# CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

(Amendment)## Amendment 2 - Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and methods - Part 4-5: Uncertainties, statistics and limit modelling - Conditions for the use of alternative test methods

## Amendment 2 - Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and methods - Part 4-5: Uncertainties, statistics and limit modelling - Conditions for the use of alternative test methods

### General Information

### Relations

### Buy Standard

### Standards Content (Sample)

CISPR TR 16-4-5

®

Edition 1.0 2021-10

TECHNICAL

REPORT

colour

inside

INTERNATIONAL SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON RADIO INTERFERENCE

AMENDMENT 2

Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and

methods –

Part 4-5: Uncertainties, statistics and limit modelling – Conditions for the use of

alternative test methods

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006-10/AMD2:2021-10(en)

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------

THIS PUBLICATION IS COPYRIGHT PROTECTED

Copyright © 2021 IEC, Geneva, Switzerland

All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form

or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from

either IEC or IEC's member National Committee in the country of the requester. If you have any questions about IEC

copyright or have an enquiry about obtaining additional rights to this publication, please contact the address below or

your local IEC member National Committee for further information.

IEC Central Office Tel.: +41 22 919 02 11

3, rue de Varembé info@iec.ch

CH-1211 Geneva 20 www.iec.ch

Switzerland

About the IEC

The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) is the leading global organization that prepares and publishes

International Standards for all electrical, electronic and related technologies.

About IEC publications

The technical content of IEC publications is kept under constant review by the IEC. Please make sure that you have the

latest edition, a corrigendum or an amendment might have been published.

IEC publications search - webstore.iec.ch/advsearchform IEC online collection - oc.iec.ch

The advanced search enables to find IEC publications by a Discover our powerful search engine and read freely all the

variety of criteria (reference number, text, technical publications previews. With a subscription you will always

committee, …). It also gives information on projects, replaced have access to up to date content tailored to your needs.

and withdrawn publications.

Electropedia - www.electropedia.org

IEC Just Published - webstore.iec.ch/justpublished

The world's leading online dictionary on electrotechnology,

Stay up to date on all new IEC publications. Just Published

containing more than 22 000 terminological entries in English

details all new publications released. Available online and

and French, with equivalent terms in 18 additional languages.

once a month by email.

Also known as the International Electrotechnical Vocabulary

(IEV) online.

IEC Customer Service Centre - webstore.iec.ch/csc

If you wish to give us your feedback on this publication or

need further assistance, please contact the Customer Service

Centre: sales@iec.ch.

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5

®

Edition 1.0 2021-10

TECHNICAL

REPORT

colour

inside

INTERNATIONAL SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON RADIO INTERFERENCE

AMENDMENT 2

Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and

methods –

Part 4-5: Uncertainties, statistics and limit modelling – Conditions for the use of

alternative test methods

INTERNATIONAL

ELECTROTECHNICAL

COMMISSION

ICS 33.100.10; 33.100.20 ISBN 978-2-8322-9844-2

Warning! Make sure that you obtained this publication from an authorized distributor.

® Registered trademark of the International Electrotechnical Commission

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------

– 2 – CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

IEC 2021

FOREWORD

This amendment has been prepared by subcommittee CISPR A: Radio-interference measure-

ments and statistical methods, of IEC technical committee CISPR: International special com-

mittee on radio interference.

The text of this amendment is based on the following documents:

DTR Report on voting

CIS/A/1321/DTR CIS/A/1324/RVDTR

Full information on the voting for the approval of this amendment can be found in the report on

voting indicated in the above table.

The committee has decided that the contents of this amendment and the base publication will

remain unchanged until the stability date indicated on the IEC website under "http://web-

store.iec.ch" in the data related to the specific publication. At this date, the publication will be

• reconfirmed,

• withdrawn,

• replaced by a revised edition, or

• amended.

IMPORTANT – The 'colour inside' logo on the cover page of this publication indicates

that it contains colours which are considered to be useful for the correct understanding

of its contents. Users should therefore print this document using a colour printer.

_____________

1 Scope

Add, in the second sentence, the following new text “and total radiated power” to the

parentheses to read: “i.e. field strength and total radiated power”.

2 Normative references

Add the following new reference to the existing list:

CISPR 16-1-1:2019, Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and

methods – Part 1-1: Radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus – Measuring appa-

ratus

Delete the existing reference to CISPR 16-4-1, modified by Amendment 1.

Replace the existing reference to CISPR 16-4-2:2003 with the following:

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021 – 3 –

IEC 2021

CISPR 16-4-2:2011, Specification for radio disturbance and immunity measuring apparatus and

methods – Part 4-2: Uncertainties, statistics and limit modelling – Measurement instrumentation

uncertainty

CISPR 16-4-2:2011/AMD1:2014

CISPR 16-4-2:2011/AMD2:2018

3 Terms and definitions

3.8

intrinsic uncertainty of the measurand

Replace the existing source, modified by Amendment 1, with the following: “[CISPR 16-4-

1:2009, 3.1.6, modified – Deletion of notes]”

Add, after the existing definition 3.10, added by Amendment 1, the following new term and

definition as follows:

3.11

EUT volume

cylinder defined by EUT boundary diameter and height that fully encompasses all portions of

the actual EUT, including cable racks and 1,6 m of cable length (for 30 MHz to 1 GHz), or 0,3 m

of cable length (for 1 GHz and above)

NOTE 1 The test volume is one of several criteria limiting the EUT volume.

NOTE 2 The EUT volume has a diameter D (boundary diameter) and a height h.

4 Symbols and abbreviated terms

Add, to the existing introductory statement, the following new sentence as follows:

The following abbreviations are used in this technical report. Note that the symbol k is used for

four different quantities.

Add the following new lines to the existing list modified by Amendment 1:

FAR fully anechoic room

RC reverberation chamber

SCU standards compliance uncertainty

Replace the two existing lines K and k with the following:

k = 2π/λ, wave number (in this document, k is used in the electrical size ka, where a is the

EUT radius)

k(f) linear conversion factor

K(f) logarithmic conversion factor

k coverage factor

k Boltzmann’s constant

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------

– 4 – CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

IEC 2021

5 Introduction

Replace the existing text with the following new text:

Over the years, several test methods and test set-ups for radiated disturbance measurement

have been described in basic standards. One particular combination of test method and test

set-up also having defined disturbance limits is the open area test site (OATS) method, which

has proven to be successful for the protection of radio services. Since the first edition of this

document, limits have been defined for other – alternative – test methods, e.g., fully anechoic

rooms and TEM waveguides, but not for reverberation chambers.

Each alternative method can be used to get measurement results related to disturbance from

an EUT. Although each method gives a disturbance level from an EUT, the different methods

might capture the EUT disturbance differently. For example, considering radiated disturbance

measurements, different methods may capture different EUT radiation pattern lobes, a different

number of lobes, or the test facility might alter the EUT radiation pattern producing a different

apparent disturbance level. Therefore the limits defined for the established test method cannot

be applied directly to the alternative test methods. Consequently, procedures are needed to

derive limits to be used for the results of alternative test methods.

The specification of such procedures considers the general goal of disturbance measurements,

which is to verify whether an EUT satisfies or violates certain compliance criteria. Past experi-

ence has shown that using the present system of established test methods and associated limits

yields a situation without many cases of interference due to conducted disturbance or radiated

disturbance. Applying an established test method with its associated limits will fulfill the protec-

tion requirement with a high probability. To preserve this situation, the most important require-

ment for the use of alternative test methods is the following:

– Use of an alternative test method in a normative standard shall provide the same protection

of radio services as the established test method.

This requirement can be met by developing procedures to derive disturbance limits for alterna-

tive test methods from the existing limits of the established test methods. Such procedures shall

relate the results from an alternative test method to those from an established test method.

Using the relations derived in this document, the limits of the relevant established test method

can be converted into limits for the alternative test method. The measured values of the alter-

native test method can then easily be evaluated against the converted limits. Such procedures

will provide a similar amount of protection, even though an alternative test method is used.

The limit conversion procedures consider the preceding goal of disturbance measurements.

The results of standard disturbance measurements can be considered as an approximation of

the interference potential of an EUT. Depending on the characteristics of an EUT (e.g., radiation

pattern characteristics for radiated disturbance test methods), and the test set-up, the measured

value deviates from the actual interference potential of the EUT. This deviation can be divided

into two parts: 1) a systematic deviation, which can be interpreted as a bias of the test method;

and 2) a random deviation depending on the characteristics of different EUTs, which can be

interpreted as an uncertainty of the test method. Each disturbance test method contains both

quantities, and consequently the established test method does too. In the following clauses, a

procedure based on these two quantities for comparing an alternative test method with the

established test method is described. To determine these quantities, the abstract term “inter-

ference potential” shall be expressed in terms of a physical quantity. For the purposes of this

document, this physical quantity is called the “reference quantity” X. Other details about com-

1

parison of test methods using a reference quantity can be found in [1] .

__________

1

Figures in square brackets refer to the Bibliography.

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021 – 5 –

IEC 2021

The significance of a reference quantity is under discussion (see Magdowski [16]). It is not used

in the derivation of limits for an alternative test method based on measurements (see Clause 7

of CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD1:2014), and in the derivation of limits for disturbance measure-

ments using a reverberation chamber (i.e. in this document).

Figure 1 – Overview of quantities to estimate for use in conversion procedure

Replace the existing figure with the following:

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------

– 6 – CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

IEC 2021

Figure 2 – Overview of limit conversion procedure using estimated quantities

Replace the existing figure with the following:

Table 2 ‒ Overview of quantities and defining equations for conversion process

Add, at the bottom of the existing table, modified by Amendment 1, the following new rows:

E Maximum field strength of an EUT in µV/m measured using the ETM, (35)

max

i.e. at d = 10 m at an OATS/SAC from 80 MHz to 1 000 MHz,

and at d = 3 m at a FSOATS/FAR from 1 GHz to 18 GHz

P Power transmitted from an EUT in pW measured using the reverberation chamber (35)

T

a)

test method (ATM), and virtual power producing the field-strength maximum E

max

measured using the ETM

a)

The virtual power is the power generating E assuming the EUT directivity is estimated in this document.

max

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021 – 7 –

IEC 2021

Add, after the existing Clause 7, modified by Amendment 1, the following new Clause 8:

8 Derivation of limits for the use of reverberation chambers as ATM for

radiated disturbance measurements based on a statistical analysis of all

essential factors

8.1 Conversion factor

Measurement of radiated power from an EUT using the RC method is described in

IEC 61000-4-21 [22]. This clause attempts to provide rules to derive disturbance limits for the

radiated power measured using the RC test method based on existing limits for radiated field

strength measured using the ETM. Radiated field strength and radiated power of an EUT are

related via the EUT directivity, and EUT directivity depends on frequency and EUT volume.

Because the type of an EUT and its directivity are typically unknown for generic and product

standards, this clause uses a statistical estimate based on assumptions described by Krauthäu-

ser [19]. For comparison and easier understanding, the conversion factors using a short dipole

as a model are described in D.2.

With reference to Annex D, conversion factors

– from OATS/SAC to RC for 80 MHz to 1 000 MHz, and

– from FSOATS/FAR to RC for 1 GHz to 40 GHz.

are introduced.

NOTE The start frequency of 80 MHz is selected because IEC 61000-4-21:2011, Table B.2 [22] on field uniformity

requirements starts at 80 MHz. Because there are RCs with lower or higher lowest useable frequencies (LUFs),

80 MHz can be replaced by “LUF.” The highest frequency of 40 GHz is selected because that is under consideration

to be the highest frequency for all CISPR documents pending agreement by NCs.

The linear conversion factor k(f) is defined as in Equation (35)

2

kf( )= E P (35)

max T

where

E is the maximum field strength of an EUT in µV/m measured using the ETM;

max

P is the power transmitted from an EUT in pW measured using the RC test method.

T

2 2 2

The unit of k(f) is V /m W or Ω/m . To convert into logarithmic quantities, Equation (35) can be

written as Equation (36):

2

lgP lgE− lgkf , or

( )

T max

(36)

10lgP 20lgE−10lgkf

( )

T max

The logarithmic conversion factor K(f) is defined as in Equation (37):

K f = 10lgkf

( ) ( ) (37)

=

=

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------

– 8 – CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

IEC 2021

The logarithmic conversion factor can be used to convert radiated disturbance limits L in

ETM

dB(µV/m) into limits of the disturbance power L in dB(pW) measured in an RC as shown in

ATM

Equation (38) (see also Equation (15) in 6.10).

L dB pW L dB μV/m− Kf

( ) ( ) ( ) (38)

ATM ETM

2

The logarithmic conversion factor K(f) has the unit dB(Ω/m ).

8.2 Measurement uncertainty

Equation (7) and Equation (9) of 6.7 provide the combined standard uncertainties of ATM and

ETM results with contributions designated in subscripts as: “m” for the instrumentation uncer-

tainty, “intrinsic” for the intrinsic uncertainty of the measurand, and “inherent” for the inherent

uncertainty of the method.

22 2

u=uu++ u

XTM XTM,m XTM,intrinsic XTM,inherent

where X in the subscript terms denotes either E or A (i.e. ETM or ATM).

For the effect of the measurement uncertainties of ETM and ATM on the disturbance limit, the

expanded uncertainties are compared (see Equation (16) in 6.10). The expanded uncertainty

of the conversion factor in Annex D (2σ in Table D.2, Table D.3,Table D.4,Table D.6, Table D.7

and Table D.8) takes into account the inherent uncertainties of the ETM (U ) and ATM

inherent,ETM

(U ). The inherent uncertainty is an indicator of the ability of a measurement proce-

inherent,ATM

dure to account for differences in EUT characteristics. A three-dimensional (3D) spatial scan

would provide the lowest uncertainty for capturing the maximum field strength radiated by an

EUT, but none of the ETMs are ideal in that respect. However, the RC ATM does capture the

radiated power of an EUT across all directions. Consequently, the inherent uncertainty of the

RC ATM is zero whereas the inherent uncertainties of the ETMs are non-zero.

In addition to the uncertainty of the conversion factor, the actual EUT size can deviate from the

EUT size assumed for the conversion factor calculation in Annex D, which justifies a contribution

U .

EUT

As can be seen from Table H.1 of CISPR TR 16-4-1:2009, the SCU U of the ETM

ETM,SC

(OATS/SAC with d = 10 m) is on the order of 10 dB, whereas U is around 5 dB according

XTM,m

to CISPR 16-4-2. Thus,

22

UU + U

ETM,SC ETM,intrinsic ETM,m

and consequently

22

U UU−= 8,7 dB

ETM,intrinsic ETM,SC ETM,m

This means that the intrinsic uncertainty of the ETM is much larger than the uncertainty of the

conversion factor K, so Equation (28) of 7.2.3 does not apply for Annex D. The intrinsic uncer-

tainty is largely dependent on cable layout and cable termination, which is an important topic

for the reproducibility of measurement set-ups. By future standardization of cable layout and

cable termination, intrinsic uncertainty and standards compliance uncertainty can be minimized.

=

=

=

---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021 – 9 –

IEC 2021

At present values of SCU (and intrinsic uncertainty) are not available for the ETM above 1 GHz,

as well as for the RC ATM below and above 1 GHz. This does not mean that the RC method

should be precluded for radiated disturbance measurements usage; there is no reason to as-

sume that the SCU of the RC method results will be larger than the SCU of the ETM results.

Product committees should provide appropriate investigations and measurements for establish-

ing the SCU.

In addition to any deviation from the EUT size for the conversion factor, the EUT type can be

different from that assumed for the conversion; e.g. with different cable arrangement and cable

termination. This means that Equation (32), Equation (33), and Equation (34) of 7.2.3 also apply

for the use of an RC disturbance measurement method as an ATM.

Details on instrumentation contributions to uncertainty for RC disturbance measurement results

is given in D.4.

B.1.1.5 Estimate the standard uncertainties of the test methods (see 6.6)

Replace the existing first paragraph with the following new paragraph:

Instrumentation uncertainty: At the time of drafting of this Annex, for the alternative test

method (3 m FAR), the instrumentation uncertainty had not yet been given in CISPR standards.

For the antenna and site contributions, numeric values from the final technical report of the EU

FAR project have been used [4]. The other numeric values were taken from CISPR 16-4-2:2003

[24], because these were expected to be the same for OATS and FAR. These instrumentation

measurement uncertainties are given in Table B.1. For the established test method, the meas-

urement instrumentation uncertainty is as shown in the basic standard CISPR 16-4-2:2011.

B.2.1.5 Estimate the standard uncertainties of the test methods (see 6.6)

Replace, in the first paragraph, "CISPR 16-4-2:2003" with " CISPR 16-4-2:2011".

B.2.1.8 Verify the calculated values (see 6.9)

Replace, in the last paragraph, "CISPR 16-4-2:2002" with " CISPR 16-4-2:2011".

---------------------- Page: 11 ----------------------

– 10 – CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

IEC 2021

Add, at the end of the existing Annex C, added by Amendment 1, the following new Annex D:

Annex D

(informative)

Statistical method for conversion of disturbance limits from radiated

disturbance established test methods to the RC test method

D.1 General

Radiated disturbance established test methods (ETMs) measure field strength at a specified

distance from an EUT, whereas the RC test method (alternative test method, ATM) measures

the radiated power from an EUT. Because the EUT directivity varies from type to type, statistical

techniques are used to derive conversion factors from ETM results to ATM results. With in-

creasing electrical size of an EUT, the complexity of an EUT’s radiation pattern increases

(see Wilson [17]).

Wilson [17] explains how the electrical size of an EUT is established by the quantity ka, where

k = 2π/λ is the wave number, and a is the radius of the minimum sphere that encloses the EUT.

The preceding concept applies for this entire annex. An EUT is considered electrically large, if

ka > 1, and it is electrically small, if ka ≤ 1. Figure D.1 shows an example radiation pattern for

a simulated electrically-large emitter. Table D.1 provides the EUT dimensions for the transition

from electrically small to electrically large as a function of frequency.

Wilson [17] also provides a statistical estimate of 3 dB for the probability of finding the maximum

radiation between a planar-cut scan (e.g. an EUT rotation without an antenna height scan) and

a full-sphere scan valid for very large EUTs. Thus, the planar-cut scan is regarded as a reduced

sampling procedure for finding the maximum field strength of an EUT. This also means that the

radiation limit for a full-sphere scan of a large EUT can be reduced by a conservative amount

of 3 dB if the full-sphere scan is replaced by a planar-cut scan.

NOTE The Y-plane and Z-plane patterns have similar characteristics, but normally only a single lobe in one plane

reaches the maximum (i.e. amplitude of 25 in this example).

Figure D.1 – Simulated radiation pattern of an electrically large emitter

(50 cm radius, ka = 10,5 at 1 GHz) in a single plane (X-plane) (Wilson [17])

---------------------- Page: 12 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021 – 11 –

IEC 2021

Table D.1 – Overview of EUT diameters (= 2a) at the transition

from electrically small to electrically large (from [17])

Frequency k ka radius a diameter

MHz 1/m cm cm

30 0,6 1,0 159,2 318,3

100 2,1 1,0 47,8 95,5

200 4,2 1,0 23,9 47,7

500 10,5 1,0 9,6 19,1

1 000 20,9 1,0 4,8 9,6

2 000 41,9 1,0 2,4 4,8

5 000 104,7 1,0 0,9 1,9

10 000 209,4 1,0 0,5 1,0

20 000 418,9 1,0 0,2 0,5

40 000 837,8 1,0 0,1 0,2

D.2 Models for EUT directivity

For a starting point Annex H of IEC 61000-4-20:20— [18] uses a Hertzian, i.e. short, dipole

(D = 3/2, and D is directivity) as a model for an EUT. For the Hertzian dipole in free space

max

(at an FSOATS/FAR) the linear conversion factor k can be calculated using Equation (D.1):

3 η

2

0

E = P

max T

2

2

4πd

2

E 3 η

max 0

k (D.1)

2

P 2

4πd

T

where

η is the free space wave impedance (approximately 120π Ω);

0

d is the measurement distance.

2 2

For d = 3 m, k = 5 V /(m W).

For a Hertzian dipole in half space (at an OATS/SAC) a geometry factor g is included, taking

max

into account the reflection from the ground plane, per Equation (D.2):

3 η

22

0

E = gP

max max T

2

2

4πd

2

E η

3

max 0 2

kg (D.2)

max

2

P 2

4πd

T

2 2

For d = 10 m and g ≈ 2, k = 1,8 V /(m W).

max

==

==

---------------------- Page: 13 ----------------------

– 12 – CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

IEC 2021

For the Hertzian dipole model, the conversion factor is independent of frequency. Using Equa-

tion (36) (see 8.1) the logarithmic conversion factor is K = 2,6 dB for the OATS/SAC to RC

conversion in the frequency range 80 MHz to 1 000 MHz, and K = 7,0 dB for the FSOATS/FAR

to RC conversion in the frequency range 1 GHz to 40 GHz. These conversion factors are useful

for comparison with the values in D.3.

As frequency increases, the directivity increases. Krauthäuser [19] shows and compares differ-

ent expressions; see Figure D.2. For modelling the directivity of unintentional radiators,

Krauthäuser [19] applies two different simulations: 1) the spherical wave expansion, and 2) the

Monte-Carlo method of isotropic point sources. Reference [19] establishes a link between the

two methods − the two models are statistically equivalent for certain values of ka. A relationship

for the number of sources as a function of ka necessary to achieve equivalent distribution func-

tions is given. The number of angle steps to calculate the directivities of large EUTs is also

described.

NOTE The two lines for “Huygen’s Source” and “Short Dipole” are defined for ka = 0,1π only, and therefore are only

visible in the lower left corner.

Figure D.2 ‒ Comparison of different expressions for maximum directivity

of antennas and unintentional emitters as a function of electrical

size ka. µ is the polarization mismatch factor

D.3 Results of modelling

Krauthäuser [19] provides conversion factors as a function of frequency and EUT size from

OATS/SAC to RC, as shown in Figure D.3.

Conversion factors k(f) of Table D.2, Table D.3 and Table D.4 are taken from the ‘mean’ curves.

To convert field-strength limits to limits of the transmitted power, values in dB are more practical

[K(f) = 10lgk(f)]. Consequently, P = E – K(f) [see Equation (15) in 6.10, and Equation (35)

limit limit

and Equation (38) in 8.1]. If conversion factors for other EUT radii are to be determined, inter-

polation should be done between the mean-value curves of Figure D.3.

---------------------- Page: 14 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021 – 13 –

IEC 2021

Table D.5 shows an example of limits for E and P for a = 0,75 m for the residential environment.

The values for the standard deviations σ in the tables are obtained by dividing the difference

between the mean and the quantile values of K(f) by 1,645, assuming a normal distribution (the

factor applies for 5 %, 95 %); e.g. σ = (K(230) − K(230) )/1,645 = 1,34 dB for a = 0,75 m

95 % mean

at 230 MHz. The variable σ is the standard uncertainty of the conversion factor. In the diagrams

of [19], σ increases when k(f) approaches 0.

NOTE Data for a = 0,1 m, 0,75 m and 2,5 m directivities (instead of 100 as in [19]) were provided by Dr. Magdowski

using Krauthäuser’s material.

Figure D.3 – Conversion factors (mean and quantile values) from OATS/SAC

(measurement distance of 10 m) results to RC results and different radii a

of the surrounding sphere as a function of frequency

Table D.2 – Conversion factors (mean, quantile values,

and standard deviation σ) for a = 0,1 m

f

80 230 1 000

MHz

Quantile k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f)

σ σ σ

2 2 2 2 2 2

Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m )

dB dB dB

95 % 2,81 4,49 2,71 4,31 6,34 2,23 5,78 7,62 1,55

Mean 1,05 0,21 1,82 2,60 3,23 5,09

5 % 0,158 −8,0 4,89 0,532 −2,74 3,29 1,47 1,67 2,07

---------------------- Page: 15 ----------------------

– 14 – CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021

IEC 2021

Table D.3 – Conversion factors (mean, quantile values,

and standard deviation σ) for a = 0,75 m

f

80 230 1 000

MHz

Quantile k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f)

σ σ σ

2 2 2 2 2 2

Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m )

dB dB dB

95 % 4,31 6,34 2,1 5,86 7,68 1,34 8,93 9,51 1,03

Mean 1,88 2,74 3,57 5,53 6,12 7,87

5 % 0,62 −2,1 3,03 1,87 2,72 1,67 3,64 5,61 1,34

Table D.4 – Conversion factors (mean, quantile values,

and standard deviation σ) for a = 2,5 m

f

80 230 1 000

MHz

Quantile k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f)

σ σ σ

2 2 2 2 2 2

Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m )

dB dB dB

95 % 5,84 7,66 1,92 8,39 9,23 1,24 11,43 10,58 1,3

mean 2,82 4,50 5,18 7,14 8,22 9,15

5 % 1,10 0,41 2,48 3,0 4,77 1,47 5,00 6,99 0,88

Table D.5 – Example of disturbance limits for a = 0,75 m

(EUT diameter 1,5 m) for the residential environment

f

80 230 230 1 000

MHz

E

limit

30 30 37 37

dB(µV/m)

K(f)

2,74 5,53 5,53 7,87

2

dB(Ω/m )

P

limit

27 24 31 29

dB(pW)

P

limit

−63 −66 −59 −61

dBm

Above 1 GHz, the ETM is measurement at an FSOATS/FAR with d = 3 m. Figure D.4 shows the

results of modelling.

The conversion factors of Table D.6, Table D.7, and Table D.8 for frequencies of 1 GHz, 3 GHz,

and 6 GHz are taken from the mean values in Figure D.4 with a = 0,75 m.

Table D.9 shows an example of limits for E and P for a = 0,75 m for the residential environment.

---------------------- Page: 16 ----------------------

CISPR TR 16-4-5:2006/AMD2:2021 – 15 –

IEC 2021

NOTE Data for a = 0,75 m and 2,5 m, and 1 000 directivities (instead of 100 as in [19]) were provided by Dr.

Magdowski using Krauthäuser’s material.

Figure D.4 – Conversion factors (mean and quantile values) from FSOATS/FAR

(d = 3 m measurement distance) results to RC results and different radii a

of the surrounding sphere as a function of frequency

Table D.6 – Conversion factors (mean, quantile values,

and standard deviation σ) for a = 0,1 m

f

1 3 6

GHz

Quantile k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f) k(f) K(f)

σ σ σ

2 2 2 2 2 2

Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m ) Ω/m dB(Ω/m )

dB dB dB

95 % 14,80 11,70 1,59 18,54 12,68 1,43 20,02 13,01 1,28

mean 7,97 9,01 10,70 10,29 12,8 11,07

5 % 3,22 5,08 2,43 5,29 7,23 1,88 6,74 8,29 1,59

Table D.7 – Conversion factors (mean, quantile values,

and standard deviation σ) for a = 0,75 m

f

1 3 6

GHz

Quantile k(f

**...**

## Questions, Comments and Discussion

## Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.