Hmmm, Interesting point. I agree with Ken's assesment for the most part. Setting a minimum level for marketability levels the playing field (which governments like). But they lend the same customer credibility to the minimally compliant as the super compliant (which consumers may or may not like). It also lessens the incentive to innovate (which engineers hate).
Perhaps a ranking system could be used similar to that used for crash testing automobiles. Any car that meets the government's minimum crash test rating can be sold. However, there are now "star" ratings given out for cars that meet and exceed the requirements. Anybody in the US who hasn't lived in a cave knows that the Ford Windstar has a "5 Star" crash test rating. It's screamed all over the TV in commercials about 25 times a night. There you have it, an incentive for not only meeting the standards, but beating it. Maybe a sliding scale could be created that tracks the state of the art (compliance wise). Equipment could then be certified as level 1, level 2 ... up to level 5 "5 Star" if you want. Then, companies that meet and exceed the safety, emissions or immunity standard could claim "5 Star emissions compliance" or "5 star safety compliance"... If the scale is adjusted from time to time; when a company improves compliance performance, they would then raise the bar for the rest of the world. Interesting discussion. Got to get back to the ball and chain Chris Maxwell | Design Engineer - Optical Division email chris.maxw...@nettest.com | dir +1 315 266 5128 | fax +1 315 797 8024 NetTest | 6 Rhoads Drive, Utica, NY 13502 | USA web www.nettest.com | tel +1 315 797 4449 | > -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Javor [SMTP:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:05 PM > To: Gregg Kervill; 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org > Subject: Re: Have we lost something? was John Woodgate - RE: New > EMC standards; now CISPR24/EN55024 query > > > My opinion only. There was a time when the reputation of a > manufacturer or > business in general was a very important part of the success of that > company, and the honesty and integrity of that company, extending to > high > quality products, was the major part of a good reputation. That is > part of > a free-market economy. The rationale behind immunity standards > (indeed, > gov't enforced emission standards) is that the free-market place does > not > work and it is more efficient to impose external political control. > This is > untrue a priori but becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: once you > impose > rigid governmental standards industry-wide, there is nothing to be > gained by > exceeding the standard performance and everything to be gained by > finding > ways to meet these limits in the most cost-effective way. In effect, > industry-wide standards tend to make what might have been a unique > product > into a commodity to be purchased from the lowest priced vendor. In > this > way, gov't imposed standards are are an assault on the integrity of > the > marketplace and ultimately justify their imposition by destroying the > integrity that previously existed, while destroying the perception of > individual integrity on the part of the consumer. Here is a simple > example > that works in the USA. Sometime in the 1930s the Federal Deposit > Insurance > Corporation was formed to insure bank deposits. Banks still like to > boast > about how "strong" they are, but for the average depositor the > strength of > the bank (the quality of their loans) is a moot point of little or no > interest. If the bank goes bust, they are insured by the Fed. One > bank > looks pretty much like another to the average depositor. > > ---------- > >From: "Gregg Kervill" <gkerv...@eu-link.com> > >To: "'John Woodgate'" <j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk>, > <emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org> > >Subject: Have we lost something? was John Woodgate - RE: New EMC > standards; > now CISPR24/EN55024 query > >Date: Thu, Nov 1, 2001, 9:20 AM > > > > > > > I agree whole heartedly with John's point.....And while deliberation > may not > > always be a bad thing, a lack of immunity in an industrial computer > must > > always be a bad thing, and very possibly a BAD THING! > > -- > > > > However it is not so much a lack of standards but a lack of will and > > commitment to Quality designs that I believe is the problem. > > > > Back in the dark ages - long ago - one of my design jobs was with a > company > > making industrial photo-electric controls. We checked out emissions > on all > > of our products using a LW/MW/VHF radio and a TV. We checked out > > susceptibility by wiring a BIG contactor as a buzzer and put x-y > caps > > between the open contact end of the coil and ground and neutral. IT > wiped > > out radios for about 50 feet! (But was only used sparingly maybe > less than > > 30 seconds a month) > > > > > > GOOD - meant the unit continued to function normally. That was my > EMC > > practice during the 1970's. Product Safety followed a similar > pattern.... > > > > > > Later I worked in a larger company that employed a few sages; > although they > > may have been a little past their prime in terms of innovation they > were > > wonderful mentors and ensured that we did not kill anyone with our > designs! > > In the same way that nurses protect patients from newly appointed > doctors. > > > > > > > > During the last 10 years the mentors seem to have be down-sized (due > to > > efficiencies) - Old Traditional (empirical) practices are displaced > - > > standards (safety and EMC) are seen as intrusive and an excuse to > design > > down to minimal requirements (at best) or as a challenge to the > integrity > > (dare I say manhood) of designers. > > > > > > During my 20 years in R&D I did some very dumb things and designed > several > > 'iffy power supplies - I know now that they are non-compliance but a > few > > escaped into the market place. > > > > Take away the mentors - allow companies to Self Assessment and Self > > Certification in Safety are will things get better or worse. Do we > need to > > direct a change of design culture? > > > > Is there a need for a recognized EMC or safety credential? > > > > DISCUSS....... > > > > > > > > > > Gregg > > > > Eurolink Ltd. -One Link-199 Countries > > P.O. Box 310 > > Reedville, Virginia 22539 > > Phone: (804) 453-3141 > > Fax: (804) 453-9039 > > Web: www.eu-link.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 Heald davehe...@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 Heald davehe...@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 Heald davehe...@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.
