In message <F766B5AD23EA4C37836CDA2A2379DA99@harrington09269>, dated Fri, 7 Nov 2008, John Harrington <[email protected]> writes:
>So can that "finite degradation" exceed the "normal performance within >specification limits" of the general criterion A degradation? It depends what individual standards say: not all have exactly the same wording for Criterion A. In any case, the manufacturer has to consider carefully how to word the statement. If the manufacturer uses those words then he must widen his spec limits to allow for the degradation, otherwise a product at the unfavourable performance limit would violate the criterion in the presence of the disturbance. For example, 'Signal-to noise ratio better than 80 dB'. If that can be degraded by 3 dB in the presence of the disturbance, then the statement must say '77 dB', not '80 dB'. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it, or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose! 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
