Victor L. Boersma wrote: > Doug, > What you call "compliance engineering" I call > "good design engineering". Basically, whether > it is a regulatory requirement or not, there > are certain things you have to do if you don't > want your equipment to disturb other equipment.
I disagree. What I call "good design engineering" is NOT "compliance engineering". From my experience, yours may be different and I'm not invalidating that. Many things can be done to make the the product "work" per the functional specification, but fail miserably in the lab. It has been my experience that only under pressure of a failure or a history of failures that "cost" the company money will they heed. True, there are techniques of simple board construction that will make a significant change in say S/N, and true also there are techniques to "good engineering design" that may overlap with compliance requirements, but that's where I draw the line. I've had to teach designers (good to excellent engineers I might add) of all sorts of experience proper board layout techniques for "compliance". Even after that I made sure I was a signatory foe releasing drawings of board layouts and other system drawings. Compliance engineering is exactly that - engineering. A compliance engineer is responsible for the engineering of the product for compliance. The designer is responsible for the engineering of the product for functionality. > No IEC-950 or CISPR-22 course will teach that. That is exactly what I didn't mean. But since you've brought it up, there are design requirements for a product in IEC-950 being a construction and performance standard (i.e. wires, pcb material, hi-pot testing, materials, grounding, user accessibility, minimum distances), but there are none in CISPR-22 being strictly a performance standard. > Given that standards are next in popularity to > cold wet toilet paper, I would never call the > course anything having to do with standards. > I certainly believe that somebody who wants to > be a design engineer, should have proper EMC > lay-out in his courses somewhere. There are none that I know as "standard" for required curriqula in a 4 year engineering program for a B.S. That you used the words "believe" and "should" tells me you know of none either. No? Again Victor, your experience is different. No argument. Mine is obviously very different also. No argument. ******************************************************* ------------------------------------------------------- The comments and opinions stated herein are mine alone, and do not reflect those of my employer. ------------------------------------------------------- *******************************************************
