Info@parctest - Co.uk WWW - Parctest.co - Uk: Doc Ref: Tr2 - M

Test Report Number 4E10576 Issue 1 Product Assessment and Reliability Centre Ltd
Unit 4 Alverdiscott Road Industrial Estate

Bideford, Devon, EX39 4LQ
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
Date of Issue: 27/11/2019 info@parctest.co.uk www.parctest.co.uk
2379
Reason for
Page 1 of 14 N/A Commercial in Confidence
Re-issue
Date Samples Arrived: 01/11/2019 Edesix Ltd.

Date Testing Started: 04/11/2019 Customer Name 16 Forth Street
Date Testing Completed: 18/11/2019 and Address: Edinburgh
Customer Purchase Order No: PO-2019AA0153 EH1 3LH
Description of Test Samples: Identity/Serial Numbers:

5 off Videobadge VB-400 Cameras Serial Numbers: 230134, 230248, 230147, 230151, 230186
Test(s) Performed in the following order unless otherwise Testing using the parameters and methodology
specified: of:
Transit Drop Test UKAS Mil Std 810G Method 516.6 Procedure 4
Salt Mist Test UKAS Mil Std 810G Method 509.5
Customer supplied document titled
Function Test Non-UKAS ‘VideoManager and VB-400 Test Instructions’
emailed to PARC 30/10/2019, see section 2.
Report Summary:
The sample content was subjected to the tests outlined above, the details of which are contained in this test report. All 5
samples were subjected to the drop testing. 3 samples were then selected for the salt mist testing - 230134, 230248 &
230147.
During the drop testing, the impact of some of the drops caused the cameras to start recording. See section 3.1.4 for
further details.
During the salt mist testing, when the cameras were being transferred from the salt mist chamber to the drying chamber,
a button on the camera was inadvertently pressed which started a recording. A green Led then illuminated on the top of
the camera which could not be extinguished. See section 3.2.4 for further details and photos.
Following both the drop test, and the salt mist test, the respective samples were subjected to a function test. All samples
recorded a video that could be reviewed. See sections 3.1.5, and 3.2.5 for observations made during the respective
function tests.
Following the test programme, the sample content was returned to the customer for further evaluation.
Distribution: Test Engineer: Tom Josling Digitally signed

1. PARC Ltd File by Tom Josling
2. Anne Ambler Date: 2019.11.27
16:10:23 Z
Sample Disposal: Approved by: Nick Fishwick, Senior Digitally signed

Sample/s returned to customer via courier Project Engineer by N. Fishwick
Date:
2019.11.28
08:59:39 Z
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of the testing laboratory. PARC performs all its product testing under a rigorous Quality
Management System. PARC is accredited by UKAS to BS EN ISO/IEC 17025:2005, the "General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories".
Details of PARC’s UKAS accredited tests and a copy of its UKAS Schedule of Accreditation are available upon request. Tests marked "non-UKAS" are currently not covered by
PARC’s UKAS 17025:2005 accreditation. All testing, whether UKAS or non-UKAS, is performed within the same Quality Management System and to the same levels of
calibration and traceability. The results contained in this report relate only to the samples tested. Any opinions expressed within this report are not included in the UKAS
Accreditation Schedule for this Laboratory.
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
1. Sample Content
Description of Test Samples: Identity/Serial Numbers:

5 off Videobadge VB-400 Cameras Serial Numbers: 230134, 230248, 230147, 230151, 230186
2. Initial Inspection & Function Test
A visual inspection was carried out on the exterior of the EUT [non-UKAS]. There was no obvious indication of
damage, and the EUT proceeded to test in the condition as received from the customer.
The sample content was subjected to an initial function test, following the criteria detailed in the customer
supplied document titled ‘VideoManager and VB-400 Test Instructions’ emailed to PARC 30/10/2019. See below
for a summary of the test criteria:
1. Press the large central button on the front of the Sample, ensure:
a. The camera beeps
b. The two red LEDs illuminate
2. Record some footage and some audio
3. Stop the recording by holding down the central button, ensure:
a. The camera beeps
b. The two red LEDs extinguish
4. Plug the camera into the customer supplied docking station, connected to the customer supplied PC
5. Review the video that was recorded, ensure:
a. The video is clear and in focus
b. The audio is clear
The sample content was observed to operate correctly during the initial function test.
(intentionally blank)
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
3. Test Procedure
3.1 Transit Drop Test
3.1.1 Test Definition
The sample content was subjected to a transit drop test using the parameters and methodology of Mil Std 810G
Method 516.6 Procedure 4; the following conditions were applied:
 Number of drops: 26 total, divided between 5 samples as follows (see section 3.1.3 for drop orientation
photos):
o 230134: 6 drops, drop orientations 1 to 6
 Drop Surface: 2" ply backed by concrete
 Drop Height: 1.22 m
 Function test performed following drops
3.1.2 Test Equipment Used
Test Equipment PARC ID Calibration Due Date

Drop Tester 845 N/A
Steel Rule 738 Indication Only
Ply Drop Surface 1206 N/A
Room Logger 777 18/01/2020
3.1.3 Test Photos
Drop Orientation Overview Drop Orientation Overview
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
Drop Orientation Overview Drop Orientation Overview
Drop Orientations 1 & 2 Drop Orientations 3 & 4
Drop Orientations 5 & 6 Drop Orientation 7
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
Drop Orientation 8 Drop Orientation 9

DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue

DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
Drop Orientation 26
3.1.4 Test Results
Following the drop testing, the samples were subjected to a visual inspection (non-UKAS); no obvious changes
were noted to any of the samples. During the drop testing, the following observations were made:
Sample 230248
Following drop orientation 8, while the camera was being set up for drop orientation 9, the camera appeared to
start recording (the camera beeped and the two red LED’s illuminated) without any buttons being pressed, circa
10 seconds after the drop. The centre button on the front of the camera was then held to stop the recording.
Note: during the post-drop function test, this video was reviewed. The recoding started at the time of the impact
from drop 8. The audible beep which indicated the start of the recording could be heard 10 seconds into the
video.
Sample 230151
Following drop orientation 20, while the camera was being set up for drop orientation 21, the camera appeared
to start recording (the camera beeped and the two red LED’s illuminated) without any buttons being pressed,
circa 10 seconds after the drop. The centre button on the front of the camera was then held to stop the
recording.
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
Note: during the post-drop function test, this video was reviewed. The recoding started at the time of the impact
from drop 20. The audible beep which indicated the start of the recording could be heard 9 seconds into the
video.
Sample 230186
At the time of impact of all 5 drops, the camera beeped to indicate the start of a recording, as well as the two red
LED’s illuminating. The centre button was pressed to stop the recording each time. Upon impact from drop
orientation 25, the green LED in the bottom right of the camera also illuminated for a few seconds, before
distinguishing on its own.
Note: during the post-drop function test, is was noted that no videos were present from the time of the drop
testing.
3.1.5 Function Test (Non-UKAS)
The samples were functionally tested following the drops, as per the customer supplied document titled
‘VideoManager and VB-400 Test Instructions’ emailed to PARC 30/10/2019; a summary of which can be found in
section 2 of this report. All samples successfully recorded a video which was then reviewed. The following
observations were made:
Sample 230134
When the button was pressed to start the recording, there was a long delay before the audible beep and the red
LEDs illuminating. When the video was reviewed, the camera did start recording as soon as the button was
pressed; the audible beep from the camera can be heard 9 seconds into the video.
Sample 230248
The video was recorded and reviewed as expected.
Sample 230147
The video was recorded and reviewed as expected. It was noted that the audible beep could be heard in the video
within the first second.
Sample 230151
Sample 230186
The video was recorded and reviewed as expected. It was noted that the audible beep to indicate the start of the
recording could be heard in the video within the first second.
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
3.2 Salt Mist Test
3.2.1 Test Definition
The samples identified as 230134, 230248 & 230147 were subjected to a salt mist test using the parameters and
methodology of Mil Std 810G Method 509.5; the following conditions were applied:
 5 % NaCl solution
 Temperature: +35 °C
 Fallout: 1 to 3 ml/80cm³/hr
 Fallout pH: 6.5 to 7.2 at +25 °C
 Duration: 24 hours exposure, 24 hours drying at ambient temperature, <50% rh
 Cycles: 2
 2 hours preconditioning at 35 °C before each salt mist exposure cycle
 Visual and function checks performed:
 Pre-test before salt mist exposure
 Following 2nd 48hr cycle.
3.2.2 Test Equipment Used
Test Equipment PARC ID Calibration Due Date

Monitored by
Salt Mist Chamber 281
Calibrated Equipment
PRT 934 04/09/2020
Scales 99 07/02/2020
Left Collection Vessel MD13 N/A
Right Collection Vessel MD14 N/A
Conductivity Meter (Conductivity) 975 N/A
Conductivity Meter (Temperature) 975 30/11/2019
pH Meter (pH) 1027 N/A
pH Meter (Temperature) 1027 30/11/2019
Climatic Chamber 11 12/11/2019
Room monitor Probe 774 18/01/2020
Chemicals Lot No Expiry Date
Conductivity Reference Solution CC18177 22/02/2020
pH Reference Solution (4) CC607108 02/2021
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
3.2.3 Test Photos
Samples Configured in Salt Mist Chamber
Samples Configured in Drying / Pre-conditioning
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
3.2.4 Test Results/Plots
Following the salt mist testing, the samples were subjected to a visual inspection (non-UKAS); no obvious changes
were noted to any of the samples.
When moving the samples from the salt mist chamber to the drying chamber for the final time, a button was
inadvertently pressed on Sample 230134 which started it recording. During the usual function test procedure,
when the camera started recording, the top two LED’s illuminated red. At this point, the lower of the two
illuminated red, but the top illuminated green, as shown below.
LED Pattern
The front button was then held to stop recording, however the green LED on top stayed illuminated. The camera
was placed into the drying chamber in this condition, as shown below.
Samples in the Drying Chamber – Final Cycle
When the samples were removed from the drying chamber, it was noted that the green LED had changed to a
flashing red LED, as shown overleaf.
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
Samples in the Drying Chamber – Red LED
The samples were then rinsed off with tap water and dabbed dry, then left to dry over the weekend at lab
ambient conditions. When it came to run the final function test on Monday morning, the red LED had
extinguished. The camera then required charging in the dock before it could be used.
40
35
30
Temperature (°C)
25
20
15
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Duration (Hours)
Salt Mist Chamber Response
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
80
70
60
Temperature
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Duration (Hours)
Humidity (%rh) Temperature (°C)
Preconditioning and Drying Chamber Response
3.2.5 Function Test (Non-UKAS)
The samples identified as 230134, 230248 & 230147 were functionally tested following the salt mist test, as per
the customer supplied document titled ‘VideoManager and VB-400 Test Instructions’ emailed to PARC
30/10/2019; a summary of which can be found in section 2 of this report. All samples successfully recorded a
video which was then reviewed. The following observations were made:
Sample 230134
Sample required charging before it would operate. When it was charged, the video was recorded and reviewed as
expected.
Sample 230248
Sample 230147
DOC REF: TR2_M
Telephone: +44 (0) 1237 421255
2379
Reason for
Re-issue
4. Report Summary
The sample content was subjected to the tests detailed within this report.
During the drop testing, the impact of some of the drops caused the cameras to start recording. See section 3.1.4
for further details.
During the salt mist testing, when the cameras were being transferred from the salt mist chamber to the drying
chamber, a button on the camera was inadvertently pressed which started a recording. A green Led the
illuminated on the top of the camera which could not be extinguished. See section 3.2.4 for further details and
photos.
Following both the drop test, and the salt mist test, the respective samples were subjected to a function test. All
samples recorded a video that could be reviewed. See sections 3.1.5, and 3.2.5 for observations made during the
respective function tests.
Following the test programme, the sample content was returned to the customer for further evaluation.
End of Test Report
DOC REF: TR2_M

Info@parctest - Co.uk WWW - Parctest.co - Uk: Doc Ref: Tr2 - M

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Info@parctest - Co.uk WWW - Parctest.co - Uk: Doc Ref: Tr2 - M

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Info@parctest - Co.uk WWW - Parctest.co - Uk: Doc Ref: Tr2 - M

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Test Report Number 4E10576 Issue 1 Product Assessment and Reliability Centre Ltd

Unit 4 Alverdiscott Road Industrial Estate

Date Samples Arrived: 01/11/2019 Edesix Ltd.

Description of Test Samples: Identity/Serial Numbers:

Distribution: Test Engineer: Tom Josling Digitally signed

Sample Disposal: Approved by: Nick Fishwick, Senior Digitally signed

Description of Test Samples: Identity/Serial Numbers:

2. Initial Inspection & Function Test

3.1 Transit Drop Test

3.1.1 Test Definition

3.1.2 Test Equipment Used

Test Equipment PARC ID Calibration Due Date

3.1.3 Test Photos

Drop Orientation Overview Drop Orientation Overview

Drop Orientation Overview Drop Orientation Overview

Drop Orientations 1 & 2 Drop Orientations 3 & 4

Drop Orientations 5 & 6 Drop Orientation 7

Drop Orientation 8 Drop Orientation 9

Drop Orientation 10 Drop Orientation 11

Drop Orientation 12 Drop Orientation 13

Drop Orientation 14 Drop Orientation 15

Drop Orientation 16 Drop Orientation 17

Drop Orientation 18 Drop Orientation 19

Drop Orientation 20 Drop Orientation 21

Drop Orientation 22 Drop Orientation 23

Drop Orientation 24 Drop Orientation 25

3.1.4 Test Results

3.1.5 Function Test (Non-UKAS)

The video was recorded and reviewed as expected.

The video was recorded and reviewed as expected.

3.2 Salt Mist Test

3.2.1 Test Definition

3.2.2 Test Equipment Used

Test Equipment PARC ID Calibration Due Date

3.2.3 Test Photos

Samples Configured in Salt Mist Chamber

Samples Configured in Drying / Pre-conditioning

3.2.4 Test Results/Plots

Samples in the Drying Chamber – Final Cycle

Samples in the Drying Chamber – Red LED

Salt Mist Chamber Response

Humidity (%rh) Temperature (°C)

Preconditioning and Drying Chamber Response

3.2.5 Function Test (Non-UKAS)

The video was recorded and reviewed as expected.

The video was recorded and reviewed as expected.

End of Test Report

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.