Well, yes, but electric motors and drive circuitry are particularly nasty emi sources. One poor-man's susceptibility test is to run a handheld drill motor as close to your circuit board as possible. In an EV, you're driving around inside one.
"Well, yes, but electric motors and drive circuitry are particularly nasty emi sources."
Agreed, but that noise can be contained with an effective Faraday screening.
If noise escapes then the shielding isn't working properly.
It seems to me that electrical engineers—especially those working in high speed digital electronics—need to think like chemical engineers who spend much of their time in the containment business. Safely containing dangerous polluting liquids and gasses is a basic premise in chemistry. Most of the engineering infrastructure of large chemical plants is involved with containing chemicals and doing so in ways that are safe and do not pollute the environment.
On the other hand, electrical engineers have a dangerous waste product—EMI—that they'd rather forget about. Well, I suggest that in today's world that thinking is just not good enough.
Put another way, when building electrical/electronic systems start with the foundation which is to ask what pollution or damage will this project cause. The first question is to ask yourselves what are the shielding/EMR requirements for this project. Chemical and civil engineers start with such requirements as a matter of form and good practice. So should electrical engineers (you do this now re electrical safety, so you just have to extend that thinking to RFI).
It's now time electrical engineers started to work in the same way. RF shielding and protecting the electromagnetic spectrum should no longer be considered an inconvenience and afterthought but as a major component of the project.
BTW, by adopting good shielding practices you'll be preparing yourselves for the next Carrington Event. Remember RF shielding works both ways—in and out!
> Agreed, but that noise can be contained with an effective Faraday screening.
I don’t think car manufacturers are saying they don’t know how to shield, they’re saying it would come at a cost:
"Requiring the installation of analog AM radios in automobiles is an unnecessary action that would impact EV range, efficiency and affordability at a critical moment of accelerating adoption," -the fine article
Well, what are those costs? Perhaps they're not wanting to resign components that were badly design in the first instance. If so, then that's unacceptable. Moreover, a redesign would benefit over the long term.
I smell short-term thinking here and concern over their current problem of falling profits from EVs
