Thank you very much to everyone who has replied, online or offline.
 
If I remember correctly, there was an IEEE paper to compare test data taken at
3m and 10m.  It concluded as Bob's comment.  The paper was forwarded by a
chief engineer, then.  I remember it was published in 1993 by an Australian
author(s). 
 
Regarding NSA at 3m chambers, based on chamber proposals I have received,
chamber manufacturers are able to build 3m chambers (about 9m x 6m x 6m, sizes
varies by manufacturers) within the required +/- 4 dB NSA (volumetric
measurement).  The best NSA can be achieved is 3 dB for a 3m chamber.  BSMI
(Taiwan's government authority for EMC and Safety) has a 10m chamber within
+/- 2 dB NSA.  I wonder a 30m chamber (if there is one) may have a better NSA. 
 
Grace

 
On 6/20/07, Bob Richards <[email protected]> wrote: 

I don't think anyone has mentioned it yet, so I will. Due to the effects of
the required reflective ground plane, the difference in the theoretical NSA
between a 3m and 10m site does not equal 10dB through much of the frequency
range. The 10dB rolloff (actually, 10.5dB) really only applies to free space.
 
It has also been my experience that 3m measurements in a 10m chamber more
closely follow the theoretical NSA than do measurements at the 10m distance.
At my previous employer, the proximity of the walls caused a deviation of
almost 4 dB at the 10m distance (from 60 to 100 MHz as I recall), while the 3m
measurements were very much closer to theoretical NSA, since the walls were
farther away relative to the measurement distance. Generally speaking,
everything else the same (like absorber performance) the larger chambers will
perform better. 
 
Bob Richards, NCT.



[email protected] wrote:

Just as a point of clarity.....................the +/- 4 dB NSA range
applies to OATS as well so there could be as much as 8 dB difference 
between one OATS and another and both could have good NSAs. The +/- 4 dB is
not a parameter just for volumetric measurements but applies to all test
sites. With volumetric measurements it is more difficult to attain the +/- 
4 dB.

And I have to agree with an earlier email. A lot 3 meter "chambers" that I
have seen are "home made" and would not pass NSA.

Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 
Tel: 651- 778-6336
Fax: 651-778-6252
=======================================
==========================================================






- ---------------------------------------------------------------- This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 
To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] 


Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 


List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 


For help, send mail to the list administrators: 


Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell  <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected] 


For policy questions, send mail to: 


Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald:  <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected] 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 


http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc


















- ---------------------------------------------------------------- This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] 


Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html 


List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 


For help, send mail to the list administrators: 


Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] 


For policy questions, send mail to: 


Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] 


All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: 


http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc 
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________



Reply via email to