with the CENELEC
secretariat and is expected to go to vote in due course
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: February-04-14 12:38 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Conflict - cited standard vs. OJ standard
In message
023e01cf21ca
In message
b9e85dc3f0723c42b041f9ae6e37b3481cc...@003fch1mpn2-053.003f.mgd2.msft.ne
t, dated Wed, 5 Feb 2014, Harris, Kevin J (DSC)
kevinharr...@tycoint.com writes:
I have consulted with TC 72 (the authors of the EN 54 series)
It should be clarified that this is CEN TC72, not IEC or
In message 000a01cf2182$bfd4c090$3f7e41b0$@westin-emission.no, dated
Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Amund Westin am...@westin-emission.no writes:
ome of the standards in the EN54-series (fire alarm equipment / CPR -
Contruction Product Regulations) have reference to the EMC standard
EN50130-4. Not only the
Amund, everyone
The principle is that the primary harmonised standard (in this case EN 54)
sets the requirements, and the dated reference prevails over the edition
listed in the OJ. However if EN 50130-4 is applied directly in its own
right to a product, then the OJ dates are used.
The guidance
In message 00bc01cf2191$4d2ec900$e78c5b00$@co.uk, dated Tue, 4 Feb
2014, Brian Jones e...@brianjones.co.uk writes:
he principle is that the primary harmonised standard (in this case EN
54) sets the requirements, and the dated reference prevails over the
edition listed in the OJ. However if
no bearing (from an EMC point
of view) on conformity.
Kind Regards
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Brian Jones [mailto:e...@brianjones.co.uk]
Sent: February-04-14 5:10 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Conflict - cited standard vs. OJ standard
Amund, everyone
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Conflict - cited standard vs. OJ standard
Brian,
That guidance is not quite applicable here. Only EN 50130-4 is listed in the
OJ as an EMC standard and so can be the only standard used for presumption
of conformity. The EN 54 series is a product performance set
In message 023e01cf21ca$7b5915e0$720b41a0$@co.uk, dated Tue, 4 Feb
2014, Brian Jones e...@brianjones.co.uk writes:
OK, this is a problem with giving general guidance on a list such as
this! The guidance that I described works when the two harmonised
standards are harmonised under the same
8 matches
Mail list logo