wow. you got yourself in a rock and hard place.
;-(
On Oct 16, 2014, at 8:08 AM, Patrick Goodyear wrote:
> Problem is "Nuclear Qualified" requires OEM only without spending
> several hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a part certified
> AND a design change approved. Passing radiation, seismic ....
> testing. We even have problems when they change a part number
> without changing the part itself.
>
> pat
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Yuan-chia Joyce Koo wrote:
>
>> 30 years? well, that is the project mgr's fault. it should be re-
>> design for a form, fit and function around 20 end of life
>> assessment and get a replacement (using new chip). you can always
>> get the original design prior to the end of life (especially, for
>> the critical item). you might have to go after red tape and get
>> someone to dig out from ware house storage, but prior to end of
>> life, it got be there... someone somewhere knew where the stuff is
>> (not easy,- went down to that road before).. after end of life,
>> your "need to know" are gone (not just the doc, but people). 35K
>> might be the only choice.... redesign and re-qual is a 50K+ add
>> on. program mgr should be the one to find balance.
>> jk
>> On Oct 16, 2014, at 12:28 AM, Patrick Goodyear wrote:
>>
>>> OK Joyce, I will go along with that concerning counterfeit
>>> however in the Nuclear world we have components that are 30+
>>> years old and failing. The manufacturers have long since stopped
>>> production and 20 + years past support, and some are long gone.
>>> In order to keep the equipment running reliably requires reverse
>>> engineering to try and figure / design a suitable replacement,
>>> or have another engineering firm reinvent the wheel at huge
>>> revenue outlay, JT-21 cost us $35000 each for a suitable
>>> replacement.
>>>
>>> I have went through the gambit with the fake Nichecon caps in '04
>>> vintage Dell computers.
>>>
>>> pat
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Yuan-chia Joyce Koo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pat, I might be on the dark side: I do like proprietary
>>>> hardware, for example, ASIC always run faster than off the
>>>> shelf programmable chip (provide you have a good design team
>>>> for ASIC), low power, efficient foot print, package to tailor
>>>> specific environment... if you have volume to justify the
>>>> design time and cost, I would take an ASIC in a heart beat. as
>>>> for guard the secret to prevent reverse engineering, i think it
>>>> is definitely needed in current environment: copycat just ripe
>>>> off all the good engineering work easily. In addition, there
>>>> are fakes around - deal with in the past with a control chip
>>>> that provides user timing/feedback control of voltage/current
>>>> adjusted output. The "fake" actually went into the field to
>>>> collect the chip and mount on the unit sell them at a knock out
>>>> price (of course the reliability and calibration is completely
>>>> off... but there are cheapy chaps actually return some of
>>>> faulty fake units for R and O to the company ...), not until we
>>>> figure out hard pot the IC on to the unit in such a way it was
>>>> almost impossible to take it off without damage the unit....
>>>> The sales went up right after the implementation of the anti-
>>>> reverse engineering... from my 1st hand experience, i would say
>>>> the anti-reverse engineering is necessary, it should be part of
>>>> design review/marketing scheme to ensure your tech leadership
>>>> is not compromised. my 1.78 cents.. (By the way, as for high
>>>> price of replacement parts, I agree with you... extended
>>>> warrantee or service contract is much better if you have a
>>>> critical equipments fall into R and O requirement - like aircraft).
>>>> jk
>>>> On Oct 15, 2014, at 7:53 PM, Patrick Goodyear wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As a technician I detest companies that provide proprietary
>>>>> hardware, the reason I don't own Apple products. Hp did this
>>>>> with their early test equipment, but the would annually publish
>>>>> a cheat sheet with their part numbers and a cross reference for
>>>>> products 5 years old.
>>>>> If a company is so dang tight-a--ed that they need to guard the
>>>>> secret, let them custom order the part with their part number
>>>>> or whatever on it, Westinghouse did this in the '70's with a
>>>>> lot of the equipment they ordered custom from Burr-Brown, so
>>>>> they made sure you ordered their replacement part at their $$$$$
>>>>> $ price, case in point OP amp modules designated A1 labeled
>>>>> JT-21.
>>>>>
>>>>> Usually unless the part is unique as long as one has knowledge
>>>>> of how it works it is easy to substitute a suitable replacement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just my opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pat Goodyear semi-retired control tech
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Craig Sullivan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a customer requirement to "apply an electronics grade
>>>>>> epoxy over
>>>>>> component x that will obscure part the part marking." They are
>>>>>> trying to
>>>>>> prevent reverse engineering of their product. There are of
>>>>>> course a
>>>>>> multitude of epoxies, but dispensing onto small ICs, etc., can
>>>>>> be a
>>>>>> challenge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know about micro abrasion processes and such but I'm curious
>>>>>> how others
>>>>>> would handle this requirement?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Craig Sullivan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Manufacturing Engineer / IT Administrator
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Phone: +1.607.266.0480 x115
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fax: +1.607.266.0482
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Email: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Web: <http://www.mplinc.com/> www.mplinc.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MPL, Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 41 Dutch Mill Road | Ithaca | NY | 14850
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _____
>>>>>> Confidentiality Notice:
>>>>>> This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information
>>>>>> which is the
>>>>>> property of MPL Incorporated, intended only for the use of the
>>>>>> intended
>>>>>> recipient(s). Unauthorized use or disclosure of this
>>>>>> information is
>>>>>> prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please
>>>>>> immediately notify
>>>>>> MPL Incorporated and destroy any copies of this email.
>>>>>> Receipt of this
>>>>>> e-mail shall not be deemed a waiver by MPL Incorporated of any
>>>>>> privilege or
>>>>>> the confidential nature of the information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Export Control:
>>>>>> This message is intended only for the addressee and may
>>>>>> contain information
>>>>>> that is company confidential or privileged. Any technical
>>>>>> data in this
>>>>>> message may be exported only in accordance with the U.S.
>>>>>> International
>>>>>> Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR Parts 120-130) or the Export
>>>>>> Administration Regulations (15 CFR Parts 730-774).
>>>>>> Unauthorized use is
>>>>>> strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the
>>>>>> intended
>>>>>> recipient, or the person responsible for delivering to the
>>>>>> intended
>>>>>> recipient, you should not read, copy, disclose or otherwise
>>>>>> use this
>>>>>> message. If you have received this email in error, please
>>>>>> delete it, and
>>>>>> advise the sender immediately.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> __ __ _
>>>>>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email
>>>>>> Security.cloud service.
>>>>>> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
>>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> __ __ _
>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________________________
>>>>> __ __
>>>>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email
>>>>> Security.cloud service.
>>>>> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>> __________________________________________________________________
>>>>> __ __
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___________________________________________________________________
>>>> __ _
>>>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud
>>>> service.
>>>> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> __ _________________
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>> __
>>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud
>>> service.
>>> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>> __
>>
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> _
>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud
>> service.
>> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
>> [log in to unmask]
>> _________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
|
