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
email    lothar.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 

Reply via email to