Hello, I'm puzzled by a proposed RF link performance standard I have just reviewed that is calling for some immunity to inband interference signals. The proposed procedure to do this to is to place a system receiver in an anechoic room and then transmit to it. The transmitter signal strength is then gradually reduced until 25% or more of the signals are not understood by the receiver. This level is recorded and then an inband interference signal at 40dB greater than the receiver level recorded earlier is introduced to the system. The original transmitter is restored to full power and the system must receive any transmission from it without fault. My question is why would you base an interference signal based on receiver sensitivity. This would mean if you had a receiver that was more sensitive than the other guy you would be subject to a less intense interference signal. Why wouldn't the interference level be fixed? Not being an RF guru, this seems plain wrong to me but perhaps there is a good technical reason for it. Any thoughts?
Regards, Kevin Harris DSC ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.rcic.com/ click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"
