RE: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006
The reason for the 1.8 factor is that you are calibrating with a CW signal. When you switch the modulation on in real testing the peak level for the amplifier will be in the range of 1.8 of the CW level. It’s just a pre-caution not to overdrive the amplifier. Best Regards Lothar Schmidt Director Regulatory Antenna Services CETECOM Inc. 411 Dixon Landing Road Milpitas, CA 95035 Phone +1 (408) 586 6214 Fax +1 (408) 586 6299 emaillothar.schm...@cetecomusa.com mailto:lothar.schm...@cetecomusa.com This e-mail may contain proprietary, privileged and confidential information for the sole use of the named intended recipient. Any review or distribution of this e-mail by any party other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and immediately contact the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Bob Richards Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 7:15 PM To: ieee Subject: Re: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006 Don, I agree completely with the additional checks that you perform. In my opinion, performing the calibration at 18v/m instead of 10v/m is not a good idea. I understand and agree with the intent, but in practice it can cause problems. In a chamber that does not perform well, you may be overdriving the amp at some probe positions (nulls) just trying to level to 18v/m. This can cause harmonics that can affect the probe readings and give erroneous field uniformity information. I have seen harmonics affect the probe readings when trying to calibrate below 80 MHz with bi-log type antennas, where the antenna factor really stinks at the lower frequencies. Even though the standard says what it says, I think it is better to calibrate at a lower level so as to make the harmonics a non-issue, make the calculations for the new drive levels (to include the 80% peak power) then perform the checks you describe. You also need to peform the radiated harmonics check as described in the standard. I would then feel much more comfortable defending the results. Bob Richards, NCT --- On Tue, 8/5/08, don_borow...@selinc.com don_borow...@selinc.com wrote: And the standard suggests doing field calibrations at the peak level of the RF during AM modulation, e.g., when calibrating for 10 V/m testing, calibrate the field at 18 V/m, which is the peak level of the RF with 80% AM modulation turned on (I have always favored this method). I do two additional checks not discussed in the standard: 1. I use the uniform drive level method of field calibration. After the calibration, I compare the drive level used during the calibration to that obtained from the 16-point calculation (for most points, the resultant drive from the 16-point calculation is lower than the uniform drive used for the field calibration); 2. Using the drive table obtained from the 16-point calculation, I make a power measurement at the output of the power amplifier to make sure the output power is comfortably within the maximum capability of the amplifier. - 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006
Lothar, Yes, you are correct. However, my point was that the higher level can cause issues as far as the 16 point uniformity data is concerned, and becomes irrelevant anyway since the final drive level will be different. Once the 16 point data has been used to calculate the required drive level, you are no longer using the same level that was used during the 16 point data collection. It may be lower, or it may be higher. The drive level, including the 80% increase for modulation, really needs to be checked AFTER the new drive level has been calculated from the 16 point data to make sure it passes the 2dB linearity check and the 6dB radiated harmonics requirement. Bob Richards, NCT --- On Wed, 8/6/08, Lothar Schmidt lothar.schm...@cetecomusa.com wrote: From: Lothar Schmidt lothar.schm...@cetecomusa.com Subject: RE: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006 To: b...@toprudder.com, ieee emc-p...@ieee.org Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 12:43 PM The reason for the 1.8 factor is that you are calibrating with a CW signal. When you switch the modulation on in real testing the peak level for the amplifier will be in the range of 1.8 of the CW level. It¢s just a pre-caution not to overdrive the amplifier. Best Regards Lothar Schmidt Director Regulatory Antenna Services CETECOM Inc. 411 Dixon Landing Road Milpitas, CA 95035 Phone +1 (408) 586 6214 Fax +1 (408) 586 6299 emaillothar.schm...@cetecomusa.com mailto:lothar.schm...@cetecomusa.com This e-mail may contain proprietary, privileged and confidential information for the sole use of the named intended recipient. Any review or distribution of this e-mail by any party other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and immediately contact the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Bob Richards Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 7:15 PM To: ieee Subject: Re: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006 Don, I agree completely with the additional checks that you perform. In my opinion, performing the calibration at 18v/m instead of 10v/m is not a good idea. I understand and agree with the intent, but in practice it can cause problems. In a chamber that does not perform well, you may be overdriving the amp at some probe positions (nulls) just trying to level to 18v/m. This can cause harmonics that can affect the probe readings and give erroneous field uniformity information. I have seen harmonics affect the probe readings when trying to calibrate below 80 MHz with bi-log type antennas, where the antenna factor really stinks at the lower frequencies. Even though the standard says what it says, I think it is better to calibrate at a lower level so as to make the harmonics a non-issue, make the calculations for the new drive levels (to include the 80% peak power) then perform the checks you describe. You also need to peform the radiated harmonics check as described in the standard. I would then feel much more comfortable defending the results. Bob Richards, NCT --- On Tue, 8/5/08, don_borow...@selinc.com don_borow...@selinc.com wrote: And the standard suggests doing field calibrations at the peak level of the RF during AM modulation, e.g., when calibrating for 10 V/m testing, calibrate the field at 18 V/m, which is the peak level of the RF with 80% AM modulation turned on (I have always favored this method). I do two additional checks not discussed in the standard: 1. I use the uniform drive level method of field calibration. After the calibration, I compare the drive level used during the calibration to that obtained from the 16-point calculation (for most points, the resultant drive from the 16-point calculation is lower than the uniform drive used for the field calibration); 2. Using the drive table obtained from the 16-point calculation, I make a power measurement at the output of the power amplifier to make sure the output power is comfortably within the maximum capability of the amplifier. - 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 emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org
BS EN 61000-4-3:2006
Dear Group, I notice that the above standard has recently been amended. Can anybody out there please give me an idea as to which of its many clauses have been changed? Many thanks in anticipation of your help. Ian Unwin Servomex Group Limited, Jarvis Brook, Crowborough, East Sussex, TN6 3DU, England. e-mail: i...@servomex.com Company Registered in England: No.2170458 VAT No.: GB 522 6077 63 Register now at http://www.servomex.com/zap.html for an opportunity to win a great prize in our quarterly draw. This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs and contains information from Servomex which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us immediately. Servomex may, as part of its normal activities, monitor, edit or censor the content of any information and software, transmitted through, or stored on, its facilities. - 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006
Dear Ian, Do you mean the A1:2007? I read it a few weeks ago and what I knew is that only a new informative Annex describing the calibration method for E-field probes was added. The 'E-field probe' here is the one used in the field uniformity calibration procedures in accordance with 61000-4-3. Best Regards, Hugo Lam From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of iun...@servomex.com Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 12:07 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006 Dear Group, I notice that the above standard has recently been amended. Can anybody out there please give me an idea as to which of its many clauses have been changed? Many thanks in anticipation of your help. Ian Unwin Servomex Group Limited, Jarvis Brook, Crowborough, East Sussex, TN6 3DU, England. e-mail: i...@servomex.com Company Registered in England: No.2170458 VAT No.: GB 522 6077 63 Register now at http://www.servomex.com/zap.html for an opportunity to win a great prize in our quarterly draw. This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs and contains information from Servomex which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us immediately. Servomex may, as part of its normal activities, monitor, edit or censor the content of any information and software, transmitted through, or stored on, its facilities. - 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006
The biggest change is a new sweep: 1.4 GHz up to as high as 6 GHz (go to product-specific standards to determine the upper limit - protective relays are tested up to 2.7 GHz). There is a new appendix with detailed methods for the proper calibration of field probes. And the standard suggests doing field calibrations at the peak level of the RF during AM modulation, e.g., when calibrating for 10 V/m testing, calibrate the field at 18 V/m, which is the peak level of the RF with 80% AM modulation turned on (I have always favored this method). I do two additional checks not discussed in the standard: 1. I use the uniform drive level method of field calibration. After the calibration, I compare the drive level used during the calibration to that obtained from the 16-point calculation (for most points, the resultant drive from the 16-point calculation is lower than the uniform drive used for the field calibration); 2. Using the drive table obtained from the 16-point calculation, I make a power measurement at the output of the power amplifier to make sure the output power is comfortably within the maximum capability of the amplifier. Donald Borowski Schweitzer Engineering Labs Pullman, WA, USA IUnwin@SERVOMEX.C OM Sent by: To emc-p...@ieee.org emc-p...@ieee.org cc 08/05/2008 09:13 Subject AMBS EN 61000-4-3:2006 Dear Group, I notice that the above standard has recently been amended. Can anybody out there please give me an idea as to which of its many clauses have been changed? Many thanks in anticipation of your help. Ian Unwin - 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
RE: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006
This may be a good lead in to a question that I had regarding that amendment. I haven't had the opportunity [or need] to really compare directly, but at first glance it seemed that the Amendment 1 to 61000-4-3:2006 may be similar to Annex D in IEEE 1309. Does anyone know if this is the case or if there was an effort made to harmonize the two? Best regards, Mac Elliott EMC Engineer Motorola GPS EMC Laboratories Phone: 954.723.5480 Email: fme...@motorola.com [] Motorola Confidential Restricted (MCR), [] Motorola Internal Use Only [ X ] General Public From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Hugo Lam ES-HKG Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 12:54 PM To: iun...@servomex.com; emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: RE: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006 Dear Ian, Do you mean the A1:2007? I read it a few weeks ago and what I knew is that only a new informative Annex describing the calibration method for E-field probes was added. The 'E-field probe' here is the one used in the field uniformity calibration procedures in accordance with 61000-4-3. Best Regards, Hugo Lam From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of iun...@servomex.com Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 12:07 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006 Dear Group, I notice that the above standard has recently been amended. Can anybody out there please give me an idea as to which of its many clauses have been changed? Many thanks in anticipation of your help. Ian Unwin Servomex Group Limited, Jarvis Brook, Crowborough, East Sussex, TN6 3DU, England. e-mail: i...@servomex.com Company Registered in England: No.2170458 VAT No.: GB 522 6077 63 Register now at http://www.servomex.com/zap.html for an opportunity to win a great prize in our quarterly draw. This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs and contains information from Servomex which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us immediately. Servomex may, as part of its normal activities, monitor, edit or censor the content of any information and software, transmitted through, or stored on, its facilities. - 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald:emc-p...@daveheald.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Re: BS EN 61000-4-3:2006
Don, I agree completely with the additional checks that you perform. In my opinion, performing the calibration at 18v/m instead of 10v/m is not a good idea. I understand and agree with the intent, but in practice it can cause problems. In a chamber that does not perform well, you may be overdriving the amp at some probe positions (nulls) just trying to level to 18v/m. This can cause harmonics that can affect the probe readings and give erroneous field uniformity information. I have seen harmonics affect the probe readings when trying to calibrate below 80 MHz with bi-log type antennas, where the antenna factor really stinks at the lower frequencies. Even though the standard says what it says, I think it is better to calibrate at a lower level so as to make the harmonics a non-issue, make the calculations for the new drive levels (to include the 80% peak power) then perform the checks you describe. You also need to peform the radiated harmonics check as described in the standard. I would then feel much more comfortable defending the results. Bob Richards, NCT --- On Tue, 8/5/08, don_borow...@selinc.com don_borow...@selinc.com wrote: And the standard suggests doing field calibrations at the peak level of the RF during AM modulation, e.g., when calibrating for 10 V/m testing, calibrate the field at 18 V/m, which is the peak level of the RF with 80% AM modulation turned on (I have always favored this method). I do two additional checks not discussed in the standard: 1. I use the uniform drive level method of field calibration. After the calibration, I compare the drive level used during the calibration to that obtained from the 16-point calculation (for most points, the resultant drive from the 16-point calculation is lower than the uniform drive used for the field calibration); 2. Using the drive table obtained from the 16-point calculation, I make a power measurement at the output of the power amplifier to make sure the output power is comfortably within the maximum capability of the amplifier. - 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 emc-p...@ieee.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 emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
