[comp.dcom.telecom] Cellular/Cordless Phones in Computer Room

PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter M. Weiss) (07/19/90)

Please relate your experiences in using either cellular or cordless
phones in a computer room, especially as it relates to any EMI that
affected the operation of a computing or electronic media device.


Pete Weiss, pmw1@psuvm or @vm.psu.edu
Penn State U

amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) (07/21/90)

In article <9939@accuvax.nwu.edu>, PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter M. Weiss)
writes:

> Please relate your experiences in using either cellular or cordless
> phones in a computer room, especially as it relates to any EMI that
> affected the operation of a computing or electronic media device.

I haven't tried one in an actual computer room, but our company
regularly uses cell phones from the floors of computer trade shows,
which are pretty rich in EMI from all of the computers and jury-rigged
cabling.  The biggest factor we've found is that it *really* helps to
have a 3W radio.  1.5W units don't seem to be as good at punching out
of the building to the nearest cell site.


Amanda Walker <amanda@intercon.com>
InterCon Systems Corporation

mrapple@uop.uop.edu (Nick Sayer) (07/21/90)

PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter M. Weiss) writes:

>Please relate your experiences in using either cellular or cordless
>phones in a computer room, especially as it relates to any EMI that
>affected the operation of a computing or electronic media device.

I have a Sun 2/170 in my living room and a cordless phone. The
"magnetic media devices" I use are built like an aircraft carrier and
are pretty immune to RF (as an example, my 300 MB hard disk weighs 165
lbs [70 kg or so]). However, depending on your location, it's nearly
impossible to talk on the cordless when its within about six feet of the
Sun. Computers use lots of square waves rich in harmonics.  Really
yucky.

Can't comment on cellular. I am a Ham, and the highest frequency I
deal with on a regular basis is 162.995 MHz. Everything from there
down gets trashed pretty good unless you use an outdoor antenna (which
is forbidden in my #&^@&#@^#*^*@!! condo complex) or cable (catv/cafm).


Nick Sayer 
quack!mrapple@uop.edu 
209-952-5347 (Telebit) 

Dan Flak <flak@mcgp1.uucp> (07/22/90)

In article <9939@accuvax.nwu.edu> PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter M. Weiss)
writes:

>Please relate your experiences in using either cellular or cordless
>phones in a computer room, especially as it relates to any EMI that
>affected the operation of a computing or electronic media device.

We have a whole office full of people using portable (cellular) phones
from any where in the building to "point blank" range. So far, no
problems. We have PC's, Macs, Vaxen, 3B2's, 386's ...


   Dan Flak - McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., 201 Elliot Ave W.,
Suite 105, Seattle, Wa 98119, 206-286-4355, (usenet: thebes!mcgp1!flak)

alans@hp-ptp.hp.com (Alan_Sanderson) (07/23/90)

In article <9939@accuvax.nwu.edu>, PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter M. Weiss)
writes:

> Please relate your experiences in using either cellular or cordless
> phones in a computer room, especially as it relates to any EMI that
> affected the operation of a computing or electronic media device.

We have computer systems installed in telco central offices along with
T1 carrier systems, D4 banks, DACS frames, and other network
equipment.  Some of our CEs are equipped with portable cellular
phones.  I have been called by the CEs from these locations, and
transmission quality has been quite good.  The computer equipment is
FCC Class B certified for RFI emissions (computer room environment -
not personal computer Class A).


 Alan Sanderson      Hewlett-Packard AMSO    alans@hpams0a.HP.COM
 US Snail:           1266 Kifer Rd. MS102F      MaBell: 408-746-5714
                     Sunnyvale, CA 94086        FAX:    408-746-5571
 Disclaimer:  <Standard Disclaimer Applies> 

alans@hp-ptp.hp.com (Alan_Sanderson) (07/23/90)

In article <9939@accuvax.nwu.edu>, PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter M. Weiss)
writes:

> Please relate your experiences in using either cellular or cordless
> phones in a computer room, especially as it relates to any EMI that
> affected the operation of a computing or electronic media device.

We have computer systems installed in telco central offices along with
T1 carrier systems, D4 banks, DACS frames, and other network
equipment.  Some of our CEs are equipped with portable cellular
phones.  I have been called by the CEs from these locations, and
transmission quality has been quite good.  The computer equipment is
FCC Class B certified for RFI emissions (computer room environment -
not personal computer Class A).


Alan Sanderson      Hewlett-Packard AMSO       alans@hpams0a.HP.COM
US Snail:           1266 Kifer Rd. MS102F      MaBell: 408-746-5714
                    Sunnyvale, CA 94086        FAX:    408-746-5571
Disclaimer:  <Standard Disclaimer Applies> 

peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (07/23/90)

In article <9971@accuvax.nwu.edu> quack!mrapple@uop.uop.edu (Nick
Sayer) writes:

> Can't comment on cellular. I am a Ham, and the highest frequency I
> deal with on a regular basis is 162.995 MHz. Everything from there
> down gets trashed pretty good unless you use an outdoor antenna (which
> is forbidden in my #&^@&#@^#*^*@!! condo complex) or cable (catv/cafm).

Have you tried the old slinky-in-a-soup-can technique? When you want
reception, "accidentally" knock the slinky off your windowsill so it
hangs down over the edge.


Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
+1 713 274 5180.   'U`
<peter@ficc.ferranti.com>

huopio@lut.fi (Kauto Huopio OH5LFM) (07/24/90)

In article <10011@accuvax.nwu.edu> flak@mcgp1.uucp (Dan Flak) writes:

> >Please relate your experiences in using either cellular or cordless
> >phones in a computer room, especially as it relates to any EMI that
> >affected the operation of a computing or electronic media device.

Well, I went to a local store once and made a "RF-Reset" to an Omron
cash register :) by talking at a NMT cellular phone operating around
450 MHz, with about five watts out.. The cash register wrnt totally
mad, printing random numbers, but it did NOT open the cash box.

NMT 900 is _nice_ !! I can take a phone from Finland and go to
Switzerland and the cellular works just fine.


                 Kauto Huopio (huopio@kannel.lut.fi) 
*US Mail: Kauto Huopio, Punkkerikatu 1 A 10, SF-53850 Lappeenranta, Finland * 
*WARNING! We have holiday season here, so be patient with my answers..      *

johns@scroff.uk.sun.com (John Slater) (07/24/90)

In article <9971@accuvax.nwu.edu>, quack!mrapple@uop.uop.edu (Nick
Sayer) writes:

>I have a Sun 2/170 in my living room and a cordless phone.

> ... it's nearly
>impossible to talk on the cordless when its within about six feet of the
>Sun.

The 2/170 is *old*! Our latest desktop machines (SPARCstation 1+ for
instance) leak very little RF. I think they're even shielded
sufficiently for use in residential areas, but I'm not certain. If you
upgrade to one of our modern machines you shouldn't have any problems.

I forget exactly which FCC regulations we comply with - they're not
really relevant in the UK. Contact your local Sun sales office for
more details.


John Slater
Sun Microsytems UK, Gatwick Office

darrel@prc.unisys.com (Darrel J. Van Buer) (07/25/90)

Computers and radios have an uneasy coexistence.  I have had problems
of mutual interference at home between a PC and my ham radio gear.
Most of the time, problems are minor (slight interference with radio
reception mostly), but on some bands my shortwave transmitter causes
the PC to act like someone is leaning on the keyboard.  They do share
a power circuit and cables from both share a rats nets of wires behind
my desk.  Problems will vary with distance, orientation, power levels
and operating frequency (since some poorly shielded wire in the
computer could resonate and absorb a lot of energy).  Some hams have
had problems with transmitters confusing the new computerized cars.

I would certainly avoid trying novel combinations of gear during
important computer activities.  Since power falls off rapidly with
distance, you can also move away before transmitting to reduce risks.


Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD; c/o Unisys; 5731 Slauson Ave, Culver City, CA 90230
(213)338-3760        KI6VY        darrelj@CULV.UNISYS.COM 

rpw3%rigden.wpd@sgi.com (Rob Warnock) (07/25/90)

In article <10066@accuvax.nwu.edu> alans@hp-ptp.hp.com (Alan 
Sanderson) writes:

| FCC Class B certified for RFI emissions (computer room environment -
| not personal computer Class A).

Sorry, you got it backwards (typo, no doubt):

FCC Part 15 Sub-Part J Class B Computing Devices is stuff used in
residential environments (PC's, answering machines, smart phones,
Teddy Bears that record/echo you, etc.); Class A is office/industrial.

A "Computing Device" as defined and covered by Part 15/J is *anything*
which contains a device for generating frequencies in excess of 10
KHz, except things covered in other FCC Parts (radios, microwave
ovens, etc.), and wrist watches (which are specifically exempted in
15/J, although I would assume they have the potential to emit
harmonics of 32,768 Hz, the most commonly used crystal).


Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510		rpw3@sgi.com		rpw3@pei.com
Silicon Graphics, Inc.		(415)335-1673		Protocol Engines, Inc.
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.         Mountain View, CA  94039-7311

julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey) (07/26/90)

In article <10066@accuvax.nwu.edu>, alans@hp-ptp.hp.com
(Alan_Sanderson) writes:

> The computer equipment is
> FCC Class B certified for RFI emissions (computer room environment -
> not personal computer Class A).

	The above statement is logical but not right. Equipment
meeting Class A requirements are Industrial/commercial. Class B covers
domestic.  The requirements for class B are far more stringent. The
FCC recommends that all equipment should strive for Class B
compliance.  The requirements of Part 15 Subpart J have recently been
revised.

	In reality you may find Class A equipment that causes less
interference than Class B equipment. You may also find equipment that
is supposed to be Class B that causes so much interference as to be
unusable. I usually get flamed mercilessly for saying this sort of
thing. Alas, no one ever wants to pay to challenge me at a test site.

	The reason for the above anomaly is that the model that passes
the FCC class B test is often not the model that goes into production.
All the capacitors, lumps of ferrite, bits of finger-stock etc that
were used to reduce emissions and meet compliance, often fail to enter
the production bill of material. Only a cynic would say this was
callous cost cutting. The other thing is that peripherals are usually
tested in an old IBM PC, well shielded and running with a nice slow
clock. That peripheral then is sold to put in high speed poorly
shielded clones.

	Just as a matter of interest, I have an apartment loaded with
a PBX, several CPUs, and sundry radios (both receivers and
transmitters). My main source of interference is a light dimmer in the
apartment building next door. When are the FCC going to do something
about light dimmers?


Julian Macassey, n6are  julian@bongo.info.com  ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian
N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice (213) 653-4495

russ@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (Russ Kepler) (07/28/90)

In article <10150@accuvax.nwu.edu> julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey)
writes:

>In article <10066@accuvax.nwu.edu>, alans@hp-ptp.hp.com

>(Alan_Sanderson) writes:
>[regarding 'good' class A and 'bad' class B]

>	The reason for the above anomaly is that the model that passes
>the FCC class B test is often not the model that goes into production.
>All the capacitors, lumps of ferrite, bits of finger-stock etc that
>were used to reduce emissions and meet compliance, often fail to enter
>the production bill of material. Only a cynic would say this was
>callous cost cutting. The other thing is that peripherals are usually
>tested in an old IBM PC, well shielded and running with a nice slow
>clock. That peripheral then is sold to put in high speed poorly
>shielded clones.

This isn't always the case.  In the one certification I worked on
there was an intense effort to add extra shielding to the serial and
parallel cables.  In addition the cables were cut to the exact length
to reduce the peak power radiated in those frequencies where we were
radiating the most.

Changing the cables or using cables with poor shielding would have
removed the B compliance.

But the real killer in a PC chassis is the single point ground on a
lot of the cards in the cage.  I've always wondered if you could DX on
CW with the power switch on a PC...


Russ Kepler -  Basis Int'l     SNAIL:  5901 Jefferson NE, Albuquerque, NM 87109
UUCP: bbx.basis.com!russ                                    PHONE: 505-345-5232