EXA N9010A信号分析仪找不到EMC测量

Hi Milorad - 较低频率的本底噪声较高，因为您是交流耦合的。
请注意显示屏右下角的状态消息。
要更改为DC耦合，请按输入/输出，RF输入，RF耦合（DC）。
按Recall，Data，Limit Lines，Open可以调出限制线。
导航到我的文档/ EMC限制和Ampcor /限制/ EN / 55015并选择适当的限制线，然后单击打开。
问候 -



     以下为原文

  Hi Milorad -

The noise floor at the lower frequencies is high because you are AC coupled. Note the status message in the lower-right corner of the display. To change to DC coupled, press Input/Output, RF Input, RF Coupling (DC). 

The limit lines can be recalled by pressing Recall, Data, Limit Lines, Open. Navigate to My Documents/EMC Limits and Ampcor/Limits/EN/55015 and select the appropriate limit line and click Open. 

Regards -

另外注意，提供的限制线现在是* .csv *格式，所以除非你有一个旧仪器，否则你的my documents文件夹中不会有旧的.lim *格式限制行。
手册需要更新。
最好的问候，迈克



     以下为原文

  One other note, the limit lines provided are now in *.csv* format, so unless you have an older instrument you will not have the old *.lim* format limit lines in your my documents folder. The manual needs to be updated.

Best regards,
Mike

@tabbott，Mike M非常感谢！
我今天做了新测量，看起来更像是合规性测量。
我还有一个问题：我在哪里可以找到使用哪种平均值检测器（平均值，RMS平均值，EMI平均值），当我想根据EN55015进行测量时，我使用哪一种？
我想如果我想将结果与标准给出的限制进行比较，我需要使用EMI平均值，但这种测量非常慢。
如果我使用平均值检测器，它可以快速工作，但使用峰值和平均值检测器进行的测量之间没有太大差异（可以吗？）。
我阅读http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/editorial.jspx?cc=RS&lc=eng&ckey=2184787&nid=-11143.0.00&id=2184787，我现在正在寻找一些解释
用于设置配置以获得满足标准要求的最快响应。
你能指点我去哪儿吗？
此致，Vukadin



     以下为原文

  @tabbott, Mike M

Thanks a lot! 
I made new measurements today and they look more like compliance measurements. I have one more question: Where can I find for what is used which Average detector (Average, RMS Average, EMI Average), which one of them I use when I want to make measurements according to EN55015? I suppose that I need to use EMI Average if I want to compare results to limit given by standard, but this measurements are very slow. If I use Average detector, it works fast, but there is not much difference between measurements done with Peak and Average detector (is it OK?). I read http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/editorial.jspx?cc=RS&lc=eng&ckey=2184787&nid=-11143.0.00&id=2184787 and I am now looking for some explanation for setting configuration to get fastest response that satisfies standard requirements. Can you point me where to look?

Regards,
Vukadin

野兽的本质是EMI探测器扫描速度慢...... EN 55015指定的平均探测器就是安捷伦所称的* EMI平均值*探测器。
我们的频谱分析仪多年来都有一个*平均值*探测器，多年来它们在不同的平均类型上都有一些增强。
但是，由于某些商业EMC标准要求的平均探测器与我们的频谱分析仪所具有的平均探测器有很大不同，我们需要通过给它一个稍微不同的名称来区分它，因此我们将其称为* EMI平均值*。
这是您需要用于这些标准的检测器。
EMC接收器中的* RMS Average *检测器是几年前添加到CISPR 16-1-1标准中的。
在这个时间点，世界各地的管理机构使用非常有限。
如果您对加速测量感兴趣，请使用峰值检测器进行扫描，并仅使用EMI平均值检测器（或您需要使用的任何EMC检测器）检测感兴趣的信号 - 接近极限的信号。
（信号列表和测量序列对此有利，因为标记功能单独测量）这是一种可接受的方式，因为任何信号的EMI平均值检测器值都不会大于峰值检测器测量的值。
最好的问候，迈克



     以下为原文

  The nature of the beast is that EMI detectors are slow for scanning...

The average detector that EN 55015 specifies is what Agilent calls the *EMI Average* detector. Our spectrum analyzers have had an *Average* detector in them for many years, and they have had some enhancements over the years with different average types. But since the average detector that certain commercial EMC standards require is much different than the average detectors that our spectrum analyzers have had we needed to differentiate it by giving it a slightly different name, so we call it *EMI Average*. This is the detector that you need to use for these standards.

The *RMS Average* detector in an EMC receiver is something that was added to the CISPR 16-1-1 standard a few years ago. At this point in time this has very limited use by the governing bodies around the world.

If you are interested in speeding up your measurements use the peak detector for doing your scans and only use the EMI Average detector (or whatever EMC detector you need to use) for signals of interest - ones that come close to your limit. (The signal list and measure sequence is good for this, as is the Measure at Marker function by itself) This is an accepted way of doing this since the EMI Average detector values for any signal will never be greater than measured by the peak detector.

Best regards,
Mike