In message 
<08bfa5ada9462e4f96e4a31a270fc86b048f5...@usa0300ms02.na.xerox.net>, 
dated Thu, 25 Oct 2007, "Spencer, David H" <[email protected]> 
writes:

>I'm trying to determine whether to include measurement of interharmonics
>as a requirement for EN 61000-3-12.
>
>EN 61000-3-12:2005 does not include a dated reference to IEC 61000-4-7.
>Whereas the current version EN61000-3-2 listed in the OJ references
>IEC61000-4-7:1993.  The difference being measurement of interharmonics
>or not,  or as was explained a month or so ago on this list-server, the
>difference between a measurement band width of 50Hz and 5Hz.
>
>As I understand, when the referenced standard is not dated, you are to
>use the most current version.

Correct. That is why many of us want IEC to use dated references, as 
CENELEC does (now).
>
>To further complicate matters (in my mind),  IEC 61000-4-7:2002, Section
>7, speaks to a "Transitional period."
>
>"The use of existing measurement instruments based upon the requirements
>given in IEC 61000-4-7 (1991) continues to be permitted until the next
>revision of this standard.   ............."
>

It doesn't complicate, surely? It allows you not to include 
interharmonics. This is because their inclusion raises many more 
problems than was realised when the change of bandwidth was made. The 
concession will remain until a solution to all the unexpected problems 
has been found.

>SO...
>Hypothetically speaking,   let's say I'm testing  a product using
>measurement equipment that is designed to include or disable (equipment
>can test to both IEC61000-4-7:1993 and IEC 61000-4-7:2002)  measurement
>of interharmonics and a product fails to meet the requirements of
>EN61000-3-12.  However, when interharmonic evaluation is disabled the
>product meets the requirements of EN61000-3-12.
>
>What is the compliance status of that product?
>
It complies, because if it was tested with the 1991 instrument, it would 
pass..
-- 
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 
______________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to