电磁兼容小小家

 找回密码
 注册
楼主: lishenglin

ESD problem

[复制链接]
发表于 2006-12-31 22:25:19 | 显示全部楼层
能量是一样的,因为静电枪的储能电容相同,电压相同的情况下能量当然是一样的,不同的是两者的放电接触面大小不同,故两者放电接触面的单位能量密度不同,所以其在单位接触面上的ESD强弱也是不同的
发表于 2007-1-29 16:12:27 | 显示全部楼层
接触模式和空气模式的放电能量应该是不同的,据我了解接触模式的放电能量要高于空气模式,
再一个用接触放电头放电时其上升时间要更短也就是高频分量更丰富,这就是为什么用接触头进行空气放电会不过
发表于 2007-1-30 15:27:11 | 显示全部楼层
引用第11楼chenchen2006-12-26 12:27发表的“”:
10楼,有几个问题, 我还是不明白?
  如果你只是换了枪头, 放电模式,你并没有改变, 这一种结果是正常的.
  如果你不仅换了枪头,而且放电模式也改变了, 那么也就是说在空气放电的模式下, 你可以用做20HZ的放电选择, 我觉得这是不大可能的,我们都知道,在空气放电的模式下, 只有单次放电这一个模式可选的。




我不知道你用的什么牌子的ESD测试仪器,我用的是EMC PARTNER的

选择空气放电,放电次数调整到最大,要不放电次数到了,仪器就停下来了.
扣住放电枪的放电开关,不要松开(枪头按照空气放电的要求接近EUT),这时候就是20Hz 的连续放电.
发表于 2007-1-30 15:32:42 | 显示全部楼层
用铝板做接地参考平面就可以了
铜成本高了很多,还不如用在打一个好一点的确 地桩
发表于 2007-5-8 13:00:44 | 显示全部楼层
我同意emctest的说法,能量是不一样的,因为用contact 尖头放电时,可达到的peak current 可达到6A/kv左右, 而用air discharge的圆头的达到的peak current 为3.75A/kv左右, 所以也正是因为这样,才有contact discharge 比较严苛的说法。大家可以看看自己使用的ESD generator的产品说明
发表于 2007-5-9 09:05:14 | 显示全部楼层
Contact 或 air 到底哪一个更严酷,很难一概而论的。 但是,前者放电时间的重复性更好,这就是为什么要优先选择前者。这就是为什么LZ得到了一个似乎是奇怪的结果

下面是我观点的论据,从61000-4-2 copy 过来的。
发表于 2007-5-9 09:16:56 | 显示全部楼层
EN61000-4-2 附录A

A.6 Technical rationale for the use of the contact discharge method

In general the reproducibility of the previous test method (air discharge) was influenced by,
for example, the speed of approach of the discharge tip, humidity, and construction of the test
equipment, leading to variations in pulse rise time and magnitude of the discharge current.
In previous designs of ESD testers, the ESD event was simulated by discharging a charged
capacitor through a discharge tip onto the EUT, the discharge tip forming a spark gap at the
surface of the EUT.
The spark is a very complicated physical phenomenon. It has been shown that with a moving
spark gap the resulting rise time (or rising slope) of the discharge current can vary from less
than 1 ns and more than 20 ns, as the approach speed is varied.
Keeping the approach speed constant does not result in constant rise time. For some
voltage/speed combinations, the rise time still fluctuates by a factor of up to 30.
One proposed way to stabilize the rise time is to use a mechanically fixed spark gap. Although
the rise time is stabilized with this method, it cannot be recommended because the resulting
rise time is much slower than the rise time of the natural event to be simulated.

Using various types of triggering devices (e.g. gas tubes or thyratrons) instead of the open
spark, is another possibility, but such kinds of triggering devices produce rise times which are
still too low compared to the rise times of the real ESD event.

The only triggering device known today which is able to produce repeatable and fast rising
discharge currents is the relay. The relay should have sufficient voltage capability and a
single contact (to avoid double discharges in the rising part). For higher voltages, vacuum
relays prove to be useful. Experience shows that by using a relay as the triggering device, not
only the measured discharge pulse shape is much more repeatable in its rising part, but also
the test results with real EUTs are more reproducible.
发表于 2007-5-9 22:14:30 | 显示全部楼层
能量一样跟EUT的反应是不是一样没有直接的关系的

发表回复

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

QQ|小黑屋|电磁兼容网 电磁兼容小小家 EMC工程师家园 电磁兼容(EMC)小小家学习园地

GMT+8, 2024-5-14 03:16 , Processed in 0.080284 second(s), 14 queries .

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表