We've just received EN 61000-6-3:2007 + A1:2011 which has added the ability to
test radiated emissions in either an OATS, Fully Anechoic Room (FAR) or TEM
waveguide.
What puzzled me is the limits for the FAR @ 3m:
30MHz ~ 230MHz: 42 to 35dBuV decreasing linearly with the log of the
James
It is to account for the lack of ground plane with its potential +6dB effect
due to reflection found during height scanning
The FCC have already considered this in KDB558074 when allowing conducted
spurious emissions measurements to be performed in lieu of radiated ones for
some
In message
a60ff8a65589d24a98d82fafc6f0ac56062eb8c...@euroexcc1.sats.corp, dated
Tue, 16 Oct 2012, Pawson, James james.paw...@echostar.com writes:
These limits are lower than those for an OATS at 3m. Does anyone know
why the limits are lower and of a different characteristic? I'm
guessing
Certainly radio frequency emissions measurement is far from an exact
science, but that's probably just fine for what
it is intended to do. Pass at one lab, fail at another seems to be a
common theme, so there must be many variables at play.
I've read that, depending on antenna size, 3 metre
In message
OFDEF1DD24.6EF50883-ON88257A99.005ECCE0-88257A99.005FC1FD@US.Schneider-E
lectric.com, dated Tue, 16 Oct 2012,
ralph.mcdiar...@schneider-electric.com writes:
I've read that, depending on antenna size, 3 metre distance is within
what is called the near field and if so, then I assume
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
In message
of1052898f.98b070cf-on88257a99.006668eb-88257a99.0066f...@hgst.com,
dated Tue, 16 Oct 2012, ravinder.ajm...@hgst.com 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
Ravinder
Unfortunate, but predictable (and I have come across smaller ones!) - very
few small test labs can afford a properly-built and fitted out 10m chamber.
As you realised, the dodgy area is the lower end of the frequency spectrum
where you are more likely to be in the near field than
Need an RFID expert consultant who can do system
design and programming (not for me, but for another
party).
Please send resume and references for completed
jobs. I will forward to the other party.
Richard Nute
Bend, Oregon
ri...@ieee.org
-
Around 1984 we were using a too-low 3 semi-anechoic chamber at Wang Labs
to audit out outgoing shipments. Not far away, Glenn Dash was arguing
that this was not nearly accurate enough.
We transported a specimen equipment to Dash, Strauss and Goodhue in
Boxboro, and had his people measure it,
There are two reasons I am aware of.
The lack of a 6 dB reflection (which is slightly less due to way
length),
requires a 5 dB lower limit (thus the 35 instead of 40 at 230 MHz).
Why then is this 35 not used at 30 MHz?
The fact that a FAR/OATS has a problem in achieving an optimal
summation of
11 matches
Mail list logo
