The talk is centered around safety because this is a safety
discussion group.
Answering to many threads recently, I must comment on your
statement: "> Safety specs are construction and performance.
> They tell you what to do. No secret there." IMHO, with any luck and a lot of
> work, safety standards in the future will not dictate construction and will
> therefore allow real engineers to solve real problems by using their minds
> instead of being trained (as opposed to being educated) to do things which
> have been done blindly for years.
And thus you have my half of the comments I will submit to this
group this year. Please keep up the discussions - this forum may be
THE BEST TOOL TO EDUCATE SAFETY PROFESSIONALS!
I strongly agree with your statement about keeping it in the box.
Regards,
Ed Eckert, Nortel
"Opinions here are the only things that I alone own; my wife owns the
rest and she is working on my opinions"
Doug McKean wrote:
>
> ----- E X T E R N A L L Y O R I G I N A T E D M E S S A G E -----
>
> Why is the talk centered around safety?
>
> Safety specs are construction and performance.
> They tell you what to do. No secret there.
>
> Emissions specs are performance specs. They say nothing
> about construction. Only one course I've seen for emi/emc
> offered at a school was a graduate class one semester.
>
> Even still, some things some people call 'fixes' have been
> 11th hour gasket/ferrite panic fixes as the primary emi
> control procedure. In fact, starting out in the field of
> emi/emc, all one can hope for to large extent are 'courses'
> sponsered by gasket/ferrite people who want you to
> improperly primary design so that you keep them in
> business.
>
> ************************************************************
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The comments and opinions stated herein are mine alone,
> and do not reflect those of my employer.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ************************************************************
