www.rfglobalnet.com Open in urlscan Pro
20.185.12.70  Public Scan

Form analysis
2 forms found in the DOM

GET /search

<form method="get" class="form-inline nav-search pr-0" action="/search">
  <input class="form-control-sm" name="keyword" type="search" maxlength="250" placeholder="Search" aria-label="Search">
  <button type="submit" class="btn-sm btn-dark">
    <i class="fas fa-search fa-sm"></i>
  </button>
</form>

<form class="form-horizontal">
  <div class="form-group row">
    <label class="col-form-label col-form-label-sm text-sm-right col-sm-4 font-weight-bold" for="companyName">Company Name</label>
    <div class="col-sm-8">
      <input class="form-control-plaintext form-control-sm" id="companyName" name="companyName" readonly="readonly" type="text" value="A.H. Systems">
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class="form-group row">
    <label class="col-form-label col-form-label-sm text-sm-right col-sm-4 font-weight-bold" for="address">Address</label>
    <div class="col-sm-8">
      <textarea class="form-control-plaintext form-control-sm" id="address" name="address" readonly="readonly" rows="3" style="height: 100%;max-height: 80px;">9710 Cozycroft Ave.
Chatsworth, CA 91311
US</textarea>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class="form-group row">
    <label class="col-form-label col-form-label-sm text-sm-right col-sm-4 font-weight-bold" for="phone">Phone</label>
    <div class="col-sm-8">
      <input class="form-control-plaintext form-control-sm" id="phone" name="phone" readonly="readonly" type="text" value="818-998-0223">
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class="form-group row">
    <label class="col-form-label col-form-label-sm text-sm-right col-sm-4 font-weight-bold" for="contact">Contact</label>
    <div class="col-sm-8">
      <input class="form-control-plaintext form-control-sm" id="contact" name="contact" readonly="readonly" type="text">
    </div>
  </div>
  <div class="form-group row">
    <label class="col-form-label col-form-label-sm text-sm-right col-sm-4 font-weight-bold" for="links"></label>
    <div class="col-sm-8">
      <a href="/ecommcenter/ahsystems">Company Profile</a><br>
      <a href="/lead/new?itemId=466613">Email Us</a>
    </div>
  </div>
</form>

Text Content

Get more RF Globalnet insight with our FREE newsletter. sign me up

Log In or Subscribe
Products
RF Amplifiers
Broadband Amplifiers Gain Block Amplifiers High Power Amplifiers Log Amplifiers
Low Noise Amplifiers Millimeter-Wave Amplifiers MMIC Amplifiers Solid State
Amplifiers Variable Gain Amplifiers
Passive Components
Attenuators Capacitors/Resistors Circulators/Isolators Couplers Diodes
Diplexers/Duplexers Filters Inductors/Limiters Power Dividers/Combiners Switches
Active Components
Mixers/Modulators Multipliers Oscillators Phase Shifters Transistors
Test and Measurement
Analyzers Current Probes Generators/Sources Matrix Switches Meters Probes
Sensors Synthesizers Tuners
Semiconductors/ICs
Diodes MMICs Thick and Thin Film Front-End Modules
Cables/Connectors
Adapters Cables Connectors
Systems/Subsystems
Receivers/Transmitters Transceivers
Optoelectronics & Fiber Optics
Materials/Packaging
Absorbers Ceramics Crystals Laminates
Antennas
Antenna Kits Biconical Antennas Omni-Directional H-Field Rods Horn
Monopole/Dipole
Software
3D Modeling Antenna Design/Analysis EM Simulation
Markets
5G Internet of Things (IoT) Military & Defense Medical RF Test And Measurement
Satellite Automotive
News and Community
Latest Headlines Industry Events Career Development LinkedIn Twitter
Suppliers
A.H. Systems Analog Devices AR AR Modular RF Communications and Power Industries
(CPI), BMD dB Control Corp. JFW Industries Knowles Precision Devices DLI KRYTAR
Mercury Systems, Inc. Qorvo Remcom Rohde & Schwarz Skyworks Solutions, Inc.
Wireless Telecom Group
IMS2022


ARTICLE | JANUARY 19, 2022




SELECTING ANTENNA/POWER AMPLIFIER COMBINATIONS

Source: A.H. Systems

By Art Cohen & Thomas Mullineaux, A.H. Systems

TESTING PRODUCTS FOR SUSCEPTIBILITY to radiated fields above 1 GHz is on the
horizon. The new medical standard now stipulates testing to 2.5 GHz, and this
upper frequency may be adopted in the coming standard for fire detection
products. Though far from certain, it looks as if 6 GHz is a strong candidate
for the upper frequency for consumer products. When test facilities test
products for compliance to these new RF immunity standards, which
antenna/amplifier combination will prove the most effective at producing the
necessary volts per meter over the new band? What is the cost-benefit trade-off?
This article presents practical combinations using existing technology and
highlights the inevitable trade-offs faced during the selection process.

Antennas and power amplifiers of various frequency bands and power capabilities
are readily available within the EMC marketplace. Ideally, you would simply
select an antenna covering 1 GHz to 6 GHz, combine it with a power amplifier
covering 1 GHz to 6 GHz, and ‘hey presto’, you have the solution. Life, as we
all know, is never that simple. Antennas covering this frequency band (and
wider) that can handle the necessary input power are indeed available from many
excellent manufacturers. In fact, antennas covering 25 MHz to 7 GHz exist,
possibly allowing coverage of the old and new frequency in an uninterrupted
sweep. Unfortunately, a power amplifier covering 1 GHz to 6 GHz and capable of
delivering the necessary power level does not exist. The band will need to be
covered by at least two amplifiers so that a switch is required to connect the
antenna to the appropriate amplifier during the immunity test. Or, if
preferable, two amplifiers and two antennas could be used. Clearly, the scene is
set for the evaluation of a selection of mix-and-match permutations.

FIRST CONSIDERATIONS
RF immunity testing is done under the control of an automatic test system (ATE).
A button is pressed, and the product is subjected to a specific RF field
strength (say 10 volts per meter) for a fixed dwell time and over a series of
predetermined spot frequencies. The ATE software program steps the system
through the frequencies, and the product is monitored for susceptibility to the
applied RF field. Figure 1 shows the antenna/amplifier combination used to
generate the necessary RF field. Also shown at a fixed distance from the antenna
is the imaginary measurement plane. The field strength is measured at points
across a section of this plane as part of the system calibration.



The selection of suitable antenna/amplifier combinations is part of the ATE
design process.
The steps in this process are:

 1. Establish what is required of this part of the ATE system
 2. Identify possible solutions
 3. Assess and compare the solutions
 4. Select the best solution

Any impact on the time taken to complete the testing of the product is
important, and the solution should represent good value in terms of performance,
reliability, and cost.

THE REQUIREMENTS
The fundamental requirement is that the antenna/amplifier combination generates
the necessary RF field strength over the specified frequency range. A field
strength of 10 V/m at a distance of 1 meter will be used in this example.
(The exercise can be repeated for different field strengths and distances as
required). Sufficient power margin must be built in to cover:

 * System losses
   These include dissipative (heat) loss in the cable feed to the antenna,
   dissipative loss in the antenna itself, and any power reflected back by the
   antenna. These losses affect the net power utilized by the antenna to
   generate the RF field.
    
 * Modulation of the RF signal
   The test signal is amplitude modulated at 1 kHz to a depth of 80%. This
   modulation results in signal peaks that require 3.3 times more power than the
   un-modulated signal. Also, waveform integrity must be maintained as flattened
   waveform peaks caused by amplifier compression could cast doubt on the
   validity of the test. In the frequency domain, flattened peaks will show up
   as harmonic noise. Note: the upcoming standard is likely to stipulate
   ‘modulation on’ at the calibration stage.
    
 * Field variation
   An allowance must be made for field variation at different points on the
   calibration measurement plane caused by the peculiarities of the chamber,
   e.g., inconsistent damping of reflected signals and the effect of locating
   the antenna in close proximity to the chamber walls. There is a size
   constraint on the antenna since it must fit within an allotted space in the
   chamber if the product is to be positioned at the prescribed distance from
   the antenna. Fortunately, at frequencies above 1 GHz, antenna dimensions are
   small compared to Sub-1-GHz broadband antennas so this should be a non-issue.


POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS—ANTENNAS
For the 1-GHz to 6-GHz frequency range, the main antenna options are microwave
horn and log periodic since they exhibit excellent performance over this band
and are physically small. The parameters of interest are input VSWR, radiation
pattern, power handling capability, and the input power required to generate 10
V/m at 1 meter. The required input power provides the most useful information in
terms of assessing suitability so this data will be utilized most frequently,
and the other data will be used to confirm the selection.



Figure 2 shows samples of each type of antenna. For this exercise, the microwave
horn (SAS-571) will be compared with log periodic antenna model (SAS-510-7). The
dimensions (L ´ W ´ H) of the microwave horn are 8.2 ´ 5.6 ´ 9.5 inches and the
dimensions (L ´ W) for the log periodic are 24.9 ´ 20.1 inches.

Table 1 and Table 2 show the power budget for each antenna. The figures in the
“Watts Required” column are actual measured data of the power required at the
antenna connector to generate 10 V/m at 1 meter. Parameters such as power
reflected back from the antenna and antenna dissipation are already factored in.
The cable loss is for nine feet cable length and uses manufacturers’ data
readily available on the Web.




Notice that cable loss increases with frequency. The “Peak Modulation Power” is
calculated by multiplying by 3.3 (adding 5.2 dB). The “Total Power Required”
adds 3 dB (doubles the power) to allow for field variation. The figures have
been rounded where appropriate. The microwave horn can handle 300 watts input
power, and the log periodic can handle 1000 watts so the power levels shown are
well within the capability of the antennas. The dimensions of both antenna types
are small so interaction with the chamber will be minimal.

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS— AMPLIFIERS
The amplifier options are solid-state (GaAsFET) and traveling wave tube (TWT).
Today, solid-state is the preferred technology up to 4 GHz, but it still has a
long way to go to beat the price/performance capability of highpower octave band
TWT amplifiers above 4 GHz. An octave represents a doubling of the frequency.
The 4-GHz to 6-GHz power modules in the dualband solid-state amplifiers referred
to in this exercise are half an octave.



Three amplifier frequency band permutations that cover or exceed the 1- to 6-GHz
requirement are shown in Figure 3. Option A and Option C are all solid-state.
Option B uses solid-state and TWT technologies.
      
The power budget tables show that the necessary linear power is 5.8 watts for
the microwave horn and 12.8 watts for the log periodic antenna. Linear power is
required to prevent distortion of the modulated waveform. For the purposes of
this exercise, Option A (all solid-state) will be combined with the microwave
horn and Option B (solid-state/ TWT) will be combined with the log periodic
antenna. Rules of thumb for linear versus saturated power require backing off 1
dB from saturated for GaAsFET amplifiers and 3 dB for TWT amplifiers. This
adjustment equates to 7.3-W saturated power for Option A and 16.2-W/25.6-W
saturated power for the Option B solid-state/TWTA combination.



Band-switching is needed irrespective of which option is decided upon. The next
section discusses how this is implemented.

BAND-SWITCHING
There are two basic approaches to switching the feed to the antenna. The first
is through an external band-switch box as shown in Figure 4. External cables are
used to connect the amplifiers to the band-switch box. With both relays in the
position shown (normal), Band 1 feeds the antenna. With both relays operated,
Band 2 feeds the antenna.

The second approach is for the amplifier manufacturer to put both amplifiers in
one chassis and switch the bands internally. A schematic of this method is shown
in Figure 5. The principle of operation is the same, but there are major space
and cost savings since many of the key components are shared. These include the
power supply, the cooling system, control circuits, and of course, the chassis
itself.

Sharing components is possible since only one amplifier is running at a time.
Therefore only one power supply is needed, and the cooling components need to
dissipate the heat from only one amplifier. Also, the internal RF cable runs can
be shorter (compared to externally run cables) resulting in reduced cable loss.
As the power budget tables indicate, cable loss can be significant, especially
at 6 GHz. Once the main chassis design of a dual-band product is complete, it is
relatively easy to substitute RF modules with different frequency bands and/or
power levels. Unfortunately, this shared component approach cannot be used with
solidstate/TWT combinations since the power supplies and cooling arrangements
are radically different.

The ATE software provides the switching signal at the appropriate place in the
test run. The time for the relays to switch is about one-tenth of a second so
the impact on the overall test time is negligible. In fact, for RF Immunity
applications, a single-band solution requiring no switching is a feature with
little benefit and can actually be detrimental to the harmonic noise performance
of the system. Cold-switching should be employed with both bandswitching
methods.
That is, the switching sequence should be:

 1. Remove the RF input signal
 2. Switch over the band
 3. Apply the RF input signal.

Alternatively, cold-switching circuits that disable the power supply during
relay switchover can be implemented easily with internally switched amplifiers.
This feature is included in the dual-band amplifiers described in this article.
RF relays suitable for band-switching are available on the open market with a
loss of less than 0.1 dB at 6 GHz so the insertion loss of the relays has not
been factored into the calculations here.

COPING WITH REFLECTED POWER
The system losses included in the power calculations reduce the amount of
reflected power the amplifier has to handle. The factors reducing the reflected
power seen by the amplifier are:

 1. The power leaving the amplifier is attenuated by the cable loss in the
    forward direction and is attenuated again in the reverse direction. At 1
    GHz, these losses represent at least 2 dB total path loss in the cable
    alone. At 6 GHz, the return path loss is 5 dB.
     
 2. The antenna does not transmit a pencil beam (unlike a laser). Instead, the
    beam spreads and bathes the measurement plane calibration area and its
    surroundings. Even with the device under test in place, the absorptive tiles
    on the walls of the chamber absorb much of the forward power; and because of
    the angle of reflection, much of the reflected power from the device under
    test as well. Even in the worst case of high reflection from the device
    under test, only a small part of the forward power is returned via the
    antenna.

The TWTA is operating in a backed-off condition and is delivering a fraction of
its forward power capability. This condition, together with the system losses
described above, means that the ratio of reflected power to forward power
capability is small. Also, GaAsFET amplifiers use an internal power combining
method that safely deflects reflected power away from the output transistors.
Collectively, these factors indicate that reflected power via the antenna is not
a crucial issue.

SUITABLE AMPLIFIER MODELS
The Option A power requirement can be met by a dualband internally switched 0.8-
to 6.0-GHz power amplifier such as the BBS3Q9ACD. This contains a 0.8- to
4.2-GHz 15 watt amplifier and a 4.0- to 6.0-GHz 10-watt amplifier providing 12
watts and 8 watts of linear power, respectively. Model BBS3Q9ACD is shown in
Figure 2(a).

The Option B power requirement can be met with models BBS3Q7EEL a 0.8- to
4.2-GHz 25 W GaAsFET amplifier, and model TWTA-7A8GFE, a 4.0- to 8.0-GHz 30 watt
TWT amplifier. These provide 20 watts and 15 watts (over 4.2 to 6.0 GHz) of
linear power, respectively. TWTA amplifiers produce significantly more power
away from the band edges so 15 watts of linear power is conservative at 6.0 GHz.
External band switching using a band-switch box is suitable for this option.
Model TWTA-7A8GFE is shown in Figure 2(b).

So far, both antenna/amplifier combinations appear well suited for generating
the necessary field strength for the upcoming standard, with Option A seemingly
providing the best value. However, there is a major consideration that needs to
be factored into the selection criteria—integration with the existing test
setup.

INTEGRATION WITH THE EXISTING TEST SETUP
If the sub-1-GHz test procedure and the above-1-GHz test procedure are performed
as separate events, then it is merely a matter of manually replacing one test
set-up with the other. Under these circumstances, the microwave horn
antenna/dual-band amplifier combination is a good match. If the intention is to
integrate the two tests and, if possible, share test components, then other
solutions need to be considered.
These include:

 * Using a single antenna for the entire frequency sweep.
 * Mounting antennas side by side.
 * Manually substituting another antenna part way through the sweep, but
   capitalizing on the available antenna characteristics to optimize the system
   performance.

Note: converting the test chamber to make it suitable for above-1-GHz testing is
beyond the scope of this article.

SINGLE ANTENNA COVERING THE EXISTING AND NEW FREQUENCY BANDS
In 1994, the University of York and Chase EMC collaborated on a hybrid
biconical/log periodic antenna intended for use in broadband emissions testing.
The antenna exhibited poor performance below 100 MHz, but this problem was
corrected relatively inexpensively by boosting the signal from the antenna with
a low power amplifier. Also, the poor match into 50 ohms at low frequencies was
corrected by inserting an in-line attenuator. Never intended for RF immunity
testing, the antenna would need a very expensive high-power amplifier to
generate RF immunity fields below 100 MHz. As regards immunity testing, a
biconical antenna is far superior below 100 MHz needing only around 70 watts of
RF input power to produce 10 V/m at one meter. The hybrid antenna would need
around 900 watts to produce the same field.

More recent attempts to create a single antenna to monitor RF emissions below 80
MHz and up to several GHz are unwieldy in size (of the order of ten feet across
and six feet long) and have a poor match into 50 ohms at the lower band edge.
The size means there is a risk of interaction with the chamber and with the
device under test (except in the largest of chambers), and the poor match of up
to 10:1 VSWR below 80 MHz means high power is required to generate the required
field strengths. Using one of these antennas for field generation makes for an
expensive antenna/amplifier combination as compared to using a biconical antenna
covering 20 MHz to 300 MHz (Model SAS-543) followed by a log periodic antenna
covering 290 MHz to 7 GHz (Model SAS-510-7). Also, antennas designed for
frequencies above 1 GHz are comparatively small, and it would be a shame to lose
this valuable feature. Very large ultra-broadband antennas are intended for use
in open area test sites, and that is where they should stay.

MOUNTING ANTENNAS SIDE BY SIDE
Antennas covering different bands can be co-located without cross interference
occurring. Therefore, it is feasible to place a biconical antenna next to a log
periodic and to switch amplifiers to the antennas at the appropriate time during
the test sweep. Mounting the antennas and maneuvering them between vertical and
horizontal polarization could prove a challenge; but as long as each antenna
adequately illuminates the calibration plane, there is no fundamental reason
this approach cannot be used.



As with all the approaches mentioned in this article, the feed to the
high-frequency antenna should be as short as possible. Most amplifiers are
available with remote control and monitoring facilities, and there is no written
rule that the high-frequency amplifier cannot be mounted up close to the chamber
to minimize cable length. A schematic of the switching arrangement is shown in
Figure 6.

MANUAL SUBSTITUTION PART WAY THROUGH THE SWEEP
With this approach, the biconical antenna is used from 20 MHz to 300 MHz and is
then manually substituted for the log periodic to complete the rest of the test
from 300 MHz to 6 GHz. The 20- to 1000-MHz amplifier feeds both antennas up to
1000 MHz, and then the 1- to 6-GHz dualband amplifier feeds the log periodic
antenna up to 6 GHz. This method has the disadvantage of a break in the test
run. The break should be kept in context. Only one component is changed in the
test setup, and this adjustment takes a fraction of the time necessary to tear
down and to install a completely new test setup. The automatic switching of the
amplifiers to the antenna feed is retained.

A FURTHER RAMIFICATION OF THE NEW STANDARD
There is a high probability that the new standard will require modulation to be
applied during calibration. For the old test standard, many test houses were
sold antenna/amplifier combinations that included a 30-watt amplifier and a log
periodic antenna. A 30-watt amplifier will produce a guaranteed minimum linear
power of about 20 watts. At 80 MHz, log periodic antennas require about 5 watts
to produce 10 V/m at 1 meter. Multiply this power by the modulation factor of
3.3, then add the allowances for system losses and chamber peculiarities, and
the performance of this antenna/amplifier combination may prove to be marginal
at best for this field strength and distance. As shown, it does not take “rocket
science” to determine field strength and design within a sensible margin. It is
never wise to accept and to pay for goods blindly, and ‘one size fits all’ with
no guaranteed margin could be construed as a prime example of this folly.

CONCLUSION
The anticipated RF immunity standard brings challenges and opportunities.
Although somewhat dependent upon the existing test setup, there are many
approaches to upgrading a test facility in readiness for the new standard. This
article lists pragmatic guidelines allowing independent determination of how to
meet the new requirement. This independence may help test houses disregard
marketing ploys that try to convince buyers that there is only one viable
solution.








A.H. SYSTEMS

 * Request Info
 * Contact Details
 * Company Profile


CONTACT DETAILS


×
Company Name

Address
9710 Cozycroft Ave. Chatsworth, CA 91311 US
Phone

Contact

Company Profile
Email Us


MORE FROM A.H. SYSTEMS

 * BICONICAL ANTENNA SELECTION
   
   For many years most regulatory standards called for the use of a half-wave
   dipole antenna set for frequencies above 20 MHz. However, to reduce test
   time, broadband antennas such as the biconical...

 * SHIELDING EFFECTIVENESS ANTENNA KITS (TRANSMIT / RECEIVE) 1 KHZ - 18 GHZ
   
   These Shielding Effectivness Antenna Kits are a portable and economical
   approach to having all the antennas required for most shielding effectiveness
   testing. Below are the details of what is...

 * ANTENNA FACTOR CALCULATIONS AND DEVIATIONS
   
   In recent years, the use of a term called "Antenna Factor" in EMC and
   spectrum pollution work has become very important. There has been a great
   need for measuring field intensity and/or...

 * HORN ANTENNAS
   
   Broadband antennas, compared to half wave dipoles, reduce test time because
   the technician did not have to stop the test to adjust the dipole antenna for
   each frequency. Most compliance standards now...

 * EMI ANTENNA KIT -- 20 HZ - 40 GHZ
   
   Constantly changing for today's dynamic environment, A.H. Systems presents
   the proven line of Antenna Kits. Designed to meet the needs of your various
   testing requirements.

 * SAS-521F-4 BILOGICAL ANTENNA

 * SAS-571 DOUBLE RIDGE GUIDE HORN ANTENNA

 * STANDARD GAIN HORN ANTENNA 18 GHZ TO 26.5 GHZ:SAS-587

 * STANDARD GAIN HORN ANTENNA 2.60 GHZ TO 3.95 GHZ:SAS-582

 * STANDARD GAIN HORN ANTENNA 3.95 GHZ TO 5.85 GHZ:SAS-583

 * STANDARD GAIN HORN ANTENNA 5.85 GHZ TO 8.20 GHZ:SAS-584

 * STANDARD GAIN HORN ANTENNA 124 GHZ TO 180 GHZSAS-586

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.
Learn more
Got it!

EXLPORE RF GLOBALNET

 * From The Editor
 * Recent Newsletters
 * Latest Headlines

CONTACT US

 * Contact RF Globalnet

ADVERTISE WITH US

 * Request A Demo

WRITE FOR US

 * Guest Article Submission Guidelines

Copyright © 1996-2022 VertMarkets, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use.
Privacy Statement. Subscriber Request Form. Don't sell my information