Vol. 85
Latest Volume
All Volumes
PIERL 123 [2025] PIERL 122 [2024] PIERL 121 [2024] PIERL 120 [2024] PIERL 119 [2024] PIERL 118 [2024] PIERL 117 [2024] PIERL 116 [2024] PIERL 115 [2024] PIERL 114 [2023] PIERL 113 [2023] PIERL 112 [2023] PIERL 111 [2023] PIERL 110 [2023] PIERL 109 [2023] PIERL 108 [2023] PIERL 107 [2022] PIERL 106 [2022] PIERL 105 [2022] PIERL 104 [2022] PIERL 103 [2022] PIERL 102 [2022] PIERL 101 [2021] PIERL 100 [2021] PIERL 99 [2021] PIERL 98 [2021] PIERL 97 [2021] PIERL 96 [2021] PIERL 95 [2021] PIERL 94 [2020] PIERL 93 [2020] PIERL 92 [2020] PIERL 91 [2020] PIERL 90 [2020] PIERL 89 [2020] PIERL 88 [2020] PIERL 87 [2019] PIERL 86 [2019] PIERL 85 [2019] PIERL 84 [2019] PIERL 83 [2019] PIERL 82 [2019] PIERL 81 [2019] PIERL 80 [2018] PIERL 79 [2018] PIERL 78 [2018] PIERL 77 [2018] PIERL 76 [2018] PIERL 75 [2018] PIERL 74 [2018] PIERL 73 [2018] PIERL 72 [2018] PIERL 71 [2017] PIERL 70 [2017] PIERL 69 [2017] PIERL 68 [2017] PIERL 67 [2017] PIERL 66 [2017] PIERL 65 [2017] PIERL 64 [2016] PIERL 63 [2016] PIERL 62 [2016] PIERL 61 [2016] PIERL 60 [2016] PIERL 59 [2016] PIERL 58 [2016] PIERL 57 [2015] PIERL 56 [2015] PIERL 55 [2015] PIERL 54 [2015] PIERL 53 [2015] PIERL 52 [2015] PIERL 51 [2015] PIERL 50 [2014] PIERL 49 [2014] PIERL 48 [2014] PIERL 47 [2014] PIERL 46 [2014] PIERL 45 [2014] PIERL 44 [2014] PIERL 43 [2013] PIERL 42 [2013] PIERL 41 [2013] PIERL 40 [2013] PIERL 39 [2013] PIERL 38 [2013] PIERL 37 [2013] PIERL 36 [2013] PIERL 35 [2012] PIERL 34 [2012] PIERL 33 [2012] PIERL 32 [2012] PIERL 31 [2012] PIERL 30 [2012] PIERL 29 [2012] PIERL 28 [2012] PIERL 27 [2011] PIERL 26 [2011] PIERL 25 [2011] PIERL 24 [2011] PIERL 23 [2011] PIERL 22 [2011] PIERL 21 [2011] PIERL 20 [2011] PIERL 19 [2010] PIERL 18 [2010] PIERL 17 [2010] PIERL 16 [2010] PIERL 15 [2010] PIERL 14 [2010] PIERL 13 [2010] PIERL 12 [2009] PIERL 11 [2009] PIERL 10 [2009] PIERL 9 [2009] PIERL 8 [2009] PIERL 7 [2009] PIERL 6 [2009] PIERL 5 [2008] PIERL 4 [2008] PIERL 3 [2008] PIERL 2 [2008] PIERL 1 [2008]
2019-06-27
Confidence Level of High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Field Tests
By
Progress In Electromagnetics Research Letters, Vol. 85, 109-115, 2019
Abstract
High-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) field tests are often conducted in the working volume of HEMP simulators to verify the hardness or HEMP survivability of the systems under test. For HEMP field tests, enough confidence should be provided through certain specific test designs. In this paper, the confidence probability of HEMP field tests is defined through a statistical analysis. Based on this definition, the confidence level of the tests is proposed to address the problem that the probability of a failure or significant upset is unknown. The relation between the number of repeated illuminations in one test status and confidence level is provided after analysis. By balancing cost and confidence level, an appropriate number of the repeated illuminations for each test status can be obtained. The comparison with the definition in another article is also made.
Citation
Zhizhen Zhu, Jing Yang, Yuewu Shi, Xin Nie, Wei Wang, Beiyun Sun, and Jinjin Wang, "Confidence Level of High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Field Tests," Progress In Electromagnetics Research Letters, Vol. 85, 109-115, 2019.
doi:10.2528/PIERL18103002
References

1. Ricketts, L. W., J. E. Bridges, and J. Miletta, EMP Radiation and Protection Technique, Wiley, 1976.

2. Zhou, H., Z. Du, and K. Gong, "Transient response of bipolar junction transistor under intense electromagnetic pulse," High Power Laser & Particle Beams, Vol. 17, No. 12, 1861-1864, 2005.

3. Zhang, L., L. Shi, and J. Tan, "Experimental studies on interference characteristics of microcontroller under EMP," Safety & EMC, 33-35, 2005.

4. Wen, D., et al. "The simulation of preamplifier circuit responding to EM pulse," Ship Science and Technology, Vol. 4, 90-92, 2011.

5. Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) --- Part 1-3: General --- The Effects of High-altitude EMP (HEMP) on Civil Equipment and Systems, Basic EMC Publication, Aug. 2002.

6. Liu, H., Y. Xi, and J. Yang, "Electromagnetic pulse effect analysis for doppler radar," Journal of Microwaves, Vol. S3, 309-311, 2012.

7. Kichouliya, R. and M. J. Thomas, "Interaction of high power electromagnetic pulses with power cables and electronic systems ," IEEE International Symposium on EMC, 159-163, Jul. 2016.

8. Kopp, C., The Electromagnetic Bomb --- A Weapon of Electrical Mass Destruction, 1-26, Monash Univ. Clayton, 1996.

9. Zhou, B., B. Chen, and L. Shi, EMP and EMP Protection, 288-289, National Defence Industry Press, 2003.

10. Sabath, F. and S. Potthas, "Tolerance values and the confidence level for high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) field tests," IEEE Trans. EMC, Vol. 55, No. 3, 518-525, Jun. 2013.

11. Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) -- Part 2: Environment --- Section 9: Description of HEMP Environment --- Radiated Disturbance, Basic EMC Publication, Dec. 1996.

12. Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) --- Part 4-25: Testing and Measurement Techniques --- HEMP Immunity Test Methods for Equipment and Systems, Basic EMC Publication, Nov. 2001.