RE: SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
Currently under vote the prA2:2001 on EN 50130-4 -Immunitytesting to 2000 MHz -replace ENV 50141:1993 reference by EN 61000-4-6 (no date). Regards, Gert Gremmen, (Ing) ce-test, qualified testing === Web presence http://www.cetest.nl CE-shop http://www.cetest.nl/ce_shop.htm /-/ Compliance testing is our core business /-/ === -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of am...@westin-emission.no Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 6:03 PM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: SV: SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 See attached file. From this document I feel that CENELEC from now on, want us to use EN61000-4-6 instead of ENV50141. or have I misunderstood the phrase Superseded ? Amund -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]På vegne av John Woodgate Sendt: 15. januar 2002 07:40 Til: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Emne: Re: SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 I read in !emc-pstc that am...@westin-emission.no wrote (in LFENJLPMMJB mhpeibnilaeclccaa.am...@westin-emission.no) about 'SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Mon, 14 Jan 2002: When CELELEC tells us that EN61000-4-6 (which also is a CENELEC document) replaces ENV50141, I can't see why we still should use it. When and where did CENELEC tell us that? OK, CENELEC have been busy with other things instead of upgrading EN50130-4. The procedure is very simple, and eliminating outdated references is not a low-priority activity. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. attachment: Gert Gremmen.vcf
Re: SV: SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I read in !emc-pstc that am...@westin-emission.no wrote (in LFENJLPMMJB mhpeibnilkecnccaa.am...@westin-emission.no) about 'SV: SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Tue, 15 Jan 2002: From this document I feel that CENELEC from now on, want us to use EN61000-4-6 instead of ENV50141. or have I misunderstood the phrase Superseded ? No, you have not misunderstood, BUT there is no provision in the CENELEC Internal Rules for a standard to be amended by putting 'superseded' in a Catalogue! It is this *confusing and contradictory information* that concerns some of us, and people (people with influence, I mean) are interpreting the situation differently: - If it says ENV5014x in the standard, that's what you must use; - All ENV5014x documents are temporary documents and have been superseded by the EN61000-4 series. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I read in !emc-pstc that am...@westin-emission.no wrote (in LFENJLPMMJB mhpeibnilaeclccaa.am...@westin-emission.no) about 'SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Mon, 14 Jan 2002: When CELELEC tells us that EN61000-4-6 (which also is a CENELEC document) replaces ENV50141, I can't see why we still should use it. When and where did CENELEC tell us that? OK, CENELEC have been busy with other things instead of upgrading EN50130-4. The procedure is very simple, and eliminating outdated references is not a low-priority activity. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I had to laugh when I saw the comparison between EMC and dentistry...How appropriate..!! From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk Reply-To: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:32:29 + I read in !emc-pstc that CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more... cet...@cetest.nl wrote (in ABEJKCKDFONELAIPOFHNOEILEMAA.cetes t...@cetest.nl) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Mon, 14 Jan 2002: If I would not advocate testing I would be a bad entrepreneur/ If I would recommend clearly unnecessary testing I would loose customers. I was *extremely* careful not to suggest otherwise. My concern is that, in some cases, the customers don't have enough knowledge to determine what is even 'clearly' unnecessary.' The same is true for dentists curing your dents. Pardon? (;-) Did YOU actually check every hole in your teeth really existed ? Yes, as it happens. Or did you never go to the dentist because no authority demands it. ;)) Also yes. I am lucky to have extraordinarily resistant enamel on my teeth, and have to visit the dentist only at intervals of many years, in spite of being encouraged by them to do so every six months. It is the difference between good and bad test houses to help selecting test suites for unknowing customers (!??!) that other otherwise choose for short time gains and long time losses. Again, I was careful to say that as well. And, as you should know, testing costs are important for very small companies only. I don't agree, not because you are necessarily wrong but because many larger companies themselves don't agree. Yes, my interests lie mostly with SMEs, but I have advised very large companies and they are by no means complacent about testing costs. Costs for EMC serial production etc. are neglect able if designed in, from the start. This is true for *large volume products*, like TV sets. But it is not applicable to a large company that makes, for example, a very wide range of professional-use products, each of which is made in quantities not exceeding 1000 or so. The gain from compliant equipment in terms of quality, product life time and need for service can easily be much higher then all testing suites I can imagine. I don't see how EMC conformity affects 'quality', life time and need for service. And there is much more to test than only EMC ! Of curse, safety has to be included, and safety conformity MAY affect 'quality' and 'need for service'. Product life-time is mostly determined by market forces (fashion and/or new versions of Windows) rather than technical end-of-life. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
SV: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
EN 50130-4 is a CENELEC document and I assume ENV50141 also was a CENELEC document. When CELELEC tells us that EN61000-4-6 (which also is a CENELEC document) replaces ENV50141, I can't see why we still should use it. OK, CENELEC have been busy with other things instead of upgrading EN50130-4. I cases like this, we have to be some kind of pragmatic . Amund -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]På vegne av Kevin Harris Sendt: 14. januar 2002 18:14 Til: EMC-PSTC (E-mail) Emne: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 Hello Robert, Clearly, for absolute correctness you follow the ENV because that is what is called out in the standard, and the section in EN 50130-4 on Dated references requires you use it. However, if you document your substitution for the more recent document I don't believe any enforcement agency would (or could) fault you. Best Regards, Kevin Harris Manager, Approval Services Digital Security Controls 3301 Langstaff Road Concord, Ontario CANADA L4K 4L2 Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378 Fax +1 905 760 3020 Email: harr...@dscltd.com -Original Message- From: Mavis, Robert [mailto:rma...@pelco.com] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 11:09 AM To: cet...@cetest.nl; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 So what do I do? Follow the EN 50130-4 : 1996 standard that states; The test apparatus procedure shall be as described in ENV 50141 : 1993, with the following modifications and clarifications taken into account. or do I substitute EN 61000-4-6 in place of ENV 50141. -Original Message- From: CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more... [mailto:cet...@cetest.nl] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 10:55 AM To: Mavis, Robert; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 It looks as if you are right, but in the case of any ENV version of a standard, this calling out is incorrect. Any ENV standard is NOT a standard. It was never meant to be used as a standard but temporarily. The EN version following it WAS. However, in this case the EN 50141 was not published, so the only alternative is the EN 61000-4-6. The ENV version, as it says itself, automatically becomes non-existent as soon as its successor is published. Regards, Gert Gremmen, (Ing) ce-test, qualified testing === Web presence http://www.cetest.nl CE-shop http://www.cetest.nl/ce_shop.htm /-/ Compliance testing is our core business /-/ === -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Mavis, Robert Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 4:55 AM To: John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 John, Even though the ENV is a pre-standard, if a Product Family Standard calls it out you must test to it. Am I not correct. Case in point, EN 50130-4 Product Family Standard for Alarm Systems calls out specifically ENV 50141 not EN 61000-4-6. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:29 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Chileshe chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk wrote (in 01c19a92.f4398e80.chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: I am testing to the generic immunity standard EN 61000-6-2 which refers to EN 61000-4-6 for immunity to conducted disturbances induced by radio-frequency fields. A query has arisen that EN 50141 is missing from my list of tests. Is my understanding correct that these two standards are essentially the same? I do not have a copy of either and currently awaiting delivery of EN 61000-4-6 which I have recently purchased. 50141 is an ENV (a 'pre-standard'), not an EN and is not called up by EN61000-6-2. Whoever threatened you with 'EN50141' is unaware of the facts. If it was a test-house, get another one! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new
RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
We test to EN50130-4 and we use EN61000-4-6 basud upon our understanding that ENV 50141 is withdrawn (see forward) and replaced by EN61000-4-6. Richard Woods Sensormatic Electronics Tyco International -Original Message- From: Mavis, Robert [mailto:rma...@pelco.com] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 11:09 AM To: cet...@cetest.nl; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 So what do I do? Follow the EN 50130-4 : 1996 standard that states; The test apparatus procedure shall be as described in ENV 50141 : 1993, with the following modifications and clarifications taken into account. or do I substitute EN 61000-4-6 in place of ENV 50141. -Original Message- From: CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more... [mailto:cet...@cetest.nl] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 10:55 AM To: Mavis, Robert; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 It looks as if you are right, but in the case of any ENV version of a standard, this calling out is incorrect. Any ENV standard is NOT a standard. It was never meant to be used as a standard but temporarily. The EN version following it WAS. However, in this case the EN 50141 was not published, so the only alternative is the EN 61000-4-6. The ENV version, as it says itself, automatically becomes non-existent as soon as its successor is published. Regards, Gert Gremmen, (Ing) ce-test, qualified testing === Web presence http://www.cetest.nl CE-shop http://www.cetest.nl/ce_shop.htm /-/ Compliance testing is our core business /-/ === -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Mavis, Robert Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 4:55 AM To: John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 John, Even though the ENV is a pre-standard, if a Product Family Standard calls it out you must test to it. Am I not correct. Case in point, EN 50130-4 Product Family Standard for Alarm Systems calls out specifically ENV 50141 not EN 61000-4-6. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:29 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Chileshe chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk wrote (in 01c19a92.f4398e80.chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: I am testing to the generic immunity standard EN 61000-6-2 which refers to EN 61000-4-6 for immunity to conducted disturbances induced by radio-frequency fields. A query has arisen that EN 50141 is missing from my list of tests. Is my understanding correct that these two standards are essentially the same? I do not have a copy of either and currently awaiting delivery of EN 61000-4-6 which I have recently purchased. 50141 is an ENV (a 'pre-standard'), not an EN and is not called up by EN61000-6-2. Whoever threatened you with 'EN50141' is unaware of the facts. If it was a test-house, get another one! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC
RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
Hello Robert, Clearly, for absolute correctness you follow the ENV because that is what is called out in the standard, and the section in EN 50130-4 on Dated references requires you use it. However, if you document your substitution for the more recent document I don't believe any enforcement agency would (or could) fault you. Best Regards, Kevin Harris Manager, Approval Services Digital Security Controls 3301 Langstaff Road Concord, Ontario CANADA L4K 4L2 Tel: +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378 Fax +1 905 760 3020 Email: harr...@dscltd.com -Original Message- From: Mavis, Robert [mailto:rma...@pelco.com] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 11:09 AM To: cet...@cetest.nl; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 So what do I do? Follow the EN 50130-4 : 1996 standard that states; The test apparatus procedure shall be as described in ENV 50141 : 1993, with the following modifications and clarifications taken into account. or do I substitute EN 61000-4-6 in place of ENV 50141. -Original Message- From: CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more... [mailto:cet...@cetest.nl] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 10:55 AM To: Mavis, Robert; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 It looks as if you are right, but in the case of any ENV version of a standard, this calling out is incorrect. Any ENV standard is NOT a standard. It was never meant to be used as a standard but temporarily. The EN version following it WAS. However, in this case the EN 50141 was not published, so the only alternative is the EN 61000-4-6. The ENV version, as it says itself, automatically becomes non-existent as soon as its successor is published. Regards, Gert Gremmen, (Ing) ce-test, qualified testing === Web presence http://www.cetest.nl CE-shop http://www.cetest.nl/ce_shop.htm /-/ Compliance testing is our core business /-/ === -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Mavis, Robert Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 4:55 AM To: John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 John, Even though the ENV is a pre-standard, if a Product Family Standard calls it out you must test to it. Am I not correct. Case in point, EN 50130-4 Product Family Standard for Alarm Systems calls out specifically ENV 50141 not EN 61000-4-6. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:29 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Chileshe chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk wrote (in 01c19a92.f4398e80.chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: I am testing to the generic immunity standard EN 61000-6-2 which refers to EN 61000-4-6 for immunity to conducted disturbances induced by radio-frequency fields. A query has arisen that EN 50141 is missing from my list of tests. Is my understanding correct that these two standards are essentially the same? I do not have a copy of either and currently awaiting delivery of EN 61000-4-6 which I have recently purchased. 50141 is an ENV (a 'pre-standard'), not an EN and is not called up by EN61000-6-2. Whoever threatened you with 'EN50141' is unaware of the facts. If it was a test-house, get another one! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send
RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
So what do I do? Follow the EN 50130-4 : 1996 standard that states; The test apparatus procedure shall be as described in ENV 50141 : 1993, with the following modifications and clarifications taken into account. or do I substitute EN 61000-4-6 in place of ENV 50141. -Original Message- From: CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more... [mailto:cet...@cetest.nl] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 10:55 AM To: Mavis, Robert; John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 It looks as if you are right, but in the case of any ENV version of a standard, this calling out is incorrect. Any ENV standard is NOT a standard. It was never meant to be used as a standard but temporarily. The EN version following it WAS. However, in this case the EN 50141 was not published, so the only alternative is the EN 61000-4-6. The ENV version, as it says itself, automatically becomes non-existent as soon as its successor is published. Regards, Gert Gremmen, (Ing) ce-test, qualified testing === Web presence http://www.cetest.nl CE-shop http://www.cetest.nl/ce_shop.htm /-/ Compliance testing is our core business /-/ === -Original Message- From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Mavis, Robert Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 4:55 AM To: John Woodgate; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 John, Even though the ENV is a pre-standard, if a Product Family Standard calls it out you must test to it. Am I not correct. Case in point, EN 50130-4 Product Family Standard for Alarm Systems calls out specifically ENV 50141 not EN 61000-4-6. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:29 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Chileshe chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk wrote (in 01c19a92.f4398e80.chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: I am testing to the generic immunity standard EN 61000-6-2 which refers to EN 61000-4-6 for immunity to conducted disturbances induced by radio-frequency fields. A query has arisen that EN 50141 is missing from my list of tests. Is my understanding correct that these two standards are essentially the same? I do not have a copy of either and currently awaiting delivery of EN 61000-4-6 which I have recently purchased. 50141 is an ENV (a 'pre-standard'), not an EN and is not called up by EN61000-6-2. Whoever threatened you with 'EN50141' is unaware of the facts. If it was a test-house, get another one! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy
Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Chileshe chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk
wrote (in 01c19cdd.70365940.chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk) about 'EN
50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Mon, 14 Jan 2002:
John, I found reference to a draft IEC801-5 and it appears it is the surge
immunity,
now IEC/EN 61000-4-5. Just so that I know where you're coming from, are you
saying
the reference (number) is completely wrong or that the draft never got to
see the light
of the day and should have never been called up?
I read your questions carefully, and decided that it's impossible to
answer them unambiguously. Won't you never fail to confirm your denial
that you are not a barrister adept at totally confusing juries, by any
chance? (;-)
Instead of trying to answer in cursive text, I'm making three
statements:
1. The reference is 'completely wrong' in the sense that no standard
exists with that reference.
2. The draft was never *carried through to publication*. However, a
product committee that considered that the surge test should be applied
to the product in question had very little option but to make a
qualified reference ('To be published' or similar words) to what was
*expected* to be the relevant Basic standard. What SHOULD have happened
was that a Corrigendum should have been issued when IEC61000-4-5 was
published.
3. There are important differences between IEC61000-4-5 and the last
draft of IEC801-5.
I hope that is clear.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero.
---
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org
Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old
messages are imported into the new server.
Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I read in !emc-pstc that CE-test - Ing. Gert Gremmen - ce-marking and more... cet...@cetest.nl wrote (in ABEJKCKDFONELAIPOFHNMEIGEMAA.cetes t...@cetest.nl) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Sun, 13 Jan 2002: As a member of the Dutch Committee EMC 2 I emphasize these topics at every occurrence of revision or amendment of these standards. Good, but you are no doubt aware that many complain but few take the effective action that you do. However, using the NB route NB route? a due diligence approach can be made, keeping both our customers and the spectrum authorities happy. You will also, I feel sure, be aware of the difficulties here. How do you know how far beyond the requirements of the standards you need to go, to make the spectrum-management authorities happy, but not delirious, at your customer's expense? How can your customer reconcile your recommendations for 'going the extra kilometre' with the fact that you gain financially if your recommendation is accepted? These matters are, of course, only of concern to conscientious test- house managers like yourself. Less responsible managers don't worry about them at all. After all, if the milking machine was tested using the clamp only, and it CAUSES interference, the authorities DO have all rights to demand additional measures to be taken. Yes, IF it causes interference. I wonder how likely that is. As ce-test works in the interest of our customers we decide with them that verification of those possible interference must be taken into account. It is not in *your* interest to carry out extra testing? That's in accordance with the philosophy of the EMC-directive also: requiring one to comply with the essential requirements, allowing to use harmonized standards as a convenient way to obtain the presumption of compliance only. Yes, many test-houses that advocate extra testing use the same argument. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I read in !emc-pstc that Mavis, Robert rma...@pelco.com wrote (in B2CC0E0F2C10D511B86600B0D068984202610968@localhost.pelco1) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: Even though the ENV is a pre-standard, if a Product Family Standard calls it out you must test to it. Am I not correct. AFAIK, the position is far from clear. The ENVs have been described as 'superseded' by ENs in the 61000-4 series, but do not seem to have been 'withdrawn'. Nevertheless, much of their content is now seriously out- of-date. It can just as well be argued that you must use the EN instead, because it is a 'better' standard, i.e. more certainly ensures that the 'essential requirements' are met. Case in point, EN 50130-4 Product Family Standard for Alarm Systems calls out specifically ENV 50141 not EN 61000-4-6. I know: see my other post saying that I am taking this up through BSI to get a general clarification from CENELEC. At least one standard calls up IEC801-5, which simply does not exist. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
RE: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
John, Even though the ENV is a pre-standard, if a Product Family Standard calls it out you must test to it. Am I not correct. Case in point, EN 50130-4 Product Family Standard for Alarm Systems calls out specifically ENV 50141 not EN 61000-4-6. -Original Message- From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:29 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6 I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Chileshe chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk wrote (in 01c19a92.f4398e80.chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: I am testing to the generic immunity standard EN 61000-6-2 which refers to EN 61000-4-6 for immunity to conducted disturbances induced by radio-frequency fields. A query has arisen that EN 50141 is missing from my list of tests. Is my understanding correct that these two standards are essentially the same? I do not have a copy of either and currently awaiting delivery of EN 61000-4-6 which I have recently purchased. 50141 is an ENV (a 'pre-standard'), not an EN and is not called up by EN61000-6-2. Whoever threatened you with 'EN50141' is unaware of the facts. If it was a test-house, get another one! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
Sorry for the confusion - I should have started a new thread. Let me try again. On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 21:20:44 +, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote: I read in !emc-pstc that Patrick Lawler plaw...@west.net wrote (in d86u3ukalc0klgvpifajq86e13bmrcf...@4ax.com) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: This is a more of a general question, since I would actually test to EN61000-6-2 (which references EN61000-4-6.) You can't do that for a UPS; the product standard takes precedence **whether you like it or not**. You can't choose to apply the Generic if a product standard exists. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I read in !emc-pstc that Patrick Lawler plaw...@west.net wrote (in d86u3ukalc0klgvpifajq86e13bmrcf...@4ax.com) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: This is a more of a general question, since I would actually test to EN61000-6-2 (which references EN61000-4-6.) You can't do that for a UPS; the product standard takes precedence **whether you like it or not**. You can't choose to apply the Generic if a product standard exists. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
Re: EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
I read in !emc-pstc that Chris Chileshe chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk wrote (in 01c19a92.f4398e80.chris.chile...@ultronics.co.uk) about 'EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6', on Fri, 11 Jan 2002: I am testing to the generic immunity standard EN 61000-6-2 which refers to EN 61000-4-6 for immunity to conducted disturbances induced by radio-frequency fields. A query has arisen that EN 50141 is missing from my list of tests. Is my understanding correct that these two standards are essentially the same? I do not have a copy of either and currently awaiting delivery of EN 61000-4-6 which I have recently purchased. 50141 is an ENV (a 'pre-standard'), not an EN and is not called up by EN61000-6-2. Whoever threatened you with 'EN50141' is unaware of the facts. If it was a test-house, get another one! -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
EN 50141 and EN 61000-4-6
Hi group, I am testing to the generic immunity standard EN 61000-6-2 which refers to EN 61000-4-6 for immunity to conducted disturbances induced by radio-frequency fields. A query has arisen that EN 50141 is missing from my list of tests. Is my understanding correct that these two standards are essentially the same? I do not have a copy of either and currently awaiting delivery of EN 61000-4-6 which I have recently purchased. Best regards - Chris Chileshe - Ultronics Ltd This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Healddavehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
