Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Quasi-peak detector

A quasi-peak detector is a type of signal detector used in electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing to measure radio-frequency interference levels by applying a weighting to signals based on their pulse repetition frequency, thereby emphasizing intermittent disturbances that are more perceptually annoying to humans, such as those affecting amplitude-modulated (AM) radio reception.^[1]^[2] Developed as the first weighting detector in 1939 for CISPR measuring receivers, it originally employed electromechanical circuits with specific charge and discharge time constants to simulate psychophysical effects, but modern implementations are digital while adhering to the same principles.^[2] In operation, the detector features a fast-attack, slow-decay response: for example, in frequency Band A (9 kHz to 150 kHz), it uses a 45 ms charge time constant and 500 ms discharge; Band B (150 kHz to 30 MHz) employs 1 ms charge and 160 ms discharge; and Bands C/D (30 MHz to 1 GHz) use 1 ms charge and 550 ms discharge, ensuring that signals with higher repetition rates produce higher output voltages relative to their peak amplitudes.^[3]^[4] These characteristics are standardized in CISPR 16-1-1 (harmonized as EN 55016-1-1), which defines quasi-peak detection alongside peak and average modes for emissions measurements across bandwidths of 200 Hz, 9 kHz, or 120 kHz, primarily below 1 GHz to assess both broadband and narrowband disturbances for regulatory compliance, such as under FCC Part 15.^[1]^[3]^[2] Quasi-peak measurements are essential in pre-compliance and certified lab testing, where they provide a more accurate indication of interference annoyance than unweighted peak detection, often requiring at least 1 second per measurement point to stabilize readings.^[1]^[2]

Introduction

Definition

The quasi-peak detector is a specialized instrument in electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing that integrates peak detection with weighted averaging, yielding output readings that are influenced by the repetition rate of the signal's spectral components. This weighting mechanism produces a voltage proportional to the quasi-peak value, which represents the steady-state response of the detector to a continuous train of impulses within a narrowband receiver.^[2]^[5] By design, the quasi-peak detector emulates the subjective annoyance perceived by a listener from intermittent radio interference, such as clicks or buzzes from impulsive sources, rather than solely measuring signal amplitude. This approach correlates the detector's output with the psychophysical impact of interference repetition on human perception, particularly in amplitude-modulated (AM) broadcast contexts.^[6] The term "quasi-peak" reflects its intermediate positioning between peak and average detection values: for high-repetition-rate signals, the reading approaches the peak value, while for low-repetition-rate signals, it trends closer to the average, providing a balanced assessment tailored to EMC evaluation.^[1]^[4]

Purpose in EMC Testing

The quasi-peak detector serves a critical purpose in electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing by measuring radio-frequency interference (RFI) in a manner that prioritizes signals likely to cause audible annoyance to listeners, such as intermittent pulsed noise generated by household appliances or automotive ignition systems.^[7]^[8] This approach emulates the human perception of interference, where sporadic high-amplitude pulses are less disruptive than repetitive low-level noise, thereby providing a more realistic assessment of potential disturbance.^[9] In EMC frameworks, the quasi-peak detector was adopted to ensure emission limits reflect the real-world impact on broadcast reception, rather than merely capturing raw signal power as a peak detector might.^[10] By incorporating a weighting based on signal repetition rate, it better correlates with the subjective "annoyance factor" experienced in radio and television reception, helping regulators set thresholds that protect usable spectrum without overly penalizing benign sources.^[11] This perceptual alignment stems from early EMC efforts to quantify man-made noise effects on broadcasting, making quasi-peak measurements a staple for evaluating compliance in consumer and industrial products.^[10] The detector's core concept involves weighting low-duty-cycle pulses less severely than continuous signals, which promotes a fair assessment of intermittent emissions that may not persistently degrade reception.^[9] For instance, a single high-energy pulse from a switching device receives reduced emphasis compared to steady-state emissions, avoiding disproportionate limits on transient events common in everyday electronics.^[8] This weighting mechanism ensures testing focuses on interference types that truly affect end-user experience, balancing technical accuracy with practical tolerability.^[7] In EMC compliance, quasi-peak readings function as the primary metric for both conducted and radiated emissions testing below 1 GHz, as specified in international standards like CISPR.^[10] This frequency range encompasses the most relevant bands for broadcast protection (e.g., 9 kHz to 1 GHz), where quasi-peak values directly determine whether devices meet regulatory limits for market approval.^[3] Above 1 GHz, simpler peak or average detectors often suffice, underscoring the quasi-peak's specialized role in lower-frequency assessments.^[10]

History

Origins in Radio Interference Measurement

The quasi-peak detector emerged in the 1930s as radio broadcasting expanded rapidly following World War I, when man-made noise from electrical devices such as motors, power lines, and sparking contacts began significantly interfering with signal reception. These disturbances, often intermittent and impulsive, disrupted audio quality and prompted widespread listener complaints, necessitating objective measurement methods to quantify radio interference beyond subjective assessments. Early efforts in the United States, including the 1924 formation of a National Electric Light Association committee and the 1931 EEI-NEMA-RMA Joint Coordination Committee, highlighted the need for standardized approaches to evaluate such noise sources.^[10] In response to these post-war radio regulation challenges, international bodies like the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) convened in Paris in 1933 to address electromagnetic interference, leading to the establishment of the International Special Committee on Radio Interference (CISPR) in 1934.^[12] The first quasi-peak detector was developed in 1939 as the initial weighting detector for CISPR measuring receivers. CISPR focused on developing uniform measurement techniques for radio noise in the broadcast band (150 kHz to 1605 kHz), driven by the limitations of existing peak and average detectors, which failed to correlate readings with the subjective annoyance experienced by listeners from repetitive, short-duration pulses like clicks or scratches.^[10] Studies in the 1930s, including those involving boards of listeners who rated interference based on audio output and pulse repetition frequency, revealed that annoyance levels increased with disturbance repetition rates, informing the design of detectors that weighted signals to better reflect human perception.^[10] Initial prototypes tested in the late 1930s incorporated weighted circuits to emulate the ear's response to repetitive impulsive noise, providing higher readings for frequent bursts compared to isolated peaks and thus aligning more closely with real-world listener experiences.^[13] These developments laid the groundwork for CISPR Publication 1, which specified the first quasi-peak detector for the radio-noise meter, marking a shift toward measurements proportional to the "nuisance value" of interfering signals.^[10] This early work evolved into formal international standards by the mid-20th century.^[14]

Standardization and Evolution

The quasi-peak detector was formally standardized by the International Special Committee on Radio Interference (CISPR) through Publication 1, published in 1961, which defined its characteristics for radio-noise meters operating in the 0.15–30 MHz frequency range to measure interference affecting broadcast reception.^[15] This initial specification built on earlier provisional developments from the 1930s and 1940s, establishing the detector's charge and discharge time constants as a reference for international radio disturbance measurements.^[10] Subsequent refinements occurred with the first edition of CISPR Publication 16 in 1978, which consolidated and expanded measurement apparatus specifications, including quasi-peak detector requirements across broader frequency bands.^[15] The 1987 edition of CISPR 16 further detailed the exact dynamic characteristics of the quasi-peak detector, such as its 1 ms attack time and 160 ms decay time for band B (150 kHz to 30 MHz), and 1 ms attack time and 550 ms decay time for bands C and D (30 MHz to 1 GHz), solidifying its role as the primary weighting method for discontinuous interference.^[10]^[3] In the 1990s, quasi-peak detector specifications were integrated into the IEC 61000 series of electromagnetic compatibility standards, aligning CISPR methodologies with global EMC frameworks for emission and immunity testing.^[15] This incorporation facilitated harmonization, with quasi-peak detection becoming the reference for EMI emission limits in key standards such as CISPR 11 for industrial, scientific, and medical equipment (first edition 1975, with ongoing updates emphasizing quasi-peak for conducted emissions up to 30 MHz) and CISPR 22 for information technology equipment (first edition 1993).^[16] Post-2000 evolutions introduced alternatives like the average and RMS-average detectors in updated CISPR publications, such as the fourth edition of CISPR 11 (2003), allowing compliance for certain conducted emissions by either meeting both the quasi-peak limit using the quasi-peak detector and the average limit using the average detector, or by meeting the average limit using the quasi-peak detector; however, the quasi-peak detector remains mandatory for regulatory compliance in frequency bands from 150 kHz to 30 MHz to account for impulsive noise weighting.^[16]^[2]

Principles of Operation

Basic Mechanism

The quasi-peak detector operates as a specialized circuit in electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing, fundamentally combining a peak detection stage with a lossy integration stage to provide a weighted measurement of signal interference. The peak detection is achieved through a diode that allows rapid charging of a capacitor in response to the input signal's positive envelope, capturing the maximum amplitude quickly. This is followed by an RC network acting as a lossy integrator, where the resistor enables a slower discharge of the capacitor, effectively averaging the signal over time while introducing weighting based on the signal's characteristics.^[17]^[7] In operation, the detector processes input signals typically derived from the envelope of a narrowband intermediate frequency (IF) filter within an EMI receiver, converting the modulated RF interference into a detectable voltage. For a single pulse, the circuit charges the capacitor swiftly via the diode but then discharges gradually through the RC network, resulting in a relatively low output voltage that does not fully retain the peak value. When pulses repeat, however, each subsequent pulse partially recharges the capacitor before complete discharge occurs, incrementally raising the average output level proportional to the repetition rate.^[17]^[18]^[7] The "quasi" designation reflects the detector's non-linear weighting mechanism, which emulates the subjective annoyance of interference to human perception by producing outputs closer to peak values for high-repetition-rate signals—such as continuous or frequent pulses—while yielding significantly lower readings for sparse, low-rate impulses. This design ensures that intermittent but high-amplitude disturbances are not overemphasized compared to more persistent, lower-amplitude ones, providing a balanced assessment in EMC evaluations.^[17]^[7]

Response Characteristics

The response characteristics of the quasi-peak detector are specified in CISPR 16-1-1, featuring frequency-dependent time constants that weight the detector's output based on signal repetition rates to simulate subjective annoyance levels in radio interference. For the range of 0.15 to 30 MHz (CISPR Band B), the charge time constant \tau_c is 1 ms, enabling rapid response to signal peaks, while the discharge time constant \tau_d is fixed at 160 ms, allowing slower decay for sustained signals with the weighting achieved through interaction with the repetition rate.^[19]^[3] This formulation embodies repetition rate weighting, emphasizing signals with higher pulse rates as more disruptive; the steady-state response follows the pulse train curves defined in CISPR 16-1-1, where outputs approach the peak value for high repetition rates (e.g., rates much greater than 1/\tau_d) and drop substantially for low rates (e.g., sparse impulses).^[4] The detector's output feeds into a meter with an additional time constant for smoothing, 160 ms for 0.15–30 MHz (CISPR Band B), which averages fluctuations in intermittent or unsteady disturbances. Provisions for impulse trains ensure the weighting accounts for short bursts, maintaining compliance with the standard's pulse response curves.^[19]

Implementation

Analog Circuits

The traditional analog quasi-peak detector is implemented using hardware components centered around a diode rectifier stage for initial envelope or peak detection of the input signal, followed by a series of weighted RC networks that provide the characteristic charge and discharge behavior. This design emulates the human perception of interference annoyance by emphasizing intermittent pulses over continuous signals through asymmetric time constants in the RC circuits. The rectifier typically employs a diode to convert the AC input to a pulsating DC, which is then smoothed and weighted by the subsequent RC stages to produce the quasi-peak output.^[20] The weighted RC networks consist of resistors and capacitors configured for fast charging (attack) and slow discharging (decay), with the time constants defined by the CISPR 16-1-1 standard to ensure consistent measurement across frequency bands. For instance, the charge time constant (τ_c) ranges from 1 ms in higher bands to 45 ms in the lowest band, while the discharge time constant (τ_d) varies from 160 ms to 550 ms, often implemented with a parallel capacitor and selectable series resistors for charging and discharging paths. These networks are typically multi-stage, with the first stage providing rapid response to signal peaks and subsequent stages applying longer decay periods to hold the value during signal absences.^[19]^[20] To accommodate different frequency bands, the analog circuit incorporates multi-stage filters with band-specific time constants; for example, the stage handling the 150 kHz to 30 MHz band uses a charge time constant of 1 ms and a discharge time constant of 160 ms, enabling effective quasi-peak weighting for conducted emissions in this range. Lower-frequency stages, such as for 9 kHz to 150 kHz, employ longer time constants (45 ms charge and 500 ms discharge) to better capture slower-varying interference typical in power line measurements. These stages are often switched electronically or mechanically to select the appropriate configuration based on the operating band.^[19] The output of the RC networks feeds into a final critically damped ballistic meter movement, which averages rapid fluctuations and provides a stable reading proportional to the quasi-peak value, with a mechanical time constant around 160 ms. This meter integration is a hallmark of legacy analog designs, such as those in the Rohde & Schwarz ESVP EMI receiver, where the full analog chain ensures compliance with early CISPR specifications without digital processing.^[21]

Digital Methods

Digital methods for quasi-peak detection involve computational algorithms that emulate the analog RC circuits and damped meter of traditional detectors, enabling implementation in software, digital signal processors (DSPs), or field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). These approaches model the charging and discharging behavior using difference equations derived from the exponential responses of RC networks. For instance, the voltage across the capacitor in a digital simulation can be approximated as V = V[n-1] \cdot e^{-\Delta t / \tau} + (1 - e^{-\Delta t / \tau}) \cdot x, where V is the output at sample n, x is the input sample, \Delta t is the sampling interval, and \tau is the time constant (e.g., 45 ms for charging or 500 ms for discharging per CISPR specifications).^[22] This infinite impulse response (IIR) filter structure precisely replicates the analog dynamics while allowing for adjustable parameters to match standards like CISPR 16-1-1.^[22] In modern spectrum analyzers, such as the Keysight N9038A MXE EMI receiver, quasi-peak detection is performed digitally on fast Fourier transform (FFT) data acquired through all-digital intermediate frequency (IF) processing. The input signal is digitized via high-speed analog-to-digital converters, transformed into the frequency domain using short-time FFTs, and then post-processed with CISPR weighting curves applied to the amplitude envelopes at each frequency bin. This method ensures compliance with quasi-peak requirements by simulating the detector's response to the rectified IF signal, including the critically damped meter integration.^[23]^[24] A key advantage of digital quasi-peak detection is the elimination of physical settling times inherent in analog circuits, enabling measurements up to orders of magnitude faster—often scanning full bands in seconds rather than minutes—while maintaining accuracy within CISPR tolerances (e.g., ±3.5 dB for pulse responses). Additionally, a single device can flexibly switch between quasi-peak, peak, average, and RMS detectors without hardware reconfiguration, supporting diverse EMC testing needs.^[24] Digital implementations adhere strictly to CISPR 16-1-1 Amendment 1 (2010), which specifies emulation of analog behavior for FFT-based instruments, including windowed integration techniques to handle non-periodic or transient signals. Short-time FFT spectrograms capture time-varying interference, applying the quasi-peak algorithm over overlapping time windows to weight amplitudes based on repetition rates, thus ensuring reliable detection of intermittent emissions like bursts from power-line communication devices.^[24]^[22]

Applications

EMI Receivers and Analyzers

EMI receivers integrate quasi-peak detectors as the standard mode for compliance-oriented measurements, processing intermediate frequency (IF) signals across frequency ranges such as 9 kHz to 1 GHz. In devices like the Rohde & Schwarz ESRP, the quasi-peak detector applies the specified charge and discharge time constants to evaluate signal envelopes, ensuring accurate assessment of interference levels during diagnostic and precompliance scans.^[25]^[26] These receivers typically employ quasi-peak detection for final compliance readings following initial peak detector pre-scans, which rapidly identify potential exceeding signals for targeted verification. The peak pre-scan provides a conservative "worst-case" overview, as its readings are always higher than quasi-peak values, allowing efficient prioritization of suspects before applying the slower quasi-peak weighting.^[27]^[28] In spectrum analyzers, quasi-peak mode implements weighting on broadband data post-FFT processing, emulating the time-domain response to enable automated sweeps while maintaining CISPR compliance. This digital approach filters wideband acquisitions to replicate the required resolution bandwidth, supporting efficient EMI evaluation. For pulsed signals, quasi-peak detection accommodates intermittent emissions through its repetition-rate-dependent weighting, often augmented by time-domain gating; typical configurations use 6 dB bandwidth filters of 120 kHz in accordance with CISPR specifications for bands C and D.^[29]^[19]^[3]

Regulatory Compliance Testing

In regulatory compliance testing for electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), quasi-peak detectors are mandatory for evaluating emissions against Class A and Class B limits specified in CISPR 32 for multimedia equipment, where quasi-peak values are compared to limits expressed in dBµV/m for radiated emissions and dBµV for conducted emissions. Similarly, under FCC Part 15 Subpart B for unintentional radiators, the CISPR quasi-peak detector is required below 1000 MHz to ensure compliance with these class-based thresholds, which differentiate between industrial (Class A) and residential (Class B) environments. These measurements verify that devices do not exceed predefined emission levels that could interfere with radio services. For radiated emissions testing, quasi-peak readings are performed in open-area test sites (OATS) or semi-anechoic chambers, particularly in the 30–1000 MHz frequency band, to assess field strengths at distances such as 3 m or 10 m from the equipment under test (EUT).^[30] The standard test sequence begins with a peak detector prescan to identify potential exceedances efficiently, followed by detailed quasi-peak measurements on frequencies where peaks surpass the limits, with an adequate dwell time per frequency step to allow the quasi-peak detector to stabilize, typically 1 second or more as required by CISPR 16-2-2, balancing thoroughness and practicality.^[31]^[32] In conducted emissions testing for mains ports, quasi-peak detection applies to the 150 kHz–30 MHz range using line impedance stabilization networks (LISN) for coupling, ensuring accurate representation of noise conducted back into the power line.^[33] If quasi-peak levels indicate non-compliance, mitigation strategies such as adding EMI filters are commonly implemented to attenuate the emissions and achieve adherence to the limits.^[34]

Comparisons

With Peak Detectors

The peak detector captures the maximum amplitude of an input signal instantaneously without any weighting based on repetition rate, resulting in the highest possible readings for any given emission and enabling rapid scans in the millisecond range. This makes it ideal for preliminary or pre-compliance electromagnetic interference (EMI) testing, where speed is prioritized to identify potential issues across a broad frequency spectrum. In contrast, the quasi-peak detector incorporates a repetition-rate weighting mechanism that emulates the human auditory response to interference, producing lower readings for intermittent or low-repetition signals while requiring longer settling times of up to 1 second due to its slower discharge characteristics.^[8]^[1]^[18] A key distinction arises in handling intermittent noise, such as sporadic pulses: the peak detector registers the full height of a single pulse without damping, often overestimating the interference level, whereas the quasi-peak detector applies its weighting to reduce the output for low-repetition events, providing a more perceptually relevant measurement aligned with electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) annoyance factors. For example, in typical pulsed emissions encountered in EMI testing, peak detector readings can exceed quasi-peak values by 6 to 20 dB, depending on the pulse repetition rate, highlighting how peak detection yields a conservative worst-case assessment. This difference underscores the quasi-peak detector's role in avoiding false alarms from transient events that may not contribute significantly to overall interference.^[1]^[4]^[35] In practice, while the peak detector's speed facilitates efficient initial scans—often completing in milliseconds compared to seconds for quasi-peak—it is not suitable for final compliance judgments, as international standards such as CISPR 16 mandate quasi-peak measurements to ensure accurate evaluation against EMC limits that account for signal repetition. The quasi-peak approach thus balances thoroughness with realism, making it essential for confirmatory testing where marginal peak results necessitate re-evaluation to determine true compliance.^[8]^[1]^[36]

With Average and RMS Detectors

Average detectors in electromagnetic interference (EMI) testing integrate the rectified input signal over an extended period, typically around 1 second, to compute the mean value, effectively ignoring the repetition rate of intermittent pulses and providing a measure of long-term average power.[^[3]] This contrasts with the quasi-peak (QP) detector, which applies weighting based on pulse repetition rate through its charge-discharge time constants, resulting in higher readings for repetitive pulsed signals compared to the average detector.[^[1]] For continuous wave (CW) signals, where the input is steady, the QP response aligns closely with the average detector output, as there is no pulsing to weight differently.[^[8]] The root mean square (RMS) detector, defined as V_{\text{rms}} = \sqrt{\text{average of } V^2}, quantifies effective power more directly and is employed in modern EMI standards for frequency bands above 1 GHz, where it better represents the heating effect or true power of signals.[^[3]] The QP detector approximates RMS behavior for high-repetition-rate pulses but deviates significantly for low-repetition-rate ones, often overestimating the effective power due to its emphasis on peak-like responses.[^[37]] Fundamentally, the QP detector emulates subjective annoyance factors from intermittent interference, such as in radio reception, whereas average and RMS detectors offer objective assessments of power content.[^[1]] For instance, in measurements of pulsed signals, the QP reading can exceed the average by 10 dB or more, depending on repetition rate and duty cycle; in one evaluation of broadband conducted emissions, QP values were approximately 8.6 dB higher than RMS-average equivalents on average.[^[37]] For a 50% duty cycle signal at low pulse repetition frequencies like 120 Hz, differences between QP and average can reach 13-27 dB, highlighting QP's sensitivity to intermittency.[^[37]] Standards such as CISPR 16-1-1 have incorporated average detectors as alternatives to QP for specific frequency bands and signal types, particularly to simplify measurements for non-pulsed emissions, while retaining QP for legacy compatibility in conducted and radiated testing below 1 GHz.[^[3]] The RMS-average detector, a hybrid introduced in the same standard, further bridges these approaches for pulsed digital signals but sees limited adoption in product standards to date.[^[37]]

References

[1]
EMI emissions testing: peak, quasi-peak, and average measurements
Jul 10, 2018 · Quasi-peak detection weighs each component based on its repetition rate: the faster repetition rate, the higher the weight given to that ...
[2]
[PDF] ETSI TR 103 581 V1.1.1 (2019-11)
Nov 1, 2019 · General info: The Quasi-peak detector (QP) was the first weighting detector that was developed. It takes into account the psychophysical ...
[3]
EMI Measurement Receiver Requirements (CISPR 16-1-1)
Aug 31, 2020 · As the name implies, the quasi-peak detector is not truly a peak detector. It utilizes the following weighted charge and discharge times ...
[4]
Real-Time Spectrum Analysis for EMI Diagnostics - Tektronix
The QP detector has the characteristic of a fast-attack, slow-decay response and contains a time constant representative of a critically damped meter, as ...
[5]
[PDF] CISPR TR 16-3:2003 - CISPR TR 16-3:2003 - iTeh Standards
rectangular impulses of pulse duration T at ... The maximum level at which the steady-state response ... The quasi-peak detector response of any interference ...
[6]
https://www.we-online.com/files/pdf1/emi-debugging-1.pdf
[7]
[PDF] PRACTICAL EMI TROUBLESHOOTING - Tektronix
Quasi-peak detection uses a measurement weighting which places more emphasis on signals which could be interpreted as more “annoying” from a broadcast ...
[8]
What Is Quasi-peak Detection? - Keysight Knowledge Center
Quasi-peak detectors weigh signals according to their repetition rate, which is a way of measuring their "annoyance factor." They do this by having a charge ...
[9]
[PDF] The importance of detectors - Reliant EMC
Quasi-peak detectors are simply a design that happens to produce the 'right' results, ie results that approximately correlate with the deleterious effect on ...
[10]
Practical Papers: The Quasi-Peak Detector
Currently, CISPR radio-noise meters use the QP detector from 9 kHz to 1 GHz; and, there is discussion of extending it into the GHz frequency range.Missing: below | Show results with:below
[11]
Current Probe Measurements in EMC Testing
Sep 1, 2017 · Quasi-peak detectors weigh signals according to their repetition rate, which is a way of measuring their “annoyance factor”. High amplitude low ...
[12]
https://geekztrainerblog.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/eic-notes.pdf
[13]
[PDF] UNIT I Basic Theroy INTRODUCTION TO ELECTROMAGNETIC ...
Radio interference from electrical apparatus such as electric motors, electric railroads, and electric signs soon began to appear as a major problem around 1930 ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[14]
Quasi-Peak Detector Measurements (Cris Schulze) - RF Cafe
Aug 10, 2018 · Most important is the so called audion-circuit (named by Lee Deforest in 1906 - I think) which allows a quick charge and a slower discharge of a ...
[15]
History of CISPR - In Compliance Magazine
Jun 1, 2010 · The history of the International Special Committee on Radio Interference (CISPR) is one that extends over 75 years.
[16]
CISPR 11—A Historical and Evolutionary Review
Jul 1, 2025 · The International Standard for electromagnetic emissions (disturbances) from industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) equipment is CISPR 11.<|control11|><|separator|>
[17]
What Every Electronics Engineer Needs to Know About: Measuring ...
Sep 4, 2018 · The quasi-peak (QP) detector is like the peak detector except it has a weighted charge and discharge time constant (charge rate much faster ...Missing: appliances vehicles
[18]
A Guide to Radiated Emissions Testing - EZ Spotlight - EngineerZone
Jul 23, 2024 · Quasi-peak detectors weigh signals according both to their amplitude and how often they occur, whereas the peak detector depends on amplitude ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[19]
[PDF] The EMI-Receiver according to CISPR 16-1-1 - schwarzbeck.de
The Quasipeak detector has a short charging time constant (1 ms in Bands B/C/D, 45 ms in Band A), which allows a fast charging, and a relatively long ...
[20]
EMI-Receiver Simulation Model with Quasi-Peak Detector
Ignoring small ripples, the steady-state quasi-peak value V quasi-peak can be derived based on charge balance on the capacitor C [12]. The equation used to ...
[21]
[PDF] EMC MEASUREMENTS IN THE TIME-DOMAIN - URSI
The American National Standard for electromagnetic noise and field strength instrumentation provides a summary of the characteristics for quasi-peak-, peak-, ...Missing: primary metric
[22]
[PDF] On the suitability of the CISPR 16 method for measuring conducted ...
Nov 30, 2022 · Finally, the CISPR 16–1–1 method [14] [15], is the only proposed method based on a quasi-peak (QP) detector of 200 Hz bandwidth to assess the ...Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
[23]
On the suitability of the CISPR 16 method for measuring conducted ...
The QP detector weights the envelope of each frequency component; then, the maximum of the weighted envelope gives the final measurement value. The QP detector ...
[24]
[PDF] N9038A MXE EMI Receiver Specifications Guide - Keysight
The logarith- mic amplifier in this receiver, however, is implemented digitally such that the range and resolution greatly exceed other instrument limitations.
[25]
Requirements of CISPR 16-1-1 Test Receivers, Spectrum Analyzers ...
Dec 6, 2012 · The reference for display of the quasi-peak value detector is 100 Hz. Here, the display value must be 31.5 dB higher than for a single current ...
[26]
R&S®ESRP EMI test receiver - Rohde & Schwarz
The R&S®ESRP EMI test receiver is designed for diagnostic measurements during development and for precompliance measurements in order to prepare products ...
[27]
[PDF] R&S®ESRP EMI Test Receiver - AV-iQ
Rohde & Schwarz R&S®ESRP EMI Test Receiver. 5. Spectrum analyzer. Sweep time ... quasi-peak, CISPR-average,. RMS-average. Units of level axis. dBm, dBµV ...
[28]
None
### Summary of Quasi-Peak Detector Use in EMI Receivers and Pre-Scans with Peak Detector
[29]
Automotive EMI/EMC Pre-compliance Tests - Tektronix
The scan using the peak detector will give a set of “worst case” measurements, and you can perform quasi-peak measurements to dig deeper into outof-limit ...Missing: readings | Show results with:readings
[30]
More Speed, More Insight: Use of FFT-based EMI Test Receivers for ...
Dec 1, 2013 · FFT-based receivers measure the emitted signals in frequency segments much wider than the measurement bandwidth. The actual measurement ...Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
[31]
Radiated Emission Measurements in the Semi-Anechoic Chamber ...
Dec 1, 2014 · 1000 MHz are usually performed at the open area test sites (OATS) or in the semi-anechoic chambers at the distances 3 or 10 m from the equipment ...
[32]
EMC Bench Notes: Pre-Compliance Testing for Radiated Emissions ...
Sep 12, 2024 · Once you've identified the peaks over the limit, if any, the next step is to use the Quasi-Peak detector as required by CISPR 11/32. You'll ...
[33]
[PDF] Pre-Compliance Conducted Emission Measurements - EMC FastPass
• Typical Frequency Range –150 kHz to 30 MHz (may down to 9 kHz or up to 108 MHz). • Limits – Average and Quasi-peak or Peak and Quasi-peak. • Measured by ...Missing: mandatory | Show results with:mandatory
[34]
[PDF] Mitigating EMI Problems & Filter Selection
▫ If emissions measured exceeds the allowable limits EMI filters are required. ▫ EMI Filters are bi-directional and they mitigate conducted emissions. They ...
[35]
EMI Testing: Peak, Quasi-Peak and Average
Mar 4, 2025 · This article introduces three waveform measurements defined by standards: Quasi-Peak (QP), Average (AV), and Peak (PK), and explains their significance.
[36]
http://www.iec.ch/emc/basic-emc/basic-cispr16.htm
[37]
[PDF] Application Note: Experience with the RMS-Average Detector
Introduction of the RMS-average detector as an alternative to quasi-peak and average detector for disturbance power conducted and radiated emission measurements ...Missing: post- | Show results with:post-