In message <of61e94bfa.fb76a93e-on88257497.00594c69-88257497.005a9...@slpower.com>, dated Thu, 31 Jul 2008, [email protected] writes:
>Is it practical to get corresponding measurements in a 3m semi-anechoic >chamber, let alone a fully-anechoic chamber? This is an elephant in the EMC room at present, and I think my UK colleagues and I are among the few that can see it yet. We had discussions in UK about it, and agreed (after MUCH discussion) that a definition of 'corresponding', or whichever word is used in a similar context, is required. Some experts are interpreting it as a strict numerical 'n dB for n dB' equivalence, which is just not realistic, and not even compatible with physics. A UK committee agreed that what was realistic to require was a repeatable correlation, e.g. notionally in the form of a look-up table, and this was submitted to CENELEC and CISPR. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it, or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose! John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - 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
