标签: box

在工业自动化与边缘计算快速发展的今天，设备的可靠性已成为衡量其价值的关键指标。飞凌嵌入式基于瑞芯微RK3588J处理器设计开发的FCU3501嵌入式控制单元，从设计之初就将"打造工业级可靠性"作为品质设计理念，通过严格的测试标准和精密的工程实现，打造出真正符合工业级要求的边缘AI产品。 1、宽温设计与高低温环境适应性 工业领域的环境往往极为严苛，工厂车间可能长期处于高温状态，而户外部署的设备则要面对四季温差的变化。FCU3501嵌入式控制单元采用无风扇被动散热设计，通过金属外壳+散热片+导热硅脂的三重导热结构，将处理器产生的热量快速传导至外壳，实现零噪音散热。 这一设计不仅避免了传统风扇散热易因灰尘堆积导致的故障，还确保了设备 在-40℃~+85℃的宽温环境中能够长时间可靠运行 。FCU3501嵌入式控制单元在研发阶段通过了严格的高低温循环检测，这是一种模拟产品在极端温度环境下性能变化的测试方法，通过反复暴露于高温和低温条件下，评估产品的可靠性和耐久性。 高温启动与运行试验 低温启动与运行试验 高低温循环检测包括温度范围设定、循环次数、升温/降温速率、保持时间等多项参数。FCU3501嵌入式控制单元成功通过了这些严苛测试，确保无论是在高温车间，还是在北方寒冬的户外站点，都能保持稳定运行。 2、卓越的电磁兼容性(EMC) 工业环境往往充满电磁干扰，这些干扰可能来自大功率设备、变频器或其他电气装置。FCU3501嵌入式控制单元通过了严格的EMC测试，确保在复杂的工业电磁环境中稳定工作。 电磁兼容性测试主要包括静电放电试验、电快速瞬变脉冲群抗扰度试验、浪涌抗扰度试验等多个项目，FCU3501嵌入式控制单元在设计上符合IEC 61000系列标准要求，能够抵抗工业环境中常见的电磁干扰。 3、冷热重启与电源适应性 在工业环境中，电源波动和频繁开关机是常见情况。飞凌嵌入式FCU3501嵌入式控制单元的电源设计经过精心优化，确保在各种异常情况下都能可靠启动和运行。 测试过程中，配套的稳压源控制软件实现了对供电状态的自动化管理，确保测试条件的一致性和准确性；在测试初始化阶段，技术人员首先验证了受试品的电源接口连接状态，确认设备在加电、断电过程中均能正常工作，并通过实时电流监测确保无过载现象发生。 冷重启试验设置了10000次的标准开关机循环测试，热重启试验设置了2083次的标准开关机循环测试，这一严苛的测试标准远超常规工业设备的要求。 4、国际认证与品质保证 目前，FCU3501嵌入式控制单元已获得CE/FCC等多项国际认证，确保产品在安全、电磁兼容性和环保方面符合全球主要市场的准入要求。这些认证不仅是产品合规的标志，更是其高质量和可靠性的有力证明。 CE标志表明产品符合欧洲安全、健康、环保标准；FCC认证确保设备不会对无线电频率产生干扰。这些认证为FCU3501嵌入式控制单元进入全球市场提供了通行证。 CE认证证书 FCC认证证书 总结而言，飞凌嵌入式FCU3501嵌入式控制单元的工业级品质不是偶然，而是通过严格的设计标准和测试流程锻造的结果。从-40℃到85℃的宽温工作能力，到抵抗各种电磁干扰的稳定性，再到全面的国际认证，FCU3501嵌入式控制单元真正做到了为严苛工业环境而生。 结合FCU3501嵌入式控制单元高性能算力、工业级可靠性、灵活扩展能力以及广泛的场景适用性，能够为边缘计算设备树立新的性能标杆。对于追求高可靠性、高算力密度的工业用户而言，FCU3501嵌入式控制单元无疑是一款值得选择的AI边缘计算产品。

     Now Introduce  more information about electromagnetic shielding box: Many shielded equipment research and development businesses, in order to meet electromagnetic compatibility requirements for conductive coupling requires the use of filtering technology, filtering technology to assist in the use of the filter element; coupling the radiation need to be supplemented by the use of shielding technology.      Electromagnetic shielding box through the shell, boxes, panels made of a metal shield, will be limited to a method of electromagnetic waves within a certain area. Since the radiation is divided into near-zone field source, the magnetic field source and the far zone plane wave, and therefore shield shielding performance according to different radiation sources in material selection, structural shapes and apertures leakage control and other aspects are different.      In the current increasingly dense electromagnetic spectrum, a sharp increase in electromagnetic power density per unit volume, high and low level devices or equipment large number of mixed use and other factors lead to equipment and system electromagnetic environment deteriorating case, its importance becomes more prominent. In this chaotic electromagnetic interference environment, in order to better work of such high performance electromagnetic devices, electromagnetic shielding box on the essential.      Electromagnetic shielding box using conductive or magnetic material shells, plates, sets, and other various shapes shield the electromagnetic capacity constraints in a certain space range for suppressing interference metal body radiation, and conduction and radiation treatment to be measured in order to achieve wireless communication devices without interference device test environment.       Finally, Tojoin remind you that if you want the design to achieve the required shielding performance, you need to first determine the source of radiation, a clear frequency range, according to each band structure typical leak to determine the control element, and then select the appropriate shielding materials, design shield housing. More relevant knowledge and shielding me please the micro-channel scanning head or concerns of the blog.

One of the downsides of cables and connectors is that, by design, they typically conceal the copper wires they handle. While that's a good thing, it makes checking those wires for signal parameters—voltage, current, rise/fall, timing, and so on—difficult to impossible. Enter the breakout box: a small, inexpensive, usually passive piece of test equipment. Breakout boxes bring those signals out to where they can be observed with probes, while also passing the signals through. I owned two of those, now lost somewhere. One was for the once-common 25-wire RS-232 connector (Figure 1), the second was for the four-wire telephone line using an RJ-11 connector (Figure 2).   Figure 1. The RS-232 breakout box saved many an engineer while troubleshooting the communications link. Breakout boxes were fun to use. They made it fairly easy to observe a signal line with a voltmeter for basic checks, or an oscilloscope if needed. Some of the RS-232 boxes were more advanced, with LEDs on the signal lines to show their state and activity, and even small DIP switches so you could disable and then jumper key lines—all of which gave you the joyous feeling of being able to both observe and control.   Figure 2. Troubleshooting telecom lines is easy with an RJ-11 telco breakout adapter. Now, though, it looks as if the simple breakout box has seen its best days. Today's high-speed, fast-slewing, small-swing signals—sensitive as they are to capacitance, load, and even temperature—can't tolerate the relatively heavy hand, figuratively speaking, of just any casual probing you might do with a breakout box. If you want to observe a signal going to or through a connector, you probably should have designed-in the necessary buffered test points in your prototype design and fabrication. Alternately, you'll likely need to get a relatively expensive test box that picks off the signals you want to observe, while not interfering with their paths and transitions in a way that the signals would notice. There's not much we can do about this, as the reality of the physics of these signals is not something you can fool. It's the electronic TM version of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. We live in a world of fast-moving signals and their precision connectors, and they don't like to be touched. Even a benign scope probe or careless finger can upset the careful balance of inductance, capacitance, and other factors that the signal and connector were designed to play with nicely. But I still think about those basic breakout boxes, and how much good they did in their days of glory. Certainly, there are some test tools that have been around "forever" and look as if they'll be staying around, whether in their original form (a basic, pencil-like logic probe, perhaps) or greatly improved implementation (DVMs, scopes). But there are some that are now relegated to the back of the closet, and that we probably won't be seeing or using much anymore.  

                                        TV box     Consumer Electronics are susceptible to damage caused by ESD, which can be generated from sources such as human contact or air discharge. Protection from these threats lies in the individual discrete protection for I/O ports at all equipment levels. Protection can also be provided at the system interconnecting ports. The protection schemes outlined are recommended for low insertion loss, high signal integrity and low noise/crosstalk with increasing bandwidth. CitrusCom's products provide protection from the effects of ESD/EFT/Surges as defined by IEC 61000-4-2, IEC 61000-4-4 and IEC 61000-4-5.

We toss the phrase "safety-critical system" around without reflecting much on its meaning. What does "safe" mean? Can you prove your system is safe? I doubt it, since that's rather analogous to proving the absence of bugs. There's really an epistemological problem with the notion of safety, since one can only create arguments for risks one understands, not the entire universe of possible risks. Does it even matter if a "system" is safe? A system – a black box, instrument, device or other stand-alone device might be "safe," but could be a disaster in practice. That system is undoubtedly just one component in a bigger product, and its interaction with the rest of the world may not be safe. The rest of the world includes people, and people are notoriously competent at injecting an idiot factor that defies most safety reasoning. A case in point: A couple of weeks ago I was on a long-haul flight and was pleased that the seat had a 110 VAC outlet to power the laptop. A 14 hour hop is about three times longer than my laptop battery lasts. But early in the flight I was engrossed in Jean Smith's new Eisenhower biography and sort of oblivious to my surroundings. Eventually looking up I noticed that my seatmate, a rather elderly Chinese woman, had her earbuds on and was trying to insert the 1/8" connector... into the power outlet!! ( see below )   The 110 VAC outlet is next to the screen A safety case for the power outlet would probably figure on low-amp fuses, proper grounding, and other parameters. But who would factor in "elderly" and "earbud"? Even more confounding, the outlet was of the North American three-prong configuration, which was possibly foreign to this Chinese national. ( I once knew a Thai woman who had grown up in a bamboo shack with no electricity – it's probably dangerous to assume any familiarity with technology when catering to the general public ). Was she an idiot? Of course not. On reflection, it's sort of logical to expect the audio socket to be near the screen instead of hidden on the armrest.