Return to the archive index

Re: Implications for wearables

 From: Claudius Li <>
>On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Thomas Geer wrote:
>
>> Hmmn,
>> I remember, possibly incorrectly, that a f-cage will protect you from
>> standard EM interference, but not from an emp. The analogy was on the
>> order of stopping ordinary vs laser light source. I think
>> that lead and or stell shielding must be used to stop the pulse from
>> either a nuke or an emp gun. I guess it al depends on the strenght of the
>> pulse.
>> 
>I'm not sure either but I think an f-cage will work fine if it conducts
>well enough.

a faraday cage will work just fine, as long as you remember to cover
the windows too 8>

>> I don't think you are allowed to protect your electronics from emp's. The
>> standard FCC warning ...
>
>True, but I don't think there are any laws against shielding my house. If
>my electronics happen to be in that house...
>After all, elevators, tunnels, and some car bodies act as pretty good
>f-cages but it's not illegal for me to have my electronics while I'm in
>one of those.

The text on the back of my ricochet modem reads:

This device complies with Part 15 of the FCC rules.
Operation is subject to the following two conditions:
(1) this device may not cause harmful interference, and
(2) this device must accept any interference received, including
interference that may cause undesired operation.

The latter doesnt' say anything about preventing the interference in
the first place.  I think it's just a disclaimer against things like
cosmic rays over which we have no control.

   - Kevin

--
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to 
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org

From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty

Archive created with babymail