Ethernet signalling evolution is interesting.Recent decades use differential
signals among other tricks.A clean differential signal, in theory, will not
have any CM component.Depending on the driver and techniques, matched to the
transformer, one can get a great differential signal out of the tr
As I recall, the EN harmonized standards include Common Modifications which
tailor the standard to fit the national requirements for member countries who
insist on them. Many EN standards have no CM in their annex.
UL/CSA/IEC 61010-1 is an example of an international standard which contains
n
I wonder if it was a calibrated field strength measurement. Shouldn’t the
units be dB(uV/m) ? I won’t consider a -37 dBm signal at the input of the EMC
receiver a particularly strong signal from a nearby intentional radiator.
Ralph
From: Ken Wyatt
Sent: March 24, 2025 10:08 AM
To: EMC-PST
Ken, I am not surprised. RFID, EAS and other items run at those frequencies
Jim Bacher, WB8VSU
j.bac...@ieee.org or ja.bac...@outlook.com
https://www.trc.guru/
From: Ken Wyatt
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2025 1:08 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Tracking down interfe
As you mention, Patrick, I have also see some improvement in eye pattern
fidelity with the addition of common mode magnetics on a given pair,
which seems to make some sense as the core is dissipating CM energy that
tends to "close up" the eye.
Respectfully,
Brent DeWitt - AB1LF
Milford, MA
On
Thanks for the comments.
Passing along what I've found. From the available research, and reading
as many manufacturers' data sheets as I can find, the use of the extra
magnetics are non-standard. However, several places state that 12 core is
beneficial to SI and EMI for 10GbEnet, but not needed
What really struck me was how busy the 915 MHz ISM band was utilized in an
urban environment! See Figure 5 in the article. This was a swept measurement in
Max Hold mode over a period of about a minute and you can see the average
signal amplitude was 50 dBµV, with strong peaks from the drug store
Hi All,
I post quite a bit on LinkedIn, YouTube, and Odysee along technical lines. Here
is a link mu LinkedIn page and articles.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/doug-smith-ee/just scroll down past the
introductory stuff.
I also post technical videos to YouTube at: @dougcsmith or
https://www.y
AS Charlie says, that IEC standard is about methods of measurement, not
compliance or conformity. For Europe, you must look at the limits in the
latest EN, and in the one cited in the OJEU, if different.
On 2025-03-24 12:51, am...@westin-emission.no wrote:
Yes, sorry, Europe .. CE marking
*F
Yes, sorry, Europe .. CE marking
Fra: John Woodgate
Sendt: 24. mars 2025 13:22
Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Emne: Re: [PSES] IEC 62311:2020 - human exposure restrictions for
electromagnetic fields
Are you asking about Europe or somewhere else? For Europe, the IEC standard may
we
Amund
This is a "method" standard, as per the scope:
This document does not specify limits expressed by means of basic restrictions
and/or reference levels. Such limits are subject to the applied assessment
scheme, for example by means of regional limits.
NOTE 2 The assessment methods and crit
Are you asking about Europe or somewhere else? For Europe, the IEC
standard may well not apply, since there is a different EN. I suspect
that the IEC standard may also not apply in USA.
On 2025-03-24 12:15, am...@westin-emission.no wrote:
Am I correct, that the 2020-version does not really co
Am I correct, that the 2020-version does not really contain any maximum
allowed limits for human exposure, but talks about being classified as equipment or not?
I though we still could compare electromagnetic fields according to the
Table no. 2 from Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC
https://eur-
13 matches
Mail list logo
