ASCII Graphic of an EMP:
Much EMF
_____
| |
| |
--------------- ---------
zero EMF
t=0 t= very short time
What frequencies would you like.... Fourier would suggest that many of
them are there :-)
:-)
Kindest regards,
Doug Jackson
em: [email protected]
ph: 0414 986878
Follow my amateur radio adventures at vk1zdj.net
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 16:04, Just Kant via cctalk <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Accordimg to certain individuals on this list, going back a few years,
> electronics/computers can be damaged due to an electrical storm, presumably
> very intense activity, even while off. Go look through the archives.
>
> I knew people back in the 80s that said they could "torque" certain
> frequencies with a cb radio in the vicinity of a car wash and turn the
> whole joint on! Vending machines are/were said to be similaely vulnerable.
> Such is the basis behind emc testing. I should know. A specific component
> is wrapped with wire say, or is placed in front of various antennas, and
> currents are pumped through or frequencies are directed at the item to see
> if it fails. Or fries (very uncommon). Specifications are provided as to
> what tests need to be conducted, literally, or radiated. If the item fails,
> additional work is required to keep the item in spec so that it doesm't
> fail in the field.
>
> Which frequencies are present in an EMP I couldn't tell you. But I have
> to believe they delivered with considerable power. I did work like that
> back in the 80s. In general I don't think too much equipment was radiation
> hardened back then. It was believed then the threat would be from a neutron
> bomb. A high altotude emp strike probably wouldn't affect much. But I'd
> certainly be concerned about one in the vicinity of a server farm or a
> military complex may frig up quite a bit. You don't havento knock out
> everyone's electronics in order to frig up a society or crucial portions of
> it. I'm binging Pikard at the moment. Their comms have limited
> effectiveness because relays (repeaters?) don't exist in 2024.
>
>
>
> Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
>
> On Monday, April 1st, 2024 at 9:46 PM, Christian Kennedy via cctalk <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 4/1/24 17:42, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote:
> >
> > > Will things like PDAs and tablets, powered off and stored inside steel
> ammo boxes survive?
> >
> >
> > Yes, as will most contemporary electronics, even without elaborate
> > protection.
> >
> > The amount of current induced in a device by EMP is a function of the
> > number and length of conductors; most modern electronics are unlikely to
> > have an issue given relatively short conductor lengths. Automotive
> > ECUs, in particular, are unlikely to be affected, as they're equipped
> > with seriously clamped lines and generally have been tested in lightning
> > simulators (EMP looks like lightning, but EMP has a much faster rise
> > time, much higher voltages, and vastly higher currents); likewise the
> > commercial electrical grid is likely to be largely unaffected due to
> > existing lightning protection. If your device can withstand a nearby
> > lightning strike, it's probably going to survive a high altitude EMP
> event.
> >
> > The biggest problem for semiconductor devices is from neutron flux when
> > under power, hence weird solutions for military systems where a PN diode
> > will be used to trigger a crowbar on the power supply (ionizing
> > radiation arrives well in advance of the neutrons). The upshot is that
> > warfighting systems will recover, although the same probably can't be
> > said for the warfighters.
> >
> > Yes, I spent entirely too much time in this space in my misspent youth.
> >
> > Note that none of this is to suggest that all electronics will survive,
> > but the doom and gloom people associate with high altitude EMP, and
> > Carrington events in particular, are generally overblown.
> >
> > --
> > Christian Kennedy, Ph.D.
> > [email protected] AF6AP | DB00000692 | PG00029419
> > http://www.mainecoon.com PGP KeyID 108DAB97
> > PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
> > "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
>
