© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC1
IEEE EMC June 2010 Chapter Meeting
Automotive EMC Component Specs - A Contemporary
Perspective
Essential PCB Design Rules
IEEE_June 2010
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC2
Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC
248-305-8264 (M 248-982-0401)
Instrumentation Engineer - 5 years
Powertrain Hardware-Software Electronics Design Engineer - 10 years
Tech Specialist - 22 years
• Electronic Design • EMC • Reliability• Product Assurance
Electronics - EMC Consulting - 5 years
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC3
Consulting Projects
Item Company Product
1 Compact Power Inc (LG Chem) Electric Vehicle Batter y Electronics (Volt)
2 Holley Performance Products Electronic Throttle Bod y
3 Android Industries TPMS (wheel/tire assembly line)
4 Methode Electronics Center Cluster Stack
5 Vectrix Electric Motorcycle
6 RGIS Handheld Data Terminal (inventory)
7 GHPS (KDS) BLDC, DSP Amplifier
8 Kostal Electric Vehicle Connectors
9 MRM Vehicle Internet
10 BASF Shielding
11 Cobasys Electric Vehicle Battery Electronics
12 L3 Communications Vehicle Communications
13 Haitec Taiwan OEM Vehicle
14 LiteOn Body ECU
15 Whetron Keyless Entry, Auto Wiper
16 Calsonic Entertainment
17 eCho Immobilizer
18 Delta Power Distribution
19 Advanced Microelectronics Headlight Control
20 Elitech Technology Ltd Inverter
21 Delphi Power Sliding Door
22 Clarion Car PC (Infotainment)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC4
Meets all specifications but what are we missing ?
But it met Specification ?
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC5
Reference Sampling
Documents, Books
1. EMC Specification, EMC-CS-2009(http://www.fordemc.com)
2. EMC Design Guide for Printed Circuit Boards(http://www.fordemc.com)
3. Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems, Henry Ott
4. High Speed Digital Design, Howard Johnson
5. Introduction to Electromagnetic Compatibility, Clayton Paul
6. “In Compliance” Magazine
7. ITEM - Interference Technology
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC6
Web Sites
1. www.fordemc.com
2. www.clev.clemson.edu/emc
3. http://www.compliance-club.com/
4. http://www.interferencetechnology.com/
5. emcesd.com, Doug Smith
Organizatons
1. SAE EMC committees (EMC, EMI, EMR). Meet often, much faster publication turn around time than international organizations
2. IEEE, ISO, CISPR, others
3. SAE Reliability Committee
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC7
Summary - Punch Line
1. Specs are idealized simulations, not “real world”
2. Much of industry specs based on old issues.
3. Much time and cost spent on non value exercises by contemporary practitioners due to limited knowledge of specification history - don’t know when to “hold or fold”.
4. Little time left for “sandboxing”
5. DV testing often late in design cycle - need more simple development testing to identify issues early.
6. Meeting spec not sufficient to mitigate field issues
7. Main goal is to minimize field issues not just pass specs.
8. More efficient EMC Process improvements:• Up-front analysis, focus on contemporary
issues• Design guidelines implementation. • Simple development testing.• Realistic data analysis and acceptance criteria.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC8
Summary of Automotive EMC History
1970’s
• Minimal electronics – radio
• Mostly concerned with ignition system interference
1980’s
• Electronics increasing - starting with electronic ignition, alternator voltage regulator, simple engine control
• Quality of IC’s and manufacturing processes not mature
• Automotive EMC design and test standards starting to be developed to address above (e.g. OEM, ISO, SAE).
• EMC evolving, many issues
1990’s
• Explosion of electronics
• Automotive electronics technology maturing - IC’s, manufacturing processes, standards, testing
• EMC specs and design practices becoming mature.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC9
Summary of Automotive EMC History
2000’s
• Specs stabilizing, similar throughout industry.
• Minimal EMC field issues (if design guidelines followed), mostly Conducted Immunity.
• Many specialized organizations in place:
OEM/Vendor EMC staff Testing facilities/staffEquipment vendors Regulators and regulations EMC committees
• A lot of inertia, perspective limited.
• Many OEM specs and International Standards exist (Different but similar):
• Ford, Mazda, GM, Hyundai, Toyota, Honda, BMW, Nissan, etc.
• ISO, CISPR, SAE, JASO, EU, FCC, Mil-Std, etc
• EMC process has potential to be improved and simplified.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC10
Automotive EMC Standards
SAE Document Description SAE Status
International Equiv
Vehicle J551-1 Vehicle, General & Definitions ISO 11451-1 J551-2 Ignition Interference Cancelled CISPR 12 J551-4 Radiated Emissions Cancelled CISPR 25 J551-5 Electric Vehicle Emissions J551-11 Immunity, Off-Vehicle Source Cancelled ISO 11451-2 J551-12 Immunity, On-Board Transmitter Cancelled ISO 11451-3 J551-13 Immunity, Bulk Current Injection (BCI) Cancelled ISO 11451-4 J551-14 J551-15 Immunity, ESD ISO 10605 J551-16 Immunity, Reverberation Chamber J551-17 Immunity, Power Lines
Component J1113-1 Component, General & Definitions ISO 11452-1 J1113-2 Conducted Immunity, Power Leads ISO 11452-10 J1113-3 Conducted Immunity, RF Power Injection. ISO 11452-7 J1113-4 Immunity, BCI ISO 11452-4 J1113-11 Immunity, Transients ISO 7637-2 J1113-12 Immunity, Coupling Clamp ISO 7637-3 J1113-13 ESD ISO 10605 J1113-21 Immunity, Absorber Lined Chamber. ISO 11452-2 J1113-22 Immunity, Power Lines, Magnetic Cancelled ISO 11452-8 J1113-23 Immunity, Stripline Cancelled ISO 11452-5 J1113-24 Immunity, TEM Cell ISO 11452-3 J1113-25 Immunity, Tri-Plate Cancelled J1113-26 Immunity, Power Lines, Electric J1113-27 Immunity, Reverb Chamber, Mode Stiring. J1113-28 Immunity, Reverb Chamber, Mode Tuning. ISO 11452-11 ----- Immunity, Portable Transmitters ISO 11452-9 J1113-41 Radiated Emissions, Narrowband Cancelled CISPR 25 J1113-42 Conducted Emissions, Transients ISO 7637-2 ----- Environmental Conditions and Testing for Electrical
and Electronic Equipment – Part 2: Electrical Loads ISO 16750-2
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC11
Automotive EMC Standards
The Present Status of the International Automotive EMC StandardsPoul Andersen, Poul Andersen Consulting37249 Hebel RdRichmond, Michigan 48062 [email protected]
http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/auto/auto_emc_standards.html
SAE Document Description SAE Status
International Equiv
IC J1752-1 IC, General & Definitions IEC J1752-2 IC Radiated Emissions, Loop Probe IEC J1752-3 IC Radiated Emissions, TEM Cell IEC
Misc J1812 Function Performance Status Class J2556 Power Spectral Density (PSD), RE Data Analysis J2628 Characterization, Conducted Immunity
OEM (sample) EMC-CS-2009 Ford MES PW 67600 Mazda GMW3097 GM DC-10614 Chrysler TSC7001, et al Toyota 28401NDS02 Nissan ES96200 Hyundai GS95002 BMW Other Related 2004/104/EC European EMC Directive
FCC Part 15J Emissions
Mil-Std 461 Requirements for the Control of Electromagnetic Interference Characteristics of Subsystems and Equipment
SAE J1211 Handbook for Robustness Validation of Automotive Electrical/Electronic Modules (Old version published in 1978).
4/2009
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC12
Causes - Relative Contributions
0
20
40
60
80
100
A=CustomerDoes Not Like
Product(Requirementsnot specified or
incorrect)
B=System DoesNot Fit
(Interfaces)
C=Can NotDiagnose
Problem (TroubleNot Indicated)
D=ComponentFailure
E=ManufacturingFault
Examples of top 3 causes:
A: Most american cars until recently
B: Boeing 787
C: Most automotive electronics TNI > 50 %
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC13
Test Methods/Limits Observations
• Meeting EMC specs necessary but not sufficient to mitigate field issues - Main goal is to minimize field issues not just pass specs.
• Originally, EMC for automotive electronics was poor so a lot of tests were “invented”. There were minimal design practices for automotive EMC.
• Many EMC tests are idealized simulations of the real world.
• Major purpose is repeatability, not necessarily what is required to find real world issues.
• Most OEM specs and processes are very severe, time consuming and expensive to implement.
• Diverts from time to “sand box” where many issues are found - focus on major contemporary concerns.
• Contemporary electronics much improved. EMC is minor issue compared to “Big Picture” - see figure
• DV testing often late in design cycle - need more simple development testing to identify issues early.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC14
Test Methods/Limits Observations
• EMC testing is typically the first time the system is “rung out” (system components interconnected and functionally examined).
• Testing methods have many limitations and compromises not appreciated by contemporary practitioners - don’t know when to “Hold or Fold”
• Much testing addresses old issues with limited value add especially for modules that follow known basic EMC design rules and are mature.
• Different people looking at the same data can come up with quite different conclusions depending on their background, insight and flexibility.
• Considering how EMC testing is done (test setup and limits are much more severe than real world) should have more flexibility, especially when one considers that most EMC issues are 3-6 sigma events.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC15
Test Methods/Limits Observations
• Simple pass-fail criteria (e.g. limit line) results in too much non value work (not real world issues).
• Does not indicate degree of compliance
• Hard to compare different samples - need variables data.
• Should use statistical approach to make better business decisions
• Issues not presently addressed (e.g.):
• Temperature• Combined stresses• Part degradation
• Power supply electrolytic cap• Battery impedance increase.• Cracked I/O caps• Worn out transient suppressor
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC16
Test Methods/Limits Observations
• Functional Safety concerns (e.g. Toyota unintended acceleration) generating potential new set of requirements.
• Non Compliance = Prosecution
• IET 2008 Guide on EMC for functional safety (177pages)
• IEC 61508 - Functional safety of electrical/electronics/programmable electronic safety related systems (7 parts)
• ISO 26262 - Road vehicles, Functional Safety. In development, adaptation of IEC 61508. Estimated July 2011.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC17
Conflicting Goals
• The responsibility for meeting EMC requirements is the Product Design (PD) Engineer.
• Although it is admirable for the EMC community to try and do the best job possible, it has a tendency to go to extremes regarding testing requirements and limits.
• Such EMC groups are typically a separate community and have a narrow view. This may be in conflict with some of the realities of the PD engineer
• Limited time on each project
• Must address many other design and manufacturing aspects.
• Keep to schedule.
• Keep costs down (weigh cost/benefit).
• Make a profit.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC18
EMC Process Improvements
• Process has potential to be improved and simplified but its extremely hard to change and think “out of the box” with so much inertia (OEM/Vendor EMC staff, Testing facilities/staff, Equipment vendors, Regulators and regulations, EMC committees).
• Fundamental test concepts not embraced by EMC community but essential for field issue mitigation.
• Failures are good (early in design process) -information theory
• Randomness is good.
• Litigation fears preventing any major change
• May be perceived as making less severe.
• Opinion - not really an issue
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC19
EMC Process Improvements
• Even so, certain practices can be implemented to improve the process:
• EMC group should be integrated with systems engineering and not a separate organization (ideally co-located).
• Up-Front analysis, focus on contemporary issues.
• Verify design guidelines implementation
• Simple early development testing
• Realistic data analysis and acceptance criteria.
• If product has already passed one OEM spec, other OEM’s should accept (minor alterations).
• Limited focused testing for mature products.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC20
EMC Process Improvements - cont’d
• One generic automotive EMC spec for the industry.
• “A Generic Automotive (Tier1) EMC Test Standard”, http://www.autoemc.net/Standards/StandardsMain.htm
• Many existing standards can make this relatively easy. Most OEM specs already use.
• Vendors can design to one spec - Lowers staffing/time/cost and results in a better product for all.
• Examples in other industries• Military = Mil-Std 461• IC’s = JEDEC• Consumer = UL standards.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC21
Simple EMC Development Tools
RE - Magnetic Field Probes
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC22
Simple EMC Development Tools
RE - RF Detector placed on wiring
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC23
Simple EMC Development Tools
RE - Digital Radio
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC24
Simple EMC Development Tools
• Noise Generator connected to Injection Clamp
• Use for DUT Power Input Noise
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC25
Simple EMC Development Tools
Adjustable Current Injection Clamp
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC26
Simple EMC Development Tools
Magnetic Field - attach to Noise Generator
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC27
Simple EMC Development Tools
• ESD Gun - Modified Lighter
• Apply in low light to see paths
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC28
Radiated Immunity
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC29
General Setup for Radiated Immunity and Emissions
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC30
Radiated Immunity (RI) Observations
• Test not like real world
• Test = Alignment of antenna and DUT/Harness maximizes susceptibility
• Real = Random harness routing, inefficient coupling, sheet metal.
• Test = Exposes large area
• Real = Exposure to only part of system.
• OEM limits too severe (Ref Mil-Std 461 ground = 50 v/m max).
• High limit based on high power on-board transmitters (rare these days).
• Contemporary = Cell Phones (only for certain DUT’s): “Cell Phone Interference in Automotive Cabin”, Craig Fanning
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC31
Radiated Immunity (RI) Observations
• Field strength varies widely in actual vehicle - can be >100 v/m difference only a few inches apart.
• Real = Field falls off rapidly from point source.
• Field impedance (E/H) different for test vs vehicle.
• Proposal - Use more realistic data analysis based on probability of concern and realization of how limit was determined.
• Example = determine susceptibility field strength average and standard deviation.
• Only resolution needed to make engineeringbusiness decision is high, medium and low (e.g. test at 100v/m but acceptable at 80 v/m)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC32
Example of RI Data
• Does it meet intent of 100 v/m ?• CW, 400-1000 MHz• Average = 83 v/m, Std Deviation = 13 v/m
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC33
Radiated Emissions
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC34
Radiated Emissions (RE) Observations
• Test not like real world
• Test = Alignment of antenna and DUT/Harness maximizes emissions measurements
• Real = Random harness routing, inefficient coupling, sheet metal.
• Many specs overcomplicate their RE limits by having many bands and associated limits. The limits are only applicable in a lab environment for a particular setup. In the vehicle, there are many variables which amplify or attenuate the signal..
• Limits are good only for test setup, changes with different harness lengths (up to 20 dB differences).
• “Automotive EMC Test Harnesses, Standard Lengths and their Effect on Radiated Emissions”, Martin O’Hara, James Colebrooke
• Spectrum Analyzer/Receiver not like real radio
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC35
RE Spec Limits
• The main factor that determines a spec. limit are the sensitivities of on-board or nearby radio and communication antennas and receivers.
• In the AM band, the antenna factor (ratio of antenna output voltage to field strength) plus the attenuation from the antenna to the radio due to antenna cable capacitance is about 20 dB.
• In addition, there is some attenuation between noise sources within the vehicle and the antenna due to sheet metal and differences in polarization.
• Assuming a radio sensitivity of 1 uv (0 dbuv), the limit = 30 dbuv/m (20 + 10)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC36
RE Limits, cont’d
• For FM entertainment radio and mobile communications, the antennas and antenna cable is much more efficient (antenna factor is 0 - 6 dB) and attenuation due to the vehicle sheet metal (openings, slots) is less due to small signal wavelength.
• Assuming a 1 uv sensitivity, the limit = 10 dbuv/m.
• The limit increases at 20 db/decade at higher frequencies to account for the fact that radio receiver antenna output voltage decreases at that rate (aperture size of a tuned antenna decreases with frequency). This can be seen by the following equation which shows the (1/f) relation (20 db/decade):
e = (33 * E) / f (quarter wavelength antenna)
e = antenna output voltage, E = field strength (v/m) impinging on antenna f = frequency (MHz)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC37
RE Spec Limits, cont’d
• The following equation provides useful conversions for testing:
dBuv/meter = dBm (reading of spectrum analyzer)+ 107 (converts power across 50 ohms of spectrum analyzer to volt) - preamp gain in db (if used) + AF in dB (antenna factor, changes with antenna/frequency)
• For example, a reading of - 60 dBm on the spectrum analyzer at 100 MHz (assuming 26 dB amplifier in series with spectrum analyzer) would be:
dbuv/meter = -60 + 107 - 26 + 14 = 35 dBuv/meter = 56 uv/meter
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC38
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC39
• Typical OEM limits are much more stringent than the FCC's, especially when one considers that FCC limits are measured 3 meters away from the radiating device and the OEM limits are at 1 meter. The typical OEM limits are more restrictive:
• Radiating devices on the vehicle are closer to radio transceivers on board the vehicle.
• A vehicle contains many radiating devices.
• Customer satisfaction
46200216 - 1000
43.515088 - 216
4010030 - 88
FCC Class B RE limits (3 meters)
10 dBV/m - 24 dBV/m3.2 - 15.8 200 - 1000
103.225 - 200
3031.60.10 - 25
dBuV/muV/mFrequency (MHz)
OEM RE limits (1 meter) typical
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC40
Example of RE Data
• Which One is Acceptable ?• Top = Few spikes over Limit, technically fails• Bottom = All spikes under Limit, technically passes
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC41
Example of Using the Wrong Part
Early detection would prevent multiple layouts
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC42
RE Data Analysis
Reference SAE J2556
• The present method of using only a limit line for determining module radiated emissions acceptance is too simplistic and is not the most effective way to make competitive business decisions. The limit line approach does not address many real issues.
• It is very difficult if not unpractical to get the same results at each frequency from different test labs for radiated emissions due to the many variables involved.
• However, it is possible to establish correlation between different labs on a statistical basis. For example, if only the highest emission levels are compared independent of the emission frequencies a higher degree of correlation is possible.
• Such an approach may be justified under the assumption that the test facility design does not significantly affect the total emissions power but mainly leads to the radiated power spectrum redistribution.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC43
• The simplistic approach of being below a limit line may still result in instances of a customer concern.
• For example, even if the RE is all below a limit line, it is more probable that a concern would exist if there are many spectral lines close to the limit (i.e. the spectral density is high).
• Another situation that may result in overdesignwould be to fail a module that only had a few data points slightly over the limit but otherwise showed little emissions.
• There are many differences between the module test setup and the vehicle configuration (e.g. harness configuration) and it is unlikely that there is a one to one correlation between the lab and the vehicle (at each frequency).
• For example, even if a module was below a limit line using the bench test configuration, in the vehicle there may be an entirely different configuration so that those frequencies that were below the limit line are now connected to a system which more effectively radiates and results in a customer concern (and conversely).
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC44
PSD Calculation
If there are narrowband (discrete peaks) emissions above a Preferred Limit and any peak does not exceed a defined level (e.g. 6 dB) over this Preferred Limit.
There is a high density of spectral lines near the limit (e.g. within 3 dB).
1. Consider the data points in terms of (x/L) 2 where x is the value of the data point in linear terms (uv/m) and L is the preferred limit at the frequency of the data point. For example, if a data point is 20dB uv/m (10 uv/m) and the preferred limit at that frequency is 10dB uv/m (3.2 uv/m), the (x/L) 2 value would be (10/3.2) 2 = 9.8.
The squaring gives exponentially more weight to data points that are high relative to a preferred limit. It also gives an indication of spectral power hence the PSD designation (receivers are sensitive to power impinging on their antenna).
2. Compute Power Spectral Density (PSD) for a given frequency span:
PSD = ∑ (x / L) 2 / (Frequency Span / Resolution)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC45
PSD Example
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC46
Conducted Immunity
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC47
OEM Test Name Type Parameters Ford, ES-XW7T-1A278-AC
CI 210 Sine 50-10KHz, stepped
CI 220 A1 Transient CI 220 A2 Transient CI 220 B1 Transient CI 220 B2 Transient CI 220 C Transient CI220 D-G Transient ISO 7637-2 CI 230 A-D, Pwr Cyc Complex Ramps, sine CI 260 A-C, Dropout Sq Wave CI 260 D, Dip Sq Wave CI 260 E, Bat Recov Complex Ramp CI 260 F, Random Complex BMW, GS 95002 Ripple Sine 50-20k, 1min sweep BMW, GS 95003-2 Ramp 0-Ubmax, 1v/min Engine Start Complex ISO Pulse 4 Dip, Very Brief Complex Dip, Brief Complex 0.5v steps Hyundai, ES-X82010 Voltage Fluctuaton Triangle 8-16v, 1v/sec Dip Complex Single 100ms dip (ramp) Ramp Triangle 0-12v, 0.1v/s-1v/min Engine Start Complex 5-12v Engine Start Complex ISO Pulse 4 Chattering Sq Wave 5 pulses, 10-50ms Ign Key Intermittent Sq Wave 5 pulses, 0.5-3s Instantaneous
Interrupt Sq Wave Single pulses, 1ms-20ms
GMW3172 Voltage Drop Dips 5% steps from V-min, PW=5 sec Voltage Dropout Complex Ramps Superimposed Volt Sine Sweep, 2 superimposed, 1-12KHz, 12-72KHz GMW3097, GMW3100
ISO Pulses 1-5 Transients ISO 7637-2
Nissan, 28401NDS02
ISO Pulses 1-5 Transients ISO 7637-2
Slow volt Inc/Dec Triangle V-nom to 0, 0.5v/min Re-initialization Dips 5% steps from V-nom, PW=5 sec Micro-interruptions Dropouts V-nom to 0v,
PW=10us to 300ms Starting Complex Ramps, sine Ripple Sine Sweep 50Hz-20KHz DCX, DC 10614 Transients ISO 7637-2 DCX, DC-10615DR2 Ripple Sine 15Hz-250KHz Drop Out Dips 11 to 0v, 10us-1sec Voltage Dip Dips 11 to 5.5-3v, 100us-.5s Low Voltage Mem Complex Ramp, 12.6v-6.5 Ramp up Complex Ramp (50mv max step), 0v-Vmax, .1-60sec Ramp down Complex Ramp (50mv max step), Vmin-0v
Sampling of OEM Specs - CI
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC48
Conducted Immunity Observations
• Majority of contemporary EMC field issues are in this category.
• Randomness is good for detecting issues - foreign to test community.
• Hot plugging (or missing/late ground) has been identified as major reason for Electrical Overstress
• Often misidentified as ESD
• Bosch SAE paper 2009 (2009-01-0294)
• USB and OBD (Europe) connectors use extended ground pins.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC49
Load Dump
• Most every spec has wrong test simulator.
• Many modules over-designed using typical simulators.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC50
Load Dump Analysis
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC51
• Load Dump is a big concern since it exposes electronic components to very high energy levels that may cause damage.
• Due to the sudden disconnection of electrical load from the alternator while operating without a battery or a discharged battery.
• These conditions can exist, for example, with a loose battery terminal, damaged battery or during a jump start.
• A simplified model of the alternator is a voltage source (Vs) in series with a resistance (function of Alternator RPM).
• Vs = Constant * Field current * alternator RPM
• If there is a sudden disconnection of load current, the alternator terminal voltage suddenly increases (voltage drop across alternator resistance decreases).
• Duration of this transient is dependent on how long it takes the field circuit to bring the alternator into normal voltage regulation (the time constant of the alternator field coil).
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC52
• A realistic simulator was determined by building actual alternator driven by electric motor and comparing results on actual DUT’s.
• Historical simulator circuits only looked at energy equivalency but this model also looked at the Action Integral.
∫ I 2 dt
• Historical simulators damaged MOV but actual alternator did not (although same energy delivered to MOV)
• Difference was Action Integral. Simulator built to give approximate same Action Integral as actual alternator.
Schaffner simulator = 38 A 2 secActual Alternator = 8New simulator = 10
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC53
Load Dump Test Procedure
Calibration:
• Set transient generator to specified voltage with the DUT disconnected and SW1 open (open circuit).
• Verify voltage waveform across R4 - with DUT disconnected and SW1 closed.
Test:
• If Central Load Dump is being evaluated, add alternator zener diode (nominal 33V peak) across DUT after calibration.
• All circuits under test shall be exposed simultaneously (at test fixture). Note that in some cases this will also subject certain DUT outputs if they are connected through a load to power.
• Connect DUT, close SW1 and subject to specified transients.
• Functionally test ESC at nominal voltage after this test.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC54
ISO 7637
• Many specs use ISO 7637 for transients
• ISO 7637 transients too idealized
• Simulation not real or effective - charge up cap then discharge through resistor network.
• Developed in days of ignition breaker points.
• Out of date, developed over 30 years ago
• Ford EMC spec only realistic version (in appendix of latest 7637). Recreates actual mechanism
• IEEE, 2005, “Comparison of ISO 7637 Transient Waveforms to Real World Automotive Transient Phenomena” Keith Frazier, Sheran Alles
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC55
Mechanical Contact Characteristics
1. Contacts start to move apart.2. Switch current suddenly goes to zero.3. L current continues dV/dt = I / C4. Distance increases and Vf increases.5. Rise of Vf slower than rise of V (Mechanical inertia).6. Repetitive flashovers occur.7. Air breakdown means Switch voltage = 0.8. C discharges into network.9. Continues until energy dissipated and can’t
flashover.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC56
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC57
Transients - ISO Example
Conclusion = Not realistic simulation
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC58
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC59
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC60
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC61
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC62
Inductor Suppression Diode Placement
Near inductor - provides protection for intermittent wiring harness opens. Worse for Radiated Emissions (RE). Larger loop area for fast rise/fall times.
Near driver - reduces RE
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC63
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC64
SAE J2628 Details
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC65
SAE J2628 (2007) - Characterization, Conducted Immunity
1. Addresses Major Issues
• Design Margins
• Voltage Interruptions and Transients
• Power Dropouts and Dips
• Current Draw
• Switch Input Noise
2. Existing ISO Type Transients (e.g. ISO 7637) not realistic or effective.
3. Collaborated with Ford EMC group (Keith Frazier) to develop realistic simulations.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC66
SAE J2628, Design Margins
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC67
Design Margins Example
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC68
Chattering Relay Configuration
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC69
Power Cycle, Power Interruptions During Start-Up (Waveform F)
The purpose of this test is to verify proper DUT start-up during ignition key-on (ignition switch or relay bounce) which can be severe over the full vehicle temperature range. This is especially important for verifying proper software initialization.
Relay 2 provides the power on-off cycle and relay 1 is connected in a chattering configuration to provide the random noise representing contact bounce at power up and after.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC70
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC71
Inductive Transients - Pulse A1, A2, C
Pulse A1 and A2 simulates the transients produced by switching off power to the DUT and an inductive load (L) that is in parallel with the DUT.
Pulse C is produced by switching off an inductive load that shares a common power feed with the DUT.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC72
Inductive Transients - Pulse A1, A2, C
Test Mode SW1 Closed = Non Chattering Open = Chattering
SW2 Closed = 220 Ω
SW3 Closed = 10nF
SW4 Closed = 6 Ω (Hi Current) Open = 39 Ω (Lo Current)
A1 1, 2
Closed Closed Closed Closed
A1-a (1)
1 Open Open Open Closed
A2-1
1 Closed Open Open Open
A2-1, C-1 2
Closed Open Open Open
A2-1, C-1
3 Open Open Open Open
A2-2, C-2
2 Closed Open Closed Open
A2-2, C-2
3 Open Open Closed Open
(1) Special for Development Mode 1 = 0.2 Hz, 10% Duty Cycle Mode 2 = Pseudo Random Sequence Mode 3 = Same as mode 2 but with chattering relay
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC73
A1 A1a - Chattering
A2 C
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC74
Inductive Transients - Pulse B1, B2.
Note: Deleted in Ford EMC-CS-2009
Pulse B1 and B2 simulates low side switching of an inductive load and applies to DUT signal inputs that are connected across the switch (e.g. A/C clutch monitor). The pulse is produced at the start of period T1 when relay 3 contact opens. R3 provides adjustment of current through L2 to give different waveform characteristics (B1 = high current, B2 = low current).
B1 B2
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC75
SAE J2628 - Power Dropouts, Dips
• Voltage Dropouts - high impedance (open circuit) typically due to poor connections (e.g. hitting pothole).
• Voltage Dips
• Low impedance most commonly experienced during engine starting.
• These dips can also occur as a result of a poor battery connection when a high current load is activated.
• Voltage dips can also be used to evaluate DUT voltage regulator input step response by monitoring the regulator output and looking for stability (limited overshoot, limited ringing).
• These waveforms apply to all power supply andcontrol circuits.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC76
SAE J2628 – Power Dropout, Dips
Test Up, U1 T (1) Duration Impedance Acceptance
Criteria A 13.5 100us, 300us, 500us,
1ms, 3ms, 5ms, 10ms, 30ms, 50ms
3 cycles separated by 20 s
High II
B 13.5 Same as Test A Same as Test A High II
C 13.5 100us, 200us, 400us Same as Test A High I
D 13.5, 5.0 Same as Test A Same as Test A Low II
1. Waveform transition time approximately 10us.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC77
UP
0 V
10T 9T 8T 7T 2T T10T 9T 8T 7T 2T T
T T T T T T TT T T T T T T
10T 9T 8T 7T 2T T10T 9T 8T 7T 2T T
UP
0 V
UP
0 VT
UP
0V
T T T T T T T TT T T T T T T T
10T 9T 8T 7T 2T T10T 9T 8T 7T 2T T
U1
Pulses A, B, C, D
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC78
SAE J2628 - Current Draw
• Measure True RMS current under various voltages and temperatures
• Good indicator of:
• Normal DUT Operation
• DUT degradation
• Inadvertent design-manufacturing changes (conformity)
• Sneak paths
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC79
System Degradation Example Switch Input
• Validation typically done with “pristine switches. Open = infinity, closed = 0 ohms, minimal switch bounce.
• More realistic test configuration shown below.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC80
SAE J2628 – Switch Input Noise
• Creates random bounce at switch transitions.
• Includes non ideal switch impedances.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC81
Electrostatic Discharge (ESD)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC82
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC83
• Handling - too many test strikes, cumulative damage, will only see a few (at most) in the field.
• ESD is highly variable event - many variables (e.g. humidity, approach speed, module positioning above ground plane)
• Plastic parts hold charge - use air ionizer to neutralize. Important when testing - subsequent discharges not like first one due to charge buildup.
• ESD can cause “walking wounded” - looks OK after test but fails when exposed to other stress.
• The order of applying ESD discharges (in total test sequence) is important.
• Most methods used for RF Radiated Immunity also apply to ESD protection.
• Some mechanical ESD events not tested - e.g. underhood ESD from belts/pulleys, tire/bearings, low carbon tires, fuel filter, etc.
• Hot Plugging shown to be issue - often misdiagnosed as ESD.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC84
Spark Gap PCB - Test Configuration
SMD resistor value shift used to determine effectiveness of gap configurations
Placed on Ground Plane
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC85
A. Nielsen, 7Oct2004
ConfigurationConfigurationConfigurationConfiguration Total # HitsTotal # HitsTotal # HitsTotal # Hits Avg %Avg %Avg %Avg % Std Dev %Std Dev %Std Dev %Std Dev % Total # HitsTotal # HitsTotal # HitsTotal # Hits Avg %Avg %Avg %Avg % Std Dev %Std Dev %Std Dev %Std Dev %
1 No Spark Gap or Cap 13 10.7 3.7
2 0.005 Air Gap 33 3 2.1 33 4.6 1.9
3 Add MDB 69 0.7 0.5 66 1.1 0.6
4 0.010 Air Gap 33 5.6 2 30 6.7 1.7
5 Add MDB 72 1.1 0.9 72 1.8 1.0
6 0.015 Air Gap 33 6.7 2.4 30 7.8 2.6
7 Add MDB 72 1.3 0.9 72 2.0 0.9
PCB: 4.5 x 6 inch, Ground plane, Multiple gaps ( u nused gaps covered with Hum-Seal).Compound = MDB-06-073, Thermoset encapsulant with a dhesion additive.Resistors = 2010 SMD, 10 KMeasurement = % shift in resistor value.
Test Setups: 1. PCB raised 3/8 inch above bench gr ound plane. 2. PCB ground connected directly to be nch ground plane.
Procedure (Generally, some deviations): 6 hits, rep lace resistors before going to next set of hits.
Spark Gap Test Results
10 KV 14 KV
Conclusions:
• Spark gaps do provide some protection, especially at small gaps.
• Protection at practical gap sizes is very limited. Product may function, but is weakened (walking wounded).
• Coating spark gap with special compound improves (also protects for dendritic growth).
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC86
General Test Requirements
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC87
Monitoring
• Too much monitoring creates its own set of problems
• Spend too much time debugging specialized test software or hardware.
• Diverts from finding real concerns.
Acceptance Criteria
• Often too severe or arbitrarily chosen.
• Majority should be what the customer would notice not necessarily what the component spec limits are.
Development Testing
• Development testing should be done by design engineer - interactive process, failures are good.
• Often done without regard to the cost/time/value.
• Appreciate the need to get to root cause but sometimes it’s for the sake of satisfying an engineer’s curiosity and is not a good business decision.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC88
Component Test Plan
The quality of event is highly dependent on preparation. Poor test preparation has historically resulted in retests and a lot of non-value work.
1.0 Introduction 1.1 Product Family Description1.2 Theory of Operation1.3 Physical Construction1.4 EMC Specification Release1.5 Approved Test Facility1.6 Component Part Number(s)1.7 Component Manufacturer(s)1.8 Component Usage
2.0 EMC Requirements Analysis2.1 Critical Interface Signals2.2 Potential Sources of Emissions 2.3 Component Surrogate selection
3.0 Test Design and Requirements 3.1 Component Operating Modes/Functional
Classifications3.2 Test Requirements3.3 Input Requirements3.4 Output Requirements3.5 Load Box/Test Support Requirements
4.0 Test Setups5.0 Test Report Requirements
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC89
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC90
Designing PCB for EMC,
Essential Design Rules
(Ref Word Document)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC91
PCB Layout Examples - Filter Connectors (1980)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC92
PCB Layout Examples - Radio
Old (many grounds) vs New (one good ground)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC93
PCB Layout Examples - EEC
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC94
PCB Layout Examples - Cluster
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC95
Supplemental Product Assurance
Information
Product Assurance Robustness
(PAR)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC96
Key Elements
• Product Assurance Robustness (PAR) Plan
• Specifically designed to address contemporary Issues. Based on case histories comparing detection capability of Traditional vs. PAR.
• Similar philosophy to best OEM’s - Focus on potential weaknesses early.
• Emphasis on Analysis and Development testing -Most “Real World’ issues not found in DV.
• Best if multi-discipline analysis by expert(s) who know what to focus on.
• Use surrogate data to reduce non-value testing.
• Reduce sample size - Allows increased monitoring and less facilities (allows more focusing on product and not on test complexity "red herring" issues).
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC97
• Focused testing and measuring degradation (not just failures).
• Addresses system interaction and degradation.
• Combines EMC and Non EMC environments.
• If fully implemented, less overall time-cost ( >50 % possible) and more effective.
• Viewed as risk since different - actually more rigorous
• Successfully used on complex programs where no OEM specs exist (aftermarket) - TacNet (Police), Dockable Family Entertainment System, etc.
• Degree of implementation depends on maturity level (experience) of OEM and Vendor.
• SAE J1211 revision (2008) and SAE J2628 (2007) reflects this philosophy.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC98
Three PAR Stages - Summary
1. Analysis - Requirements, Thermal, Mechanical, Electrical, Reliability, Referential Data - Use of experts emphasized (electrical, mechanical, etc) to focus testing.
2. Development - Formalized testing based on analysis.
• Besides analysis, this is where real issues are identified.
• Allows max flexibility to experiment and sufficient reaction time.
• Stage where failures are good (maximize information).
• Simple and low cost techniques that requires minimal lab facilities.
• Uses Product Assurance Robustness (PAR) tester, Ref SAE J2628
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC99
Development Tests
Type ID Name Description
General G-10 Internal Inspection Solder Joints, Connectors, e tc
G-20 Functionality Emphasis on Transition States.
Characterization C-10 Design Margins Ramp Voltage, Upper-Lower Operati ng Limits (UOL, LOL) Multiple Temps, Two Methods (Rigorous, Abbreviated),Includes C-20.
C-20 Interruptions,Transients
Power Interruptions, Transients
C-30 Power Dips Various Pulse Widths and Voltages
C-50 Current Draw True RMS Current During Power On-Of f, Multiple Temps.
C-60 Overvoltage True RMS Current at 19v, 24 v, Multi ple Temps.
C-70 Reverse Battery Current
True RMS Current at -14 v
C-80 Oscillator Function Momentary Short Oscillator, Verify Recovery
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC100
Development Tests, Cont’d
Type ID Name Description
Failure Modes FM-10 Shorts to Power-Ground
0.3 ohms, Monitor Current During Shorts
FM-20 Load Faults Opens, Partial Shorts in Certain Lo ads
FM-30 Leakage Resistance All pins = 50K to Power or G round
FM-40 Sneak Paths, Opens Open Power-Ground to DUT (at DUT)
EMC-RF EMC-10 RF Immunity Bulk Current Injection (BCI)
EMC-20 Emissions Current Probe on Harness or AM/FM Radio
EMC-30 ESD Pins = +/- 10kv, Controls = +/- 15kv
EMC-40 Crosstalk Noise From Chattering Relay Coupled by Parallel Wire
Environmental Env-10 Moisture Immunity Apply Windex Directly to PCB , Verify No Combustion.
Env-20 Mechanical Disturbance
Plastic Hammer, Drop (15cm), Flexing of PCB
Env-30 Resonant Search Identify Potential Vibration I ssues
Env-40 High Temp Exposure Monitor Suspect Hot Points. Hot Box if Applicable
Env-50 Combined Envir Exposure
High Temp-Humidity-Shock
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC101
3. Validation - (Qualification, Endurance)
• This is often “Test for Success” oriented - “Feel Good” testing that can give false sense of acceptability.
• Specified by customer - Plan depends on OEM flexibility. Simplify (e.g. surrogate data, focus on what’s new, etc)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC102
Traditional vs PAR Summary
Stage
Traditional
PAR
1. Analysis
1. Define Requirements 2. Expertise Distributed – Analysis Piecemeal 3. Little Synergy to Identify Weaknesses.
1. Define Requirements 2. Multi-Disciplined Perspective (Broad Experience). 3. Identifying Weaknesses Critical - Where to Focus.
2. Development
1. Not Required or Limited. 2. Waiting for DV to Detect Concerns.
1. Main Focus - More Important than DV 2. Formalized Series of Simple Tests. 3. Low Cost, Minimal Lab Facilities. 4. Typically Takes 3 days. 5. Failure is Good - Maximizes Information 6. Identifies Concerns Early.
3. Validation
1. Cookbook Test Procedures. 2. Late in Program 3. Large Sample Sizes. 4. "Test for Success", Feel Good Results. 5. Limited "Play Time" to Find Customer Issues. 6. Software Validation Under Pristine Conditions
1. Small Sample Size. 2. More of Systems Approach. 3. Heavy Use of Surrogate Data. 4. More Focused on Weaknesses. 5. Key Life Test Looking at Degradation (Not Failu re).
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC103
Item
D
escr
ipti
on
T
rad
itio
nal
P
roce
ss
Inte
llig
ent
Tes
tin
g P
roce
ss
1 A
ppro
ach
Coo
kboo
k T
ailo
red
test
pla
n ut
ilizi
ng h
isto
rical
dat
a, a
naly
sis
and
deve
lopm
ent t
estin
g to
focu
s on
pot
entia
l pro
duct
w
eakn
esse
s an
d ch
ange
s.
2
Sur
roga
te D
ata
Var
ies
Max
imiz
e to
red
uce
non
valu
e te
stin
g.
3
Cos
t, T
est T
ime
Exp
ensi
ve, L
ong
Pot
entia
l to
redu
ce b
y 50
% o
r m
ore.
4 E
ffect
iven
ess
Min
imal
M
ore
effe
ctiv
e. A
imed
at c
onte
mpo
rary
issu
es
Foc
used
on
wha
t is
unkn
own.
5 T
est f
or S
ucce
ss
Maj
ority
of t
ests
S
ome
but a
lso
gene
rate
s va
riabl
e da
ta (
test
to fa
ilure
or
mea
surin
g de
grad
atio
n).
6
Sam
ple
Siz
e
Larg
e
Sm
alle
r, r
educ
ed fa
cilit
ies
with
the
focu
s on
wha
t’s
ne
eded
to v
erify
the
unkn
own.
7 M
onito
ring
Lim
ited
Con
tinuo
us m
onito
ring
(allo
wed
by
smal
ler
sam
ple
size
)
8 T
est C
onfig
urat
ion
Art
ifici
al lo
ads,
m
inim
al in
terf
aces
S
ub-s
yste
m w
ith r
ealis
tic lo
ads
and
inte
rfac
es (
allo
wed
by
redu
ced
sam
ple
size
).
9
Tim
e C
ompr
essi
on
whe
re P
ossi
ble
Not
app
lied
suffi
cien
tly
Exa
mpl
e: R
educ
e dw
ell t
imes
on
ther
mal
cyc
ling/
shoc
k.
Mea
sure
DU
T b
oard
tem
p an
d se
t dw
ells
to s
tabi
lizat
ion
+ 5
m
inut
es.
Use
sur
roga
te d
ata
to o
nly
run
the
test
req
uire
d to
ve
rify
the
unkn
own.
10
EM
C T
estin
g D
one
sepa
rate
ly
at r
oom
tem
p.
Sup
plem
ente
d b
y m
ore
real
istic
Con
duct
ed Im
mun
ity te
stin
g in
Dev
elop
men
t Sta
ge.
Ref
eren
ce S
AE
J26
28
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC104
Actual Example Plan
Note - Although PAR much shorter, plan is better
(customized to address many issues not in original)
OEM Original Request PAR - OEM Approved
Analysis Moderate Similar but also Developed Focused Test Plan
Development Test Time No 24 hr (3 X 8 hr)
DV Sample Size 12 6
DV Cumulative Test Time 3000 hr 400 hr
Key Life Test Time 4800 hr 300 hr
Overall Total Test Time 7800 hr 700
Note: software validation, EMC additional
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC105
PAR Support Hardware
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC106
Product Assurance Robustness (PAR) Tester
• Based on real world issues often missed in typical Product Assurance/Validation process.
• Uses simple, low cost techniques and includes many functions in one package (does not require a test laboratory environment).
• Makes it practical for Hardware-Software Robustness and Design Margin testing throughout the design process. Enables early detection of issues and a lean testing process.
• Capability to do many OEM, ISO, etc Conducted Immunity EMC tests.
• Recreates “real world” transient events (unlike the unrealistic simulations of ISO 7637).
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC107
PAR Tester Cont’d
• Creates other waveforms via a 2 channel Arbitrary Waveform Generator (AWG) and 2 channel DC power amplifier. Fast waveforms use the Electronic Switch module.
• Evaluates non ideal DUT switch signal inputs via a 4 channel switch simulator that creates random noise on switch transitions. Also simulates non ideal switch impedances.
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC108
1. DC Power Amplifiers:
a. Power Op Amps - switching power supplies.
b. 0-20 KHz, 0-24 volts.
c. Two Channels (150 and 50 watts)
2. Arbitrary Waveform Generator (AWG):
a. 2 channels
b. PC Controlled via USB
c. Easy to use waveform editor.
3. Electronic Switch, DC voltage source
a. 1us rise/fall time
b. Capability = 10 amps
c. Voltage Source = 1.5 - 20 volts, 1.5 amp (Higher currents available via DC Amp)
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC109
4. Transient Generator: Uses inductors and relays (including chattering relay) to simulate vehicle Transients per SAE J2628 and Ford EMC spec.
5. Switch Noise Simulator:
a. Creates random bounce at switch transitions (adjustable)
b. 4 channels, separate or simultaneous activation.
c. Includes non ideal switch impedances.
Contents: Rack Assembly, Enclosure (pull handle, wheels), DC Amps, Electronic Switch, Switch Noise Simulator, Transient Generator, AWG, Waveform files, User manual. Weight approx 30 lbs
Contact:
Arnie Nielsen, (248) 305-8264, [email protected]
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC110
© Arnie Nielsen Consulting LLC111