Dear Dave,
Thanks for your information.
Since the local regulatory body set both E-Field AND H-Field limit for
frequency range under 195kHz. But as I know, for all radiated emission
measurement under 30MHz should use loop antenna, so I use EMCO 6502 for E and
H- fields measurement.
The spectr
Dave,
We have run the measurements at 300 m, 30 m, and 10 m and found the fall
off of 1/R^3 apply because the magnetic field is being measured using a
loop antenna. The far field E field rule does not apply for a magnetic
field.
Regards,
Frank de Vall
Sr. Engineering Manager - Compliance
Assa A
Derek,
in regards to the magnetic field measurement from 50 kHz to 1 GHz:
You can figure that your measurement is in the far-field when the distance is
>1/6 wavelength. At a distance of 10 meters this occurs above 5 MHz. So above 5
MHz the field will drop as 1/d and the difference between 300
Don Umbdenstock posted
> and one will not be able to
measure the H field of a loop source of 50 kHz in the far field. <<
>From a "former life" I recall we never once saw a VDE 0871 H-field emission
>from our computers. Still had to look!
Cortland Richmond
KA5S
This message is from the IEEE Pro
6 -0400
> To: ieee pstc list
> Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
>
> Ken Javor wrote
>
>>> The only practical solution is to use a
> probe that looks like the one the victim of rfi is going to be using,
> connected to a receiver of equal
stin, TX).
IMO, such test would only be for very special circumstances and do not
warrant standardization as routine requirements.
> From: Bob Richards
> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 05:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
> To: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measu
ck
Manager Compliance Engineering
Tyco Safety Products / Sensormatic
6600 Congress Avenue
Boca Raton, FL 33487 USA
561.912.6440
djumbdenst...@tycoint.com
From: Bob Richards [mailto:b...@toprudder.com]
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 8:05 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Ne
Ken,
I'm no expert, but as I understand it, making
measurements at low frequencies, measured in the near
field, it is possible to have a very high E-field and
very low H-field if the radiating source is high
impedance. The opposite is true if the radiating
source is low impedance, ie: high H-field
Ken Javor wrote
>> The only practical solution is to use a
probe that looks like the one the victim of rfi is going to be using,
connected to a receiver of equal to or greater sensitivity than the victim,
and similar bandwidth, and verify that the level of rfi at a particular
separation is suffic
; To: ieee pstc list
> Subject: RE: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
>
> Bob Heller asked:
>
>>> How would one go about accurately measuring low frequency fields say at
> 10
> kHz where the far-field even at lambda/6 is 5000 meters? <<
>
> Ac
table antenna is
only appropriate if a far field measurement is possible.
From: "Iain Summers"
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:44:27 +0100
To:
Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
Ken very succinctly put. I believe it was me t
demic because politicians don't do EMC.
Iain
- Original Message -
From: Ken Javor <mailto:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com>
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
There is a significant over-
e
probe to get an amplitude data point."
From: neve...@comcast.net
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 18:56:33 +0000
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
By measuring the E and H components separately, using near-fiel
Bob Heller asked:
>> How would one go about accurately measuring low frequency fields say at
10
kHz where the far-field even at lambda/6 is 5000 meters? <<
Accuracy and what regulatory authorities require are not always the same
thing. It isn't hard to measure the magnetic field accurately, given
??? RE: ??? RE: Near field
> 06/23/2005 11:24 H-field measurement.
> AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bob Richards [mailto:b...@toprudder.com]
> &g! t; Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 7:06 AM
dder.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 7:06 AM
> To: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
>
> Ken,
>
> I believe you are correct. There should be factors for this
> loop antenna from Emco that convert the raw reading (in dBuv)
> to a
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Richards [ mailto:b...@toprudder.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 7:06 AM
> To: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
>
> Ken,
>
> I believe you are correct. There should
hards
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 07:05:43 -0700 (PDT)
> To: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
>
> Ken,
>
> I believe you are correct. There should be factors for
> this loop antenna from Emco that convert the raw
> reading (in
oyitg.com
> Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
> Subject: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field
> measurement.
>
>
> Dear Dave,
>
> Thanks for your information.
>
> Since the local regulatory body set both E-Field AND
> H-Field limit for
> frequency range under 195kHz. But as
-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:41:41 +0800 (CST)
To: fdev...@assaabloyitg.com
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: ??? RE: ??? RE: Near field H-field measurement.
Dear Dave,
Thanks for your information.
Since the local regulatory body set both E-Field AND H-Field limit for
20 matches
Mail list logo
