Brian, and Grace, I've had experience with two "turnkey" systems, the EMTest system, and an older Teseq system. For both of those, there was no way to directly control the signal generator or any other part of the system. I tried to get documentation for the Teseq, after finding out there were GPIB commands to control the instrument, but those commands were closely guarded by Teseq and were only available to calibration labs. I gave up on that one and relegated the system to the surplus equipment cabinet. Where I work now, we have the EMTest system but only use the internal amplifier, hooked up to an external sig-gen and power meter running 3rd party software. The internal firmware routines were very limited and I could never get the external probe feedback to work to my satisfaction. On either of those above mentioned systems, there wasn't a good way to perform threshold verification or mitigation work. I much prefer having individual intruments with PC based software. Much more flexible IMHO. The AR system that Grace mentioned seems to be a collection of intruments in one box and it appears to be possible to drive everything individually. That system look promising, but I still think I would want standard off-the-shelf instruments that *might* have more support for drivers or software. Bob R.
________________________________ From: "Kunde, Brian" <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2013 10:22 AM Subject: RE: 61000-4-6 Immunity Test Systems We have never used a turnkey system for conducted immunity so I would be most interested in hearing feedback from those who do. I assume the system automates the calibration method and provides feedback during the test to insure the equipment is operating properly. There are different test methods such as the standard substitution method, level off forward power, level off current clamp, direct couple, etc. Does a turnkey system easily handle all these test methods and more? We have always used discrete signal generator, amp, bidirectional coupler, and CDNs (clamps). The equipment can be used for other purposes such as calibration verification of cables, attenuators, LISNs, etc. So for us to consider a turnkey system would really have to prove it’s worth. Like I said I would really like to hear feedback on this topic along with the request from Grace Lin (I don’t want to hijack this thread). The Other Brian From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Grace Lin Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 9:12 AM To: [email protected] Subject: 61000-4-6 Immunity Test Systems Dear Members, I am researching 61000-4-6 conducted immunity test systems. If you have knowledge of any manufacturer and models, could you please share, good (online or offline) or bad (offline)? In addition to the emtest CWD 500N1 (http://www.emtest.com/products/product/135120100000010151.php), at this time, there are two systems on my list: AR CI00250A (http://www.arww-rfmicro.com/html/18200.asp?id=655) and Teseq NSG 4070 (http://www.teseq.com/products/NSG-4070.php). Thank you very much and look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Grace Lin - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]> ________________________________ LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]>
