This is another case in which it would be good to hear from the company's designers to see why exactly they made the washer this way. You say that "the designer group had very little knowledge of reliable solid-state electronics." But shouldn't the company know better? And shouldn't they be held accountable somehow or try to improve this situation?
Elizabeth, sometimes you run across a system that has the feel of being designed by a bunch of fresh-from-school engineers without enough experienced supervision. This story has that feel.
The company as a whole may very well know better, but the company isn't a homogeneous whole.
As to accountable, the only time that happens is for safety (think automobile recalls). If the interior door cosmetic panel has a push-in plastic fastener that fails after the warranty expires, and fails consistently, I doubt the automobile company will recall the panel.
The Calypso was a nightmare. I tried to hang onto mine, I figured since I didn't pay for it, I could afford a few repairs. First the level sensor went. Then there was a huge problem with the suds lock sensor on the pump. Some pumps worked, some pumps didn't even though there wasn't really anything wrong with the pump. Then the transmission would get grease all over your clothes, and that was a big issue. Finally, the transmission in mine failed, so I bought a new machine.
This machine also has the cute change cup to catch foreign material like coins before they eat the pump (sometimes guitar picks, too), but you have to take the machine half apart to get to the cup.
The guys at Whirlpool tried to make a nice machine with unique features, but they really over-engineered the machine and then rushed it to market without fully testing it- probably because the project had already taken so long to develop.
Yes, Chuck, I'm thinking the idea to hear from the manufacturers on some of these design-flaw issues is not just a great idea, but almost becoming necessary. People spend a lot of money on products and we are meant to trust that the people designing them know better than we do how to make a solid project. With all the consumer fixes we see in Design News columns, it's clear that many times this isn't true. There needs to be some accountability, I think.
Interesting to hear about the capacitor problem. Is this the same issue that there was with several brand refrigerator/freezers? The power supply of the electronics was apparently done by capacitive divider. The film capacitor lost gradually its capacitance (self healing action due to transients or faulty lot) until it was so small that the electronics started to work intermittenly manifesting itself by the lamp blinking (thus causing the syndrome to be called as disco syndrome).
Because of the number of these incidents and the high price of the replacemet control board there is a DIY instructions how to change the capacitor:
Based on my experiences, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting to hear from the designers! I'm an (analog) electronic circuit designer and do a lot of teaching via trade-show seminars and writing (was even an invited lecturer at MIT in 2007). My company specializes in solving signal interface noise issues (hum and buzz in audio or "hum bars" in video) and, as a result, I end up talking technicians through troubleshooting steps to identify and fix the problem. Many times, the problem is due to a design defect in the equipment. If I call the equipment manufacturer to get more information or point out a design issue, it is *extremely* difficult to actually get to the designer. Sometimes, I have to actually create a partial schematic of the product myself (manufacturers often treat the simplest "me-too" designs as if they were top secret). Since they won't lift a finger to help ... I then use their faulty design as an example in my seminars (as a "don't do this") and I identify the make and model. Students love this honesty but, when word reaches the manufacturer, the reaction is very different. Usually, the threatening e-mail comes first ... whereupon I remind them that I tried to enlist their cooperation but they refused and that it's not libel unless the information I spread is false, whereupon I challenge them to refute any of the facts ... and call off your lawyers. A few times, I've been visited by the company's PR and marketing folks (acting a bit like a "goon squad") to intimidate me to shut up. I tell them I'll happily spread the word that the problem is fixed ... if they're willing to be part of the solution rather than the cover-up. It doesn't always work, but I find public embarrassment to be a powerful tool. I can recall only two cases where the manufacturer not only supplied my requested inforrmation, but actually implemented the design change I suggested ... and sent me one of their power amplifiers as a "thank you" gift! The company is Rotel, by the way. - Bill Whitlock, president & chief engineer, Jensen Transformers, Life Fellow of the Audio Engineering Society, Life Senior of the IEEE
Thanks for the input, Analog Bill. It's disappointing to hear that the manufacturer's designers are often so reticent to respond. But the top secret mentality has always been there among appliance manufacturers. We've seen it repeatedly in the press. So, yes, it's disappointing but not surprising.
Digital healthcare devices and wearable electronic products need to be thoroughly tested, lest they live short, ignominious lives, an expert will tell attendees at UBM’s upcoming Designer of Things Conference in San Jose, Calif.
The company says it anticipates high-definition video for home security and other uses will be the next mature technology integrated into the IoT domain, hence the introduction of its MatrixCam devkit.
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.