In message <C16858ED90BCC74686D26F1CFBFC00EA5EB35E@exchange>, dated Wed, 11 Apr 2007, [email protected] writes:
>Can any one comment on whether the following semi-recent amendments >made significant changes to the test methods and/or limits of their >original standards? > >Amendment A2: 2002 to EN 55014-1:2000 > >and > >Amendment A1:2001 to EN 61000-3-3:1995 The only 'safe' answer is 'yes' to both, but it might just happen that your particular product isn't affected. In the case of EN 61000-3-3, the amendment includes significant clarification of the standard, especially in respect of requirements and test methods for inrush current. You might think from reading the unamended version that inrush current isn't covered, but it is. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
