In message <003501c89c2e$045001c0$0201a8c0@Pickard1>, dated Fri, 11 Apr 2008, "Ron Pickard, RPQ" <[email protected]> writes:
>The question was "What does the "or in part" portion of this statement >actually mean and how could it be interpreted?" There is no obligation to carry out any tests, and compliance can often be assured without carrying out some tests. A simple example is that you obviously do not need to test a purely resistive heater or an incandescent lamp for mains harmonic emissions (EN 61000-3-2) or flicker (EN 61000-3-3), but you might need to measure the inrush current of the heater (also EN 61000-3-3) in some cases. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Murphy's Law has now been officially re-named The Certainty Principle 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
