There is something I do not understand about this discussion.
An instrument, IMHO, should not primarily named by its application.
In this case, I would call it a test receiver, not an EMI receiver (not good)
or EMC receiver (even worse).
The same test receiver can be used to measure EMI, but
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf
Of michael.na...@emerson.com
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 1:05 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: EMI Receivers
An instrument, IMHO, should not primarily named by its application.
In this
Well, yes. Not surprising. German terminology is quite exact.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: michael.na...@emerson.com
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 09:04:48 -
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Conversation: EMI Receivers
Subject: RE: EMI Receivers
There is something I do not understand about
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken
Javor
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 8:08 AM
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
With this sloppy terminology, rife in the
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Ken
Javor
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 8:08 AM
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMI Receivers
Second, please folks, there is no
In message
384ddcf824e208478e2aba72f5fbeb4cefa...@etsmsg-lonexm01.etsmsg.org,
dated Mon, 1 Dec 2008, michael.na...@emerson.com writes:
An instrument, IMHO, should not primarily named by its application. In
this case, I would call it a test receiver, not an EMI receiver (not
good) or EMC
Hi All
What was wrong with the old Stoddart/Ailtech Identity?
EMI/Field Intensity Meter
Regards
Andy
Andrew P. Price
Principle Hardware Engineer, EMC Specialist
SELEX GALILEO, Sensors Airborne Systems
Christopher Martin Road
Basildon
Essex SS14 3EL
Mail Ref : K160
( Tel
My management calls it that expensive do-hickey.
Bob Heller
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel: 651- 778-6336
Fax: 651-778-6252
Price, Andrew
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Price,
Andrew
(SELEX GALILEO, UK)
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 7:00 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: EMI Receiver
Hi All
In message
baaffc88eeb3c541b27f567064251ef905333...@desmdswms202.des.grplnk.net,
dated Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Price, Andrew (SELEX GALILEO, UK)
andrew.p.pr...@selexgalileo.com writes:
What was wrong with the old Stoddart/Ailtech Identity?
EMI/Field Intensity Meter
But does it measure field
Picking a very small nit, field intensity is measured in terms of Volts per
meter, these days. Radiated power density is measured in terms of Watts per
square meter.
The reason that Stoddart so named their devices, which clearly are
two-terminal voltmeters, and not in and of themselves field
John,
Many thanks for your very useful advice.
Regards,
Scott
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 2008?~11??30?? 19:47
To: Scott Xe
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: UK plug sockets etc. (Safety) regulations
In message 493262ac.08486e0a.6911.6...@mx.google.com, dated
In message c5596668.3288c%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Mon, 1
Dec 2008, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
Picking a very small nit, field intensity is measured in terms of Volts
per
meter, these days. Radiated power density is measured in terms of Watts
per
square meter.
This may be one of those usage differences that occur on opposite sides of
the Pond. After all, what we in the USA call a billion, you call a milliard,
and what you mean by a billion is what we call one trillion.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk
Can we please drop this topic now..I am beginning to lose
the will to live.
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Price,
Edward
Sent: 01 December 2008 16:53
To: Untitled
Subject: RE: EMI Receiver
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf
Of Ken Javor
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 8:47 AM
To: Untitled
Subject: Re: EMI Receiver
This may be one of those usage differences that occur on
opposite sides of the Pond. After all, what we in
I would like to get a modest capability to do some of the ramped power quality
tests defined in MIL-STD-704. Typically, I would want to be able to apply
various DC voltage inputs to a test specimen, and then slew those voltages
following the typical dV/dT requirements.
Typical exposures might be
In message c5597135.328a7%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Mon, 1
Dec 2008, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
This may be one of those usage differences that occur on opposite sides
of the Pond. After all, what we in the USA call a billion, you call a
milliard, and what you
Not just yet, sorry. Of course you can always do what they tell us to do
when they pollute the airwaves with rotgut television shows: change the
channel. No one is forcing anyone to watch the trash or read these posts,
which are nicely labeled as to subject.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
Ed,
The automotive EMC / Power Quality testing community use Techron 7700 series
DC Coupled audio amplifiers for the type of test you are talking about. They
can supply typically either 100V or 100A. They can ramp in typically 50 µs
depending on what the ramp amplitude is. We also use these
In message
9d04b979323dcd428297dda95108893e0120c...@bb-corp-ex2.corp.cubic.cub,
dated Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Price, Edward ed.pr...@cubic.com writes:
So USA 2 billion is a UK billiard?
Of course. The basis is the archaic unit 'ard' = 10^12, so a milliard is
obviously 10^9. (;-)
--
OOO - Own
Ed,
have a look into automotive power simulators.
Manufacturers: Toellner http://www.toellner.de
Em-Test http://www.emtest.de
Argantix is also worth a look: http://www.argantix.com
California Instruments (same company as Argantix) as well.
Best regards,
Michael
I guess all that English lit they made us read was that old... My mistake on
the numbers, but the field intensity vs. power density definitions are as I
stated on the west side of the Pond.
In fact over here we state the definition of the Poynting vector as:
Power density (W/m^2) = electric
Ed and I are on the same page about 95% of the time, and that is a
conservative estimate. But this time he is wrong. Not in the fundamental
concepts, but as they apply to the control of RE and RI.
Certainly every electronic device can be both an emitter (culprit) and
receiver (victim). That
In message c5598078.328cf%ken.ja...@emccompliance.com, dated Mon, 1
Dec 2008, Ken Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com writes:
The clear and undeniable truth is that radiated emission limits are
necessary to protect BCB radio reception, and only that.
This question is being studied by CENELEC.
What is the requirement for susceptibility to magnetic
fields from the AC mains as listed in EN60601-1?
The requirement does appear in 60601 doesn't it? Or is
there a more stringent requirement in another spec?
Is the magnetic field susceptibility to be measured at 2
milliTeslas? seems a bit
In message web-197812...@california.com, dated Mon, 1 Dec 2008,
m...@california.com writes:
What is the requirement for susceptibility to magnetic fields from the
AC mains as listed in EN60601-1?
It's really dangerous to rely on answers to such questions, even from
this erudite community.
Going to, but need to design NOW, or at least make certain
I'm not painted into a corner later.
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:35:37 +
John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote:
In message web-197812...@california.com, dated Mon, 1
Dec 2008, m...@california.com writes:
What is the requirement
In message web-197819...@california.com, dated Mon, 1 Dec 2008,
m...@california.com writes:
Going to, but need to design NOW, or at least make certain I'm not
painted into a corner later.
You can buy EN 61010-1 on-line as a download in English from many of the
European standards
I have a question for the group. I was told that I need matched antennas
to perform a site attenuation measurement. If that is true I would like
to know why. I was planning on using appropriate antennas that cover the
needed ranges, but they are not identical.
Thanks,
Cody
-
This message is
The normalized site attenuation calculation is based on matched antennas
(identical gains and antenna factors).
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: codymil...@micron.com
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:31:10 -0700
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Conversation: Site Attenuation
Subject: Site Attenuation
The matched antennas are calibrated together and the antenna factors and
gains divided in half and then assigned to each - that's the matching part.
Look at the math for the NSA calculation and it appears that these effects are
subtracted out.
- Bill
Indecision may or may not be the problem.
32 matches
Mail list logo
