RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

>-Original Message- >From: plaw...@west.net [mailto:plaw...@west.net] >Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:33 AM >To: EMC-PSTC >Subject: Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes. > > > >Are you saying that the results of a 'tuning' style >measurement

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

t;>From: HALL,KEN (HP-Roseville,ex1) [mailto:ken_h...@hp.com] >>Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:38 AM >>To: 'Pettit, Ghery'; HALL,KEN (HP-Roseville,ex1); 'John Woodgate'; >>emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >>Subject: RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes. &

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

ry'; HALL,KEN (HP-Roseville,ex1); 'John Woodgate'; >emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >Subject: RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes. > > > >Hello Gary and all, > >The point is do an experiment with your Stepping receiver. > >Ken > >-Original Message---

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

;HALL,KEN (HP-Roseville,ex1)'; 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes. Ken: Did you do your test by first setting the receiver to the 2950 MHz signal, and then setting up a symmetrical scan from that reference? For example, if I used

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

I read in !emc-pstc that Price, Ed wrote (in ) about 'Stepping receiver, step sizes.', on Fri, 7 Dec 2001: >BTW, my 8571A system uses an 8566B SA, and that analyzer actually uses an >analog swept oscillator. But under software control, it will obey the >software requests to look only at the direc

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

the measurement error. -- >From: John Woodgate >To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >Subject: Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes. >Date: Thu, Dec 6, 2001, 4:15 PM > > > I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor wrote > (in <20011206195802.LCFL6698.femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.c

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

- >From: HALL,KEN (HP-Roseville,ex1) [mailto:ken_h...@hp.com] >Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:09 AM >To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >Subject: RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes. > > > >Hello all, > >We typically measure in 500 MHz spans, ou

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

o.ieee.org Subject: RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes. Hello all, We typically measure in 500 MHz spans, our spectrum analyzer has 400 bits so 1.25 MHz/bit. Concerned that we could miss an emission I perfromed the below experiment, try it: Injected a 2950 MHz signal into EMI Receiver, set for 1MH

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

M To: 'John Woodgate'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes. Hello all, We typically measure in 500 MHz spans, our spectrum analyzer has 400 bits so 1.25 MHz/bit. Concerned that we could miss an emission I perfromed the below experiment, try it: Injec

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes. I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor wrote (in <20011206195802.LCFL6698.femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com@[65.11.150.27]>) about 'Stepping receiver, step sizes.', on Thu, 6 Dec 2001: >Keeping the step size to one-half the measurem

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

I read in !emc-pstc that Ken Javor wrote (in <20011206195802.LCFL6698.femail7.sdc1.sfba.home.com@[65.11.150.27]>) about 'Stepping receiver, step sizes.', on Thu, 6 Dec 2001: >Keeping the step size to one-half the measurement bandwidth is an accepted >way of assuring that all possible signals are

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

Thank you all for those that replied to my question. I found your suggestions to be exactly what I was looking for! The emc-pstc, and all who belong continue to be a great resource in the EMC world! Regards, Scott Mee EMC Engineer Johnson Controls Inc. PH: 616.394.2565 EMAIL: scott@jci

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

Keeping the step size to one-half the measurement bandwidth is an accepted way of assuring that all possible signals are captured. Using a step size equal to a measurement bandwidth is not quite as good but reasonable. -- >From: scott@jci.com >To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >Subject

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

I read in !emc-pstc that scott@jci.com wrote (in ) about 'Stepping receiver, step sizes.', on Thu, 6 Dec 2001: >We are performing radiated emissions testing in a semi-anechoic chamber >using an EMI receiver. We plan to cover a high frequency range between 1 >and 5 GHz (a large spanse to cover

Re: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

The FCC uses a bandwidth of 1.0 MHz for frequencies above 1.0 GHz, see Part 15, 15.35(b). I do not believe that there is a stated CISPR bandwidth above a gig. Bob Heller 3M Product Safety, 76-1-01 St. Paul, MN 55107-1208 Tel: 651- 778-6336 Fax: 651-778-6252

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

>-Original Message- >From: scott@jci.com [mailto:scott@jci.com] >Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 5:17 AM >To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >Subject: Stepping receiver, step sizes. > > > >Hello Group! > >I would like to ask a question regarding EMI Receiver step sizes in the >hi

RE: Stepping receiver, step sizes.

Scott, An old rule of thumb from way back says that if you are looking for narrowband signals (defined as narrow with respect to the bandwidth of the receiver), you should not tune in steps larger than 1/2 of the bandwidth you are using. Larger steps may result in missing signals. As FCC radiat