I should reiterate from my original message that the text I posted is the introduction to an article, not a complete article.
The example was included to engage the reader from the start; demonstrate that electromagnetic compatibility between systems is a real-world issue; and show that a lack of EMC can have severe consequences. It highlights the importance of compatibility between systems in their operating environment, not the importance of compliance with standards in a laboratory, which I agree is often a separate matter. Any other examples that illustrate these points would be gratefully received. Best regards, Richard King Systems Engineer Thales Communications UK > -----Original Message----- > From: John Woodgate [SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 9:54 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Help wanted with succinct subject description for > non-special ists > > > I read in !emc-pstc that King, Richard <[email protected]> > wrote (in <C02943801230D611919D00508BDF0C246EB61A@RTWEXCH>) about 'Help > wanted with succinct subject description for non-special ists' on > Thu, 27 Mar 2003: > > >In 1967 off the coast of Vietnam, a jet landing on the aircraft carrier > >U.S.S. Forrestal was briefly illuminated by carrier-based radar. This is > >quite a normal event, however the energy from the radar caused a stray > >electrical signal to be sent to the jet weapon systems. The result was an > >uncommanded release of munitions that struck a fully armed and fuelled > >fighter on deck. The subsequent explosions killed 134 sailors and caused > >severe damage to the carrier and aircraft. > > This is an appallingly bad example, insofar as it was caused by a > **fault condition**. EMC standards, and the testing itself, do not take > fault conditions into account. There is a separate subject 'EMC and > functional safety', which is incredibly complicated. If you just think > about it for a while, you will see why. > > Don't let your audience think that EMI occurs only when source or victim > is faulty. EMI occurs when both would be working perfectly normally if > the EMI were not present. > -- > Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. > http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk > Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go > to > http://www.isce.org.uk > PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! > Thales Defence (Wells) DISCLAIMER: The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. Thank you. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
