Re: [PSES] R&S FSP Spectrum Analyzer

Dear Group Members, I finally received the following information from R&S for the reason that FSP is not CISPR 16 compliant: " 1. The spectrum analyzer needs to have a CISPR-Average detector (linear average detector with meter time constant) to measure narrowband disturbance signals that are int

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

I disagree. The decision-makers leave the safety as well as the specific design to the experts. The decision-makers look at the bigger picture as to the features of the product, how it fits into the product mix, and other high-level stuff. They don't engage in the specific design and th

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

And not so cordially either! From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk] Sent: 06 March 2015 21:47 To: 'Bonsen, Robert' Subject: RE: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering Robert You have obviously "been there"! I sympathise, completely - I have too! John

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Does the guy at the top know what "risk tolerance" means in terms of safety? Personally I doubt that more than a very small proportion of them do because, to most of them, risk is measured in financial impacts, and thus the most important to them are meeting, or not, targets for sales and prof

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Isn't the guy at the top supposed to set Risk Tolerance?? Best Regards, John John Allen USA From: John Allen Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 2:35 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering And I’ve just tho

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

And I've just thought of "another BIG one" myself that we must all have encountered at some time: - The "guy in the middle" does not think that the "guy at the top" would "like" the possible outcomes of a risk assessment, what it could do to his own "prospects", and/or "I do what I'm to

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

In message <005201d05847$b60d6d80$22284880$@pctestlab.com>, dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015, dward writes: “Obvious things” – you mean like “Duh, this is a knife, if you run the narrow side over your hand you will probably bleed and need stitches or at minimum a band aide”, or “Duh, this is a hot cup o

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

In message <15713043.1425671644973.javamail.r...@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> , dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015, Cortland Richmond writes: I forwarded Dr Feynman's appendix !!! -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look fo

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Dennis Another BIG one – especially for consumer products – and remember that what is “obvious” to one person may not be to another. That is particularly relevant where the people doing the risk assessments – which means those involved in the design, development and marketing - don’t rea

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

And the BIG ones just keep coming - bring 'em on! From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com] Sent: 06 March 2015 20:08 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering A key contributor to the Columbia disaster was the method they used

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Dave You are almost certainly correct! (unfortunately, I was trying to finish putting my thoughts down in order to get some food and to wind down for the day!). Thus, add another BIG one to the rest! John Allen W. London, UK. From: Nyffenegger, Dave [mailto:dave.nyffeneg...@bhem

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

A key contributor to the Columbia disaster was the method they used to attach the insulating foam to the External Tank. They had changed it from the original method (which worked well) because it was not ³green² enough. The new technique satisfied the arbiters ³greenness² but it didn't work as well

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

“Obvious things” – you mean like “Duh, this is a knife, if you run the narrow side over your hand you will probably bleed and need stitches or at minimum a band aide”, or “Duh, this is a hot cup of coffee, don’t place in your lap, it might burn you.” ​ Dennis Ward This communication an

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

I forwarded Dr Feynman's appendix to the Rogers Commission report to someone involved in processes that would, if followed, rein in this kind of thing. I am not an optimist.Cortland Richmond-Original Message- From: msherma...@comcast.net Sent: Mar 6, 2015 12:16 PM To: k...@earthlink.net Cc:

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

You left off arguably the biggest reason, - What’s a risk assessment?; they don’t know they should be doing one. -Dave From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 2:14 PM To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Good evening My “ three pennyth” / “few cents worth” – for what they are worth J: Regardless of what product or system is under discussion, there is rarely (if ever?) a rationale for not doing relevant risk assessments - what may put some people off doing it, or doing it properly, could

[PSES] WEEE symbol

The symbol has (had) a black bar or date area to indicate that the product had been introduced after April in 2005, but I thought that the bar has now been removed. True/False? Thanks Gary McInturff Reliability/Compliance Engineer Esterline Interface Technologies Featuring ADVANCED INPUT, GA

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

“Risk Assessment” or in plain English – How many people have to get injured or killed before anything is done that should have been done in the beginning anyway. ​ Dennis Ward This communication and its attachements contain information from PCTEST Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and I

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Indeed very interesting and controversial issue. During the change of the messages was circulated very useful ideas and opinions which are resulted from long experiences. In my opinion the main aspect which need to act as a link between all these valuable inputs is the formation process of a Pr

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Mike,"...dismissal of identifiable risks..."Isn't this the main problem with Risk Assessment in general.   The people assigned to identify risks and catalog their risk values are almost always the same ones who design and built the product. The same goes for FMEA, and PFMEA.  The assignment of risk

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

In message <1114397781.7050411.1425662208729.javamail.zim...@comcast.net>, dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015, Mike Sherman - Original Message - writes: Re "...and dismissal of identifiable risks deemed conveniently unlikely to occur." This is a real issue in organizations, and was a key contri

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

'TANSTAAFL' format is from Heinlein's "Moon Is A Harsh Mistress", and is, as Mr. Woodgate notes, the literally correct acronym. The ' TAANSFL' format is from some of Friedman's stuff, where there are at least three forms of this acronym for (presumably) the same thing. While in this divergent

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Re "... and dismissal of identifiable risks deemed conveniently unlikely to occur. " This is a real issue in organizations, and was a key contributor to the Columbia space shuttle disaster. NASA's Columbia Accident Investigation Board's final report explores this contributor a lot. The repor

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

TANSTAAFL = There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch :-) Doug Nix d...@ieee.org +1 519 79 5704 > On 6-Mar-15, at 02:53, John Woodgate wrote: > > In message > .com>, dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015, Brian Oconnell > writes: > >> TAANSFL. > > Pardon? TANSTAAFL? > -- > OOO -

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

On 3/6/2015 2:56 AM, John Woodgate wrote: Making the designers responsible for the safety of the design (as opposed to the safety of what is shipped, over which they have no control) immediately eliminates any claim that it's not their problem and/or cramps their style. I'm not a Safety Engin

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Charlie That sort of wording is written into most of the existing, and all the NLF version, of the major Directives. Unfortunately, many "senior" people in many companies are concerned only with the "so designed" bit in order to get the DoC signed and the product onto the market, and then

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

Brian I'm not sure I quite understand your post, but I think I agree with you! However, my experience indicates that many companies - and even some very big ones! - DON'T always have adequate control of their sub-contract suppliers! Again, I'm not sure, but I think a lot of the issues come down

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

This is clearly written into the LVD: ANNEX I Principal Elements of the Safety Objectives for Electrical Equipment Designed For Use within Certain Voltage Limits 1. General conditions d) The electrical equipment should be so designed and manufactured as to ensure that protection against the

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

In message <20150306053546.6066326.83663@gmail.com>, dated Thu, 5 Mar 2015, Douglas Powell writes: Far too often, I have seen a dangerous design attempted and the person responsible for the design claims the safety department didn't do their job.   This if the company even has a departmen

Re: [PSES] Safety standards versus safety engineering

In message .com>, dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015, Brian Oconnell writes: TAANSFL. Pardon? TANSTAAFL? -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - ---