To English language standard experts,

How do you understand "specific part" and "specific range of parts" in last 
sentence in EN 50581:2012 Cl. 4.3.3 (a):
"Such declarations ... shall cover a specific ... part ... or a specific range 
of ... parts..."

According to:
- directives understanding of putting product on the market (not type but 
single piece),
- direct meaning of the words (as I fill them),
it looks that:
part = this one single part,
range of parts = some (specified) number of the same type parts.

If it is true I see problems with ROHS DoC.
If I buy 100pcs of 0603 1k resistors should I ask the supplier for sending me 
the declaration for specified range of these 100pcs ?
And the same for all 200 other types of elements ?

The other way of understanding is:
part = part type (resistor 0603 1k)
range of parts = range of part types (resistor 0603 from 1ohm to 10Mohm)

This looks more logical for someone trying to make ROHS DoC but:
If they wonted to say "part type" or "range of part types" they would certainly 
said that. As they didn't said that I think they had the previous understanding 
in mind.

What is the solution I don't see ?

Best Regards
Piotr Galka

-
----------------------------------------------------------------
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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
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]>

Reply via email to