Richard,
 
I can live with a couple of dB failure that is in the minutia.  What I am
talking about is a signature that can be broad band in nature and having a
class B product fail class A miserably.  This is just a blatant disregard for
the standards.
 
Mark J. Kirincic
mkirin...@houston.rr.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Stone, Richard A  <mailto:rsto...@lucent.com> (Richard) 
To: 'drcuthbert' <mailto:drcuthb...@micron.com>  ; 'Mark 
<mailto:mkirin...@houston.rr.com> Kirincic' ; Stone, Richard A (Richard)
<mailto:rsto...@lucent.com>  ; lfresea...@aol.com ;
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:03 AM
Subject: RE: OK, what's going on?

There has been an enormous amount of feedback
>from Dereks email this week. Including mine.
 
I am beginning to get the notion
this is all brand new to most of the people here..
it isn't..........going on for years...
were not going to change evolution,
we can gripe and complain....
 
best thing to do is our own diligence on our
product,..not censor someone elses...
 
what do you do to the company that passes site A
oats,then fails site B...go to site C?...best 2 out of 3?
 
think bill gates would care if he sold PC's?
and not just software...People who rely on word/excel and
other programs would care less about failing by a few db.
 
the FCC is in place....
they run it....we try our best....
Richard,
 


From: drcuthbert [mailto:drcuthb...@micron.com]
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:54 AM
To: 'Mark Kirincic'; Stone, Richard A (Richard); lfresea...@aol.com;
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: OK, what's going on?


What would NARTE say about certified EMC engineers and technicians signing off
on equipment that does not make the grade? It would be great if everyone and
every company handled the issue of EMC ethically. But since the world does not
always work this way.......I favor the idea of a fine for every unit that is
shipped from a lot that statistically fails. I.E. mandatory sampling (of boxed
and shipped units) and only a certain percentage are allowed to fail, etc.
Companies would then weigh the cost of compliance against the cost of
non-compliance. 
 
Devils advocate speaking now: But from the viewpoint of economics this would
of course add cost to every unit shipped. Is the additional manufacturing cost
to the public offset by any savings due to lower emissions and lower
susceptibility? Would society truly benefit from better EMC enforcement or
does this serve only the EMC community?  
 
    Dave Cuthbert
    Micron Technology
 
 

From: Mark Kirincic [mailto:mkirin...@houston.rr.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 8:53 PM
To: Stone, Richard A (Richard); lfresea...@aol.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: OK, what's going on?


To further clarify my point, all the major companies are guilty of this.  I
know of first hand information where a unit passed in Asia and failed here in
the states at the companies test lab, and they are forced by upper management
to ship the product anyway.  These companies are trying to get their product
out the door as cheaply as possible with little to no concern about the
consequences.  I have read in some of the responses that we should fine these
companies, that is a good point but that is only a slap on the wrist and a
chance most of them are willing to take.  
 
In my opinion, what really needs to be done is full accountability for failed
products that the company by having the company name made public at the FCC
and CE websites and trade journals.  Also have the companies pay for audits of
all the units that are in the country that fail to meet FCC and CE standards. 
What I am saying is to charge a flat fee per unit that fails.  Secondly, I 
would prevent them form selling into a market segment if the audit shows non
compliance of multiple units.  Have the company provide future proof of
compliance before shipping which will hurt them in their pocket book a lot
more than just a simple fine.
 
 
Mark J. Kirincic
mkirin...@houston.rr.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Stone,  <mailto:rsto...@lucent.com> Richard A (Richard) 
To: 'Mark Kirincic' <mailto:mkirin...@houston.rr.com>  ; lfresea...@aol.com ;
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: OK, what's going on?

Mark mentioned reports,
a paper trail...or is it?
 
Vendors doing the EMC/EMI ?,
who might a vendor be for say IBM or Dell?
would think the mfr'r would have an associate
there during testing like most of us do.
 
Seems it would be easy to look at the report,
>from which test lab did it,
are they accredited?  if yes,
then there shouldnt be any questions..
only thing I see, maybe Disparity,
as readings can be differnet from lab to lab.
 
these days its ship now...or not at all..
and barely passing for PC's, since its class B
may be enough for the PC companies.
Richard,


From: Mark Kirincic [mailto:mkirin...@houston.rr.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 8:55 AM
To: lfresea...@aol.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: OK, what's going on?


I guess now its my turn to put in my two cents.  The major reason that you are
having a hard time finding units that pass is that all these major computer
companies rely on their vendors to test the products to FCC and CE limits. 
Since the majority of these companies have suppliers in the Taiwan and China
all of these units pass due to pressure from the major computer companies and
the vendors themselves.
 
These major computer companies then try to legitimize it by getting copies of
test reports showing the units are in compliance.
 
None of these companies will report each other to the authorities mainly
because they can not guarantee that all of their products pass and they fear
retaliation.  Their philosophy is as long as we have this report we can sell
this product until someone catches us and then they go into a major scramble
to fix the problem that was uncovered.
 
The only way to reduce this is through FCC and CE random audits.
 
I have worked for several major computer companies in my 19 years of
experience, and they all share this philosophy. One former company was the
exception, they were deathly afraid of bad press and they went to great
extremes to make sure their products passed with adequate margin.
 
I will get off my soap box now.  
Mark J. Kirincic
mkirin...@houston.rr.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: lfresea...@aol.com 
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org 
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 2:05 PM
Subject: OK, what's going on?

Hi all,

This e-mail has been prompted because of a number of things that have all come
together. This may take a little reading, but please stick with it.

Last note... this is not intended to pick on any individuals, or organization,
but I do want to stir the pot.

I operate an engineering lab, helping clients harden their designs to meet EMC
requirements. In this particular instance, I was working for a small client,
on a card  that goes in the PC . In order to test I need a host PC. So, to
save money, the card maker supplies 2 clones.

Neither of the two PCs passed emissions testing with the card, in fact, above
100 MHz, they fail even the Class A limit: badly! So, before calling my
client, I pull his card, the PC is no different, I pull the monitor, then the
keyboard, then the mouse... No different.  I test just the PC chassis one at a
time. On their own, booted and then the peripherals removed. Not even close to
passing.

Disgruntled, I get my office PC... Fail. I get my kids PC.. over 20 dB over
the limit!

So, I think so much for clones... I buy 2 Dell ( sorry, no point trying to
hide names... ) desktops, both fail, quite badly. However, they have very
similar noise profiles...

Can 5 PC's all fail? I think my measuring system is set -up wrong. So I verify
this. I am within 1 dB of what I expect when I inject a signal from a signal
generator and account for antenna factors.

Here lies the question: why can I not find a PC that passes? Worse, since they 
don't pass, who is chasing them
down to enforce the requirements? I'm unhappy, because I am taking a clients
money to make him meet the requirements, when it seems no one else is.

Now, what's making this worse for me, is that I am an EMC Lab assessor. So, I
go to labs and make them jump through hoops so that they produce, as
consistently as possible, data the characterizes a product. Exercises, like
those performed by USCEL, show that labs can have very consistent results.
Anyone that stands up and says EMC is not a field where consistency can be
achieved, should not be in the compliance business: please close your lab. So
if the test are consistent, why the HUGE variations?

In the 20+ labs I have assessed, I feel that almost every one had an ethical
approach. Ironically, I felt that the bigger companies I visited like HP and
Intel were exceptional: both ethically and technically. The rest of the labs
were between good to very good. So cheating is unlikely..

I have now spent about 60 man-hours looking for a PC that passes FCC Class B
emissions. Something that I should just be able to go to the store and get. As
yet, I have no PC. Our field, it appears, is not a level playing field. It
appears more like a rugby game in which we have no referee!

So why are there no fines being levied? Especially since it seems I can find
non-compliant products everywhere! Is the self policing approach out of
control?

I intend to take this up with the FCC. Is there anyone out there that is
supportive of this action ( which means you must be doing things right.. )? Am
I wasting my time ( in which case if this is all lip service... why should we
even test!!!! )? Or am I missing something ( I listen to 2 by 4's )?

Derek Walton
Owner of an EMC Lab
EMC Lab Assessor
NARTE EMC Engineer
30 years of EMC experience 


Reply via email to