time it will take to
accomplish it.
The time will pass anyway.”
Earl Nightingale
From: Ed Price [mailto:edpr...@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC,
etc,) Where?
The ARRL (
2-2606
> (913) 440-1540
> KB5UKT
>
> “Never give up on a dream just because of the time it will take to accomplish
> it.
> The time will pass anyway.”
> Earl Nightingale
>
> From: Ed Price [mailto:edpr...@cox.net]
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:21 AM
> To
om: Ed Price [mailto:edpr...@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
The ARRL (American Radio Relay League, the US national ha
[mailto:edpr...@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:21 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
The ARRL (American Radio Relay League, the US national ham radio club) has its
own shielded enclosure and EMI
-
From: CR [mailto:k...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 6:27 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
On 10/14/2015 10:25 PM, Ted Eckert wrote:
>
> It is fairly common to run into issues where on
On 10/14/2015 10:25 PM, Ted Eckert wrote:
It is fairly common to run into issues where one product causes
interference where it shouldn’t.
http://www.compliance-club.com/archive/old_archive/Bananaskins.htm
Do note that the archive only covers up to 2004. I've had occasion to
cite entry 3
On 10/14/2015 4:40 PM, Dan Roman wrote:
The other Brian wrote:
Does anyone have first-hand experience dealing with EMC failures in the field?
If you fail by 1db, are you dragged
through the mud, fined, banned, prosecuted, black helicopters circle your
house, masked men drag you out of bed in
of my
employer.
-Original Message-
From: Dan Roman [mailto:danp...@verizon.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 4:40 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
The other Brian wrote:
> Does anyone have f
The other Brian wrote:
> Does anyone have first-hand experience dealing with EMC failures in the
> field? If you fail by 1db, are you dragged
> through the mud, fined, banned, prosecuted, black helicopters circle your
> house, masked men drag you out of bed in
> the middle of the night? Or is
use, masked men drag you out of bed in the
middle of the night? Or is action taken only on severe non-compliances? What's
the likely scenario?
The Other Brian
-Original Message-
From: Pearson, John [mailto:john.pear...@polycom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 1:34 PM
To: EMC-P
rano Salsa Design Moderator
-Original Message-
From: dward [mailto:dw...@pctestlab.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 12:01 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
Actually, that is not exactly correct.
ly on severe non-compliances? What's
the likely scenario?
The Other Brian
-Original Message-
From: Pearson, John [mailto:john.pear...@polycom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 1:34 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CI
and delete the material from
any computer.
Thank you for your co-operation.
-Original Message-
From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]
Sent: Tuesday 13 October 2015 18:44
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC
uter.
Thank you for your co-operation.
-Original Message-
From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]
Sent: Tuesday 13 October 2015 18:44
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
All the issues being ra
-
From: Pearson, John [mailto:john.pear...@polycom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 10:34 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
Hello
If you are selling into the EU your DoC declaring to the harmonized std
icter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
Bingo. Safety and EMC standards have 'built-in' margins per committee members
that cared to converse with this plebian.
A supplier's margin is in internal policy, or is per your customer's spec, or
is per empirical
o: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
Thank you Gert! I was beginning to wonder if anyone would say it.
Gary Stuyvenberg
Sr. Electrical/EMC Engineer
thompsonconsultingservi...@yahoo.com
___
t.
Indeed, per Mr. Crane, why assume anything?
Brian
Sr Burrito and Ale Test Engineer
-Original Message-
From: Crane, Lauren [mailto:lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 9:44 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than leg
All the issues being raised regarding possible variability must be known to the
members of various standards committees. Does anyone know that the issues are
*not* taken into account when the committees set test levels? If standards are
followed, including any instructions regarding EUT sampling
r,
please notify the sender either by telephone or by e-mail and
delete the material from any computer.
Thank you for your co-operation.
From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Tuesday 13 October 2015 07:19
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter l
mission.no]
Sent: Tuesday 13 October 2015 07:19
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] SV: [PSES] Stricter limits than legal (CISPR11, IEC, etc,)
Where?
5-6dB margin.
Bring two samples to the test lab, and make a quick check that sample no.2 also
is within 6dB (yes, additional test
5-6dB margin.
Bring two samples to the test lab, and make a quick check that sample no.2 also
is within 6dB (yes, additional test costs may apply)
Repeat testing (quick scanning) after 2 years to check compliance. More often
if modified in some way.
This is not a 100% good approach, but i
22 matches
Mail list logo
