|
|
|
|
RF Shielding - RF Cafe Forums
|
davorak
Post subject: RF Shielding Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:00
pm
Lieutenant
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:56 pm
Posts:
3
My question is weather my recent purchase, Rose & Bopla 01234023
85 http://www.rose-bopla.com/Prod_Pgs/Basic_Boxes/Prod_01_Aluminum_Unpainted.htm
with rmi-efi gasket, was overkill for my project. What other shielding
options make sense?
I have recently started a research project
and purchased a box to shield my electronics
I will be making noise
measurements ~-215dBm/hz. Frequency range:50Mhz to 3 Ghz, Though the
measurement currently focus on f<1Ghz.
I have a similar set
up working in a small Hammond aluminum diecast box.
For large
rf projects what shielding options do I have?
Thank you.
Top
Kirt Blattenberger
Post subject: Re: RF ShieldingPosted:
Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:54 am
Site Admin
Joined: Sun Aug
03, 2003 2:02 pm
Posts: 308
Location: Erie, PA
Greetings davorak:
Are you really going to be making noise measurements down to -215
dBm/Hz?
Thermal noise in a 1 Hz BW at room temp (25 C) is -174
dBm/Hz, and near absolute zero (1 K), thermal noise in a 1 Hz BW is
-198 dBm/Hz. At room temp (25 C), thermal noise is at -174 dBm/Hz. So,
in order to obtain -215 dBm/Hz, even at 1 K you would have to be interested
in noise in a 0.02 Hz BW. A temperature of about 0.05 K at 1 Hz BW also
gets you near the -215 dBm/Hz number.
Thermal noise power (in
dBm/Hz)
= 10 * log (k * T * B *1000)
where k = Boltzmann's constant
= 1.3806504e-23 J/k
T = temperature in K
B = bandwidth in Hz
So, either you're pulling our legs here, or you might need to revisit
your thermal noise number.
_________________
- Kirt Blattenberger
RF Cafe Progenitor & Webmaster
Top
davorak
Post subject: Re: RF ShieldingPosted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:48 pm
Lieutenant
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:56 pm
Posts:
3
The bulk of my question is about enclosures for large RF projects,
specifically what options do I have so that my next purchase will be
a more informed one. I would appreciate and answer on this.
My
first calculation and post was sloppy I apologize if you got the chance
to read it. Hopefully this is a little better.
You may be right
I will tell you how I reached this number.
I am measuring shot noise.
Pn = 2 e I B *R (current noise in a 50 ohm terminated system)
at
one micro amp, a bandwidth of ~400 Mhz, 50 termination gives ~-112 dBm
and
~-198dbm/hz.
Thermal noise should be
pn = kb T B
Gives ~-88 dBm and ~-174 dBm/hz
The difference between those
two should allow for a measurement even though the shot noise even though
it is at ~-198dbm/hz right? I can certainly run the numbers though the
specs for my amps and log power meter and I get a result that can easily
be measured and corresponds to what I do measure fairly closely.
(-215dBm from before was current noise 2 e I, without accounting
for the resistance)
edit 2:pn = 4*kb T B/R -> pn = kb T B
Top
yendori
Post subject: Re: RF ShieldingPosted:
Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:13 pm
General
Joined: Thu Sep
25, 2003 1:19 am
Posts: 50
Location: texarcana
Wrong!
Quote:
A temperature of about 0.05 K at 1 Hz BW also gets you
near the -215 dBm/Hz number.
A temperature of about 0.05
K at .5Hz BW also gets you near the -215 dBm/Hz number.
Not so
smart now are ya, hot shot?
I choose the RFCAFE t-shirt.
Top
Kirt Blattenberger
Post subject: Re: RF ShieldingPosted:
Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:10 am
Site Admin
Joined: Sun
Aug 03, 2003 2:02 pm
Posts: 308
Location: Erie, PA
Greetings
davorak:
The calculation showing that shot noise will be below
thermal noise is just an indication that you can ignore it.
Regarding
choice of an acceptable enclosure, it really comes down to how low of
a signal you need to detect and how high the ambient noise levels are
to determine the required isolation. My approach would be to calculate
the inband system noise levels and the required minimum detectable signal
(MDS) level. From there, you have to have an idea of the test environment's
ambient noise levels in the detection band (as well as any that might
translate into the band due to frequency conversion and/or sampling)
to calculate how much isolation the enclosure needs to provide.
I see from the spec on the gasket for your box that it is supposed
to provide 100 dB or so. That number was probably achieved under conditions
of a perfectly mating gasket and seating surfaces, with a previously
unused gasket. Let the gasket be slightly misaligned, or the cover screws
not be tightened properly, or the mating surface be a bit deformed or
contaminated, and the isolation at some frequencies can drop significantly.
That is motivation for using the best box you can afford for making
measurements. Bigger enclosures need lots of screws and carefully machined
surfaces on robust castings to achieve high levels of isolation.
Many moons ago, I had to design a production test fixture for a
wireless PDA device that needed around 80 dB of isolation up to about
2 GHz. The company I worked for had a commercialized fixture with a
hinged clamshell configuration with a latchable handle to allow operators
rapid open/close motions. It was spec'ed at 100 dB, so no problem, right?
Well, it turned out that achieving 50-60 dB consistently over many cycles
without careful operation was the best it could do in real-world environments.
The fixture was useable, but operators had to be trained to ascertain
certain conditions were met for enclosure alignment prior to running
the tests.
So, this does not necessarily answer your question
about a source for an inexpensive large enclosure, but does offer a
caveat about cutting corners without being aware of the potential for
underperformance. If you have dot yet done so, I recommend looking on
my "Cabinets, Enclosures, Equipment Racks & Packaging" vendor page.
http://www.rfcafe.com/vendors/component ... osures.htm
_________________
- Kirt Blattenberger
RF Cafe Progenitor & Webmaster
Top
davorak
Post subject: Re: RF ShieldingPosted: Fri
Apr 17, 2009 3:12 pm
Lieutenant
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009
2:56 pm
Posts: 3
Thanks Kirt, thank you for sharing your practical
experience with large rf enclosures. It would make my life easier if
I could ignore the shot noise, but the purpose of the setup up is to
measure it.
Posted 11/12/2012
|
|
|
|