In message <380-220073422104439...@earthlink.net>, dated Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Cortland Richmond <k...@earthlink.net> writes:
>This borders on an ethical question, not a technical one. What "due >diligence" are we required to exercise? My answer as always been: >enough. Pretesting is SMART. Yes, but with INSIGHT. It isn't smart just to do an arbitrary pre-test that the standard doesn't require. You should consider what potential emissions might not be observed by the test in the standard but could get up and bite you later. When you've identified those potential emissions, go looking for them with a specifically-designed test that will find them if they exist -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk There are benefits from being irrational - just ask the square root of 2. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
