This takes my thoughts immediately to ESD grounded workstations.Whenever working with developing prototypes for any electronic computing device, our labs were always monitored by our internal ESD cops – the QA safety team that insured that all benches had that light-blue anti static pad as the work-surface, and that any user at the station had the mandatory wrist-straps and ankle grounds.Even if a manager wandered down into the lab to check on the daily progress, they were in violation (with the ESD cops) if they reached into the prototype set-up without first grounding themselves with a strap.While I realize that ESD safety precautions are more prevalent today than they were when the SPARC station was introduced about 20+ years ago, I'm wondering if the author of the article had ESD cops at his facility-?
Boy does this bring back memories of grad school. We had an ultrafast-spectroscopy instrument that we assembled from $1.2 Million of lasers and fancy electronics equipment. In essence, our system was a very, very fast strobe light that would illuminate a repetitive chemical reaction at precisely the right time. We used a liquid nitrogen-cooled scientific CCD camera that would record the faint output signal viewed through a maze of optics and filters. We would darken the lab and use upwards of 20-min CCD exposures to collect the very faint signal. Every now and again our data would be extremely noisy and we would have to collect data again. After some major sleuthing, we discovered that one of the PCs on the far side of the lab running Windows3.0 had a screen saver consisting of a bouncing ball. All but the top 5% of the computer monitor was obscured by equipment and only when the image of the ball bounced near the top of the screen did the extra photons get entrained into our optics. I've disliked screen savers ever since...
Actually, the grounding precautions were not so much for the equipment, but for the safety of the developing prototypes and new product introductions.But the equipment is normally sitting right on the same bench as the product, which is the target of the precautionary measures. And yes, this was a recent practice used on manufacturing floors as late as last year when I was introducing a military computing device at a domestic OEM.
You're lucky you were able to isolate it. I've seen many intermittent failures in the lab, which were impossible to reliability repeat, and thus diagnose. I suspect this is something that's very widespread, and accounts for a lot of in-the-field glitches.
So, you are saying the power supply wasn't properly grounded and the output was float in reference to ground. Sounds like things were not properly installed and grounded. I don't go along with the Vandergraf garbage,
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.