Even when a client passes by just a few dB, I explain to them about measurement
uncertainty (of the ordinary kind) and why the result is only technically a
pass and should be treated as a very nearly a failure. Then the acceptance of
risk (or not) is up to them. That's because they can't guarantee that
production units would also pass, or that a regulatory agency (or competitor)
won't test a sample and declare a failure. A 6dB margin is the least I'll
accept as a solid pass, not that it's always attainable.
The arguments for and against MU analysis (of the questionable kind) are
certainly interesting. Thank you Derek and all for the in-depth discussion.
Orin Laney
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:43:01 -0400 [email protected] writes:
I keep going back to measuring some limit, which I still maintain is
somewhat arbitrary. If you fail by a few dB, so what... In real life you should
be held accountable for your products performance. If you get calls because it
malfunctions, then you don't have a good design. If you never get a call, then
it's probably fine.
We need to forget about MU and address the other low hanging fruit
first...
Sincerely,
Derek Walton
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<[email protected]>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.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 <[email protected]>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected]>
David Heald <[email protected]>
