Colgan, Christopher [Harman Pro Group UK]
christopher.col...@harmanpro.com wrote (in
59FA3256BB317445884A09FF0576065E49B506@SCFTUKX1A) about 'Harmonics and
flicker', on Wed, 9 Nov 2005:
This begs the question, why are product family standards calling up
other standards that are listed in the
rehel...@mmm.com wrote (in
of5c335feb.f83c1c5e-on862570b4.003ece62-862570b4.003f4...@mmm.com)
about 'Harmonics and flicker', on Wed, 9 Nov 2005:
A standard can not remove the requirement for harmonics and flicker
testing because 61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 are family standards unto
themselves (all
This begs the question, why are product family standards calling up other
standards that are listed in the OJ? For instance EN55103-1 calls up
EN61000-3-2 3-3. Surely this is unecessary, as testing to these two stand
alone standards is required if following the standards route to compliance
Subject
RE: Harmonics and flicker
11:31
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: Harmonics and flicker
A standard can not remove the requirement for harmonics and
flicker testing
because 61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 are family standards unto
themselves (all
equipment equal to or less than 16 amps)..
Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory
A standard can not remove the requirement for harmonics and flicker testing
because 61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 are family standards unto themselves (all
equipment equal to or less than 16 amps)..
Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel: 651- 778-6336
Fax: 651-778-6252
Gordon,Ian ian.gor...@bocedwards.com wrote (in
e1ba0362b28ed211a1e80008c71ea30603387...@z-160-100-30-252.est.ibm.com)
about 'Harmonics and flicker', on Wed, 9 Nov 2005:
Is it necessary to show compliance with harmonics and flicker
requirements for products even though the product standard
I read in !emc-pstc that Alan E Hutley al...@nutwood.eu.com wrote (in
002501c3f9b6$ceac7a80$5a2e9fd9@Alan1) about 'Harmonics and Flicker
repeatability/reproducibility Round Robin' on Mon, 23 Feb 2004:
You may be interested in this extract from an article by Phil carter.
The complete article
I read in !emc-pstc that Hall, Ken ken_h...@hp.com wrote (in
a85be98e3961aa4398e3e704a78f5a93f...@cacexc05.americas.cpqcorp.net)
about 'Harmonics and Flicker repeatability/reproducibility Round Robin'
on Sun, 22 Feb 2004:
Well, I was hoping to hear from you, I have seen some of your comments
on
...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Harmonics and Flicker repeatability/reproducibility Round Robin
I read in !emc-pstc that Hall, Ken ken_h...@hp.com wrote (in
a85be98e3961aa4398e3e704a78f5a93f...@cacexc05.americas.cpqcorp.net)
about 'Harmonics and Flicker repeatability/reproducibility Round Robin'
on Fri, 20
/2004 9:32 AM
To: Hall, Ken; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Cc: Paul Wright
Subject: Re: Harmonics and Flicker repeatability/reproducibility Round Robin
Ken and EMC-PSTC colleagues,
Apologies if this is already known, but a great deal of work on
evaluating the inconsistencies of harmonic
I read in !emc-pstc that Hall, Ken ken_h...@hp.com wrote (in
a85be98e3961aa4398e3e704a78f5a93f...@cacexc05.americas.cpqcorp.net)
about 'Harmonics and Flicker repeatability/reproducibility Round Robin'
on Fri, 20 Feb 2004:
In the process of evaluating replacement equipment that meets the
Hi Ken --
Very interesting results! I'm glad to see that someone is actually checking
out lab equipment and test procedures in the real world, instead of just
looking for a consensus interpretation of the latest standard.
I hope you will be able to share your results with this forum when you
Ken and EMC-PSTC colleagues,
Apologies if this is already known, but a great deal of work on
evaluating the inconsistencies of harmonic and flicker analysers has
been done by Paul Wright of the UK National Physical Laboratory (NPL).
This work has been published in award-winning NCSL papers,
Sounds like a useful test.
Please let me know if there is anything Voltech can do to help.
A number of Voltech customer PM3000A-002 Power Analyzers have recently been
verified to 61000-4-15 by the NPL in the UK without problems. You do need to
have PC Software v3.10 and PM3000A firmware v2.20
Another fix is to run your system components off of a UPS.
Dave Cuthbert
Micron Technology
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 12:06 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: harmonics testing
I read in !emc-pstc that Brian Epstein
I read in !emc-pstc that Pettit, Ghery ghery.pet...@intel.com wrote
(in 42050df556283a4d977b111eb7063208138...@orsmsx407.jf.intel.com)
about 'Harmonics and conducted emissions' on Tue, 27 May 2003:
EN 61000-3-2, by definition, is unhelpful. End of editorial comment.
That's a bit harsh. IEC/EN
Neil,
The out of band emissions below 150 kHz are nothing new. I remember
having this problem when testing to the old German standards that had us
performing power line conducted emissions tests down to 9 kHz. The
noise off the input rectifiers would saturate the front end of a
spectrum
Neil Helsby wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the tendency of modern switch mode power supply
designers to save manufacturing costs at the expense of harmonic and
conducted emissions measurements?
It's not modern. I ran into it in the 1980's. Saving costs isn't _bad_,
mind; it's simply doing
I read in !emc-pstc that Neil Helsby nei...@solid-state-logic.com
wrote (in 20030527.10334...@mis.configured.host) about 'Harmonics and
conducted emissions' on Tue, 27 May 2003:
Has anyone else noticed the tendency of modern switch mode power supply
designers to save manufacturing costs at the
I read in !emc-pstc that Brian Epstein brian.epst...@veeco.com wrote
(in 41c71af75675d54bb97c2fadcae7f994260...@exchange.di.com) about
'harmonics testing' on Fri, 23 May 2003:
That raises and interesting question. The components are not in a rack or
case, they are tabletop mounted. I would
Engineer
Veeco Instruments
112 Robin Hill Rd
Santa Barbara CA 93117
805-967-2700 x2315
brian.epst...@veeco.com mailto:brian.epst...@veeco.com
From: ssel...@yorkemc.co.uk [mailto:ssel...@yorkemc.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 2:08 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: harmonics testing
I read in !emc-pstc that ssel...@yorkemc.co.uk wrote (in E19J8TQ-
000cv7...@anchor-post-31.mail.demon.net) about 'harmonics testing' on
Fri, 23 May 2003:
Brian/John
I notice that EN61000-3-2(2000) para 6.3 says Where individual
self contained items are installed in a rack or case, they are
Brian/John
I notice that EN61000-3-2(2000) para 6.3 says Where individual
self contained items are installed in a rack or case, they are
regarded as being individually connected to the mains supply. The
rack or case need not be tested as a whole. So, is it a rackfull of
systems, or a system
I read in !emc-pstc that Brian Epstein brian.epst...@veeco.com wrote
(in 41c71af75675d54bb97c2fadcae7f994260...@exchange.di.com) about
'harmonics testing' on Thu, 22 May 2003:
We make a product that has several components that plug into the power mains
including a computer, two monitors, and two
Rick:
Sounds like the harmonics are adding or canceling as the case may be. Check
to see if the offending harmonics are triplen or other harmonics. The high
harmonics are sometimes tricky in the way they behave. Harmonics are always
a function of the AC supply impedance. I would suspect
I read in !emc-pstc that Lesmeister, Glenn glenn.lesmeis...@hp.com
wrote (in 31891b757c09184bbfec5275f85d559502d1d...@cceexc18.americas.cp
qcorp.net) about 'Harmonics Testing for PCs' on Thu, 20 Feb 2003:
The problem with class A limits is that the higher your power draw, the lower
your
I read in !emc-pstc that rbus...@es.com wrote (in B47A89AEC4538744B9D94
bad7e78efc7458...@torino.corp.es.com) about 'Harmonics Testing for PCs'
on Thu, 20 Feb 2003:
As for the limits, we are using A. I understand that D is used
exclusively for ITE and has tighter limits.
You said that the
, Glenn; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject:RE: Harmonics Testing for PCs
The PDU (power distribution network) provides 4-5 outlets per phase. We
try to balance based on current loads rather than qty of cords. The
graphics processor draws significantly more current per cord than the
PCs
I read in !emc-pstc that rbus...@es.com wrote (in B47A89AEC4538744B9D94
bad7e78efc7454...@torino.corp.es.com) about 'Harmonics Testing for PCs'
on Thu, 20 Feb 2003:
During the Harmonics test (EN 61000-3-2) the system failed harmonics.
Testing all of the peripherals individually, they all passed.
and has tighter limits.
From: Lesmeister, Glenn [mailto:glenn.lesmeis...@hp.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 3:23 PM
To: Rick Busche; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Harmonics Testing for PCs
Rick,
You don't indicate how all of the other components are wired in the
power distribution
Rick,
You don't indicate how all of the other components are wired in the power
distribution system. If you are balancing all load on the 3 phases, but only
have 2 cords for the graphics controller, you must have something else picking
up the slack on the 3rd phase. Are there any other
I read in !emc-pstc that Mowbray, John H jm134...@exchange.canada.ncr.c
om wrote (in D74C689B5F7FD211887700E0292651EC08287669@exchange.canada.
ncr.com) about 'Harmonics - IEC/EN 61000-3-4 for equipment 16A' on
Wed, 16 Oct 2002:
If you read the info on the -3-4 document, it is a technical report
Jim
If you read the info on the -3-4 document, it is a technical report (the
committee could not get sufficient agreement to publish it as a standard)
and is provided only for information. Work is in progress on a standard
which is to have a different number when it is published.
John Mowbray
Sent by: cc:
owner-emc-pstc@majordoSubject: Re: Harmonics
measurement instrumentation
Hmmm...measured with a current meter, then measured with a wattmeter and got
different answersHarmonics out of phase? contain no power?
- Robert -
Robert A. Macy, PEm...@california.com
408 286 3985 fx 408 297 9121
AJM International
I read in !emc-pstc that Hans Mellberg emcconsult...@yahoo.com wrote
(in 20011218072701.24359.qm...@web13003.mail.yahoo.com) about
'Harmonics, WAS: 2 Phases in North America', on Mon, 17 Dec 2001:
A harmonic frequency does NOT imply a multiplier of, but one that
sympathetically resonates with the
3.0.6.32.20010301104158.007f5...@mail.cinepower.com, Enci
e...@cinepower.com inimitably wrote:
When is the next revision due and can you tell us anything more about it?
It will probably be published in 2003 or 2004 and become mandatory in
Europe 3 years later.
As yet there is no text other
At 21:33 28/02/01 +, John Woodgate wrote:
31891b757c09184bbfec5275f85d55950b0...@cceexc18.americas.cpqcorp.net,
Lesmeister, Glenn glenn.lesmeis...@compaq.com wrote:
Why should all equipment need harmonic control when only some equipment
cause problems?
That's what the Amendment A14 to
-Original Message-
From: Lesmeister, Glenn glenn.lesmeis...@compaq.com
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Harmonics
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:06:15 -0600
There may be a lot more to the story, but it sounds like the HRT is doing a
good job. It also sounds like
31891b757c09184bbfec5275f85d55950b0...@cceexc18.americas.cpqcorp.net,
Lesmeister, Glenn glenn.lesmeis...@compaq.com wrote:
Why should all equipment need harmonic control when only some equipment
cause problems?
That's what the Amendment A14 to EN61000-3-2 (also voted positive by a
majority of
4203d61676d0ae468aa5cea90a891c13235...@cof110avexu4.global.avaya.com,
Wagner, John P johnwag...@avaya.com inimitably wrote:
The European harmonics standard IEC 61000-3-2, and I call it European
because that is exactly what it is,
Indeed, that's because (and it is a matter of record)
This month's Electrical Review (a free trade magazine in the UK)
has just fallen on my desk, with this text and its associated
picture taking up about a fifth of the area of the front page - I'm
quoting it just for interest with regard to this thread!
Perfect Harmony? Power conditioning
McInturff[SMTP:gary.mcintu...@worldwidepackets.com]
Reply To: Gary McInturff
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 8:55 AM
To: 'John Juhasz'; 'Rich Nute'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Harmonics -- WSJ opinion.
Years ago when switch mode power supplies were really first
of318a279e.2188070d-on85256a00.006a3...@somers.hqregion.ibm.com,
Edward Jones ejjo...@us.ibm.com inimitably wrote:
John, in response to your attached thread you may want to review some of
the field surveys that are available from the Low Frequency Emissions
Industry Coalition (LFEIC) @
200102271645.iaa00...@epgc196.sdd.hp.com, Rich Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com
inimitably wrote:
Of course, no one has shown that unacceptable
overheating will actually occur.
Do you have any more such gems to contribute? What do you think happens
to the total current through a capacitor
To: 'Rich Nute' ri...@sdd.hp.com, emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
cc:
Subject: RE: Harmonics -- WSJ opinion.
Rich,
I would think that you knew that this would generate discussion?
One comment of Mr Hunter's that stood out in particular was the very last .
. .
. . . the only ones who benefit from
Hi John:
Of course, no one has shown that unacceptable
overheating will actually occur.
Do you have any more such gems to contribute? What do you think happens
to the total current through a capacitor when the applied voltage
contains harmonics? What happens to the I^2R
[mailto:jjuh...@fiberoptions.com]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 10:37 AM
To: 'Rich Nute'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Harmonics -- WSJ opinion.
Rich,
I would think that you knew that this would generate discussion?
One comment of Mr Hunter's
Subject: RE: Harmonics -- WSJ opinion.
Rich,
I would think that you knew that this would generate discussion?
One comment of Mr Hunter's that stood out in particular was the very last .
. .
. . . the only ones who benefit from the harmonic current emission
standard
are the European electricity
E15CFB09B1FAD311B74700D0B746BDC12CC814@EMAIL, John Juhasz
jjuh...@fiberoptions.com wrote:
I like to give the benefit of the doubt that the standard was created
based
on sound technical evidence.
It was based on INADEQUATE technical evidence, but not on NO technical
evidence. Also
200102262030.maa28...@epgc196.sdd.hp.com, Rich Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com
wrote:
Of course, no one has shown that unacceptable
overheating will actually occur.
Do you have any more such gems to contribute? What do you think happens
to the total current through a capacitor when the applied voltage
Hi John:
I must admit to several motives for posting my
message regarding the WSJ-E opinion article.
1. I wanted our subscribers to know that the
issue rated comment in the WSJ-E, a high-
level, respected newspaper.
2. I wanted our subscribers to know that the
technical
200102261711.jaa27...@epgc196.sdd.hp.com, Rich Nute ri...@sdd.hp.com
wrote:
With thanks to Ed Jones...
On Thusday, February 22, The Wall Street Journal Europe
published an interesting opinion on the harmonic current
emissions standard.
The opinion is by Rob Hunter, a lawyer and Chairman of
Rich,
I would think that you knew that this would generate discussion?
One comment of Mr Hunter's that stood out in particular was the very
last . . .
. . . the only ones who benefit from the harmonic current emission
standard
are the European electricity distributors. They avoid
We just went through the same thing a few months back. The confusion comes
from a clause near the end of 61326 which appears to exempt you from any
responsibility on harmonics and flicker if your product is non-domestic. I
know a number of EMC professionals who take that as the last word on
John,
We have bounced this subject around ad nauseam (to the point of sickness
for those not into latin).
As I understand it, the long and short of it is:
The writers of EN 61326-1 separated equipment into two classes. Class A and
Class B. They intended to exclude Class A equipment from
Woods
--
From: O'Shaughnessy, Paul [SMTP:paul_oshaughne...@affymetrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 8:31 PM
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: RE: Harmonics and the 600W limit
Hello List,
Is this a reasonable
: Gert Gremmen [mailto:cet...@cetest.nl]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 4:55 AM
To: Don Rhodes; 'Wagner, John P (John)'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org;
gunter_j_ma...@embraco.com.br
Subject: RE: Harmonics and the 600W limit
Steps are being taken at the highest level to publish A14 in the OJEC ASAP
...@avaya.com]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 7:10 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; 'gunter_j_ma...@embraco.com.br'
Subject: RE: Harmonics and the 600W limit
CENELEC prA14 passed amending EN61000-3-2 Class D to include only PC's,
monitors, and TV's. So, if your product is not in any of those categories
CENELEC prA14 passed amending EN61000-3-2 Class D to include only PC's,
monitors, and TV's. So, if your product is not in any of those categories,
you need not comply with Class D after the doa of the amendment.
Nevertheless, if your product is Class D, the Class D limits are the same
as those
The Commission has commented on this situation in their explanatory
document. A non-compliant product may remain in distribution virtually
forever if it entered distribution prior to the effective date.
Richard Woods
--
From: Joshua Wiseman
Joshua Wiseman wrote:
Hi group,
I have a question regarding Harmonics and Flicker of equipment greater
than 16A. I have a supplier who wants to know if he has to comply. I
of coarse led him in the right direction.
My question though is what is the DOW or DOC of the newer standards:
PM
To: cet...@cetest.nl
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Harmonics Testing
Gert,
Does this imply that the current revision will be withdrawn before it
becomes mandatory for CE-marking? If so, how does this affect CE-Marking
requirements in the 1-1-2001 to 1-1-2003 timeframe? Can you
Hello from San Diego:
Classifying products according to EN 61000-3-2 is
not straight-forward.
A product with the special waveshape (i.e., the
waveshape created by a rectifier-capacitor circuit
of a switching-mode or linear power supply) is
Class D.
A product with input current waveform
Actually I had the same question as what Randy raised hear. I felt confused
when trying to classify my EUT below 50W input power as Class A or Class D.
Thanks for the clarification made by Gert. I was wondering why I could not have
found the answer in Fig. 2 Flow-chart for classification of
month UAP
procedure:
acceptance 7 or 8/2000 Publication OJEC winter 2001. Transaction time
probably 2 years.
Regards
Gert Gremmen
-Original Message-
From: rehel...@mmm.com [mailto:rehel...@mmm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2000 11:32 AM
To: cetest
Subject: RE: Harmonics Testing
'emc-pstc' emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
cc:(bcc: Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US)
Subject: RE: Harmonics Testing
I suppose Randy you are concerned about the EN-61000-3-2 instead of the
EN 61000-3-3 which is concerned with Flicker testing.
Please Note that the 3-2 is currently under
Gert,
Is 3-2 applicable to power supplies of 50W in Jan 1, 2001 ?
Or is it still 75W in Jan 1, 2001, then 4 years later changed to 50W ?
thanks
Bruce
cetest wrote:
I suppose Randy you are concerned about the EN-61000-3-2 instead of the
EN 61000-3-3 which is concerned with Flicker testing.
Randall,
First, the standard is IEC (or EN) 61000-3-2, not -3. Article 5 defines
Class D products as those Equipment having an input current with a special
wave shape as defined in figure 1 and an active input power, P= 600 W,
measured under the test conditions given in the relevant clause of
The last paragraph is a typical example of particular American ingenuity.
Lovely, indeed.
-Original Message-
From: Paul McCoy [SMTP:pmc...@lsr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 1:25 PM
To: EMC and Safety list
Subject: Re: Harmonics (EN 61000-3-2) testing of EUT's 1KW
Kyle,
I have good news and bad news for you:
The bad news is that your equipment is defined in the standard and has to meet
the Class A limits of table 1 (which incidentally corresponds to the maximum
Class D limit for odd harmonics plus even limits). There is no hole in the
requirements for
Kyle:
Lots of questions. First the ITE product is professional equipment and it
draws more than 1 kW. Therefore there are no limits for professional
products over 1 kW, even after 2001. Class E was a proposal by the IEC
committee and it was not accepted and therefore not in the standard.
I
Kyle,
The UK EMC Journal, June 1999 edition includes a very good article on
harmonics and flicker, by Dr. Philip Slade. I have just checked, and
it is available on their web site.
http://www.emc-journal.co.uk
Regards,
Geoff Lister
From: Ehler, Kyle kyle.eh...@lsil.com
To:
From what I remember in High School and College, Fo (actually it was
omega-naught) was originally used to designate the resonant frequency
of an LC network. I would then surmise that Fo, over the years, has
been carried over to designate the primary frequency of oscillation.
Fourier series and
...@majordomo.ieee.org emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: 23 April 1999 18:07
Subject: RE: Harmonics
Jeeez, if we follow the convention of the harmonic being the being written
as FX (and the fundamental F0) where the subscript is some integer which
represents an harmonic
[SMTP:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 1999 9:12 AM
To: Robert Macy; Scott Douglas
Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject:Re: Harmonics
Robert and Scott:
I agree that the fundamental is the First Harmonic.
Now
On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 ffied...@granville.com wrote:
Hi,
The reason for this message is to point out that the Fourier Series approach
to waveform analysis and hence the harmonic content of signal waveforms is
based on the period of a signal from T0 to T1 were there is non-repeating
signal.
If you want to somewhat retain a square looking wave and
non-sinusoidal, then you must keep the third harmonic. The first and
third are essential. All subsequent odd harmonics can be filtered
aggressively, i.e. w/ a multi-pole filter. The even harmonics add and
subtract at the wrong places. You
Hi,
I should have responded to this before which was also in Robert Macy's
response.
The sinx/x frequency response which he talked about is the result from a
finite impulse signal repeated in x period of time. The square wave is a
special case were the pulse width is 1/2 of the period. In the
OOPS!
On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Robert Macy wrote:
Can't make a general statement. A perfect square wave of 50% duty
cycle is missing all the even harmonics. A perfect 25% duty cycle is
missing every harmonic that's a multiple of 4 with even harmonics higher
Hi,
Robert Macy is correct in that I had reversed the harmonic attenuation rate
for the triangle and square waveforms.
The reason for this message is to point out that the Fourier Series approach
to waveform analysis and hence the harmonic content of signal waveforms is
based on the period of a
Robert and Scott:
I agree that the fundamental is the First Harmonic.
Now, to muddy things up some more, how does all this discussion square with
calling the fundamental Fo?
;-)
Ed
From: Robert Macy m...@california.com
Subject: Re: Harmonics
Date: Wed, 21 Apr
The amount of harmonic content in a waveform is weather it is an even or
odd or somewhere in between function. A triangle waveform has all
harmonics decreasing in a 1/N function. A square waveform has harmonics
decreasing in a 1/(N*N) function. A perfect square wave (centered around
zero value
My two cents intertwined below ...
At 01:38 PM 4/21/99 -0400, Scott Douglas wrote:
Hi All,
Recently an interesting discussion came up about harmonics. A general
disagreement followed. We hope you all can offer some insight and perhaps
help us settle the question.
The question is numbering of
If the fundamental frequency is 200 MHz, the first harmonic is 200 MHz, and
the first overtone is 400 MHz.
-Original Message-
From: s_doug...@ecrm.com [mailto:s_doug...@ecrm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 1:38 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Harmonics
Hi All,
Recently
Hi group,
The answer and formula for harmonics is N*Hz. Hence, for the example, the
second harmonic is 400 Hz when N=2, third harmonic is 600 Hz is when N=3,
and so forth.
The amount of harmonic content in a waveform is weather it is an even or
odd or somewhere in between function. A triangle
In my excitement I mis-typed the standard! It should, of course, be
EN61000-3-2, not EN61000-3-1, for harmonics.
Bob
--
From: Robert F. Martin ITS/QS-Box
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Harmonics
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Monday, April 20, 1998 7:55AM
To (hopefully!)
Sorry that it doesn't include the spoken word but the following provides
the overheads shown at the above Harmonics/Flicker meeting:-
http://www.emisoft.co.uk/special/harmonics/index.htm
Regards Andy Griffin
__
EMiSoft Limited - Test and
Hi Brent.
You wrote:
We are currently looking for a user friendly - IEC1000-3-2/3 test system -
We am looking at both the California Instruments 4801iL integrated IEC AC test
system and the HP Harmonics System (all in one box test system - don't have
the
model number since the paperwork
90 matches
Mail list logo
