I'd like to thank all who chimed in with their thoughts. And yes, I am well aware of how standards get put together and appreciate the hard work of those who give them life. In no way I wanted to criticize their work, I was just seeking confirmation that I'm not (that) crazy.
I particularly liked the suggestion of using an intermediate plate, into which I could drill as many holes as I want. I will explore that idea for sure. AP On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 7:19 AM John Woodgate <j...@woodjohn.uk> wrote: > I endorse paragraph 2 below. We in GB are lucky that participation in > standards work in BSI is free. (But it doesn't stop us complaining about > the cost of BSI standards - a doozy I found yesterday is £200 for six > pages, of which three are the actual text.) > > Standards work is to a significant extent supported by people who, for > whatever reason, have more than normal time to devote to it. Quite a large > proportion are formally retired, and for them, continued participation is > not only 'making a difference' but also essential intellectual exercise. > > Makers of AMNs and the like might address this issue by devising other > ways of attaching the boxes to the ground plane without using holes. For > example, if there is a sheet of steel under the ground plane. magnets on > the boxes would work. > > Best wishes > John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only > J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk > Rayleigh, Essex UK > > On 2019-08-10 10:37, Gert Gremmen wrote: > > Drilling holes in (new) chamber is like drilling holes in your new cars > roof for an antenna. I can imagine your hesitation. However there is (as > long as the holes are not to big and correctly made) nothing against it. If > it allows you to reliably position your AMN devices you need, a swiss > cheese will be the best solution. > > Regarding the standards... standards are written by guys like you and me. > Experts in the WG and national committees are not paid for their knowledge > (which actually is one of the finest on the planet !) , and many of them > will confirm that they (or their employer) actually need to pay to transfer > their expertise to IEC. Many members will lack motivation (or are not > allowed ) to really spend time in correcting, drafting and searching for > problems in standards texts. Participating in standards work is a kind of > charity, but for those who are nominated to defend their employers > interests. So small errors are easily overlooked, and it seems that you > found a few of them. > > Please do not worry and find your own (defendable) solutions, experiment > and verify if measurement differences occur. There will be. EMC testing is > not an exact science and standards are should be read as a generic > guideline. No-one will notice the differences in set-up and no-one will > challenge them as their own experience will be similar. If your are to be > audited, referring to the open issues in the standard might help. > > Cable lay-out is the most difficult part of emission testing, and small > difference will make sometimes 10's of dB of differences. Where the > equipment set up and the room calibration will give you a measurement > uncertainty (MU) of about 5 dB (if all done right) the EUT setup will > easily add 15-20 dB to that. > > Oh and if you are interested into a better test set-up than CISPR32 > (former 22), look into the CISPR 16 series,especially the chapters om > measurement volumes. > > > Gert Gremmen > > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc > discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to < > emc-p...@ieee.org> > > All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: > http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html > > Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at > http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in > well-used formats), large files, etc. > > Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ > Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> > List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org> > Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org> > David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com> > - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
