In message
<of1052898f.98b070cf-on88257a99.006668eb-88257a99.0066f...@hgst.com>,
dated Tue, 16 Oct 2012, [email protected] writes:
Several years ago I was using a 3m FAR for pre-compliance measurements.
They were using a giant BiLog antenna for the measurements. A constant
factor was added to the measured values to arrive at the OATS value.
The reason I stopped using their facility was because the data didn't
correlate well with the 10m semi-anechoic chamber.
This sort of thing will continue, but we may hope that it doesn't create
an insuperable problem, because the correct technical procedure would be
to establish an empirical correlation (possibly very complex) between
SAR, FAR and OATS by means of a huge 'round-robin' test of hundreds of
different product samples in each environment. Clearly, no-one will pay
for this.
The standards-makers have done their best within the realms of the
possible.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
The longer it takes to make a point, the more obtuse it proves to be.
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion
list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
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]>
