In message <[email protected]>, dated Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Jon Francis <[email protected]> writes:
>There is confusion because a small clause What do you mean, 'small'? Size doesn't matter, in this context anyway. Your comment seems likely to increase, or even generate, confusion. >in the 2002 version states: "The use of existing measuring instruments >based upon the requirements given in IEC 61000-4-7 (1991) continues to >be permitted until the next revision of this standard". It can be >argued that this clause still applies, It VERY DEFINITELY DOES. Let there be NO rumours that it doesn't. The change from the 1991 to 2002 editions was to widen the measurement bandwidth by a factor of TEN times. No equipment manufacturer realised the implications; millions of products that operate without any problem on the network fail the '2002' interharmonic grouping test. All the electricity suppliers represented on the IEC committee are content for the 'grandfather' clause to remain until a satisfactory solution is found. Intensive work is being carried out continuously to find that solution. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK Help stamp out intolerance! - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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]>
