Re: RFI/EMI/EMC Why
- From: RHF <rhf-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:14:24 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 31, 10:34 am, sw...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
-
- This link has the single best explanation of why
- the EMI radiation and emission levels were set
- at their current specifications.
-
- See page 2 of the PDF.
-
- <http://www.edn.com/contents/images/81915.pdf>
-
- Terry
-
Terry/SWLer,
EMI and Emissions: Rules, Regulations, and Options
<http://www.edn.com/contents/images/81915.pdf>
Wow 7 Pages and all too Technical for my little Brain
to Absorb in one Reading : So I will have to go back at
least 2~3 times to get a better understanding of it all.
Why not Tighten-Up the RFI/EMF/EMC Part 15 Regs by 1/3
for 5 Years; and then tighten that up by another 1/3 of that for
5 Years; with with a final 1/3 of those. Over the course of 15
Years you would end-up-with a new Reduced RFI/EMF/EMC
Level-of-Acceptance that would be 30% of the current Standard.
Allows for long term Product and Process Improvement over
a normal Manufacturing and Technological Change Cycle.
IMHO - Practically speaking for the average Consumer that
uses Over-the-Air TV and AM/FM Radio along with Cable TV
and Satellite TV/Radio the Standard has NOT Changed. The
only significant RFI/EMF/EMC Improvement for them has been
the migration to and the use of Quad-Shield RG-6 Coax Cable
from the old Single Shield RG59 Coax Cable.
~ RHF
.
-ps- Telamon be sure to Count* this as another one
of my 'Clueless Posts' -cause- IT IS ! ;-{
Plus Extra Credit for the : Cut, Copy and Paste Stuff. :o)
* Rec.Radio.Shortwave Newsgroup Readers :
Please I Need Your Votes ! -and- I Want Your Votes !
In this Weeks Race for the RRS "Clueless Troll" Award.
.
.
- References:
- RFI/EMI/EMC Why
- From: swler
- RFI/EMI/EMC Why
- Prev by Date: Re: (OT) : David -proclaims- Death to Fascists
- Next by Date: (OT) : John McCain - Does He Meet the US Constitutional Standard for US President ?
- Previous by thread: RFI/EMI/EMC Why
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
