Panasonic's "Fully Rugged" (What that means)

In researching the purchase of a "fully rugged" CF-29, I came across a lot of posts where people were asking just how weatherproof the Panasonic "Fully Rugged" Toughbook line was. I was curious myself, considering that the videos and literature made a big deal out of the Toughbook being MIL-STD-810F compliant, but not describing to what level they are tested under the 810F.

Well, it turns out that the Panasonic Toughbook "Fully Rugged" series of laptops, including the CF-28, CF-18, CF-29, CF-19 and CF-30 (and perhaps others) are tested to a rating of IP65.

IP ratings have two required numbers and one optional number.

The first refers to the object's resistance to solid objects:
0 — / No protection against contact and ingress of objects
1 >50 mm / Any large surface of the body, such as the back of a hand, but no protection against deliberate contact with a body part
2 >12.5 mm / Fingers or similar objects
3 >2.5 mm / Tools, thick wires, etc.
4 >1 mm / Most wires, screws, etc.
5 dust protected
6 dust tight / No ingress of dust; complete protection against contact

The second refers to the object's resistance to water ingress.
0 not protected —
1 dripping water / Dripping water (vertically falling drops) shall have no harmful effect.
2 dripping water when tilted up to 15° / Vertically dripping water shall have no harmful effect when the enclosure is tilted at an angle up to 15° from its normal position.
3 spraying water / Water falling as a spray at any angle up to 60° from the vertical shall have no harmful effect.
4 splashing water / Water splashing against the enclosure from any direction shall have no harmful effect.
5 water jets / Water projected by a nozzle against enclosure from any direction shall have no harmful effects.
6 powerful water jets / Water projected in powerful jets against the enclosure from any direction shall have no harmful effects.
7 immersion up to 1 m / Ingress of water in harmful quantity shall not be possible when the enclosure is immersed in water under defined conditions of pressure and time (up to 1 m of submersion).
8 immersion beyond 1 m / The equipment is suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions which shall be specified by the manufacturer.NOTE: Normally, this will mean that the equipment is hermetically sealed. However, with certain types of equipment, it can mean that water can enter but only in such a manner that produces no harmful effects.

This means that the fully-rugged toughbooks are completely dust-tight. What is the definition of "dust"? The actual test uses an enclosed chamber with silica flour, which means that the dust being tested against is on the order of 8-100 microns. This is at the level where inhalation causes silicosis and other lung-related problems due to blockages of the lung, inflammation due to auto-immune response, as well as particle accumulation in the lymph system.

We've all seen the videos where the half-hoop sprinkle spins around the toughbook, spraying it from all sides. The time that this test is done for 40 minutes, according to Panasonic. What is the difference between an IP65 and an IP66 rating? 12.5l/min for IP65 and 100l/min for IP66. To put this in perspective, the average "normal" shower head puts out ~15l/min. The average "water saver" shower head puts out ~8.5l/min. A small fire hose is about 100l/min.

In a recent Channel Five television show, the Toughbook CF-30 was tested against another rugged laptop (I can't remember which one), and during the course of the test, a small fire hose sprayed full-force against the CF-30. According to the presenters the Panasonic failed after the test. However, according to the video there was clearly about 30-40 seconds of time that the laptop was still operational (screen running and keyboard was in use) under the fire hose. The presenter even used the toughbook to block the fire hose spray.

This tells me that the Toughbook should be able to resist at an IP66 rating for a few seconds at least, but probably not long enough to warrant an actual rating (which requires 3 min.) I do not recommend testing this yourself, unless you like a dead Toughbook.

Full immersion is out of the question, obviously.

 

Yeah, well...

You're always going to have people out there looking to knock the ToughBooks off their perch; they made the "Ruggedized" laptop a mainstream product.

As such, they have a fine line to walk - that between producing a laptop that has EVERY CONTINGENCY planned for and protected against, and producing a laptop they can bring to market at a price point that is merely painful rather than astronomical, and still be able to do so profitably.

The proof, they say, is in the pudding; and the "Fully Ruggedized" line of Toughbooks now has nearly 2 decades of REAL-WORLD TESTING in some of the harshest environments possible; from research duty in the frozen wastes of the Antarctic to active combat duty in nearly every desert in the Middle East.

Of course you'll have SOME failures; but even after all the abuse (some of it TRULY STUPID LEVELS of abuse) the product line has been subjected to, they still carry a 1.5% annual failure rate... I call that pretty d@mn good.

mnem
Numbers don't lie... but the people who live by them are usually the biggest liars of all.

 

HI All,
Have any of you noticed that the lady doctor (Penelope Cruz) in the movie Sahara is toting a CF-29 (?) among the sand dunes and bullets? Good attention to detail, don't you think?

And, as we all know, anything in the movies is the real deal.

Sparky

 

I think this is pretty much all covered on Panasonic's PDF isn't it?

 

It's not just the IP rating, it's the mil-spec standards which the fully-rugged systems from Panasonic, Opentec, Getac, etc. meet that makes them able to be described as 'fully rugged' to borrow the Panasonic terminology.

Craig.

 

Unfortunately, the MIL SPEC standard has to do with the testing methodology, not the actual resistance of the laptop to impact or water.

It's totally possible to have a MIL-SPEC-810F laptop that is only IP44, and another MIL-SPEC-810F laptop that is IP67. Both tested to the same MIL SPEC, both totally different levels of environmental resistance.

 

We understand your point; but the fact is, it's pretty much irrelevant. You're talking about a formula for testing; what we're saying is that every manufacturer is going to LOOK FOR WAYS AROUND that formula to their own benefit, so what REALLY matters is the product's survival rate in the real world vs how much they cost.

Example: You can pay $3300 each for 100 Toughbook laptops with the IP44 rating; those laptops have a failure rate of 1.5% per annum.

You can also pay $13,000 each for 25 of another Military Spec laptop that meets IP67 standard and has a failure rate of 0.5% - I'm not sure, but I believe the model I was looking at when I saw that figure was a Getrac, but anyways...

Your third of a million dollars outfits 25 soldiers with the hypothetical Getrac unit; but even if you allow a backup onsite for every soldier carrying a Toughbook, you can outfit 50 soldiers with the Toughbook. Now expand that to a more reasonable one spare for every two soldiers, and now you've outfitted 75 soldiers for that same 1/3 of a mil.

Now OBVIOUSLY there are going to be cases where you need 0% failure (or as close as possible); spaceborne research would be one such area... it's not like you can requisition a replacement laptop from orbit; and of course, there will be SOME ENVIRONMENTS where meeting ONE standard but not the other will result in 100% failure; immersion being one example. But unless you're a Navy Seal and your Pelican case gets shot full of holes enroute you're not likely going to care about that either, and then that waterlogged laptop will likely be your last concern. Again, THOSE customers will need to figure out what they need, and will need to expect to pay the ASTRONOMICAL figures one would expect from such a device; the rest of us will continue to be happy with a laptop that survives the inevitable coffee spill or snarfage and keeps on playing our YouTube...


mnem
Good idea: having a beer with your Toughbook.
Bad Idea: having a beer WITH your Toughbook.
Incredibly BAD Idea: having a beer WITH your NetBook...

 

Well put Mnem, spoken like you helped design these fantastic laptops

 

I don't believe I was comparing the Toughbook to anything. I was shopping for a Toughbook and thought my original post would be informative.

I hope you can respond rationally to this question, but what does a statistical failure rate have to do with what the IP rating of a notebook is?

I may be new to this forum, but your tone makes me feel as if you are screaming at me like I'm stirring up controversy...

 

Welcome to the forum

You have studied the Toughbooks a bit I see, do you have it narrowed down to a model yet?



At least you are not being ignored



Alex

 

sonoronos.... To borrow an old phrase.... You are preaching to the choir. Most of us here are very well aware of the capabilities of the Toughbook as we either own them, hack them, sell them or a combo of all three or even more. No one means anything by their comments. We are all eager to share what we know.

Welcome to the forum!

 

Thanks, sorry for preaching

 

*Goes back and rereads original post*

D'OH!

Okay... forgive me; it's true - nowhere in your original post did you make the attack on the Toughbook product testing system I thought you had; this was my own foolishness. Usually I'm more careful; but in my own defense, please understand that about every 2-3 months we have some guy comes poking around the forum quoting the very same Mil-spec standards as you did, and every time they're attacking the ToughBook for using such misleading specifications. We on this forum kindof get tired of it, and I simply went off on you without being sure that's what you were doing.

Sorry about that. Welcome to the forum, and here's your ticket for one free swipe at the ol' dwagon.

Furthermore -

Most of the regulars here are INTIMATELY AWARE, even PAINFULLY AWARE, of just how misleading the Mil-Specs that these kinds of hardware are manufactured to can seem... remember, the standards are created by a committee on which the MANUFACTURERS THEMSELVES have a vote. This means that by careful wording of a specification they are able to create a test procedure which, as you have seen, may SEEM comprehensive but actually does NOT prove fitness for a particular purpose.

The reason I point to that failure rate is simple; that figure INCLUDES units in service in some pretty severe conditions, even ABUSIVE conditions - ie COMBAT DUTY - as compared to a "consumer-grade" laptop where those failures are DELIBERATELY removed from the statistical record before they even begin.

If instead you look at the real-world failure rate of an instrument already deployed in the kind of harsh environment YOU WISH TO USE IT IN; then you can have much more tangible evidence of what it can or cannot withstand.

This, I feel, is a much more reasonable measure of "fitness for a particular purpose" than some hashed & rehashed document designed in part to make a particular product LOOK GOOD.

The downside of this is that you might disregard some new products by an unproven manufacturer that are IN FACT SUPERIOR BY DESIGN; that is where design & testing documents like the MIL-STD-810F rating come into play - any machine we would consider will survive use in the rain or a coffee spill; the higher-rated rated machine is likelier to survive droppage in a mud puddle or garden-hose-assault by your average 7-year-old. Of course, if that new product REALLY IS SUPERIOR QUALITY, it will not take long for it to create a reputation as such and then the manufacturer will soon have long-term failure data to point to.

mnem<~~~D'OH DWAGON~~~*

 

What I love is that, it seems, the Toughbook is a whole lot tougher than it appears and in some cases seems to go WAY over the specs. We've all heard about the numskull who filled up his bathtub and dropped in his Toughbook to see how well it withstood water ingress.... Except for the port covers being open... It may have worked!

But they continue to amaze me. Whether it is being dropped, poured on by rain or being run over by a car... I just love them. It is weird however that other things, such as a grain of sand, can wreak havoc on it. It doesn't happen often... But it can and does happen.

***One word of caution though to those who have purchased your Toughbook used*** BEFORE you do the dunk/drop/run-over testing... Make sure you either check it out or have someone who is qualified check it out to make sure that all that Mil-Spec stuff even applies to your laptop. As everyone and their dog is into modding, hacking and "rebuilding" these.... A lot of the Mil-Spec stuff is damaged or destroyed in their "Refurbishment" process. This alone is a good reason for people to be VERY picky about where they purchase their rebuilt/refurbished/customized Toughbook. We've heard a lot of stories here about people who have bought their used Toughbook and tested it only to find out that they just shorted it their LCD screen because the seller swapped touchscreens and didn't seal it correctly, if at all. In my years of working strictly with the fully rugged CF-28s, 29s, 30s and CF-18s.... I have seen some real botch jobs with glue, epoxy or tape. Wires hooked up incorrectly... The wrong screws in the wrong places... (Very common) Stripped screws because the person didn't have precision tools... (Also very common) Weird stuff they accidentally left inside. The list is long.... It always amazed me that people who don't have time to do it right the first time usually have the time to try to do it right the second time... Either that or they sell it.

<Stepping down from soapbox>

 

Well IP65 rating or not, I think I just put one of the fully rugged models to a very extreme test..... 4 hours in the back seat of a car with a 2 year old girl and a 4 year old girl. They had candy, drinks sticky fingers and the works while drawing pictures on the CF-19 in tablet mode. The battery even lasted the whole time and got nothing more than a smudged up screen and a sticky reside.

Panasonic you have made my road trip easier. I salute you!!

Dan

 

Yes, but did it meet the BARF65 specification?

mnem
Stop teasin' the baby with that cigarette & JUST GIVE IT TO 'IM...

 

lol, you guys are a crack up

 

Well.... Truth be known.... mnem is the main instigator around here... Also the chief of knowledge, dispenser of wisdom... And a few other things...

 

I can literally see his ego growing with every word you type Rick.

 

Hey!

My ego isn't THAT BIG!!!

mnem
Y'all are just jealous cuz the voices only speak to ME!

 

Yea, his wife said if the rest of his "parts" were as big as his ego....she would never leave the house!

 

That's kinda not cool

 

Are you kidding?

I NEVER get any sleep as it is... in fact, I know RIGHT NOW she's in the bedroom, just WAITING for her ever-lovin' hunka-hunka burnin' dwagon love...

mnem
Ya cain't rape the willing...

 

What's that buzzing noise I hear coming from the bathroom?

 

WOMAN, you better not be shaving your legs with my Norelco AGAIN...

mnem
Sic 'em, MARCUS!

 

Hello,
First Post!
New to the forum, & soon to be a new Toughbook owner.
Well, New to me . A Used CF-28, I can’t wait!!!!!
I have a question to propose, on this topic of what is Rugged.
Hopefully, I don’t kick the can of worms over!
I will likely Punt the can! Nevertheless, by maybe bringing this up!
Or Answering , Why some people question the Toughbook.

Here we go!
Panasonic listed there Laptops in three ways.
Business-Rugged …F8, T8
Semi-Rugged …. 52, 74
Fully-Rugged …. 19, 30
I know these are the current models for each toughbook product that
is discontinued now. I.e. …..28’s, 29’s, 57, 72’s, T’s ..etc

Past Toughbooks listings, As Fully-Rugged from Panasonic:
28:
http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webap...85944&catGroupId=49557&surfModel=Toughbook-28
29:
http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webap...68953&catGroupId=49557&surfModel=Toughbook-29

When searching for information on this forum. I can across a very useful link for Toughbook Configurations.
www.config.toughbook.com/pcsc/config/tgconfigure.nsf?open&selected=discontinued-all

All ways good, In till I read through this thread and Remembered something. If you read the first two posted links. The toughbook 28: and 29: are listed as Fully-Rugged, Right!

But on the configurations linked page. Click on The 28 and 29 listed their.
They are stated as semi-rugged, Right!

I guess my first question is,
Which is true?
Are their variants to even past listed Fully-Rugged Models?
And/or
Did Panasonic down play their listing because they are discontinued?

I pose these questions to the experts here. I did try and search for the answer first on this Forum, but with no luck.
I’m not questioning the toughbooks, At all!

Do you guys and any gals have a answer?

 

My answer would be:

They contracted some webweenies to manage their website, and said webweenies don't know (or care) about the difference.

It appears that ALL the Discontinued Model Toughbooks use the same CSS table with a fixed header which starts with " semi-rugged"; only the information after that header is changed per the individual item's specifications.

If you look at the page for the P1, you will note that it is listed as a " hanheld" computer instead of " handheld"; I promise, each P1 did NOT come with a swashbuckling space pirate from Star Wars to carry it for you. I know several women (and a few men) who would buy as many as they had if it did...

Anyhow... the CF-29,CF-29 AND the P-1 too(I believe) were all originally specified as Full-Rugged models. Don't get too worried about the internet equivalent of a typo on the webpage, but don't expect it to change anytime soon either. Panasonic, like most major manufacturers, doesn't like to expend any more resources than absolutely necessary on products that have reached End of Life; and it would cost them money to have their webweenies fix that error on the website.

mnem
Ahhh... the sounds of summer. Lawns mowing, kids laughing, the sizzle of webweenies on the BBQ...

 

Well, As you know.
Webweenies:
Made with Real 100% U.S.D.A., Lips and corn holes!
Hurl one on, for me!! And Burn it!

mnementh
Thank you, Sir!
I thought that would be the answer.
Stuff like that would feed and equip, anyone bent of taking something down.
Even when the information is wrong, &/or Interpreted incorrectly.

Now,
I have not talk to, nor run in to anyone personally. That had something bad to say about the Toughbook.
The only thing I get is, Why would you want one?
While they sit their, On their 3rd to 4th new Crack-Berry.
“I have nothing bad to say about CRACK-BERRY“S, Just put it DOWN for a minute or two”
I always have an answer for them! But, They never seem to have an answer for me.

 

Well, you know what Frank Perdue said when asked what "chicken parts" means on a hotdog package?

"Parts is PARTS."

As for the CrackBerry thing... well... if it's good enough for the President, then I've got nothing bad to say about it... and truthfully, I'm glad to finally see a man in the Oval Office who's NOT too old or just too d@mn dumb to use one.

mnem <~~~ iPwned since 2008 ~~~<<<

 

I think there are more people finally understanding the fact that the best thing the guy in the oval office could do is sit in the corner somewhere and play on his crackberry...and nothing else! (By the way, could we make that a threesome with Pelosi and Reid?)