Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Pi-L

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Pi-L
From: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick)
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 10:01:17 +0100
Carl says:

>Maybe Im missing something but I fail to see any difference in the
>ability to attenuate harmonics on 160/80 than 40/20 or other bands. 

If I understand you correctly, Carl, you're saying that if you need a Pi-L
for harmonic suppression on 160/80, you need it for the other bands. AGREED!

As far as FCC interpretation goes, that's another thing. A certain VERY well
known far eastern laptop manufacturer sells devices that totally fail FCC
Class B requirements, despite the label. We found this while doing type
approval on our Wireless LAN modules. When we approached them (XXXXXXX
America), they said it wasn't their problem, and they weren't prepared to do
anything about it. I wanted to take the matter up with the FCC, but certain
people in the company felt it was better to let sleeping dogs lie, as we
only had the evidence of one device, and the FCC would need evidence of
several devices failing before they could/would act.

In Europe, it's very similar, but for EMC, the idea is that 80% of
production should pass. Proving this gets so messy that people tend to make
sure, especially in Germany.

73

Peter G3RZP

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [AMPS] pi-l, Peter Chadwick
    • [AMPS] Pi-L, Peter Chadwick <=