RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
At the final stages of development of IEC 61000-3-2, TC77 WG1 responsible for the document made an editorial change without review by voting bodies. That change was to add the statement This section is a Product family standard. With the exception of a few questionable characters leading WG1, no one thought of this as a product standard. We have been at odds over this standard ever since. John P. Wagner Lucent Technologies, Bell Labs 11900 N. Pecos St, Room 2F58 Denver CO 80234 email: johnwag...@lucent.com phone: 303 538-4241 fax: 303 538-5211 -- From: Barry Ma[SMTP:barry...@altavista.com] Reply To: Barry Ma Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 2:55 PM To: chr...@gnlp.com Cc: bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Chris, I am impressed by your gentleman discussion manner. We all agree that the committee of EN 61326-1 has very solid reason to exclude 3-2 3-3 for Class A equipment. If we had had the vote right we might have done the same thing. Unfortunately 3-2 3-3 became Product Standards with very broad definition. The rumor I heard is that these two standards were originally drafted as Basic Standards. ... (There must be some esteemed members in the EMC-PSTC group able to tell us what really happened.) If I have a piece of Class A lab equipment (referenced to EN 61326-1) with current 16A, I would rather test it for 3-2 3-3. Because I want to be prudent and conservative for the best interest of my company, the same attitude as you said: I don't want cause my company to be seduced by the dark side of non-compliance. Thank you very much. Best Regards, Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com --- On Tue, 28 March 2000, Maxwell, Chris wrote: Barry, You have a great point. It doesn't just apply to Information Technology Equipment. I apologize for using the term ITE loosely. I feel (don't know) that the lowering of the current limit from 16A per phase (one of the main differences between IEC 555-2, 3 and IEC 1000-3-2,3) was aimed at the proliferation of ITE and consumer products. Someone at IEC realized that there could be a cumulative effect of harmonic currents. However, the scope of the standards is very broad. It can be interpreted to include anything that uses an electron :-) I felt that the commitee that wrote EN 61326-1 actually looked at the difference between Class A and Class B equipment within EN 61326-1 and consciously left the harmonics and flicker limits out of the Class A requirements. This was confirmed by Norm Provost's reply to the thread. He participated in the writing and development of the standard. I think that you have a valid point in that EN 61326-1 treated EN 61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 as Basic Standards as opposed to Product Standards. I never considered that point of view before your email. But I want to know more. Now that I have conceded that I used ITE incorrectly, could I get an explanation of what makes IEC 1000-3-2 and IEC 1000-3-3 a Product Standard as opposed to a Basic Standard? Thanks, Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer GN Nettest Optical Division 109 N. Genesee St. Utica, NY 13502 PH: 315-797-4449 FAX: 315-797-8024 EMAIL: chr...@gnlp.com -Original Message- From:Barry Ma [SMTP:barry...@altavista.com] Sent:Tuesday, March 28, 2000 12:40 PM To:chr...@gnlp.com Cc:bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Hi Chris, Would you please prove that two product family standards 3-2 and 3-3 are only applicable to ITE? Thanks. Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
Chris, I am impressed by your gentleman discussion manner. We all agree that the committee of EN 61326-1 has very solid reason to exclude 3-2 3-3 for Class A equipment. If we had had the vote right we might have done the same thing. Unfortunately 3-2 3-3 became Product Standards with very broad definition. The rumor I heard is that these two standards were originally drafted as Basic Standards. ... (There must be some esteemed members in the EMC-PSTC group able to tell us what really happened.) If I have a piece of Class A lab equipment (referenced to EN 61326-1) with current 16A, I would rather test it for 3-2 3-3. Because I want to be prudent and conservative for the best interest of my company, the same attitude as you said: I don't want cause my company to be seduced by the dark side of non-compliance. Thank you very much. Best Regards, Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com --- On Tue, 28 March 2000, Maxwell, Chris wrote: Barry, You have a great point. It doesn't just apply to Information Technology Equipment. I apologize for using the term ITE loosely. I feel (don't know) that the lowering of the current limit from 16A per phase (one of the main differences between IEC 555-2, 3 and IEC 1000-3-2,3) was aimed at the proliferation of ITE and consumer products. Someone at IEC realized that there could be a cumulative effect of harmonic currents. However, the scope of the standards is very broad. It can be interpreted to include anything that uses an electron :-) I felt that the commitee that wrote EN 61326-1 actually looked at the difference between Class A and Class B equipment within EN 61326-1 and consciously left the harmonics and flicker limits out of the Class A requirements. This was confirmed by Norm Provost's reply to the thread. He participated in the writing and development of the standard. I think that you have a valid point in that EN 61326-1 treated EN 61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 as Basic Standards as opposed to Product Standards. I never considered that point of view before your email. But I want to know more. Now that I have conceded that I used ITE incorrectly, could I get an explanation of what makes IEC 1000-3-2 and IEC 1000-3-3 a Product Standard as opposed to a Basic Standard? Thanks, Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer GN Nettest Optical Division 109 N. Genesee St. Utica, NY 13502 PH: 315-797-4449 FAX: 315-797-8024 EMAIL: chr...@gnlp.com -Original Message- From:Barry Ma [SMTP:barry...@altavista.com] Sent:Tuesday, March 28, 2000 12:40 PM To:chr...@gnlp.com Cc:bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Hi Chris, Would you please prove that two product family standards 3-2 and 3-3 are only applicable to ITE? Thanks. Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
The standards have general applicability; however, the push by the European Power Industry for this standard has been to target switching power supplies as the culprit. Since most ITE use switching power supplies.. According the the scope, both 3-2 and 3-3 apply to virtually all electronic products. Mike Hopkins mhopk...@keytek.com -Original Message- From: Barry Ma [SMTP:barry...@altavista.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 12:40 PM To: chr...@gnlp.com Cc: bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Hi Chris, Would you please prove that two product family standards 3-2 and 3-3 are only applicable to ITE? Thanks. Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com -- On Tue, 28 March 2000, Maxwell, Chris wrote: . My understanding of the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 is that it is targeting Information Technology Equipment (ITE). Much of the equipment under EN 61326-1 is not ITE. . For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
Barry, You have a great point. It doesn't just apply to Information Technology Equipment. I apologize for using the term ITE loosely. I feel (don't know) that the lowering of the current limit from 16A per phase (one of the main differences between IEC 555-2, 3 and IEC 1000-3-2,3) was aimed at the proliferation of ITE and consumer products. Someone at IEC realized that there could be a cumulative effect of harmonic currents. However, the scope of the standards is very broad. It can be interpreted to include anything that uses an electron :-) I felt that the commitee that wrote EN 61326-1 actually looked at the difference between Class A and Class B equipment within EN 61326-1 and consciously left the harmonics and flicker limits out of the Class A requirements. This was confirmed by Norm Provost's reply to the thread. He participated in the writing and development of the standard. I think that you have a valid point in that EN 61326-1 treated EN 61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 as Basic Standards as opposed to Product Standards. I never considered that point of view before your email. But I want to know more. Now that I have conceded that I used ITE incorrectly, could I get an explanation of what makes IEC 1000-3-2 and IEC 1000-3-3 a Product Standard as opposed to a Basic Standard? Thanks, Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer GN Nettest Optical Division 109 N. Genesee St. Utica, NY 13502 PH: 315-797-4449 FAX: 315-797-8024 EMAIL: chr...@gnlp.com -Original Message- From: Barry Ma [SMTP:barry...@altavista.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 12:40 PM To: chr...@gnlp.com Cc: bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Hi Chris, Would you please prove that two product family standards 3-2 and 3-3 are only applicable to ITE? Thanks. Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com -- On Tue, 28 March 2000, Maxwell, Chris wrote: . My understanding of the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 is that it is targeting Information Technology Equipment (ITE). Much of the equipment under EN 61326-1 is not ITE. . For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
Hello Group, Although EN 61326-1 excludes harmonics for class A, and that is a product standard having a narrower scope then EN 61000-3-2, I still believe the en 61000-3-2 , or at least the harmonics issue should be considered for laboratory equipment. At first: The European commission has expressed there concern about standards deviating from the framework of generic standards, leaving out or invalidating certain aspects that were brought in cover a set of minimum requirements equipment in Europe should be tested against. In their opinion the requirements of EN 50081/2-1/2 should be the minimum requirements. I remember that, just because of this and other product committees trying tricks to escape the EMC testing framework, a guideline to the product committees (TC210 Sec 133 / 001 /008) was issued stating the above. (there may be newer versions available) The report mentioned that any phenomena deviating from the generic framework should be rationalized and argumented. Too much of these standards could jeopardize the situation that CENELEC has, being a private organization having the confidence of the EC for creating standards with almost legal power. Second: Any notified body could consider a piece of equipment without harmonics current testing and complying as being not in compliance with the Essential Requirements, and as one should know Ess. Req. have preference to product standards (giving presumption of compliance only). There motives would be the statement and report above. Too many product committees and standard writing individuals (read: companies) deliberately overlook the ER's, trying to escape from costly requirements. They risk severe measures against there equipment, possibly by competing companies that take the EMC directive serious. 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...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of Provost,Norm Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 5:39 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Cc: Maxwell, Chris; 'Barry Ma'; bkundew...@qtm.net Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Unfortunately I don't get to post to this list very often, but now find myself posting twice the same week! I simply want to emphasize the intentions of EN 61326-1 relative to harmonics. The standard was written in IEC of course, but many of the same participants are involved in the sister CENELEC committee. I participated directly in the writing of this standard (in IEC) and still participate in the ongoing maintenance. I can assure you with the highest confidence possible that the harmonics requirements were not overlooked. As you might imagine, there was a considerable and hot debate on the subject at the committee level, but the conclusions are indeed reflected accurately in the standard. The standard was also voted on and accepted by both the international IEC community and the European (CENELEC) community by a wide margin. The words of EN 61326-1 speak for themselves. The underlying reasons for the decisions are partly and correctly described in Chris Maxwell's posting. The question of hierarchical authority is perhaps not fully solved, so user beware. If put to the test today, users of EN 61326 have firm ground to stand on in my opinion. Best Regards, Norm Provost -Original Message- From: Maxwell, Chris [SMTP:chr...@gnlp.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 8:48 AM To: 'Barry Ma'; bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics I'd like to present a dissenting opinion on this one. I feel that, as the standard is written now, Class A test and measurement equipment complying to EN 61326-1 is exempt from the harmonics and flicker standards of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3. I don't feel as if it was overlooked by EN 61326-1. How could that be? It was specifically listed for Class B equipment (see Table 4, Page 14). I then assume that it was explicitly omitted for Class A equipment (see Table 3, Page 14). I just can't believe that the commitee working on the standard just plain forgot to include it in the Class A emissions requirements. My assumption is that they know the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 better than I. My understanding of the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 is that it is targeting Information Technology Equipment (ITE). Much of the equipment under EN 61326-1 is not ITE. I believe that there is a solid foundation for this reasoning. Harmonic and Flicker standards were written because equipment with poor power factors and or large in-rush currents were drawing disproportionately large peak currents. These fast moving, high amplitude current peaks can cause voltage
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
Hi Chris, Would you please prove that two product family standards 3-2 and 3-3 are only applicable to ITE? Thanks. Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com -- On Tue, 28 March 2000, Maxwell, Chris wrote: . My understanding of the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 is that it is targeting Information Technology Equipment (ITE). Much of the equipment under EN 61326-1 is not ITE. . For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
Unfortunately I don't get to post to this list very often, but now find myself posting twice the same week! I simply want to emphasize the intentions of EN 61326-1 relative to harmonics. The standard was written in IEC of course, but many of the same participants are involved in the sister CENELEC committee. I participated directly in the writing of this standard (in IEC) and still participate in the ongoing maintenance. I can assure you with the highest confidence possible that the harmonics requirements were not overlooked. As you might imagine, there was a considerable and hot debate on the subject at the committee level, but the conclusions are indeed reflected accurately in the standard. The standard was also voted on and accepted by both the international IEC community and the European (CENELEC) community by a wide margin. The words of EN 61326-1 speak for themselves. The underlying reasons for the decisions are partly and correctly described in Chris Maxwell's posting. The question of hierarchical authority is perhaps not fully solved, so user beware. If put to the test today, users of EN 61326 have firm ground to stand on in my opinion. Best Regards, Norm Provost -Original Message- From: Maxwell, Chris [SMTP:chr...@gnlp.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2000 8:48 AM To: 'Barry Ma'; bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics I'd like to present a dissenting opinion on this one. I feel that, as the standard is written now, Class A test and measurement equipment complying to EN 61326-1 is exempt from the harmonics and flicker standards of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3. I don't feel as if it was overlooked by EN 61326-1. How could that be? It was specifically listed for Class B equipment (see Table 4, Page 14). I then assume that it was explicitly omitted for Class A equipment (see Table 3, Page 14). I just can't believe that the commitee working on the standard just plain forgot to include it in the Class A emissions requirements. My assumption is that they know the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 better than I. My understanding of the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 is that it is targeting Information Technology Equipment (ITE). Much of the equipment under EN 61326-1 is not ITE. I believe that there is a solid foundation for this reasoning. Harmonic and Flicker standards were written because equipment with poor power factors and or large in-rush currents were drawing disproportionately large peak currents. These fast moving, high amplitude current peaks can cause voltage dips in the power grid and can cause harmonic currents (currents whose fundamental frequency is a multple of the power grid frequency) in capacitors of other devices connected to the same power grid. It's physical fact that these voltage dips and harmonic currents can hurt other devices connected to the power grid. The initial Harmonic and Flicker standards set by IEC (IEC 555-2 and 555-3) included equipment drawing more than 16A of current per phase because IEC thought that it took at least 16A of un-powerfactor-corrected (my own word) nominal current draw, per phase, to have a detrimental effect. It's my belief that the new standards (EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3) lowered the current draw limitation because of the cumulative effect of numerous pieces of ITE equipment connected to the same grid. For instance, in my office, we have 100 computers (ITE equipment). If all of these computers did not have power factor correction, we could have some serious harmonic current draw. EN 61326-1 covers a great deal of equipment that is not ITE equipment. As such, I don't think that the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 supercedes or overlaps the scope of EN 61326-1. The great thing about this forum is that, if I'm wrong in this, I hope that someone can point out my error and back it up with some tangible evidence. If I'm wrong, I'd really like to know. I don't want cause my company to be seduced by the dark side of non-compliance. Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer GN Nettest Optical Division 109 N. Genesee St. Utica, NY 13502 PH: 315-797-4449 FAX: 315-797-8024 EMAIL: chr...@gnlp.com -Original Message- From: Barry Ma [SMTP:barry...@altavista.com] Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 12:10 PM To: bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject:RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Hi Brian, Here is my $0.02. (1) As far as EN61326-1 is concerned, Class A is not required to pass EN61000-3-2 and EN61000-3-3. Because EN61326 committee treated these two standards as basic standards. (2) However, they are not basic standards. They are product standards. If your product falls under their definition the product MUST comply with them no matter whether EN61326 calls for them. (3) Therefore, we
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
I'd like to present a dissenting opinion on this one. I feel that, as the standard is written now, Class A test and measurement equipment complying to EN 61326-1 is exempt from the harmonics and flicker standards of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3. I don't feel as if it was overlooked by EN 61326-1. How could that be? It was specifically listed for Class B equipment (see Table 4, Page 14). I then assume that it was explicitly omitted for Class A equipment (see Table 3, Page 14). I just can't believe that the commitee working on the standard just plain forgot to include it in the Class A emissions requirements. My assumption is that they know the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 better than I. My understanding of the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 is that it is targeting Information Technology Equipment (ITE). Much of the equipment under EN 61326-1 is not ITE. I believe that there is a solid foundation for this reasoning. Harmonic and Flicker standards were written because equipment with poor power factors and or large in-rush currents were drawing disproportionately large peak currents. These fast moving, high amplitude current peaks can cause voltage dips in the power grid and can cause harmonic currents (currents whose fundamental frequency is a multple of the power grid frequency) in capacitors of other devices connected to the same power grid. It's physical fact that these voltage dips and harmonic currents can hurt other devices connected to the power grid. The initial Harmonic and Flicker standards set by IEC (IEC 555-2 and 555-3) included equipment drawing more than 16A of current per phase because IEC thought that it took at least 16A of un-powerfactor-corrected (my own word) nominal current draw, per phase, to have a detrimental effect. It's my belief that the new standards (EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3) lowered the current draw limitation because of the cumulative effect of numerous pieces of ITE equipment connected to the same grid. For instance, in my office, we have 100 computers (ITE equipment). If all of these computers did not have power factor correction, we could have some serious harmonic current draw. EN 61326-1 covers a great deal of equipment that is not ITE equipment. As such, I don't think that the scope of EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3 supercedes or overlaps the scope of EN 61326-1. The great thing about this forum is that, if I'm wrong in this, I hope that someone can point out my error and back it up with some tangible evidence. If I'm wrong, I'd really like to know. I don't want cause my company to be seduced by the dark side of non-compliance. Chris Maxwell, Design Engineer GN Nettest Optical Division 109 N. Genesee St. Utica, NY 13502 PH: 315-797-4449 FAX: 315-797-8024 EMAIL: chr...@gnlp.com -Original Message- From: Barry Ma [SMTP:barry...@altavista.com] Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 12:10 PM To: bkundew...@qtm.net; nprov...@foxboro.com Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Hi Brian, Here is my $0.02. (1) As far as EN61326-1 is concerned, Class A is not required to pass EN61000-3-2 and EN61000-3-3. Because EN61326 committee treated these two standards as basic standards. (2) However, they are not basic standards. They are product standards. If your product falls under their definition the product MUST comply with them no matter whether EN61326 calls for them. (3) Therefore, we found a conflict between 61326 and 61000-3-2/3 (although they are all listed in harmonized standards). How to solve the conflict? There might be two options. (A) Change 61326: Class A is also required to pass EN61000-3-2 and -3. (B) Change 61000-3-2/3: They are basic standards. (the same as 61000-4-X series). Best Regards, Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com -- On Fri, 24 March 2000, Provost,Norm wrote: The exclusion of harmonic test requirements in EN 61326 for equipment which need only meet Class A emission limits was a deliberate decision by the authors. It was not an omission by error. Many outside the committee now view this decision as a mistake. There is no revision in progress. Best Regards, Norm Provost -Original Message- From:Brian Kunde [SMTP:bkundew...@qtm.net] Sent:Friday, March 24, 2000 12:16 PM To:'IEEE EMC/PS Group' Subject:EMC: EN61326-1 Harmonics The EN 61326-1 family standard for laboratory equipment only lists Harmonic testing as a requirement for Class B environments. So Class A products are not required to pass the harmonics tests (flicker too). Is this going to continue as the rule in the future? Will this rule carry over to other family and generic standards? I had heard that omitting harmonic testing in a class A environment was a mistake and that it will be corrected on future versions of the standard. Can anyone validate or invalidate
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
All, I commented on this before, in essence saying that a new standards committee must be able to create a the standard they are charged-with and believe they are free to create requirements appropriate for the product familiy and that can differ as needed from other standards. Otherwise, why create new standards if the older standards are so entrenched as to kill variation? Why form a new committee if only to mimic the work of another? There are other important differences (relaxations?) between EN 61326-1 and the other new generation product family standards. I decided not to list them here because I'd suspect that somebody out there would complain and start another thread. Trying to compare different product family standards is doomed to find differences that annoys someone. Regards, Eric Lifsey Compliance Manager/Engineer National Instruments Please respond to Barry Ma barry...@altavista.com To: bkundew...@qtm.net, nprov...@foxboro.com cc: emc-p...@ieee.org (bcc: Eric Lifsey/AUS/NIC) Subject: RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics Hi Brian, Here is my $0.02. (1) As far as EN61326-1 is concerned, Class A is not required to pass EN61000-3-2 and EN61000-3-3. Because EN61326 committee treated these two standards as basic standards. (2) However, they are not basic standards. They are product standards. If your product falls under their definition the product MUST comply with them no matter whether EN61326 calls for them. (3) Therefore, we found a conflict between 61326 and 61000-3-2/3 (although they are all listed in harmonized standards). How to solve the conflict? There might be two options. (A) Change 61326: Class A is also required to pass EN61000-3-2 and -3. (B) Change 61000-3-2/3: They are basic standards. (the same as 61000-4-X series). Best Regards, Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com -- On Fri, 24 March 2000, Provost,Norm wrote: The exclusion of harmonic test requirements in EN 61326 for equipment which need only meet Class A emission limits was a deliberate decision by the authors. It was not an omission by error. Many outside the committee now view this decision as a mistake. There is no revision in progress. Best Regards, Norm Provost -Original Message- From:Brian Kunde [SMTP:bkundew...@qtm.net] Sent:Friday, March 24, 2000 12:16 PM To:'IEEE EMC/PS Group' Subject:EMC: EN61326-1 Harmonics The EN 61326-1 family standard for laboratory equipment only lists Harmonic testing as a requirement for Class B environments. So Class A products are not required to pass the harmonics tests (flicker too). Is this going to continue as the rule in the future? Will this rule carry over to other family and generic standards? I had heard that omitting harmonic testing in a class A environment was a mistake and that it will be corrected on future versions of the standard. Can anyone validate or invalidate this statement. Thanks, Brian --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
Hi Brian, Here is my $0.02. (1) As far as EN61326-1 is concerned, Class A is not required to pass EN61000-3-2 and EN61000-3-3. Because EN61326 committee treated these two standards as basic standards. (2) However, they are not basic standards. They are product standards. If your product falls under their definition the product MUST comply with them no matter whether EN61326 calls for them. (3) Therefore, we found a conflict between 61326 and 61000-3-2/3 (although they are all listed in harmonized standards). How to solve the conflict? There might be two options. (A) Change 61326: Class A is also required to pass EN61000-3-2 and -3. (B) Change 61000-3-2/3: They are basic standards. (the same as 61000-4-X series). Best Regards, Barry Ma b...@anritsu.com -- On Fri, 24 March 2000, Provost,Norm wrote: The exclusion of harmonic test requirements in EN 61326 for equipment which need only meet Class A emission limits was a deliberate decision by the authors. It was not an omission by error. Many outside the committee now view this decision as a mistake. There is no revision in progress. Best Regards, Norm Provost -Original Message- From:Brian Kunde [SMTP:bkundew...@qtm.net] Sent:Friday, March 24, 2000 12:16 PM To:'IEEE EMC/PS Group' Subject:EMC: EN61326-1 Harmonics The EN 61326-1 family standard for laboratory equipment only lists Harmonic testing as a requirement for Class B environments. So Class A products are not required to pass the harmonics tests (flicker too). Is this going to continue as the rule in the future? Will this rule carry over to other family and generic standards? I had heard that omitting harmonic testing in a class A environment was a mistake and that it will be corrected on future versions of the standard. Can anyone validate or invalidate this statement. Thanks, Brian For the largest MP3 index on the Web, go to http://mp3.altavista.com --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
RE: EN61326-1 Harmonics
The exclusion of harmonic test requirements in EN 61326 for equipment which need only meet Class A emission limits was a deliberate decision by the authors. It was not an omission by error. Many outside the committee now view this decision as a mistake. There is no revision in progress. Best Regards, Norm Provost -Original Message- From: Brian Kunde [SMTP:bkundew...@qtm.net] Sent: Friday, March 24, 2000 12:16 PM To: 'IEEE EMC/PS Group' Subject: EMC: EN61326-1 Harmonics The EN 61326-1 family standard for laboratory equipment only lists Harmonic testing as a requirement for Class B environments. So Class A products are not required to pass the harmonics tests (flicker too). Is this going to continue as the rule in the future? Will this rule carry over to other family and generic standards? I had heard that omitting harmonic testing in a class A environment was a mistake and that it will be corrected on future versions of the standard. Can anyone validate or invalidate this statement. Thanks, Brian --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org --- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. 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: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson:pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
