You are on page 1of 0

2004:07

DOCTORAL THESIS
Characterization of Components
and Materials for EMC Barriers

Urban Lundgren

Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
Division of EISLAB
2004:07 • ISSN: 1402 - 1544 • ISRN: LTU - DT - - 04/07 - - SE

of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Lule˚ University of Technology a Lule˚ Sweden a. Supervisors: Professor Jerker Delsing and Professor Dag Bj¨rkl¨f o o .Characterization of components and materials for EMC barriers Urban Lundgren EISLAB Dept.

ii .

To my dear wife Karin and to my parents Erland and Margaretha Lundgren .

iv .

Such data is used for characterization. Considering the purpose of studied shielding materials in an application the usefulness of the far field shielding effectiveness measurement method is questioned. electromagnetic shielding etc. transfer impedance measurements. Methodologies for generation of EMC barrier modeling techniques have been developed. data for shielding thermoplastic materials was acquired. The concept of EMC barriers is introduced as a general view of filter components. EMC barrier measurement methodologies of interest in this thesis includes shielding effectiveness measurements. v . By comparison of far field and near field shielding effectiveness measurement methods. separation of conductors (crosstalk problems). measurements of material permittivity and permeability and near field scanning techniques for analysis of current distributions. Problems with existing barrier characterizing measurement methods have been identified. scattering parameter measurements. The aim is to find methodologies to help engineers to identify EMC problems and to include the management of EMC in the design of a electrical circuit in a practical and effective manner. In particular measurement methods are reviewed and devised for acquiring data on barriers used for EMC. modeling and model verification of barriers. This work have resulted in design tools for electronic design engineers to include EMC considerations at an early design stage of a new product.Abstract This thesis presents contributions to work for better methodologies for addressing Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) issues.

vi .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Suggested Further Work 31 References 33 Paper A 43 Paper B 51 Paper C 59 Paper D 67 Paper E 75 Paper F 83 Paper G 91 . . . . . . . .5 Near Field Scanning of Printed Circuit Boards and Conductive Surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .EMC Barriers 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Measurement Methods Essential to Work on Barriers 3. . . . . .3 A Motivation to Work on EMC Barriers . .4 EMC Barrier Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . 3. . .Contents Chapter 1 . . . . 2. . . . . . . . . . . .a real and a legal requirement on electronics . . . Barriers . 1 1 2 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Characterization of Permittivity and Permeability . . .Thesis Introduction 1. . . . . . . . . . .1 Summary of Contributions .3 Characterization of EMC 2. . . 23 23 Chapter 5 . . . . . . .2 EMC . .2 Shielding Effectiveness Measurement Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . 1. . .2 Types of EMC Barriers .1 The Need for Electromagnetic Compatibility in the Information Technology Society . . Chapter 2 . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Conclusions . .1 Introduction to measurement methodologies . 5 5 5 8 11 Chapter 3 . . 13 13 14 18 20 22 Chapter 4 . . .Thesis Summary 4. . . .3 Transfer Impedance Methods . . .

viii .

I want to thank my supervisors. Professor Jerker Delsing and Professor Dag Bj¨rkl¨f o o for their guidance and kind support. when a professorship in EMC Technology was inaugurated at the University and the present EMC Laboratory was built. The new knowledge I acquired during the master thesis project gave me a desire to find out more. ix . I also want to thank my wife. I want to thank all my friends and colleagues at Lule˚ University of Technology and especially ˚ke and Jonas for assisting me and sharing a A their experiences. This experience was making me start thinking that EM compatibility is something I want to work with. It was not a coincidence that the EMC directive became mandatory in Sweden in 1996. to consider staying at the university as a PhD student.Preface This thesis is a summary of the research I have been participating in at Lule˚ University a of Technology since 1996. In 1996 I started on my master thesis project studying possible EMC problems related to the use of high speed modems (VDSL) connected to overhead telecommunication lines. R&D and a support center for SMEs in the region. Karin Lundgren for helping me finding out what really counts and my family for their support. making EMC a hot topic for all manufacturers of electronic products. made me take the step towards a PhD degree. That was my first encounter with the concept of EMC and I really found a lot of new interesting experiences. The occupation of people near me and discussions with friends doing PhD studies. After receiving the master of science degree in 1997 I came to a decision based on many circumstances at that time. Today Lule˚ a EMC Center is a competence center for education.

x .

Part I .

xii .

People are experiencing that banking services and a variety of E-commerce opportunities exists through the use of modern information technology. In such devices it is sometimes desired to use wireless communication for transfer of control and data. digital communication between machines is essential. and more and more of products and services of today becomes digitalized.Chapter 1 Thesis Introduction 1. workplace and to the environment we live in. For a system consisting of many parts with a substantial amount of interconnections. For the access to digital services networked computers are used. Embedded systems also increases the standard of living by offering a higher level of functionality to the home. electrical currents in ground conductors and cable shields can cause electromagnetic interference problems. it is also important to realize that EMC considerations becomes central. To reduce the effort made and improve the availability to gain access to digital services. 2]. mobile terminals such as mobile phones and handheld computers (PDAs) can be used. The use of robust wireless communication can give an advantage in electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) issues if this implicate a reduction of cabling and galvanic interconnections in a system. In literature the future of digital services and media is expected to have a great impact on the society [65. As a consequence this will make it hard or even fatal for companies in many business areas to neglect the changing situation. Such mobile terminals typically use wireless communication to maintain mobility while communication can take place.1 The Need for Electromagnetic Compatibility in the Information Technology Society In later years embedded systems and smart sensors have been of increasing interest for machine to machine (sometimes abbreviated M2M) communication and automation of services. A device with wireless communication capabilities is a transceiver of electromagnetic energy but may at the same time affect other radio receivers and be subject to electromagnetic 1 . However when the density of devices equipped with wireless communication capabilities increases. When digital information becomes more important.

This scenario shows a number of issues that is known to influence on the requirements for EMC. It is however necessary for modern electronic devices to be designed with electromagnetic compatibility issues in mind to fulfill all safety and protection requirements and offer the functionality and quality expected from the device. It is also an advantage if this can be combined with an encapsulation technique that offers robust mechanical and weatherproof capabilities. This kind of automated services will bring forward a big demand on reliable wireless devices that must face hard condition including the threat of EMI.a real and a legal requirement on electronics The necessity of electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) is not that obvious for people with no experience from electronic design. A module is attached to a cargo container and by wireless communication it reports its whereabout and the status of the cargo to the owner.2 Introduction interference (EMI) from other devices emitting electromagnetic energy. To assure a high quality of communication and reliable operation while using a digital service the electronic devices involved must be adapted to the electromagnetic environment where they will be used. the EMI threats can be reduced by EMC barriers in the design of electronic devices. 1. There is a desire to come to better understanding how to make small electronic devices that uses wireless communication but is protected from EMI. this may cause sensitivty to EMI • plastic encapsulation of electronics offers limited shielding performance and therefore increases the risk of EMI • larger number of electronic devices is expected and increases the risk of EMI To manage the situation with an increasing density of mobile electronic devices where many are equipped with wireless communication technology. As an example application where hard conditions must be met is electronic devices for identification and monitoring of cargo containers. Using electromagnetic simulation techniques to identify situations where EMC problems may occur. More advanced services such as video communication will require terminals with high performance (high clock frequency). An apparatus both emits and receives electromagnetic energy conducted .2 EMC . EMC issues must be considered at at planning stage. • Wireless communication devices emits electromagnetic energy that may cause EMI • High clock frequencies in electronic circuits requires better knowledge of EMC to design devices with reliable functionality • high level of integration of electronic circuits is used in handheld computers and mobile phones.

The European EMC directive (directive 89/336/EEC [21]) states under article 4 that an electrical apparatus (covered by the directive) should be constructed so that: • the electromagnetic disturbance it generates does not exceed a level allowing radio and telecommunications equipment and other apparatus to operate as intended • the apparatus has an adequate level of intrinsic immunity of electromagnetic disturbance to enable it to operate as intended. Because of this undesired side effect there are legislated demands on the device regarding its electromagnetic properties. The way the directive is written (called the new approach) gives the manufacturer responsibility of all products placed on the market even if a product is approved by a third party.a real and a legal requirement on electronics 3 on attached cables or radiated from enclosures and cables. Because of the increasing frequencies for the electromagnetic energy due to the use of high clock frequencies and fast digital logic circuits in modern electronic designs. If the EMC issues are neglected until a working prototype is ready. designing the device from scratch again.1. The problems have to be solved before products involving electronic circuits can be put on the market [9. That is just a side effect when a electronic device is offering some functionality and can not be completely avoided. These statements must be respected by all manufacturers of electric and electronic equipment to be placed on the internal European market or they may experience legal actions from market surveillance authorities. Which means that a manufacturer of a apparatus covered by the directive must design the apparatus and specify how it should be used so that it does not cause electromagnetic disturbance harming other devices that do comply with the directive. It is necessary for the electronic designer to incorporate EMC into the device at an early stage of the design process.2. the apparatus must be designed to be immune to a normal level of electromagnetic energy in the environment it is intended to be used. the cost for fixing eventual EMC problems and non-complience may be severe. However there are no general regulations addressing a required level of a immunity against electromagnetic disturbance as the case is in Europe. The EMC regulations are an important step since they are helping people to realize that it is necessary to address electromagnetic compatibility problems. In the United States the FCC regulations (FCC part 15 [24]) states limits on the maximum acceptable levels (section 15. It is sometimes necessary to start over. The European EMC directive which was introduced in 1992 makes it necessary for manufacturers with intent to put their products on the European market to address EMC issues.g. the EMC requirements gets even harder to meet. 10]. except for certain medical technical devices which are regulated by FDA. A good approach to reach EMC is usually to use different kinds of electromagnetic barriers such as filters and shielding enclosures with . Also. EMC . e. This issue is in the United States left for the market itself to take care of. an accredited test lab or a competent/notified body.109) of emitted electromagnetic disturbance from an apparatus working with signals in radio frequency (RF) range.

4 Introduction conductive gaskets. It is much easier and much less expensive to meet the regulations if the apparatus is well designed regarding EMC aspects to start with. This work aims in general to a better understanding of EMC barriers. From such understanding we can devise improved design and verification methodologies. . shielded connectors and shielding materials for use in electronic device enclosures. 1. Following is a short review of barrier concepts and methods to model and experimentally characterize barriers. than trying to fix an insufficient design. However the lack of easy to use design tools to address EMC problems often makes EMC fixing necessary at a late stage in the design process. My focus have been on: • measurement methodologies evaluating barriers • measurement methodologies characterizing barriers • measurement methodologies to produce barrier modeling input data • measurement methodologies for verification and validation of barrier modeling and computer simulations • measurement methodologies for barrier material data such as permittivity and permeability • material data Investigated barriers include filters. or just a well planned layout of the circuit. Thus cutting time to market and development costs. Better knowledge of EMC barriers as components and design blocks can simplify EMC considerations at an early design stage. shielded cables.3 A Motivation to Work on EMC Barriers It is well understood by most electronic design engineers that it is important to meet requirements on EMC.

The 5 . Barriers can be divided into physical barriers and geometrical barriers. The geometrical barriers can be characterized completely by the geometrical design and material properties. The characteristics for these barriers can be found on datasheets from the manufacturer or have to be obtained by measurements. A short overview will be given with examples on barriers and how they are used. The boundaries between the zones represents barriers and reduces the influence of charges and charge movements in one interconnection path on charges in another interconnection path.Chapter 2 EMC Barriers 2. printed circuit board trace separation and separation between pins in a multiconductor connector. The physical barrier category contains standard construction elements like filters. The electromagnetic barriers thereby offers a certain attenuation of electromagnetic energy that reduces the threat of electronic equipment in one zone interfering with equipment in another zone. where internal component values and geometrical design usually are unknown. 2. Examples of this kind is for instance enclosures made of homogeneous conductive materials like metals and plastic materials.2 Types of EMC Barriers Electromagnetic barriers used in EMC problem solutions may take many different forms. Designing circuits that make use of high frequency electromagnetic signals puts extra demands on the interconnections.1 Interpretation While designing an electronic circuit the engineer is trying to interconnect integrated circuits or different kinds of discrete components so that the components and integrated circuits interact to give the desired functionality. here of course the exact material properties can sometimes be hard to find. Such barriers often needs to be frequency selective so that desired function of interconnections can be maintained. A good approach when designing electronic circuits is to use an electromagnetic topology approach by separating the EM environment into zones with different signal quality or different signal amplitudes.

6 EMC Barriers following examples are considered: • Physical or generalized screens (Shields) • Conductive gaskets • Shielded cables and connectors • AC line filters • Feed through filters • Conductor spacing/routing To reduce radiated interference or radiated emissions. The design should offer: • Low production cost for enclosure • Customer appealing and user friendly product • Ventilation or cooling for interior parts • Communication with user and/or other devices • Mechanical protection for interior parts • Moisture and dust seal • Electromagnetic shielding • Care must be taken when choosing materials and production techniques so that the necessary enclosure properties lasts for the specified lifetime of the product There are of course many techniques available in each aspect of the enclosure design problem. When designing shielding enclosures thus compromises must be made. The design of a shielding enclosure can be a tricky task since the enclosure often play many roles and must fulfill requirements other than those on electromagnetic shielding. The choice of material influences on the possible techniques available for meeting the overall specification on an enclosure. The electromagnetic shielding offered by a shielding material used in an enclosure is a combination of shielding effects where each can be physically explained by theory. Considering the electromagnetic shielding aspect. For electromagnetic waves the electric field component E and the magnetic field component . the enclosure material can be metallic. and enclosure design regarding shielding performance and user friendliness. nonconductive covered with a conductive layer or conductive composite or polymer. enclosing the victim or the radiating source. It is important that a good compromise can be reached between material and production cost. a barrier in the form of a conductive enclosure can be used as a shield.

2. λ For near field shielding (distance from source less than 2π ) the electric field and the magnetic field components must be considered separately and can be treated using different shielding approaches. effective for magnetic fields • Induced eddy current shielding. If metallic materials are used to make an enclosure . This is the case when far field shielding is referred to and then the shielding effects can be described by the following losses: • Absorption losses due to ohmic losses in shielding material. The enclosure will thereby offer good shielding effectiveness for both electric and magnetic field at reasonable high frequencies. high permeability material. • Reflection losses due to impedance change for propagating EM wave crossing medium boundary. effective for high frequency magnetic fields For an enclosure where a high level of electromagnetic shielding is desired.1: As an example a shielding box of high conductivity material can offer good shielding even for time varying magnetic fields H(f ) if induced currents I(f ) are free to flow all over the surface. a metallic material is the best choice since metals offers the best conductivity. effective for electric fields • Low-reluctance path shielding. The desired lifecycle of shielding enclosure is a main factor when the designer is choosing the materials to be used. high conductivity material. E Z= H In free space the wave impedance is constant and equal to 377Ω. high conductivity material.7 2. The field type and frequency decides which materials and techniques to use to achieve desired shielding performance: • Faraday’s cage shielding. Types of EMC Barriers H(f) I(f) Figure 2. An aperture forces currents to a longer path around the aperture which causes a voltage potential difference across the aperture that can couple into the shielding box H are orthogonal and related by a wave impedance Z depending on the medium where the wave is propagating.

When a signal trace is crossing a boundary between electromagnetic zones surface mounted filters can be used to keep the integrity of the boundary and the signal in the more sensitive circuit. 2. Filters are used for separating zones in electronics with different electromagnetic environment (EME). gaskets and other barrier components to improve component designs and compare material choices.8 EMC Barriers offering a high level of shielding it may be necessary to include bolts.3. . On a printed circuit board ground planning is necessary when different parts of the circuit have different signal quality for instance analog ground and digital ground.1. techniques to characterize the electromagnetic properties of the barriers are needed. High conductivity paths between different metals can accelerate corrosion and can also cause noise in sensitive circuits [54]. It would also be a great advantage if circuit simulations were possible with the barrier components included. That enables manufacturers of filters. High conductivity paths between the parts are necessary for the shielding performance.1 Scattering parameters Scattering parameters is a commonly used tool in RF and microwave design. It is also wise to make sure that the board is routed to give adequate separation between traces especially for traces with analog signals with low signal levels and traces that is crossing zone boarders. A barrier is often described in terms of: • scattering parameters • shielding effectiveness – insertion loss – attenuation • circuit elements – transfer impedance and transfer admittance – lumped circuit network 2. The scattering parameters (s-parameters) represents the reflection coefficients and transmission coefficients for a two port circuit.3 Characterization of EMC Barriers It is desired to find ways to describe barriers so that the efficiency of different barrier solutions can be compared. The two involved reflection coefficients are denoted S11 and S22 . That would give the electronic design engineer tools to evaluate the EMC performance of a design in an early design stage. The two transmission coefficients are denoted S12 and S21 . rivets and gaskets in the enclosure design to ensure high conductivity between the parts. but is also a problem when considering the life cycle of the shielding enclosure. In order to make such barrier descriptions. see Figure 2.

3. If a electromagnetic wave enters the two-port via a connected transmission line.1). 2. Generalizations of the s-parameter description can be made for characterization of networks with three ports or more [41. Characterization of EMC Barriers a1 S21 a2 S12 S11 Port 1 S22 b1 S 11= b1 a1 Port 2 b2 a 2= 0 S 21= b2 a1 a2= 0 S 12= b1 a2 a1= 0 S 22= b2 a2 a1= 0 Figure 2. For insertion loss measurements the attenuation of the test object equals the inverse of the magnitude of the scattering parameter representing transmission. the transmitted wave and the reflected wave is represented by the s-parameters.2 Shielding Effectiveness Shielding enclosure materials and conductive gasket performance can be specified by means of shielding effectiveness that is obtained by an insertion loss measurement. . The insertion loss is the difference between attenuation measurements with and without the object present in a fixture.9 2.1) If a complete four s-parameter description is available it is often presented in matrix form.2. equation (2. S21 (or S12 ). Insertion loss measurements are usually made with far field shielding conditions using transmitting and receiving antennas or in transmission line fixtures.3.2: Using scattering parameters to describe signal paths in a two-port Scattering parameters can be explained by studying a passive two-port shown in figure 2. For a backward direction of wave propagation the incident wave is denoted a2 . the transmitted wave b1 and the reflected wave b2 . The relationships between the incident wave. the wave is scattered and both transmitted trough the two-port and reflected back towards the source of the wave. By transformation of the s-parameter matrix into the what is called the chain-matrix the effect of cascading networks can easily be calculated by matrix multiplication. the transmitted wave b2 and the reflected wave b1 . These representations of waves are actually complex entities and so are the corresponding s-parameters. For a forward direction of wave propagation the incident wave is denoted a1 . 50]. A complex s-parameter holds information of the magnitude ratio and phase angle difference between the two waves that is considered. b1 b2 = S11 S12 S21 S22 a1 a2 (2.

there is also a transfer admittance that can be causing leakage through an electromagnetic shield.3. This is shown in the right part of figure 2. shielded connectors and conductive gaskets but it can also be used for shielded enclosures in general. see equation (2. see left part of figure 2. 46]. see equation (2. It can be obtained from measurements as the ratio of a potential difference across an electric field Eout on the secondary side of a shield due to a current density Jin on the primary side. The effect of the barrier then can be studied under correct drive and load conditions in time domain or in frequency domain [14. It is therefore practical to use the transfer impedance/admittance description only at frequencies where the wavelength is much greater than the size of the shielding component to be characterized. [49].3.2) Yt = Jout Ein (2.10 2. The circuit elements and their values describing the barrier is sometimes easily obtained from datasheets.3). The current density is therefore given the dimension of [A/m] rather than [A/m2 ]. is instead the ratio of the current density Jout on the secondary side of the shield by the potential difference across the primary side caused by an incident electric field Jin . However the effect of the transfer impedance on the shield leakage is often dominant over the transfer admittance which thereby often can be neglected [49. shielding components can be characterized by measurements with good repeatability [58] from really low frequencies (dc) up to a frequency dependent on the size of the fixture.3. Zt = Eout Jin (2.2). The transfer impedance Zt represents two coupling mechanisms namely the diffusion through the thickness of the shield and the magnetic field coupling through imperfections in the shield [49]. It is sometimes a great advantage to use the circuit description because of the possibility to include the barrier in a circuit simulation of the entire system.3) Transfer admittance Yt that represents electric field coupling through imperfections in the shield. The transfer impedance and transfer admittance are usually considered as being a distributed homogeneously over the length of a gasketed seam or similarly for other components. Using transfer impedance fixtures. Shielding performance is sometimes given in form of the transfer impedance. This is typically the case for shielded cables. Transfer impedance measurement results characterizing conductive gaskets at frequencies up to 10 GHz have been published[37]. sometimes they are possible to extract from the geometry or by measurements. . To completely describe the shielding effect on electromagnetic fields the transfer impedance description is not enough.3 EMC Barriers Circuit Elements Barriers characteristics can also be described by a circuit schematic. The current density used in this context is the current per unit length of a gasketed seam or per width of a shielding surface rather than the current per area commonly used in other contexts. 55].

Barrier models can then by computer simulation give an estimation on shielding effectiveness etc. On approach to investigate a current distribution by measurement is by near field scanning of magnetic field component over a conductive surface and then estimate the corresponding surface currents. Jout Secondary side Figure 2.3. the knowledge of the material complex permittivity and complex permittivity may be necessary for accurate modeling of those barriers. For some EMC barriers an approach for characterization is to study the current distribution that results from some excitation. Replacing EMC measurements on product prototypes with computer simulations also makes it possible to try varied designs at a lower cost. In addition electromagnetic radiation from a conductive surface can be estimated if the surface current distribution is known. 2.11 2. For development of numerical modeling techniques for use in computer simulations. It may for instance be of interest to study the current distribution over a gasketed seam in a shielding enclosure application to understand the effect of different conductive gaskets. To the right the coupling mechanism represented by transfer admittance is shown.4 EMC Barrier Modeling The need to address EMC issues at an early stage of product development is driving research on computer modeling techniques to analyze design solutions. Eout Secondary side Current density. 2. In the layout of printed circuit boards (PCBs) the effect of separated ground segments can be analyzed by studying the ground layer current distribution and can adjustments can be made to solve signal integrity issues. Ein Electric field. comparisons with measured data and analytical models . For dielectric materials included in EMC barriers.3: To the left the two coupling mechanisms represented by transfer impedance is shown. Jin Electric field.4.4 Other measures to characterize and evaluate EMC barriers Material electromagnetic properties such as complex permittivity and complex permittivity are another description from which an EMC barrier can be characterized. Using traditional absorbtion loss and reflection loss calculations the shielding effectiveness of a material can be estimated under certain assumptions [48]. EMC Barrier Modeling Transfer impedance Transfer admittance Primary side Primary side Current density.

Earlier work usually focuses on a specific barrier or design element and do not develop generic approaches to generate lumped element circuit models. 43. 18]. This approach is of course desired and it sometimes gives opportunities to study internal characteristics that hardly can be studied by other means. 5]. It is often necessary to design a custom made fixture for this measurement depending on the design and shape of the barrier and the frequency range that is considered for the measurement. Earlier research in this field have investigated discrete component models for improving the high frequency accuracy of circuit simulations [70].12 EMC Barriers are essential for verification and validation. Partial Equivalent Element Circuit (PEEC) and Method of Moments (MOM) are the most commonly used numerical techniques [5]. . More recent research have diversified and is covering a wide range of aspects. Depending on the complexity of an EMC barrier its characterization may be obtainable by modeling the structure of the barriers and applying a numerical electromagnetic field solver that can extract the s-parameters or circuit component values from the geometry and material data given in the model. This is particularly the case for components with unknown internal geometries and when new materials with unknown electromagnetic properties are involved. For this kind of measurements an instrument known as a vector network analyzer is used because of its ability to collect a full s-parameter description of a studied two-port. By including stray capacitances and pin inductances realistic simulation results were obtained at frequencies up to 1 GHz for resistors. Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD). For circuit simulations of crosstalk in multi conductor cables and on printed circuit boards models based on transmission lines and multi conductor transmission lines are commonly used [43.and material data for EMC barrier modeling it is often necessary to characterize physical samples by measurements. Numerical modeling techniques for extracting lumped component values or transmission line parameters from geometrical structures has been an expanding research area [60. 69]. Generation of a lumped circuit model followed by a circuit simulation using SPICE or equivalent software tools is an approach many have chosen to use [60. 69. To provide barrier component. capacitors and coils.

• Scattering parameters (s-parameters) measurements are used for characterization of filters and can also be used to study signal integrity and crosstalk problems.Chapter 3 Measurement Methods Essential to Work on Barriers 3. This data can then be used in barrier modeling. • Transfer impedance (Zt ) measurements are typically used for characterization of shielded cables. • Permittivity and permeability measurements are used for characterization of materials used in barriers. • Shielding effectiveness (SE) measurements are typically used for characterization of shielding materials and components of a shield such as conductive gaskets. Development of computer simulation techniques needs verification and validation to prove the technique to be accurate when solving real design problems. Different measurements methods are used for this purpose to compare an observable parameter with the corresponding parameter from a simulation. This is usually accomplished by comparisons of simulation results with analytical models and with measurements on prototypes. shielded conductors and conductive gaskets. For instance divided ground planes can be analyzed. 13 .1 Introduction to measurement methodologies The concept of EMC barriers is a general view of techniques to reduce interference between electronic devices or interference within a device (signal integrity). Since a barrier can be in the form of an electromagnetic shielding enclosure as well as a filter component. different measurement methods must be used for characterization of different barrier types. • Near field scanning measurements may be used for analysis of current distribution in a conductive surface.

these standardized methods can not always be used because they need well defined samples that is sometimes impossible to make due to the properties of the object to be measured. In these cases it is necessary to design measurement equipment that differs from standardized equipment. will not necessarily expose the sample for the same electromagnetic field impedance as a method where an incident plane wave is radiated from an antenna [68]. The custom made measurement equipment can be tailored to be used for measurements on specific gaskets or sheets of material with a particular shape and size. Measurements according to MIL-STD-285 have been used to examine new shielding materials as conductive composites and performance of conductive gaskets. This wall has an aperture where test objects are mounted. However. the antennas are directed towards each other and at a fix distance from each other.2.1 MIL-STD-285 Type Methods The foundation of shielding effectiveness measurements has earlier been the American military standard MIL-STD-285 from 1956 [51]. Each measurement method is producing a performance value that is hard to relate to the performance value obtained using another measurement method. Unfortunately it is very hard to relate the data obtained with a tailored fixture to corresponding data as obtained according to standards and thereby the effort is not always made. transmission line fixture methods and so on. The transmitter is transmitting at constant power and the receiver measure the transferred power with and without test object mounted in the aperture. The method uses two screened rooms with one common wall as shown in figure 3. This makes the repeatability poor. Another reason why this relationship is seldom established is the fact that it is well known that some standardized measurement techniques struggles with repeatability problems. Improved versions of the method in MIL-STD-285 have developed were the problems with reflections have been minimized by the use of absorbing material in the chambers . The standard is now withdrawn but improved methods of this type have made new standards evolve. The difference between these measurements is the insertion loss (IL) for the test object. for example [68]. There exists standardized measurement methods for obtaining a performance value for shielding enclosures and shielding enclosure components such as conductive gaskets. 3. Drawbacks with the method are that measured insertion loss is dependent on the antenna placement and the reflections of the electromagnetic wave inside the screened rooms.1. In one room is the transmitter antenna located and the receiver antenna is located in the other room. For example a measurement method where a shielding material sample is mounted inside a coaxial transmission line. A performance value can be obtained using radiated measurements methods.2 Measurement Methods Shielding Effectiveness Measurement Methods The methods to measure the shielding effectiveness of an enclosure or a conductive gasket or other shielding components includes a variety of standard methods and variation on standard methods.14 3.

It can also be implemented by modulating the signal source and create frequency mode stirring [63]. A mode stirring action can also be used when the stirring mechanism is causing a continuously changing electromagnetic environment in the chamber. Shielding Effectiveness Measurement Methods 15 Test object Transmit antenna Receive antenna Figure 3. It uses two mode stirred chambers next to each other with a common wall having an aperture for mounting of test objects. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the USA o and others [58. 67. the Swedish Defence Research Agency in Link¨ping. The facility can be used for mode tuning when the stirring mechanism is stepped between measurements so that several measurements are obtained in different electromagnetic environments. A 1 Watt amplifier can be used to create a field in the chamber with electric components of 100 Volts per meter or more. 3.2. the placement of antennas is for instance not critical here. A mode stirred chamber is a shielded room with a mode stirring arrangement to create electromagnetic fields with a large number of modes within the chamber. The multimode electromagnetic field in the chambers can be of high amplitude using a small not to expensive power amplifier. see figure 3. New improved version of the method in MIL-STD-285 can also be found in the standard IEEE-STD-299 from 1997 [33].1: Shielding effectiveness measurement according to the standard MIL-STD-285 [11]. The lower frequency limit for the method is about 500 MHz and it is dependent on the smallest size of the mode stirred chambers (the smallest distance inside a chamber should be seven times the wavelength of . Drawbacks are that the needed equipment to control the mode stirring can be expensive and the method does not show if the test object is particularly sensitive to a certain field polarity from a certain direction. 57]. 26. 56. 28. Frequency range a few MHz to 18 GHz [58].2 Dual Mode Stirred Chamber A measurement method called the dual mode stirred chamber or dual reverberation chamber method is being developed by FOI. also referred to as electronic mode stirring. Sweden.2.3. This makes the measurements considerably easier. The mode stirring arrangement can be a mechanical paddle wheel or some other highly conductive structure that can be rotated stepwise or continuously. depending on the quality factor (Q) of the chamber [63].2.

2: Shielding effectiveness measurement using a dual mode stirred chamber facility the lowest frequency [56].e.3 Apertured TEM Cell in a Reverberating Chamber This is a simplified method [58. The usable frequency range is 200 MHz to 1 GHz and dynamic range about 100 dB [58]. Here two TEM cells are connected together in a ”piggy-back” manner.4 Dual TEM Cell A related and even cheaper method is the dual TEM cell method [58. The second TEM cell have two outputs where electric field coupling and magnetic field coupling can be measured respectively. A drawback with this method is that the polarization of the electric field is normal to the sample [58]. 67] that makes use of one mode stirred chamber. The sample is mounted over an aperture in the TEM cell. 3. The location of the transmitting antenna and the TEM cell is not critical but the antenna should not be aiming towards the TEM cell and the TEM cell should not be close to the walls or other reflecting objects [31.2. Inside the chamber a transmitting antenna is located and an apertured TEM cell as receiver [58. The aperture is covered with the sample to be investigated. Other ways to derive the lowest useful frequency [31.and . 15]. measurement of the field uniformity [31] in the completed chamber is the best way to get an exact realistic value [29].2. 67. A TEM cell is an expanded section of a rectangular co-axial transmission line. 40]. 500 MHz gives a distance of more than four meters). A nice feature with this method is that both electric. An electromagnetic field is then generated with the antenna and a receiving instrument connected to the TEM cell is used to measure the leakage through the sample. 35]. 53. The TEM cells are coupled trough an aperture in the common wall. An important feature with this measurement method is that near field SE measurements are obtained (E-field and H-field shielding effectiveness). 15. i. One TEM cell is connected to a signal source and terminated in the other end.3. 3. 17] gives different lower frequency limit and to really know the lower frequency limit. see figure 3.16 Measurement Methods Stirring paddle Transmit antenna Stirring paddle Test object Receive antenna Figure 3.

100 dB [58]. 27]. 35. When performing a measurement the wall with the reflector and quarter loop antenna is joined with the half TEM cell and the sample in between. it is also called rectangular split transmission line holder. 58].2. The continuous conductor (cc) version is an expanded 50Ω coaxial transmission line with tapered ends to fit standard 50Ω coaxial connector. Both the center conductor and the outer conductor must make good contact with the sample on both sides so that the cell is shorted by the sample. A sample is characterized by the insertion loss calculated from a measurement of attenuation through the empty cell with the halves joined and a measurement of attenuation through the shorted cell with the halves joined with the sample in between.5 Split TEM Cell (TEM-T Cell) Another usage of the TEM cell is the split TEM cell [58.6 Circular Coaxial Holder There are two quite different versions of this kind of test fixture [27.3: Shielding effectiveness measurement using a dual transverse electromagnetic (TEM) cell magnetic field shielding simultaneously can be investigated by measuring the received power in both ends of the secondary TEM cell. The sample has to have an annular washer shape to fit between the inner and outer conductor and thereby short the transmission line.17 3. Shielding Effectiveness Measurement Methods Test sample Termination Signal source Far end measurement Near end measurement Figure 3. Then a loop antenna is combined with a box equipped with a 90degree angle reflector on one wall. The continuous conductor test fixture has an operating frequency range of dc to 1 GHz and a dynamic range of 90 . The frequency range for this method is 1 MHz to 200 MHz and the dynamic range is about 60 dB. The frequency range for this method is 1MHz to 1 GHz (1 MHz to 400 MHz for H-field) and the dynamic range about 70-80dB [58]. The split TEM cell is made as an ordinary TEM cell in two halves. The loop antenna is mounted trough the reflector such that three quarters of the loop is inside the box and one quarter outside.2. 3. The receiving half of the TEM cell can be modified to measure the magnetic field shielding efficiency. . 3.2.

The outer conductor is equipped with flanges to offer good capacitive coupling between the two halves of the fixture.2.7 Dual Chamber Test Fixture (ASTM ES7-83) A box split into two sections. 3. Each section has an antenna fixed on the inside. A sheet of the sample material is sandwiched between the two sections and the transmission through the material is measured. Test samples are needed both for the reference measurement and for the actual measurement of the material. The transfer impedance of the cable shield can then be calculated be a formula (3. The split conductor fixture has a frequency range of 1 MHz to 1. For the reference measurement a small disc shaped piece is fitted between center conductors and a large washer shaped piece is fitted between outer conductors.3.1) given in . 3. geometrical shape among others. The fixture is usually used with a network analyzer and transmission through the fixture (S21 ) is recorded.4. In the actual measurement a large disc shaped piece is fitted between the two halves of the fixture. 3.3 Transfer Impedance Methods The transfer impedance or surface transfer impedance is a way to describe the high frequency characteristics of an electromagnetic shield in terms of lumped or distributed circuit elements. By determination of the transfer impedance these properties are modelled by a circuit element giving the corresponding electric field on the secondary shield surface for a certain current on the primary shield surface. From these measurements the shielding efficiency is calculated as the insertion loss.8 GHz and a dynamic range of 90 . The triaxial fixture setup used in this standard can for a characterization of a 50Ω schematically be shown as in figure 3.1 Transfer Impedance of Coaxial Cables For measuring the efficiency of a coaxial cable shield a method is commonly used were transfer impedance is measured.18 Measurement Methods The other version called split conductor (sc) is described in the standard ASTMD4935 and has a similar design but is split in two halves. This simplifies mounting of test samples. The standard IEC 96-1A [32] describes this procedure and the design of the test fixture. This method keeps distance and material between the two parts of the fixture constant except for the region between center and outer conductor.100 dB [58]. Properties influencing the performance of an electromagnetic shield are the skin depth. The test method has been used for frequencies from 100 kHz to 1 Ghz and gives a dynamic range of 80 dB. The insertion loss is calculated as the difference between the measurement of the large disc sample and the reference measurement. This model are then very suitable for generation of a SPICE model making it possible to simulate the penetration of an electromagnetic shield in a circuit simulator [46]. As a reference the transmission between the antennas are measured without the sample present.

see figure 3. The higher the transfer impedance for a gasket is the lower is the performance of the gasket since an electromagnetic field on the front side of the shield easier can give raise to electromagnetic fields on the backside of the shield. especially when testing .19 3. 37].5 . The contact pressure between the gasket and the mating surface is an important parameter that has to be controlled when a gasket is examined. 60 )) d where d is the outer diameter of the cable screen under test. Transfer impedance is defined as the voltage Uout on the secondary side of the shield divided by the current density Jin (in Ampere per meter) on the primary side of the shield. This method has its drawbacks.2 Transfer impedance of conductive gaskets The standard SAE ARP 1705 [61] (from 1981) and the revised version SAE ARP 1705A [62] (from 1997) describes how transfer impedance measurements is used to determine the performance of EMC gaskets.1) Other standards exists for transfer impedance measurements on shielded cables. 3. Transfer Impedance Methods 50Ω Ω U ~ 50Ω Ω 50Ω Ω I V Figure 3.4: Schematic measurement setup example for the triaxial transfer impedance fixture used in standard IEC 96-1A the standard.3. The useful frequency range for the IEC 96-1A fixture is DC to 30 MHz.4 · 60 · ln( (3.3. Zt = abs(S21 · 2 · 1. There are improved versions of transfer impedance test fixtures for use at higher frequencies [36. by improvements of this model more exact results would be obtained [56. The measurement procedure is straightforward and to be able to determine the transfer impedance from the measured entities a simplified low frequency model of the test fixture is used. The test fixture in the standard SAE ARP 1705 is stated to be useful for absolute measurements up to 700MHz. More advanced fixtures using quadraxial and quintaxial setups are useful up to 1 GHz [30]. 13]. In the SAE ARP 1705 fixture this is accomplished by pneumatic pressure behind a membrane involving the ”cover” that rests on the gasket. The current density Jin may for instance be induced by an incident electromagnetic field.

Here the focus is on standardized antenna positions and other measures for the repeatability of the measurement. 26. Experimental comparisons have been performed to relate the different representations of shielding performance [58. In this case no special effort is made to control the current distribution caused by the incident field. 25. 38]. 3.3.4 Relating Transfer Impedance to Other Performance Measures The transfer impedance is a circuit theory description of the shielding performance. the attenuation of an electromagnetic wave is studied. In measurement methods for shielding effectiveness in terms of insertion loss.3. There is no easy way to convert transfer impedance to the insertion loss measured using a MIL-STD-285 type measurement since that would require the geometry of the test fixture and the incident angle of the field towards the gaskets to be taken into account [20.5: The transfer impedance measurement on a conductive gasket fingerstock gaskets that needs a small contact pressure and long compression height [64]. 57]. The most common measurement methods can be categorized as: . In a fixture for transfer impedance measurement the purpose of the fixture design is usually to establish an uniform current distribution over the test object. 3. 1. Different fixtures are used in published studies [22.20 Measurement Methods Jin + Uout − Figure 3.4 Characterization of Permittivity and Permeability Several methods exists for the measurement of permeability and permittivity. The newer SAE ARP 1705A the membrane is removed and the new construction is using pneumatic cylinders to set the contact pressure.3 Transfer Impedance of Shielded Connectors For shielded connectors the transfer impedance characterization is also commonly used. 66]. 3.

[6.4. An advantage of the loaded coaxial transmission line method is that it offers the possibility to perform measurements in a broad frequency band. particularly for measurement of imaginary part of the permittivity for determining the losses in a material [6. 7]. The open ended coaxial line has a main advantage that it is a non destructive test method. Characterization of Permittivity and Permeability 21 • Loaded resonant waveguide cavity • Open ended coaxial line • Loaded coaxial transmission line Loaded cavity resonance measurement methods are commonly used because of the good accuracy offered. 19]. However the resonance of a cavity makes the method only covering a narrow frequency band. A good overview of available measurement methods are given in publications [6. Both reflection and transmission through the fixture is used when calculating the test material data [6. The dimensions of the sample piece are critical to ensure a precise fit. The measurement accuracy for this method is not as good as the other methods mentioned. The sample piece must be of certain dimensions to fit. . This can be improved to some extend by including higher order resonant modes. The loaded coaxial transmission line method makes it possible to measure over wide frequency range with better accuracy than what the open ended coaxial line method offers [6]. The advantages and disadvantages of the methods gives a guideline on what measurement method to use depending on restrictions on sample preparation and desired frequency range and accuracy of the data. The loaded cavity resonance measurement method gives high accuracy data for narrowband measurements at frequencies of over 100 GHz. Because of temperature variations the dielectric material can cause impedance mismatch losses and degrade the performance of a device. From the reflection coefficient the permittivity can be determined. The open ended coaxial line offers a method where only a flat surface of studied material is needed. One disadvantage is that the method is sensitive to air gaps that disturb the electric field the probe and the sample [6]. In later years plastic material data at microwave frequencies have been of major concern because the increased need for accurate data when designing devices working at higher frequencies [59]. 59]. Older publication (before 1985) often focused on plastic material data at frequencies below 100 MHz [12]. 7]. 8]. The measurement accuracy for this method is not as good as that of loaded cavity resonance measurement methods. There exists a large number of publications on electromagnetic properties of plastic materials.3. The material may load the line and cause a change of characteristic impedance. The coaxial probe is pressed against a specimen and the reflection coefficient is measured. In the loaded coaxial transmission line method the material under test is placed to fill the volume between the inner and outer conductor in a section along the transmission line. That sample material is mounted inside a resonant cavity and thereby loading the cavity. It is then also important to study the temperature variations in the electromagnetic properties of the material under test [12.

By scanning of magnetic field over a ground plane on a printed circuit board the current distribution can be analyzed and it can be decided if the ground planning design stage have been done properly. A broken component or a poorly routed conductor trace can thereby be identified and fixed. The near field scan were collected using a computer controlled three dimensional positioning mechanism. However it is of great value to able to verify computer simulation results with measured data. The method of near field scanning used in the study is suggested to be accurate enough for far field predictions of the radiation from a printed circuit board. The other port of the vector network analyser is connected to the conductive surface for excitation of surface currents. An investigation on near field radiation from traces on a printed circuit board shows good agreements between measured and simulated fields [16].5 Measurement Methods Near Field Scanning of Printed Circuit Boards and Conductive Surfaces Near field scanning is a useful tool in EMC for finding radiating sources on a printed circuit board (PCB). In particular near field scanning of magnetic field over a conductive surface gives a hint of the surface current distribution. For antenna design work near field scanning is also used. . The measured values compares well with simulated results using a thin-wire structure analysis program (NEC). Both E-field and H-field probes was used and the magnitude of the field was studied. The coupling between the surface and the field probe is measured to magnitude and phase.22 3. A similar study were done using two probes scanning simultaneously at different height to obtain a phase difference and a amplitude difference [42]. In this case a magnetic field probe is stepwise positioned over the conductive surface and connected to one port of a vector network analyser. From this magnetic field distribution the surface current distribution can be estimated [34]. This type of analysis usually better suited to be run in a computer simulation. The current distribution in a printed antenna can be analyzed and the far field radiation pattern can be estimated [34].

.. ”An Approach to the Generation of SPICE Models Feasible for EMC Problems”. and Delsing J. ”A comparison of measured and simulated current distributions on a printed log-periodic antenna”. Symposium Record. Canada). Symposium Record. and Delsing J. Symposium Record. 2000 Paper B: Jenvey S. USA). 2000 Paper C: Ekman J.. ”Analysis of Printed Antenna Structures using the Partial Element Equivalent Circuit (PEEC) Method”.. (Uppsala. and Lundgren U. Symposium Record... Carlsson J.. 2002 23 ..C. EMB01. Sweden). Antenn 00. EMC Europe 2002. 2001 Paper E: Lundgren U. (Lund. Paper A: Carlsson J. 2001 Paper D: Lundgren U. Italy). Ekman J. and Lundgren U.Chapter 4 Thesis Summary 4. Sweden). and Lundgren U. Nordic Antenna Symposium. (Montreal.1 Summary of Contributions My research is documented in seven papers of which two are submitted to scientific journals and five have been presented at scientific conferences and published in conference proceedings. Symposium Record. (Washington. D. 2001 IEEE International Symposium On Electromagnetic Compatibility. 2000 IEEE International Symposium On Electromagnetic Compatibility. ”Characterization of Conductive Thermoplastic Composite Materials Using Multiple Measurements Methods”. ”SPICE models of barrier compared to measured data”. (Sorrento.

and Delsing J. work have been done to develop methods to generate SPICE models for a few barrier kinds. physical barriers and geometrical barriers. IEEE Transactions on 4.. Good agreement was obtained between measurements and circuit simulation results with the generated circuit model of the barrier.1. It has been shown that for a geometrical barrier where the structure has a fixed cross section. and Delsing J. while some models could be improved to perform well in the frequency range 1 GHz to 4 GHz. Submitted to Microwave Theory and Techniques. The program computes the per-unit length parameters of the multi-conductor transmission line assumption of the barrier. The geometrical barriers are geometrically well known structures like a shielding enclosure or separation of traces on a printed circuit board. ”Electromagnetic properties of thermoplastic material for varying temperatures”. Barriers with stepwise changing cross sections were also applicable when different circuit model segments were cascaded. In the physical barrier group we can find filters and other commercially available components with unknown interior structure.24 Thesis Summary Paper F: Lundgren U. Some models were performing well up to 4 GHz (limited by lab equipment).1 Paper A: An approach to the generation of SPICE models feasible for EMC problems Considering electromagnetic barriers and the desire to be able to simulate barriers in circuit simulators. . the barrier characteristics can be calculated with inexpensive tools if the material properties are known. Submitted to Electromagnetic Compatibility.. A two-dimensional finite difference program was developed in which the cross-section of the barrier is defined using a CAD-like user interface. IEEE Transactions on Paper G: Lundgren U.. ”Shielding Effectiveness Data on Commercial Thermoplastic Materials”. Prototype printed circuit boards incorporating the studied barriers was subject to measurements. Good agreement was obtained for all comparisons at frequencies up to 1 GHz. The highest useful frequency for models created with this approach depends on the number of segments in the lumped circuit model. Models generated this way was also verified by comparison of measured values to simulation results of the generated model. Ekman J. For physical barriers another technique was developed based on measurements on the barrier followed by a error minimization procedure of an assumed lumped component circuit to the measured data. The barriers considered are divided into two groups.

By using a specialized discretization. This paper can be considered as an fundamental introduction to this electromagnetic computation technique. the partial element equivalent circuit (PEEC) method is illustrated and applied to printed antenna structures where measurements are compared to simulations and analytical solutions. The use of the printed circuit board to support the radiating elements and the parallel wire transmission feeder line led to a mixed dielectric environment. Two polarizations of the magnetic field was acquired with magnitude and phase. current/voltage source etc in the resulting PEEC model. This affected the current distributions on the feeder and the radiating elements and hence the radiation patterns and the impedance characteristics of the antenna.1. The resulting equivalent circuits are solved by using a commercial circuit simulation program like SPICE. The current distribution on the antenna were studied by examining the magnetic fields obtained by the scanning procedure. The possibility to use simplified PEEC models to decrease computation time is discussed with illustrative examples.4. The probe was positioned by a computer controlled scanning mechanism. The partial elements are calculated either by using numerical integration techniques or simplified closed form equations. 4. The first example displays the possibility to make PEEC models by using closed form equations to calculate the partial elements and a free version of SPICE as the solver. transmission lines. The antenna was constructed on a printed circuit board.3 Paper C: Analysis of Printed Antenna Structures using the Partial Element Equivalent Circuit (PEEC) Method In this paper. The international interest for the method has been gaining rapidly for the past years but in the Nordic countries the research effort has been low. Measured current distributions were compared with predicted distributions obtained from Method of Moments (MOM) analysis of the LPDA structure.1. The field was sampled using a loop probe connected to a vector network analyzer.2 25 Paper B: A comparison of measured and simulated current distribution on a printed log-periodic antenna The current distribution on a log periodic dipole antenna (LPDA) have been studied using near field measurements and simulations based on method of moments. Measured and predicted far field radiation patterns are also compared. Detailed measurements of the magnetic field was obtained with 5 mm stepping two dimensional scanning just above the surface of the antenna. the original structure is converted into a network of discrete inductances. capacitances and resistances. Summary of Contributions 4. The use of SPICE-like circuit solvers facilitates the inclusion of discrete components. The PEEC method is a full wave technique for the solution of mixed circuit and field problems in both the time and frequency domain. Comparison results show that magnetic field scanning of a printed antenna is a useful tool for getting a better understanding of the real performance of the antenna. This feature makes the method .1. The PEEC method has been shown to be a very powerful simulation technique for combined circuit and electromagnetic field problems. called the partial elements.

The application of PEEC’s to antennas is a valuable tool in many areas where antenna resonance frequencies are of importance. in some instances a remaining offset is found. . However. The paper shows that antennas are modelled with good agreement compared to analytical solutions and measurements. Differences between 10 and 40 dB in the two configurations is found. Good agreement was found between simulated and measured data. passive surface mounted filters and encapsulation was designed. A transfer impedance approach modelled incident electromagnetic waves in SPICE. With the EM clamp injection method a much better agreement is obtained between the measured system transfer impedance and the SPICE simulation. The focus for electronic system designers is on product functionality.1. It is reasonable to believe that better agreement would be found if the SPICE simulation could be done at 100 MHz. Test systems using D-sub connectors. The models are based on data from 2D and 3D Maxwell equation solvers. The deviation between the obtained results seems to decrease when frequency increases in the frequency range of this study. The measurement results obtained in the unechoic chamber shows a poor agreement with the SPICE simulations in the frequency range 30 MHz to 60 MHz where overlapping data is available. The frequency range for the SPICE simulation was limited by the transfer impedance data obtained for the coaxial cable shield. By combining measurements for the parts of the system into a complete system transfer impedance good agreement is obtained with SPICE simulation. 4.26 Thesis Summary possible to use in education and for simple design tasks.4 Paper D: SPICE models of barrier compared to measured data SPICE models of electromagnetic zone barrier are devised. The coupling through the zone barriers was measured. Test system verification measurements were made in a fully anechoic chamber. This work thus focuses on building SPICE models for electromagnetic zone barriers enabling SPICE simulations of incident radiated power and immunity to incoming disturbances. the method require a retarded circuit solver to be considered a full wave method comparable with a method of moments solution. SPICE models has been developed for commercially available components that can be regarded as EMC barriers. Surface mounted filters and shielded connectors and cables are examples of such components. The measurements for the desired verification are hard to do with one single approach. Here EMC aspects are hard to approach using for the electronic engineer well known tools such as SPICE. However when comparing with other measurements or by extrapolation of the simulation results a better agreement is found in the higher frequency range towards 100 MHz. Models have also been developed for EMC barriers that appear in a circuit due to the layout of circuit.

As can be expected materials that shows a relatively high shielding effectiveness for a incident plane wave also in general offers shielding in the near field situation that was studied.4. samples were manufactured and measured. Several boxes of different materials were specially manufactured for this study. The frequency range in this study is 150 MHz to 1 GHz. plane wave shielding effectiveness (SE) and near electric field shielding effectiveness. As a second measurement method a modified MIL-STD-285 type method was used. Samples with different base polymers. that is the relation of electric field strength to magnetic field strength is unknown. The imaginary part of the permittivity includes the effect of conductivity in the material. Using traditional techniques this data can be used for estimation of SE for an infinitely large plane electromagnetic shield. The repeatability for these measurements are very good and the results presented are from one measurement occasion but the results must of course be regarded as unique to this test set-up. The samples were characterized in terms of their complex permittivity and complex permeability. In conclusion the thermoplastic ma- .1. By analyzing the measured permittivity and permeability further a large difference is found in imaginary permittivity for the materials. This is because the shielding material is in close proximity of the transmitting antenna so that the input impedance of the transmitting antenna may change when changing material. Data from three of those are here used for the comparison of the three methods. Summary of Contributions 4. Three different measurement methods are compared to test the validity of the methods. When studying a larger number of different materials than presented in this paper. A battery powered square wave generator with dipole antenna was enclosed in a box made of the tested material. The third method was to use a loaded coaxial transmission line fixture for measurement of complex permittivity and complex permeability. A measurement method for studying near field shielding effectiveness was developed. Measured shielding effectiveness with this far field method show the same trend in frequency response as the near field method but with an offset in some cases.1. This paper describes the work to compare measurement methods to acquire electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of conductive thermoplastic materials. Measured data are also compared to give an indication how shielding effectiveness is affected by incident field impedance and by the permittivity and permeability of the material. For the comparison of measurement methods a number of different composite materials were analyzed in the study. filler materials and different amount of filler made it possible to generate data for many combinations. A correlation between SE and complex permittivity was also found. materials that performs well in the plane wave case usually also offers good shielding in the near field case. The largest deviation found in this comparison is almost 20 dB. Also the near field impedance. The cause of the losses in a dielectric material is usually that the conductivity is large.5 27 Paper E: Characterization of Conductive Thermoplastic Composite Materials Using Multiple Measurements Methods In a study of conductive thermoplastic composite materials. Calculated SE based on measured material properties does not agree well with measured near field shielding effectiveness.

In some instances manufacturer data were available for comparison. For near field shielding. the recorded results are presented and conclusions from the comparisons are drawn. Further. Ten materials were chosen and samples manufactured for analysis using two measurement methods. the measurement techniques are discussed.28 Thesis Summary terials with high imaginary part of the permittivity seem to give an improved shielding effectiveness compared to materials with small imaginary part of permittivity. Faradex XX711 showed the best combined far field and near field shielding results.and far. housings of the different thermoplastic materials was constructed and equipped with a EMI source to model a realistic near field shielding effectiveness situation. In some instances manufacturer data were available for comparison. The real part of the permittivity does not correlate well with shielding effectiveness. Far field shielding effectiveness was tested using a modified standard measurement technique to provide results comparable with company provided data.6 Paper F: Shielding Effectiveness Data on Commercial Thermoplastic Materials Ten different commercially available conductive thermoplastic materials have been tested for near. 4. • Faradex XP211 offer the best far field shielding effectiveness. The manufacturers of different conductive filler materials sometimes specifies the shielding performance of their material in an application according to standardized measurement method but deviations from the exact standard often occurs.field shielding effectiveness for the thermoplastic materials the following is noted. One problem that arises for the EMC engineer is to select an encapsulation technique that offers a desired degree of electromagnetic shielding for a new electronic device. Thus it was decided to evaluate electromagnetic shielding effectiveness for commercially available thermoplastic materials. . This paper describes the composition of the chosen materials. When comparing the near. • Faradex XA611 is the material with the lowest level of shielding effectiveness for both near. The conductive thermoplastic material Faradex XP211 (with filling of stainless steel fibre) and RTP EMI 283 (with filling of nickel coated carbon fibre) were the two materials offering the best far field shielding performance. the measurement techniques are discussed. the recorded results are presented and conclusions from the comparisons are drawn.field.and far-field shielding effectiveness. • Faradex XX711 and Beki-Shield offer the best near field shielding effectiveness knocking the signal from the EMI source (transmitter) down below the noise floor. Faradex XX711 and Bekaert BekiShield (both with filling of stainless steel fibre) were the two best performing. Shielding effectiveness data up to 1GHz is presented. This paper describes the composition of the chosen materials.1. This makes comparisons between different manufacturers hard.and far. Further the standardized method just give a hint of what the shielding performance can be for the same material in an electronic device encapsulation application.

4.0 at room temperature (20◦ C) and it is independent of temperature in the range 20◦ C to 60◦ C. Real part of the relative permittivity was found to be 2.1. The complex permittivity and complex permeability are obtained while the temperature is varied from 20◦ to 60◦ Celsius.1. Considering that the near field shielding measurement imitates the use of material in an application it is disappointing to se how poor guide the far field shielding effectiveness results are when a material selection for an enclosure must be made. Thus series of experiments have been conducted to obtain complex permittivity and complex permeability for the thermoplastic over temperature 20 − 60◦ C and frequencies from 100 MHz to 2. agreement was quite good with the near field method in one instance while the difference was close to 30 dB in the other three instances. It is of interest to explore the usage of a particular laminated encapsulation material with integrated antennas in environments with changing temperature.7 Paper G: Electromagnetic properties of thermoplastic material for varying temperatures A thermoplastic material is examined. To be able to design stripline transmission lines in the laminate it is necessary to know the electromagnetic behavior of the isolating plastic material. The major problem is to establish a test methodology where temperature effects other than these of the material under test are sufficiently suppressed. In cases where manufacturer data were available. Summary of Contributions 29 • Faradex XX711 is the best material for the combined shielding effectiveness. The good results from this work led to a patent application for an encapsulation technique with integrated patch antenna and antenna feed transmission line [44]. The laminated technique offers a good barrier against moisture and good shielding for electromagnetic energy. The results for the permeability was as expected for the material under test. Measurements were then done at three temperature points. This value shows a very small dependence of temperature changes in the range 20◦ Celsius to 60◦ Celsius. The thermoplastic material is used in a laminate with metallic foil for encapsulation of electronic circuits. It was found that the material under test have a real relative permittivity of 2.0 ± 0. with careful calibration at each temperature to cancel the temperature effects on the cables and connectors.5 GHz. The measurement setup was very sensitive to temperature variations. The real part of the relative permeability is close to 1 and imaginary part close to 0. 4. The first attempt to cover the temperature range 0◦ Celsius to 80◦ C with a single calibration was insufficient.1 in the frequency range 100 MHz to 2. 20◦ .5 GHz. 40◦ and 60◦ C. It was necessary to perform instrument calibration at each temperature to cancel temperature effects on cables and connectors. . Imaginary relative permittivity was slightly smaller for the material under test than for polyethylene.

30 Thesis Summary .

It would also be of interest to compare PEEC model simulations of current distributions with measured current distributions since this is an important step towards barrier modeling including coupling to radiated fields. Modeling of printed antenna structures have been done using the Partial Element Equivalent Circuit (PEEC) method (Paper C). In a study for characterization of a thermoplastic material in terms of permittivity and permeability measurements. Thus it is questioned how useful far field (plane wave) SE data is when a material selection for an enclosure must be made. Measured near field SE for conductive thermoplastic materials are compared with results from a far field SE measurement method.Chapter 5 Conclusions . The developed methods have been verified successfully for frequencies up to 1 GHz. A comparison of current distributions on a printed antenna attained by Method of Moment (MoM) simulations and scanning measurements of magnetic field distribution demonstrates this technique (Paper B). 31 .Suggested Further Work This thesis concludes with some reflections on achieved results and interesting angles to be aimed at for further work. the temperature dependence of the material parameters was of interest (Paper G) . From SPICE computer simulations with the generated antenna models good agreement is found when comparing with analytical solutions and s-parameter measurements. It is desired to find methodologies that increases the useful frequency range of the generated models further and that would enable barrier modeling for addressing electromagnetic shielding for instance in shielding enclosures. A near field shielding effectiveness (SE) measurement method has been developed imitating the use of shielding material in an application (Paper E and F). To acquire reliable data instrument calibration were necessary at each temperature point to cancel the temperature effects on the cables and connectors. The measured near field SE results deviates substantially from measured far field SE. Techniques to generate lumped circuit models for electromagnetic barriers have been developed and methods have been devised for generating models for transmission like barriers as well as for barriers with unknown geometrical shape (Papers A and D). It was noted that the measurement cables were very sensitive to temperature variations. for some barrier models up to 4 GHz.

. • Work to establish barrier modeling techniques for electromagnetic shielding where radiating sources are considered. • Work on PEEC modeling for analysis of current distribution in conductive surfaces such as patch antennas and PCB ground planes. This may require better understanding of impedance of radiated field from a device and electric field SE and magnetic field SE given separately for a shielding material. This is an important step towards the ability to include barriers for electromagnetic field shielding in circuit simulation. Near field scanning measurements of magnetic fields could be used for verification in such work. • Better methods are desired for specification of electromagnetic shielding materials since far field SE measurements may fail to reflect the application of a shielding material in an electronic device enclosure. Here the transfer impedance and transfer admittance description of an electromagnetic shield may be an important approach. PEEC modeling is also an interesting and powerful technique for this purpose. This would enable circuit simulation using SPICE software to estimate shielding effectiveness of shielding enclosures.32 Conclusions Further work is desired in the area of EMC barrier characterization and modeling and could be summarized: • Development of improved lumped circuit model generation techniques to increase the useful frequency range for generated barrier models.

References 33 .

34 References .

A.E. 1987 [4] Archambeault B. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Symp.. Symposium Record. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Aug. ”LET THE CIRCLE BE UNBROKEN.. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. ”EMI fingerstock performance when mated to various surfaces”.H.. Harbour Research Inc. Janezic M. Issue: 1. Compliance Engineering. Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation. IEEE 1989 Int. 2003 [3] Archambeault B.. Jr.M. Boston USA.. Riddle B. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Jones C... ”Guidelines for Application of the EMC Directive”. ”Dielectric and Conductor-Loss Characterization and Measurements on Electronic Packaging Materials”.. 492-496.G. 161-163... Grosvenor J. automated. Symp. July 2001.. 1975 [2] Allmendinger G. and Thibeau R.References [1] Acuna V. R. Blendell J. How the Information Circle Created by Device Networking / M2M and the Internet Will Automate the Global Enterprise”.D. 1998 Page(s): 571-577 [8] Barry W.D. ”EMC Standards and Their Application”. IEEE 1975 Int. Krupka J. Geyer R..... Symp... ”A broad-band.L. IEEE 1999 Int. Symposium Record. ”Transfer impedance measurement as a test for electromagnetic compatibility”. January 1986 [9] Bjorklof D. IEEE Transactions on.. stripline technique for the simultaneous measurement of complex permittivity and permeability”. p.. Microwave Theory and Techniques. July. 1999 [6] Baker-Jarvis J. NIST Technical Note 1520.. 1999 35 . Compliance Engineering. Riddle B. CODEN: NTNOEF [7] Baker-Jarvis J.. p. 1989 [5] Archambeault B. E. IEEE Transactions on. Volume: 34. Holloway C. Janezic M. ”Modeling and Simulation Validation for EMC Applications”.. Volume: 5 Issue: 4 . Symp. ”Effects of corrosion on the electrical properties of conducted finishes for EMI shielding”. Symposium Record. 1999 [10] Bjorklof D... IEEE 1987 Int. 46-51. p. Weil C. Symposium Record. Paulter N.”Dielectric characterization of low-loss materials a comparison of techniques”.G.

p. Anechoic chamber and OATS Users Meeting & Tutorial. Evaluation and use of a Reverberation Chamber for Performing Electromagnetic Susceptibility/Vulnerability Measurements”. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 260-265. Symp. July 1985 [13] Carlsson E. G. 2000 IEEE International Symposium On Electromagnetic Compatibility. and Jenkins B. p. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 5233306. Symposium Record . and B¨ckstr¨m M. L. ”Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) Directive 89/336/EEC”. Symposium Record. ”Analysis of transfer impedance technique: equivalent circuit model and network analyzer measurements”. IEEE 1979 Int. 1990 . and Martens L. Luo X. IEEE 1979 Int. Haelvoet K. The Council of the European Communites [22] Dunwoody S.. and Kasevich R. Drewniak J. ”Theoretical and Experimental Quantitative Characterization of the Near-Fields of Printed Circuit Board Interconnection Structures”. Symposium Record. p. P. 133-138. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Polymer. J. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Page(s): 963-977. Lund´n O.. 2000 [15] Crawford M. IEEE 1997 Int.H. Wallenberg R. Colorado [18] Cui W. 3. Apr 28 . IEEE 1995 Int. 471-474.. Pat. Vail. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1993 [20] Dike G. W.. Denny H. Van Doren T. National Bureau of Standards.. 1997. Symp. M. 1997 [19] Devendra K. S.L. ”Dielectric properties of polymers at microwave frequencies: A review”. and VanderHeyden E.36 References [11] Bodnar D. 1995 [17] Csenki W.. Symposium Record. Symp. and Lundgren U. Aug. 27-33. Symposium Record. ”Electromagnetic relationships between shielding effectiveness and transfer impedance”. and Birkin J. and Koepke G.May 2... April 1986 [16] Criel S. (Washington. Sha F.. 1979 [12] Bur A. D. and Anderson T.... 97 MSC. Symposium Record. ”Transient Behaviour of Large Multi e a o Mode Resonant Cavities”. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1987 [14] Carlsson J. Shi H. ”Transfer impedance testing of multiconductor shielded connectors of arbitrary cross-section”.. p. Symp.. ”Method and apparatus for measuring the permittivity of materials”. USA). Symp. IEEE 1990 Int. M. J.. Volume: 26. Symposium Record. no. 1979 [21] Directive 89/336/EEC... IEEE 1987 Int. ”Lumped-element Sections for Modeling Coupling Between High-Speed Digital and I/O Lines”.C. United States Patent. ”An Approach to the Generation of SPICE Models Feasible for EMC Problems”. NBS Technical Note 1092. ”Shielding effectiveness measurements on conductive plastics”.... Symp. ”Design..

References 37 [23] Ekman J. Symposium Record. Antenn 00. Symp. and Freyer G. p. ”Gasket shielding performance measurements obtained from four test techniques”. ”Investigations to Extend the Lower Frequency Limit of Reverberation Chambers”.Section 3: Radiated. 308-314. Rowan J. O. ”IEEE Standard Method for Measuring the Effectiveness of Electromagnetic Shielding Enclosures”. ”A comparison of measured and simulated current distributions on a printed log-periodic antenna”. Symposium Record. ”Amendment to IEC 61000-4-3: Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) . S. and Hatfield M. Symp.Part 4: Testing and measurement techniques . Symposium Record.. p. Symposium Record. Nordic Antenna Symposium. 1997 [34] Jenvey S. Symposium Record. and Hatfield M. electromagnetic field immunity test . p.Radio Frequency Devices”. p. 142-148. J. Part I: General Requirements and Measuring Methods”. Symposium Record. International Electrotechnical Commission. on Electromagnetic Compatibility.. O. (Lund. Connectors and Cable Assemblies”. O. Sweden). 1992 [31] IEC 77B/215/CD. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Symp. ”Comparison of gasket transfer impedance and shielding measurements part II”. and Lundgren U. and Masahiro U. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. and Hofstra J. radio-frequency. J. (Uppsala. Symp. ”Analysis of Printed Antenna Structures using the Partial Element Equivalent Circuit (PEEC) Method”.Reverberation chamber method”. Symposium Record. ”Measurement of Surface Transfer Impedance of Multi-Wire Cables.. Federal Communications Commission [25] Freyer G. Dec 09. ”Radio Frequency Cables. A. 1976 [33] IEEE-STD-299. 139-141. 279-284. ”Comparison of gasket transfer impedance and shielding measurements part I”. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. on Electromagnetic Compatibility.. Symp. ”Part 15 . on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1992 [29] Hatfield M. IEEE 1992 Int. 2000 . and Freyer G.. 1994 [27] Hariya E. Sweden). 1984 [28] Hatfield M. 800-805. 1992 [26] Freyer G. EMB01. IEEE 1994 Int. Godfrey E. September 1997 [32] IEC 96-1A. IEEE 1998 Int. IEEE 1992 Int.. IEEE 1992 Int. IEC Standard Publication 96-1A. Symp. 2001 [24] FCC Part 15. ”Instruments for measuring the electromagnetic shielding effectiveness”. O.. O. J. IEEE 1984 Int.Annex XX: Alternative method .. 1998 [30] Hoeft L. p.. and Lundgren U. Symposium Record. J..

on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1978 [40] Kunkel G.. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1997 [44] Leeb K. Luebbers R. C. IEEE 1990 Int. Symp.. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 2001 . IEEE 1993 Int. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Symp. 287-292.. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. p. 262-264.-E. ”Quantitative measurement of the degradation of EMI shielding and mating flange materials after environmental exposure”. 1990 [38] Kunkel M. ”SPICE models of barrier compared to measured data”.. p. IEEE 1978 Int. ”Design of transfer impedance test fixture accurate through 10 GHz”. Symposium Record. p. 2003 [45] Lessner P. 1992 [37] Kunkel G. (Montreal.. Symposium Record. ”Introduction to the testing for the shielding quality of EMI gaskets and gasketed joints”. Canada). and Kunkel G.S. No. IEEE 1986 Int. J.. Symp. C. 1997. SE0201263. p. ”Comparison Between Transfer Impedance and Shielding Effectiveness Testing”. p. 198-203... and Delsing J..2 [42] Laurin J. ”Corrosion effects on field penetration through apertures”. 207-213. Oct. 1986 [36] Kunkel G.1001 vol. ”Efficient FDTD calculation of multi-port S parameters for microstrip and stripline circuits”.38 References [35] Kashyap S. IEEE 1993 Int. Symp. IEEE 1992 Int. p. Symp. a Pat. 1992 [39] Kunkel G. ”Equivalent Circuit Model for the Time-domain Analysis of Multiconductor Transmission Lines by the Implicit FDTD Method”.. Symp. Symposium Record. Swedish Patent. 322-326. Symposium Record. ”Shielding effectiveness measurements with a dual TEM cell and a split TEM cell”. Volume: 2 .. 628-633. Symposium Record. 149-153. Park D. p. ”Corrosion effects on EMI gasketed joints”. M. and Chung Y. ISBN: 0 7803 1304 6 [46] Lundgren U. IEEE 1992 Int. Symposium Record. 27. Bj¨rkl¨f D. Symp... Symposium Record. p. Symposium Record. and Inman D. Lundgren U. 1993. Symp. 1993 [43] Lee K. 13-18 July 1997 Pages:998 . J. M. IEEE 1997 Int... on Electromagnetic Compatibility.. Symposium Record. IEEE. Symp. 134-138. IEEE 1979 Int. Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium. p. Lee S.. 1979 [41] Langdon H. Carlsson J. ”Anordning med integrerad antenn f¨r o o o kapsling av radioelektronik samt s¨tt att tillverka anordningen”. 96-99. on Electromagnetic Compatibility... 2001 IEEE International Symposium On Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1997 Digest . Symposium Record. ”Near-field characterization of PCBs for radiated emissions prediction”.

p.. IEEE Transactions on . 1992 . ”Shielding effectiveness of an enclosure employing gasketed seams . on Electromagnetic Compatibility. (Sorrento. and Pesta A.relation between SE and gasket transfer impedance”. ”Transfer impedance and transfer admittance measurements on gasketted panel assemblies. Aug. W. and honeycomb air-vent assemblies”.. 1982 [56] Quine J. 2002 [49] Madle P. ”S-parameter measurements yielding the characteristic matrices of multiconductor transmission lines”. 1993 [57] Quine J. IEEE Transactions on [48] Lundgren U. P. Cloete J.. p. J... for electronic test purposes. IEE Colloquium on ’Screening of Connectors. ”EMC Shielding materials. Italy).. 1998 Pages:249 . p. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 25 June 1956 [52] Molyneux-Child J. Symposium Record. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1976 [50] van der Merwe.”. p. W. ”Electromagnetic properties of thermoplastic material for varying temperatures”. Cables and Enclosures’ (Digest No.. J. Dowling J. 249-256. J. 1997. ISBN 0-7506-3548-7 [53] Ondrejka A. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Symp.256 [51] MIL-STD-285. IEEE 1984 Int.. p.. W. 9/1-9/6 of 68. on Electromagnetic Compatibility.H. A designer’s guide”. Symposium Record. ISBN 0-471-85068-3 [55] Peel R. 312-317. Oxford: Newnes. IEEE 1976 Int. and Adams J. P. Symposium Record. Symp.. K.C. ”Relationships of shielding effectiveness to transfer impedance/admittance for shielded cables”. 204-209. EMC Europe 2002. Symposium Record.... 392-395. ”Shielding effectiveness measurement techniques for various materials used for EMI shielding”. Reader H. Submitted to Microwave Theory and Techniques. ”Characterization and testing of shielding gaskets at microwave frequencies”.. IEEE 1982 Int. Ekman J. ”Characterization of Conductive Thermoplastic Composite Materials Using Multiple Measurements Methods”. 1988. Saha P. and Curran T. Symposium Record. Symposium Record. electromagnetic shielding. Issue: 3 . on Electromagnetic Compatibility.References 39 [47] Lundgren U. J. 1984 [54] Ott H. 306-308. and Delsing J.. IEEE 1995 Int. and Delsing J.012) London. ”Shielding effectiveness (SE) measurement techniques”. Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1995 [58] Rahman H. ”Attenuation measurements for enclosures.. IEEE 1993 Int. Symp. Volume: 40 . ”Noise reduction techniques in electronic systems”. Inc. p. Symp.. R. method of. Symp.

T. June. Symposium Record. IEEE 1999 Int.. Symp. No. Symp. 3. ”A Rapid Method for Measuring the Transfer Impedance of Connectors”. and G¨risch A.F. B. 1999. Design. o ISBN: 91-47-04533-7 [66] Van Horck F. 193-200. ”Improved testing for EMC gasket performance”. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. pp. 1987 [68] Wilson P. Microwave theory and techniques. F. ISSN: 0163-321x [65] Str¨m P. Ma M. F. Vol. 1985 [69] Wollenberg G. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. IEEE 1985 Int. IEEE 1987 Int. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. ”Vinna eller f¨rsvinna i IT-˚ o o aldern”.. no. 1997 [63] Spiegelaar H. on Electromagnetic Compatibility. ”Techniques for measuring the shielding effectiveness of materials”. 1999 [70] Woody J. IEEE Transactions on. Symposium Record. Committee AE-4G.”Complex Permittivity Measurements of Common Plastics Over Variable Temperatures”. ”Application of the Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) Method to a Challenging Real-World EMC Problem”. ”Coaxial test procedure to measure the RF shielding characteristics of EMI gasket materials”. and Piket-May M. 1981 [62] SAE ARP 1705A. Symp. and Ma M.A Cost Effective EMC Testing Alternative”. 2003 Page(s): 727-733 [60] Rumsey I. Jan. 1999 [61] SAE ARP 1705. T. 679-683. Symposium Record.. p. M. A... 1995 [64] Stickney W. R. 1. Committee AE-4G. ”Modeling techniques for discrete passive components to include parasitic effects in EMC analysis and design”. 1980 . Malm¨. vol. 848-853.40 [59] Riddle B. p. Symp. on Electromagnetic Compatibility.. Volume: 51 Issue: 3 . March. and VanderHeyden E. et al. IEEE 1980 Int. Symp. 39-45. Symposium Record. Liber Ekonomi. IEEE 1995 Int.. on Electromagnetic Compatibility.. ”Coupling of PEEC Models with Transmission o Line Models for Simulation of Wiring Structures”.. Symp. 547-552.. and Paludi C. p. ”Coaxial test procedure to measure the RF shielding characteristics of EMI gasket materials”.. p. Baker-Jarvis J. Symposium Record. p.. Krupka J.. 1984. ”Factors influencing material shielding effectiveness measurements”. Aug. IEEE transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility. A. Symposium Record. 7. Society of Automotive Engineers. Page(s): 29-33. ”The Mode Stirred Chamber . 40. 40-44. Society of Automotive Engineers. IEEE 1999 Int. 1998 [67] Wilson P.

Part II .

42 .

USA). D. (Washington. Reprinted with permission. 2000 c 2000.Paper A An Approach to the Generation of SPICE Models Feasible for EMC Problems Authors: Jan Carlsson and Urban Lundgren Reformatted version of paper originally published in: Symposium Record.C. 2000 IEEE International Symposium On Electromagnetic Compatibility.. IEEE. 43 .

44 Paper A .

SWEDEN Luleå University of Technology Regnbågsallén SE-971 87. The circuit is constructed by viewing the barrier as a multi-conductor transmission line for which the per-unit length parameters have to be determined. order to describe its electrical characteristics.g. it must have a uniform cross-section with an extent that is small compared to the wavelength. SWEDEN Abstract: A method to describe barriers such as filters. The circuit can then be used in a standard circuit simulator such as e. Two different approaches to accomplish this have been used. However. The requirement for this method to be successful is that the barrier under consideration can be viewed as a multi-conductor transmission line. This is done in an iterative scheme searching among component values in a given range. Borås. [L] = l 21 l 22 l 23 l33dz 3 l23dz l13dz 2 l12dz 1 ref. z For some type of barriers it is sufficient to have knowledge of the geometrical shape and the material in the cross-section in − c12 k =1      Barriers such as e.g. i. The approach that we have used for these types of barriers is to first determine the per-unit length parameters and then create a discrete circuit representation. Luleå. i. 3 ∑c      For barriers that can be viewed as multi-conductor transmission lines the cross-section.e. From the solution the charges on each conductor can be computed and thereby the per-unit length inductance and capacitance matrices. The computed Sparameters are then compared with measured for the frequency range of interest and the weighted difference is minimized by adjusting component values.An Approach to the Generation of SPICE Models Feasible for EMC Problems Jan Carlsson Urban Lundgren SP Swedish National Testing & Research Institute Brinellgatan 4 SE-501 15. be the barrier between two parallel conductors on a printed circuit board for which the crosstalk could be computed with the knowledge of the geometry and the material properties of the circuit board. which is assumed to be uniform. In the method that we have used the first step is to set up a discrete circuit and then compute the S-parameters.e. For barriers that cannot be viewed as transmission lines a method for determining equivalent circuits outgoing from measured S-parameters has been developed.g. Since the approach that we have used is based on multiconductor transmission line theory we have to determine the per-unit length parameters in order to arrive at the wanted circuit representation. connectors etc. For barriers that don’t have a uniform cross-section it is sometimes possible to describe them as a number of cascaded sections with uniform cross-sections. Looking at the circuit representation of a short section of a multi-conductor transmission with three wires (reference not counted). with circuits consisting of linear discrete components is presented.g. When the matrices are known it is a straightforward task to construct a circuit representation that can be used in a standard circuit simulator. is divided into small elements and the Laplace equation is solved. commercial filters that cannot be viewed as transmission lines must be treated in another way. By describing a barrier with a circuit consisting of discrete components the propagation of disturbances in the system can be computed by the use of an ordinary circuit simulator as e. Determination of the per-unit length parameters [C ] = 1k − c13 3 − c 21 ∑c 2k − c 23 k =1 3 − c 31 − c 32 ∑c k =1 3k l11 l12 l13 l 31 l 32 l 33 c22dz c33dz . a staircase approximation. . Figure 1. One example would e.            Introduction l22dz l11dz c23dz c12dz c11dz c13dz z+dz Figure 1 Circuit representation of a short section of a three-wire transmission line. A developed two-dimensional finite difference program in which the cross-section is defined by drawing it using the CAD-like user interface computes these.            When analyzing EMC problems for complex systems it is necessary to break down the system and characterize each coupling path or barrier. Derived models have been used in SPICE and validated by comparison with measurements. SPICE [1]. the main problem is to find a circuit representation and component values that describe the behavior of the barrier. cables. SPICE to obtain the desired responses either in the time or in the frequency domain. the following relations between the entries in the per-unit length capacitance and inductance matrices and the values of the circuit elements can be found.

Computer code for determining per-unit length parameters Based on the method for computing the per-unit length parameters described above a computer code called FD2D was developed. For the general case the ij-element in the capacitance matrix can be determined by letting the potential on all conductors except the j:th be equal to zero and evaluating the charge on the i:th conductor. distribution. The solution of the Laplace equation gives the potential distribution in the region and we can by applying Gauss’ law determine the charge per unit-length on conductor i as: Vi-1. [6]. j −1 (ε A + ε D ) 2(ε A + ε B + ε C + ε D ) (1) Figure 4 Printed circuit board for measurements of crosstalk between adjacent conductors. Thus. the finite element method (FEM) [3] etc. j (ε A + ε B ) 2(ε A + ε B + ε C + ε D ) Vi . see Figure 5. The method that we have used is the finite difference method (FDM) [4. and by scanning through the nodes by an iterative . The code has been validated against several test cases and the agreement has been found to be good with previously published results. As an example of a simple validation the characteristic impedance for an air coaxial cable with an inner to outer conductor radius ratio of five was computed using a grid size of 200 by 200 nodes. For the simple example shown in Figure 2 the dimension of the per-unit length capacitance and inductance matrices will be two by two. i.57 Ω. The code has a Windows user interface where the cross-section of the barrier easily can be defined by simply drawing it on the screen. Vi0j . [5].The per-unit length parameters can be computed by using numerical methods such as the method of moments (MoM) [2]. m ≠ j . ˆ li n is an outward directed unit vector and V is the potential ˆ Figure 3 A part of the finite difference mesh. Vi . we have to solve the Laplace equation for the configuration two times with different boundary conditions. Conductor 2 Conductor 1 Vi. The inductance matrix can be computed by the knowledge of the capacitance matrix for the case when all material in the cross section is free space. mainly because it is simple to implement and that it easily can handle complicated cross-sections with different materials. [L] = µ 0ε 0 [C0 ]−1 where [C0 ] is the capacitance matrix when all dielectric material in the cross section is replaced by free space. C ij = Qi Vj Vm = 0.j-1 ∫ Qi = − ε∇ V ⋅ ndl i where li is a closed line around conductor i. in order to determine the capacitance matrix for the PCB in Figure 2.e. By starting with Maxwell’s equations for the two-dimensional electrostatic case and approximating the derivatives with finite differences we can quite easily write down the following relation between the potential in neighboring nodes in the finite difference mesh.j εB εA Vi. . 3]. Sec. By giving all nodes in the cross-section an initial estimate. i.j+1 Reference (ground plane) εC Figure 2 Cross-section of a printed circuit board with two conductors. j +1 (ε B + ε C ) 2(ε A + ε B + ε C + ε D ) + + Vi −1. j (ε C + ε D ) 2(ε A + ε B + ε C + ε D ) Vi.j εD Vi+1. procedure we can determine the potential distribution in the whole region and thereby are we able to compute the per-unit length parameters. For some simple cases it is even possible to use analytical formulas.e. see Figure 3. The computed impedance was 96. j = + Vi +1. The remaining problem now is to determine the potential distribution by solving the Laplace equation.j Vi. since we have two conductors and a common reference (the ground plane).85 Ω. which should be compared to the exact value of 96.

One example of the agreement between the computed crosstalk and the measured crosstalk is shown in Figure 6. Configurations with different spacing between the conductors were measured and compared with simulations on the corresponding circuit models. see Figure 4. One reason for this is that in the circuit model approach that we have used radiation losses are not taken into account. As an example the crosstalk between conductors on a printed circuit board was analyzed. As can be seen in the figure the agreement is good up to 1 GHz.U N E/U g . -70 -80 -90 300k 1M 10M 100M 1G Frequency. Hz Figure 6 Crosstalk between conductors on a printed circuit board determined by modeling the barrier as a discrete circuit compared to measurements. Also conductors with a non-uniform cross section along the length were considered. although the resonance frequencies are not accurately predicted. Validation against measurements In order to validate the computed response of a barrier by using the FD2D program for generating circuit files and then using them in SPICE a number of measurements have been conducted. U FE/U g [dB] Figure 5 User interface of the finite difference program for determination of per-unit length parameters. . see (2). In the example a D-sub connector is analysed. For the measurement of near end and far end crosstalk a vector network analyzer was used to get the scattering parameters from the four-port made of two adjacent conductors with the length 100 mm across the circuit board. The S-parameters are determined by -30 first setting up the chain matrix for the analyzed device [7] and -40 then using relations between the chain matrix and the Near end scattering matrix. All four ports were connected to 50 Ω during all measurements. By defining the length of the analyzed barrier the code is 0 capable of generating a representative SPICE circuit file or Measured -10 Computed computing the scattering parameters (S-parameters) for a -20 given frequency range. These relations can easily be found by -50 Far end expressing the total voltages and currents in terms of the -60 scattering voltages and currents.

Thus. This can be done by first computing the chain matrix for the network and then convert to S-parameters.For some types of barriers measurement is the only possible way of characterizing the behavior. the success of this method is only guaranteed if the assumed network actually can represent the device under consideration. When the calibration was done the four S-parameters S11. a basic knowledge of circuit theory and some experience are required. is found. S12 and S22 for each surface mounted filter were measured. ∗ 1 [B] (Z 0 [C ] + [D])−1 − [1] Z0     ∗ (Z 0 [C ] + [D])−1 (Z 0 [C ] − [D])     −1 1 [B] Z0 1 [B] Z0                       [S 22 ] = − [1] + (Z 0 [C ] + [D])−1 [A] +          [S21 ] = 2 [1] + (Z 0 [C ] + [D ])−1 [A] +                  1 [B ] − [A] + 1 Z0 Z0 −1         [S12 ] = [1] + [A] + 1 [B ] (Z 0 [C ] + [D])−1 Z0 [ A] − minimize −1     [ A] + 1 [B ] (Z 0 [C ] + [D ])−1 Z0     [S11 ] = [1] + [A] + we 0 -60 Since measurements with a network analyzer usually gives the S-parameters of a network it is natural to use these parameters as the basis for the comparison with the assumed network. . reflection and match calibration method. When the S-parameters have been determined for all frequencies of interest we have to compare the values with measured S-parameters. S21. In order to find component values in the network that will make the network representing the measured device we minimize the average difference between measured and In order to validate the method a number of different surface mounted filters were studied. [C] and [D] are the usual sub-matrices in the general chain matrix. ∆i ( f ) . Figure 8.              where [A]. Figure 7 shows an example of such a comparison. computed S-parameters. [B]. The measurement procedure that was used involves calibration to the footprint of the examined component by a through. we have to compute the S-parameters for the network. The next step is to seek for optimal values for components in the network so that a best fit. The relations between the S-parameters and the chain parameters are: i. In this approach we take the measured S-parameters and compute the same for an assumed network. function Q = ∑             the -10 -20 -30 ∆ i(f) -40 -50 Com puted Measured -70 -80 1M 10M 100M 1G Frequency [Hz] Figure 7 Example of computed and measured Sparameter. Of course. in some respect. By this procedure the wanted network representing the measured device can be determined. on which also conductors for calibrating the network analyzer were present. i | S 21 | [dB] Barriers that cannot be viewed as transmission lines (Z 0 [C ] + [D])−1 −1 (Z 0 [C ] + [D])−1 ∗ (2)         [A] − 1 [B] + (Z 0 [C ] − [D]) Z0 Figure 8 Printed circuit board for the characterization of commercial surface mounted filters with three calibration traces and four different filters. Thus.e. The filters were placed on a special circuit board. For these cases a method by which it is possible to deduce a network from measured data has been developed.

opj 3G Frequency [Hz] Figure 10 Insertion loss for a feed through filter determined using a circuit model and measurements. R6 2000 C2 R1 1. In Figure 10 the results from a simulation of insertion loss is shown. lumped circuit model for the filter finally chosen is shown in Figure 11 together with the generator and load used in simulation. The resulting simulated insertion loss is shown in Figure 12 together with measured values. L-C m odel -60 -80 100k -60 Computed Measured -70 -80 1M Filter L1. After minimizing the error function for this network a reasonable good fit to the measured insertion loss was obtained. 0 Insertion Loss [dB] -10 -20 | S21 | [dB] -30 -40 -20 -40 Filter L1.Lumped circuit generation for a feed through capacitor filter For one of the studied commercial filters of the type feed through capacitor the error function minimization procedure explained above gave component values to the assumed network resulting in a lumped circuit model shown in Figure 9. For comparison the measured insertion loss for the commercial filter is shown in the same graph. Lumped circuit generation for a series inductance filter A surface mounted series inductor filter was included in the study. The different lumped circuit models with increasing complexity were used when simulating the insertion loss of the filter in a circuit simulator. In this case there is a very good agreement between the developed lumped circuit model of the filter and the measurements up to at least 4 GHz. With this developed lumped circuit description of the feed through capacitor filter the behavior of the filter can easily be simulated in an electronic circuit simulator such as SPICE. . The 1M 10M 100M 1G 5G Frequency [Hz] Figure 12 Insertion loss for a series inductance filter determined using different circuit models and measurements. L m odel Filter L1. The assumed network for this filter was enhanced stepwise by adding discrete components one at a time.15pF R3 R4 50 L2 50 50 2. L-C-R model m easured data -50 10M 100M 1G M C3resultD. Figure 9 A derived lumped circuit model of a feed through filter used in the computation (note that in SPICE syntax M or m stands for the prefix milli-). As can been seen in Figure 12 the first two attempts to a network design both failed to agree with measured data at a frequency close to 100 MHz.9uH R2 5M V2 L4 R5 50 1V V1 280PH 1V 0 C1 0 220nF 0 0 Figure 11 A derived lumped circuit model of a series inductance filter used in the computation. The schematic also shows a 50 Ω generator and a matched load used when running the SPICE circuit simulation. The third attempt to choose a network capable of adapting to the correct behavior was more successful.

. 2. 4. 32. [6] C.. May 1975. 1997. [4] Pei-bai Zhou. Costache. 2nd ed. Karlsson. Springer-Verlag 1993.Conclusions The developed methods for generating lumped circuit models for transmission like barriers as well as for barriers with unknown geometrical shape have been verified against measurements on prototype printed circuit boards. pp. Better agreement in the high frequency range can of course be reached by assuming a more complex network. W. Nagel.L. an agreement within a few dB:s up to 1 GHz was achieved with 16 cascaded sections. For the 100 mm parallel conductor crosstalk. F. Memorandum No. Ianoz and T. M. inc. ”EMC analysis methods and computational models”. May 1993. ”Field computation by moment methods".P. Harrington. For models of transmission like barriers the upper frequency limit for good agreement is depending on the number of cascaded sections in the circuit model. Cambridge University Press. IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility. Mautz and T. . The method of adapting an assumed network to measured S-parameters gave an good agreement up to 1 to 4 GHz when simple networks were assumed. 178-184. Good agreement between SPICE simulation and measurement was found for frequencies up to 1 GHz. R. ”Multiconductor Transmission Lines in Multilayered Dielectric Media”. M520. [2] R. V. Tesche.. Wei. M.F. John Wiley & Sons. 1990. Silvester and R. ”SPICE2: A Computer Program to Simulate Semiconductor Circuits”. 439-450. Vol. Ferrari. References [1] L. [7] F. Harrington. Laroussi and G. [5] R. Macmillan New York 1968. R. K. Vol. Acknowledgements Thanks to Lennart Hasselgren at IVF (The Swedish Institute of Production Engineering Research) for running SPICE simulations with the generated lumped circuit models. No. ”Numerical Analysis of Electromagnetic Fields”. Sarkar. 35. No. ”Finite-Element Method Applied to EMC Problems”. ”Finite elements for electrical engineers". April 1984. I. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques. [3] P. pp. J.

Nordic Antenna Symposium. Antenn 00. Sweden).Paper B A comparison of measured and simulated current distributions on a printed log-periodic antenna Authors: Stewart Jenvey and Urban Lundgren Reformatted version of paper originally published in: Symposium Record. Reprinted with permission. 2000 c 2000. 51 . SNRV. (Lund.

52 Paper B .

Consequently the current distribution on the antenna. and the LPDA impedance and radiation patterns. are different from those that would exist for a wire LPDA operating at the same frequencies in a free space environment.A COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND SIMULATED CURRENT DISTRIBUTION ON A PRINTED LOG-PERIODIC ANTENNA Stewart Jenvey* and Urban Lundgren† *Department of Electrical and Computer Systems Engineering. Measured and predicted far field radiation patterns are also compared. Sweden SUMMARY This paper describes the use of a position scanned magnetic field probe to investigate the current distributions on the surface of a log periodic dipole antenna (LPDA) which was constructed on printed circuit board. The use of the printed circuit board to support the radiating elements and to separate the two strips forming the parallel wire transmission feeder line created a mixed dielectric environment. Australia 3168 † Systemteknik. The wave nature of the current distribution can be readily observed and problems with the design such as standing waves on the feeder lines are highlighted for attention in a revised design. Clayton. The antenna examined was made using printed circuit technology so that a prototype could be quickly created and that subsequent modifications to the design based on the investigations described herein could be quickly and easily incorporated in the antenna design. New versions of the prototype antenna could then be quickly and cheaply produced. broadband type of antenna. Porsön. . Universitetsområdet. The computed and predicted radiation patterns resulting are also compared. Luleå Tekniska Universitet. Luleå. The measurement results are presented in Section 4. Section 5 discusses the MOM modelling of the LPDA and Section 6 then compares the measured currents with those predicted by the MOM analysis. 1. The design. construction and testing of a printed LPDA and the use of magnetic scanning to aid in optimising the design are discussed in this report. Monash University. linearly polarised. Wellington Rd. INTRODUCTION Log periodic dipoles are a common. These current distributions on the printed antenna were studied experimentally by examining the magnetic field of the antenna as described in Section 3. These were used in the analysis of the antenna design. The basic design parameters and construction of the printed of the antenna are addressed Section 2. Measured current distributions are compared with predicted distributions obtained from Method of Moments (MOM) analysis of the LPDA structure. Measurements of the magnetic field magnitude and phase at each point of the scan were used to derive the time variant instantaneous values of the magnetic field and the instantaneous currents on the LPDA.

By using double-sided printed circuit board to construct the LPDA the transmission line could consist of two strip conductors.97) then the impedance and the radiation patterns remain reasonably constant with frequency over the frequency range in which the shortest to longest elements become halfwave resonant. If τ and σ are small (σ around 0. . Feed Ln dn Xn+1 Xn Figure 1.2.8-0. Values of τ = 0. The effective dielectric constant for the LPDA transmission line could be calculated from the formula for the effective wavelength [3] in microstrip of the same track width and half the dielectric thickness of the board used for the LPDA. and alternating which half dipole went on which side of the board.22 and τ in the range 0.5) 1/16 inch thick was used to construct the LPDA. Fibreglass board (εr = 4. where f0 is a reference frequency. and Ln (the length of the nth dipole). The required frequency range of the LPDA was 900 MHz to 3GHz which meant that the dipole elements. 2]. By putting one half of each dipole on either side of the board and connecting it to the transmission line strip. one on either side of the board. and by the relationships X L τ = n +1 = n +1 Xn Ln dn 2 Ln which ensures that the structure will thus have impedance and radiation patterns that scale as f0τn . the alternating feed connection was obtained (see Figure 2). The exact resonant length of the individual dipoles was initially unknown due to the mixed dielectric environment in which the dipole standing waves exist. A typical LPDA The geometry of an LPDA is defined in terms of Xn (the distance of the nth dipole in the array from the array apex). DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE LPDA The design principles of the LPDA are well established [1. based on a free space wavelength.8 and σ = 0.16 were used in this case.06-0. were of a length that could easily be accommodated on the 200 mm by 300 mm printed circuit board used. The LPDA (as shown in Figure 1.) is an array of dipoles connected to a common transmission line fed from the apex of the array. σ = The transmission line from the feed must alternate which side of the line connects to which side of the dipole in order to get the correct phasing to create an antenna that radiates in the direction of the array apex.

Two measurement scans per . The center of the loop probe was about 10 mm above the surface of the printed antenna. The LPDA was connected to port 1 of a Vector Network Analyser (VNA) and the loop antenna was connected to port 2. MAGNETIC FIELD DISTRIBUTION MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUE The magnetic field distribution on the LPDA was measured with the aid of a magnetic probe (a shielded loop antenna). Because the coordinate table surface formed a metallic ground plane. In Figure 3 the probe is X polarized to be sensitive to currents along the dipole. 1. the probe was attached to an extension arrangement making it possible to scan the antenna to the side of the table (see Figure 3). frequency range 9 kHz – 4 GHz • EMC-scanner. a coordinate table and a vector network analyzer. positioned in parallel with the plane of the antenna. Rotating the loop ninety degrees about the vertical axis to be Y polarised enabled the probe to respond to currents on the transmission line joining the dipoles. with the polarization axis normal to the plane of the loop. This arrangement reduced the influence of the ground plane.Y X Figure 2 The LPDA studied 3. Measurement equipment used: • Rohde & Schwarz ZVR Vector Network Analyzer. The small magnetic field probe was positioned close to the upper surface of the printed antenna and moved stepwise in a rectangular grid pattern. made by Detectus AB • 903B. Sweden • PC software for controlling coordinate table and network analyzer. Between each positional step the magnitude or phase for signal transmission from the antenna to the probe was measured. The LPDA was excited with CW from port 1 of the VNA and S21 was measured as the loop antenna was scanned in a raster pattern over the surface of the antenna. coordinate table manufactured by Detectus AB.0 cm diameter electrically shielded H-field loop probe from EMCO probe set model 7405 The probe used was a 1 cm diameter loop antenna. The PC software for controlling the coordinate table utilised modified GPIB instruction files to enable automatic control of the vector network analyzer in order to make the entire measurement procedure automatic.

The procedure was repeated for each of the X and Y polarisations of the magnetic field and at each measurement frequency. This corresponds to the current distributions on the dipoles and the feed line respectively. As the tangential magnetic field at the surface of a conductor is a measure of the current density. close to the LPDA surface Figure 5 shows a two dimensional contour plot of the X and Y directed components of the surface magnetic field at 1132 MHz.132 GHz Figure 5(a) X Polarised Figure 5(b) Y Polarised . Figure 4 X directed magnetic field at 1132 MHz. 4. The measured magnitude of magnetic field at 1. Scanning the LPDA using the coordinate table. Figure 4 therefore graphically shows the current distribution on the dipoles of the LPDA. MANETIC FIELD MEASUREMENT RESULTS Figure 4 is a three dimensional plot of the X directed magnetic field measured at 1132 MHz close to the surface of the LPDA. Figure 3. Dark areas surround the strongest fields.polarisation were necessary to obtain both magnitude and phase information (due to limitations in the control software).

1 Far Field Azimuth and Elevation Radiation Patterns LPDA E Plane Pattern LPDA H Plane Radiation Pattern 0 0 Az-meas Az-calc -5 dB dB -10 -10 -15 -15 -20 -20 -25 -25 -30 -200 -100 Figure 6 El-meas El-calc -5 0 Degrees -30 100 200 -200 -100 0 Degrees 100 200 E Plane and H Plane radiation patterns of the LPDA at 1132 MHz The computed and measured E plane and H plane radiation patterns of the LPDA are shown in Figure 6. but for analysis of this antenna the MOM package was unable to handle the mixed dielectrics (air and PC board substrate). COMPARISON OF MEASURED AND PREDICTED RESULTS 6. The current distributions on the dipoles are dependent on the antenna near fields that exist in the mixed dielectric environment. 6.0 (as the radiation takes place principally in free space). Differences between the actual current distribution and that derived from the MOM analysis must be resolved to improve this back lobe match. There is good agreement between them for the main lobe of the pattern but some variance is seen between the back lobes. This gave a value of εr = 1. 6. The match between the measured and predicted radiation patterns is shown in Figure 6.84 The current distributions determined in the MOM analysis were then used to calculate the radiation patterns assuming εr = 1.2 Current Distribution on the Dipole Elements The currents on the individual dipoles are shown in Figure 6. The currents are plotted normalised and in dB as the surface magnetic fields were measured in relative levels expressed in dB. METHOD OF MOMENTS MODELLING OF THE LPDA MOM modelling of a wire LPDA in free space is straightforward.5. . The value for this effective dielectric constant was determined from the magnetic scanning of the LPDA by observing which dipoles of what length went resonant at which frequency. An effective uniform dielectric constant was used with the MOM program to represent this mixed dielectric environment in order to calculate the current distributions.

05 dB 0 metres 0. CONCLUSIONS Magnetic scanning of the LPDA has been used in order to get an understanding of the LPDA operation from its current distributions. REFERENCES 1.Normalised Current Element 5 Normalised Current Element 3 0 0 dB -5 -5 -10 -10 -15 -15 -20 -20 -25 -25 -0. L.1 -0. Prentice-Hall. 2. John Wiley and Sons.. C.02 0. A.1984. . 7. 1987. New Jersey. Stutzman and G. McGraw-Hill. Antenna Theory and Design. Antenna Engineering Handbook. The current distributions observed on the prototype antenna were used to see where problems existed with the design (such as the standing waves seen on the feed line in Figure 5(b)).07 metres Figure 7 Current distributions on two of the dipole elements (Solid-measured. Microwave Circuit Analysis and Amplifier Design. Liao.03 0. Observed differences in the magnitude of the measured and computed currents on the dipoles require further investigation. W. Jasik.1 -0. It is expected that investigations with a smaller loop antenna passed closer to the surface of the antenna and analysis with other numerical methods (eg Finite Difference Time Domain) will reveal the reason for this mismatch. They were also used to determine information on the effective relative dielectric constant to be used in MOM analysis of the antenna and its radiation characteristics. Thiele.05 0. S. 2nd Ed. 8. R. Some of the absolute levels of the individual dipole currents do not correspond well. 2nd Ed. Johnson and H. 3.08 -0. broken-predicted) The shapes of the current distributions match except for an asymmetry in them which is assumed to be due to the presence of the co-ordinate table (see Figure 3). That the patterns predicted matched reasonably well gives confidence in this approach. Y. This may be due to a non-proportional relationship between the magnetic field strength (measured with a finite sized loop antenna just above conductors of varying width) and the total current on that conductor.

Sweden). 2001 c 2001. Reprinted with permission.Paper C Analysis of Printed Antenna Structures using the Partial Element Equivalent Circuit (PEEC) Method Authors: Jonas Ekman and Urban Lundgren Reformatted version of paper originally published in: Symposium Record. 59 . (Uppsala. EMB01. SNRV.

60 Paper C .

Ò ÐÝ× × Ó ÈÖ ÒØ È ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ ÒØ ÒÒ ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ ËØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Ù× Ò Ö Ù Ø ´È Ø µ Å Ø Ó ÂÓÒ × Ñ Ò ÍÖ Ò ÄÙÒ Ö Ò ÁËÄ ¸ ÄÙÐ ÍÒ Ú Ö× ØÝ Ó Ì ÒÓÐÓ Ý¸ Ë ¹ ½ ÄÙÐ ¸ ËÛ Ò ÂÓÒ ×º Ñ Ò ×ѺÐÙØ º× ÍÖ ÒºÄÙÒ Ö Ò ×ѺÐÙØ º× ×ØÖ Ø Ì Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø ´È µ Ñ Ø Ó × Ð ØÖÓÑ Ò Ø × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ò ÕÙ ×Ù Ø Ð ÓÖ Ñ Ü Ö Ù Ø Ò ¬ Ð ÔÖÓ ¹ Ð Ñ׺ Ì Ø Ò ÕÙ × ÒÙÑ Ö ÐÐÝ ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ ØÓ Ñ Ø Ó Ó ÑÓÑ ÒØ× ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒ Ù× Ò Ð Ö Ò ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒº ÁÒ Ø × Ô Ô Ö¸ Ø È Ñ Ø Ó × ÐÐÙ×ØÖ Ø Ò ÔÔÐ ØÓ ÔÖ ÒØ ÒØ ÒÒ ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Û Ö Ñ ¹ ×ÙÖ Ñ ÒØ× Ö ÓÑÔ Ö ØÓ × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ× Ò Ò ÐÝØ ¹ Ð ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒ׺ Ì ÔÓ×× Ð ØÝ ØÓ Ù× × ÑÔÐ ¬ È ÑÓ Ð× ØÓ Ö × ÓÑÔÙØ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ñ × × Ù×× Û Ø ÐÐÙ×ØÖ Ø Ú Ü ÑÔР׺ Áº ÁÒØÖÓ Ù Ø ÓÒ Ì È ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø ´È µ Ñ Ø Ó × ÙÐÐ Û Ú Ø Ò ÕÙ ÓÖ Ø ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒ Ó Ñ Ü Ö Ù Ø Ò ¬ Ð ÔÖÓ Ð Ñ× Ò ÓØ Ø Ø Ñ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý ÓÑ Òº Ì ÒØ ÖÒ Ø ÓÒ Ð ÒØ Ö ×Ø ÓÖ Ø Ñ Ø Ó × Ò Ò Ò Ö Ô ÐÝ ÓÖ Ø Ô ×Ø Ý Ö× ÙØ Ò Ø ÆÓÖ ÓÙÒØÖ × Ø Ö × Ö «ÓÖØ × Ò ÐÓÛº Ì × Ô Ô Ö Ò ÓÒ× Ö × Ò ÙÒ Ñ ÒØ Ð ÒØÖÓ Ù Ø ÓÒ ØÓ Ø × Ð ØÖÓÑ ¹ Ò Ø ÓÑÔÙØ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ò ÕÙ º Ì Ñ Ø Ó × × ÓÒ Ø ÓÒÚ Ö× ÓÒ Ó Ø Å Ü ÈÓØ ÒØ Ð ÁÒØ Ö Ð ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ÅÈÁ µ ØÓ Ø Ö Ù Ø ÓÑ Òº Ý Ù× Ò ×Ô Ð Þ × Ö ØÞ ¹ Ø ÓÒ¸ Ø ÓÖ Ò Ð ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ × ÓÒÚ ÖØ ÒØÓ Ò Ø¹ ÛÓÖ Ó × Ö Ø Ò Ù Ø Ò ×¸ Ô Ø Ò × Ò Ö ¹ × ×Ø Ò ×¸ ÐÐ Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ׺ Ì ¹ Ô Ø Ú ´ Ð ØÖ ¬ Ð µ Ò Ò Ù Ø Ú ´Ñ Ò Ø ¬ Ð µ ÓÙÔÐ Ò × Ö ÑÓ ÐÐ Ù× Ò Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ð ¹ Ñ ÒØ× Û Ö ×ÙÐØ× Ò Ð ØÖÓÑ Ò Ø ÓÖÖ Ø ÑÓ Ðº Ì Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ö Ð ÙÐ Ø ¹ Ø Ö Ý Ù× Ò ÒÙÑ Ö Ð ÒØ Ö Ø ÓÒ Ø Ò ÕÙ × ÓÖ × ÑÔÐ ¬ ÐÓ× ÓÖÑ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ׺ Ì Ö ×ÙÐØ Ò ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø× Ö ×ÓÐÚ Ý Ù× Ò ÓÑÑ Ö¹ Ð Ö Ù Ø × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ ÔÖÓ Ö Ñ Ð ËÈÁ º Ì Ù× Ó ËÈÁ ¹Ð Ö Ù Ø ×ÓÐÚ Ö× Ð Ø Ø × Ø Ò¹ ÐÙ× ÓÒ Ó × Ö Ø ÓÑÔÓÒ ÒØ׸ ØÖ Ò×Ñ ×× ÓÒ Ð Ò ×¸ ÙÖÖ ÒØ»ÚÓÐØ ×ÓÙÖ Ø Ò Ø Ö ×ÙÐØ Ò È ÑÓ Ðº Ë Ò Ø Ñ Ø Ó × × ÓÒ Ò ÒØ Ö Ð ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ÓÖÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ò ÐÝ× × Ó ³ÓÔ Ò Ö³ ÔÖÓ Ð Ñ× Ð Ö Ø ÓÒ ÖÓÑ ÒØ ÒÒ × Ö ÓÑÔÙØ Ø ÓÒ ÐÐÝ Æ¹ Òغ ÌÓ Ú Æ ÒØ Ð ØÖÓÑ Ò Ø ÓÑÔÙØ ¹ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ò ÕÙ × ÓÖ ÔÖ ÒØ ÒØ ÒÒ ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Ò ÑÔÓÖØ ÒØ ØÓ ×Ô ÙÔ Ø Ú ÐÓÔÑ ÒØ Ó ÓÖ Ü ÑÔÐ ÑÓ Ð Ñ ÒØ ÖÒ Ø ×Ý×Ø Ñ׺ ÁÁº Ö Ú Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø È ÑÓ Ð Ì ×Ø ÖØ Ò ÔÓ ÒØ ÓÖ Ø Ø ÓÖ Ø Ð Ö Ú Ø ÓÒ × Ø ×ÙÑÑ Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø Ð ØÖ ¬ Ð ¸ ¸ Ø ¬ Ð ÔÓ Òظ Ö¸ Ò ÑÙÐØ ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ ×Ý×Ø Ñ ÜÔÖ ×× Ò Ø ÖÑ× Ó Ø Ú ØÓÖ Ñ Ò Ø ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð Ò Ø × Ð Ö Ð ØÖ ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð ¨ Ø ×ÓÙÖ ÔÓ ÒØ Ö¼ º ÓÖ ×Ô Ý ´Ö ص   Ø ´Ö ص   Ö¨´Ö ص ´½µ ×Ý×Ø Ñ ÓÒØ Ò Ò Ã ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ× Ø Ö ¹ Ö Ò³× ÙÒ Ø ÓÒ Ö Ø Ö ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð× Ö Ú Ò Ã ´Ö ص Ò Ú ½ ½ à ¨´Ö ص ½ ¸Û Ö Ø¼ Ø  Ú Â ´Ö¼ ؼ µ Ú Ö   Ö¼ ´¾µ Õ ´ Ö ¼ ؼ µ Ú Ö   Ö¼ ´¿µ Ö   Ö¼ Ú ´µ ¸ ÒÓØ × Ø Ö Ø Ö Ø ÓÒ Ø Ñ Ò Ø Ñ ÙÑ Û Ø ÔÖÓÔ Ø ÓÒ ×Ô Úº Ì Ö Ò× ØÝ Õ ÓÒ¹ × Ö× ÓØ Ø ÓÙÒ Ö × Ò Ø Ö × ÓÙÒ ÒØ Ð ØÖ Ö ÓÒ׺ Ì ÜÔÖ ×× ÓÒ ÓÖ Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ Ò× ØÝ Â ÑÙ×Ø ÑÓ ¬ ½¾ ØÓ Ò ÐÙ Ø ÓÒ Ù Ø ÓÒ ÙÖÖ ÒØ Ò× ØÝ Â Ò .

Ø ÔÓÐ Ö Þ Ø ÓÒ ÙÖÖ ÒØ Ñ ÙÑ ÓÖ Ò ØÓ Ò× ØÝ Ò Ø Ð ØÖ ´µ · Ó´ Ö   ½µ Ø Ë Ò Ø ØÓØ Ð Ð ØÖ ¬ Ð Ø Ø ×ÙÖ Ó ÓÒ¹ Ù ØÓÖ¸ ´Ö ص¸ Ò ÜÔÖ ×× Ù× Ò Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ Ò× ØÝ Ò ÓÒ Ù Ø Ú Øݸ Ò ÒÓ Ò ÒØ ¬ Ð × ÓÒ× Ö ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ µ × Ó Ø Ò Ý ÓÑ Ò Ò ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ× ´½µ¸ ´¾µ¸ ´¿µº   ´Ö ص à ½ Â Ú Ú ½ ½ ´Ö¼ ؼ µ Ú · ؾ Ö   Ö¼ ¾ Ó ´ Ö   ½µ à  ´Ö¼ ؼ µ Ú Ø Ö   Ö¼ à · ½ Ö Ó Ú Õ ´Ö¼ ؼ µ Ú Ö   Ö¼ · ´µ ¼ ÌÓ ×ÓÐÚ Ø ×Ý×Ø Ñ Ó ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ× Ò ´ µ¸ Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ Ò Ö Ò× Ø × Ö × Ö Ø Þ ÒØÓ ÚÓÐÙÑ Ò ×ÙÖ ÐÐ× Ö ×Ô Ø Ú Ðݸ ÙÖ ½´ØÓÔµº Ì ×ÓÐÙ¹ Ø ÓÒ Ö ÕÙ Ö × Ð×Ó Ø Ø Ø ×ÙÖ ÐÐ× Ö × Ø Ð ÐÐ Ð Ò Ø ØÓ Ø ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ× × Ò Ø Ò ÙÖ ½´ØÓÔµº Ì ÙÖÖ ÒØ ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ× Ð Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ ØÛ Ò Ø ÒÓ × Ò Ø Ö ×ÙÖ¹ ÐÐ× Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ Ø ÒÓ Ö º ÁÒ× Ø ÐÐ× Ø Ú Ö Ð × Ö ÓÒ×Ø Òغ ÔÔÐÝ Ò Ø ÐÖ Ò Lp i(t) Rm Cp12 Cp11 º ½º È Cp22 ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ × Ö Ø × Ø ÓÒ´ØÓÔµ Ò ÑÓ Ð´ ÓØØÓѵ Ñ º Ì Ò Ù Ø Ú Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ × × ÓÒ Ø ÚÓй ÙÑ ÐÐ× ØÛ Ò ØÛÓ ×Ù × ÕÙ ÒØ ÒÓ ×º Ò ¸ Ø Ô Ø Ú Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ × × ÓÒ Ø ×ÙÖ ÐÐ× ×¹ ×Ó Ø ØÓ ÒÓ º Ì × × ÐÐÙ×ØÖ Ø Ò ÙÖ ¾º Ì ØÛÓ Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ× Ö Ù× ÓÖ Ø Ð ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ ÓÖÖ ×ÔÓÒ Ò Ñ Ø Ó Ã ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ× Ö Ó Ø Ò ÓÖ Ø Ã ÚÓй ÙÑ ÐÐ× Ó Ø ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ º Ì ÒØ ÖÔÖ Ø Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø × ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ× × ÐÓÓÔ ½ Ð × ØÓ Ø ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ Ó Ø ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø ÓÖ È Ðи ÙÖ ½´ ÓØØÓѵº Ì ÔÖ Ø Ð ÑÔÐ Ø ÓÒ× Ó Ø × ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒ Ö ¹ ÕÙ Ö × Ø Ø ¬Ü ÒÓ × Ö ÔÐ ÓÒ Ø ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ ÙÒ Ö Ø ×غ ÖÓÑ Ø × ÒÓ × ØÛÓ Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ× Ö º ¾º È Ó Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× × Ø ÓÒº º È ÖØ Ñ Ø Ó ÔÖÓ ÙÖ ÓÖ Ò ØÓ Ø ÓÐÐÛÓÛ Ò Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ì × Ö Ø ÓÑÔÓÒ ÒØ× Ò ÙÖ ½ Ò ¾ Ö ÒÓØ Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ò Ø Ð ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ× Ö Ô Ö ÓÖÑ × ÓÒ Ø ÓÑ ØÖ Ð × Ô Ó Ø Ò Ù Ø Ú Ò Ô Ø Ú Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ× Ù× Ò ÒÙÑ Ö Ð ÒØ Ö Ø ÓÒ ÓÖ ÐÓ× ¹ ÓÖÑ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ׺ º½ È ÖØ Ð Ö × ×Ø Ò ÁÒ ÙÖ ½´ ÓØØÓѵ¸ ÊÑ × Ø ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ Ö × ×Ø Ò Ó Ø ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ× Ò Ø Ò Ù Ø Ú Ô Ö¹ Ø Ø ÓÒ׺ Ì Ö × ×Ø Ò Ò Ø È ÑÓ Ð ÓÖÖ ¹ ×ÔÓÒ ØÓ ÓÒ Ù Ø Ú ÐÓ×× × Ò Ø Ò ÐÙ× ÓÒ Ö ×ÙÐØ× Ò ´ÊµÈ ÑÓ Ðº Ì Ö × ×Ø Ò × × ÑÔÐÝ Ø Ö × ×Ø Ò Ó Ø ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ Ð ÙÐ Ø × ÊÑ ÐÑ Ñ ¡ ´µ Û Ö ÐÑ × Ø ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ Ð Ò Ø Ò Ø Ö Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ ­ÓÛ¸ Ñ × Ø ÐÐ ÖÓ××¹× Ø ÓÒ Ò × Ø ÓÒ Ù Ø Ú ØÝ Ó Ø ×Ô ¬ Ñ Ø Ö Ðº .

º¾ È ÖØ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò ÁÒ ÙÖ ½ Ò ¾ ÄÔ × Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò Ð¹ ÙÐ Ø Ù× Ò Ø Ò Ù Ø Ú Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ Ò ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ µº ½ ÄÔÑÒ Ö   Ö¼ Ñ Ò Ñ Ò ÐÑ ¡ ÐÒ ÐÑ ÐÒ Ñ Ò ´µ Á Ò Ñ¸ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ µ Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ× Ø Ô ÖØ Ð × Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò Ó Ø Ñ Ø Ðк Ì × × Ø ÒØ ÖÒ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò Ó Ø ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ Ò × ÓÒÒ Ø Ò × Ö × Û Ø Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ö × ×Ø Ò ØÛ Ò Ø ÒÓ ×º Á Ò Ñ¸ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ µ Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ× Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙ¹ ØÙ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò ØÛ Ò Ø Ñ Ø Ò Ø Ò Ø Ðк Ì × ÓÖÖ ×ÔÓÒ × ØÓ Ø Ñ Ò Ø ¬ Ð ÓÙ¹ ÔÐ Ò ØÛ Ò Ø ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ׺ ÁÒ ËÈÁ Ø × « Ø × ÑÓ Ð Ù× Ò Ø Ã ÓÑÑ Ò º Ì × Ö ÔÖ × Ò¹ Ø Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò × Ò×Ø ÒØ ¹ Ò ÓÙ׸ Ñ Ò Ò Ø Ø Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ Ò ÓÒ ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ « Ø× ÐÐ ÓØ Ö ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ× Ø ÓÒ º ÓÖ ÚÓÐÙÑ ÐÐ× Ø Ø Ö Ö Ô Öظ ÓÖ ÓÖ Ö ÕÙ Ò ×¸ Ø × Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ Ø ÓÒ ÓÑ × ÙÒÚ Ð × Ò Ø ¬ Ð ÓÙ¹ ÔÐ Ò × Ó ÙÖ Ø ¬Ò Ø ØÖ Ú Ð Ø Ñ ×º Ì × ÔÖÓ Ð Ñ × ×ÓÐÚ Ý Ø Ù× Ó Ð Ý ¸ Ö Ø Ö ¸ ÙÖÖ Òع ÓÖ ÚÓÐØ ×ÓÙÖ × ½½ º Ì × × × Ö Ò ¹ ÙÖ ¿´Ð ص Û Ö ÙÖÖ ÒØ ¾ ½ × Ò×Ø ÒØÐÝ Ò Ù Ò ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ ¾ Ù ØÓ Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ Ò ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ ÓÒ Ø ÖÓÙ Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò ÄÔ ½¾º ÁÒ ¹ ÙÖ ¿´Ö ص Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò × ÓÙ¹ ÔÐ ØÓ ÙÖÖ ÒØ ×ÓÙÖ Û Ø ×Ô ¬ Ð ÝØÑ º ÙØ × Ò Ð Ý ×ÓÙÖ × Ö ÒÓØ ×ÙÔÔÓÖØ Ý ÑÓ×Ø ÓÑÑ Ö Ð Ö Ù Ø × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ ØÓÓÐ× Ð ËÈÁ ×Ô Ð Þ ×ÓÐÚ Ö ÑÙ×Ø Ù× ¸ × ¹ ×Ö Ò ½ º Ì Ò ÐÙ× ÓÒ Ó Ô ÖØ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò × Ò Ö Ø Ö Ø ÓÒ Ò È ÑÓ Ð × ÒÓØ ´ÄÔ¸ µÈ ÑÓ Ðº ËÒ Ø Ð ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò × Ù× Ò ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ µ × ÓØ ÓÑÔÐ Ü Ò Ø Ñ ÓÒ¹ ×ÙÑ Ò × Ø Ó ÐÓ× ÓÖÑ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ× × Ò ÔÖ ¹ × ÒØ ¸ × ½ Ò º i1 Lp11 i2 _ 1 Lp1 2 Lp2 2 º ¿º Å Ò Ø ¬ Ð Lp11 ÓÙÔÐ Ò Ù× Ò i1 i2 _ 1 Lp2 2 Ð Ý ÙÖÖ ÒØ ×ÓÙÖ × º¿ È ÖØ Ð Ô Ø Ò Ô Ò ÙÖ ½ Ò ¾ × Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ô Ø Ò Ø Ø Ò Ð ÙÐ Ø ÖÓÑ Ø Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓ¹ Ø ÒØ Ð È ¸ Û Ö ½ ½ È ´µ × × Ö   Ö¼ Ó × × × × Ì Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð × Ò ÐØ ÖÒ Ø Ú Ô ¹ Ø Ú Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ Ø ÓÒ Ö Ð Ø Ò Ø ×ÙÖ ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð¸ θ ØÓ Ø ×ÙÖ Ö ¸ ɸ ÓÖ Ò ØÓ Î ÈÉ Ì Ö ÙÐ Ö Ô Ø Ò ÒÓØ Ø ÓÒ¸ ¸ × Ø ØÓ Ø Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð × Ò Î É ´½¼µ ÒÚ Ö× ´½½µ Á Ò ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ µ¸ Ø Ô ÖØ Ð × Ð Ó Æ ÒØ Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð Ó Ø Ø ×ÙÖ ÐÐ × Ð ÙÐ Ø º Ì × Ô Ø Ò × ÓÒÒ Ø ØÛ Ò Ø ÓÖÖ ×ÔÓÒ Ò ÒÓ ×¸ ×ÙÖ Ðи Ò Ø ÒÓ Ø Ò¬Ò Øݺ Á ¸ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´ µ Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ× Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙ¹ ØÙ Ð Ó Æ ÒØ Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð ØÛ Ò Ø Ø Ò Ø Ø ×ÙÖ Ðк Ì × ÓÖÖ ×ÔÓÒ ØÓ Ø Ð ¹ ØÖ ¬ Ð ÓÙÔÐ Ò ØÛ Ò Ø ×ÙÖ ÐÐ׺ Ë Ò ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ ´½¼µ × Ò×Ø ÒØ Ò ÓÙ× Ö Ð Ø ÓÒ× Ô Ø Ò¹ Ú Ö× ÓÒ Ó Ø Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð Ñ ØÖ Ü¸ È ¸ ØÓ Ø Ô Ø Ò Ñ ØÖ Ü¸ ¸ Ò ÓÒÐÝ ÓÒ Û Ò Ö Ø Ö Ø ÓÒ Ø Ñ × Ö Ò Ð Ø º Ì Ò Ø Ó¹ Ò Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ò Ø Ñ ØÖ Ü Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ× Ø Ô ÖØ Ð × Ð Ô Ø Ò ØÓ ×ÙÖ Ðи Ô Ò ÙÖ ½ Ò ¾º Ì Ó« ÓÒ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ö Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ô Ø Ò × ØÛ Ò Ø ×ÙÖ ÐÐ׸ Ô Ò ÙÖ ½ Ò ¾º Ï Ò Ö Ø Ö Ø ÓÒ Ø Ñ × ÑÙ×Ø ÓÒ× Ö ¸ ¹ Ð Ý ×ÓÙÖ × Ö Ù× Ò × Ñ Ð Ö Ñ ÒÒ Ö × ÓÖ Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò × ½½ º Ì Ò ÐÙ× ÓÒ Ó ¹ Ô Ø Ò × ÓÖ Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð Ò È ÑÓ Ð × ÒÓØ ´ µÈ ÓÖ ´ÈµÈ ÑÓ Ð Ö ×Ô Ø Ú Ðݺ ÐÓ× ÓÖÑ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ× ÓÖ Ø Ð ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð¸ Ø Ù× Ð×Ó Ô ÖØ Ð ¹ Ô Ø Ò ×¸ × Ò ÔÖ × ÒØ Ò ¾ º º ÜØ Ò È ÑÓ Ð× Ì Ö Ö ÒÙÑ ÖÓÙ× ØÙÖ × Û Ø Ø È Ñ Ø Ó Ø Ø × ÒÓØ ÓÚ Ö Ò Ø × Ô Ô Ö¸ × Ò Ü¹ ÑÔÐ .

ÓÖ È ÑÓ Ð× Û Ö Ð ØÖ Ö ÓÒ× ÑÙ×Ø ÓÒ× Ö ¸ Ø È ÑØÓ × Ò Ü¹ Ø Ò Ø ÖÓÙ Ø Ù× Ó Ð ØÖ ÐÐ× ½¾ º ¯ Ì Ü Ø Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Ù×Ù ÐÐÝ Ô Ö¹ ÓÖÑ Ù× Ò ÙÖÖ Òع ÓÖ ÚÓÐØ ×ÓÙÖ ×º ÁÒ ½¿ Ø ÓÖÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ Û × ÜØ Ò ØÓ Ò ÐÙ Ü Ø Ø ÓÒ Ù× Ò Ò ÒØ ¬ Р׺ ¯ Ò Æ ÒØ Ë Ò « Ø ÑÓ Ð Û Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ Ò ½ º Dipole ¯ ÁÁÁº ÔÓÐ Ì ¾ ÔÓÐ Ò ÑÓÒÓÔÓÐ ÒØ ÒÒ × Ö Óѹ ÑÓÒ Ö Ø Ò ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Ò Ð ØÖÓÒ ×Ý×Ø Ñ× Ò × Ø Ö ÓÖ Ó Ö Ø ÑÔÓÖØ Ò º Ì × ÑÔÐ ØÝ Ó Ø × ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Ñ × Ø Ò Ð Ü ÑÔÐ ÓÖ × Ñ¹ ÔÐ È ÑÓ Ð׺ ÌÓ ÑÓ Ð Ø Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý Ó Ò ¼ Ñ Ö ×Ô ¾ ÔÓÐ ¸ Ø ÙÔÔ Ö Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý Ð Ñ Ø¸ ÓÖ¹ Ö ×ÔÓÒ Ò Ñ Ò¸ ÑÙ×Ø ×Ô ¬ º Ì × ÑÙ×Ø ÒÓÛÒ ØÓ ××ÙÖ Ø Ø Ø Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ó Ø ÚÓÐÙÑ Ò ×ÙÖ ÐÐ× Ò Ø È ÑÓ Ð Ó × ÒÓØ Ü¹ º Ì Ù× Ó ¾¼ ÑÑ ÚÓÐÙÑ Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ñ × ½¼ Ø È ÑÓ Ð Ú Ð ÙÔ ØÓ ½º ÀÞ Ò × Ò Ø Ø ÓÖ Ø Ð Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý ÓÖ Ø ÔÓÐ × ¿ ÅÀÞ¸ Ø × × ÓÓ× Òº Ì ¬Ö×Ø ×Ø Ô Ò Ø ÑÓ Ð Ò × ØÓ Ñ Ø Ò¹ Ù Ø Ú Ò Ô Ø Ú Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ × ÓÒ Ø ÐÐ Ð Ò Ø ×º Ì × × × ÓÛÒ Ò ÙÖ Û Ö ÐÐ Ò Ù ¹ Ø Ú ÚÓÐÙÑ Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ö ¾¼ ÑÑ ÐÓÒ ´Ø ÔÓÐ ÖÓ××¹× Ø ÓÒ Û × ÓÓ× Ò ØÓ ½Ü½ Ñѵº Ë Ò Ø Ô Ø Ú ÐÐ× Ö × Ø Ð ÐÐ Ð Ò Ø ØÓ Ø Ò Ù Ø Ú ÐÐ× Ø ØÛÓ ÒØ ÒÒ Ð Ñ ÒØ× ÓÒ× ×Ø× Ó ½½ Ô Ø Ú ÐÐ× ´ØÛÓ ½¼ ÑÑ Ò Ò Ò ¾¼ Ñѵº Ë ÓÒ ¸ ÐÐ Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ö Ð ÙÐ Ø Ù× Ò Ø ÔÖÓÔÓ× ÐÓ× ÓÖÑ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ׺ Ì Ö ¸ Ø Ò Ù Ø Ú Ò Ô Ø Ú ÐÑ ÒØ× Ö ÓÑ Ò ÒØÓ Ø È ÑÓ Ð¸ × Ò ÙÖ ¸ Ò Ø ¹ × Ö Ò Ð× × × Ô Ö ÓÖÑ º Ñ Ò - Place nodes Inductive partition Capacitive partition Combine into complete PEEC model Ü ÑÔÐ × ÁÒ Ø × × Ø ÓÒ ØÛÓ Ü ÑÔÐ × Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ Ò Ø ÓÖÖ ×ÔÓÒ Ò È ÑÓ Ð× Ö × Ù×× º ÁÒ Ø È ÑÓ Ð Ü ÑÔÐ × Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ú Ò Ð ÙÐ Ø Ù× Ò Ø ÐÓ× ÓÖÑ ÕÙ ¹ Ø ÓÒ× ×Ù ×Ø Ò Ø ÔÖ Ú ÓÙ× × Ø ÓÒº ÓÖ Ø ÖØÖ ÙÖÖ ÒØ»ÚÓÐØ ×ÓÙÖ × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ ×Ô ¹ Ð Þ ×ÓÐÚ Ö × Ò Ù× ½ º Ì ÙÖ Ý Ó Ø È ÑÓ Ð× Ö ÓÑÔ Ö Ò×Ø Ò ÐÝØ Ð ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒ× Ò Ñ ×ÙÖ Ñ ÒØ׺ º À Ð Û Ú Ð Ò Ø + + º º ¾ Ì Ò Ù ØÚ ÔÓÐ Ü ÑÔÐ Ò - Ô Ø Ú Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ× ÓÖ Ø Ø ¬Ö×Ø × ÑÔÐ ¬ ´Ê¸Ä¸ µÈ ÑÓ Ð ÓÖ Ø ÔÓÐ Û × ÑÔÐ Ñ ÒØ Û Ø ÓÙØ Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙ¹ ¾ ØÙ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ú Ò Ô Ø Ú Ð Ñ ÒØ׺ Ì Ö ×ÙÐØ× × × ÓÛÒ Ò ÙÖ Û Ö Ø Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý × ÐÓÛ Ý ¾¼ ± ÒÓ Ñ Ò Ø ¬ Ð ÓÙÔÐ Ò ´ ÓØØ Ð Ò µ × Ò ÐÙ ÓÖ Ý ¿¾ ± ÒÓ Ð ØÖ ¬ Ð ÓÙÔÐ Ò ´ × ¹ ÓØ Ð Ò µ × Ò ÐÙ ÓÑÔ Ö ØÓ Ø ÓÖÖ Ø ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒ¸ ×ØÖ Ø Ð Ò Ò ÙÖ º Ì Ô Ö¹ ÓÖÑ Ò Ó Ø ÑÓ Ð × ÑÔÖÓÚ Ý Ø Ù× Ó ÐÐ Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ò Ø Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý × ÔÖ Ø ØÓ ¿ ÅÀÞ ´ º ± Ó«µ¸ ¹ ÙÖ ´ × µº Á Ø × È ÑÓ Ð × ÙÔ Ö ØÓ ÖØÖ ÓÖÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ Ù× Ò ¬Ò Ø ØÖ Ú Ø Ñ × ¹ ØÛ Ò Ø Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ø Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý × ÔÖ Ø ØÓ ¿ ÅÀÞ ´ ¼º¿ ± Ó«µ¸ ÙÖ ´×ÓÐ µº Ì Ò ÐÙ× ÓÒ Ó Ø Ñ Ö Ø Ö Ø ÓÒ Ò Ø È ÑÓ Ð Ð×Ó ÒØÖÓ Ù × ÑÔ Ò Ò Ø ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Øº Ì × × Ð ÖÐÝ Ú × Ð Ò ÙÖ Û Ö Ø Ö Ú ÙÖÖ ÒØ ÓÖ Ø ÒÓÒ Ö Ø Ö ÓÖÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ × Ú ÖÝ É¹Ú ÐÙ ÓÑÔ Ö ØÓ Ø Ö Ø Ö ÓÖ¹ ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒº Ë Ò Ø Ó Ù× × ÓÒ Ø È ÑØÓ ¸ Ø ØÙ Ð É¹Ú ÐÙ Ò Ö Ú ÙÖÖ ÒØ ÑÔÐ ØÙ × ÒÓØ Ò ÒÚ ×Ø Ø º º È Ø ÒØ ÒÒ Ì Ô Ø ÒØ ÒÒ × Ú ÖÝ ÓÑÑÓÒ ×ØÖÙ ØÙÖ Ò ÒØ ÒÒ ÔÔÐ Ø ÓÒ× Û Ö Ø Ý ÔÔ Ö × × Ò¹ Ð Ô Ø × ÓÖ Ò ÖÖ Ý ÓÖÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ׺ Ì × ×ØÖÙ ¹ ØÙÖ × ÑÓÖ ÓÑÔÐ Ø ÓÑÔ Ö ØÓ Ø ÔÓÐ ÒØ ÒÒ × Ò Ø È ÑÓ Ð ÑÙ×Ø Ò ÐÙ ´½µ .

º º Ü ÑÔÐ Ô Ø ÓÑÔÓÒ ÒØ× Ò Ø º º Ë ÑÙÐ Ø « Ö ÒØ È ´Ð Ò µ Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò Ý ÓÖ ¾ ÔÓÐ Ù× Ò ÑÓ Ð× ÓÑÔ Ö ØÓ Ò ÐÝØ Ð ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒ ¬Ò Ø ÖÓÙÒ ÔÐ Ò ¸ ´¾µ Ø Ð ØÖ Ñ ÙÑ ¹ ØÛ Ò Ø ÔÐ Ò × Ò ´¿µ ØÛÓ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÙÖÖ ÒØ ×ØÖ Ù ÙØ ÓÒ ØÓ ÓÖÖ ØÐÝ ÑÓ Ð Ø Ô Ø ÒØ ÒÒ º ÌÓ ÑÓ Ð Ø ÖÓÙÒ ÔÐ Ò Ò Ø Ô Ø ÒØ ÒÒ Ù× Ò ØÛÓ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÙÖÖ ÒØ ×ØÖ ÙØ ÓÒ ¸ ÓÒ Ü¹ Ö Ø Ò ÓÒ Ý¹ Ö Ø Ò Ù Ø Ú Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ × Ñ Ù× Ò Ø ¬Ü ÒÓ × Ò × Ñ Ð Ö Ñ ÒÒ Ö × ×Ö Ò ÙÖ ¾º Ì × ÑÓ Ð ÓÙÐ Ð×Ó Ü¹ Ø Ò ØÓ Ò ÐÙ ÙÖÖ ÒØ× Ò Ø Ø Ò ×× Ó Ø Ô Ø Ò ÖÓÙÒ ÔÐ Ò º ÙØ × Ò Ø Ö Ñ Ò¹ × ÓÒ Ð È ÑÓ Ð× Ö ÓÑÔÐ Ø Ø ØÛÓ ¹ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð Ö ÔÖ × ÒØ Ø ÓÒ Û × ÓÓ× Òº ÁÒ Ø × Ü ÑÔÐ ¿ Ñ Ø ¾ ¢ ÑÑ Ô Ø ÒØ ÒÒ ÐÓ Ø ÓÒ ½º ÑÑ Ð ØÖ ×Ù ×ØÖ Ø ¸ ¸ ÓÚ Ö ÖÓÙÒ ÔÐ Ò × ÑÓ Ð º Ì Ö Ô Ø × × ÓÛÒ Ù Û Ö Ø Ò ÔÓ ÒØ × Ñ Ö Û Ø ª¹×ÝÑ Óк Ì × × Ó Ø ØÛÓ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø ÓÖ Ø Ô Ø Ò Ø ÖÓÙÒ ÔÐ Ò × × ÓÛÒ¸ Ò Ø ¬ ÙÖ ØÓÔ Ö Ø ÓÖ¹ Ò Ö¸ Û Ö Ø Ô ÖØ Ð × Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò × Ò Ø Ô ¹ Ø Ð Ö × ×Ø Ò × Ö ×ÔÐ Ý º ÆÓØ Ø Ø Ø Ô ÖØ Ð × Ð Ô Ø Ò × Ò ÐÐ Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ö Ü ÐÙ Ò Ø ¬ ÙÖ ¸ ÓÖ × ÑÔÐ ØÝ Ö ×ÓÒ׸ ÙØ ÒÓØ Ò Ø È ÑÓ Ðº Ì Ð ØÖ Ñ ÙÑ × ÒÓØ ÑÓ ÐÐ Ù× Ò ÐÐ׸ Ò×Ø Ò « Ø Ú Ö × Ò Ù× ½¼ º × ÓÖ Ø ÓÒ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð × ¸ Ø ÔÓÐ ¸ Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ð¹ Ñ ÒØ× Û Ö Ð ÙÐ Ø Ù× Ò ÐÓ× ÓÖÑ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ׺ ÒØ ÒÒ Û Ø ÙØ ØÓ × ÓÛ Ø È ÑÓ Ð ×ÖØ ÓÖ Ø × È ÑÓ Ð Ø Ö ­ Ø ÓÒ Ó Æ Òظ ˽½¸ Û × Ñ ×ÙÖ Ù× Ò Ê Ó ² Ë Û ÖÞ ÎÊ Ò ØÛÓÖ Ò ÐÝÞ Öº Ì Ñ ×ÙÖ Ñ ÒØ× Ö ÓÑÔ Ö ØÓ ´ÄԸȸʸ µÈ ÑÓ Ð × × ÓÛÒ Ò ÙÖ º Ì × Ö Ø × Ø ÓÒ Ó Ø Ô Ø ÒØ ÒÒ ÒØÓ Ñ Ü ÐÐ × Þ Ó ¾¼ ¢ ¾¼ ÑÑ Ö ×ÙÐØ× Ò ÙÔÔ Ö Ö ¹ ÕÙ Ò Ý Ð Ñ Ø Ó ½º ÀÞº Ì × ÐÐ × Þ × ¬Ò ÒÓÙ ØÓ ÑÓ Ð Ø ¬Ö×Ø Ö ×ÓÒ Ò ÖÓÙÒ ½º¾ ÀÞ¸ Ò ¹ Ø Ý Ñ ×ÙÖ Ñ ÒØ׺ × Ò × Ò Ò Ø ¬ ¹ º º Ê ­ Ø ÓÒ Ó Æ ÒØ ÓÖ Ô Ø × Ð Ò × Ñ ×ÙÖ Ñ ÒØ× Ò Ø Ð Ø ÓÒ ÙÖ Ø Ñ Ö Ñ Òظ Ú ÐÙ ÓÖ Ø Ì È ÒØ ÒÒ Û Ö Ø ×ÓÐ Ð Ò × × ÑÙ¹ ×ÙÖ Ñ ÒØ× Ò × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ× Ö Ò ÐÓ× Ü ÔØ ÓÖ Ø Ö ÔÔ Ð Ò Ø Ö É¹ Ñ ×ÙÖ Ö ­ Ø ÓÒ Ó Æ Òغ ÑÓ Ð Ù× Ò Ø × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ× ÓÒ× ×Ø× .

Ó ½ Ô ÖØ Ð × Ð Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð ½ ¾ Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ó Æ ÒØ× Ó ÔÓØ ÒØ Ð ¯ ½¿¾ ܹ Ö Ø Ò ½ ¼ ݹ Ö Ø Ô ÖØ Ð × Ð Ò¹ ÙØÒ × ¾ ¾ ¯ ½¿¾ · ½ ¼ Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ò Ù Ø Ò × ¯ ¾ ¾ Ô ÖØ Ð Ö × ×Ø Ò × Ò Ø × ÔÔÖÓÜ Ñ Ø ÐÝ Ñ ÒÙØ × ØÓ ÖÙÒ ÓÒ ÈÁÁÁ» ¼ ÅÀÞ Ð ÔØÓÔ ÓÑÔÙØ Öº ÌÓ ×Ô ÙÔ Ø ÓÑÔÙØ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ñ Ø × ÔÓ×× Ð ØÓ Ü ÐÙ Ô ÖØ Ð ÑÙØÙ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Û Ø Û ÓÙÔÐ Ò Ó Æ ÒØ׸ ¼º½ ¸ Û Ø ÓÙØ « Ø Ò Ø ÔÖ Ø Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ¹ ÕÙ Ò Ý ÑÓÖ Ø Ò ·»¹ ±º Ì ×Ô ÙÔ ÙØ Óѹ ÔÙØ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ñ × Ý ÔÔÖÓÜ Ñ Ø ÐÝ ¾ Ñ ÒÙØ ×º ÌÓ ÑÔÖÓÚ Ø ÙÖ Ý Ó Ø È ÑÓ Ð¸ Ð ¹ ØÖ ÐÐ× Ò ¬Ò Ö Ô ÖØ Ø ÓÒ ÓÙÐ Ù× º ¯ ¯ Áκ ½ ¾ ¿ ½½ ½¾ ÓÒ ÐÙ× ÓÒ× Ì È Ñ Ø Ó × Ò × ÓÛÒ ØÓ Ú ÖÝ ÔÓÛ Ö ÙÐ × ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ Ø Ò ÕÙ ÓÖ ÓÑ Ò Ö Ù Ø Ò Ð ØÖÓÑ Ò Ø ¬ Ð ÔÖÓ Ð Ñ׺ Ì ¬Ö×Ø Ü¹ ÑÔÐ ×ÔÐ Ý× Ø ÔÓ×× Ð ØÝ ØÓ Ñ È ÑÓ ¹ Ð× Ý Ù× Ò ÐÓ× ÓÖÑ ÕÙ Ø ÓÒ× ØÓ Ð ÙÐ Ø Ø Ô ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ× Ò Ö Ú Ö× ÓÒ Ó ËÈÁ ×Ø ×ÓÐÚ Öº Ì × ØÙÖ Ñ × Ø Ñ Ø Ó ÔÓ×× Ð ØÓ Ù× Ò Ù Ø ÓÒ Ò ÓÖ × ÑÔÐ × Ò Ø × ×º ÀÓÛ¹ Ú Ö¸ Ø Ñ Ø Ó Ö ÕÙ Ö Ö Ø Ö Ö Ù Ø ×ÓÐÚ Ö ØÓ ÓÒ× Ö ÙÐÐ Û Ú Ñ Ø Ó ÓÑÔ Ö Ð Û Ø Ñ Ø Ó Ó ÑÓÑ ÒØ× ×ÓÐÙØ ÓÒº Ì ÔÔÐ Ø ÓÒ Ó È ³× ØÓ ÒØ ÒÒ × × Ú ÐÙ Ð ØÓÓÐ Ò Ñ ÒÝ Ö × Û Ö ÒØ ÒÒ Ö ×ÓÒ Ò Ö ÕÙ Ò × Ö Ó ÑÔÓÖ¹ Ø Ò º Ì Ô Ô Ö × ÓÛ× Ø Ø ÒØ ÒÒ × Ö ÑÓ ÐÐ Û Ø ÓÓ Ö Ñ ÒØ ÓÑÔ Ö ØÓ Ò ÐÝØ Ð ×ÓÐÙ¹ Ø ÓÒ× Ò Ñ ×ÙÖ Ñ ÒØ׺ Ê ½¼ Ö Ò × º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ ÁÒ Ù Ø Ò Ð ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ× Ò ÓÑÔÐ Ü ÁÒØ ¹ Ö Ø Ö Ù Ø ÒÚ ÖÓÒÑ ÒØ ¸ Á Å ÂÓÙÖÒ Ð Ó Ê × Ö Ò Ú ÐÓÔÑ Òظ ÚÓк ½ ¸ ÒÓº ¸ × Ôº ½ ¾¸ Ôº ¼¹ ½º Ⱥ º Ö ÒÒ Ò¸ º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Æ ÒØ Ô Ø Ò Ð¹ ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ× ÓÖ Ì Ö ¹ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÅÙÐØ ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ ËÝ×Ø Ñ× ¸ Á ÌÖ Ò× Ø ÓÒ× ÓÒ Ñ ÖÓÛ Ú Ì ÓÖÝ Ò Ì Ò Õ٠׸ ÚÓк ÅÌÌ ¾½¸ ÒÓº ¾¸ º ½ ¿¸ Ôº ¹ ¾º º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø ÅÓ Ð× ÓÖ Ì Ö ¹ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÅÙÐØ ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ ¸ Á ÌÖ Ò× Ø ÓÒ× ÓÒ Ñ ¹ ÖÓÛ Ú Ì ÓÖÝ Ò Ì Ò Õ٠׸ ÚÓк ÅÌÌ ¾¾¸ ÒÓº ¿¸ Ñ Ö ½ ¸ Ôº ¾½ ¹¾½º ĺ Ϻ Æ Ð¸ ËÈÁ ¾ ÓÑÔÙØ Ö ÈÖÓ Ö Ñ ØÓ Ë ÑÙÐ Ø Ë Ñ ÓÒ Ù ØÓÖ Ö Ù Ø׸ Å ÑÓÖ Ò ÙÑ ÆÓº Å ¾¼¸ Å Ý ½ º Ⱥ º Ö ÒÒ Ò¸ º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Ô Ø Ò ÅÓ Ð× ÓÖ ÁÒØ ¹ Ö Ø Ö Ù Ø Å Ø ÐÐ Þ Ø ÓÒ Ï Ö × ¸ Á ÂÓÙÖÒ Ð Ó ËÓÐ ËØ Ø Ö Ù Ø׸ ÚÓк Ë ½¼¸ ÒÓº ¸ º ½ ¸ Ôº ¿¼¹ º Ⱥ º Ö ÒÒ Ò¸ ƺ Ê Ú Ö¸ º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Ì Ö ¹ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÁÒ Ù Ø Ò ÓÑÔÙØ Ø ÓÒ× Û Ø È ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø× ¸ Á Å ÂÓÙÖÒ Ð Ó Ê × Ö Ò Ú ÐÓÔÑ Òظ ÚÓк ¾¿¸ ÒÓº ¸ ÒÓÚº ½ ¸ Ôº ½¹ º ½¿ ½ ½ ½ ½ º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Ⱥ ú ÏÓЫ¸ ÁÒ Ù Ø Ò ÓÑÔÙØ Ø ÓÒ× ÓÖ ÓÑÔÐ Ü Ì Ö ¹ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÓÑ ØÖ × ¸ Á ÁÒØ ÖÒ ¹ Ø ÓÒ Ð ËÝÑÔÓ× ÙÑ ÓÒ Ö Ù Ø× Ò ËÝ×Ø Ñ׸ Á ¸ ÆÛ ÓÖ ¸ ½ ½¸ ¿ ÚÓк Ôº ½ ¹½ ¸ ÚÓк ½º ˺ Ú ¸ Àº À ¸ ˺ Â Ò ¸ º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Ë ÑÙÐ Ø Ò Ð ØÖÓÑ Ò Ø Ê Ø ÓÒ Ó ÈÖ ÒØ Ö ÙØ Ó Ö × ¸½ ¼ Á ÁÒØ ÖÒ Ø ÓÒ Ð ÓÒ Ö Ò ÓÒ ÓÑÔÙØ Ö¹ × Òº ÆÓÚº ½½¹½ ½ ¼¸ Ôº ¿ ¾¹¿ º Ë Æ ¼¹ ½ ¹¾¼ ¹¾º Àº À ¸ º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ ÔÔÖÓÜ Ñ Ø Ì Ñ ¹ ÓÑ Ò ÅÓ ¹ Ð× Ó Ì Ö ¹ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ÁÒØ Ö ÓÒÒ Ø× ¸ ÈÖÓ Ò ×¸ ½ ¼ Á ÁÒØ ÖÒ Ø ÓÒ Ð ÓÒ Ö Ò ÓÒ ÓÑÔÙØ Ö × Ò¸ ÎÄËÁ Ò ÓÑÔÙØ Ö× Ò ÈÖÓ ××ÓÖ׸ Á ÓÑÔÙغ ËÓ º ÈÖ ×׸ ÄÓ× Ð Ñ ØÓ׸ ¸ ÍË ¸ ½ ¼¸ Ôº ¾¼½¹ º ˺  ÒÚ Ý¸ ͺ ÄÙÒ Ö Ò¸ ÓÑÔ Ö ×ÓÒ Ó Å ×ÙÖ Ò Ë ÑÙÐ Ø ÙÖÖ ÒØ ×ØÖ ÙØ ÓÒ× ÓÒ ÈÖ ÒØ ÄÓ ¹È Ö Ó ÒØ ÒÒ ¸ ËÝÑÔÓ× ÙÑ Ê ÓÖ ¸ ÒØ ÒÒ ¼¼ ÆÓÖ ÒØ ÒÒ ËÝÑÔÓ× ÙѺ ÄÙÒ ¸ ËÛ Ò¸ ¾¼¼¼º º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Àº À ¸ Ê Ø Ö ÅÓ Ð× ÓÖ È Ó Ö ÁÒ¹ Ø Ö ÓÒÒ Ø× ¹ ÓÖ ÀÓÛ Ø ËÔ Ó Ä Ø « Ø× ÓÙÖ ËÈÁ Ö Ù Ø Ë ÑÙÐ Ø ÓÒ ¸ ½ ½ Á ÁÒØ ÖÒ Ø ÓÒ Ð ÓÒ Ö Ò ÓÒ ÓÑÔÙØ Ö¹ × Òº Á ÓÑÔÙغ ËÓ º ÈÖ ×׸ ÄÓ× Ð Ñ ØÓ׸ ¸ ÍË ¸ ½ ½¸ Ôº ¼¹¿º º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Ö Ù Ø ÅÓ Ð× ÓÖ Ì Ö ¹ Ñ Ò× ÓÒ Ð ¹ ÓÑ ØÖ × ÁÒ ÐÙ Ò Ð ØÖ × ¸ Á ÌÖ Ò× Ø ÓÒ× ÓÒ Å ¹ ÖÓÛ Ú Ì ÓÖÝ Ò Ì Ò Õ٠׸ ÚÓк ¼¸ ÒÓº ¸ ÙÐÝ ½ ¾¸ Ôº ½ ¼ ¹½ º º ÖÖ Øظ º È Ùи º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Ö Ù Ø ÅÓ Ð× ÓÖ ¿ ËØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Û Ø ÁÒ ÒØ Ð × ¸ ½ ¿ ÁÒØ ÖÒ Ø ÓÒ Ð ËÝÑÔÓ¹ × ÙÑ ÓÒ Ð ØÖÓÑ Ò Ø ÓÑÔ Ø Ð ØÝ ËÝÑÔÓ× ÙÑ Ê ÓÖ ¸ Á ¸ Æ Û ÓÖ ¸ Æ ¸ ÍË ¸ Ù º ½ ¿¸ Ôº ¾ ¹¿¾º º ÖÖ Øظ º È Ùи º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ ÁÒ Ù Ø Ò Ð ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ× Ù× Ò È ÖØ Ð ÁÒ Ù Ø Ò × Ò Å ÖÓÑÓ Ð× ¸ ØÐ ÒØ ½ º Å ¹ ÐÓ Ð ÓÒ ÖÒº Á ½ ÁÒØ ÖÒ Ø ÓÒ Ð ËÝÑÔÓ¹ × ÙÑ ÓÒ Ð ØÖÓÑ Ò Ø ÓÑÔ Ø Ð Øݸ ËÝÑÔÓ× ÙÑ Ê ÓÖ º Á ¸ Æ Û ÓÖ ¸ Æ ¸ ÍË ¸ ½ ¸ Ôº ¾¿¹ º º º ÖÖ Øظ Ú Ò Ñ ÒØ× Ó Ø È ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ ÕÙ Ú ¹ Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø ÓÖÑ ÙÐ Ø ÓÒ¸ È º º ×× ÖØ Ø ÓÒ¸ Ì ÍÒ Ú Ö¹ × ØÝ Ó Ã ÒØ٠ݸ ½ º º ÓÖ × ¸ º ÏÓÐÐ Ò Ö ¸ Ò ÐÝ× × Ó ¿¹ ÁÒØ Ö ÓÒÒ Ø ËØÖÙ ØÙÖ × Û Ø È Í× Ò ËÈÁ ¸Á ÌÖ Ò× Ø ÓÒ× ÓÒ Å ¸ ÚÓк ½¸ ÒÓº ¸ ÒÓÚº ½ ¸ Ôº ½¾¹ º º Ò ÐÐ Ö ×¸ ú ź ÓÔ Ö ¸ º º ÊÙ Ð ¸ Ò Ò Ë Ò « Ø ÓÖ È ÖØ Ð Ð Ñ ÒØ ÕÙ Ú Ð ÒØ Ö Ù Ø ´È µ ÅÓ Ð× ¸ Á ÌÖ Ò× Ø ÓÒ× ÓÒ Å ÖÓÛ Ú Ì ÓÖÝ Ò Ì Ò ÕÙ × ¸ Ú ¸ Ò ¸ × Ô¸ ¾¼¼¼¸ Á ¸ È × Ø Û Ý¸ Ƹ ÍË ¸ Ô ½ ¿ ¹½ ¾º .

Jan Carlsson and Jerker Delsing Reformatted version of paper originally published in: Symposium Record. 2001 IEEE International Symposium On Electromagnetic Compatibility. Canada). (Montreal. IEEE.Paper D SPICE models of barrier compared to measured data Authors: Urban Lundgren. 2001 c 2001. 67 . Reprinted with permission.

68 Paper D .

The weighted difference is minimized by adjusting component values in an iterative scheme. It is then desired to find a lumped component circuit with the behavior described by the S-parameters. fig. Borås. The next step is to set up a discrete circuit and then compute the Sparameters. The models are based on data from 2D and 3D Maxwell equation solvers. For instance for a filter the insertion loss is often the only given performance parameter. A skilled RF designer can from the geometry of a barrier judge if it can be regarded as a multi-conductor transmission line (MTL). The S-parameters of the component are measured using a vector network analyzer. cascaded MTLs or if a more general approach has to be chosen. Surface mounted filters and shielded connectors and cables are examples of such components. The computed S-parameters are then compared with measured data for the frequency range of interest. An assumption is made that the cross-section is uniform. searching among component values in a given range [1]. This made it possible to analyze the system in many configurations. To be able to make accurate SPICE models for a component it is necessary to know the entire scattering parameter matrix. four parallel traces on a printed circuit board and a surface mounted filter. SPICE model generation techniques For barriers that can be viewed as multi-conductor transmission lines the cross-section is divided into small elements and the Laplace equation is solved [1]. Luleå. Simulations For further verification of the generated models a test system was designed involving several combined barriers and many connection ports. SWEDEN Abstract: SPICE models of electromagnetic zone barrier are devised. Here another method has been used. The modeling approach for the different kinds of barriers have to by chosen with care to obtain useful data with a limited amount of effort put in. To verify the generated SPICE models results from SPICE simulations were compared with measurements on the barriers. Luleå. The traces on the printed circuit board were designed as 50Ω microstrips to minimize reflections and standing waves in the system causing unpredictable results in the measurements. Good agreement was found between simulated and measured data. passive surface mounted filters and encapsulation was designed. l33dz 3 l23dz l13dz 2 Introduction The focus for electronic system designers is on product functionality. l22dz c23dz l11dz c12dz c11dz z c13dz c22dz c33dz z+dz Figure 1 Circuit segment representing a multi conductor transmission line Barriers with complex or unknown geometry. Here some a priori knowledge is necessary. The coupling through the zone barriers was measured. Here EMC aspects are hard to approach using for the electronic engineer well known tools such as SPICE. This includes separation of traces on a printed circuit. . The datasheets from the manufacturer seldom gives a complete description of the electrical characteristics of a component. A transfer impedance approach modeled incident electromagnetic waves in SPICE.SPICE models of barrier compared to measured data Urban Lundgren Jan Carlsson Jerker Delsing Luleå University of Technology Regnbågsallén SE-971 87. solution the charges on each conductor can be computed and thereby the per-unit length inductance and capacitance matrices. cannot be viewed as transmission lines. When the matrices are known it is a straightforward task to construct a circuit representation that can be used in a standard circuit simulator. SWEDEN Luleå University of Technology Regnbågsallén SE-971 87. for instance commercial filters. Test systems using D-sub connectors. SWEDEN SP Swedish National Testing & Research Institute Brinellgatan 4 SE-501 15. Good agreement was found [1]. The test system consists of a terminated coaxial cable (RG58). This work thus focuses on building SPICE models for electromagnetic zone barriers enabling SPICE simulations of radiated power and immunity to incoming disturbances. see fig. 1. a shielded 9-pin D-sub connector. SPICE models has been developed for commercially available components that can be regarded as EMC barriers. 2. From the l12dz 1 ref. Models have also been developed for EMC barriers that appear in a circuit due to the layout of circuit. Test system verification measurements were made in a fully anechoic chamber.

A surface mounted filter is included on one microstrip and a coaxial cable is via a 9-pin D-sub connected to the PCB. Measurements Two measurement ports on the PCB utilizing SMA connectors makes it possible to monitor both transmitted signals in a microstrip and signals in an adjacent microstrip due to crosstalk on the PCB.DSUB1 R7 R8 in1 R10 100MEG in2 R20 R21 100MEGin3 100MEG in4 R11 100MEGin5 DSUB9 100MEG in6 100MEG in7 in8 in9 0 R15 50 V1 R14 1V 0 Filter 0 Track1 in1 in2 in3 inref R13 100MEG 100MEG inref 0 R1 R2 R3 100MEG R4 R5 100MEG 100MEG R6 100MEG 100MEG 50 out1 out2 out3 out4 out5 out6 out7 out8 out9 out1 out2 out3 outref 0 0 0 in1 inref R16 DPAT3P16 outref SMA1 Track2 0 0 out1 outref DPAT4P16 R18 0 R19 50 5m L1 0 50 0 0. The SMA ports of the PCB were extended to the wall of the box (see fig. To model the coaxial cable shield leakage and D-sub connector shield leakage the transfer impedance for those components were used. The outer conductor (shield) of the cable was in good connection over 360° with the backshell of the shielded D-sub connector. 4). The simulated system was implemented on a PCB and shielded by a metallic box with the shield connected to the groundplane of the PCB microstrip lines. SMA 2 Trace connected to pin 8 SMA 1 Filter Trace connected to pin 7 Figure 4 Setup of the system inside the unechoic chamber Figure 3 The test system consisting of a printed circuit board with parallel traces in a shielded enclosure. The shell of the D-sub connector was then grounded in the shielded box. Moreover the unused measurement port can be left open or terminated with matched impedance which renders 16 different test configurations that has been used in the comparison.28n 0 SMA2 Track3 in1 inref 0 out1 outref DPAT4P16 R17 0 C2 50 0 220n 0 Figure 2 SPICE simulation model of the system (the models for the cable and connector shield is not included in this figure). A 1 meter RG58 coaxial cable was terminated in the far end in 50 Ω and in the near end connected to 4 different pins of the Dsub in sequence. 3). Using the generated SPICE models of the EMC barriers to describe the essential electromagnetic behavior of the test system in a circuit simulation. the different configurations were analyzed in the frequency domain. For the cable the IEC 96-1A standard was used to obtain transfer impedance values and for the Dsub connector a method was used that is described in [2]. The coupling from the radiating antenna through the cable and connector shield and through filters and crosstalk between parallel . Measurements were performed inside a fully anechoic chamber where the excitation of the test system was done with an incident electromagnetic plane wave (fig.

with the center conductor of the coaxial cable connected to each of the 4 pins of the D-sub connected to the traces on the PCB. then the coupling was measured with the system S21system. By the using the EM clamp for the injection of current smoother frequency dependence is obtained. As a comparison measurement were made on the shielded box only. The electromagnetic field was generated with a bilog antenna at a distance of 3 meters from the system. First the coupling between the antenna and the single conductor was measured as S21single. see fig. 8. However when comparing with other measurements or by extrapolation of the simulation results a better agreement is found in the higher frequency range towards 100 MHz. Therefore the lower end of the frequency range in this measurement should be regarded with some caution. The metallic box and the termination of the coaxial cable were is good contact with the groundplane making a closed loop for the current. After measuring the voltage level at the SMA ports (USMA). . The obtained coupling values were combined with the transfer function due to the transfer impedance data for the coaxial cable and D-sub connector shield. 7 and fig.microstrips was measured using a vector network analyzer. leaving unused pins open. To improve the method an EM clamp was used for injection of current on the cable shield outer surface. This offers another way to calculate the system transfer impedance. A problem with this method is however the poorly defined input impedance of the current injecting point. Differences between 10 and 40 dB in the two configurations shown in fig. The lower frequency limit of the antenna is 30 MHz and of course the corresponding 10 meter wavelength does not give good far field conditions at the 3 meter antenna distance. The source port of the network analyzer connected to the cable termination causing a direct injection of current on the cable shield. A calibrated current probe was used to monitor the current and calculations were carried out as described above. The current (Iprobe) was monitored using a calibrated current probe while the cable was positioned at a fix distance of 20 mm over a groundplane. 5. The coupling for the test system was and compared to the coupling for a single conductor that replaced the system in the same position. For each of these measuring output on SMA1 and SMA2 leaving the unused connector open or with a matched load. When analyzing the results from the method using direct current injection there seem to be a resonant behavior at about 25 MHz probably due to the uncertain input impedance at the current injection point (the far end of the coaxial cable). including the PCB inside and the D-sub and SMA connectors. Because the incident field is giving raise to a surface current on the cable shield the system transfer impedance was calculated by including the 50 Ω measurement system impedance: Z T _ system = S 21system ⋅ 50Ω S 21sin gle (1) The system transfer impedance was obtained for 16 configurations of the system. the system transfer impedance is easily calculated as: Figure 6 Measurement setup were the current injetion was improved by the use of an EM clamp (the current probe is missing in this figure). To have better control of the current distribution another measurement was made according to the sketch in fig. 6. Results Z T _ system U = SMA I probe (2) Figure 5 Setup for measurement with direct injection of current onto the cable shield The measurement results obtained in the unechoic chamber shows a poor agreement with the SPICE simulations in the frequency range 30 MHz to 60 MHz where overlapping data is available. Again this measurement was repeated for all 16 configurations.

0E+07 4.0E+08 Frequency (Hz) Figure 7 Comparison of SPICE simulation results and measured data with input on D-sub pin 7 and output on SMA 2.0E+07 1. SMA 1 terminated in 50 ohm .0E+07 6. SMA 1 terminated in 50 ohm Impedance (dBohm) System transfer impedance .0E+07 6.0E+07 8.SMA 2 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 0.Dsub pin 8 .0E+08 Frequency (Hz) Figure 8 Comparison of SPICE simulation results and measured data with input on D-sub pin 8 and output on SMA 2.Impedance (dBohm) System transfer impedance .0E+00 SPICE simulation Direct current injection EM clamp current injection Combined transfer functions Incident plane wave 2.0E+07 8.0E+07 1.0E+07 4.0E+00 SPICE simulation Direct current injection EM clamp current injection Combined transfer functions Incident plane wave 2.SMA 2 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 0.Dsub pin 7 .

3. M. 2000 [2] Van Horck F. Conclusion The measurements for the desired verification are hard to do with one single approach. 2000 IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility.C.. IEEE transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility. “ A Rapid Method for Measuring the Transfer Impedance of Connectors”. Washington. References [1] Carlsson J.With the EM clamp injection method a much better agreement is obtained between the measured system transfer impedance and the SPICE simulation. et al. “An Approach to the Generation of SPICE Models Feasible for EMC Problems ”. and Lundgren U. It is reasonable to believe that better agreement would be found if the SPICE simulation could be done at 100 MHz. Vol. 193-200. 7. In fig. 8 but a remaining offset is shown in fig... The frequency range for the SPICE simulation was limited by the transfer impedance data obtained for the coaxial cable shield. 21-25 Aug. By combining measurements for the parts of the system into a complete system transfer impedance good agreement is obtained with SPICE simulation in fig. It may also be affected by the poor performance of the antenna at this frequency. 7. The deviation between the obtained results seems to decrease when frequency increases in the frequency range of this study. For the measurements with incident plane wave in the unechoic chamber the problems at 30 MHz are likely to be caused by the short distance between the setup and the radiating antenna compared to the wavelength. No. pp. 40. USA. Aug. B. shown in fig. 1998 . D. 8 the same comparison is not so good but exhibits an almost constant offset.

74 Paper E .

EMC Europe 2002. (Sorrento. 75 .Paper E Characterization of Conductive Thermoplastic Composite Materials Using Multiple Measurements Methods Authors: Urban Lundgren. Reprinted with permission. Jonas Ekman and Jerker Delsing Reformatted version of paper originally published in: Symposium Record. IEEE. 2002 c 2002. Italy).

76 Paper E .

% Stainless steel fibre ABS 1. Previously published work related to this problem has been found in [1] which reviews a large number of papers and summarizes in four measurement methods. % Stainless steel fibre For each material test samples were made as boxes for near field SE. It is desired to find a method to establish the shielding effectiveness for a box encapsulating electronic equipment. INTRODUCTION This paper describes the work to compare measurement methods to acquire electromagnetic shielding effectiveness (SE) of conductive thermoplastic materials. % Stainless steel fibre ABS 1 vol. methods were found in [5] and [6]. Table I Materials for which measured data are presented in this paper Base polymer Main additive PC/ABS 1 vol. square plates for the far field SE measurement and two smaller rectangular plates for the permittivity and permeability measurement. II.In a study of conductive thermoplastic composite materials. The methods are using cavity resonance or transmission line loading techniques. Another method developed from the MIL-STD-285 is shown in [4]. In [2] a method is reviewed for estimating shielding effectiveness when knowing complex permittivity and permeability of a material. This method was selected as reference since it provides the closest match to the desired application of the shielding material. A good method should also be as simple as possible regarding instrumentation so that necessary investments to be able to do the measurement are kept small. filler materials and different amount of filler made it possible to generate data for many combinations.1 Shielding of a Electric Near Field Source This measurement method mimics a shielding enclosure application by enclosing a radiating dipole with a box made of the sample material. II. In [2] and [3] two measurement methods are suitable involving a TEM cell. Three different measurement methods are compared to test the validity of the methods. As a tool for the plastic manufacturing industry this will enable improvement of electromagnetic shielding effectiveness in plastic enclosures for electronics.CHARACTERIZATION OF CONDUCTIVE THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITE MATERIALS USING MULTIPLE MEASUREMENT METHODS Urban Lundgren Jonas Ekman Jerker Delsing EISLAB Luleå University of Technology 971 87 Luleå. An easy to use measurement method would allow the study of new material mixtures and the effect on shielding effectiveness of varying process parameters. Samples with different base polymers. Sweden Abstract . This measurement method is suitable for both near field and far field measurements. The materials used are listed in Table I. The main 1 . As can be expected materials that shows a relatively high shielding effectiveness for a incident plane wave also in general offers shielding in the near field situation that was studied. For the comparison of measurement methods a number of different composite materials were analysed in the study. samples were manufactured and measured. EXPERIMENTAL MATERIALS SETUP AND The three thermoplastic composite materials used in the comparison have the base polymers Polycarbonate / Acrylnitrilbutadienstyren (PC/ABS) or Acrylnitrilbutadienstyren (ABS). Data from three of those are here used for the comparison of the three methods. A correlation between SE and complex permittivity was also found. I. Measured data are also compared to give an indication how shielding effectiveness is affected by incident field impedance and by the permittivity and permeability of the material. The samples were characterized in terms of their complex permittivity and complex permeability. plane wave shielding effectiveness and near electric field shielding effectiveness. For measurement of permittivity and permeability on a material.5 vol. However the TEM cell limits the upper frequency to less than 1 GHz. As a near field measurement methods suitable for materials with insulative surface standards ASTM-ES-7 and modified MIL-STD-285 are suggested. The frequency range in this study is 150 MHz to 1 GHz. Those two methods are also reviewed in [2].

this is due to an internal compensation in the instrument and should not affect the measured values at the peaks according the manufacturer. even if the levels of the peaks are affected the step is about 4 dB and this error would not alter the conclusions in this paper. In this method the thermoplastic material is very close to 2 .0 1000. see Fig. A high impedance source generating mainly electric field was designed and used for measurement of the near field shielding effectiveness. This measurement data is used as the baseline in the insertion loss calculation. -10 -20 20. Figure 3 Transmitter placed in box made of a thermoplastic material A Rohde & Schwarz ESPC EMC/EMI test receiver was used for this measurement. Figure 4 Cross section of box wall showing male – female arrangement to ensure good seal when closing a box The emitted signal spectra were measured with the generator in box located at the same position as in the baseline measurement.0 MHz Figure 2 Radiated electric field from battery powered comb generator Figure 1 Transmitter for near field SE measurements The battery powered comb generator was constructed (Fig. However. the shielding effectiveness is calculated as the difference between this measurement and the baseline. 4. 2. The comb generator alone were placed on a table in a anechoic room and the emitted free-space signal spectra at 3 m distance were measured. In this work the frequency range that have been used is 150 MHz to 1 GHz. To ensure good seal when closing the box the meeting surfaces were designed to have a male and female configuration. that offered a wave trap function. see Fig.0 mm was facing the receiving antenna. 1) with a fundamental frequency of 20 MHz and does produce strong frequency components well above 2 GHz. The thickness of the material is 5. The instrument causes a step in the baseline at 500 MHz. see Fig.0 mm in the walls of each half of a box. Finally. near field measurements were made. The wall with thickness 3.0 mm in the bottom and 3. To be able to access the interior of the box the boxes were made in two halves. 50 70 60 40 dBµV 30 20 10 0 If the near field radiation mainly is an electrical field (high impedance) then conductive thermoplastic materials are expected to offer better shielding effectiveness than for mainly magnetic field (low impedance).0 100. 80 Because of the desire to evaluate the usefulness of the materials in an electronic equipment encapsulation application. The battery powered generator was enclosed in a box of the sample material with the dimensions 18 x 11 x 12 cm. 3.drawback of this method is the cost of making the boxes used as test samples and the expensive anechoic shielded room facility used for the measurement.

see Fig. The complex permittivity and complex permeability were measured indirectly using the transmission line technique described in [6]. It is lined on all inside surfaces with ferrite tiles that absorbs radio frequency electromagnetic fields and reduces reflections. This is the least costly method in terms of sample preparation and test facility. A Rohde & Schwarz ZVR vector network analyzer was used in conjunction with an Amplifier Research power amplifier to measure the attenuation in the transmission between the antennas.3 Transmission line technique for complex permittivity and permeability measurements The third method offers a compact way to estimate the shielding effectiveness by theoretical calculations based on measured complex permittivity and complex permeability. The results from these measurements are therefore ’unique’ to this test set-up and can not be directly applied to other shielding applications. similar to [4]. is 50 Ω when the medium between the center conductor and the 3 . The transmit antenna located in the larger chamber 3 meters from the aperture wall of the cube is a wideband CHASE bilog antenna often used for EMC testing. The samples were squeezed between the wall of the brass cube and a 20 x 20 cm brass frame with a 90 x 90 mm aperture. The transmission line was constructed using two coaxial cables with characteristic impedance. The attenuation was measured again and the insertion loss was calculated as the difference between this reading and the baseline. 5. The miniature chamber is a cube of brass with the sides 0. Then closing the aperture with a 5 mm thick brass plate and using conductive tape to seal thoroughly around the plate. see Fig.the signal source like in most shielding applications. II. A top loaded monopole antenna is used as receive antenna and is mounted over a 20 x 20 cm ground plane. II. The aperture size is 90 x 90 mm corresponding to the sample size of 95 x 95 mm. Samples are fitted in an aperture in the miniature chamber. the thermoplastic material. This means that the barrier. The dynamic range is more than 50 dB in the chosen frequency range.2 Far Field Shielding Effectiveness Measurement Another method was used to measure the plane wave shielding effectiveness (shielding material located in far field from radiator). IEEE-STD-299 and MIL-G-83528B. Z0 = 50 Ω connected to a rectangular metallic housing as seen in Fig. The attenuation of electromagnetic plane waves is measured as the insertion loss when closing an aperture with a test sample. 7. 6. The metallic housing impedance. Figure 5 Test set-up for far field measurements The plane wave shielding effectiveness measurements were carried out in an anechoic chamber with a miniature anechoic chamber inside. A miniature anechoic chamber is located inside a large anechoic chamber with 3 meter measurement distance. It is implemented in a nested anechoic chamber set-up. ZL. The shielding effectiveness is obtained as the difference between the antenna coupling with open aperture and the antenna coupling with a sample fitted in the aperture. The test samples in this case are simple flat slabs but this method uses an expensive anechoic shielded room facility. Figure 6 Dynamic range for far field SE measurement test setup The useful dynamic range for this set-up was investigated by first measuring a baseline attenuation with the aperture open. Between the sample and the metallic surfaces a fabric over foam conductive gasket was used. In this improved set-up both the primary and secondary chamber are fully anechoic. is in the near field of the source and the impedance of the emitted electromagnetic wave is unknown. The frequency range was chosen to 150 MHz to 1 GHz because of the restrictions induced by the small aperture and limitations of the power amplifier used. This arrangement is located in the centre of the cube. The methodology is similar to that of standards MIL-STD285.6 meter.

See (6) – (9) found in [2]: SE = A + R + B dB (6) where ′ A = 0. The dimensions of the test samples were t x 43 x 0. γ = j 0. εr = k 1− R    k0  1 + R  (1) µr = k 1+ R    k0  1 − R  (2) where k 0 = ω µ 0ε 0 ( 2 2 cos −1 e − j 4 k0l + S12 − S11 t S R = − j 2 k0l 11 − jkt e − S12 e k= Figure 7 Transmission line fixture for εr and µr measurements ( (3) ) (4) ) (5) To verify this technique. ZL.8 2 GHz Figure 10 Real part of permittivity for polyethylene Figure 9 Test fixture loaded with Polyethylene The transmission line fixture was loaded with test samples resulting in a change in characteristic impedance. reflection (R) and correction (B) also called re-reflection loss.5 3 2. From the measured scattering parameters. The total shielding effectiveness is the sum of absorption (A) . The samples are mounted in the fixture in pairs with one on each side of the flat center conductor. For a complete theoretical derivation. see [3]. Since the reference case in this comparison is the near field shielding with a box a thorough theoretical model would be too complex and the assumptions is made that this simplified case is a good approach.6 1.5 0 0.6 0.5 1 0. measurements on polyethylene were performed. The measured data of the permittivity and permeability is used to calculate theoretical plane wave shielding effectiveness for an infinite flat shield. S11 and S12. The change in ZL introduces reflections in the transmission line structure that was be measured using a Rohde & Schwarz ZVR vector network analyzer.2 1.021 ⋅ f ⋅ ε r dB (7) (8) (9) 4 .2 0.4 1. proportional to the material properties.8 1 1. The measured values differs from the correct by ± 7%.1285 µ r ( ε r − ε r ) dB ε  R = 20 ⋅ log10  r  dB  4    −2γl B = 20 ⋅ log 1 − e . 3. 10 the real part of relative permittivity εr for polyethylene is shown.4 0.housing is air (see Fig.25 for Re{εr} [7]. 8) and is thereby matched to the coaxial cables. the complex properties are calculated (1) – (5).48 mm where t was 20 mm and 40 mm and represents the length along the propagation direction in the transmission line.5 Figure 8 Unloaded test fixture 2 Re{e r} 1. 9. The dotted lines indicates the published constant value εr = 2. See Fig. In Fig.

the stars indicates the insertion loss at frequencies where peaks were present in the transmitter free-space signal spectra (Fig. 12 and 13 shows the calculated shielding effectiveness values based on measured permittivity and permeability for the different thermoplastic materials. For the materials used in Fig. 14. 80 40 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Frequency /MHz Figure 14 Imaginary part of the measured complex permittivity for PC/ABS with 1% Stainless steel 5 . 12 and 13 for the different thermoplastic materials. respectively. 13 and Fig. Figure 12 ABS with 1% Stainless steel Figure 13 ABS with 1. 11 and Fig. In Fig. 12 and 13. The dotted lines in Fig. III. In the figures. The repeatability for these measurements are very good and the results presented are from one measurement occasion but the results must of course be regarded as unique to this test set-up. RESULTS Data from the three methods were collected and are here shown for the three sample materials in Fig. 11. Also the near field impedance. This term is very small and have been neglected in the calculations. This is because the shielding material is in close proximity of the transmitting antenna so that the input impedance of the transmitting antenna may change when changing material. The results are for 3 mm thick sample plates and are averaged results for 4 measurement occasions performed over a period of 2 weeks. that is the relation of electric field strength to magnetic field strength is unknown. 12 the measured imaginary part of the permittivity is shown in Fig. 11. 12 and 13 the stars shows near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source. 11. 11.The re-reflection loss B corrects for the multiple reflections inside the barrier and is always a negative value since re-reflections degrade SE.5% Stainless steel 200 160 Figure 11 PC/ABS with 1% Stainless steel 120 The results for the far field shielding effectiveness measurements are presented as solid lines in Fig. 2).

F. no. Paul. When studying a larger number of different materials than presented in this paper. For the near field case. 1992 [3] Wilson P. By analyzing the measured permittivity and permeability further a large difference is found in imaginary 6 .. Jenkins B. [5] Bush G. pp. no noticeable difference can be seen. 27-33. vol. p. ISSN: 0360-2559 [2] Rahman H. 12). W. “Measurement techniques for permeability. The imaginary part of the permittivity includes the effect of conductivity in the material. DISCUSSION Measured shielding effectiveness with the far field method show the same trend in frequency response as the near field method but with an offset in some cases. 1. 60 40 In conclusion the thermoplastic materials with high imaginary part of the permittivity seem to give an improved shielding effectiveness compared to materials with small imaginary part of permittivity. 2.. 14 and Fig.. M. 80-84. for the materials... REFERENCES 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Frequency /MHz Figure 15 Imaginary part of the measured complex permittivity for ABS with 1% Stainless steel IV. 1987 [4] Bodnar D. 22-26 Aug. and measurements related to electromagnetic interference shielding". This is also supported by calculated shielding effectiveness for an infinite flat shield based on the measured electrical properties. 333 – 339. The base PC/ABS offers 8 dB to 10 dB better far field SE than the pure ABS base with vol... pp. 1979. and Curran T. This could indicate the effect of the incident field impedance on SE. 11).. ISBN: 0-314-60175-9 The difference in calculated shielding effectiveness (dotted lines) between Fig. IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility. p. West Publishing Company. “A Broad-Band. 1994. on MTT.permittivity. see Fig. that is a larger value of SE were expected for near field SE than for far field SE indicating expected good electric field shielding. 15. 1986. The largest deviation found in this comparison is about 20 dB (Fig.K. testing. “Shielding effectiveness measurements on conductive plastics”.. modeling and simulation. 9/1-9/6 of 68. Dowling J. IEEE Trans.”Engineering Applications of Electromagnetic Theory”. T.. USA. IEE Colloquium on Screening of Connectors. [7] Liao S. design factors. IEEE EMC Society Symposia Records. St. 12 can be explained by studying the properties of the materials. The largest deviation found in this comparison is almost 20 dB (Fig.. materials that performs well in the plane wave case usually also offers good shielding in the near field case. permittivity and EMI shielding: a review”. However the deviation would then be expected to be in the opposite. London. 1% stainless steel fibre as the additive.. 34. "A review of materials. Cables and Enclosures Digest No. In conclusion the measurement of material properties does not give good information on near field shielding effectiveness (SE). “Shielding effectiveness measurement techniques for various materials used for EMI shielding”.. The real part of the permittivity can not alone be correlated to a good SE. 11 and Fig. Ma M. 20 V.012. Jan. G. D. The cause of the losses in a dielectric material is usually that the conductivity is large [7]. Manoochehri S. Chicago. [1] Mottahed B. IEEE EMC Society Symposia Records. “Techniques for measuring the shielding effectiveness of materials”. Stripline Technique for the Simultaneous Measurement of Complex Permittivity and Permeability”. 271-346. Further the approach of far field measurement agrees well in most cases but deviations with no reasonable explanation are found. Mars 1995. p.G. ISBN: 0-78031398-4 [6] Barry W. Calculated shielding effectiveness based on measured material properties does not agree well with measured near field shielding effectiveness. no. Automated. Y. Symposium Record. 547-552. pp. Saha P. 1994. 34. Denny H. USA. vol.. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering.

Jonas Ekman and Jerker Delsing Reformatted version of paper originally published in: Submitted to Electromagnetic Compatibility.Paper F Shielding Effectiveness Data on Commercial Thermoplastic Materials Authors: Urban Lundgren. 83 . Reprinted with permission. IEEE Transactions on c 2004. IEEE.

84 Paper F .

• XP211 Polypropylene (PP) with stainless steel content of 1. .and farfield shielding effectiveness. This method is often referred to by conductive composite material manufacturers. When a material is used in an enclosure for an electronic device it is usually exposed to a different electromagnetic field condition than in the standardized test method. corresponding to 12%-wt. the measurement techniques are discussed. Shielding effectiveness data up to 1GHz is presented. The last couple of years. J. Those include surface treatment of non conductive plastic such as conductive paint. There are a number of methods available to make encapsulations of plastic materials offering some degree of electromagnetic shielding [7]. To measure plane wave shielding effectiveness for a small sample of a material several methods are published [4] and [5]. housings of the different thermoplastic materials was constructed and equipped with a EMI source to model a realistic near field shielding effectiveness situation. This makes it important to control emitted radio frequency electromagnetic emissions. The materials are typically used for EMI protection (housing) of electronic components/systems including LAN connection boxes and credit card payment devices. PC/ABS. For near field shielding. I. Also different manufacturers uses different measurement methods which makes comparisons hard. boxes of metal sheets have earlier been used. Materials from the following manufacturers were selected. Far field shielding effectiveness was tested using a modified standard measurement technique to provide results comparable with company provided data. vacuum metallization etc. Ekman. In some instances manufacturer data were available for comparison. This makes comparisons between different manufacturers hard. Further the standardized method just give a hint of what the shielding performance can be for the same material in an electronic device encapsulation application. II. A great advantage with this method is that the number of production steps are reduced. and PP. A problem with this kind of measurement method is that it seldom reflects the real situation. Also circuits must be protected from electromagnetic energy in its environment. Thus it was decided to evaluate electromagnetic shielding effectiveness for commercially available thermoplastic materials. the recorded results are presented and conclusions from the comparisons are drawn. A circular split coaxial transmission line (flanged coaxial holder) is described in the standard ASTM-D4935. Faradex XX711 showed the best combined far field and near field shielding results. with stainless steel fibres in relatively low concentrations.Shielding Effectiveness Data on Commercial Thermoplastic Materials U. I NTRODUCTION Shielding effectiveness data of commercially available conductive thermoplastic materials are seldom published other than in product specification from the manufacturer. contains flame retardant. Manufacturer LNP Engineering Plastics. internal clock frequencies in electronic circuits have increased to more than 1 GHz. ABS.5%-vol.5%-vol. P RESENTATION OF T HERMOPLASTIC M ATERIALS This paper presents measurements on ten thermoplastic materials. plastic materials have replaced metal in encapsulation. J. Delsing EISLAB Lule˚ University of Technology a Lule˚ . Another method is to mix conductive particles into the plastic before the encapsulation product is formed. One problem that arises for the EMC engineer is to select an encapsulation technique that offers a desired degree of electromagnetic shielding for a new electronic device. SE-971 87 a Sweden Abstract— Ten different commercially available conductive thermoplastic materials have been tested for near. PC. Faradex XX711 and Bekaert BekiShield (both with filling of stainless steel fibre) were the two best performing. Ten materials were chosen and samples manufactured for analysis using two measurement methods. This is made by including filters in the circuit design and to use encapsulation with electromagnetic shielding capabilities. The following materials were used: • XA711 Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene (ABS) with stainless steel content of 1. Further. Lundgren. The raw materials was bought from three large manufacturers and prepared according to manufacturer instructions. corresponding to 10%-wt. The conductive thermoplastic material Faradex XP211 (with filling of stainless steel fibre) and RTP EMI 283 (with filling of nickel coated carbon fibre) were the two materials offering the best far field shielding performance. During the last two decades. The manufacturers of different conductive filler materials sometimes specifies the shielding performance of their material in an application according to standardized measurement method but deviations from the exact standard often occurs. For encapsulating electronic devices. This paper describes the composition of the chosen materials. Inc offers Faradex [1] compounds that combine thermoplastics.

with absorbers on the inside walls. corresponding to 7%wt. The lower frequency limit is set to ensure far field conditions at the front of the metallic box and by the aperture size. contains flame retardant. Drawbacks with the method are that measured insertion loss is dependent on the antenna placement and orientation and the reflections of the electromagnetic wave inside the shielded rooms [9]. This improved method have been used in this paper for the far field shielding effectiveness measurements with the modifications that the receiving antenna is placed inside the box and the transmitting antenna in the room outside the box. The aperture size is determined by the thermoelectric material sample size which is 95 x 95 mm. contains flame retardant. Manufacturer RTP Company [2] offer different kinds of plastic products to match specific applications demanding EMI shielding. There is an aperture in one wall of the box where test objects can be mounted. Inside an anechoic shielded room a brass box containing the receiver antenna is placed on a wooden table. directed towards each other at a fix distance. corresponding to 9%-wt. Also the box aperture and sample holder has been adapted to the material samples available to us. Also the demands on preparation of test samples may influence when choosing method of measurement. The intention with this second method is to resemble an application of the material where it is used for the encapsulation of a working electronic device. The difference between these measurements is the insertion loss (IL) for the test object. contains flame retardant. Typically. or nickel coated carbon fibre are used in a thermoplastic matrix to provide the necessary shielding. S HIELDING E FFECTIVENESS M EASUREMENT T ECHNIQUES For the measurement of electromagnetic shielding effectiveness various techniques are offering different dynamic ranges in different frequency intervals. contains flame retardant. Usually measurements are done in the range 200 MHz to 18 GHz. [7] and [8]. EMI 283 NYLON-6. Frequency range from a few MHz to many GHz. dynamic range about 50dB [4]. New improved versions of the method in MIL-STD-285 can also be found in the standards IEEE-STD-299 from 1991 and MIL-G-83528B from 1992. modified MIL-STD 285 Type Measurement The foundation of shielding effectiveness measurements has earlier been the American military standard MIL-STD-285 from 1956 (now withdrawn) [4]. For the test Beki-Shield was mixed in Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene (ABS) with a fibre content of 15%-wt. Far field shielding effectiveness measurements. The transmitter and receiver antenna is located in separate rooms. The box is damped inside with ferrite tiles and has a 90 x 90 mm aperture on one side. Improved versions of the method in MIL-STD-285 have developed were the problems with reflections have been minimized. A comparison have been made between the far field shielding effectiveness measurement method and the application imitating near field method [6]. The insertion loss is determined in the same manner as above.• • • XX711 Polycarbonate (PC) with stainless steel content of 1. The box is placed in an anechoic shielded room together with the receiving antenna. Measurements according to MIL-STD285 have been used to examine new shielding materials like conducting composites and performance of conducting gaskets. A. EMI 330 F FR Polycarbonate (PC) with stainless steel fibre content of 15%-wt. containing the transmitting antenna. high temperature protection.6 Polyhexamethylene-adipamide (PA) with nickel coated carbon fibre content of 20%-wt. XA611 Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene (ABS) with stainless steel content of 1%-vol. The frequency range for this test set-up is 150-1000 MHz. stainless steel fiber. contains flame retardant. The chopped fibres are bound together with polymeric binders specific for various polymer resins. The shielding effectiveness for that specific thermoplastic material is then calculated as the difference between these two measurements. A proposed method [10] involves a box. III. The transmitter is transmitting at constant power and the receiver measure the transferred power with and without test object mounted in the aperture. A transmitting antenna were placed three meters from the aperture and the receiver antenna measured the transmitted power with and without a thermoplastic material in the aperture. A number of standardized methods exists. corresponding to 7%-wt. EMI 162 Polypropylene (PP) with stainless steel fibre content of 15%-wt. Manufacturer Bekaert [3] offer a stainless steel fibre (BekiShield) that is used as filler for electrically conductive plastics. XC711 Polycarbonate/Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene (PC/ABS) with stainless steel content of 1%-vol. The method uses two shielded rooms with one common wall. We have chosen to use two measurements methods where the first method (A) is a far field shielding measurement that is based on standardized methods. The following materials were used: • • • • EMI 2583 C FR Polycarbonate/Acrylonitrile-ButadieneStyrene (PC/ABS) with nickel coated carbon fibre content of 20%-wt. The second measurement method (B) is a generic approach to totally encapsulate a transmitter in its near field with the material under test. and wear durability. . however in practical use tailor made test fixtures often deviates from the design in standards which makes measured data specific to the modified fixture and comparisons becomes less significant. carbon fibre.5%-vol. This wall has an aperture were test objects can be placed. In this paper to characterize the far field shielding effectiveness for the ten different conductive thermoplastics we used the method described below.

Dynamic range for far field SE measurement test set-up. is in the near field of the source and the nature. 3. is enclosed in a 18 x 11 x 12 x cm box. IV. R ESULTS A. made of each material and the emitted signal spectra were measured. A battery powered transmitter. B. The dynamic range for the test set-up can be seen in Figure 1 and is over 50 dB for all frequencies.0 1000. the transmitter were enclosed in a box. Above 800 MHz the output power was not sufficient. 1. the near field shielding effectiveness differs significantly. The low level of output power from the battery powered transmitter give an undesired consequence of small dynamic range for this method. The boxes were made of two halves joined together with a slit. Fig. The transmitting antenna was a Chase 6112B BiLog. The measurements shows clearly the different materials shielding effectiveness. see Figure 3. The main drawback for this set-up is the small aperture size. however larger material samples would then be required. Radiated electric field from battery powered transmitter. of the emitted electromagnetic wave is unknown. Four of the ten materials offer a far field shielding effectiveness of better than 40 dB in the entire frequency range. The measured data from this method presented in this paper cover the frequency interval 200 MHz to 800 MHz. from 17 dB to more than 50 dB for some materials. Among these materials. This means that the results from these measurements are ’unique’ to this test set-up and can not be directly applied to other shielding applications. Other suggestions for improving the technique can be summarized as follows: • better cables connecting the measurement receiver and the receiver antenna offering a higher level of shielding against the radiated incident field. Measurement results The results from the two different measurements are displayed in parallel in Figures 4 to 13.0 100. 60 50 40 dBµV 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 20. The upper frequency limit is set to 1000 MHz by the upper frequency limit for the transmitter power amplifier. the thermoplastic material.0 MHz Fig. • improved sample holder design to simplify mounting of test sample with repeated measurements. The transmitter were placed on a table in a anechoic room and the emitted free-space signal spectra at a 3 m distance were measured. only 90x90mm. In this case the thermoplastic material is very close to the signal source like in most shielding applications. Meaning that the barrier. Then. the shielding effectiveness is calculated as the difference between these two measurements. 2.Fig. 80 70 This aperture acts like a wave guide and attenuates the electromagnetic field under a specific cut-off frequency resulting in measurement problems and a reduced dynamic range for lower frequencies. Finally. high or low impedance. made out of the different materials. All of the curves shows an increased SE for higher frequencies and the reason can be the test set-up . Near field shielding effectiveness measurements. The dynamic range could be increased and the lower frequency limit could be decreased if a bigger aperture could be used. see Figure 2. application specific measurement The second method used a more ’realistic’ test set-up to characterize the shielding effectiveness for the different thermoplastic materials. Transmitter placed in box made of a thermoplastic material.

The frequency range is 100 MHz to 1.5 GHz.3 0.7 Frequency (GHz) 0. the far field shielding effectiveness is reported by manufacturer to be 42-50 dB using ASTM D4935 test method [2]. Measured shielding effectiveness for Faradex XP211. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles.7 Frequency (GHz) 0. This random error may to some part be a explained by non repeatable effects from the mounting of the test samples over the aperture.2 Manufacturer data 60 50 40 30 Far field S E Near field S E 20 Fig. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles. The measured far field shielding effectiveness data presented in this paper lies in the span 40 to 48 dB for a 3 mm thick sample in the frequency range 200 MHz to 1 GHz. Beki-Shield is stated by the manufacturer Bekaert to offer more than 60 dB electromagnetic shielding effectiveness in the frequency range 30 MHz to 1 GHz [3].8 0. A bias error of ±2 dB is expected in this measurement.9 1 Fig. The measurement accuracy for the far field shielding effectiveness measurements is hard to estimate because only two measurements were made for each material sample. The measured far field shielding effectiveness data presented in this paper lies in the span 35 to 49 dB for a 3 mm sample in the frequency range 200 MHz to 1 GHz. For RTP EMI 283 (0.2 0. 4.2 0.7 Frequency (GHz) 0.3 0.9 1 Fig.6 0. Other problems with this type of measurement method is also known [9]. by manufacturer to be 26-30 dB using ASTM D4935 test method [2].4 0. As can be seen in Figure 1 the dynamic range for the set-up is also increasing with frequency.4 0. For Faradex XX711 (3 mm thick sample).6 0. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles. 6. the far field shielding effectiveness is reported by manufacturer to be 50 to 65 dB using the ASTM D4935 test method [1].5 0.8 GHz is a typical range for this method [4].79 mm). the far field shielding effectiveness is reported 10 0 0.5 GHz.50 40 30 20 10 0 0. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles.8 0.05 mm). The frequency range is 100 MHz to 1. B. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles.120 inch thick corresponding to 3.5 0. The measured far field shielding effectiveness data presented in this paper lies in the span 33 to 38 dB for a 3 mm sample in the frequency range .6 0. Deviations of up to ±6 dB was observed when measurements was repeated.4 0. Comparison with manufacturer data Manufacturer data for some thermoplastics can be found at the manufacturers webpages. The frequency range is unspecified but 1 MHz to 1. 40 70 30 10 0. Measured shielding effectiveness for Faradex XX711. 50 S hielding effectivenes s (dB) Far field S E Near field S E 60 S hielding effectivenes s (dB) and the small aperture size.110 inch thick corresponding to 2. Measured shielding effectiveness for Faradex XA711. For RTP EMI 2583 C FR (0.9 1 S hielding effectivenes s (dB) 20 0 0. This value is corresponding to a conductive composite with 15% stainless steel fibre content (the Beki-Shield material).8 0.3 0.5 Far field S E Near field S E 60 0. The measured far field shielding effectiveness data presented in this paper lies in the span 40 to 53 dB for a 3 mm sample in the frequency range 200 MHz to 1 GHz. 5. The test method and sample thickness are not specified. The measurements was not repeated enough to do a proper statistical analysis of the distribution of the measurement results because the sample holder was demanding to work with.

4 0.6 0.5 0.7 Frequency (GHz) 0.2 0.9 1 Fig.2 1 Fig.4 0. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles. Particularly the ABS base polymer gave lower far field shielding effectiveness values that other base polymers with the same amount of conductive filler.9 1 Fig. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles.8 0. 8.3 0.and far. agreement was quite good with the near field method in one instance while the difference was close to 30 dB in the other three instances.7 Frequency (GHz) 0. Choice of base polymer seem to influence the performance of the conductive plastic material. Measured shielding effectiveness for RTP EMI 162.2 0.8 0. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles.5 0.8 0. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles.3 0.3 0. • Faradex XX711 is the best material for the combined shielding effectiveness.6 0. 7. 200 MHz to 1 GHz. 10. Measured shielding effectiveness for Faradex XA611. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles.7 Frequency (GHz) 0.Far field S E Near field S E 60 50 S hielding effectivenes s (dB) S hielding effectivenes s (dB) 50 40 30 Manufacturer data 40 30 20 20 10 10 0 0.8 0. 0.field. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles.and far.6 0. . Fig.5 0. 9.9 1 0 0. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles. • Faradex XX711 and Beki-Shield offer the best near field shielding effectiveness knocking the signal from the EMI source (transmitter) down below the noise floor. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles. V. Measured shielding effectiveness for RTP EMI 2583 C FR. • Faradex XA611 is the material with the lowest level of shielding effectiveness for both near.9 0 0. Measured shielding effectiveness for Faradex XC711. Far field S E Near field S E 60 Far field S E Near field S E 60 50 50 S hielding effectivenes s (dB) S hielding effectivenes s (dB) Far field S E Near field S E 60 40 30 40 30 20 20 10 10 0 0.4 0. Polymers with a 20% fill of nickel coated carbon fibre performs similar to polymers with 15% fill of stainless steel in far field measurement. Considering that the near field shielding measurement imitates the use of material in an application it is disappointing to se how poor guide the far field shielding effectiveness results are when a material selection for an enclosure must be made. • Faradex XP211 offer the best far field shielding effectiveness.4 0.7 Frequency (GHz) 0.2 0. In cases where manufacturer data were available.field shielding effectiveness for the thermoplastic materials the following is noted.6 0.5 0. C ONCLUSIONS When comparing the near.3 0.

1979 . ”Shielding effectiveness measurements with a dual TEM cell and a split TEM cell”.7 Frequency (GHz) 0.2 0. Page(s): 271-346....5 0. testing.8 0.8 0.7 Frequency (GHz) 0.bekaert.3 0. Page(s): 29-33. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles. Measured shielding effectiveness for RTP EMI 330 F FR. D.lnp.. 12. [6] Lundgren U. The reason for this have not been studied but may be caused by ununiform fibre distribution in mould. ”Shielding effectiveness measurement techniques for various materials used for EMI shielding”.. R. Jenkins B. Sorrento 2002 [7] Mottahed B. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles. Measured shielding effectiveness for RTP EMI 283.. Delsing J.2 40 30 Manufacturer data R EFERENCES 20 10 0 0. The reason for this is unclear and have not been studied. Ma M.. 13.7 Frequency (GHz) 0. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles.6 0.. Faradex and EMI-X Electrically Conductive Compounds. Nov. W. 2003. Volume: 34.3 0.. F. Denny H. 1984 [9] Wilson P.6 0. Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering. W.Symposium Record. ”A review of materials. G. Mars 1995.012. Page(s): 262-264 ISSN: 0190-1494..com [4] Rahman H. ”Shielding effectiveness (SE) measurement techniques”. modeling and simulation. Available: http://www. Saha P.4 0.8 0. The RTP EMI 162 material showed lower shielding effectiveness performance that expected when compared to other materials with same base polymer and amount of conductive filler. Curran T.com/products/index.. IEEE EMC Society Symposia Records. M. Page(s): 27-33.K..htm [3] Bekaert.com/LNP/Products/PShieldingEmi. all other were premixed compounded grains.9 1 Fig. Far field S E Near field S E 60 0. [Online]. ”Characterization of Conductive Thermoplastic Composite Materials using Multiple Measurement Methods”. [Online]. IEE Colloquium on Screening of Connectors. The material RTP EMI 162 show unexpected poor near [1] LNP. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles. This fact may have caused that poor fibre distribution in mould was achieved and give some explanation why poor far field results were observed for the Beki-Shield material. 2003. Manoochehri S. 11. ”Shielding effectiveness measurements on conductive plastics”.. Nov. In this study only the Beki-Shield material was mixed when the plastic samples was produced. Dowling J. and measurements related to electromagnetic interference shielding”. EMC Europe 2002. Page(s): 9/1-9/6 of 68. design factors. T. Cables and Enclosures Digest No. Available http://www.5 0.rtpcompany. The results for near field shielding effectiveness of an electric field source is shown with filled circles. IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility . IEEE EMC Society Symposia Records. Page(s): 249256. ”Factors influencing material shielding effectiveness measurements”.4 0.9 1 Fig.Far field S E Near field S E 60 Manufacturer data 60 50 S hielding effectivenes s (dB) S hielding effectivenes s (dB) 50 40 30 40 30 Far field S E Near field S E 20 20 10 10 0 0.. Adams J. Compared to the far field shielding effectiveness the material containing Beki-Shield stainless steel fibre performed relatively well in near field shielding effectiveness. 1985 [10] Bodnar D.5 0.. Available http://www. 1992 [5] Kashyap S. Nov. [Online].6 0.9 1 Fig. IEEE EMC Society Symposia Records. The reason for this have not been studied..4 0.3 0.html [2] RTP Company. 1986. London. ISSN: 0360-2559 [8] Ondrejka A. Shielding effectiveness data for plane wave shielding is shown with circles. Measured shielding effectiveness for Beki-Shield.. 50 S hielding effectivenes s (dB) 0 0. field shielding effectiveness in respect to the stainless steel filler percentage. Issue: 2. 2003. Materials containing stainless steel fibres shows better near field shielding effectiveness than materials with nickel coated carbon fibre even though stainless steel fibre filler percentage is lower..2 0. Ekman J.

IEEE. Reprinted with permission.Paper G Electromagnetic properties of thermoplastic material for varying temperatures Authors: Urban Lundgren and Jerker Delsing Reformatted version of paper originally published in: Submitted to Microwave Theory and Techniques. IEEE Transactions on c 2004. 91 .

92 Paper G .

To be able to design a antenna on the laminate it is necessary to know certain material parameters of the involved parts. [4]. This value shows a very small dependence of temperature changes in the range 20◦ Celsius to 60◦ Celsius. [5]. Jerker Delsing EISLAB Lule˚ University of Technology a Lule˚ . It is of interest to explore the usage of a particular laminated encapsulation material with integrated antennas in environments with changing temperature. In later years plastic material data at microwave frequencies have been of major concern because the increased need for accurate data when designing devices working at higher frequencies [2]. [2].5 GHz. However the resonance of a cavity makes the method only covering a narrow frequency band. M EASUREMENT METHOD Several methods exists for the measurement of permeability and permittivity.1 in the frequency range 100 MHz to 2. SE-971 87 a Sweden Abstract— A thermoplastic material is examined. Due to its useful frequency range the loaded coaxial transmission line technique is used in this paper for the measurement of the . A material choice that have very interesting properties in all these aspects are laminated materials. There exists a large number of publications on electromagnetic properties of plastic materials.0 and 2. Since many new electronics devices are mobile it is of interest to integrate electrical circuits for example antennas in the laminate. For instance the complex permittivity of the isolating material effects the characteristic impedance which must be considered in the design of the geometry.5 because of preliminary tests on similar materials. The major problem is to establish a test methodology where temperature effects other than these of the material under test are sufficiently suppressed.5 GHz. weight. II. The laminated technique offers a good barrier against moisture and good shielding for electromagnetic energy. This can be improved to some extend by including higher order modes. It is then also important and µ = µ0 · µr = µ0 · (µr − jµr ) where ε is the complex permittivity and µ is the complex permeability. The complex permittivity and complex permeability are obtained while the temperature is varied from 20◦ to 60◦ Celsius. When studying temperature stability it is desired to use a method that measures the permittivity and the permeability. Cavity resonance measurement methods are commonly used because of the good accuracy offered. the encapsulation technique based on such laminates offers a good barrier against dust and moisture and good electromagnetic shielding. In many applications the cost. to study the temperature variations in the electromagnetic properties of the material under test [1]. Thus series of experiments have been conducted to obtain complex permittivity and complex permeability for the thermoplastic over temperature 20 − 60◦ C and frequencies from 100 MHz to 2.0 ± 0. particularly for measurement of imaginary part of the permittivity for determining the losses in a material [3]. mechanical protection. To be able to design stripline transmission lines in the laminate it is necessary to know the electromagnetic behavior of the isolating plastic material. Further weight and cost turns out to be advantageous. At frequencies above 1 GHz the losses in the isolator starts to become an issue and this is also an effect of the complex permittivity. Some of the most common are the loaded resonant waveguide cavity [3]. The thermoplastic material is used in a laminate with metallic foil for encapsulation of electronic circuits. dust and moisture barrier and EMC properties of the encapsulation are critical parameters. I NTRODUCTION ε = ε0 · εr = ε0 · (εr − jεr ) Most electronic devices are encapsulated to protect the electronic circuits from the environment.Electromagnetic properties of thermoplastic material for varying temperatures Urban Lundgren. It was necessary to perform instrument calibration at each temperature to cancel temperature effects on cables and connectors. Real part of the relative permittivity was found to be 2. not the effect on the transmission line that is caused by thermal expansion and contraction of the plastic material. It is expected that the real relative permittivity εr of the studied thermoplastic material will be between 2. Older publication (before 1985) often focused on plastic material data at frequencies below 100 MHz [1]. The desired material characteristics consists of a real and imaginary part according to the following notation I. the open ended coaxial line [3] and the loaded coaxial transmission line [3]. Due to that the laminated material is composed of foils of metallic and thermoplastic material. The temperature stability is unknown but very important to judge the usefulness of the material.

of ktreal can be used when the sample length t is λm 0≤t≤ 2 where λm is the wavelength inside the material. Care must be taken when calculating the propagation constant k using equation 4 due to the inverse cosine expression. How these errors on the Sparameters influences on the resulting εr and µr has not been derived. The technique [5]. see Figure 2. see [5]. If equation 4 is rewritten and the argument for the inverse cosine term is called Arg according to 2 2 kt = arccos(e−j4k0 l + S12 − S11 ) = arccos(Arg) then kt = ktreal + j · ktimg and ktreal = arctan( Im(Arg + Arg 2 − 1) Re(Arg + Arg 2 − 1) ) ± 2nπ ktimg = ln( [Re(u)]2 + [Im(u)]2 ) u = Arg + Arg 2 − 1 The principal branch. The two involved reflection coefficients are denoted S11 and S22 . The scattering parameters in the fixture was measured with a vector network analyser (Rohde & Schwarz ZVR) . ferrite for reducing undesired cavity modes in stripline chamber (one in each corner) complex parameters. For a complete theoretical derivation. εr and µr . only two S-parameters are used since the test fixture in Figure 1 are assumed to be symmetrical and reciprocal. In the transmission line fixture the material under test is placed to fill the volume between the inner and outer conductor in a section along the line. [6]. Temporal temperature fluctuations stay within ±1◦ C according to chamber specification. III. SMA connector. Both reflection and transmission through the fixture is used when calculating the test material data [5].1 2 3 4 where k is the propagation constant in the loaded region and k0 is the propagation constant in the unloaded region and given by √ k0 = ω µ0 ε0 5 For a sample length of t meter and an unloaded region in the housing of l meter. A. n = 0. Test fixture containing sample with following parts: 1. Model for parameter extraction and and simplifies the calculations considerably. M EASUREMENTS S22 = S11 µr = and (4) where The calculation of complex permittivity and complex permeability The expressions for the calculation of the complex permittivity and complex permeability are given in this part. top lid. The two transmission coefficients are denoted S12 and S21 . 5. . 3. By using an alternative expression for the inverse cosine. one on each side of center conductor). ZL − Z0 R= (1) ZL + Z0 between the unloaded and loaded region in the housing according to k 1−R ) (2) εr = ( k0 1 + R k 1+R ) ( k0 1 − R R= (e−j2k0 l S11 − S12 e−jkt ) (5) which are used in equation 2 and 3 to solve for the unknown quantities. 4. A possible remaining bias error may come from an unknown behavior of the coaxial fixture which were not included in the calibration. In the calculations. it is possible to express k and R by using S11 and S12 according to k= Fig. This means that S21 = S12 and 2 2 arccos(e−j4k0 l + S12 − S11 ) t (3) The coaxial fixture described above was placed in an temperature test chamber (Heraeus HT4010). the propagation constant can be split in its real and imaginary part. can be expressed using the reflection coefficient. 2. material sample (2 pieces. [6] used for the measurements in this section utilizes the measured complex S-parameters for a loaded 50Ω transmission line seen in Figure 1. see Figure 3. The material may load the line and cause a change of characteristic impedance. Reflection coefficients and transmission coefficients are often given as scattering parameters (S-parameters) for a two port circuit. The complex quantities. stripline center conductor. 1. This chamber acts as a combined oven and freezer capable of keeping a programmed temperature stable. After calibration the vector network analyser and attached cables introduces a random error of less than ±1 dB.

5 2 1.8 0. R ESULTS The measured real part of relative permittivity for polyethylene is 2.1 at room temperature (20◦ C). However the temperature of the material sample has not been monitored. 0. polyethylene reference (PE) and empty fixture (air) reference. Calibration is done at each temperature and temperature and cable layout were kept fixed until measurements had been carried out.1 at room .4 0.0 ± 0. Test setup including vector network analyser and climate chamber 0. The measurement scheme was redesigned to Material under tes t (MUT) P olyethylene (P E) Empty fixture 0. A measurement reading at preprogrammed temperature could then be done.5 3 9 x 10 Fig.5 1 0.5 Frequency (Hz) 2 2. The upper frequency limit is therefore dependent of the sample material. The calibration kit of the network analyser is specified to perform accurately for temperatures up to 50◦ C.5 Frequency (Hz) 2 2. Imaginary part of relative permittivity at room temperature 1 Fig. IV.4 -0.5 0 Fig.3 ± 0. Measured real part of relative permittivity at room temperature (20◦ ) Celsius for material under test (MUT).5 1 1. For the first measurement attempt the vector network analyser was calibrated in room temperature and temperature was set and settling for 3 hours. it was assumed that repeated identical measurement readings indicated that temperature equalization was reached.5 GHz for the material under test in this paper and 2.4 GHz for polyethylene. polyethylene reference (PE) and empty fixture (air) reference. include three temperatures 20◦ .2 -0.5 3 9 x 10 Test fixture inside climate chamber Fig.5 1 1. 40◦ and 60◦ C.8 -1 The upper frequency limit of the measurement is determined by the wavelength in the transmission line and the sample length in the wave propagation direction. For the material under test the value is 2. The frequency axis in Figures 4 to 7 continues up to 3 GHz but reliable data is limited to 2.6 -0.2 0 -0.3 Real part of relative permittivity at room temperature Material under tes t (MUT) P olyethylene (P E) Empty fixture 2. then measurement was taken. 3. 4. After setting the temperature in the chamber.6 0. 5. 2. see Figure 4. For measurements at 80◦ C proper calibration was not possible. This proved to be an insufficient method because the measurement setup was very sensitive to temperature changes and temperature response from measurement cables and connectors had to be cancelled. In our measurements at 60◦ C calibration was successful and good results were acquired. After some testing it was decided that 3 hours waiting after setting chamber temperature gave the coaxial fixture enough time to equalize the temperature. Measured imaginary part of relative permittivity at room temperature (20◦ ) Celsius for material under test (MUT). the data recording was done after waiting 3 hours for temperature equalization in the coaxial fixture.

2289 0 20 Fig.5 1 0.5 3 9 25 30 35 40 45 Temperature in Celcius 50 55 60 x 10 Fig.0183 + (5E − 4) ∗ t εr−Airref erence = 0. For the material under test a temperature change from 20◦ C to 60◦ C . The temperature dependence on the real relative permittivity is very small in temperature range and frequency range.4 0. 6.0283 − (2E − 4) ∗ t The corresponding straight line equations are at 1800 MHz: εr−P olyethylene = 2.5 1 1. polyethylene reference (PE) and empty fixture (air) reference.9909 + (2E − 4) ∗ t The corresponding straight line equations are at 2400 MHz: εr−P olyethylene = 2.2 3 Material under tes t (MUT) P olyethylene (P E) Empty fixture 2.4 0.2690 − (6E − 4) ∗ t εr−M U T sample = 2. thermoplastic material (MUT) and empty fixture (air) in same graph and corresponding fitted polynomials. at 1. Measured temperature characteristics for polyethylene (PE). The corresponding straight line equations are at 900 MHz: εr−P olyethylene = 2.6 Real part of relative permittivity at 900 MHz Real part of relative permeability at room temperature 1.5 Frequency (Hz) 2 2.4 -0. A polynomial of degree 1 (a straight line) was fitted to the measured data and is plotted together with the measured data.5 Frequency (Hz) 2 2. at 900 MHz 3 1 Material under tes t (MUT) P olyethylene (P E) Empty fixture 0. material under test and air is shown for three frequencies in Figures 8.6 2 P E meas ured data P E fitted polynomial MUT meas ured data MUT fitted polynomial Air reference meas ured data Air reference fitted polynomial 1.4 1. 9.5 0.6 2 P E meas ured data P E fitted polynomial MUT meas ured data MUT fitted polynomial Air reference meas ured data Air reference fitted polynomial 1.5 1.2 0 0.3321 − (9E − 4) ∗ t εr−M U T sample = 2.8 -1 0.8 2.9661 where εr denotes the real part of the relative permittivity for corresponding materials and t denotes the temperature in degrees Celsius. which can be seen in small coefficients of the line equations.8 GHz εr−M U T sample = 2. thermoplastic material (MUT) and empty fixture (air) in same graph and corresponding fitted polynomials. Measured imaginary part of relative permeability at room temperature (20◦ ) Celsius for material under test (MUT). 8.2 -0.8 1.8 0. 30 35 40 45 Temperature in Celcius 50 55 60 Fig.2 1 0.6 0. Measured real part of relative permeability at room temperature (20◦ ) Celsius for material under test (MUT).0690 − (5E − 4) ∗ t εr−Airref erence = 0.2 0 -0. temperature.5 Real part of relative permittivity at 1800 MHz Imaginary part of relative permeability at room temperature 25 9 x 10 0.5 -0.0985 + (1E − 4) ∗ t εr−Airref erence = 1.5 0 20 3 Fig. A curve fitting method have been used in a least square error manner. The measured temperature dependence for reference material (PE). 9 and 10.5 1 0. polyethylene reference (PE) and empty fixture (air) reference. 7.5 1 1. Measured temperature characteristics for polyethylene (PE).

.. ”Dielectric properties of polymers at microwave frequencies: A review”. Ekman J.. The imaginary part of relative permittivity for the material under test is slightly lower (closer to zero) than corresponding measured value for polyethylene.. 2003 Page(s): 727-733 [3] Baker-Jarvis J.H. see Figure 5. Paulter N. Riddle B. stripline technique for the simultaneous measurement of complex permittivity and permeability”. Janezic M. The results for the permeability was as expected for the material under test. January 1986 [6] Lundgren U.D.. Microwave theory and techniques.. This change is smaller than what the accuracy of this measurement method can resolve and must be considered non significant.5 1 0. Relative permeability values are expected to be close to 1 for the real part and close to 0 for the imaginary part in all measurements.”Dielectric characterization of low-loss materials a comparison of techniques”.. The measurement setup was very sensitive to temperature variations. 10. Sorrento 2002 . 40◦ and 60◦ C.5 2 P E meas ured data P E fitted polynomial MUT meas ured data MUT fitted polynomial Air reference meas ured data Air reference fitted polynomial 1.”Complex Permittivity Measurements of Common Plastics Over Variable Temperatures”. [1] Bur A. Weil C. The sensitivity for this measurement method is not enough to quantify the magnitude difference. Baker-Jarvis J. Issue: 1.. Microwave Theory and Techniques. C ONCLUSIONS The material under test has a real relative permittivity of 2.G.5 0 20 25 30 35 40 45 Temperature in Celcius 50 55 60 Fig. 1998 Page(s): 571-577 [5] Barry W. Aug. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Karl-Erik Leeb at ProofCap AB contributed to this study by producing the material samples. ”Dielectric and Conductor-Loss Characterization and Measurements on Electronic Packaging Materials”. Jones C. EMC Europe 2002. The measured relative permeability data is stable under temperature variations. Blendell J.4 GHz is causing the real relative permittivity to decrease 1%. NIST Technical Note 1520. V.0 at room temperature (20◦ C) and it is independent of temperature in the range 20◦ C to 60◦ C. Riddle B. Polymer.. Volume: 26.. automated. VI.. at 2. This was also the case in the measured data shown in Figure 6 and 7.. J.M.D. Geyer R. Krupka J. The real part of the relative permeability is close to 1 and imaginary part close to 0. ”A broad-band.. 20◦ .. March. IEEE Transactions on. Grosvenor J.. Delsing J. Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation.. Volume: 34. July 1985 [2] Riddle B. IEEE Transactions on.L. Page(s): 963-977. CODEN: NTNOEF [4] Baker-Jarvis J. Janezic M. Measurements were then done at three temperature points. Volume: 51 Issue: 3 . Krupka J.. Jr. Imaginary relative permittivity was slightly smaller for the material under test than for polyethylene. ”Characterization of Conductive Thermoplastic Composite Materials using Multiple Measurement Methods”....E.G...A.3 R EFERENCES Real part of relative permittivity at 2400 MHz 2. Measured temperature characteristics for polyethylene (PE). thermoplastic material (MUT) and empty fixture (air) in same graph and corresponding fitted polynomials.. Volume: 5 Issue: 4 . IEEE Transactions on. July 2001. Holloway C. with careful calibration at each temperature to cancel the temperature effects on the cables and connectors. The first attempt to cover the temperature range 0◦ Celsius to 80◦ C with a single calibration was insufficient.