(replying even though I’m not a guru)


Hi Charles, hope all is well with you



Speaking from my own experience. Over the last four years of running a 
consultancy, pre-compliance and low cost test EMC laboratory I would (very 
roughly) estimate that around:



*       50% of products pass their desired radiated emissions limits without 
any modification

*       33% or less pass all of the applicable tests first time without 
modification



The major caveats and notes here are that



*       These figures are for customers products where the EMC performance is 
not known before testing. We do a lot of work helping people solve existing EMC 
problems but we are not counting this in these figures.
*       Most of my customers are smaller businesses that can’t afford to employ 
an engineer to just look after compliance. That job role is either split 
amongst several people or the engineer in question has to look after quality, 
manufacturing, sustaining, thermal, system, and everything else. Speaking as 
someone who has designed many products and systems in the past, trying to 
design for functionality whilst simultaneously considering best EMC performance 
is HARD. I use the metaphor of
*       The products that pass first time generally fall into one of three 
categories

*       Products that we have design reviewed before the design was finalised
*       Retests of products that have already been through our lab once
*       Products that are very simple in nature

*       Our hit-rate at being able to solve our customers problems is around 
90-95%
*       The “ones that got away” where we were unable to help deliver a 
compliant include

*       No action taken: Products where it was deemed by the manufacturer not 
economically feasible to modify the product (e.g. product going end of life)
*       No further communications from the manufacturer so we don’t get to find 
out what happened next (no news is good news, right?)



I would echo the sentiments of others on this thread regarding the need to 
design in compliance from the start.



One of the problems with the field of compliance is that it is too often 
“learned through experience in industry” and not explicitly taught. When it is 
taught at academic level it is often a surface treatment with a theoretical 
look at shielding or maybe crosstalk with no other practical context or 
background.



The split between industry and academia is one of the possible causes. Yes, 
there are exceptions to this but they primarily remain exceptions. I had 
discussions with a local university about some guest lectures on compliance and 
the theme of the response was “it doesn’t really fit into any of our modules” 
and “we can’t have it as an optional lecture as none of the students will 
attend”.



The number of times I hear “oh, thanks for that. No one has every explained it 
that clearly before” is worrying!



All the best

James









James Pawson

The EMC Problem Solver



Unit 3 Compliance Ltd

EMC : Environmental : Safety : CE + UKCA : Consultancy



 <http://www.unit3compliance.co.uk/> www.unit3compliance.co.uk  |  +44(0)1274 
911747  |  +44(0)7811 139957

2 Wellington Business Park, New Lane, Bradford, BD4 8AL

Registered in England and Wales # 10574298



From: Grasso, Charles [Outlook] <charles.gra...@dish.com>
Sent: 24 May 2021 15:47
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] What percentage of products pass first time?



Hello EMC gurus!



Calling all labs - In your experience how many products pass the Unintentional 
Emissions
test first time? ​





-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> >

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 
<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html>
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> >
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> >

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> >
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> >



--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Reply via email to