EMC Peak vs Average Detection: What's the Difference?

  • Thread starter Thread starter senmeis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Standard
AI Thread Summary
Military EMC standards like MIL 461 mandate peak detection, while consumer standards typically use average detection. Peak detection is not necessarily stricter but focuses on the highest RF noise levels. The effectiveness of compliance with standards depends on emissions, testing methods, and specific limits. Peak detection serves as a reliable "worst case" screening method, often indicating good performance if it meets average detection levels. This approach allows for targeted work on high emission frequencies identified during testing.
senmeis
Messages
72
Reaction score
2
Hi,

I’ve read military EMC standard (such as MIL 461) requires peak detection while consumer standard requiers average detection. Does it mean the peak detection is stricter than the average one?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
No, but the peaks create the top RF noise.
 
senmeis said:
Hi,

I’ve read military EMC standard (such as MIL 461) requires peak detection while consumer standard requiers average detection. Does it mean the peak detection is stricter than the average one?
But... In addition to different spectrum analyzer configurations, the limits required are also different. So whether you meet your applicable standard can depend both on the sort of emissions you have, the test methods, and the limits.

However, in my experience (mostly commercial products), peak detection is a fairly good "worst case" screening setup. It's a quick and easy way to check. If you pass the levels required for averaging detectors with your peak detector, your usually in good shape. Then you can focus your work on the high emission frequencies you see. The average detectors will seldom give more signal than peak detectors.
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
Back
Top