Welcome back. Before we get started – two updates:-
3D EM Software Analysis of the Automotive Emissions Test Fixture
The tutorials in the handbooks are completed (there are quite a few because there is an entire suite of analysis tools). Also done are the ones that are downloaded with the software. With all tutorials, a lot of time is devoted to constructing the models to be analyzed. This makes sense since an accurate 3D EM analysis of a real-life component depends entirely on an accurate 3D model.
Attention has now moved to the more comprehensive tutorials on the software house’s website (you have to sign in with the license details).
It can be hard not to try running before you can walk. One of the booklet tutorials is on the analysis of a monopole. It crossed my mind that if you lay the monopole on its side, placed a conducting sheet below it, and terminated the far end in 120 ohms, then ‘hey presto’, you have the basis of the automotive emissions test arrangement. Probably better to be more familiar with the many tools available before going down that path. For instance, maybe creating the test set-up in the cable analysis tool, and then transferring it into the microwave tool is the best way to go.
By the way, I added a new task to the EM analysis list: – Establishing the change of attenuation when an RF wave strikes a pyramidal absorber at an acute angle.
It is all to do with a proposal that could improve the performance of 3m semi-anechoic chambers. An article titled ‘Applying Stealth Technology to EMC Test Chamber Designs’ will appear in the next Interference Technology publication (2014 EMC Europe Guide).
The pictures show the first efforts at defining and placing primitives and then using the knowledge gained to create a pyramidal absorber shape.
To be continued…….
UPDATE ON EMC-LIVE ROUNDTABLE EVENT
Theme: Elephants in the Test Room
Date: October 16
Time: 1:30 pm EST
Venue: Your computer
A prize-winning academic has joined the panel, and one of the expert panellists at the round table actually has access to a study that collected and compared test-house emission measurements on a ‘golden’ test piece.
I, armed with a jaundiced eye, am at odds with the entire premise of the study and see the ‘problem’ being addressed as systemic, even before operator competence is factored in. I think due to its longevity, and hence people growing up with it, many in the industry are in awe of the OATS set up. To my mind they worship a false idol.
And that’s just one of the topics – be sure to mark your calendar, be sure to register beforehand (http://emclive2014.com/elephants-test-room/), and when the big the day arrives, be sure to set the alarm on your cell phone. And then listen in on the fireworks!
The Annual IEEE EMC Show – Why Dresden?
So far we have covered the motives of those at the show to attend presentations and those at the show to sell (vendors).
We concluded that vendors are a sideshow, and that the survival of the symposium is down to the audience count, that is the number of registrants there to learn from papers and workshops.
Obviously the number of registrants that sign up to learn is directly proportional to the relevance and quality of the papers / workshops on offer.
So what entices a person to go to the trouble of composing and then delivering a paper / workshop?
The Presenters Tale
We start with papers. We will focus on workshops next time.
Presenters of Papers
For the purposes of this discussion, academic papers will not be a factor. In my view the main reason academic staff present papers is down to the ‘publish or die’ syndrome, and as such, content is rarely a compelling reason for prospective registrants to attend. There are exceptions, but they are few.
That pretty much leaves industry professionals as the technical-paper presentation candidates. So if we accept the main body of presenters is made up of industry professionals, what do they get out of it?
These include but are not limited to: –
· The travel and subsistence costs are covered by their employer
· To raise or maintain their profile in the industry
· Straightforward self promotion (consultants)
· Have stumbled on something big in their work (hands-on professionals)
· Have a gripe about a technical issue, and it is gnawing at them
· They are selling something
Most of these are self explanatory so I will expand on only a few.
Vendor staffs often get to witness life at ‘the coal face’, so on occasion they have something useful to contribute. Their flight and hotel are already paid for, so expense is not a barrier. As much as they would like to deliver marketing dressed as technical discourse, this won’t get through the paper acceptance filter. The paper has to have relevance and a good measure of technical content, so the only reward the company backing the endeavour can expect is their company name in the presenter’s title.
Papers are a great way to raise the profile of a newcomer to the industry, and one of the quickest ways to get to know key players in the industry.
One man companies such as consultancies know papers are an excellent way to promote their services
If something is seriously new in the industry and an innovative ‘mousetrap’, with the addition of a bit of gratuitous math, these have been known to get through the symposium filter process.
These include but are not limited to: –
· Travel and subsistence costs not covered by a sponsor
· Pressure at work
· Employer has not budgeted for staff excursions
· No experience at writing papers
· Not good at public speaking (jitters)
· Cannot guarantee will be available in 8 months time (too far ahead, fluid situations at work and at home)
Let me pose some questions: –
1. If you were on the symposium board, what recommendations on raising the relevance and quality of papers would you suggest?
2. Do any of your suggestions tie in with the strategy behind the European venue?
To be continued……
The 3D EM tutorials are digging into to the time available for blogging, so I will pick up Elephant #4 ‘The Zip Code Lottery in Achieving Product Compliance’ next time.