Not an answer, but one would expect some sort of correlation between the
61000-4-6 levels of 1, 3, and 10 V, and the 61000-4-3 levels of 1, 3, and 10
V/m.

But I have asked for and never seen the derivation.

Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261

 

Hello all,

 

I am looking for background information on the rationale behind the
conducted immunity test levels defined in EN 55035 / CISPR 35 and IEC
61000-4-6.

 

Specifically, in 55035:2016  table 2, clause 2.1 calls for a test level of
3V rms from 0.15 to 10MHz.  It also defines a slope that reduces the signal
level above 10MHz.

 

What is the technical rationale behind 3V rms being the desired immunity
level for ITE equipment?

 

Second, why does the voltage level taper above 10MHz in 55035, as opposed to
55024, where the test remains constant from 150kHz - 80MHz?

 

IEC 61000-4-6 also calls for 1V, 3V, 10V rms test levels and calls for 80%
AM modulation "to simulate actual threats".  Is the rationale behind this
documented somewhere? What threats were considered?

 

I suspect this is a rabbit hole, but curiosity (and a concerned client) has
gotten the best of me.

--

Jeff Keyzer

MightyOhm LLC
[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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.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://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
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]>

Reply via email to