Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFI\]\s+Appliance\s+interference\s+and\s+approvals\s+$was\s+Sears\s+battery\s+charger\s+model\s+\#200\.71222$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFI\]\s+Appliance\s+interference\s+and\s+approvals\s+$was\s+Sears\s+battery\s+charger\s+model\s+\#200\.71222$\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [RFI] Appliance interference and approvals (was Sears battery charger model #200.71222) (score: 1): Author: "Cortland Richmond" <ka5s@earthlink.net>; Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 20:57:06 -0400; There are no FCC *emission requirements* for equipment used in appliances. Section 15.103 Exempted devices. The following devices are subject only to the general conditions of operation in Sections 1; /archives//html/RFI/2010-04/msg00025.html (11,977 bytes)
2. Re: [RFI] Appliance interference and approvals (was Sears battery charger model #200.71222) (score: 1): Author: "Christopher E. Brown" <cbrown@woods.net>; Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 20:12:38 -0500 (CDT); This I think is the big issue. Even 30 years ago what did these devices have, a few switches, maybe a motor or some heating elements. Ok, some switch and brush arcing. Now they all have an onboard co; /archives//html/RFI/2010-04/msg00026.html (13,626 bytes)
3. Re: [RFI] Appliance interference and approvals (was Sears battery charger model #200.71222) (score: 1): Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>; Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:56:48 -0400; You're confusing emissions with the certification requirement. Under Part 15.103(d), appliances are exempt from the certification requirement. Appliances are not exempt from the generation of harmfu; /archives//html/RFI/2010-04/msg00027.html (9,685 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]