Already a subscriber?
MADCAD.com Free Trial
Sign up for a 3 day free trial to explore the MADCAD.com interface, PLUS access the
2009 International Building Code to see how it all works.
If you like to setup a quick demo, let us know at support@madcad.com
or +1 800.798.9296 and we will be happy to schedule a webinar for you.
Security check
Please login to your personal account to use this feature.
Please login to your authorized staff account to use this feature.
Are you sure you want to empty the cart?
PD CISPR/TR 16-4-1:2009 Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and methods - Uncertainties, statistics and limit modelling. Uncertainties in standardized EMC tests, 2010
- cispr16-4-1{ed2.0}en.pdf [Go to Page]
- CONTENTS
- FOREWORD
- INTRODUCTION
- 1 Scope
- 2 Normative references
- 3 Terms, definitions, and abbreviations [Go to Page]
- 3.1 Terms and definitions
- 3.2 Abbreviations
- 4 Basic considerations on uncertainties in emission measurements [Go to Page]
- 4.1 Introductory remarks
- 4.2 Types of uncertainties in emission measurements
- 4.3 Relation between standards compliance uncertainty and interference probability
- 4.4 Assessment of uncertainties in a standardised emission measurement
- 4.5 Verification of the uncertainty budget
- 4.6 Reporting of the uncertainty
- 4.7 Application of uncertainties in the compliance criterion
- 5 Basic considerations on uncertainties in immunity testing
- 6 Voltage measurements [Go to Page]
- 6.1 Introductory remarks
- 6.2 Voltage measurements (general)
- 6.3 Voltage measurements using a voltage probe
- 6.4 Voltage measurement using a V-terminal artificial mains network
- 7 Absorbing clamp measurements [Go to Page]
- 7.1 General
- 7.2 Uncertainties related to the calibration of the absorbing clamp
- 7.3 Uncertainties related to the absorbing clamp measurement method
- 8 Radiated emission measurements using a SAC or an OATS in the frequency range of 30 MHz to 1 000 MHz [Go to Page]
- 8.1 General
- 8.2 Uncertainties related to the SAC/OATS radiated emission measurement method
- 9 Conducted immunity measurements
- 10 Radiated immunity measurements
- Annex A (informative) Compliance uncertainty and interference probability
- Annex B (informative) Numerical example of the consequences of Faraday’s law
- Annex C (informative) Possible amendments to CISPR publications with regards to voltage measurements
- Annex D (informative) Analysis method of results of an interlaboratory test
- Annex E (informative) Uncertainty budgets for the clamp calibration methods
- Annex F (informative) Uncertainty budget for the clamp measurement method
- Annex G (informative) Uncertainty estimates for the radiated emission measurement methods
- Annex H (informative) Results of various round robin tests for SAC/OATS-based radiated emission measurements
- Annex I (informative) Additional information about distinctions between the terms measurement uncertainty and standards compliance uncertainty
- Bibliography
- Figures [Go to Page]
- Figure 1 – Illustration of the relation between the overall uncertainty of a measurand due to contributions from the measurement instrumentation uncertainty and the intrinsic uncertainty of the measurand
- Figure 2 – The process of emission compliance measurements and the associated (categories of) uncertainty sources (see also Table 2)
- Figure 3 – Relationship between uncertainty sources, influence quantities and uncertainty categories
- Figure 4 – Involvement of the subcommittees CISPR/H and CISPR/A in the determination of the measurands and application of uncertainties
- Figure 5 – The uncertainty estimation process
- Figure 6 – Example of a fishbone diagram indicating the various uncertainty sources for an absorbing clamp compliance measurement in accordance with CISPR 16-2-2
- Figure 7 – Illustration of the minimum requirement (interval compatibility requirement) for the standards compliance uncertainty
- Figure 8 – Graphical representation of four cases in the compliance determination process without consideration of measurement uncertainty during limits setting
- Figure 9 – Graphical representation of four cases in the compliance determination process with consideration of measurement uncertainty during limits setting.
- Figure 10 – Generic relation between overall uncertainty of measurand and some major categories of uncertainties
- Figure 11 – Graphical representation MIU compliance criterion for compliance measurements, per CISPR 16-4-2
- Figure 12 – Basic circuit of a voltage measurement
- Figure 13 – Basic circuit of a loaded disturbance source (N = 2)
- Figure 14 – Relation between the voltages
- Figure 15 – Basic circuit of the V-AMN voltage measurement (N = 2)
- Figure 16 – Basic circuit of the V-AN measurement during the reading of the received voltage Um (the numbers refer to Figure 15)
- Figure 17 – The absolute value of the sensitivity coefficient c2 as a function of the phase angle difference q of the impedances Z13 and Zd0 for several values of the ratio |Z13/Zd0|
- Figure 18 – Variation of the parasitic capacitance, and hence of the CM-impedance, by changing the position of the reference plane (non-conducting EUT housing)
- Figure 19 – Influence quantities in between the EUT (disturbance source) and the V-AMN
- Figure 20 – Schematic overview of the original clamp calibration method
- Figure 21 – Diagram that illustrates the uncertainty sources associated with the original clamp calibration method
- Figure 22 – Schematic overview of the clamp measurement method
- Figure 23 – Diagram that illustrates the uncertainty sources associated with the clamp measurement method
- Figure 24 – Measurement results of an absorbing clamp RRT performed by six test laboratories in the Netherlands using a drill as EUT
- Figure 25 – Schematic of a radiated emission measurement set-up in a SAC
- Figure 26 – Uncertainty sources associated with the SAC/OATS radiated emission measurement method
- Figure A.1 – Measured field strength distributions X1 and Y1, emission limit and level to be protected of relevance in the determination of the corresponding interference probability determined by distributions X2 and Y2
- Figure B.1 – Voltage and current limits as given in CISPR 15:2005, Tables 2b and 3, and the ratio UL/IL
- Figure B.2 – Factor Ks derived from the data in Figure B.1 and Equation (B.4)
- Figure C.1 – Schematic diagram of a V-AMN yielding an improved figure-of-merit about the actual compliance probability via two current probes
- Figure H.1 – Expanded uncertainties of emission measurement results for five different emulated EUTs each with five different cable termination conditions [24]
- Figure H.2 – Interlaboratory comparison measurement results of twelve 10 m SACs [see “HP (2000)” in Table H.1]
- Figure H.3 – ILC measurement results radiated emission SAC/OATS 3 m (11 sites) [32]
- Figure H.4 – ILC measurement results radiated emission SAC/OATS 3 m (14 sites) [13], [25]
- Figure H.5 – Measured correlation curve of 3 m and 10 m SAC/OATS-emission measurement of a battery-fed table-top type of EUT, compared with the free-space rule-of-thumb ratio [13], [25]
- Tables [Go to Page]
- Table 1 – Structure of clauses related to the subject of standards compliance uncertainty
- Table 2 – Categories of uncertainty sources in standardised emission measurements
- Table 3 – Example of detailed standard induced uncertainty sources for a radiated emission measurement
- Table 4 – Different types of uncertainties used within CISPR at present
- Table 5 – Examples (not exhaustive) of the translation of ‘uncertainty sources’ into ‘influence quantities’ for an emission measurement on an OATS per CISPR 22
- Table 6 – Influence quantities associated with the uncertainty sources given in Figure 21 for the original clamp calibration method
- Table 7 – Influence quantities associated with the uncertainty sources given in Figure 23 for the clamp measurement method
- Table 8 – Measurement results of an absorbing clamp RRT performed by six test laboratories in Germany using a vacuum cleaner motor as EUT
- Table 9 – Summary of various MIU and SCU values (expanded uncertainties) for the clamp measurement method derived from different sources of information
- Table 10 – Influence quantities for the SAC/OATS radiated emission measurement method associated with the uncertainty sources of Figure 26
- Table 11 – Relation between/and type of EUT and set-up-related uncertainties
- Table 12 – Example of uncertainty estimate associated with the NSA measurement method, 30 MHz to 1 000 MHz
- Table 13 – Relationship between intrinsic and apparent NSA
- Table E.1 – Uncertainty budget for the original absorbing clamp calibration method in the frequency range 30 MHz to 300 MHz
- Table E.2 – Uncertainty budget for the original absorbing clamp calibration method in the frequency range 300 MHz to 1 000 MHz
- Table F.1 – Uncertainty budget for the absorbing clamp measurement method in the frequency range 30 MHz to 300 MHz
- Table F.2 – Uncertainty budget for the absorbing clamp measurement method in the frequency range 300 MHz to 1 000 MHz
- Table G.1 – Uncertainty estimate for the radiated emission measurement method in the frequency range 30 MHz to 200 MHz at a measurement distance of 3 m
- Table G.2 – Uncertainty estimate for the radiated emission measurement method in the frequency range 200 MHz to 1 000 MHz at a measurement distance of 3 m
- Table G.3 – Uncertainty data of some influence quantities for the radiated emission measurement method in the frequency range 30 MHz to 200 MHz at measurement distances of 3 m, 10 m, or 30 m
- Table G.4 – Uncertainty data of some influence quantities for the radiated emission measurement method in the frequency range 200 MHz to 1 000 MHz at measurement distances of 3 m, 10 m, or 30 m
- Table H.1 – Summary of various MIU and SCU uncertainty values for the SAC/OATS-based radiated emission measurement method, assembled from various sources [Go to Page]