I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote
(in 20020119014135.UEWQ10932.femail35.sdc1.sfba.home.com@[65.11.150.27]
) about 'RF Field Uniformity and Antenna location', on Fri, 18 Jan
2002:
I went to the EMC Test Systems website and looked at the 3106 half power
beamwidth
is not as much as my gut reaction. I am used to working at 1
meter separations and the directionality of the DRG horn is a greater
problem than at three meters.
--
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: RF Field Uniformity and Antenna location
Date: Fri
I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote
(in 20020118175519.JJOG20810.femail29.sdc1.sfba.home.com@[65.11.150.27]
) about 'RF Field Uniformity and Antenna location', on Fri, 18 Jan
2002:
Assuming
it is, I can't imagine using a horn, which is a constant aperture antenna
I read in !emc-pstc that scott@jci.com wrote (in OFF94D1E4A.FD295DB
3-on85256b45.00491...@na.jci.com) about 'RF Field Uniformity and
Antenna location', on Fri, 18 Jan 2002:
4. Our experience has been that position 3, is generally lower in field
strength when compared to other points
absorber on the floor between antenna and quiet
zone.
--
From: scott@jci.com
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Cc: craig.har...@jci.com, james.e.te...@jci.com
Subject: RF Field Uniformity and Antenna location
Date: Fri, Jan 18, 2002, 10:13 AM
To All,
We are working toward adding
To All,
We are working toward adding capability to perform Radiated Immunity Free
Field Testing (Substitution Method), which is very similar to the IEC
61000-4-3 method. The main differences are the following:
1. We have a 15 position target area for uniformity instead of 16
2. Uniformity
6 matches
Mail list logo
