Good EMC Design Techniques save time and cost, show students
EMC Testing Vol 1 No. 1
Direct Line +44 (0) 20 7863 3078 Editor Andy Pye MA (Cantab)
Technical Editor Jonathan Newell BSc jon.ne
Advertising Direct Line +44 (0) 20 7863 3077
Advertising Manager John Harvey email@example.com
Managing Director Paul Williams
Concorde Publishing Ltd
100 Borough High Street, London SE1 1LB, UK Main office +44 (0) 20 7863 3079 firstname.lastname@example.org
EMC Testing is produced by
Concorde Publishing Ltd in association with the Society of Environmental Engineers
The Society of Environmental Engineers 22 Greencoat Place, London SW1P 1PR email@example.com www.environmental.org.uk
The Society of Environmental Engineers (SEE) is a
professional Society that exists to promote awareness of the discipline of environmental engineering, and
to provide members of the Society with information, training and representation within this field.
hese graphs show the results of a practical laboratory exercise for undergraduate students, taken from: “Teaching EMC using an
EMC demonstration unit”, a paper submitted for the 2018 APEMC/IEEE symposium in Singapore.
Students had to design a PCB for an
LVDS driver circuit, using a commercial PCB autorouter. Then they had to lay it out again – this time applying good EMC design practices from an EMC PCB design textbook.
Both boards were tested to meet
functional specifications, then their RF emissions were tested to CISPR 32 Class B limits in the University’s EMC Test Laboratory, with the following results. The top graph (1) shows that the autorouted board would need shielding and/or filtering adding to comply with Class B. If an unshielded plastic enclosure had been intended, it would have needed a design iteration, and re-testing. Shielding/filtering is quite tricky to do
at frequencies above 300MHz, so a second design/test iteration might have been needed before the product passed Class B.
20 /// EMC Testing 2018 Vol 1 No. 1
However, the bottom graph (Fig.2) shows that the board laid out using the guidance in the CISPR 32 would comply with Class B even in a low-cost unshielded plastic enclosure. Why suffer design iterations, with their delays, risks and costs, when even undergraduate students with no previous experience find it easy to use good EMC design techniques to make products that pass EMC tests first time? EMC Standards is a company which aims to educate electronic design engineers, electrical engineers, other electrical/electronic practitioners, and their managers about well-proven good design techniques for electromagnetic compatibility and safety. Set up by established experts, the company aims to refresh the way people learn about EMC and safety design issues, using on-line technologies to provide a new type of service that is more useful to engineers throughout their careers, and reaches a worldwide audience. EMC Standards offers good, free
practical guidance for designers of electronic products, equipment, systems, and installations. n
For information about the Society or to become a member please contact us at
Next in this series...
© Concorde Publishing Ltd 2018 This publication is copyright under the Berne Convention and the international Copyright
Convention. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, no part may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, electrical, chemical mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owners. Unlicensed multiple copying of the contents of this publication is illegal. Inquiries should be addressed to: The Publisher, Concorde Publishing Ltd, 100 Borough High Street, London SE1 1LB, UK.
Views expressed are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Society
of Environmental Engineers or its publishers Concorde Publishing Ltd. Data and conclusions developed are for information only and are not intended for use without independent substantiating investigation by the potential user.
| Page 2
| Page 3
| Page 4
| Page 5
| Page 6
| Page 7
| Page 8
| Page 9
| Page 10
| Page 11
| Page 12
| Page 13
| Page 14
| Page 15
| Page 16
| Page 17
| Page 18
| Page 19
| Page 20
| Page 21
| Page 22
| Page 23
| Page 24