RE: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread Nick Williams
At 9:03 -0800 14/11/03, Peter L. Tarver wrote: Thanks to the responders to my query. SNIP I know I must purchase some standards, but I'd like to minimize the financial hit. I'd appreciate opinions regarding these three standards in particular: EN ISO 4871:1996 [Acoustics - Declaration and

RE: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread Peter L. Tarver
I know I must purchase some standards, but I'd like to minimize the financial hit. I'd appreciate opinions regarding these three standards in particular: That's one...two...thr...FOUR standards...yeah four... (whudduh week) EN ISO 4871:1996 EN ISO 9614-1:1995 EN ISO

Re: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread John Woodgate
I read in !emc-pstc that Peter L. Tarver peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com wrote (in nebbkemlgllmjofmopleceimenaa.peter.tar...@sanmina-sci.com) about 'Machinery Directive acoustic requirements' on Fri, 14 Nov 2003: There are 23 standards containing acoustic requirements called out in the 14AUG2003

RE: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread Peter L. Tarver
Thanks to the responders to my query. There are 23 standards containing acoustic requirements called out in the 14AUG2003 list of harmonized standards. Some of these standards clearly don't apply in this particular instance (those related to ducting or workstations that would apply to the final

RE: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread Gary McInturff
...@conformance.co.uk] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 2:34 AM To: Peter L. Tarver Cc: PSTC Subject: Re: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements Peter, It's not quite true to say 'this is a nightmare' but it's certainly a pain to deal with! Over a period of years, I have ended up buying most

RE: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread Gordon,Ian
John et al Yes - ISO 37xx not IEC. Sorry for the confusion. Ian Gordon _ This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MCI's Internet Managed Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit

Re: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread John Woodgate
I read in !emc-pstc that Gordon,Ian ian.gor...@bocedwards.com wrote (in E1BA0362B28ED211A1E80008C71EA3060206FE62@z- 160-100-30-252.est.ibm.com) about 'Machinery Directive acoustic requirements' on Fri, 14 Nov 2003: The tests required therein will undoubtedly be based on the IEC 37xx series

Re: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread Nick Williams
Peter, It's not quite true to say 'this is a nightmare' but it's certainly a pain to deal with! Over a period of years, I have ended up buying most of the noise standards just so that I can answer this question, but frankly I'm still not much the wiser. Our experience is that you can use the

RE: Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-14 Thread Gordon,Ian
Peter You need to see if there is a relevant product standard which will detail the required uncertainty of measurement e.g. do you need a fully anechoic room etc. The tests required therein will undoubtedly be based on the IEC 37xx series and IEC 3744 in particular. My understanding is as

Machinery Directive acoustic requirements

2003-11-13 Thread Peter L. Tarver
Good day to all. In reviewing the list of harmonized standards called up to support a DoC to the Machinery Directive, several acoustic standards are mentioned. Many of these standards appear to address test methods. Going only by the titles of these standards, some test methods (for instance,