The talk is centered around safety because this is a safety discussion group.
Answering to many threads recently, I must comment on your statement: "> Safety specs are construction and performance. > They tell you what to do. No secret there." IMHO, with any luck and a lot of > work, safety standards in the future will not dictate construction and will > therefore allow real engineers to solve real problems by using their minds > instead of being trained (as opposed to being educated) to do things which > have been done blindly for years. And thus you have my half of the comments I will submit to this group this year. Please keep up the discussions - this forum may be THE BEST TOOL TO EDUCATE SAFETY PROFESSIONALS! I strongly agree with your statement about keeping it in the box. Regards, Ed Eckert, Nortel "Opinions here are the only things that I alone own; my wife owns the rest and she is working on my opinions" Doug McKean wrote: > > ----- E X T E R N A L L Y O R I G I N A T E D M E S S A G E ----- > > Why is the talk centered around safety? > > Safety specs are construction and performance. > They tell you what to do. No secret there. > > Emissions specs are performance specs. They say nothing > about construction. Only one course I've seen for emi/emc > offered at a school was a graduate class one semester. > > Even still, some things some people call 'fixes' have been > 11th hour gasket/ferrite panic fixes as the primary emi > control procedure. In fact, starting out in the field of > emi/emc, all one can hope for to large extent are 'courses' > sponsered by gasket/ferrite people who want you to > improperly primary design so that you keep them in > business. > > ************************************************************ > ------------------------------------------------------------ > The comments and opinions stated herein are mine alone, > and do not reflect those of my employer. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ************************************************************