Reply to Derek @ LF Research, because his post is labelled as SPAM.
Yes, adding OATS is always healthy.😉
Is there an accepted explanation for the '3 m excess'? The published
results are consistent with the field being diffuse (that term is from
acoustics: I'm not sure how widely it's used in EMC circles), i.e the
resultant of a large number of direct, reflected and diffracted rays. It
is hardly surprising: a cuboid space is 'ideal' for producing a diffuse
field above 'eigentone' wavelengths. This might create at least a 3 dB
increase over 'inverse square' and maybe more. I suppose things get
complicated at wavelengths that cannot be called 'short'.
Has anyone tried a spherical chamber? If that's too difficult, a
'quartic sphere [(x,y,z)^4 = r^4, like a Swedish traffic circle] has
noticeably rounded corners and edges, so might be close enough for a
useful improvement.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only
Best Wishes
John Woodgate
Keep trying
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
[email protected]
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Website: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/
Instructions: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe)
List rules: https://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pses/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Mike Sherman at: [email protected]
Rick Linford at: [email protected]
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher: <[email protected]>
_________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the EMC-PSTC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=EMC-PSTC&A=1
