I read in !emc-pstc that richhug...@aol.com wrote (in <126.349fcefb.2cea 1...@aol.com>) about 'IEC and EN standard relationships' on Mon, 17 Nov 2003: > I did read what you wrote, which was "There are always > differences".
Do you pick up on everyone else's posts like this, or are you affording me special treatment? > > If you look at what I wrote, you will see that I gave an example of > a standard where the CENELEC > version of the IEC standard has no > Common Modifications, no Special National Conditions and no 'A' > Deviations. So where are the differences that always exist? How > can such differences "be specific to one manufacturer"? OK, among the thousands of standards, you found an exception. A difference can be specific to one manufacturer if their product does not conform to a CENELEC variation, but their competitors' products do. This is not unknown where the unfortunate manufacturer is US-based. I have found one case myself, a few years ago. > > Remember that the original question referred to a manufacturer who > had lots of IEC standards but did not have the corresponding ENs. > > Personally, I would not make a statement that "There are always > differences" between and IEC > and CENELEC standard because it is > absolute - "There are often differences" I could except. Well that's you, and this is me. We aren't all the same. I'll settle for the *conservative* advice, that if your product must conform to a CENELEC standard, you'd better have that standard, not the underlying IEC standard. There is a 'due diligence' aspect. > > Of course, if by 'difference' you mean that in CENELEC a previous > version of a standard is not > superseded straight away whereas in > IEC it is then I do agree - and I covered this point in my reply. Yes, that is a good reason for needing the CENELEC standard. > > Hence, CENELEC standards have a Date of Withdrawal of conflicting > standards (commonly, previous versions of the same standard). From > a regulatory point of view, the Date of Cessation of > the > presumption of compliance with the Safety Objectives of the LVD for > a superseded standard (set by the Commission) is usually set to be > the same as the Date of Withdrawal (set by CENELEC). Yes. I don't see that it is relevant here. > > Given an identical product, I cannot see how a standard would be > applied differently to manufacture 'A' or manufacturer 'B'. I covered that above. The standard isn't applied differently: some products conform to the CENELEC standard, some don't. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to http://www.isce.org.uk PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! 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: Ron Pickard: emc-p...@hypercom.com Dave Heald: emc_p...@symbol.com For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
