{"id":241594,"date":"2024-10-19T15:49:27","date_gmt":"2024-10-19T15:49:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/uncategorized\/bsi-pd-cispr-tr-16-4-12009\/"},"modified":"2024-10-25T10:39:18","modified_gmt":"2024-10-25T10:39:18","slug":"bsi-pd-cispr-tr-16-4-12009","status":"publish","type":"product","link":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/publishers\/bsi\/bsi-pd-cispr-tr-16-4-12009\/","title":{"rendered":"BSI PD CISPR\/TR 16-4-1:2009"},"content":{"rendered":"

This part of CISPR 16-4 gives guidance on the treatment of uncertainties to those who are involved in the development or modification of CISPR electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) standards. In addition, this part provides useful background information for those who apply the standards and the uncertainty aspects in practice.<\/p>\n

The objectives of this part are to:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    identify the parameters or sources governing the uncertainty associated with the statement that a given product complies with the requirement specified in a CISPR recommendation. This uncertainty will be called \u201cstandards compliance uncertainty\u201d (SCU, see 3.1.16);<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    give guidance on the estimation of the magnitude of the standards compliance uncertainty;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    give guidance for the implementation of the standards compliance uncertainty into the compliance criterion of a CISPR standardised compliance test.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    As such, this part can be considered as a handbook that can be used by standards writers to incorporate and harmonise uncertainty considerations in existing and future CISPR standards. This part also gives guidance to regulatory authorities, accreditation bodies and test engineers to judge the performance quality of an EMC test-laboratory carrying out CISPR standardised compliance tests. The uncertainty considerations given in this part can also be used as guidance when comparing test results (and their uncertainties) obtained by using different alternative test methods.<\/p>\n

    The uncertainty of a compliance test also relates to the probability of occurrence of an electromagnetic interference (EMI) problem in practice. This aspect is recognized and introduced briefly in this part. However, the problem of relating uncertainties of a compliance test to the occurrence of EMI in practice is not considered within the scope of this part.<\/p>\n

    The scope of this part is limited to all the relevant uncertainty considerations of a standardized EMC compliance test.<\/p>\n

    PDF Catalog<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    PDF Pages<\/th>\nPDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
    4<\/td>\nCONTENTS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    9<\/td>\nFOREWORD <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    11<\/td>\nINTRODUCTION
    Tables
    Table 1 \u2013 Structure of clauses related to the subject of standards compliance uncertainty <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    12<\/td>\n1 Scope
    2 Normative references <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    13<\/td>\n3 Terms, definitions, and abbreviations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    14<\/td>\n3.1 Terms and definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    17<\/td>\n3.2 Abbreviations
    4 Basic considerations on uncertainties in emission measurements
    4.1 Introductory remarks <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    19<\/td>\n4.2 Types of uncertainties in emission measurements
    Figures
    Figure 1 \u2013 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 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    22<\/td>\nFigure 2 \u2013 The process of emission compliance measurements and the associated (categories of) uncertainty sources (see also Table 2)
    Table 2 \u2013 Categories of uncertainty sources in standardised emission measurements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    23<\/td>\nTable 3 \u2013 Example of detailed standard induced uncertainty sources for a radiated emission measurement <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    24<\/td>\nTable 4 \u2013 Different types of uncertainties used within CISPR\u00a0at present <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    25<\/td>\nTable 5 \u2013 Examples (not exhaustive) of the translation of \u2018uncertainty sources\u2019 into \u2018influence quantities\u2019 for an emission measurement on an OATS per CISPR\u00a022 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    27<\/td>\n4.3 Relation between standards compliance uncertainty and interference probability
    Figure 3 \u2013 Relationship between uncertainty sources, influence quantities and uncertainty categories <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    28<\/td>\nFigure 4 \u2013 Involvement of the subcommittees CISPR\/H and CISPR\/A in the determination of the measurands and application of uncertainties <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    29<\/td>\n4.4 Assessment of uncertainties in a standardised emission measurement
    Figure 5 \u2013 The uncertainty estimation process <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    31<\/td>\nFigure 6 \u2013 Example of a fishbone diagram indicating the various uncertainty sources for an absorbing clamp compliance measurement in accordance with CISPR\u00a016-2-2 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    33<\/td>\n4.5 Verification of the uncertainty budget <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    35<\/td>\nFigure 7 \u2013 Illustration of the minimum requirement (interval compatibility requirement) for the standards compliance uncertainty <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    37<\/td>\n4.6 Reporting of the uncertainty <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    39<\/td>\n4.7 Application of uncertainties in the compliance criterion <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    40<\/td>\nFigure 8 \u2013 Graphical representation of four cases in the compliance determination process without consideration of measurement uncertainty during limits setting <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    41<\/td>\nFigure 9 \u2013 Graphical representation of four cases in the compliance determination process with consideration of measurement uncertainty during limits setting.
    Figure 10 \u2013 Generic relation between overall uncertainty of measurand and some major categories of uncertainties <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    43<\/td>\nFigure 11 \u2013 Graphical representation MIU compliance criterion for compliance measurements, per CISPR 16-4-2 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    46<\/td>\n5 Basic considerations on uncertainties in immunity testing
    6 Voltage measurements
    6.1 Introductory remarks
    6.2 Voltage measurements (general) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    47<\/td>\nFigure 12 \u2013 Basic circuit of a voltage measurement <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    48<\/td>\nFigure 13 \u2013 Basic circuit of a loaded disturbance source (N = 2) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    49<\/td>\nFigure 14 \u2013 Relation between the voltages <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    50<\/td>\n6.3 Voltage measurements using a voltage probe
    6.4 Voltage measurement using a V-terminal artificial mains network <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    51<\/td>\nFigure 15 \u2013 Basic circuit of the V-AMN voltage measurement (N = 2) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    52<\/td>\nFigure 16 \u2013 Basic circuit of the V-AN measurement during the reading of the received voltage Um (the numbers refer to Figure 15) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    53<\/td>\nFigure 17 \u2013 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| <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    55<\/td>\nFigure 18 \u2013 Variation of the parasitic capacitance, and hence of the CM-impedance, by changing the position of the reference plane (non-conducting EUT housing) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    57<\/td>\nFigure 19 \u2013 Influence quantities in between the EUT (disturbance source) and the V-AMN <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    58<\/td>\n7 Absorbing clamp measurements
    7.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    59<\/td>\n7.2 Uncertainties related to the calibration of the absorbing clamp <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    60<\/td>\nFigure 20 \u2013 Schematic overview of the original clamp calibration method <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    61<\/td>\nFigure 21 \u2013 Diagram that illustrates the uncertainty sources associated with the original clamp calibration method <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    62<\/td>\nTable 6 \u2013 Influence quantities associated with the uncertainty sources given in Figure 21 for the original clamp calibration method <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    66<\/td>\n7.3 Uncertainties related to the absorbing clamp measurement method
    Figure 22 \u2013 Schematic overview of the clamp measurement method <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    67<\/td>\nFigure 23 \u2013 Diagram that illustrates the uncertainty sources associated with the clamp measurement method <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    68<\/td>\nTable 7 \u2013 Influence quantities associated with the uncertainty sources given in Figure 23 for the clamp measurement method <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    72<\/td>\nFigure 24 \u2013 Measurement results of an absorbing clamp RRT performed by six test laboratories in the Netherlands using a drill as EUT
    Table 8 \u2013 Measurement results of an absorbing clamp RRT performed by six test laboratories in Germany using a vacuum cleaner motor as EUT <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    73<\/td>\n8 Radiated emission measurements using a SAC or an OATS in the frequency range of 30\u00a0MHz to 1 000\u00a0MHz
    8.1 General
    Table 9 \u2013 Summary of various MIU and SCU values (expanded uncertainties) for the clamp measurement method derived from different sources of information <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    74<\/td>\n8.2 Uncertainties related to the SAC\/OATS radiated emission measurement method
    Figure 25 \u2013 Schematic of a radiated emission measurement set-up in a SAC <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    76<\/td>\nFigure 26 \u2013 Uncertainty sources associated with the SAC\/OATS radiated emission measurement method <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    78<\/td>\nTable 10 \u2013 Influence quantities for the SAC\/OATS radiated emission measurement method associated with the uncertainty sources of Figure 26 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    79<\/td>\nTable 11 \u2013 Relation between\/and type of EUT and set-up-related uncertainties <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    84<\/td>\nTable 12 \u2013 Example of uncertainty estimate associated with the NSA measurement method, 30 MHz to 1 000 MHz <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    85<\/td>\nTable 13 \u2013 Relationship between intrinsic and apparent NSA <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    90<\/td>\n9 Conducted immunity measurements
    10 Radiated immunity measurements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    91<\/td>\nAnnex A (informative) Compliance uncertainty and interference probability <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    92<\/td>\nFigure A.1 \u2013 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 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    93<\/td>\nAnnex B (informative) Numerical example of the consequences of Faraday\u2019s law <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    94<\/td>\nFigure B.1 \u2013 Voltage and current limits as given in CISPR 15:2005, Tables 2b and 3, and the ratio UL\/IL
    Figure B.2 \u2013 Factor Ks derived from the data in Figure B.1 and Equation (B.4) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    95<\/td>\nAnnex C (informative) Possible amendments to CISPR publications with regards to voltage measurements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    97<\/td>\nFigure C.1 \u2013 Schematic diagram of a V-AMN yielding an improved figure-of-merit about the actual compliance probability via two current probes <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    98<\/td>\nAnnex D (informative) Analysis method of results of an interlaboratory test <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    99<\/td>\nAnnex E (informative) Uncertainty budgets for the clamp calibration methods
    Table E.1 \u2013 Uncertainty budget for the original absorbing clamp calibration method in the frequency range 30 MHz to 300 MHz <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    100<\/td>\nTable E.2 \u2013 Uncertainty budget for the original absorbing clamp calibration method in the frequency range 300 MHz to 1 000 MHz <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    101<\/td>\nAnnex F (informative) Uncertainty budget for the clamp measurement method
    Table F.1 \u2013 Uncertainty budget for the absorbing clamp measurement method in the frequency range 30 MHz to 300 MHz <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    102<\/td>\nTable F.2 \u2013 Uncertainty budget for the absorbing clamp measurement method in the frequency range 300 MHz to 1 000 MHz <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    103<\/td>\nAnnex G (informative) Uncertainty estimates for the radiated emission measurement methods <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    104<\/td>\nTable G.1 \u2013 Uncertainty estimate for the radiated emission measurement method in the frequency range 30 MHz to 200 MHz at a measurement distance of 3 m <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    105<\/td>\nTable G.2 \u2013 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 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    106<\/td>\nTable G.3 \u2013 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 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    107<\/td>\nTable G.4 \u2013 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 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    108<\/td>\nAnnex H (informative) Results of various round robin tests for SAC\/OATS-based radiated emission measurements <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    109<\/td>\nTable H.1 \u2013 Summary of various MIU and SCU uncertainty values for the SAC\/OATS-based radiated emission measurement method, assembled from various sources <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    110<\/td>\nFigure H.1 \u2013 Expanded uncertainties of emission measurement results for five different emulated EUTs each with five different cable termination conditions \u200e[24]
    Figure H.2 \u2013 Interlaboratory comparison measurement results of twelve 10 m SACs [see \u201cHP (2000)\u201d in Table H.1] <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    111<\/td>\nFigure H.3 \u2013 ILC measurement results radiated emission SAC\/OATS 3\u00a0m (11 sites) \u200e[32] <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    112<\/td>\nFigure H.4 \u2013 ILC measurement results radiated emission SAC\/OATS 3 m (14 sites) [13], [25] <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    113<\/td>\nFigure H.5 \u2013 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 \u200e[13], \u200e[25] <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    114<\/td>\nAnnex I (informative) Additional information about distinctions between the terms measurement uncertainty and standards compliance uncertainty <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    116<\/td>\nBibliography <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and methods – Uncertainties, statistics and limit modelling. Uncertainties in standardized EMC tests<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
    Published By<\/td>\nPublication Date<\/td>\nNumber of Pages<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    BSI<\/b><\/a><\/td>\n2010<\/td>\n122<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":241600,"template":"","meta":{"rank_math_lock_modified_date":false,"ep_exclude_from_search":false},"product_cat":[626,2641],"product_tag":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-241594","1":"product","2":"type-product","3":"status-publish","4":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"product_cat-33-100-20","7":"product_cat-bsi","9":"first","10":"instock","11":"sold-individually","12":"shipping-taxable","13":"purchasable","14":"product-type-simple"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product\/241594","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/product"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/241600"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=241594"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"product_cat","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product_cat?post=241594"},{"taxonomy":"product_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/product_tag?post=241594"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}