Assessing The Broad Business Case For Rugged Computing
______________________________________________________________________________________
Copyright © All Rights Reserved for Larstan Business Reports
5
Some private equipment testing agencies have tested and assessed durable
computing products for manufacturers and their customers. The results of these
tests, however, are often not released to the public in their entirety – if at all.
Thus, manufacturers define their own standards for rugged computing, and
additionally, have introduced variations on the concept of rugged.
Most manufacturers who claim to build rugged computers have gravitated to a
variation of a standards scheme set forth by a leading user of rugged computing
technology: the U.S. Armed Services. The MIL-STD-810F standards specify a
variety of environmental tests that manufacturers can use to prove that
equipment will survive in the field. Of these variables, those that are most
relevant to rugged computing include:
•
Humidity
•
Contamination by Fluids*
•
Salt
Fog
•
Sand
and
Dust*
•
Icing/Freezing
Rain
•
Explosive
Atmosphere
(arcing/sparks)
•
Leakage
•
High
Temperature
•
Low
Temperature
•
Temperature
Shock
•
Solar Radiation (Sunshine)
•
Low Pressure (Altitude)
•
Shock (transport, dropping)
•
Vibration
•
Rain*
(*On the topic of Ingress Protection, or IP rating, it should be noted that a specific
standard has been developed by the International Electrotechnical Commission to
classify the degree of protection provided by the enclosures of electrical
equipment.)
Currently, the Armed Services do not conduct actual tests or certify that rugged
devices meet MIL-STD-810F standards. Instead, the Armed Services expect their
suppliers of rugged computing equipment to assure or guarantee adherence to
the standards. As a result, many rugged computing manufacturers are able to tout
their devices as “MIL-STD-810F-compliant” when they meet only one or two of the
testing criteria, and even if the device is never offered to or purchased by the
Armed Services.
Manufacturers often claim partial- or near-compliance with a particular MIL-STD-
810F testing standard, or otherwise overstate their device’s rugged
characteristics. This is why it is critical that claims be tested and proven.
