Sign up Calendar Latest Topics Donate
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Alex

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member
Registered:
Posts: 204
Reply with quote  #1 
Hello. Do you have any experience with the ˝new˝ standard? Are there any significant changes? Is it worth buying?
Curran919

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member / Supporter
Registered:
Posts: 599
Reply with quote  #2 
It does officially supercede 10816-1, however, until the supporting chapters come out, its not very useful. Chapter 1 of 10816 isn't used normatively, and this doesn't prescribe vibration limits either. It just gives the necessary background for the soon-to-be-published chapters 2-9. But unlike everything else in the world, standards don't really get cheaper the older they are.

The biggest change is that 20816 is essentially a merging of 10816 (stator) and 7919 (rotor). However, the Appendix B (now C) zone boundary range chart is identical. Not like it was ever useful in the first place. I remember going through the two of them together in 2016 and there were a few points where I thought, "about time they include that caveat," but otherwise not much revolutionary.
Alex

Avatar / Picture

Sr. Member
Registered:
Posts: 204
Reply with quote  #3 
Curran919, thank you very much for your info.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.