At the final stages of development of IEC 61000-3-2, TC77 WG1 responsible for the document made an editorial change without review by voting bodies. That change was to add the statement "This section is a Product family standard." With the exception of a few questionable characters leading WG1, no one thought of this as a product standard.
We have been at odds over this standard ever since. John P. Wagner Lucent Technologies, Bell Labs 11900 N. Pecos St, Room 2F58 Denver CO 80234 email: [email protected] phone: 303 538-4241 fax: 303 538-5211 > ---------- > From: Barry Ma[SMTP:[email protected]] > Reply To: Barry Ma > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 2:55 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics > > > Chris, > > I am impressed by your gentleman discussion manner. > > We all agree that the committee of EN 61326-1 has very solid reason to > exclude 3-2 & 3-3 for Class A equipment. If we had had the vote right we > might have done the same thing. > > Unfortunately 3-2 & 3-3 became Product Standards with very broad > definition. The rumor I heard is that these two standards were originally > drafted as Basic Standards. ... (There must be some esteemed members in > the EMC-PSTC group able to tell us what really happened.) > > If I have a piece of Class A lab equipment (referenced to EN 61326-1) with > current < 16A, I would rather test it for 3-2 & 3-3. Because I want to be > prudent and conservative for the best interest of my company, the same > attitude as you said: > > I don't want cause my company to be seduced by the "dark side" of > non-compliance. > > Thank you very much. > Best Regards, > Barry Ma > [email protected] > > ----------- > On Tue, 28 March 2000, "Maxwell, Chris" wrote: > > > Barry, > > > > You have a great point. It doesn't just apply to Information Technology > > Equipment. I apologize for using the term "ITE" loosely. > > > > I feel (don't know) that the lowering of the current limit from 16A per > > phase (one of the main differences between IEC 555-2, 3 and IEC > 1000-3-2,3) > > was aimed at the proliferation of ITE and consumer products. Someone at > IEC > > realized that there could be a cumulative effect of harmonic currents. > > However, the scope of the standards is very broad. It can be > interpreted to > > include anything that uses an electron :-) > > > > I felt that the commitee that wrote EN 61326-1 actually looked at the > > difference between Class A and Class B equipment within EN 61326-1 and > > consciously left the harmonics and flicker limits out of the Class A > > requirements. This was confirmed by Norm Provost's reply to the thread. > He > > participated in the writing and development of the standard. > > > > I think that you have a valid point in that EN 61326-1 treated EN > 61000-3-2 > > and 61000-3-3 as "Basic Standards" as opposed to "Product Standards". > I > > never considered that point of view before your email. But I want to > know > > more. > > > > Now that I have conceded that I used "ITE" incorrectly, could I get an > > explanation of what makes IEC 1000-3-2 and IEC 1000-3-3 a "Product > Standard" > > as opposed to a "Basic Standard"? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer > > GN Nettest Optical Division > > 109 N. Genesee St. > > Utica, NY 13502 > > PH: 315-797-4449 > > FAX: 315-797-8024 > > EMAIL: [email protected] > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Barry Ma [SMTP:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 12:40 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > > > Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics > > > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > Would you please prove that two product family standards 3-2 and 3-3 > are > > > only applicable to ITE? > > > > > > Thanks. > > > Barry Ma > > > [email protected] > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > > ------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > [email protected] > with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Jim Bacher: [email protected] > Michael Garretson: [email protected] > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: [email protected] > > ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: [email protected] Michael Garretson: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected]
