From: Jay Chesavage ([email protected])
Date: Tue Jan 04 2000 - 13:23:28 PST
Last time I checked, chaos theory had to do with temporally varying
phenomenon, rather than spatially fixed phenomenon. Chaos theory, for
example, may be used to study weather, but doesn't work to well to figure
out where to put telephone poles. Unless the holes in your sheet metal
chase each other around a lot more than mine do, or you can convince
someone that EMI measurements need to be made while the antenna moves
randomly, I can't imagine chaos theory being applicable here.
Is there a class of Chaos theory which has to do with optimizing fixed,
static structures? Sounds more like linear programming to me (explore
state space for minimum radiation at frequency f, where the variable is
hole placement), and then go repeat the process for each and every f, and
each and every hole placement(!).
This seems on the surface to pay far less dividends for much more effort
than does, for example, quadrupling the number of holes, while quartering
the area of each one (assuming the aspect ratio has already been reduced
to 1 wherever possible).
Am I missing something?
-Jay
On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Adrian Shiner wrote:
> Do Douglas' results provide yet another elegant demonstration of the
> interference effect of transmission of electromagnetic energy through (in
> this case imperfect) parallel slots?
> If so, then surely room for further development...chaotic hole spacing or
> narrow short slots at chatotic angular orientations and lengths. Read up on
> Chaos Theory for the use of chaotic in the sentence above.
> Bet wishes for the new year
>
> Adrian
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Douglas McKean <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: 04 January 2000 18:02
> Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : Chassis hole opening and frequencies
>
>
> > Hi Doug,
> >
> > Henry Ott has a bunch of relationships regarding
> > holes. Namely circular, rectangular, an array of
> > circular holes, an array of rectangular holes.
> >
> > He begins discussing cutoff frequencies for
> > individual types of holes. Circular hole cut
> > off frequency is based on the diameter.
> > Rectangular hole cut off frequency is based on
> > longest side. I have an Excel spreadsheet where
> > I translated these equations for ease of use. The
> > actual relationships I can look up for you.
> >
> > The following results are linear so I'll use
> > 1 inch and the result for 1/10 of an inch is
> > simply 1/10 the result for the 1 inch and so on ...
> >
> > 1 inch Circular Hole: cut off freq = 6.90E+09
> > 1 inch Rectangular Hole: cut off freq = 5.90E+09
> >
> > Mr. Ott continues the discussion with Shielding
> > Effectiveness (SE) for the geometry of a particular
> > hole, i.e. circular and rectangular and the
> > thickness to diameter ratio. Again, the
> > relationships are linear so I'll normalize them
> > for you at 1:1 for thickness:diameter
> >
> > SE for circular hole 1:1 (thick:dia) = -32dB
> > (Thus, a ratio of 1:10 = -3.2 dB)
> > SE for rectangular hole 1:1 (thick:dia) = -27.2dB
> > (Thus, a ratio of 1:10 = -2.7 dB)
> >
> > Intuitively, it should become obvious that the
> > length of the hole forces the "hole" whatever
> > geometry it is the deciding as to how much the
> > of a cavity effect begins to dominate.
> >
> > Mr. Ott also discusses the "pattern effectiveness"
> > of an array of holes (circular or rectangular IIRC).
> > I'll give some results from my little spreadsheet.
> >
> > A 4x4 inch array of 1/4 inch diameter holes with
> > a 1 inch center to center separation in 18 gage
> > sheet metal (thickness =0.0478 in)
> >
> > SE = -52.1 dB
> >
> > Same array of holes as above changing only
> > the separation to 1/2 inch,
> >
> > SE = -40 dB
> >
> > It works out with this relationship that halving
> > or doubling the separation of holes results in
> > changing the SE by about 12 dB. IOW, a 2 inch
> > separation of the above array gives an SE = -64 dB
> > or -12 dB added to the -52 dB for the 1 inch.
> >
> > Keep in mind that there are many assumptions
> > made with these results. And the rules of thumb
> > regarding linearity or changing results by 12 dB
> > are merely theoretical.
> >
> > One further note, Dr. Hubing at an EMC presentation
> > here in Santa Clara two summers ago, discussed
> > results from mucho research on his behalf about
> > holes in covers. The bottom line is that slots
> > are the thing to worry about and not holes. And
> > with that conclusion I wholeheartedly agree.
> >
> > Regards, Doug McKean
> >
> >
> > **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
> [email protected]. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
> si-list, for more help, put HELP.
> > si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list
> > ****
> >
>
>
> **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to [email protected]. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP.
> si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list
> ****
>
>
>
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to [email protected]. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP.
si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list
****
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 11:34:24 PDT