John:
I don’t see how a test house can “impose” compliance. I thought all they could do was perform testing, and by looking at the results of the testing, declare compliance. You also ask “how can a company know that the result is reliable?” Isn’t that the entire justification for accreditation of a test lab by a 3rd party? I have had “expert customers” where they were so involved in the compliance process that they had their own QA representative sit in my lab and check off each step of a detailed, written test procedure as each step was started and completed. OTOH, a majority of my customers would say something like “call us when you know if we have passed.” When a lab customer is not qualified to determine the experience and capabilities of a test lab, the customer can increase his chances of reliable results by using a test lab that has had their facilities, people, procedures and support processes reviewed by an organization that specializes in the review of test labs. In the example that started all this, I assumed the test lab was an accredited facility. As the test lab’s product proved to be unreliable, there was a breakdown of the test lab’s operations. That breakdown was supposed to have been made vanishingly improbable by the blessing of that test lab by an accreditation authority. I suppose that would mean that the accreditation authority’s process thus also broke down. I guess we then have to question the accreditation accreditors who accredited the test lab accreditors. Sorry for making the chain of accreditation sound comical. I suppose you know a lot more than me about the efficacy of 3rd party oversight in ensuring reliable results. Can you elaborate just a bit about the amount the reliability should increase when a customer chooses an accredited test lab over an unaccredited test lab (assuming that was possible if the standard didn’t make accredited test labs a pre-condition)? Does the additional oversight layer (the accreditation) increase performance reliability by perhaps 1 or 2 Sigmas or some percentage? Thanks! Ed Price WB6WSN Chula Vista, CA USA From: John Woodgate [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 1:19 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] Question re: Measuring a signal in a noisy environment I doubt anyone would disagree with that. But if a company allows a test house to impose compliance, how can it know that the result is reliable? Best wishes John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk<http://www.woodjohn.uk> Rayleigh, Essex UK On 2019-04-19 21:09, Grasso, Charles wrote: With all due respect I made a different text section: “Ultimately, I sold reliable answers..” (underline added by me) That is all I am looking for as a customer. Thanks! Charles Grasso W: 303-706-5467 - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 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]>
