1 is tube power needed for a given flux

Re[2]: Measurement Uncertainty

Tony, Radiated immunity tests set up a situation where only the unloaded field is known. You're correct we cannot know for sure what is actually getting into the EUT. If we had to know what current was actually entering the ports we would need to monitor it

Re[2]: FCC Class A Label?

Part of the confusion, I think, is that the Rulemaking says labels shown replace existing labels, without clearly discriminating between Class A and Class B. It is not clear that the intent was only to replace the Class B label, although the text is contains actions evidently meant to qualify

Re[6]: Shiep rules

Chris, The blame for standards can be assessed everywhere. But you posted: ...how we stood by and let the power generating industry make the consumer responsible for the supply quality. The problem here is that the industry can't control what we hang on the line. Remember Tungar (TM)

Re[4]: Shiep rules

Chris, Here my natural cynicism comes out... In this business we all get cynical. The reduction in Electronic Fog in our universe is a secondary effect Here we disagree. CISPR-12 was based on actual interference tests using real people as subjects. The standard, which was

Re: LOW COST mesurement equipment. (Was Shiep rules)

Paul, I too have looked at consumer grade equipment with an eye towards EMI measurement. I have the ICOM R7000 (modified) and R7100, as well as Yupiteru 7100 and AOR AR8000 handheld scanners, plus the usual amateur radio handheld transceivers, and I have made some use of all of

Re[2]: Shiep rules

Well, how to answer this? I would say that I feel sympathetic to his particular problem, but I am not in favor of eliminating rules which exist to protect the rest of us from side effects of products they sell. Yes, stand ar ds can eliminate minor manufacturers, like the family computer

Re[2]: Shiep rules

While not losing sight of the reason why regulations exist, let's also remember that if we don't participate in making them, we can only complain afterwards about their impact. I have participated in the FCC's comment process on several

Re: Human exposure to microwave RF

Subject: Human exposure to microwave RF Author: doug_fra...@atk.com (Doug Frazee) at internet List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date:12/16/96 9:29 I am looking for documents that discuss safe exposure levels to radiated microwave RF energy in the 2-4 and 4-8 GHz frequency

Re: FCC Class A data vs. EN5502

Is the (FCC A) data package acceptable as being compliant with EN55022? That is, can I use that data set to support my claim of compliance with EN55022? I don't see why it _should_ be sufficient. For one thing, the conducted

Re: FCC Class A data vs. EN5502

... possible to FAIL the FCC limits but PASS the CISPR limits. The question then becomeswhat next? Can I still ship to US customers... Doesn't that answer the question for you? I really don't think you want

Re: wooden tables

Jim, I've used plywood, plastic and plywood/solid construction where I've worked with good results. Particle board -- in my opinion -- is NOT the best choice for anything that has to bear a load. You can easily

Re: EMI Compliance - Need to Re-Test

Rod, I think you will have to make sure your tests (to Class A) comply with the FCC Part 15 test setup (which differs somewhat from CISPR-22 -- see ANSI C63.4) and also include tests above 1 GHz if the equipment has clocks of 108 MHz

Re: PCI Video Card

Robert, My experience has been that separating logic ground from the D-sub shell on a plug-in card is not necessarily a good idea. When you evaluate this card, please check it not only on a system you know is a good performer for

Verses: EMI, RFI

The question duly asked, What meaning's then attached When one says RFI's on hand, Another's EMI is banned? And why two experts, old and wise, Cannot their terms in one comprise This thing on which they both must toil;