Agreed Ken. In this case the e-field conversion is irrelevant, and the
specified antenna factor is what it is.
From: Ken Javor [mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 11:11 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] CORRECTION (wrong page) Passive Loo
MANY years ago when I ran the Amador lab in Colorado, we had a well-known RFID
customer whose tags read at 150 kHz. Measurement distance for the FCC limit
was 300 meters. It just happened that the far corner of our 8-acre property
was very close to 300 meters as measured by my mountain bike's
If we go all the way back to the OP:
> The customer has requested an extended magnetic field emission test over the
> range 100kHz to 2MHz with a limit defined in dBpT.
> The antenna to be used is an EMCO 6512 which has it correction factors
> provided in dBS/m which the emission software used doe
On 2/27/2017 7:53 PM, Brent DeWitt wrote:
I think Ken's rational makes sense to me, since the 51.5 is derived from
20*log(377).
Sure, but now we're back to how close we are -- wavelengths -- to the emitter.
20*log(??)
Low frequencies can be tricky, and I once had to double-check a test
la
I think Ken's rational makes sense to me, since the 51.5 is derived from
20*log(377).
Brent DeWitt, AB1LF
Milford, MA
-Original Message-
From: Macy [mailto:m...@basicisp.net]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 2:54 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] CORRECTION (wrong
S/m does actually make sense (to me) as the antenna factor units for getting
magnetic field strength. Since the input to our SA or receiver measures
voltage, we get back to current by multiplying the voltage times the
conductivity, or 1 over the impedance. That doesn't directly get you to
Teslas,
Oops sorry. What Tom Sato said.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: Ken Javor
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:57:51 -0600
To:
Conversation: [PSES] Passive Loop Emissions [General Use]
Subject: Re: [PSES] Passive Loop Emissions [General Use]
Starting with an rf potential indicated on an EMI re
Starting with an rf potential indicated on an EMI receiver, using the
stipulated mho/m antenna factor yields amps/meter.
Makes sense to me if the limit is in terms of amps per meter.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
From: Ed Price
Reply-To: Ed Price
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:34:44 -0800
To:
Ralph:
I'm afraid that your explanation didn't get through to me.
When I think of an electric field, I think of two voltage levels separated
by a distance, so Volts per meter seems very descriptive. For instance, two
plates, one meter apart, with one plate at 5 Volts and the other plate at
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:15:43 +,
"Price, Andrew (Leonardo, UK)" wrote:
> The customer has requested an extended magnetic field emission test over the
> range 100kHz to 2MHz with a limit defined in dBpT.
> The antenna to be used is an EMCO 6512 which has it correction factors
> provided in
Accuracy within 1%, if measured outside the source loop by 3X, which is like
'far field'
--- ken.ja...@emccompliance.com wrote:
From: Ken Javor
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] CORRECTION (wrong page) Passive Loop Emissions [General Use]
Date: Mon, 27
The phase angle between the electric and magnetic fields appears nowhere in the
math. Electric field and 51.5 dB aren't even mentioned, nor 2.653 m$ (the fee
for entering an infinitely wide-open door!). This purely a magnetic field
relationship, B = µ_oH.
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO Own
It's valid in the absence of a magnetic material (relative permeability =
1). The 51.5 dB factor is based on the far field.
Ken Javor
Phone: (256) 650-5261
> From: John Woodgate
> Reply-To: John Woodgate
> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 18:07:27 -
> To:
> Subject: Re: [PSES] CORRECTION (wrong p
On 2/27/2017 12:23 PM, John McAuley wrote:
The difference between dB(pT) and dB(µA/m) is 2 dB.
dB(pT) -2 = dB(µA/m)
His customer wants dB s/m, which is not printable with the TE software.
From the EMCO manual:
/
/Cortland Richmond/
/
.
-
--
I doubt that, because it's valid at audio frequencies, which undoubtedly means
'near field'.
With best wishes DESIGN IT IN! OOO – Own Opinions Only
www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and Associates Rayleigh England
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond [m
On 2/27/2017 12:23 PM, John Macaulay wrote:
The difference between dB(pT) and dB(µA/m) is 2 dB.
dB(pT) -2 = dB(µA/m)
This is
true only in the Far Field.
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-ps
The difference between dB(pT) and dB(µA/m) is 2 dB.
dB(pT) -2 = dB(µA/m)
-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond [mailto:k...@earthlink.net]
Sent: 27 February 2017 16:45
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] CORRECTION (wrong page) Passive Loop Emissions [General Use]
O
Hi, any chance that you are using TILE software?
-David
-Original Message-
From: Cortland Richmond [mailto:k...@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 8:45 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] CORRECTION (wrong page) Passive Loop Emissions [General Use]
On 2/27/2
It's about as obscure as using "dBuV/m" for field strength
Ralph McDiarmid
Product Compliance
Engineering
Solar Business
Schneider Electric
From: Ed Price [mailto:edpr...@cox.net]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 5:37 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Passive Loop Emissions [
On 2/27/2017 7:15 AM, Price, Andrew (Leonardo, UK) wrote:
The customer has requested an extended magnetic field emission test over the
range 100kHz to 2MHz with a limit defined in dBpT.
The antenna to be used is an EMCO 6512 which has it correction factors provided
in dBS/m which the emission s
On 2/27/2017 7:15 AM, Price, Andrew (Leonardo, UK) wrote:
... customer has requested an extended magnetic field emission test over the
range 100kHz to 2MHz with a limit defined in dBpT.
The antenna to be used is an EMCO 6512 which has it correction factors provided
in dBS/m which the emission s
Quite likely, but condensing units like that is very confusing. I remember from
a long time ago, someone complaining about it and citing the reference pressure
sensitivity of a piezo-electric element, which is (volts/m)/(newtons/ square
metre). The American spec writer had condensed that to 'voltm
Andrew:
I thought that S/m was a unit of electrical conductivity, defined as 0.01
mho/cm. This seems like a useless unit for magnetic field strength.
I did find one site:
http://www.mdltechnologies.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/6512-datasheet.p
df
which provides a side-by-side ch
I think you have to ask EMCO, because that horrible dBS/m ( S = siemens) is
mathematically unsound (don't ask) and is dB (amps/volts)/m, whereas picotesla
only involves current, distance and the permeability of space, not voltage.
This does assume that everyone is using the correct units and the
Hi All
I need some help in obtaining the correct result.
The customer has requested an extended magnetic field emission test over the
range 100kHz to 2MHz with a limit defined in dBpT.
The antenna to be used is an EMCO 6512 which has it correction factors provided
in dBS/m which the emission so
25 matches
Mail list logo