Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Hi John,
I do this all the time. Its a simple comparative test so antenna choice only needs to be something that covers the frequency range of interest. It simply has to remain in the same relative location/orientation.
Simply run the SA44B with a couple of traces – one in max hold and the other in average mode across the frequency range of interest. An EMC analyser peak mode is the same as max-hold, and quasi-peak will be less than peak but not less than average.
You just need to run each test for a little while to get a build up of most of the spikes or transients.
I then export the ambient (your DUT off) and DUT active respective traces out as CSV and post process with Excel/Matlab etc. This method is usually sufficient, however it can miss burst events due to the sweep times, and if your unit has any emissions in the region of persistent signals (FM radio for example) these may be masked. You can use the same method with the real time mode though to narrow in on any peculiarities. If this is going to be a common occurance for you and your product, then, if budget allows, the BB60C may be better (Spike includes the EMC Precompliance tools for BB series).I’d still like to see the EMC tools opened up for the SA series, just with a disclaimer around its shortcomings. I’d still have to run a compliance test anyway, it would just be more convenient.
And in the September issue of Microwave Journal – page 146 ff. there is a write up on the SM200A.
Probably need to do this in something like Matlab (communications toolbox possibly, unless they have a new toolbox for LTE) and just feed it the raw I/Q data
If you are needing EMC pre-compliance then the BB60C is the better choice.
I’ve been away from RF-land for a bit, but needed to use my SA44B today… I upgraded Spike, found more new features and thought I’d check with the forum for interesting news, tips, tricks and conversations.
Oh WOW. 1THz/s… WOW.
The BB60C is considerably better than the SA44B, but the new SM200A looks significantly better than the BB60C!Will be checking in more regularly to see how this product develops!
Well done Bruce, Andrew, Justin and whomever I have left out!! Keep up the good work!
February 10, 2016 at 3:42 pm in reply to: Background File Creation for Baselines & Difference Files?
Hi Mike/Randy,
For EMC debugging I use average (set to 64 counts) and max hold traces.
I take an ambient capture, then a DUT on, then an ‘improved DUT on’ sweep. There are 6 available traces so this works out quite well.
As AJ has suggested…You’ll find EMC lab’s receivers, with their preselection filters, specific RBWs and defined QuasiPeak, Average and Peak detectors, that you wont reproduce EMC receiver results with a spectrum analyser.
However the BB60C is more than up to the task of EMC debugging.
Feel free to email me directly with some more specifics at
apollyon25 at hotmail dot comI’m more than happy to give you a few things to look at.
What other bits and bobs do you have for EMC?Jared
What do you have connected? and how are they connected?
i.e. draw a schematic.I use a combination of the mRS VNA, the SA44B as a receiver, and the VSG25A as a transmitter.
Works well so far…Jared
There are other posts on setting up limit lines if you havent found them already…
