Browse: Home / Articles / Shielded vs.

Unshielded Square Magnetic Field Loops for EMI/ESD Design and Troubleshooting
SUBSCRIBE CONTRIBUTE ADVERTISE DIRECTORY ABOUT

NEWS STANDARDS TESTING DESIGN FUNDAMENTALS RESOURCES MAGAZINE SUBSCRIBE

Search… 

Shielded vs. Unshielded Square

Magnetic Field Loops for
EMI/ESD Design and
Troubleshooting
POSTED BY DOUGLAS SMITH ON JULY 31, 2014 IN TESTING | LEAVE A RESPONSE
Download Digital
Edition
Square magnetic loops are very useful
troubleshooting and noise investigation tools IN THIS ISSUE:
for electronics. They are adequate for
HUMA N
coupling signals into a PCB or measuring IN THE EERC RESOURCE CENTER
INTE R E S T
noise in a circuit. This article describes the Faraday’s
Lines of Force Capacitor
construction and characteristics of unshielded
and Maxwell’s Selection
and shielded magnetic loops as well as comparing them. for Switch
Theory of the
Electromagne Mode
Often the simplest of tools can be used to successfully track Power
tic Field
down a problem in a circuit. Magnetic loops (magnetic near eld Supply
TEST I N G Application
probes) are very useful troubleshooting and noise investigations s
Prepping for
tools for electronics both in emissions and susceptibility subjects
EMI Testing
[2]-[3]. They can be found from many vendors [4]-[5] both Alpha
DESI G N Ionization
shielded and unshielded usually in round forms.
Using EMC For
Tools to Help Neutralizin
Square loops are very useful for making measurements of circuit g Sensitive
Designs Pass
voltage and current while either square or round loops are the First Time Component
suitable for measuring magnetic elds in free space [6]. s in Tight
THE V I E W Con nes
FROM T H E
A magnetic eld probe built from a short piece of wire is very
CHAL K B O ARD Multi-Tone:
useful for making Mdi/dt voltage measurements in circuits, to The View Testing,
measure the relative phase or time delay between two signals, to from the Theory and
locate a noise source or to inject signals into a path on a circuit Chalkboard – Practice
August 2014
board. The application of this technique to impulsive signals has
been made practical with the advent of relatively inexpensive, FUND A M E NTA
portable, and fast digitizing scopes. LS
On Maxwell,
Occasionally, a shielded loop is called for and usually shielded The Natural    
Philosopher
loops are made from semi-rigid coaxial cable.
TEST I N G 
In this article square unshielded wire loops are compared to Shielded vs.
shielded solutions including simple techniques to build them in Unshielded
Square JOIN US ON FACEBOOK!
your lab. Some examples are included to show that unshielded
Magnetic
loops often work as well as shielded loops in some applications, Field Loops
especially for injecting signals into circuits. for EMI/ESD
Design and UPCOMING EVENTS
Troubleshoo
Unshielded Magnetic Loops ting
APRIL
24 - 25
Figure 1 shows the construction of a paper clip probe. Two RECENT 24 - 25 A2LA - ISO 15189
APR AND CLIA
minutes, some heat shrink tubing, and a pair of needle nose IEC 60500:2017 CLINICAL
Published for LABORATORY
pliers are all that is needed. A BNC barrel adapter makes a
Underwater ACCREDITATION
convenient mounting for the loop. The result is a square shape, Acoustics – COURSE
Hydrophones
covered with insulation, forming an unshielded magnetic loop  9:00 am - 4:00 pm
April 23, 2017 (25) EST
probe. The International  Frederick A2LA
Headquarters
Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC)
has released IEC
60500:2017
25 - 27 EMC BY YOUR
APR DESIGN A
ISO Publishes PRACTICAL
ISO/IEC APPLICATIONS
24759:2017: Test SEMINAR &
Requirements WORKSHOP
for  (All Day) Central Time
Cryptographic Zone
Modules  Northbrook Hilton
Figure 1: Magnetic eld probe build from a paper clip. April 22, 2017
The International
Organization of
25 - 26 EMC
APR MEASUREMENT
Standardization
ENVIRONMENTS -
(ISO) releases the
A conductor carrying a current, i, will have a voltage drop across it YORK EMC
standard, ISO/IEC SERVICES
given by: 24759:2017
 (All Day)
Recently  Castleford
e1 = Ldi/dt + Ri (1) Published Laboratory (Methley
Road) York EMC
Standard, IEC Services
where L is the inductance per unit length of the conductor; R is 60364 Part 7-
712, for Solar
the resistance per unit length and e1 is the voltage drop per unit Photovoltaic
26 THE PHOENIX
length. The unit length will be small compared to a wavelength at Power Supply APR IEEE EMC
Systems SYMPOSIUM
the highest frequency of interest. That means the conductor is April 22, 2017  (All Day: Wednesday)
electrically short. The International MST
Electrotechnical  The Embassy Suites
Phoenix -Tempe
At frequencies above a few hundreds of kHz, the resistive Commission (IEC)
has released IEC
component becomes negligible and (1) simpli es to just: 60364-7-
712:2017
26 A2LA - ROOT
APR CAUSE ANALYSIS
e1 = Ldi/dt (2) Meet The AND CORRECTIVE
Colosseum: A ACTION COURSE
A conductor nearby the current carrying conductor, such as a Giant Testbed  8:00 am - 4:30 pm
for Wireless CST
side of the square loop above, will pick up an open circuit voltage Technologies  Oak Brook Chicago
Marriott Oak Brook
of: April 21, 2017
DARPA is
e2 = Mdi/dt (3) challenging SHOW MORE EVENTS
researchers to
create the next
where M is the mutual inductance between the current carrying evolution of
wire and the nearby wire per unit length. electromagnetic
communication.

Since L and M are constants, then e1 and e2 are only di erent by Newly Released
Standard
a constant. M must be smaller than L for two parallel wires (due
ISO/IEC TS
to the magnetic ux that ows between the wires instead of 29125, for
Telecommunica
enclosing both), so e1 is a lower bound estimate for the
tions Cabling
magnitude of e2 and has the same wave shape. Requirements
April 21, 2017
Using that principle, a simple square loop, such as the one above, The International
Organization of
can be used to estimate the voltage drop across conductors. Standardization
When the probe is held up to a conductor carrying high (ISO)
releases ISO/IEC
frequency current, the probe’s open circuit output voltage is a TS 29125:2017
lower bound for the voltage between the corners of the probe
Nanowire
along the current carrying conductor as measured by the Technology Digs
Deeper into the
magnetic eld captured in the area of the loop.
Science of How
the Brain Works
The probe should be connected to an oscilloscope or spectrum April 20, 2017
analyzer using a coaxial cable terminated in its characteristic A new type of
nanowire gives
impedance. This resistive load on the loop in combination with us our most in-
the self inductance of the loop forms a low pass lter on the depth look at the
human brain yet.
probe output. For a loop with sides of 1 cm, this corner frequency
will be between 200 and 300 MHz.
Possible uses are estimating the drop across bonding wires and
lead frames of integrated circuits [7] or measuring noise e ects
on a printed wiring board [8].

An Easy to Build Shielded Magnetic Loop Probe

Occasionally, a shielded loop is called for and usually shielded

loops are made from coaxial cable. The loop is formed by making
a square from the coax with a gap and soldering inner conductor
to shield in point (A) as in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Square loop from a coax cable unshielded (left) and

shielded (right).

Figure 3 shows the construction steps for quickly and simply

making a shielded magnetic loop in the lab.

Figure 3: Building a shielded loop.

Step 1: Take a piece of sti copper wire or rod (16 gauge is best
for tting in BNC connector). The wire is covered with heat shrink
tubing and then copper tape is wound around the heat shrink
tubing so that it is covered with three layers of tape. In that way,
when the wire is bent to form a square loop, the outermost layer
may crack slightly. Since the crack is only on the outside of the
bend and it is small, it does not pose much of a problem because
the gap will be closed by the underlying layers.

The characteristic impedance of the coax formed by the foil and

sti wire is probably not 50 Ohms like the feed cable likely is. But,
it does not matter much since the two parasitic transmission lines
formed by the two halves of the loop and their shields are un-
terminated at the gap in any event.
Step 2: Put a second layer of heat shrink tubing over the
assembly.

Step 3: The loop is then bent and one end inserted into a BNC
connector. Both the other end of the wire and copper tape are
soldered to the side of the BNC connector.

Step 4: Next, the end of the BNC connector and two ends of the
loop are covered in copper tape which is soldered to the copper
foil of the loop. The added copper tape may also be soldered to
the BNC connector as well.

Step 5: Finally, the assembly is covered with heat shrink tubing to

make the nal product. The position of the gap is very important
to the performance of the shield. A shielded loop that is not
symmetric (e.g. gap at base of loop) will be somewhat sensitive to
E elds. E eld induces current in shield so there is voltage drop
across shield that will be induced into center conductor loop [8].

Better shielding e ectiveness is obtained if the gap is located in

the middle of the loop as shown in Figure 4. In that way, electric
eld symmetry is obtained.

Figure 4: Square loop from a coax cable unshielded (left) and

shielded (right).

The loop is formed by making a square from the coax with a gap
placed symmetrically in the middle of the loop as in Figure 4. The
center wire is connected again to shield in point (A).

The loop’s shielding may be tested as described in [8] by applying

an electric eld source to the loop. The loop should be least
sensitive over the gap with the maximum sensitivity just o the
gap in either direction. The sensitivity should gradually fall o as
the electric eld source is moved toward the side of the loop (at
the BNC connector) opposite the gap.

Square Shielded Loop with Semi-rigid Coax

One can minimize the work required to build a shielded loop by

buying a short length of small semi-rigid coaxial cable with SMA
connectors already mounted on each end [9]. The assembly can
be cut in half to make two shielded loops saving the trouble of
mounting the connectors on the semi-rigid cable.

Use a small diameter semi-rigid cable as the smaller the semi-

rigid coax diameter, the better coupling between the center
conductor of the coax and the adjacent circuit.
For our purposes, one can think of the loop as starting with a
straight length of semi-rigid coax of small diameter with an SMA
connector on one end and shorting the center conductor to the
shield with solder at the other end. Then the loop is bent around
to form a square (being careful not to bend the coax too sharply
at the corners) and the solder shorted end is soldered back on
the coax so as to form a square symmetric loop. A small gap is
made in the shield in the middle of the side opposite the feed
line. Figure 5 shows a square shielded loop built [8] into a plastic
housing which has been split to show the loop inside.

Figure 5: Cutaway View of a Square Shielded Loop

Shielding against electric elds is best achieved if the eld is

symmetric around a line from the solder junction to the gap in
the shield, a condition that is met when a shielded loop is used to
measure a eld much further from a source than the size of the
source itself.

To help ensure electric eld symmetry when the loop is used on

the surface of a circuit board in the near eld, the gapped side
should be held against the board with the loop itself
perpendicular to the board. And therein lies the main reason for
using a square loop, most circuit boards are at and one side of
the loop can be held directly against a circuit board resulting in
better coupling to the circuit than a round loop of the same size
would give.

The performance of a loop constructed in the previous section

(Figure 3) should compare favorably with one made from semi-
rigid coaxial cable up to the rst resonance of the loop. The rst
resonance occurs at the frequency where the circumference of
the loop is one half wavelength. At this frequency, the parasitic
transmission lines formed by the two shields and the underlying
sti wire are one quarter wavelength un-terminated stubs.

Square shielded loops can be used both to measure many kinds

of signals and to inject small RF signals (~0 dBm) into circuits.
Some of the techniques involve coupling high voltage/current
short pulses into a circuit. For that application shielded loops
made from small semi-rigid coax are not a good option for this
purpose because of possible voltage breakdown in the coax and
even heating under some conditions. For large pulses, use
unshielded sti wire loops.

Parasitic Coupling Between Unshielded Wire Loops

Unshielded wire loops are inexpensive and easy to build but
capacitive (electric eld) coupling has always been a concern
when using these simple loops. Coupling between unshielded
wire loops is investigated, included parasitic capacitive coupling.

Figure 6 shows an overall view of the test setup comprised of a

pair of square wire unshielded loops connected to an Agilent
N1996A spectrum analyzer set up to perform a two port insertion
loss measurement. The two loops are about one inch, a few cm,
on a side and they are positioned end-to-end.

Figure 6: Measuring loop to loop coupling for a pair of square

shielded loops (end-to-end) in reversed direction.

In Figure 6, the loops are reversed in position, that is the + side of

one loop (center conductor of BNC) is opposite the – of the other
loop (ground side of BNC). This will be referred to as the
“reversed” direction. By inverting one of the loops the “normal”
direction is obtained (+ side to + side of the loops). Data is
presented for both directions.

If only magnetic eld coupling existed between the loops, the

change resulting when one of the loops is reversed would be a
180 degree phase shift in the output, which would not change the
spectrum analyzer plot.

If signi cant capacitive coupling existed between the loops, the

output of the receiving loop would be the combination of the
inductive and capacitive components. Since the phase of the
inductive component is reversed when one loop is reversed but
the phase of the capacitive component is not, the spectrum
analyzer plot will be di erent.

In other words, capacitive coupling between the loops would

cause the normal and reversed positions of the loops to yield
di erent responses.

Figure 7(a) and 7(b) show the loop-to-loop transmission from

10 MHz to 1 GHz for the reversed case and normal cases of the
two loops. No resonance is found, with the frequency response
being relatively at by comparison. The di erences are about 6
dB maximum at a few frequencies and the traces are not as
smooth as the shielded loops. However the “lumps” in the
frequency response are only a few dB in peak amplitude. The
relatively at frequency response in Figure 7 is indicative that
simple wire loops may be useful for injecting signals into circuit
board paths and cables by inductive coupling. Using loops for this
purpose will be covered in parts VII and VIII.

Figure 7: Response end-to-end loops reversed and normal

directions.

Figure 8 shows the overview of a related case where the loops

are overlapped to insure maximum coupling. Notice that the
loops are arranged in the normal position as opposed to
reversed in Figure 6, that is the sides of the loops connected to
the BNC center pin (or shield connection) are both on the same
side.
Figure 8: Measuring loop to loop coupling (loops overlapped).

Figures 9(a) and 9(b) (page 80) show the coupling from 10 MHz to
1 GHz for the setups in both the reversed and normal
orientations. The di erence between the two traces is only a few
dB, and without shielding!

Figure 9: Response of overlapped loops reversed and normal

directions.
Frequency response plots of the coupling between small simple
wire loops are reasonably at.

Parasitic coupling electric eld Shielding in square shielded

magnetic loops.

We have introduced before that shielded magnetic loops are

used to reduce electric eld coupling to the loop and square
magnetic loops are useful for coupling signals into a PCB or
measuring noise in a circuit. However, signi cant electric eld
coupling can still occur with shielded loops. One case of electric
eld coupling between a pair of shielded loops is presented
which results in a signi cant resonance between the shielded
loops. Such a resonance can cause errors in signal injection used
for troubleshooting circuits.

Figure 10 shows an overall view of the test comprised of a pair of

square shielded loops connected to an Agilent N1996A spectrum
analyzer with a tracking generator which is set up to perform a
two port insertion loss measurement. The two loops are
positioned end-to-end and held in place with paper tape on the
back of the loops. The semi-rigid coax used to form the loops is
encased in plastic as explained in Figure 5.

Figure 10: Measuring loop to loop coupling for a pair of

square shielded loops and close-up of loops for coupling
measurement.

Figure 11 shows the resulting plot of insertion loss (un-

normalized) between 10 MHz and 1 GHz. Notice the signi cant
dip of around 30 dB at about 394 MHz.
Figure 11: Plot of loop to loop coupling showing resonance.

This resonance can be explained with reference to Figure 12.

Figure 12: Circuit of parasitic resonance

The capacitance Co between the shield segments shown in

Figure 12, form a resonant circuit with the inductance of the two
loops. The current path for the resonance is shown by red
arrows. The loops used for this test are one inch on a side, so the
e ective loop for the resonant circuit is approximately two inches
by one inch.

The theoretical calculation of inductance [10] gives a value of

about 125 nH for such a loop assuming a wire (shield) radius of
10 mils. The resonant frequency of 394 MHz then yields a
capacitance of about 1 pF for the total capacitance in the tuned
circuit of Figure 12. Adding ferrite to the coax cables feeding the
loops did not change the characteristics of Figure 11 so the
current loop of Figure 12 is the controlling feature.

Current owing in the center conductor of the driven loop

generates inductive voltage drop (Ldi/dt) around the loop. A
shielded cable is nearly an ideal transformer, so the voltage drop
on the center conductor under each of the two shield segments is
magnetically coupled into the shield segments as Mdi/dt. The
mutual inductance, M, between the center conductor and the
shield, is the inductance of the shield itself.

This driving voltage on the two shield segments causes current to

ow around the four shield segments coupled by the parasitic
capacitance between the loop shields as shown in Figure 12 thus
driving the resonant circuit. In this discussion, we are treating the
circuit as composed of lumped elements since each segment and
the loops themselves are small compared to a wavelength at
400 MHz.

If a resonance caused by the current path of Figure 12 is the

reason for the dip in plot in Figure 11, then moving the loops
apart should increase the resonant frequency. This would
happen because the capacitance Co between the loops is
reduced. Figure 13 shows the test setup modi ed to space the
loops one cm apart. The two loops are taped to a plastic ruler to
maintain the spacing during the measurement as shown in the
close-up detail.

Figure 13: Measuring loop to loop coupling for a pair of

square shielded loops at one cm spacing including a close-up.

The resulting two port insertion loss plot is shown in Figure 14.
Note that the resonant dip has moved to about 495 MHz. This
would represent a signi cant drop in capacitance on the order
of 40%. As the loops are moved further apart, L gets slightly
larger but C gets much smaller. As the distance is increased, the
capacitance between all parts of the loops begins to contribute
an increasing portion of the capacitance between the loops
complicating the picture somewhat. One would not expect the
capacitance to decrease as much as just that of the facing sides
as the loops are separated.

Figure 14: Loop to loop coupling with 1 cm spacing.

The problem is that using a shielded loop can sometimes give a
false sense of security that electric eld e ects are not important.
Parasitic capacitance coupled to a shielded magnetic loop can
a ect its performance. In this case, a resonance was caused that
signi cantly a ected the signal induced into a second shielded
magnetic loop.

CASE 1: Coupling to a PCB

A case is shown where using a shielded loop to inject signals into

a path on a circuit board results in a signi cant resonance
whereas using an unshielded wire loop results in a relatively at
frequency response of the injected signal.

Figure 15(a) shows a square unshielded wire loop held up to a

path crossing a break in the ground plane of a test board. The
injected signal was measured at the BNC connector on the board
(left side) for the cases where the loop is positioned as shown
and for a 180 degree rotation of the loop and similarly for a
square shielded loop, embedded in plastic for strength, as shown
in Figure 15(b). Figures 16(a) and 16(b) (page 84) show the
measured signal at the BNC connector on the board for the
unshielded wire loop in the normal position and for the 180
degree rotated position of the loop respectively. The data was
taken using an Agilent N1996A spectrum analyzer as a two port
insertion loss measurement. The square loop was connected to
the tracking generator output and the BNC connector on the
board was connected to the receiver input of the analyzer.

Figure 15: Coupling into a circuit with loop: Unshielded (left)

and Shielded (right).

Capacitive coupling between the loop and the board will cause
either a resonance e ect (dip or peak in the response) or a
directional e ect when the loop is rotated 180 degrees because
the phase of the inductive coupling changes by 180 degrees
whereas the capacitive coupling remains the same.

As can be seen in Figures 16(a) and 16(b), there is no resonant

e ect, the frequency response is nearly at. The capacitive
coupling itself is very low compared to the inductive coupling
because the di erence is only a few dB and then only at the
higher frequencies above 600 MHz.
Figure 16: Injected signal for unshielded loop normal
orientation and reversed 180º

Contrast the responses for the unshielded loop to the responses

in Figures 17(a) and 17(b) for the shielded loop. In both
Figures 17(a) and 17(b), a resonant dip in the response is seen
similar to that shown for coupling between shielded loops in part
V. In this case, the resonance is due to the sum of the inductance
of the shields of the loop and the inductance around the split in
the ground plane interacting with the capacitance between the
shields and the ground plane of the board. As one would expect
for a shielded loop, the plots in Figures 17(a) and 17(b) are not
very sensitive to the normal and rotated positions of the loop.
Figure 18: Measuring the coupled signal into a circuit in the
time domain

One can conclude from the above plots that the unshielded loop
works better for injecting signals into a path crossing a ground
plane split than does the shielded loop. Surely this result holds in
general for injecting signals into circuit boards with ground and
power planes.

CASE 2: Measurements in the Time Domain

A case is shown where using both unshielded and shielded

magnetic loops to inject signals into a path on a circuit board
results in an injected signal that is about the same for both loops.
Figure 18 shows a square unshielded loop held next to a path
crossing a break in the ground plane of a test board.

The injected signal from a Fischer Custom Communications TG-

EFT pulse generator connected to the loop was measured at the
BNC connector on the board (left side) using an oscilloscope for
cases where the loop is positioned as shown and for a 180
degree rotation of the loop. Bandwidth of the oscilloscope used
was 500 MHz and the TG-EFT was set to generate open circuit
pulses of 100 V with a rise time of about 2 ns and pulse duration
of about 100 ns.

Figures 19(a) and 19(b) (page 86) show the results as displayed on
the oscilloscope using the unshielded loop oriented in the both
positions parallel to the path over the break in the ground plane,
180 degrees rotated from each other.

Figure 19: Injected Signal for normal and reversed unshielded

loop.
Both plots have about the same pulse shape, amplitude, and
width. Any change between the plots might be attributable to
capacitive coupling, however the only di erence of any note is
that the rise time in Figure 19(a) is a little faster than in
Figure 19(b). The overall di erence in the plots is not signi cant
enough to make much di erence when using pulse injection for
troubleshooting designs.

The plots in Figures 20(a) and 20(b) for the shielded square loop
are also very similar as well as having about the same rise time
for both plots. The amplitude of the injected pulse is about 20%
less because the distance between the center conductor of the
semi-rigid coax forming the loop is further from the path on the
circuit board due to the diameter of the coax and the thickness of
the plastic housing. The slight improvement in matching of rise
times is not signi cant enough to warrant the extra complication
and cost of shielded loops. In addition, if the scope had greater
bandwidth, the resonance at about 600 MHz between the
shielded loop and the board would likely cause distortions in the
pulses displayed in Figure 20.

Figure 20: Injected Signal for normal and reversed shielded

loop.

Conclusion

Capacitive coupling from an unshielded loop is not always a

problem that requires the use of shielded loops to solve. On the
contrary, unshielded loops often work as well as shielded loops
as was demonstrated by pulse injection in this example.

This article on square shielded loops has shown that unshielded

loops are useful in many cases and for injecting signals into
circuit boards speci cally. Unshielded loops can even outperform
shielded loops in some applications. Given the ease of
constructing an unshielded loop and its low cost, this is an
important result.

References

1. Smith, Douglas C. 1992. High Frequency Measurements and

Noise In Electronic Circuits. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
ISBN #0-442-00636-5.
2. Ott, H. W. 2009. Electromagnetic Compatibility Engineering.
Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN-13: 978-0470189306.
3. Montrose, M. I. and E. M. Nakauchi. April 8, 2004. Testing for
EMC Compliance: Approaches and Techniques. First edition.
Hoboken: Wiley-IEEE Press. ISBN-10: 047143308X.
4. EMCO. 1999. User’s Manual Near Field Probe Set Model 7405.
REV E-PN399107.
5. www.com-power.com/near_ eld_probes.html
6. Smith, Douglas C. 1993. High Frequency Measurements and
Noise in Electronic Circuits. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
ISBN 0-442-00636-5.
7. Smith, Douglas C. 1997.“A method for troubleshooting noise
internal to an IC.” IEEE 1997 International Symposiumon
Electromagnetic Compatibility: 223-5.
8. Smith, Douglas C. 1999. “Signal and noise measurement
techniques using magnetic eld probes.”IEEE 1999
International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility:
559-63.
9. Pasternack Enterprises. www.pasternack.com.
10. Missouri Univ. of Science and Technology. Inductance
Calculator. www.emclab.mst.edu/inductance/square.

Douglas C. Smith
Mr. Smith held an FCC First Class Radiotelephone license by age 16 and a
General Class amateur radio license at age 12. He received a B.E.E.E. degree
from Vanderbilt University in 1969 and an M.S.E.E. degree from the California
Institute of Technology in 1970. In 1970, he joined AT&T Bell Laboratories as a
Member of Technical Staff. He retired in 1996 as a Distinguished Member of
Technical Staff. From February 1996 to April 2000 he was Manager of EMC
Development and Test at Auspex Systems in Santa Clara, CA. Mr. Smith
currently is an independent consultant specializing in high frequency
measurements, circuit/system design and verification, switching power supply
noise and specifications, EMC, and immunity to transient noise. He is a Senior
Member of the IEEE and a former member of the IEEE EMC Society Board of
Directors. His technical interests include high frequency e ects in
electronic circuits, including topics such as Electromagnetic
Compatibility (EMC), Electrostatic Discharge (ESD), Electrical Fast
Transients (EFT), and other forms of pulsed electromagnetic
interference. He also has been involved with FCC Part 68 testing and
design, telephone system analog and digital design, IC design, and
computer simulation of circuits. He has been granted over 15 patents,
several on measurement apparatus.

Mr. Smith has lectured at Oxford University, The University of

California Santa Barbara, The University of California Berkeley,
Vanderbilt University, AT&T Bell Labs, and internationally at many
public and private seminars on high frequency measurements, circuit
design, ESD, and EMC. He is author of the book High Frequency
Measurements and Noise in Electronic Circuits. His very popular
website, http://emcesd.com (www.dsmith.org
 <http://www.dsmith.org> ), draws many thousands of visitors each
month to see over 150 technical articles as well as other features.

He also provides consulting services in general design, EMC, and

transient immunity (such as ESD and EFT), and switching power supply
noise. His specialty is solving di cult problems quickly, usually within
a couple of days. His work has included digital and analog circuits in
everything from large diesel powered machinery to IC chip level
circuits. His large client base includes many well known large
electronic and industrial companies as well as medium sized
companies and start-up companies.

Arturo Mediano
Arturo Mediano received both his M.Sc. (90) and Ph. D. (97) in Electrical
Engineering from the University of Zaragoza, Spain where he has held a
teaching professorship in EMI/EMC/RF since 1992. He is member of the Group
of Power Electronics and Microelectronics (GEPM) of the Aragon Institute for
Engineering Research (I3A). Since 1991 he is working in EMI, EMC and RF
(HF/VHF/UHF) fields for communications, industry and medical applications
with substantial experience in collaboration with industries, focusing on training,
consulting, design and troubleshooting. He is Instructor of Besser
Associates (CA, USA), o ering periodically public and on-site courses in
EMI/EMC, Signal Integrity (SI) and RF subjects through the USA,
specially in Silicon Valley/San Francisco Bay Area and he has taught
tens of RF/EMI/EMC/SI courses through Europe. He was Invited
Lecturer for the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) in
Lausanne (Switzerland) and for the Institut National des
Télécommunications (INT) in Evry (France).

He is author/co-author for many publications and patents and a

frequent speaker in the most important symposiums and conferences
related to RF/EMC. Arturo is Senior Member of the IEEE, member of
the EMC Society (ESAC Committee), and member (Chair since 2013) of
the MTT-17 (HF/VHF/UHF technology) Technical Committee of the
Microwave Theory and Techniques Society. Arturo shares free time
between his family, y shing, and drawing cartoons.

Share this story:

 Email  Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  Google

 Print

POSTED IN TESTING | TAGGED DOUG SMITH, LOOP, MAGNETIC, MEDIANO, SHIELDED,

SQUARE, UNSHIELDED

Our benefactors

WHY IN COMPLIANCE? EXPLORE INDUSTRY TOPICS

We are a leading source in news, Magazine Aerospace

information, and resources for Newsletters Automotive
electrical engineering In Compliance Directory Communications
professionals. Standards Library Consumer Electronics
Education
Delivering the latest news, Energy & Power
standards updates, technical CONTRIBUTE Industrial
   
explanations & guidance, and Information Technology
more - In Compliance is where
engineers turn for education, Editorial Medical 531 King St. Suite 5
information, and inspiration. Advertise Military & Defense Littleton, MA 01460
Tel (978) 486-4684

©2009 - 2017. Same Page Publishing, Inc.

Contact Us Privacy Policy Terms of Use Change of Address Cancel Subscription Feedback