I beg your pardon to all who were following this blog, for an extremely long silence on this page. Actually I got caught in an EMC mess starting from the beginning of this year and got occupied for last few months. The problem was radiated emission related and it helped me gathering some more knowledge around that topic and we will discuss something similar when we discuss on "radiated emission".
But I can't help sharing a lesson I learned from my experience: "I would always run Radiated Emission (RE) Test FIRST after I could power a prototype successfully, before running all other EMC immunity tests, if I feel there is a risk with RE. So that I could fix any issues related to RE first". We will discuss on this later, but let us just continue on what we were discussing.
In the previous part we have seen how the surge testing gets conducted as per IEC 61000-4-5 on the un-shielded IO lines. There are again different test procedures specified in that standard for the EUT having balanced unshielded IO/communication lines, shielded IO, communication line etc. I am not going through all of those test procedures and would recommend you to get hands on the standards and be thorough with the test procedures to be well equipped with the knowledge rather than learning in the hard way while going through the testing.
But I can't help sharing a lesson I learned from my experience: "I would always run Radiated Emission (RE) Test FIRST after I could power a prototype successfully, before running all other EMC immunity tests, if I feel there is a risk with RE. So that I could fix any issues related to RE first". We will discuss on this later, but let us just continue on what we were discussing.
In the previous part we have seen how the surge testing gets conducted as per IEC 61000-4-5 on the un-shielded IO lines. There are again different test procedures specified in that standard for the EUT having balanced unshielded IO/communication lines, shielded IO, communication line etc. I am not going through all of those test procedures and would recommend you to get hands on the standards and be thorough with the test procedures to be well equipped with the knowledge rather than learning in the hard way while going through the testing.
So far, do we understand the difference between the EFT and Surge? I found the the article in the link below, which is very useful to understand that difference between EFT & Surge:
http://7ms.com/enr/online/2007/01_02/notebook.html
Just to highlight a few important takeaways from the article, please note that the rise time of the surge voltage is approximately 1.2us, where as the rise time of the EFT waveform is ~5ns.
Now, given the rise time of a pulse = tr, the knee frequency Fknee is given by the following equation:
Fknee = 1/(pi*tr);
For surge voltage having rise time of 1.2us, Fknee = 265KHz, approximately 300KHz;
Where as on the other hand, EFT voltage having rise time of 5ns, Fknee = 63.7MHz, approximately 65MHz; Hence, surge is a high energy, low frequency transient and EFT is a low energy high frequency transient.
The following picture shows comparison of energy level produced by different types of electrical transients such as EFT, ESD, surge, ring wave (we will discuss next) etc, having same peak voltage level. Note that the energy contained in surge voltage transient is the highest among all:
The measures for making the design tolerant to the required level of surge voltage is quite the same as the techniques used to make the design immune to ESD transients and EFT:
(1) Use transient suppressors or "SHIELD" to "divert" the voltage transient to the "Frame ground" or "Chassis ground" with MINIMUM RESISTANCE AND INDUCTANCE (ideally zero) on the return path. The following table shows a comparison of different types of transient suppression devices to be used to divert the energy to the frame/chassis ground. Please note that the transient suppression devices used for diverting the "surge transients" shall be required to handle maximum amount of energy compared to other transients. But it need not to be as fast as that required for EFT or ESD.
(2) Implement appropriate filtering for the transient noise due to voltage surge to get filtered out so that the disturbance does not affect the functionality of the design or damage the devices while operating. For filtering power lines, bandwidth is not an issue. In principal, we could use enough filtering to control both surge and EFT. Audio frequency signal lines can usually be filtered adequately as well. Surge, having a bandwidth of 300kHz, requires a filter cut-off of 30kHz or less in order to provide sufficient protection. Where as EFT, having a bandwidth of 60MHz, would need a cutoff of 6MHz or less, might be acceptable for many RS 232 lines, but too low for many digital data streams.
In the next part I am going to discuss some more on the design tips for surge protection.
http://7ms.com/enr/online/2007/01_02/notebook.html
Just to highlight a few important takeaways from the article, please note that the rise time of the surge voltage is approximately 1.2us, where as the rise time of the EFT waveform is ~5ns.
Now, given the rise time of a pulse = tr, the knee frequency Fknee is given by the following equation:
Fknee = 1/(pi*tr);
For surge voltage having rise time of 1.2us, Fknee = 265KHz, approximately 300KHz;
Where as on the other hand, EFT voltage having rise time of 5ns, Fknee = 63.7MHz, approximately 65MHz; Hence, surge is a high energy, low frequency transient and EFT is a low energy high frequency transient.
The following picture shows comparison of energy level produced by different types of electrical transients such as EFT, ESD, surge, ring wave (we will discuss next) etc, having same peak voltage level. Note that the energy contained in surge voltage transient is the highest among all:
The measures for making the design tolerant to the required level of surge voltage is quite the same as the techniques used to make the design immune to ESD transients and EFT:
(1) Use transient suppressors or "SHIELD" to "divert" the voltage transient to the "Frame ground" or "Chassis ground" with MINIMUM RESISTANCE AND INDUCTANCE (ideally zero) on the return path. The following table shows a comparison of different types of transient suppression devices to be used to divert the energy to the frame/chassis ground. Please note that the transient suppression devices used for diverting the "surge transients" shall be required to handle maximum amount of energy compared to other transients. But it need not to be as fast as that required for EFT or ESD.
 |
| Table 1: Comparison of different transient protection devices |
(2) Implement appropriate filtering for the transient noise due to voltage surge to get filtered out so that the disturbance does not affect the functionality of the design or damage the devices while operating. For filtering power lines, bandwidth is not an issue. In principal, we could use enough filtering to control both surge and EFT. Audio frequency signal lines can usually be filtered adequately as well. Surge, having a bandwidth of 300kHz, requires a filter cut-off of 30kHz or less in order to provide sufficient protection. Where as EFT, having a bandwidth of 60MHz, would need a cutoff of 6MHz or less, might be acceptable for many RS 232 lines, but too low for many digital data streams.
In the next part I am going to discuss some more on the design tips for surge protection.
No comments:
Post a Comment