| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Attached presentation for discussion and consideration – this was the genesis of the cable clamp test.
It shows how it relates to EMC testing, and perhaps provides some guidance as to which assumptions have changed and how the test might be adjusted. Specifically – It was designed to reflect unshielded Cat5e cabling behavior (and hence this effects the calibration of the CM noise
leve) It was designed for 3V/m testing. It was shown to reflect EMC testing for this scenario. George Zimmerman Principal, CME Consulting Experts in Advanced
PHYsical Communications Technology george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 310-920-3860 (PLEASE NOTE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS.
THE OTHER WILL STILL WORK, BUT PLEASE USE THIS FOR CME BUSINESS) From: Cibula,
Peter R [mailto:peter.r.cibula@xxxxxxxxx] All, Materials for today’s Rx CMNR ad-hoc meeting are attached.
·
Proposed agenda
·
Contribution on “40GBASET EMC”, (German Feyh and Neven Pischl, Broadcom) Looking forward to your participation! Pete Cibula Rx CMNR ad hoc Chair -----Original Appointment----- This invitation announces the inaugural meeting of the P802.3bq Receiver Common-Mode Noise Rejection (Rx CMNR) ad hoc. As of this writing, the meeting teleconference is scheduled to be held Wednesday, October 22nd,
2014 at 8AM PDT. Introduction to the Rx CMNR ad hoc As noted in the unconfirmed minutes of the IEEE P802.3bq 40GBASE-T Task Force meeting held September 9-10, 2014 in Kanata, ON, Canada,
this ad hoc has been chartered by the P802.3bq Task Force Chair to investigate the common mode noise rejection test (also known as the cable clamp test.). To further elaborate on the expected scope and deliverables of this ad hoc, I’m indebted to our Clause 98 Chief Editor, George Zimmerman,
for the following high-level description of what I anticipate will be the focus of our work. From IEEE P802.3bq™/D1.0, subclause 98.5.4.3 Common-mode noise rejection: “This test, known as the “cable clamp test” is currently in the draft, but is being reviewed to see whether frequency extension,
augmentation of the existing test, replacement of the test or deletion is desired.” I welcome your participation in this ad hoc, and also welcome contributions even as we define our charter, scope and deliverables. Some initial areas for discussion may include, but are not limited to, the following:
·
Investigations along the lines of improving and augmenting the existing test
·
Determining appropriate frequency extensions
·
Identifying improvements/augmentations to the existing test and associated configuration/calibration procedures
·
Investigations along the lines of
replacing the existing test
·
Identifying alternative test methods
·
Investigations along the line of
deleting the existing requirement
·
Evaluating common-mode noise coupling over supported cabling systems
·
Assessing PHY transceiver sensitivity to common-noise signals coupled over supported cabling systems
·
Confirming that PHYs operating over supported cabling systems can meet the BER objective in the presence of common-mode
impairments Inaugural meeting agenda The final agenda will be confirmed prior to the meeting, but I would like to suggest the following as a starting point to cover
some basic first steps. Participants are encouraged to review IEEE meeting guidelines available at the following URL -
https://development.standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/mob/preparslides.pdf 8:00 am meeting start
1.
Roll call Record attendance, attendees’ names and affiliations (Following previous meeting practice, ad hoc attendees are asked to please email Dave Chalupsky <david.chalupsky@xxxxxxxxx>
or Pete Cibula <peter.r.cibula@xxxxxxxxx> a note confirming their attendance)
2.
Reminder of IEEE patent policy
3.
Housekeeping
·
Approve meeting agenda
·
Review the ad hoc charter/scope and deliverables
·
Charter (Proposed): Investigate the common mode noise rejection (CMNR) test, also known as the cable clamp test.
·
Deliverables: TBD
4.
Brainstorming session
·
Review relevant content from prior study group/task force work and/or new contributions
·
Define actions/next steps needed to begin moving forward with developing the ad hoc’s deliverables.
5.
Discussion and next steps 10:00 am meeting end
Your action required Acknowledging that we are in the midst of exciting innovations and advances in twisted pair technology, I recognize that there may
be conflicts with other industry group and standards meetings. To that end, I’ve attempted to schedule this meeting so as not to conflict with scheduled CFI socialization and consensus discussion. If you are aware of any conflicts with the proposed meeting time, I am open to proposals for alternate times that allow broad participation
by interested parties. Thanks in advance for your participation in this activity as we continue to make progress with P802.3bq™ D1.0 Best regards, Pete Cibula P802.3bq Rx CMNR ad hoc Chair |
Attachment:
IEEEclamp-1998-07-converted.pdf
Description: IEEEclamp-1998-07-converted.pdf