Iec 61000-4-23-2016

IEC 61000-4-23
®
Edition 2.0 2016-10
INTERNATIONAL
STANDARD
colour
inside
BASIC EMC PUBLICATION
Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) –

Part 4-23: Testing and measurement techniques – Test methods for protective
devices for HEMP and other radiated disturbances
IEC 61000-4-23:2016-10(en)
THIS PUBLICATION IS COPYRIGHT PROTECTED
Copyright © 2016 IEC, Geneva, Switzerland
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from
either IEC or IEC's member National Committee in the country of the requester. If you have any questions about IEC
copyright or have an enquiry about obtaining additional rights to this publication, please contact the address below or
your local IEC member National Committee for further information.
IEC Central Office Tel.: +41 22 919 02 11

3, rue de Varembé Fax: +41 22 919 03 00
CH-1211 Geneva 20 info@iec.ch
Switzerland www.iec.ch
About the IEC

The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) is the leading global organization that prepares and publishes
International Standards for all electrical, electronic and related technologies.
About IEC publications
The technical content of IEC publications is kept under constant review by the IEC. Please make sure that you have the
latest edition, a corrigenda or an amendment might have been published.
IEC Catalogue - webstore.iec.ch/catalogue Electropedia - www.electropedia.org

The stand-alone application for consulting the entire The world's leading online dictionary of electronic and
bibliographical information on IEC International Standards, electrical terms containing 20 000 terms and definitions in
Technical Specifications, Technical Reports and other English and French, with equivalent terms in 15 additional
documents. Available for PC, Mac OS, Android Tablets and languages. Also known as the International Electrotechnical
iPad. Vocabulary (IEV) online.
IEC publications search - www.iec.ch/searchpub IEC Glossary - std.iec.ch/glossary

The advanced search enables to find IEC publications by a 65 000 electrotechnical terminology entries in English and
variety of criteria (reference number, text, technical French extracted from the Terms and Definitions clause of
committee,…). It also gives information on projects, replaced IEC publications issued since 2002. Some entries have been
and withdrawn publications. collected from earlier publications of IEC TC 37, 77, 86 and
CISPR.
IEC Just Published - webstore.iec.ch/justpublished
Stay up to date on all new IEC publications. Just Published IEC Customer Service Centre - webstore.iec.ch/csc
details all new publications released. Available online and If you wish to give us your feedback on this publication or
also once a month by email. need further assistance, please contact the Customer Service
Centre: csc@iec.ch.
IEC 61000-4-23
®
Edition 2.0 2016-10
INTERNATIONAL
STANDARD
colour
inside
BASIC EMC PUBLICATION
Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) –

Part 4-23: Testing and measurement techniques – Test methods for protective
devices for HEMP and other radiated disturbances
INTERNATIONAL
ELECTROTECHNICAL
COMMISSION
ICS 33.100.99 ISBN 978-2-8322-3687-1
Warning! Make sure that you obtained this publication from an authorized distributor.
® Registered trademark of the International Electrotechnical Commission

–2– IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
CONTENTS
FOREWORD ........................................................................................................................... 6
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 8
1 Scope .............................................................................................................................. 9
2 Normative references ...................................................................................................... 9
3 Terms and definitions .................................................................................................... 10
4 HEMP test concepts ...................................................................................................... 15
4.1 General ................................................................................................................. 15
4.2 Testing of shielding enclosures ............................................................................. 16
4.2.1 General ......................................................................................................... 16
4.2.2 Buildings ....................................................................................................... 19
4.2.3 Shelters and shielded rooms .......................................................................... 20
4.2.4 Cabinets, racks and boxes ............................................................................. 21
4.3 Testing of shielded cables and connectors ............................................................ 23
4.3.1 General ......................................................................................................... 23
4.3.2 Testing of cable shields ................................................................................. 23
4.3.3 Testing of cable connectors ........................................................................... 26
4.4 Testing of shielding materials ................................................................................ 27
4.4.1 General ......................................................................................................... 27
4.4.2 Conducting gaskets ....................................................................................... 27
4.4.3 Conducting sheets and screens ..................................................................... 29
4.4.4 Cut-off waveguides and honeycombs ............................................................. 32
4.5 Summary of test concepts ..................................................................................... 33
5 Test methods for measuring the shielding effectiveness of HEMP protection
facilities ......................................................................................................................... 34
5.1 General ................................................................................................................. 34
5.2 Electromagnetic field testing ................................................................................. 34
5.2.1 General ......................................................................................................... 34
5.2.2 Pulse field testing .......................................................................................... 34
5.2.3 CW field testing ............................................................................................. 40
5.3 Current injection test procedures .......................................................................... 55
5.3.1 General ......................................................................................................... 55
5.3.2 Injection testing of enclosures ....................................................................... 55
5.3.3 Transfer impedance and admittance of cable shields and connectors ............ 57
5.3.4 Testing of gasket material .............................................................................. 57
Annex A (informative) HEMP test concepts for electrical systems ........................................ 60
A.1 Overview............................................................................................................... 60
A.2 Types of HEMP tests ............................................................................................ 60
A.2.1 General ......................................................................................................... 60
A.2.2 System-level transient tests ........................................................................... 60
A.2.3 CW field illumination tests ............................................................................. 61
A.2.4 Current injection testing ................................................................................. 61
A.2.5 Partial illumination testing .............................................................................. 62
A.2.6 Subsystem and component testing ................................................................ 62
A.3 Definition of the testing interface ........................................................................... 63
A.4 Use of test data .................................................................................................... 65
A.4.1 General ......................................................................................................... 65
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 –3–
A.4.2 Acceptance of new systems ........................................................................... 65

A.4.3 System assessments ..................................................................................... 65
A.4.4 Hardness surveillance monitoring .................................................................. 65
A.4.5 System design ............................................................................................... 65
A.5 Testing uncertainties ............................................................................................. 66
Annex B (informative) Characterization of shielded cables ................................................... 67
B.1 Fundamentals of cable shielding ........................................................................... 67
B.2 Definitions of transfer impedance and transfer admittance .................................... 68
B.3 Relative significance of Z′ t and Y′ t ......................................................................... 71
Annex C (informative) Equipment for HEMP pulse measurements ........................................ 72
C.1 General ................................................................................................................. 72
C.2 Sensors for HEMP measurements ......................................................................... 72
C.2.1 B- and H-field sensors ................................................................................... 72
C.2.2 D- and E-field sensors ................................................................................... 74
C.2.3 Current sensors ............................................................................................. 76
C.3 Signal transmission ............................................................................................... 77
C.3.1 General ......................................................................................................... 77
C.3.2 Fibre optic links ............................................................................................. 77
C.3.3 Fibre optic transducers .................................................................................. 78
C.4 Signal detection and processing ........................................................................... 78
Annex D (informative) Equipment for CW testing ................................................................. 80
D.1 General ................................................................................................................. 80
D.2 Antenna system .................................................................................................... 80
D.3 Power amplifier ..................................................................................................... 82
D.4 Receiver (network analyser).................................................................................. 83
D.5 Reference and response sensors .......................................................................... 83
D.6 Fibre optic system ................................................................................................. 85
D.7 Limitations of measurements ................................................................................ 88
Annex E (informative) Characterization of a planar shield for HEMP protection .................... 89
E.1 General ................................................................................................................. 89
E.2 Problem geometry ................................................................................................. 90
E.3 Equivalent circuit representation ........................................................................... 91
E.3.1 General ......................................................................................................... 91
E.3.2 Chain parameter representation of the shield ................................................. 92
E.3.3 Circuit responses ........................................................................................... 93
Annex F (informative) Inside-to-out measurement method ................................................... 97
F.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................ 97
F.2 Comparison of existing SE test methods ............................................................... 97
F.3 Inside-to-out SE test of shielded rooms ................................................................. 98
F.3.1 Measurements of the inside-to-out SE ........................................................... 98
F.3.2 Summary ..................................................................................................... 101
Bibliography ........................................................................................................................ 102
Figure 1 – Example of measured magnitude and phase of the transfer function

T(ω) = H in /H out for a shielded enclosure .............................................................................. 17
Figure 2 – Electric field and magnetic field shielding effectiveness of a 0,5 mm thick
aluminum enclosure [29] ....................................................................................................... 18
Figure 3 – Measured magnetic field shielding effectiveness SE H for a building ...................... 19
–4– IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Figure 4 – Conceptual illustration of the HEMP test of a building .......................................... 19

Figure 5 – Illustration of a shielded room or enclosure excited by HEMP fields ..................... 21
Figure 6 – Illustration of equipment racks, cabinets and box excited by internal HEMP
disturbance ........................................................................................................................... 21
Figure 7 – A general shield excited by current injection ........................................................ 22
Figure 8 – Basic configuration for transfer impedance measurement ..................................... 24
Figure 9 – Measured transfer impedance magnitude and phase of transfer impedance
per unit length for four braided shield cables with good shielding properties ......................... 25
Figure 10 – Basic configuration for transfer admittance measurement ................................... 26
Figure 11 – Test configuration for transfer impedance measurement of a cable
connector .............................................................................................................................. 26
Figure 12 – Examples of conducting gaskets used as HEMP protection devices ................... 28
Figure 13 – Circuit model representing the behaviour of a conducting gasket for HEMP
protection ............................................................................................................................. 28
Figure 14 – Measurement configuration for the resistivity of a sample ................................... 29
Figure 15 – Test concept for measuring the resistivity with surface probes ........................... 30
Figure 16 – Concepts for shielding effectiveness measurement of conducting sheets
and screens .......................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 17 – Example of the calculated plane-wave shielding effectiveness of a
0,01 mm thick plate of different material as a function of frequency ...................................... 32
Figure 18 – Cut-off waveguides and honeycomb used as protective elements ....................... 33
Figure 19 – Examples of full-scale, pulse-radiating HEMP simulators.................................... 37
Figure 20 – Test procedure for the pulse test ........................................................................ 39
Figure 21 – Typical configuration of a CW test facility ........................................................... 40
Figure 22 – Example CW measurement set-up ..................................................................... 41
Figure 23 – Test and analysis procedures for conducting a CW test...................................... 42
Figure 24 – Analysis flow diagram for extrapolating a measured CW spectrum to the
HEMP response .................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 25 – Example scan from 9 kHz to 3 GHz for the ambient electromagnetic field
from communication signals .................................................................................................. 44
Figure 26 – Test procedure for the ambient EM excitation test .............................................. 45
Figure 27 – Double-ended TEM cell for field illumination testing of small enclosures ............ 46
Figure 28 – Example test set-up for field illumination in the TEM cell .................................... 47
Figure 29 – Illustration of the single-ended TEM cell and associated equipment ................... 48
Figure 30 – Test set-up for the plane-wave shielding effectiveness measurements ............... 50
Figure 31 – Test set-up for the H-field shielding effectiveness measurements ....................... 51
Figure 32 – Example of antenna locations for the localized antenna tests for a
hypothetical shielded enclosure or facility ............................................................................. 52
Figure 33 – Test concept and equipment configuration for current injection testing of a
shielded enclosure or box ..................................................................................................... 56
Figure 34 – Surface probe for volume resistivity measurement ............................................. 59
Figure A.1 – Sample HEMP interaction diagram illustrating penetration mechanisms,
system responses and generic test interface locations .......................................................... 64
Figure B.1 – Geometry of a shielded coaxial line with an internal circuit ............................... 67
Figure B.2 – Coaxial cable located over a conducting ground plane ...................................... 68
Figure B.3 – Two per-unit-length circuits formed by the sheath and its ground return,
and the sheath and the internal conductor ............................................................................ 69
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 –5–
Figure C.1 – Magnetic field sensors [23] ............................................................................... 73

Figure C.2 – Single-slot, cylindrical coil sensor [23] .............................................................. 73
Figure C.3 – Two- and four-slot cylindrical coil sensors [23] .................................................. 74
Figure C.4 – Electrical configuration of an E-field sensor [23] ............................................... 74
Figure C.5 – Biconical E-field sensor .................................................................................... 75
Figure C.6 – E-field sensor mounted on a conducting ground plane [23] ............................... 75
Figure C.7 – Equipotential shapes for an optimally designed E-field sensor [23] ................... 75
Figure C.8 – Rogowski coil used for current measurements [23] ........................................... 76
Figure C.9 – Toroidal current sensor made of magnetic material [23] .................................... 76
Figure C.10 – Voltage pick-up points on the edges of the toroidal sensor [23] ....................... 76
Figure C.11 – Example of a single-channel fibre optic transmission system [23] ................... 77
Figure C.12 – Attenuation of coaxial lines and fibre optic cables as a function of
frequency .............................................................................................................................. 78
Figure D.1 – Various antennas for CW testing....................................................................... 81
Figure D.2 – Relationship between the CW antenna and the incident HEMP field ................. 82
Figure D.3 – Incident and ground-reflected field contributions to the reference sensor
excitations ............................................................................................................................ 84
Figure D.4 – Measured reference H-field spectrum and its inverse Fourier transform ............ 85
Figure D.5 – Measured sensor responses and calibration function ........................................ 87
Figure D.6 – Measured transfer function, corrected by calibration file ................................... 87
Figure E.1 – Example of a general shielding problem ............................................................ 89
Figure E.2 – Behaviour of the impedance ratio EH as a function of distance from a
source [29] ............................................................................................................................ 90
Figure E.3 – Conducting slab of thickness, d, and infinite extent serving as an
electromagnetic barrier ......................................................................................................... 91
Figure E.4 – Equivalent circuit representation of the shielding problem ................................. 92
Figure E.5 – Two-port representation of a circuit ................................................................... 93
Figure F.1 – Test set-up for the outside-to-in and inside-to-out SE measurement ................ 100
Table 1 – Recommended test procedure for different test objects ......................................... 34

Table 2 – Dimensions and composition of distances d 1 to d 3 , with reference to Figure 30 .... 50
Table 3 – Dimensions and composition of distances d 1 to d 3 , with reference to Figure 31 .... 51
Table 4 – Measurement frequencies and antennas in plane-wave ......................................... 52
Table 5 – Measurement frequencies and antennas in magnetic field ..................................... 54
Table E.1 – Surface resistance and electrical parameters for selected materials ................... 95
Table F.1 – Comparison with other standards ....................................................................... 98
Table F.2 – Test shielded rooms ........................................................................................... 99
Table F.3 – Comparison of the SE measurement results ..................................................... 101
–6– IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION

____________
ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY (EMC) –
Part 4-23: Testing and measurement techniques –

Test methods for protective devices for HEMP
and other radiated disturbances
FOREWORD
1) The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) is a worldwide organization for standardization comprising
all national electrotechnical committees (IEC National Committees). The object of IEC is to promote
international co-operation on all questions concerning standardization in the electrical and electronic fields. To
this end and in addition to other activities, IEC publishes International Standards, Technical Specifications,
Technical Reports, Publicly Available Specifications (PAS) and Guides (hereafter referred to as “IEC
Publication(s)”). Their preparation is entrusted to technical committees; any IEC National Committee interested
in the subject dealt with may participate in this preparatory work. International, governmental and non-
governmental organizations liaising with the IEC also participate in this preparation. IEC collaborates closely
with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in accordance with conditions determined by
agreement between the two organizations.
2) The formal decisions or agreements of IEC on technical matters express, as nearly as possible, an international
consensus of opinion on the relevant subjects since each technical committee has representation from all
interested IEC National Committees.
3) IEC Publications have the form of recommendations for international use and are accepted by IEC National
Committees in that sense. While all reasonable efforts are made to ensure that the technical content of IEC
Publications is accurate, IEC cannot be held responsible for the way in which they are used or for any
misinterpretation by any end user.
4) In order to promote international uniformity, IEC National Committees undertake to apply IEC Publications
transparently to the maximum extent possible in their national and regional publications. Any divergence
between any IEC Publication and the corresponding national or regional publication shall be clearly indicated in
the latter.
5) IEC itself does not provide any attestation of conformity. Independent certification bodies provide conformity
assessment services and, in some areas, access to IEC marks of conformity. IEC is not responsible for any
services carried out by independent certification bodies.
6) All users should ensure that they have the latest edition of this publication.
7) No liability shall attach to IEC or its directors, employees, servants or agents including individual experts and
members of its technical committees and IEC National Committees for any personal injury, property damage or
other damage of any nature whatsoever, whether direct or indirect, or for costs (including legal fees) and
expenses arising out of the publication, use of, or reliance upon, this IEC Publication or any other IEC
Publications.
8) Attention is drawn to the Normative references cited in this publication. Use of the referenced publications is
indispensable for the correct application of this publication.
9) Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this IEC Publication may be the subject of
patent rights. IEC shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
International Standard IEC 61000-4-23 has been prepared by subcommittee 77C: High power
transient phenomena, of IEC technical committee 77: Electromagnetic compatibility.
It forms Part 4-23 of IEC 61000. It has the status of a basic EMC publication in accordance
with IEC Guide 107.
This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition published in 2000. This edition
constitutes a technical revision.
This edition includes the following significant technical changes with respect to the previous
edition:
a) updates to the shielding effectiveness (SE) test method in Clause 5;

b) a new Annex F describing methods for testing ‘inside-to-out’ has been added.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 –7–
The text of this standard is based on the following documents:
CDV Report on voting

77C/253/CDV 77C/257/RVC
Full information on the voting for the approval of this standard can be found in the report on
voting indicated in the above table.
This publication has been drafted in accordance with the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.
A list of all parts in the IEC 61000 series, published under the general title Electromagnetic
compatibility (EMC), can be found on the IEC website.
The committee has decided that the contents of this publication will remain unchanged until
the stability date indicated on the IEC website under "http://webstore.iec.ch" in the data
related to the specific publication. At this date, the publication will be
• reconfirmed,
• withdrawn,
• replaced by a revised edition, or
• amended.
A bilingual version of this publication may be issued at a later date.
IMPORTANT – The 'colour inside' logo on the cover page of this publication indicates
that it contains colours which are considered to be useful for the correct
understanding of its contents. Users should therefore print this document using a
colour printer.
–8– IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
INTRODUCTION
IEC 61000 is published in separate parts, according to the following structure:
Part 1: General
General considerations (introduction, fundamental principles)
Definitions, terminology
Part 2: Environment
Description of the environment
Classification of the environment
Compatibility levels
Part 3: Limits
Emission limits
Immunity limits (in so far as they do not fall under the responsibility of the product
committees)
Part 4: Testing and measurement techniques

Measurement techniques
Testing techniques
Part 5: Installation and mitigation guidelines

Installation guidelines
Mitigation methods and devices
Part 6: Generic Standards
Part 9: Miscellaneous
Each part is further subdivided into several parts, published either as international standards,
as technical specifications or technical reports, some of which have already been published
as sections. Others will be published with the part number followed by a dash and a second
number identifying the subdivision (example: IEC 61000-6-1).
The IEC has initiated the preparation of standardized methods to protect civilian society from
the effects of high power electromagnetic (HPEM) environments. Such effects could disrupt
systems for communications, electric power, information technology, etc.
This part of IEC 61000 is an international standard that establishes the test concepts, set-ups,
required equipment, and test procedures for protective devices against HEMP radiated
disturbances.
Annex F provides examples of the SE test method placing the TX antenna inside the barrier.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 –9–
ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY (EMC) –
Part 4-23: Testing and measurement techniques –

Test methods for protective devices for HEMP
and other radiated disturbances
1 Scope
This part of IEC 61000 provides a protective devices test method for HEMP and other
radiated disturbances. It is primarily intended for HEMP testing but can be applied to other
externally generated radiated disturbances where appropriate. It provides a brief description
of the most important concepts for testing of shielding elements. For each test, the following
basic information is provided:
– theoretical foundation of the test (the test concepts);

– test set-up including outside-to-in and inside-to-out measurements;
– required equipment;
– test procedures;
– data processing.
This international standard does not provide information on requirements for specific levels
for testing.
This part of IEC 61000 has been updated to include a new test method.
Due to the available space, a transmitting antenna position outside the barrier has mainly
been suggested. However, nowadays, many EMP protection facilities in practical use do not
actually have enough space available outside the electromagnetic barrier due to physical
constraints such as concrete walls or soil to allow the method described in IEC 61000-4-
23:2000 (edition 1) to be applied correctly. From experience many facilities have available
space for a 1 m separation or less only.
Therefore, in many practical cases it is not possible to measure shielding effectiveness

according to the test method of previous documents. The constructors for EMP protection
facilities are also unwilling to build facilities with extra space for measurements with the
transmitting antenna outside the barrier due to the great expense and inefficiency of the
operational working area for new or existing buildings.
This document provides additionally a method that allows the transmitting antenna to be
placed inside the enclosure and the receiving antenna outside the barrier (‘inside-to-out’
method). Annex F includes test set-up and procedure examples.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their
content constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition
cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including
any amendments) applies.
IEC 60050-161, International Electrotechnical Vocabulary (IEV) – Part 161: Electromagnetic

compatibility (available at www.electropedia.org)
– 10 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
IEC 61000-2-9, Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) – Part 2: Environment – Section 9:

Description of HEMP environment – Radiated disturbance
IEC 61000-5-3, Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) – Part 5-3: Installation and mitigation
guidelines – HEMP protection concepts
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in IEC 60050-161, as well
as the following apply.
3.1
aperture
opening in an electromagnetic barrier (shield) through which EM fields may penetrate
3.2
aperture point-of-entry
intentional or inadvertent holes, cracks, openings or other discontinuities in a shield surface
Note 1 to entry: Intentional aperture points-of-entry are provided for personnel and/or equipment entry and egress
and for ventilation through an electromagnetic barrier.
3.3
attenuation
reduction in magnitude (as a result of absorption and scattering) of an electric or magnetic
field, a current or a voltage, usually expressed in decibels
3.4
bandwidth (of a device)
width of a frequency band over which a given characteristic of an equipment or transmission
channel does not differ from its reference value by more than a specified amount or ratio
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-06-09, modified – the note has been deleted.]
3.5
bandwidth (of an emission or signal)
width of the frequency band outside which the level of any spectral component does not
exceed a specified percentage of a reference level
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-06-10]
3.6
bounded wave simulator
type of simulator for producing electromagnetic fields in a localized region of space referred to
as a "test volume"
3.7
box
enclosure that contains electrical equipment
Note 1 to entry: Such boxes usually contain modules of subsystems.
3.8
broadband
3.8.1
broadband
<emission> emission which has a bandwidth greater than that of a particular measuring
apparatus or receiver
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 11 –
3.8.2
broadband device
device whose bandwidth is such that it is able to accept and process all the spectral
components of a particular emission
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-06-12]
3.9
circuit
collection of interconnected electronics forming one or more closed paths
3.10
conductive point-of-entry
electrical wire or cable or other conductive object, such as a metal rod, which passes through
the electromagnetic barrier
3.11
coupling
interaction of electromagnetic fields with electrical systems, whereby part of the energy of the
field is transferred to the system
3.12
current injection test
test technique by which, through some external means, a current is forced to flow in a circuit
at a desired location
Note 1 to entry: For EMP testing purposes, it is a process by which simulated EMP transient current pulses are
introduced into a component, circuit or system to measure damage or upset thresholds.
3.13
cut-off frequency
<waveguide> lowest frequency for which there is no attenuation of the electromagnetic fields
propagating in a lossless waveguide
Note 1 to entry: Below this frequency, the fields attenuate exponentially with distance along the waveguide.
3.14
dipole
straight antenna, usually fed in the center, that produces maximum radiation in a plane normal
to its principal axis
3.15
direct drive
excitation of an electrical system by directly applying a voltage or current source (either
transient or continuous wave) to system cables or surfaces as a means of simulating the
effects of transient EM pulses
Note 1 to entry: See current injection test (3.12).
3.16
direct field penetration
penetration of the system shielding by the EM field
3.17
direction of propagation
direction of the electromagnetic plane-wave propagation vector k, which is perpendicular to
the plane containing the vectors of the electric and the magnetic fields
– 12 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
3.18
electric field strength
E
magnitude of the electric field vector of an electromagnetic wave or of a field created by an
electric charge distribution, measured in volt per meter
3.19
electromagnetic barrier
shield
topologically closed surface made to prevent or limit EM fields and conducted transients from
entering the enclosed space
Note 1 to entry: The barrier consists of the shield surface and PoE treatments and it encloses the protected
volume.
3.20
electromagnetic disturbance
any electromagnetic phenomenon which may degrade the performance of a device,
equipment or system, or adversely affect living or inert matter
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-01-05]
3.21
electromagnetic environment
totality of electromagnetic phenomena existing at a given location
3.22
electromagnetic pulse
EMP
all types of electromagnetic fields produced by a nuclear explosion
Note 1 to entry: Electromagnetic pulse is also referred to as nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NEMP).
3.23
(electromagnetic) radiation
a) phenomenon by which energy in the form of electromagnetic waves emanates from a
source into space
b) energy transferred through space in the form of electromagnetic waves
3.24
electromagnetic topology
description of the interconnection of shields or electromagnetic barriers in a system that limit
the EMP environment within the system
3.25
external coupling
process by which an incident electromagnetic field strikes the exterior portions of a
conducting system enclosure and induces currents and charges
3.26
gasket
element, normally electrically conductive and flexible, used to seal an aperture in an
enclosure
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 13 –
3.27
inside-to-out
test method where the transmitting antenna is placed inside and the receiving antenna is
placed outside the shielded enclosure
3.28
hardening
process of decreasing the vulnerability of a system or component by design techniques, for
example by protecting against, or decoupling from, an undesirable external environment such
as EMP
3.29
high-altitude electromagnetic pulse
HEMP
electromagnetic pulse produced when a nuclear explosion occurs outside the earth's
atmosphere, typically above an altitude of 30 km
3.30
hyperband
spectrum of EM field with a band ratio greater than 10
3.31
impulse radiating antenna
IRA
half IRA
full IRA
full IRA with a full parabolic dish or half IRA with a divided parabolic dish on a conducting
ground plane and an impedance transformer from 50 Ω to 100 Ω
3.32
inside-to-out
alternative test method where the receiving antenna is placed outside and the transmitting
antenna is placed inside of the shielded enclosure
3.33
magnetic field strength
H
magnitude of the magnetic field vector of an electromagnetic wave, or the field produced by a
current flowing in a wire, loop antenna, etc., measured in amperes per meter
3.34
outside-to-in
conventional test method where the receiving antenna is placed inside and the transmitting
antenna is placed outside of the shielded enclosure
3.35
overall shielding
global shielding
protection of an entire entity by use of a single shielding enclosure or some practical
equivalent, such as the protection of the contents of an entire building by shielding the entire
building
3.36
penetration
transfer of electromagnetic energy through an electromagnetic barrier from one volume to
another
– 14 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Note 1 to entry: This can occur by field diffusion through the barrier, by field leakage through apertures, and by
electrical current passing through conductors connecting the two volumes (wires, cables, conduits, pipes, ducts,
etc.).
3.37
point-of-entry
PoE
physical location (point/port) on the electromagnetic barrier, where EM energy may enter or
exit a topological volume, unless an adequate PoE protective device is provided
Note 1 to entry: A PoE is not limited to a geometrical point. PoEs are classified as aperture PoEs or conductor
PoEs according to the type of penetration. They are also classified as architectural, mechanical, structural or
electrical PoEs according to the architectural engineering discipline in which they are usually encountered.
3.38
PoE protective device
PoE treatment
protective measure used to prevent or limit EM energy from entering a protected volume at a
PoE
Note 1 to entry: Common PoE protective devices include waveguides below cut-off, closure plates for aperture
PoEs, and filters and surge arresters on penetrating conductors.
3.39
protected volume
three-dimensional space enclosed by an electromagnetic barrier
3.40
pulse
abrupt variation of short duration of a physical quantity followed by a rapid return to the initial
value
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-02-02]
3.41
radio frequency
RF
frequency of the electromagnetic spectrum that is between the audio frequency portion and
the infrared portion
Note 1 to entry: Sometimes, audio frequencies are considered to be included as part of the RF spectrum.
3.42
penetrating field
field inside the shielded volume that may penetrate via shield imperfections
3.43
shielded enclosure
screened room
mesh or sheet metallic housing designed expressly for the purpose of separating
electromagnetically the internal and external environment
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-04-37]
3.44
shielding degradation
general or localized reduction of electromagnetic shielding effectiveness as a result of
openings, penetrations, wear, improper utilization, etc.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 15 –
3.45
shielding effectiveness
SE
measure of the reduction or attenuation in the electromagnetic field strength at a point in
space caused by the insertion of a shield between the source and that point, usually
expressed in decibels (dB)
3.46
skin effect
tendency of alternating current to concentrate in the surface layer of a conductor, resulting in
the effective resistance of the conductor increasing with frequency
3.47
system
collection of equipment, subsystems, skilled personnel, and techniques capable of performing
or supporting a defined operational role
Note 1 to entry: A complete system includes related facilities, equipment, subsystems, materials, services and
personnel required for its operation to the degree that it can be considered self-sufficient within its operational or
support environment
3.48
transient, adjective and noun
pertaining to or designating a phenomenon or a quantity which varies between two
consecutive steady states during a time interval short compared with the time-scale of interest
[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-02-01]
3.49
protection device
device providing protection to a conductive PoE
Note 1 to entry: It may, for example, consist of one or more of the following: a spark gap, a metal oxide varistor
(MOV) or a filter. These devices are used to reduce the electrical disturbance which penetrates an electromagnetic
barrier.
3.50
waveguide below cut-off
waveguide whose primary purpose is to attenuate electromagnetic waves at frequencies
below its lowest cut-off frequency, while at the same time providing a physical opening into a
shielded enclosure
3.51
wire mesh
connected wire fabric normally used for protection of apertures in an electromagnetic barrier
4 HEMP test concepts
4.1 General
A key aspect in HEMP protection is describing and using the electromagnetic shielding
topology of the system. This amounts to locating and characterizing the various surfaces (or
electromagnetic barriers) within the system enclosing regions (volumes) protected against
HEMP. In real systems, openings shall be present in the shields for the normal operation and
functioning of the equipment inside. These openings degrade the shielding, and if the
degradation is too large, various types of HEMP protection devices shall be provided at these
penetration points in the shield. The location of the various penetration points and the types of
protective devices determine the location and type of test to be conducted to verify the system
shielding.
– 16 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
As an example, a hypothetical case of a building containing a highly shielded screen room is

considered. Inside the screen room, it is assumed that there are several equipment
enclosures, linked together by shielded cables and connectors. The first shielding surface in
this system is the building enclosure. Depending on the type of building, this may or may not
provide significant shielding for the interior volume. After energy penetration along
inappropriately protected signal and power lines field penetration through apertures in the wall
(including cracks and inappropriate joints) and diffusion through the wall are the main
pathways for external energy to leak into the shielded room. Large apertures in the form of
doors and windows, as well as conducting penetrations for electrical power and
communications lines, may be present. Tests of these individual penetration mechanisms
shall be required to evaluate the shielding provided by this enclosure.
Inside the building, the HEMP field is attenuated somewhat by the building walls or enclosure.
Thus, the electrical disturbance experienced by the internal screen room is lower than that of
the ambient external HEMP field. Because the internal shielded room is specifically designed
to reduce the EM fields inside, it is expected that it will function properly – if the various
protection devices applied to the shield penetrations are operational. Field penetration
through cracks and joints in the walls, diffusion through the shield material and conductive
penetrations along signal wires are the main pathways for energy to leak into the shielded
room.
Inside the screen room, the conducting exteriors of the equipment housing and the shielded
cables form the third barrier in this hypothetical system. As before, the EM energy is able to
penetrate into these internal boxes by conductive penetrations, aperture penetrations and by
diffusion. Moreover, energy penetration through braided cables and cable connectors may
occur on the lines linking the various internal equipment enclosures.
Annex A describes test concepts for both conductive and radiated disturbances. In Clause 4,
various methods are described for testing protective measures against the radiated HEMP
environment only. These tests involve the direct generation of EM fields acting on equipment
enclosures or shields, or the injection of current and charge onto shields to simulate the
radiated field interaction to the structures. In the remainder of Clause 4, a brief introduction
into the various HEMP test concepts and techniques for radiated field disturbances is given.
The specific test procedures are presented in Clause 5.
4.2 Testing of shielding enclosures
4.2.1 General
There are several different ways of characterizing the behaviour of protective enclosures.
Below, various test concepts are examined that serve to describe the shielding behaviour of
the individual shielding elements in question. Annex A should be consulted for more
information regarding these types of HEMP tests. Instead, test methods for verifying the
protection levels provided by individual shielding components within the system will be
examined and indication given as to what should be measured in the tests.
Field transfer functions
A common measure of shielding is obtained by examining the strength of the internal EM field
relative to the intensity of the external excitation EM field (i.e. the field with the building
removed). Because the external and internal EM environments can be defined in terms of
either the E-field or the H-field, and because these fields are vector quantities, a large number
of field combinations is possible. Moreover, these fields are time-varying in nature, due to the
transient nature of the HEMP threat.
Considering the internal and external fields to be decomposed into their frequency-domain
spectra, a measure of the attenuation provided by the building is provided by the field transfer
function T(ω) which is the ratio of suitably chosen field quantities as
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 17 –
Ain (ω ) (1)
T (ω ) =
Aout (ω )
where
Aout (ω ) represents the spectral magnitude and phase components of a particular vector
component of either the E or H excitation field outside the facility; and
Ain (ω ) represents a magnitude and phase component of either E or H inside the building.
Depending on the choice of the internal and external fields, this ratio can be dimensionless or
have dimensions of an impedance (in ohms) or an admittance (in siemens).
The field transfer function in Equation (1) is a complex valued function, having both a
magnitude and phase. An illustration of a measured transfer function between the external
excitation and the internal H-fields for a sample shielding enclosure is illustrated in Figure 1. If
an accurate representation of the internal transient fields is to be determined from
measurements of T(ω), both quantities shall be measured. If only a relative indication of the
attenuation as a function of the frequency is desired for the building, then it is sufficient to
measure only the magnitude |A in | and |A out |.
Magnitude
Hin/Hout
Frequency (Hz)
Phase
Phase (Hin/Hout)
Frequency (Hz)
IEC
Figure 1 – Example of measured magnitude and phase of the transfer function

T(ω) = H in /H out for a shielded enclosure
Shielding effectiveness
The shielding effectiveness of a facility is closely related to the shield transfer function
discussed above in that it compares the relative magnitudes of two similar field components in
the frequency domain. However, this quantity contains less information because the phase
information is lacking. Shielding effectiveness of the enclosure is defined as follows:
– 18 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
 A   
 out   1 
SE A = 20 log10   = 20 log10  T (ω )  dB (2)
 Ain
   A 
where
A out and A in represent suitable external and internal E- or H-field quantities.
Thus, it is closely related to the magnitude plot of the transfer function for the fields.
Because of the fundamental differences in electric and magnetic shielding mechanisms at low
frequencies, the shielding effectiveness for electric fields, denoted by SE E , and for magnetic
fields, SE H , are significantly different at low frequencies. Figure 2 illustrates the theoretical
shielding provided by a closed aluminum shell of a thickness of 0,5 mm. Generally, SE H is less
than SE E at low frequencies (below 100 kHz), due to the fact that the low-frequency magnetic
field is able to diffuse through the protective enclosure walls more easily than does the
electric field. It is for this reason that magnetic field SE is typically used at lower frequencies
(below 10 MHz), and at higher frequencies (above 10 MHz) the SE for electric or magnetic
field can be used to characterize an enclosure.
Electric field
Total shielding effectiveness (dB)
SEE
Magnetic field
SEH
Frequency (kHz)
IEC
Figure 2 – Electric field and magnetic field shielding effectiveness

of a 0,5 mm thick aluminum enclosure [29] 1
As a further example of the measured magnetic field shielding effectiveness of a real

enclosure, Figure 3 illustrates the behaviour of SE H as measured for the same building
discussed in Figure 1. It should be noted that the shielding has several peaks and nulls,
corresponding to internal and external resonances of the enclosure, as well as frequency-
dependent penetrations that occur in addition to the simple diffusive penetration of fields
through the shield material.
______________
1 Numbers in square brackets refer to the Bibliography.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 19 –
H-field shielding
SEH (dB)
Frequency (Hz)
IEC
Figure 3 – Measured magnetic field shielding effectiveness SE H for a building
4.2.2 Buildings
For a building such as that illustrated in Figure 4, the internal HEMP-induced response arises
mainly from conductive and aperture-type penetrations. Thus, any test of the global enclosure
shielding should strive to adequately excite these penetrations. The field penetration by
diffusion through the building shield (i.e. the walls of the enclosure) is generally smaller than
that of the conducting shield inside the walls.
The HEMP test concept for physically large buildings requires either the excitation by HPEM
ultra-wideband (UWB), continuous wave (CW) signals simulating fields on the exterior of the
test object (see the discussion of the various test interface locations in Figure A.1). For this
excitation, the measurement of a suitable internal response induced by this external field is
needed.
Incident HEMP field

Internal E- field and H-field
Earth-reflected field
IEC
Figure 4 – Conceptual illustration of the HEMP test of a building
On the exterior of the building, the radiated or simulated HEMP excitation field is expressed
by the following parameters (see IEC 61000-2-9):
– the incident field (plus ground-reflected field, if any) waveform characteristics (such as its
amplitude, rise time, and fall time);
– the excitation field polarization;
– the amount of the system exterior illuminated by the radiated or simulated field.
Details of how this external field may be produced or approximated are presented in 5.2.
– 20 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Different types of internal responses can be chosen to describe the shielding of the facility
enclosure. These include the internal E- or H-fields or the induced voltage and current on
internal conductors. Consequently, different measures for the shielding can be generated for
any particular system. Moreover, the location of the internal observation point can vary, again
giving rise to wide variations of shielding figures of merit.
4.2.3 Shelters and shielded rooms
For a shelter or a shielded room, it is assumed that the radiated HEMP environment is still
being applied to the exterior of the enclosure where the incident HEMP fields are assumed to
provide the main excitation to the structure. Consequently, the test concepts for these
enclosures are similar to those for large buildings. These smaller enclosures can again be
characterized by either
– a complex-valued field transfer function, or

– a shielding effectiveness.
It should be kept in mind, however, that there will also be transient signals conducted into this
facility on conducting PoEs such as power lines and data lines, and these shall be addressed
separately, as discussed in IEC 61000-5-3.
The main difference between large buildings without conducting shielded enclosures and
shelters or shielded rooms is that the HEMP protection levels provided by these smaller
enclosures will be significantly higher, since they are specifically designed to provide a high
degree of shielding. Consequently, the internal signal levels are usually smaller than in the
case of just buildings. This makes the measurements more susceptible to noise. In addition,
due to the smaller size, the effects of internal cavity resonances will occur at higher
frequencies. As a result, quasi-static shielding concepts are applicable over a wider range of
frequencies for these enclosures (see IEC 61000-5-3).
Figure 5 illustrates a generic shielded room with several PoEs of the shielding barrier
identified.
NOTE Power and signal conducting penetrations are not illustrated, as they are considered separately in
IEC 61000-4-25.
Characterizing the overall barrier shielding by a field transfer function T(ω), or by shielding
effectiveness SE, provides a global measure of the penetration effects from all of the
penetration mechanisms indicated in Figure 5. That is to say, the internal fields arise from the
penetrations from all of the PoEs taken together, along with the diffusion through the material
in the walls of the shield. Other measurement techniques are available for characterizing the
protection provided by the individual penetrations (such as the gasket, air vent, shielded
conduit, etc.) and these are discussed in 4.4.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 21 –
Excitation E-field and H-field

Shielded room Seams
Incident HEMP field
Air vent
Gasket
Shielded conduit
Door
IEC
Figure 5 – Illustration of a shielded room or enclosure excited by HEMP fields
4.2.4 Cabinets, racks and boxes
These enclosures are typically located within an existing EM barrier, which significantly
modifies the electromagnetic field environment exciting the system. An internal box or an
equipment cabinet is excited by a combination of the internal EM field plus injected currents
on cable shields coming from other equipment that have also been excited by the local fields.
This is illustrated in Figure 6.
Incident HEMP field
Vents
Box Equipment cabinet
Coupled
current
I(t)
Shielded
cable
Connectors
Door gaskets Ground
IEC
Figure 6 – Illustration of equipment racks, cabinets and box excited

by internal HEMP disturbance
Field illumination test
For tests of these enclosures involving the EM fields inside a larger enclosure, the previous
concept of field illumination can be adopted to measure the global shielding provided by the
equipment. As before, this shielding may be characterized by
– a complex-valued field transfer function, or

– a shielding effectiveness of the enclosure.
Due to the smaller size of these enclosures, however, difficulties in this measurement can
arise from the dense internal packing of internal electronic components. Often this makes it
difficult to locate suitable EM field sensors inside the box. Furthermore, because the testing is
conducted on the box or enclosure surface, there are large uncertainties in the
– 22 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
characterization of the HEMP field environment. Finally, the interconnection between the
various equipment items can be rather complex, and if a single box or equipment rack is
tested, its measured response may be considerably different from that found when it is
connected to the rest of the system.
Shield transfer impedance
An alternative to the field testing of boxes and small enclosures is to use the concept of a
transfer impedance of the enclosure (see Annex E). This is similar to the treatment of a
shielded cable discussed in 5.3, and involves testing at a box level interface in the system. In
this case, a current I(t) is injected onto the surface of the box or rack, and an open-circuit
voltage V oc (t) on a suitable internal sense wire is measured. In this form of testing, it is
important to ensure that the injected current flows over the exterior of the box in the same
way as when the box is connected to the rest of the system. This implies that the current exit
point (the ground connection) has to be maintained so that the injected current can be
removed properly.
Figure 7 illustrates a general shielded enclosure excited by an external current injection. Just
inside the shell at points a and b, a sense wire is connected to the shield, and the open-circuit
voltage V oc is measured. The transfer impedance of this enclosure is a complex valued
quantity, defined in terms of the frequency domain spectral components as
Voc (ω )
Z t (ω ) = (3)
I (ω )
where
I(ω) is the injected current, and
V oc (ω) is the measured open-circuit voltage on the sense wire.
This shield transfer impedance value varies, depending on the location of terminals inside the
enclosure for determining the open-circuit voltage. For adequate sensing of the shielding
provided by the entire enclosure, the voltage sense points should be located within the
enclosure, near the current injection locations.
Current injection point
Io
Shield
a
Voc
Sense
wire b
Current extraction point

IEC
Figure 7 – A general shield excited by current injection
The shield transfer impedance is a function of the electrical properties of the shielding
material, as well as the shield dimensions and the nature of any imperfections in the
enclosure such as seams, apertures, etc. In the special case of a thin spherical shield in
which there are no aperture penetrations, it is possible to calculate the H-field shielding
effectiveness SE H , given the shield transfer impedance and the d.c. resistance of the shield
through the relationship:
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 23 –
a 2
 (g∆ ) 
 ∆ 
SEH = 20 log10 (4)
Zt
3
R'
where
a is the radius of a thin spherical shield (in m);
∆ is the thickness of the shield (in m);
γ is the propagation constant in the shielding material, given by γ ≈ �𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗;
σ is the electrical conductivity of the shield material (in S/m);
Z t is the shield transfer impedance (in Ω/m);
R′ is the per unit length d.c. resistance of the shield (in Ω/m).
4.3 Testing of shielded cables and connectors
4.3.1 General
Shielded cables are frequently used to transmit information between equipment contained
within two protective enclosures. As such, one can define two distinct transmission lines: an
external line having currents and charges flowing on the exterior of the cable, together with a
possible ground-plane return, and an internal line consisting of the conductors inside the
shield. HEMP fields can excite the external transmission line, and if the cable shield is
imperfect, some of the external currents and charges can penetrate through the shield and
excite the internal line. This leads to an unwanted response in the "protected" equipment. In
4.3, test concepts for this coupling mechanism are examined.
Annex B summarizes important aspects of the characterization of a cable shield. This involves
two parameters: the shield transfer impedance and the transfer admittance. For most practical
cable shields, the transfer impedance is a complex valued, frequency-dependent function,
described by real and imaginary parts, or equivalently, by a magnitude and phase function.
The transfer admittance, however, is primarily reactive, and is effectively modelled by a
frequency independent capacitance.
While the transfer impedance is a function of the shield properties only, the transfer
admittance depends on both the shield and the configuration of the external transmission line.
It is possible, however, to present the measured transfer admittance parameter in another
form: that of the shielding leakage parameter, which is independent of the external circuit.
Subclause 4.3.2 considers test methods for the transfer impedance and admittance quantities,
keeping in mind that the latter quantity depends on the details of the external circuit, such as
the external line height, wire radius, and nature of the local ground plane near the cable.
4.3.2 Testing of cable shields
4.3.2.1 Determination of the transfer impedance
Although there are several different test configurations for measuring the transfer impedance
of a cable shield, they are all related to the basic configuration shown in Figure 8. An external
voltage source V s feeds the x = 0 end of a cable shield of length L which is connected to the
ground (i.e. the reference conductor) through a short-circuit at the opposite end of the cable.
The resistance Z s at the source limits the current flowing in the cable exterior.
The inner (coaxial) conductor of the shielded cable is shorted to the shield at the x = L end of
the line, and the open-circuit voltage, V i , is measured at the x = 0 end. Under the assumptions
that
– the internal and external transmission lines are electrically short (L << λ), and
– 24 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
– that there is negligible field excitation of the inner cable due to fields entering through the
ends of the line,
the frequency-dependent transfer impedance of this cable shield can be approximated from
Equation (B.8) as
( ) ( ) ( )
Z t' ω = Rt' ω + jX t' ω ≈
Vi
IeL
Z V
≈ s i Ω/m
L Vs
(5)
where
Z′ t is the cable transfer impedance (in Ω/m);
ω is the angular frequency (in 2π × Hz);
V i is the open-circuit voltage on the internal conductor;
I e is the open-circuit current on the shield;
V s is the excitation voltage of the external circuit of the cable shield (in V);
L is the length of the shield conductor (in m);
Z s is the effective source impedance of the external voltage source (in Ω).
When using these expressions, it is very important to ensure that the line is electrically short.
As the frequency increases, the current distribution on the exterior cable begins to have
periodic nulls and peaks due to reflections from the shorted end of the line. Moreover, there
are internal reflections from the short on the interior cable. These oscillations are the cause of
significant errors in the measurement of transfer impedance at high frequencies.
Shield
Short-
conductor
circuit
Internal
conductor
Short-
circuit
X
Ie
Vi
Zs L
Vs Reference
ground plane
0 IEC
Figure 8 – Basic configuration for transfer impedance measurement
Figure 8 illustrates the typical frequency domain behaviour of the measured transfer
impedance for four different braided cables having reasonably good shielding. At low
frequencies, Z′ t is primarily resistive, with a value equal to the per-unit-length d.c. resistance
of the shield. At higher frequencies, the field penetration through the apertures in the braid of
the shield begins to affect the internal response and the shielding behaviour is slightly
degraded. Accompanying this increase in transfer impedance at high frequencies is an
electrical phase variation – a quantity that it is essential to know if any detailed calculations
are to be performed using the measured Z′ t .
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 25 –
Sample 1
Sample 2
Sample 3
Sample 4
Angle (Zt) deg

Zt Ω/m
Sample 1
Sample 2
Sample 3
Sample 4
∝ƒ
∝ ƒ
Frequency (MHz) Frequency (MHz)

IEC IEC
a) – Magnitude b) – Phase
NOTE At high frequencies the curves are proportional to √f rather than f, which indicates that responses are not
well represented by a simple inductance.
Figure 9 – Measured transfer impedance magnitude and phase of transfer impedance

per unit length for four braided shield cables with good shielding properties
4.3.2.2 Determination of the transfer admittance
The evaluation of the transfer admittance of the cable shield utilizes the general test
configuration shown in Figure 10. This is similar to the configuration for the transfer
impedance measurements, but with different terminations at the cable ends. Using Equation
(B.9), together with the same assumptions as for the transfer impedance, the transfer
admittance of the shield can be expressed as
1 Ii
Yt' ≈ − ≈ − jωCi' Ce' S S/m (6)
L Vs
where
Y′ t is the cable transfer admittance (in S/m);
Ii is the internal conductor current (in A);
Vs is the excitation voltage of the external circuit of the cable shield (in V);
L is the length of the cable (in m);
ω is the angular frequency (in 2π × Hz);
S is the shield leakage parameter (in m/F);
C′ i is the internal per-unit-length capacitance of the coaxial cable (in F/m);
C′ e is the external per-unit-length capacitance of the coaxial cable (in F/m).
Thus, a measurement of the internal conductor current arising from the external source
voltage provides the transfer admittance. Under the approximation that Y′ t is purely reactive,
the shield leakage parameter can be determined, if the internal and external per-unit-length
capacitances of the coaxial cable are known. The parameter S is a single, real-valued number,
and depends only on the characteristics of the braided cable. Hence, it is a useful descriptor
for cable shields.
– 26 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Shield
conductor
Internal Short-
conductor circuit
Open
Ii circuit
Short- X
circuit
L
Vs
Reference
ground plane
0 IEC
Figure 10 – Basic configuration for transfer admittance measurement
4.3.3 Testing of cable connectors
Connectors on shielded cables are often more important in determining the overall shielding
of the cable system than is the cable shield. This is because the connector introduces an
interruption to the shield, and, as such, presents an imperfection in the shielding topology.
One way to represent the effects of the connector (as seen by the internal, or shielded,
transmission line circuit) is by using discrete voltage and current sources at the location of the
connector. The strengths of these sources are related to the external current and voltage on
the connector multiplied by discrete transfer impedance and admittance parameters
representing the connector, much as in the case of the distributed cable shield penetrations.
As in the case of a braided shield, the lumped transfer impedance of a connector contains
both a resistive and reactive part, and the transfer admittance of a connector is primarily
capacitive. However, cable connectors are always designed so that there is very small E-field
penetration through the device. Consequently, the transfer admittance effects of the
connector are almost always much lower than the effects from the transfer impedance.
Usually, the lumped transfer impedance parameter is the only one required.
The test configuration for cable connectors is similar to that for the cable shield transfer
impedance discussed previously. Figure 11 illustrates the general test configuration for such
measurements. The same requirements for the test equipment for the cable shield test are
required here, and the construction of the outer shield shall be such that it is a much better
shield than the connector. This implies that a solid shield is preferable to a braided shield for
this measurement.
Connector Solid shield

(idealized)
Short-
circuit
Internal
conductor
Short-
circuit
X
Vi Ie
Zs L
Vs Reference
ground plane
0 IEC
Figure 11 – Test configuration for transfer impedance

measurement of a cable connector
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 27 –
Given a measurement of the internal open-circuit voltage, the transfer impedance of the
connector is determined by the expression
( ) ( ) ( )
Z t ω = Rt ω + jx t ω ≈
Vi
Ie
V
≈ Zs i Ω
Vs
(7)
where
V i and V s have been defined in 4.3.2.1,
Zt is the transfer impedance of the connector (in Ω), and
Zs is the impedance of the external circuit (in Ω).
It should be noted that while the length of the cable, L, does not appear explicitly in this
expression, it is necessary that L << λ. Thus L should be as short as possible to maximize the
frequency range of validity for the measurements.
4.4 Testing of shielding materials
4.4.1 General
Imperfections in the shielding topology of a system can often be protected by using localized
methods such as gaskets (on seam or between doors and their jambs), conducting sheets or
screens (covering apertures), and other specialized measures like honeycombs and
waveguides beyond cut-off. Characterizing these protection measures is less obvious
because their behaviour depends not only on their individual electrical composition, but also
on how the devices are connected to the shielding topology. For example, a very long crack
might be protected by filling it with a conducting material. This could be effective in protecting
against currents flowing across the crack: the conducting material lets the current pass over
the crack without much distortion and the H-field on the shielded side is minimized. However,
for currents parallel to the crack, the presence or absence of the protective filling is
unimportant. The current is not significantly affected by the slit, and any protection against
this current component is unnecessary.
In describing tests suitable for these components, therefore, an attempt is made to

characterize the intrinsic shielding property of the protection device, independently of how it is
used in a particular installation. This means that a particular component might be classified as
a "good" protective device in one installation, but due to the particularities of how it is used in
another facility, considered to be a "poor" component in another installation. Evaluating the
global behaviour of a system, together with all of its protection devices, is the role of system
level testing, a subject which is beyond the scope of this standard.
4.4.2 Conducting gaskets
Figure 12 shows several configurations of a conducting gasket serving as a HEMP protection

device. The basic mechanism for protection is that the gasket forms a conducting path
between the two parts of the enclosure; this keeps current and charge from "leaking" into the
inside (i.e. into the protected region). Each of the three configurations in the figure has a
different shielding behaviour, due to the differences in the geometry of the enclosure walls
that surround the gasket.
– 28 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Gasket
Cover
Gasket
Wall
IEC
Figure 12 – Examples of conducting gaskets used as HEMP protection devices
A simple yet general circuit model for a gasket seal can be made by noting the important parts
of the geometry in Figure 12. Current flowing from one conductor to another has to pass
through the gasket and this will present an electrical resistance to the current. Similarly, the
flat plates on either side of the gasket appear locally as a capacitance through which a
displacement current can flow. Finally, the metal conductors of the two walls form an
inductance in this circuit.
Figure 13 shows the equivalent circuit representation of such a gasketed opening. The
resistance of the gasket and the capacitance of the gasket opening appear in parallel, and
this combination is in series with the inductances representing the current paths through the
walls of the enclosure. Specific values for L and C depend on the local geometry of the seal,
whereas the value of R depends on both the geometry and on the intrinsic electrical properties
of the gasket material.
R C
IEC
Figure 13 – Circuit model representing the behaviour

of a conducting gasket for HEMP protection
These circuit values can be measured or calculated using simple models for the specific
shape and geometry under consideration for a given problem. For characterizing the electrical
properties of the gasket material, however, measurements of electrical resistivity of the gasket
material can be used. This quantity is independent of the surroundings of the gasket and can
be used to rank the effectiveness of one type of gasket with another. It should be noted,
however, that such gaskets are usually made of flexible material, and, therefore, their
characteristics are dependent on contact pressure as in all examples of Figure 12. The age of
gasket materials is also a factor.
Figure 14 illustrates the measurement configuration for the resistivity. This is the four-
electrode method, and it is specially designed so that measurements of materials with very
low resistivities can be made. For this measurement, a block of the gasket material is
sandwiched between two electrodes made from copper or another highly conducting material.
An external d.c. voltage source is connected across the two outer electrodes and a current is
allowed to pass through the electrode. The resulting voltage drop across the sample is
measured using a high input impedance voltmeter, so as not to disturb the current flow in the
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 29 –
sample. With these parameters measured, the d.c. resistivity of the sample material is given
by the expression:
Vs A
ρ DC = Ω·m (8)
Io L
where
ρ DC is the d.c. resistivity of the sample material in (Ω·m);
A is the cross-sectional area of the gasket material (in m 2 );
L is the thickness of the gasket sample (in m);
I o is the current passing through the sample (in A);
V s is the voltage drop across the sample (in V).
Electrodes
Bulk gasket material
Area A
Vs
Voltmeter
Vo Io
A
Current meter
Primary voltage
source
IEC
Figure 14 – Measurement configuration for the resistivity of a sample
Similar measurements can be made at higher frequencies and a frequency-dependent gasket

impedance can be measured. However, this quantity is of limited use, because its frequency
variations are easily confused with those of the gasket-mounting hardware and surroundings.
Consequently, the d.c. resistivity is the most commonly used parameter for characterizing the
gasket material.
4.4.3 Conducting sheets and screens
4.4.3.1 General
Conducting screens or sheets of conducting material are often used to limit the HEMP
penetration through apertures in the shield. Such protection devices include
– wire mesh screens;

– conductive paint coatings;
– vacuum metallized coatings;
– flame/arc sprays;
– metallic foils lining equipment bays;
– metallic fillings added to plastic enclosures.
– 30 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
As in the case of gasketing material, it is possible to characterize these protection devices

either by measurements of their shielding behaviour as installed in a specific topological
configuration, or by an alternate measurement of some intrinsic electrical property of the
shielding material. While this latter measurement may not accurately indicate how the
protection device will function in an arbitrary installation, it does provide a useful technique for
distinguishing between one protection material and another in a self-consistent manner. Two
test concepts for conducting aperture protective devices are discussed in 4.4.3.2 and 4.4.3.3:
one which measures the resistivity of the conducting material, and another which measures
the shielding effectiveness of the material used for shielding under controlled conditions.
4.4.3.2 Measurement of material resistivity
The resistivity of the material comprising the protective cover of an aperture is one parameter
that may be used to characterize its shielding. As in the case of the conducting gasket
described in 4.4.2, the resistivity of a conducting sheet can be determined using the test
configuration shown in Figure 14. An alternative approach is to use a measurement technique
in which the d.c. resistivity is measured with probes located on the surface of the sample as
indicated in Figure 15.
Surface
electrodes
Cross-section
source Io
Voltmeter
V
t
Material
sample
Cross-section
area A
IEC
Figure 15 – Test concept for measuring the resistivity with surface probes
In this test, a constant d.c. current source I o is connected to two electrodes separated by a
distance L and in good electrical contact with a block of conducting material. In response to
this current, a voltage V s is induced across the two electrodes. This voltage may be measured
by a high impedance voltmeter and the resistivity is again given by the expression in
Equation (8). The same expression is used in the present case, because it is assumed that
the block is a good conductor and the current tends to flow uniformly across the cross-
sectional area A of the material from one electrode to the other.
It is important to note that this measurement procedure is applicable only at low frequencies
where the skin depth of the material in question is very large compared to the thickness of the
sample. If the frequency of the current source were allowed to increase, the skin depth (given
by 𝛿 = �𝜌⁄(𝜋𝜋𝜋)) decreases and, at some point, begins to be comparable with the thickness of
the material under test. At this point, the details of the current distribution in the conductor
cross-section shall be taken into account, as discussed in Annex E.
As noted in Annex E, both the surface impedance (relating the tangential E-field outside the
protective barrier to the excitation surface current) and the transfer impedance (relating the
tangential E-field inside the protective barrier to the excitation surface current) may be
calculated (see Equations (E.14) and (E.18)), once the material resistivity is known. Thus, the
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 31 –
d.c. measurement of the resistivity can be used to infer the shielding properties of the material
for higher frequencies.
4.4.3.3 Shielding effectiveness measurements
A more direct approach for characterizing the shielding behaviour of a wire mesh or
conducting screen is to measure its shielding effectiveness under standard conditions. It is
well known that in the near field (or equivalently, for low frequencies), the electric and
magnetic fields penetrate into a conductor differently. Consequently, a shield shall be
characterized in general by two different shielding effectiveness parameters. For far-field
shielding, where the incident field on the shield is a plane wave, the two shielding
effectiveness values become equal, and this single value may be used to characterize the
protection.
Figure 15 illustrates a measurement concept for the plane-wave shielding effectiveness of

screens and sheets. Figure 15 a) shows the ideal situation, in which a plane wave is incident
upon an infinite screen. The shielding of this screen can be characterized by the following
equation (see Equation (2)):
 A 
 out 
SE A = 20 log10   dB (9)
 Ain
 
where
Aout represents the principal component of the incident field E inc (or H inc ) at an observation
point with the conducting screen removed;
Ain is the same component of the field that is transmitted through the screen: E tr (or H tr ).
The resulting shielding effectiveness depends on the angle ψ that the incident field makes
with the normal to the sheet. Normally, the angle ψ = 0° is chosen for defining the shielding
properties of the infinite plane.
For actual measurements, the idealized configuration of Figure 16a) cannot be realized, due
to the fact that the source producing the incident field is not of infinite size, nor is it infinitely
far from the screen. Moreover, the screen is not infinitely large. This implies that the
measurements made using the test configuration in Figure 16b) can be different from those
expected from a theoretical treatment of the infinite plane geometry, due to the following
effects:
– the non-plane-wave nature of the incident fields from the source;

– the radiation pattern from the source;
– diffraction from the edges of the screen.
To minimize this difficulty, it is common to require the following conditions to be maintained in

the measurement configuration:
– the size of the screen a >> λ;

– the observation and source positions d o and d s < a;
– = 0° (normal incidence).
With these assumptions, an approximation to the plane-wave shielding effectiveness of the

screen is obtained by making two measurements of the selected primary field components at
the observation location. The first measurement is with the plate removed and is denoted as
m m
Eremoved (or H removed ). The second measurement is the same field component with the plate
– 32 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
m m
in place in front of the radiator, and is denoted as E covered (or H covered ). The shielding
effectiveness for this configuration is then evaluated as
 m 
 Eremoved 
SE = 20 log10   dB (10)
 Em 
 covered 
 
Einc Perfectly conducting

Infinite conducting Localized screen
sheet or screen source
k
Conducting sheet
Hinc Surface a or screen
normal Surface
Incident normal
field ^n ds
Transmitted ^
n Measured
Ψ Ψ
Etr field field
Em
Htr k
do k
Hm
Observation Observation
point point
IEC IEC
a) Idealization b) Experimental realization
Figure 16 – Concepts for shielding effectiveness measurement

of conducting sheets and screens
As an example of the plane-wave shielding effectiveness of a plate of different material,

Figure 17 presents calculated data for copper, aluminium and iron sheets, each having a
thickness of 0,01 mm. Similar results are expected for materials having other conductivities.
120
Material parameters:
Shielding effectiveness (dB)
Cu : σ = 58 × 10 6 S/m, mr = 1
Al : σ = 38 × 10 6 S/m, mr = 1
110
Fe : σ = 10 × 10 6 S/m, mr = 400
Cu
100 Al
Fe
90
80
10 6 10 7 10 8
Frequency (Hz)
IEC
Figure 17 – Example of the calculated plane-wave shielding effectiveness

of a 0,01 mm thick plate of different material as a function of frequency
4.4.4 Cut-off waveguides and honeycombs
Another type of HEMP protection measure is to use one or more cut-off waveguides or
honeycomb structures in a conducting wall, as illustrated in Figure 18. This permits the easy
flow of air or other non-conducting material in and out of an enclosure, while at the same time
providing large attenuation to the EM field environment. The test concept for this penetration
protection method is identical to that for the conducting mesh or screen shown in Figure 15.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 33 –
As before, the waveguides or honeycomb protection shall be located in a highly conducting

wall, and shielding effectiveness measurements shall be made with and without the wall
present, as described in 4.4.3.
Incident field Conducting sheet

E inc or screen
Waveguides
k beyond cut-off
H inc
Transmitted field
Et
Honeycomb
penetrations
k
Ht
Observation point
IEC
Figure 18 – Cut-off waveguides and honeycomb used as protective elements
4.5 Summary of test concepts
A number of different test concepts have been presented in Clause 4 for different aspects of
shielded systems. Table 1 summarizes the recommended test concepts for the different
system components. In selecting the various tests, it is important to realize that there is never
a "best" test for a system. Each test has its strong points and its flaws. Each test has
uncertainties and errors in the result, for example test object and measurement equipment
interaction, test object variability, uniformity of fields, non-linear effects and measurement
errors. In selecting a test, therefore, the user should carefully consider the following
requirements for the proposed test:
– why is the test being conducted?

– is the test really necessary?
– what is the expected result from the test?
– what is the required accuracy of the test results?
Answers to these questions will serve to put the various test procedures into better
perspective and will allow the user to select the proper test and minimize the cost of the
testing.
– 34 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Table 1 – Recommended test procedure for different test objects
Test procedure
Full- &
reduced Small
Test object Full-scale Local Current Specialized
scale TEM cell simulator
CW excitation injection test
transient simulation pulse
illumination of PoEs testing fixtures
illumina- excitation
tion
Buildings a b - - c - -
Shielded rooms a b - - c c -
Equipment
- - a a b c -
enclosures
Apertures - - - - a b c
Gaskets and
- - - - b a c
seams
Cable and
conduit - - c c - b a
characterization
a Recommended test concept(s).
b Back-up test concept.
c Test of last resort.
5 Test methods for measuring the shielding effectiveness of HEMP protection

facilities
5.1 General
Because of the diverse ways to simulate the effects of HEMP on a system, there is a wide
variety of facilities, equipment configurations, and procedures that can be used to perform
tests on protection devices. Clause 5 summarizes test procedures for each of the test
concepts presented in Clause 4.
5.2 Electromagnetic field testing
5.2.1 General
As noted in the interaction sequence diagram of Figure A.1, testing can be done either by
generating the excitation E- and H-fields at a testing interface within the system, or by
simulating the effects of these fields interacting with the system barriers by injecting
appropriate current and charge on the surfaces. Subclause 5.2 discusses simulation methods
for the field excitation of the system under test.
5.2.2 Pulse field testing
5.2.2.1 Full-scale system illumination
Full-scale pulse testing is most suitable for performing a high-confidence, system-level

assessment. Because it is capable of providing much more information about the system
response to HEMP, it is seldom used to evaluate only the shielding behaviour of a single
protective element of the system, such as the outer shielding barrier.
The incident HEMP fields are typically produced by a capacitive discharge MARX generator
which stores energy in capacitor banks over a period of several minutes and then discharges
the energy in a time of the order of several nanoseconds into a physically large radiating
structure (typical dimensions being of the order of 50 m to 100 m). The radiating structure can
behave like a waveguide to conduct the fields to the test object, or it can behave like an
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 35 –
antenna radiating in free space. In either case, the test object is illuminated by a transient
HEMP field and it responds in the appropriate manner. Typically, the test object should not be
greater than one-third to half the height of the working volume of the simulator so as to
minimize the plate interaction and to better approximate free-space conditions. Figure 19
illustrates several example types of full-scale simulators. Alternative types of simulators
having different properties can also be considered.
– 36 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Top wire plates

Working volume
Ground plane
Pulser building (33 m × 40 m × 40 m)
Input conic section
Oil and gas box
Output conic section
Terminator
Underground pathway
Sensors
Shielded instrumentation room Test object

IEC
a) Vertically polarized, bounded-wave simulator

Resistive terminations
W = 60 m
Test object
Reference field sensor

H=
31 m
L = 145 m
Pulser
Sensors
Shielded instrumentation room IEC
b) Alternate configuration for a vertically polarized, bounded-wave simulator

Pulser Simulator dimensions
Height : 20 m
Dielectric support Overall length 60 m
structure
E
Antenna
Reference field
sensor
System under test
Measurement
equipment
Fibre optics
instrumentation cable
IEC
c) Horizontally polarized radiating simulator

IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 37 –
60 m
Upper
Resistively loaded netword
conductors
Glass-fibre
stays
40 m Conductive
hoops
Supporting
masts
Z = 80 Ω Transition
2 MV Marx zone
generator
Test object
IEC
d) Vertically polarized radiating simulator
Bicone
Z c = 160 Ω
1,5 MV Marx generator
3 m diameter
Resistive loading
67 m
h
E
Test object
Ground
IEC
e) Airborne horizontally polarized radiating simulator
Figure 19 – Examples of full-scale, pulse-radiating HEMP simulators
Test set-up
Figure 19b) illustrates the typical test set-up for this type of HEMP testing. The test object is
located in the "working volume" of the simulator. A reference field sensor is located in the
working volume at a location where it will not be severely affected by the scattered fields from
the test object. (The manufacturer of the facility will usually provide information as to the
optimum locations of the working volume and reference sensor.)
The test object is instrumented according to the goals of the particular test. This involves
placing E- or H-field probes, current probes or voltage probes at pre-selected points within the
system, and connecting these to the data acquisition computer by means of the non-
conducting fibre optic cables. Depending on the test objective, the test object configuration
– 38 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
may involve connections to the power mains and to other connected equipment, which can
affect the test results.
Control of the pulser and the data acquisition system is carried out in an equipment room
which is located under or near the simulator structure. It should be designed so that it does
not interfere with the simulator fields, and it is usually shielded so that the simulation fields do
not adversely affect the data recording and processing equipment.
Test equipment
Aside from the basic simulator facility needed to simulate the HEMP environment, the
following types of equipment are needed for this type of testing:
– E- and H-field reference sensors for measuring the transient excitation simulator fields;
– E- and H-field sensors for measuring fields within the system under test;
– current and voltage sensors for measuring internal wire responses;
– calibration equipment for all sensors;
– fiber optic transmitters, receivers and cable for data extraction;
– transient digitizers for each data channel (rise time of 1 ns);
– data acquisition computer and mass storage medium;
– data processing computer and plot capability.
Details of these equipment items are provided in Annex C.
Test procedure
This is a transient test: the pulser is fired and the transient response of the system is
measured with the waveform digitizing equipment. If this test is used to characterize the first
layer of shielding of the system, as defined in Annex A and in Clause 4, it is necessary to
convert the measured transient responses into the frequency domain to evaluate the system
transfer function T(ω) or the shielding effectiveness, SE. Figure 20 summarizes the steps in
this test procedure. It should be noted that after the response ratio R(ω)/F(ω) has been
computed, corrections to the transfer function may be needed. This situation arises when the
design of the simulator is such that the spectrum F(ω) has a very small value at certain
frequencies. At these frequencies, the response R(ω) is dominated by noise and the ratio can
have a large pseudo-resonance.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 39 –
Fire pulser
Measure reference
field F(t) Measure internal
(E ref or H ref ) response R(t)
Compute spectrum F( ω ) Compute spectrum R( ω )

using Fourier transform by Fourier transform
Compute ratio
R( ω ) F( ω )
Correct spectrum
Output transfer Output as

function SE
IEC
Figure 20 – Test procedure for the pulse test
It is important to realize that HEMP can arrive with different angles of incidence relative to the
test object. Therefore, the test procedure in Figure 20 should be carried out for different
polarizations of the excitation field (if permitted by the simulator) and with different
orientations of the test object.
5.2.2.2 Small HEMP simulators
Smaller versions of the full-scale transient HEMP field simulators discussed in 5.2.2.1 are
often found in university laboratories, research organizations and manufacturing companies.
These simulators are similar to their larger counterparts, with the exception that entire
systems cannot be tested, due to the small working volume. Usually, these simulators are
used to test individual boxes, small cabinets or cables.
The small size of these simulators provides a benefit in that the rise times of the fields are
usually faster than in the larger, full-scale simulators. However, the peak voltages of the
pulser, and consequently the peak E- and H-field strengths, are limited by the dielectric
breakdown characteristics of the air near the feeding section.
The test equipment, test set-up and procedures for these small-scale simulators are the same
as indicated in 5.2.2.1.
5.2.2.3 Reduced-scale system illumination
A solid state hyperband generator connected to a full IRA, adapted half IRA or another 50 Ω
directed antenna represents a reduced-scale system illumination method with characteristics
according to 5.2.2.2. Such a medium power pulse source is easily transportable to a test site
and has a field strength which is detectable within the shielding enclosure with a high
probability.
With the exception of the signal source the test equipment, test set-up and procedures for
these reduced-scale simulators are the same as indicated in 5.2.2.1.
– 40 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
5.2.3 CW field testing
5.2.3.1 General
An alternative to pulse testing is to make the measurements in the frequency domain. Such
tests are significantly less expensive than the transient tests, due to the relatively inexpensive
equipment involved. Moreover, because it is possible to dwell on each frequency for a long
time, this test method can be used for highly shielded systems in which pulse testing is
inefficient due to the low signal strength.
5.2.3.2 Global illumination with active radiators
A typical test configuration for a CW test is shown in Figure 21. This figure shows the facility
being tested, the CW antenna, the measurement equipment enclosure and associated cable
connections. The measuring equipment is located on the ground near the facility. Because
this is a field illumination test, it is important to have the CW radiating antenna located at least
several wavelengths from the facility so that the illuminating field appears as a plane wave.
CW radiating antenna
Balun
Dielectric pole
Resistively
loaded wire
Shielded facility
Reference Internal cable

Power field sensor
amplifier
Current probe
Network alayser and

measurement equipment
IEC
Figure 21 – Typical configuration of a CW test facility
Test set-up
Figure 22 illustrates the details of the CW measurement set-up. The heart of the system is a
network analyser, which has the capability of measuring two responses simultaneously: a
reference channel and channel A, which is the desired system response. The network
analyser is controlled by a personal computer (PC). Both pieces of equipment should be
located in a shielded region, well away from the radiated field produced by the incident field of
the CW antenna.
Associated with the measurement computer is a data analysis computer. This analysis
function can be contained within the measurement computer itself, or it can be performed by a
separate computer, linked directly to the measurement computer.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 41 –
CW antenna
with balun
Out
Fibre optics Fibre optics
receiver transmitter Network
analyser
RF Coaxial cable
amplifier Electrical
bond Data acquisition Off-line
computer storage (tape)
Fibre optics Fibre optics link A
Fibre optics
transmitter receiver
Internal sensor
Data processing Printer/plotter
Fibre optics link Ref computer
Fibre optics Fibre optics
External reference
sensor Shielded enclosure
IEC
Figure 22 – Example CW measurement set-up
The external field/current sensors for the reference and the measurement channels should not
violate the shield topology surrounding the measurement equipment. A common way of
ensuring that the shielding is maintained is to use fibre optic links for both of these channels.
This requires a conversion of the electrical signals at the sensors to optical signals by means
of a fibre optics transmitter, the transmission of the optical signals via an optical cable, and
the reconstitution of the electrical signal within the equipment enclosure by a fibre optics
receiver.
The network analyser provides an output RF signal which is swept over the frequency range
of interest. This signal is transmitted via a 50 Ω coaxial cable to an RF power amplifier, which
boosts the signal level and then feeds it to a specially designed antenna to radiate the signal.
The coaxial cable shield should be electrically bonded to the shielded equipment enclosure at
the penetration point to isolate the external and internal regions, as indicated in Figure 22. In
addition, ferrite bead attenuators can be located at about 30 cm intervals along the cable to
help minimize the unwanted external field coupling and propagation along the cable. An
alternative to the use of a hard-wired connection between the network analyser and the
amplifier is to use a fibre optics link, as illustrated in Figure 22.
Test equipment
For this test, the following types of equipment are needed:
– CW radiating antenna;
– power amplifier;
– network analyser;
– reference and response sensors;
– fiber optics transmission system;
Pertinent details of this equipment are discussed in Annex D.
Test procedure
– 42 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
To ensure that the CW test is conducted properly, a series of steps should be performed in
setting up the measurement equipment and conducting the measurements. As shown in
Figure 23, these procedures consist of activities that pertain directly to the conduct of the test
(labelled as "CW test activity"). The other analysis support tasks (denoted as "CW data
processing activity") serve to ensure that the test configuration is correct and that the test
data are of sufficient quality for the data analysis, and finally to perform the desired analysis
on the measured CW data.
CW test activity CW data processing activity
Set-up network analyser

radiating CW antenna
and power amplifier
Locate the Examine reference

reference sensor sensor response
Plot the sensor

Calibrate the CW system responses and
measurement chain calibration file
Locate defined
measurement points
and link with fibre
optics cable
Measure the Plot the measured

facility transfer sensor responses and
functions the transfer function
Correct measurements and

re-compute transfer
functions if needed
Extrapolate the CW
transfer functions to
the desired transient
HEMP excitation
IEC
Figure 23 – Test and analysis procedures for conducting a CW test
The first step in conducting the CW test is to decide upon the location of the CW test antenna.
In the direction broadside to the antenna, the radiated EM field is primarily horizontally
polarized. Thus, this CW antenna is suitable for simulating the effect of an incident
horizontally polarized HEMP field. Details of antenna placement are provided in Annex D.
Once the antenna location is fixed, the reference sensor is selected and the calibrations of
the response and reference sensors are performed. The next step in the CW test procedure is
to locate the desired measurement points (presumably within the facility or test object),
connect the previously calibrated sensors, and run the fibre optic cables from the transducer
near the network analyser to the measurement location. In doing this, care should be taken to
ensure that the shielding topology of the test object is not violated. For example, even though
the fibre optic cables do not conduct electrical signals, if they pass through a door into a
shielded enclosure, the door shall remain open to let the cable pass. Such an open door
constitutes a shielding violation and should be avoided.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 43 –
With the appropriate equipment connected at the internal measurement points, the
measurement process can proceed, with the simultaneous measurement of the reference and
the response sensors. Generally, the calibration transfer function T o (ω) is applied to these
responses during the measurement process and, as a result, there are three data files
provided for each measurement:
– the reference sensor spectrum;

– the response sensor spectrum;
– the corrected transfer function.
As noted in Figure 23, concurrent with the measurements, data analysis should be performed,
with plotting of these data files, and a preliminary examination of the reasonableness of the
results should be made. If there are any bad data points in either of the sensor responses,
they should be checked and a new transfer function calculated.
After the measurements of the transfer functions are completed, Figure 23 indicates that the
remaining task is the processing of the measured data. Usually, for a CW test, this will involve
taking the measured (and corrected) transfer function spectrum and converting it to a
transient, HEMP response of the system. To describe this extrapolation process, the signal
flow diagram shown in Figure 24 can be used. In addition, if only the shielding effectiveness
of the enclosure is desired, this quantity can be determined from the transfer function, as
discussed previously in Clause 4.
Excitation
Swept CW
excitation spectrum Calibration
E( ω ) function
Reference
sensor To(ω )
Radiating Transfer T( ω ) = R( ω )/E( ω )/T o ( ω )
antenna function
Response
sensor CW
System under test response
R( ω )
Incident field E tot ( ω ) Extrapolation to

Fourier Total excitation incident field
specification f(t) transform field excitation
G( ω ) = T( ω )E tot ( ω )
Inverse
Fourier
transform
g(t)
Extrapolated
system response
g(t)
IEC
Figure 24 – Analysis flow diagram for extrapolating

a measured CW spectrum to the HEMP response
5.2.3.3 Global illumination with existing CW sources
An alternative to the CW or pulse testing of a system, using an active transmitter and

antenna, is to consider a passive approach in which ambient EM signals around the system
provide the excitation. These signals arise from stationary transmitters and, consequently,
there can be a large variability in the results. Consideration should be given to the illumination
direction of the stationary transmitter.
– 44 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Figure 25 illustrates an example scan of the EM spectrum (from 9 kHz to 3 GHz) which could
be used to excite a test object in this manner.
100
90 AM Cells
FM
80
70 TV
Signal level (dBuV)
60
50
40
30
20
10
–10
0,01 0,1 1 10 100 1 000
Frequency (MHz)
IEC
Figure 25 – Example scan from 9 kHz to 3 GHz for the ambient

electromagnetic field from communication signals
There are several advantages in performing tests in this manner:
– the incident EM environment is a plane wave, exciting the entire system under test
simultaneously;
– there is no interference with nearby equipment;
– no regulatory (PTT, FCC, etc.) approval is needed;
– the test is inexpensive, due to minimal equipment costs;
– there is no equipment liability issue.
However, this method presents the following disadvantages:
– there is no control over the characteristics of the excitation EM environment (amplitude,

polarization, etc.);
– the signal/noise ratio is low, making it difficult to measure in highly shielded regions;
– phase information and complete spectral information are not available, making it
impossible to calculate the correct transient responses;
– the internal equipment shall be turned off due to the low signal levels provided by the
external sources.
Test set-up
The test set-up in this case is similar to that shown in Figure 21, except that the transmitting
antenna and power amplifier are not present. Moreover, the network analyser may be
replaced by a spectrum analyser, as the phases of the external reference and internal
response signals are not measured.
Test equipment
For this test concept, the following types of equipment are needed:
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 45 –
– spectrum analyser capable of simultaneous measurements on two channels;

– reference and response sensors;
Test procedure
The procedure for performing this test is illustrated in Figure 26. It is important to perform a
pre-test assessment of the ambient EM field environment to determine if it is suitable for
performing the test. If there are not enough EM field emissions over the desired bandwidth,
then it will be necessary to perform a pulse or CW test.
An important aspect of this type of test is to ensure that the measurements of the internal and
reference responses are performed simultaneously. Because the ambient EM environment
changes as a function of time, there is no guarantee that the incident fields will be constant. If
the measurements of these responses are not simultaneous, variations of the received signal
strengths will mask the shielding of the system.
Locate spectrum analyser

and reference sensor near
the facility
Perform ambient
EM spectrum measurement
Excitation No Perform
spectrum active test
adequate
?
Yes
Define and instrument

internal measurement
locations
Simultaneous measurements
of reference and internal
response spectra
Modify internal
sensor location/polarization
Calculate SE of
test enclosure
IEC
Figure 26 – Test procedure for the ambient EM excitation test

– 46 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
5.2.3.4 Double-ended TEM cell
The double-ended TEM cell is another way of producing a uniform and controlled EM field
environment to globally excite a shielded enclosure. This device is like a coaxial transmission
line, with a source at one end and a matched load at another. The source produces a
transverse EM (TEM) field within the coaxial line which interacts with the test object located
inside the coaxial region, and is ultimately absorbed by the termination impedance.
Figure 27 illustrates a typical double-ended TEM cell, with a cut-away view showing the
centre conductor of the coaxial system and the object under test. As long as the test object is
not too large compared with the cross-section of the cell, the excitation field can be taken to
be approximately uniform. Because the TEM mode in this waveguide has no low-frequency
cut-off, the testing may be conducted at very low frequencies – well below the frequencies
permitted by a radiating antenna structure. As the frequency of operation increases, however,
other modes and cavity type resonances can occur; these effectively limit the high-frequency
utility of the device. Suppliers of individual TEM cells provide information as to the usable
bandwidths of their equipment, which typically range from several tens of kilohertz to 100 MHz
for cells having a working volume in the order of a metre in height.
Field pattern in cross-section
E-field
Centre plate
H-field
CW power
Field probe Test object Centre plate
amplifier
50 Ω
Network termination
analyser
Insulating supports
Control and
data acquisition
IEC
Figure 27 – Double-ended TEM cell for field illumination testing of small enclosures
Test set-up
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 47 –
The equipment set-up for testing in the TEM cell is similar to that used for the CW field
illumination testing discussed in 5.2.3.2, with the exception that the shielded enclosure
surrounding the equipment in the CW case is not needed, because of the shield surrounding
the TEM cell. Figure 28 illustrates the equipment connections for this test.
TEM cell enclosure CW signal out

Termination Network analyser
Coaxial cable RF
amplifier
Excitation
Measurement
sensor Data acquisition Off-line
computer storage (tape)
Fibre optics Fibre optics link Fibre optics
Signal
Reference
Data processing
sensor Printer/plotter
computer
Fibre optics Fibre optics link Fibre optics
Reference
IEC
Figure 28 – Example test set-up for field illumination in the TEM cell
Test equipment
For this test concept, the following types of equipment are needed:
– TEM cell with matched termination resistance;

– CW power amplifier, network analyser or spectrum analyser capable of simultaneous
measurements on two channels:
– reference and measurement sensors;
Test procedure
Testing in the TEM cell proceeds in a manner similar to the other tests described previously:
the network analyser drives the power amplifier and sweeps from a low frequency to a high
frequency which is determined by the upper limits of operation of the TEM cell. Measurements
of the reference field sensors and the internal system response are made simultaneously by
the network analyser and the transfer function between these two quantities is developed
directly in the spectrum analyser. If an extrapolated transient response is desired from these
measurements, then the analysis procedure illustrated in Figure 24 is used. However, if the
shielding effectiveness of the enclosure is desired, such a detailed analysis is not performed:
only the SE response is formed from the transfer function, as described by Equation (2).
5.2.3.5 Single-ended TEM cell
An alternative to the double-ended TEM cell described above is the tapered TEM cell as
shown in Figure 29. In this test chamber, the inner conductor is offset vertically so as to
create a larger test volume, and it has a gradually flared rectangular coaxial cross-section,
terminating in a matched load.
The end termination consists of a combination low-frequency circuit element of 50 Ω load and
a high-frequency absorber wall for absorbing the incident propagating wave as in anechoic
chambers. The crossover between these two regimes depends on the cell size and the
absorber length. The broadband impedance match provided by the termination acts to
suppress higher modes. The absorbing material significantly reduces the Q of the chamber
– 48 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
cavity, thereby reducing the resonance effects of the cavity modes. Field variability inside the
empty chamber should be less than ± 4 dB for frequencies from d.c. to 1 GHz.
The cells have been given the name "GTEM" cells to emphasize their gigahertz capability.
Cells have been constructed with test chamber heights from 0,5 m to over 3 m for use in
testing printed circuit boards up to box-size equipment. Larger cells, capable of complete rack
or vehicle testing, are under study.
Testing in these modified TEM cells is identical to that discussed in 5.2.3.4, with the exception
that the upper frequency range is higher. Consequently, similar equipment is used (but
perhaps with a larger bandwidth), and the same test procedure as that discussed in 5.2.3.4 is
used. See also IEC 61000-4-20 for information on testing with the use of TEM cells.
CW power
amplifier
Absorbers
Test object
Field probe
Top conductor
Inner conductor
(offset)
Bottom conductor
Network
analyser
Spherical support
Control and
data acquisition
system
IEC
Figure 29 – Illustration of the single-ended TEM cell and associated equipment
5.2.3.6 Localized barrier shielding effectiveness test method
In some instances, a shielded enclosure cannot be viewed as being a “good” shield. Such is
the case if there are many openings in the shield or if the shield material is not highly
conducting. In these instances, the testing of the shielding can be accomplished by
performing a local barrier illumination using a small antenna that provides EM field
illumination in the vicinity of the barrier penetration. Such tests are less reliable than are the
full system illumination tests, because the shielding effectiveness values depend on the
location of the internal measurement sensor, as well as the location of the external antenna.
Thus, a range of SE values can be obtained for any particular system. For example, as
illustrated in Clause 4, local illumination tests can be applied to the measurement of the
overall shielding of the enclosure (as in Figure 5), to the localized measurement of the
shielding provided by wire mesh or conducting panel protection over apertures (as in
Figure 15), or to the localized testing of other PoE protection methods (as suggested in
Figure 18).
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 49 –
Due to the localized nature of the excitation source, this measurement provides information
only about the shielding in the region where the excitation EM field is strongest. For localized
PoE measurements the testing is performed in the vicinity of the penetration point.
As noted in Clause 4, the shielding behaviour of an enclosure at low frequencies is different

for the E- and H-fields. Because the E-fields are relatively easy to shield for these
frequencies, only tests of the magnetic field shielding effectiveness are required. As the
frequency increases, the E- and H-shielding effectiveness becomes identical, and it is
equivalent to the plane-wave shielding effectiveness. This quantity is also measured by the
test method.
Since the electromagnetic barrier has to remain intact during the conduct of the shielding
effectiveness measurements, and since the use of electrically noisy equipment has to be
restricted, construction activity or unusual operations (facility modification, maintenance) may
be affected. Radiated signal levels are low and present no hazard to equipment, but
frequency adjustments may be required to avoid self-interference or interference with nearby
facilities. Normal electrical safety precautions apply during this test.
Test set-up
In conducting these low-frequency magnetic field or plane-wave shielding effectiveness tests

of the enclosure, the basic test set-ups illustrated in Figure 29 and Figure 31 shall be used.
Measurements of the receiving antenna responses, with and without the shield present, are
made, and the ratio of these responses provides an indication of the shielding effectiveness of
the local barrier as
Vc
SE = 20 log10 dB (11)
Vm
where
Vc is the measured receiver response under calibration conditions (without the barrier);
Vm is the measured response with the barrier in place.
This procedure should be applied to shielded enclosures large enough to accommodate the
test equipment inside the enclosure.
Test set-up for plane-wave measurements
The set-up for calibration and measurement of plane-wave shall be placed in accordance with
Figure 30a) and Figure 30b).
If it is not possible to place the transmitting antenna outside due to physical constraints, the
set-up for the measurement follows Figure 30c). The oscillator and power amplifier may be
placed inside the shielded enclosure with an additional shielded rack. When using a vector
network analyser, the oscillator is part of the network analyser and therefore in its location.
– 50 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Transmitting d1 Receiving
antenna antenna
Power
Oscillator Preamplifier Spectrum analyser
amplifier
IEC
a) Calibration
Transmitting d2 d3 Receiving
antenna antenna
(Outside) (Inside)
Power
amplifier
Electromagnetic barrier IEC
b) Measurement
d2 d3
Transmitting Receiving
antenna antenna
Oscillator (Inside) (Outside)
Power Spectrum analyser/

Preamplifier
amplifier Network analyser
Electromagnetic
barrier
Shielded enclosure
IEC
c) Measurement (inside-to-out)
Figure 30 – Test set-up for the plane-wave shielding effectiveness measurements
The dimensions and composition of the various distances d 1 to d 3 are given in Table 2.
Table 2 – Dimensions and composition of distances d 1 to d 3 , with reference to Figure 30
Term Minimum dimension Composition

d1 2m d 2 + d 3 + barrier thickness
d2 30 cm d 1 – d 3 – barrier thickness
(within dynamic range and physical constraints)

Test set-up for magnetic field measurements
The set-up for magnetic field calibration and measurement shall be used in accordance with
Figure 31a) and Figure 31b).
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 51 –
If it is not possible to place the transmitting antenna outside for a separation distance of twice
the loop antenna diameter and the thickness of the electromagnetic barrier due to physical
constraints, the transmitting loop antenna shall be placed at a distance of 30 cm from the test
area surface. In this case, the distance of the receiving antenna from the test surface shall
also be 30 cm, and the distance between two loop antennas for the calibration shall be twice
the loop antenna diameter and the thickness of the electromagnetic barrier.
Transmitting d1 Receiving
antenna antenna
Loop diameter
Power
amplifier
IEC
a) Calibration
d2 d3
Transmitting Receiving
antenna antenna
Oscillator Power Preamplifier Spectrum analyser

amplifier
Electromagnetic barrier
IEC
b) Measurement
Figure 31 – Test set-up for the H-field shielding effectiveness measurements
The dimensions and composition of the various distances d 1 to d 3 are given in Table 3.
Table 3 – Dimensions and composition of distances d 1 to d 3 , with reference to Figure 31
Term Minimum dimension Composition

Loop diameter - Usually 30 cm
d1 60 cm + barrier thickness d 2 + d 3 + barrier thickness

The localized antennas are used to illuminate various portions of the shielded enclosure. For
the plane-wave shielding measurements, the entire surface (including the floor when both
sides of the shield are accessible) of the electromagnetic barrier shall be divided into
numbered plane areas not greater than 2,5 m × 2,5 m, as illustrated by the example in
Figure 32. The circles in this figure in the centre of each area indicate the various transmitting
antenna locations for these measurements. The magnetic field shielding effectiveness
measurements shall be performed at seams and PoEs, such as air vent, access panel, filter
and so on.
– 52 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
IEC
Figure 32 – Example of antenna locations for the localized antenna tests

for a hypothetical shielded enclosure or facility
Test equipment
The test equipment required for shielding effectiveness measurements includes the following:
– RF signal oscillators;
– RF power amplifier(s) with a power output as required for dynamic range;
– preamplifier(s);
– receivers/spectrum analyser(s);
– antenna(s);
– miscellaneous cables and attenuators – as required.
NOTE 1 Alternatively a vector network analyser can be used in place of RF signal oscillators and
receivers/spectrum analysers.
Test procedures
Plane-wave shielding effectiveness measurements
For each plane-wave test area defined in Figure 32, eight shielding effectiveness
measurements shall be made by sweeping the receiver antenna position. These
measurements shall be made at four distinct frequencies in the HEMP band, for each of two
transmitting antenna polarizations, as follows.
a) Frequencies
One test frequency in each frequency range of Table 4 shall be chosen according to the
approved test plan by the owner.
Table 4 – Measurement frequencies and antennas in plane-wave
Frequency range Antenna type

20 MHz to 100 MHz Biconical
100 MHz to 300 MHz Biconical
300 MHz to 600 MHz Dipole or log periodic
600 MHz to 1 GHz Dipole or log periodic
NOTE 2 Instead of measuring only four single test frequencies, a vector network analyser can be used to
measure a sweep over the frequency range listed in Table 4. If available, transmitting antennas with a broad
frequency range (usually log periodic) can be used and the frequency ranges of the sweeps according to Table 4
can be adjusted to the frequency range of the chosen transmitting antennas. Receiving antennas with fibre optic
systems with corresponding sensors of a broad frequency range can be used as well.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 53 –
b) Transmitting antenna polarizations
Dipole (or antenna aperture) parallel to the test area surface in two orientations, at 90° to
each other and parallel to the principal weld seams in the shield.
The plane-wave calibration for each frequency and transmitting antenna polarization shall be
performed in accordance with Figure 29a). The transmitting and receiving antennas such as
biconical, dipole, log periodic, or other linear antennas shall be oriented parallel to each other
(or aperture antenna planes parallel to each other). The distance between antennas shall be
as large as possible, within dynamic range constraints, but shall be at least 2 m. The
receiving antenna position shall be varied by ± 30 cm from its nominal location to ensure that
it is not located at a minimum of the radiation pattern. Test equipment shall be chosen to
provide a dynamic range at least 20 dB in excess of the shielding effectiveness requirement
at the test frequency. During calibration, no equipment or other electromagnetic reflector
(except ground) shall be closer than three times the antenna separation. The antennas shall
be at least 0 m above ground. The received signal strength for each frequency and
transmitting antenna polarization shall be recorded as the calibration signal (V c ) for that
configuration.
NOTE 3 To get an idea of the limits of the measuring system and the truth of the test results a noise
measurement can be performed over all frequency ranges of interest. Therefore the receiving antenna can be
replaced by a 50 Ω terminator (or packed into an aluminium foil in case of a small fibre optic field sensor).
After the calibration is completed, the plane-wave shielding effectiveness measurements for
each test area, and at each required frequency and transmitting antenna polarization, shall be
performed as shown in Figure 29b). Identical equipment, antennas, cable and equipment
settings (except attenuator settings) shall be used in the calibration and measurement
sequences.
The transmitting antenna shall normally be placed outside the electromagnetic barrier and
centered on the test area. The transmitting antenna’s axis (or plane in the case of an aperture
antenna) shall be parallel to the test area surface and parallel to one of the two principal weld
seam directions. The distance from the closest points of the transmitting antenna to the test
area surface shall be 30 cm less than the separation at which calibration was performed.
To perform the swept measurements, the receiving antenna shall be swept over the entire test
area at distances of approximately 5 cm to 60 cm from the test area surface and shall be
rotated in orientation until a maximum received signal is obtained. The maximum received
signal strength shall be recorded as the swept measure signal V m for that test area,
frequency, and transmitting antenna polarization. Shielding effectiveness values are
calculated using Equation (11).
If it is not possible to place the transmitting antenna outside due to physical constraints, the
transmitting antenna can be placed in the shielded enclosure. The plane-wave calibration is
the same as in Figure 29a) and the shielding effectiveness measurements shall be performed
as shown in Figure 29c). For measurements, all equipment except for the transmitting
antenna shall be placed outside or shielded inside the enclosure to avoid interference with the
transmitting EM wave. It is recognized that testing of the shielded enclosure shall be avoided
at, or very near, the shielded enclosure resonant frequency. The test procedure for shielding
effectiveness measurements is the same as that of placing the transmitting antenna outside.
Magnetic field shielding effectiveness measurements
For each 2,5 m × 2,5 m magnetic field test area shown in Figure 32, six shielding
effectiveness measurements shall be made at three frequencies for each of two transmitting
antenna polarizations, as follows:
1) Frequencies
– 54 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
One test frequency in each frequency range of Table 5 shall be chosen according to the
approved test plan by the owner.
Table 5 – Measurement frequencies and antennas in magnetic field
Frequency range Antenna type

10 kHz to 16 kHz Loop
140 kHz to 160 kHz Loop
14 MHz to 16 MHz Loop
NOTE 4 Instead of measuring only three single test frequencies, a vector network analyser can be used to
measure a sweep over the frequency range listed in Table 5. As receiving antennas, fibre optic systems with
corresponding sensors of a broad frequency range can be used as well.
2) Antenna polarizations
Plane of the loop antenna normal to the test area surface in two orientations, at 90° to each
other and parallel to the principal weld seams in the shield.
For these measurements, magnetic field calibration at each frequency and transmitting
antenna polarization shall be performed in accordance with Figure 31a). The loops of the
transmitting and receiving antennas shall be in the same plane.
The receiving antenna position shall be varied by ± 30 cm from its nominal location to ensure
that it is not located at a minimum of the radiation pattern. Test equipment shall be chosen to
provide a dynamic range at least 20 dB in excess of the shielding effectiveness requirement
at the test frequency. During calibration, no equipment or other electromagnetic reflectors
(except ground) shall be closer than three times the antenna separation. The antennas shall
be at least 2 m above ground. The received signal strength for each frequency and
transmitting antenna polarization shall be recorded as the calibration signal V c for that
configuration.
NOTE 5 To get an idea of the limits of the measuring system and the truth of the test results a noise
measurement can be performed over all frequency ranges of interest. Therefore the receiving antenna can be
replaced by a 50 Ω terminator (or packed into an aluminium foil in case of a small fibre optic field sensor).
After the calibration is completed, magnetic field shielding effectiveness measurements for
each test area, and at each required frequency and transmitting antenna polarization, shall be
performed as shown in Figure 31b). Identical equipment, antennas, cable and equipment
settings (except attenuator settings) shall be used in the calibration and measurement
sequences.
The transmitting antenna shall normally be placed outside the electromagnetic barrier and
centered on the test area. The plane of the transmitting loop antenna shall be normal to the
test area surface and parallel to one of the two principal weld seam directions. The distance
from the closest points of the transmitting antenna to the test area surface shall be 30 cm less
than the separation at which calibration was performed.
The receiving antenna shall normally be inside the barrier. To perform the swept
measurement, the receiving antenna shall be swept over the entire test area at distances from
approximately 5 cm to 60 cm from the test area surface and shall be rotated from vertical to
horizontal polarization until a maximum received signal is obtained. The maximum received
signal strength shall be recorded as the swept measure signal V m for that test area,
frequency, and transmitting antenna polarization.
Test frequencies and pass/fail criteria
The owner shall define test frequencies and all pass/fail requirements. However, as a guide
for owners, this standard recommends frequencies like Table 4 and Table 5 that can be
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 55 –
selected for testing their shielded enclosures. Successful tests at these frequencies should
provide very high confidence that a shielded enclosure provides a “good” shield at all the
frequencies from 10 kHz to 1 GHz.
5.3 Current injection test procedures
5.3.1 General
Tests in 5.3 deal with those that involve the excitation of a HEMP protection device or
material by a direct injection of current (and charge), as opposed to the excitation by an
electromagnetic field. This corresponds to the excitation of the system shielding topology at
observation points inside the principal shielding surface, as discussed in Annex A.
5.3.2 Injection testing of enclosures
The low-frequency testing of the shielding provided by an enclosure or box by current

injection is discussed in 4.2.4 and is illustrated conceptually in Figure 7. This diagram is
repeated in Figure 32a) which shows current being injected at one location on the external
shield and extracted at another location. The internal open-circuit voltage is measured across
two sense wires connected to the inside of the enclosure.
This test is not designed to simulate the effects of an incident HEMP field acting on the
enclosure; rather, it simulates the effects of an HEMP-induced current on long cables being
conducted onto the shielding enclosure. Thus, the locations of current injection shall
correspond to points at which there would be current flowing onto the enclosure when it is in
its normal operating configuration. In some cases, there may be multiple cable attachment
points, requiring several different current injection simulations to account for the different
possible excitations of the shield.
Test set-up
Figure 32b) illustrates the set-up for this test. A network analyser, controlled by a data
acquisition computer, feeds a low-level excitation signal to a power amplifier. This amplifier,
typically with a coaxial cable output, feeds a balun-like splitter which injects current onto one
connection on the enclosure exterior and removes the current from another point. These
injection points shall correspond to locations having electrical connections in the normal
operating configuration of the system.
A suitable voltage is measured across an internal sense wire and is conducted back to the
network analyser by a fibre optic link, so as not to interrupt the current path on the system
exterior. With a measurement of this internal voltage, a measure of the shield transfer
impedance Z t is obtained from Equation (3).
In performing this test, it is important to ensure that the frequency of operation is sufficiently
low, so that λ = c / 2 πf > L, where L is the longest dimension of the enclosure.
– 56 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Current injection point

Io
Shield
a V oc
Sense
wire b
Current extraction point
IEC
a) Test concept
CW power
amplifier
Signal Power
input out
Enclosure under test
L
Test object
Current Current
in out
Balun
Current Fibre optic

probe transmitter
Reference current
measurement Measured signal out
Fibre optic cable

Network
analyser Fibre optic
receiver
Control and
data acquisition
system
IEC
b) Equipment configuration
Figure 33 – Test concept and equipment configuration for

current injection testing of a shielded enclosure or box
Test equipment
– network analyser or other suitable detector capable of measuring the injected current on
the enclosure exterior and the internal voltage;
– low-frequency amplifier suitable for injecting the amplified current onto the enclosure;
– balun or other coaxial balanced line transition device for injecting current onto the system;
– voltage and current probes;
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 57 –
– fiber optic transmission unit or other data transmission medium suitable for passing the
internal measured voltage back to the network analyser without causing perturbations in
the external current path;
– controlling computer and data analysis station;
– assorted cables and connectors.
Test procedure
This test is conducted by first examining the system to determine the various current injection
points that would normally be excited by an HEMP event. The size of the enclosure (L) is
measured, and the highest frequency of operation (f max) is then determined, so that the
minimum wavelength (λ min ) is λ min = c/2 πf max > L. Then, the network analyser is swept from
the lowest possible frequency to the computed maximum frequency, and the complex valued
transfer impedance ratio of V oc /I is evaluated.
This measurement is repeated for different internal voltage collection points, so as to obtain a
representative sampling of the variations of the internal responses. In addition, if there are
other external current injection points possible, these measurements shall be repeated with
the injection of the CW current being made at these points.
The total set of measured responses should be presented in the form of summary curves
showing the response distributions as a function of frequency. Furthermore, the shielding
effectiveness of the enclosure can be computed using Equation (4).
5.3.3 Transfer impedance and admittance of cable shields and connectors
Test procedures for determining the transfer impedance and admittance of cable shields are
defined for example within the IEC 62153-4-x series. Annex A provides information on these
measurement techniques.
5.3.4 Testing of gasket material
5.3.4.1 Resistivity measurement
The testing of the resistivity of a gasket material has been described in 4.4.2. Such
measurements may not be indicative of how it might actually perform as a hardening element
when installed in a facility or enclosure, but, nevertheless, such tests of the d.c. resistivity are
useful in characterizing the gasket material.
Test set-up
The test set-up for this measurement is illustrated in Figure 14. In this figure, the material
under test is located between two electrodes; a current is caused to flow by the excitation
voltage source, and the resulting voltage is measured across the sample. In the actual test
set-up, the excitation source and the voltmeter are all contained in one unit − the four-probe
voltmeter, as specified below.
Test equipment
– a four-probe ohmmeter having a measurement range of 10 4 Ω to 10 –5 Ω;

– silver- or gold-plated electrodes having a contacting area A = 1,6 cm 2 (corresponding to a
circular diameter of 1,43 cm) for holding the sample. These electrodes should have
suitable provisions for attaching the ohmmeter electrodes;
– a thickness gauge for measuring in increments of 0,02 mm;
– 58 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
– an appropriate fixture or apparatus having capabilities of supporting the electrodes and

test specimen, and suitable means of applying a pressure of (6,89 × 10 6 ) Pa on the
sample.
Test procedure
Gasket specimens with thicknesses ranging from 0,1 cm to 0,3 cm and a cross-sectional area
at least the same as the electrodes shall be obtained for testing. Prior to testing, the surfaces
of the material should be cleaned and any dirt or foreign matter removed. The electrodes
should also be cleaned. Prior to testing, the test specimen and test fixture and electrodes
should be conditioned for at least 3 h at a standard temperature of 23 °C and at a relative
humidity of 45 % to 75 %.
Measure the area A of the silver- or gold-plated electrodes. Using the thickness gauge
measure and record the thickness L of the material at the contact location with the electrodes.
The material being tested shall have sufficient area to contact the entire electrode area. Then,
position the material between the electrodes and apply a pressure of (6,89 × 10 6 ) Pa ± 5 %
across the sample. While maintaining constant pressure, measure and record the sample
resistance R.
With these measured quantities, the d.c. resistivity of the gasket material is calculated as
A
ρ DC = R (12)
L
where
ρ DC is the d.c. resistivity (W·m);
R is the measured resistance (W);
A is the smallest cross-sectional area of part or sample between probe electrodes (m 2 );
L is the distance between the two electrodes (m).
5.3.4.2 Material resistivity using the surface probe method
An alternative test method for the resistivity of a gasket may be used for cases where the
gasket material cannot be cut. This involves making a surface measurement of the resistance
of the sample.
Test set-up
For this test, the two-point probe shown in Figure 34 is used. This probe has an electrode
separation of L = 2,54 cm, and other typical dimensions are indicated in the figure. For parts
too small to be measured with this probe, a different probe with a smaller electrode separation
may be used, with the electrode’s width and spacing being reduced together.
Each electrode should touch the gasket at one point. In the case of a part whose cross-
section configuration makes it difficult or impossible to measure using this method, the
smaller test probe described above should be used.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 59 –
Dimensions in centimetres
Insulating material
1,27
2,54
Electrodes
Ohmmeter
V in V out
Gasket material
I in I out
Cross-sectional
area A
0,47
Probe weight: 200 g to 240 g
Probe separation L = 2,54

IEC
Figure 34 – Surface probe for volume resistivity measurement
Test equipment
– a four-probe ohmmeter having a minimum sensitivity of 1 mΩ;

– silver- or gold-plated electrodes having the dimensions shown in Figure 34, and suitable
provisions for attaching the ohmmeter electrodes.
Test procedure
The d.c. volume resistivity of the material shall be measured using an ohmmeter capable of
measuring to a minimum of 1 mΩ. The sample to be measured shall be placed on a
nonconductive surface. The measurement probe shall be placed on the gasket part being
tested, or alternatively, on a piece of sample material that is 1,27 cm wide by 7,62 cm long by
0,14 cm to 0,3 cm thick, in such a manner that the weight of the test probe is uniformly
distributed on the part or test sample. The entire width of the part shall be in contact with
each electrode. After a 30 s stabilization period, the resistance R on the ohmmeter shall be
recorded. The d.c. volume resistivity shall be calculated using Equation (12).
– 60 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Annex A
(informative)
HEMP test concepts for electrical systems
A.1 Overview
HEMP testing of an electrical system is necessary because mathematical and numerical

models do not provide sufficiently accurate results to give a high confidence level in the
assessment of a system's survivability in an HEMP environment. Many different factors enter
into the decision to perform an HEMP test:
– relative importance of the system and its survivability requirements;

– type of system, its physical configuration and location;
– available funds, time and personnel for testing;
– desired accuracy of the results.
Before determining the test requirements for a system, the above factors should be carefully
weighed to see if a test is actually needed.
A.2 Types of HEMP tests
A.2.1 General
There are several different types of tests that can be performed on systems to determine the
response to an HEMP excitation. Some tests are rather simple and straightforward, while
others require large facilities and significant data processing capabilities. The following
subclauses A.2.2 to A.2.6 briefly describe the major types of HEMP tests.
A.2.2 System-level transient tests
Perhaps the most thorough test of a system (aside from using an actual nuclear environment)
is to perform a threat-level test on the entire system. This type of test involves locating a
threat-level, pulsed EMP simulator near the facility being investigated, and conducting a
series of measurements by changing parameters such as the angles of incidence or the
system's electrical configuration (i.e. doors open or shut, etc.).
Typically, in this type of test, a large amount of transient data is measured and saved for
analysis after the test is completed. The results of the post-test analysis are usually
expressed as a probability of survival of the system in the event of an HEMP event, and
involve the concept of waveform norms.
The principal advantage of this type of test is that the entire system is subjected to the
desired threat-level environment. As a result, any non-linear protection devices will be
stressed and the resulting system response will include the effects of these elements.
Furthermore, the effects of other unintended non-linearities such as flashovers in cables,
which are very difficult to predict analytically, will be included.
On the other hand, the equipment involved in such tests is bulky, expensive and not easily
transportable. Consequently, a fixed site simulator is usually used for this type of testing. If
the system to be tested cannot be easily moved, this test is difficult to conduct. Furthermore,
there is usually a large amount of data generated by this type of test, and the post-test
analysis effort can be considerable.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 61 –
A.2.3 CW field illumination tests
An alternative to the full-scale, threat-level pulse testing is to use the CW field illumination
test concept. This test concept is similar to that of the system-level pulse-testing concept in
that a radiating structure (i.e. an antenna) is located near the system under test. Unlike the
pulse test, however, the excitation of the antenna is time harmonic (e.g. CW) and is swept or
stepped through a range of frequencies, starting at a low frequency of 10 kHz to 100 kHz and
stopping at a high frequency of 100 MHz to 200 MHz. Some newer CW testing systems
operate up to the gigahertz (GHz) frequency range.
The basic goal of the CW test is to measure a transfer function from a suitable reference
electromagnetic EM field quantity outside the facility to a response inside the facility. As this
measurement is conducted in the frequency domain, the transfer function is a complex valued
function, characterized by its magnitude and phase or conversely by its real and imaginary
parts.
Suitable external reference quantities include a component of the incident or total E- or H-

fields, a current induced on a long external cable, or perhaps the input current in the CW
antenna itself. In cases when the measured response has to be extrapolated from an HEMP
response, the choice of the external reference should be made so that it can be related to an
incident HEMP field. Internal response quantities can include E- and H-fields inside the
facility, currents on internal cables and voltages at equipment terminals.
This form of testing has several advantages over the full-scale pulse testing described earlier.
The equipment used is readily available and is significantly less costly than that required for
pulse testing. Furthermore, the entire system can be easily transported to remote sites and
quickly erected. Because of the narrowband characteristics of the excitation and
measurement process, the effects of noise can be reduced. Typically, it is easier to get a
"clean" CW spectrum than to get a clean transient waveform.
The major disadvantage of CW testing is that, because of the low power level and non-
transient mode of operation, non-linear protective devices within the system are not triggered.
In addition, other unpredictable non-linearities, such as cable insulation flashover, are not
noted. Consequently, this test method only provides the linear (or low-level) response and
systems tested in this manner may appear to be more vulnerable than they really are, since
the non-linear effects can add extra protection – if they operate.
This deficiency may not be serious in some circumstances, as many systems use both
nonlinear devices together with electrical filters. CW testing on these systems provides a
reasonable worst-case estimation of the response – namely, the response that would be
obtained if the non-linear device were not to function properly. Moreover, there exist methods
to combine analytically the low-level CW measurements of a system with the non-linear
device characteristics to permit a calculation of the pulsed, non-linear behaviour of the
system.
A second disadvantage of this test approach is that the final measured result is usually not
the final desired result. To obtain the extrapolated transient HEMP response, some additional
data processing should be undertaken, and this can give rise to errors in the resulting
transient response.
A.2.4 Current injection testing
The two previous tests are applied to the entire system. An alternate test concept is to excite
only parts of the system. One way of doing this is to identify important electrical conductors
entering a facility and inject pulse or CW currents onto the cables. The injected currents will
then re-distribute themselves within the facility and provide an indication of the system
response under external field excitation conditions.
– 62 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Typically for this type of test, a pre-test analysis should be performed in order to identify the
important conductive current paths into the facility or system being considered. These might
include power lines, communication cables or mechanical conductors. For each of these
conductors, an analysis of the external EM-field coupling should be performed to estimate the
amplitude and waveshape of the HEMP response. A current injection source having the
proper transient (or spectral) characteristics is then applied to each of the selected
conductors and the internal responses are measured.
The advantage of this type of test is that pulse injection equipment is typically smaller and
less expensive than the full-scale simulator and associated equipment. Furthermore, threat-
level currents are easier to induce by pulse injection methods than by an EM-field
illumination. When operated in a pulsed mode, this type of testing also provides the possibility
of exciting nonlinear devices located along the conducting paths being excited. Thus, a pulsed
current injection test and a CW field illumination test can complement each other.
This type of test is fundamentally incomplete, as the possible synergistic effects of

simultaneous excitation of the whole system are not taken into account. Thus, there is always
some unknown error in this simulation technique. Furthermore, a key feature of this type of
test is that the linking of the injected current levels on the external conductors to the incident
HEMP field is often done by analysis. This step can introduce uncertainties in the results.
A.2.5 Partial illumination testing
Partial illumination testing is the counterpart to pulse injection testing, except that the system
excitation is viewed as arising from a partial EM-field excitation of the system instead of a
current injection on one of the system's conductors. This testing approach is sometimes
denoted as the piece-wise application of radiation through an EMP simulator (PARTES)
concept.
This test is accomplished by using small electric or magnetic dipole antennas referred to as
"drivers" at various locations on the exterior surface of the system being tested. Locally, these
drivers produce an EM field excitation of the system and a suitable internal response can be
measured. Either CW or pulse testing is possible using this concept. By considering a suitably
large number of driver locations and by analytically combining the measured responses for
each, the response of a plane-wave excitation of the system can be inferred.
The main advantage of this approach is that electrically large systems can be tested.
Although such systems might require many measurements as the driver location is changed,
the method can allow for such testing.
The principal disadvantage of this testing is that considerable analytical work should be done
to correctly combine the measured data files to obtain the final desired result. In addition,
there is always the open question of deciding upon the best locations of the driver sources.
Finally, the question of non-linear device operation is not addressed completely in this type of
test.
A.2.6 Subsystem and component testing
Besides full-scale system testing, testing also exists at the subsystem (i.e. "black-box") level
and at the component level. In this test, a piece of electronic equipment or perhaps even a
discrete component within the equipment is tested for its response. In doing this the HEMP
stress at the component should be determined, either from a test or by analysis.
This type of test is advantageous because component testing is relatively inexpensive and is
rapidly conducted. Furthermore, if the component or equipment fails, hardening procedures
can be determined by analysing the mode of failure of the device.
However, the major disadvantage of this type of testing is that it is difficult to ensure that the
component is tested with the same electrical stress that would be found under HEMP
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 63 –
excitation conditions. The HEMP stress inside a complex system is difficult to know exactly
without performing a system level test. (If such a test were to be performed, then there would
be no need to perform a component test.) Typically, the HEMP stress at a component is
usually determined by analysis, and this is then used to design the proper pulse or CW
excitation of the component.
A.3 Definition of the testing interface
A key aspect of testing is the definition of the testing interface within the system. This can be
thought of as the location at which the simulated HEMP stress shall be applied to the system.
It is generally recognized that an electrically complex system can be represented by a series
of shielding surfaces, or "EM barriers," which are penetrated at selected points by one of
several "EM penetration mechanisms," such as diffusion, aperture penetration or conducting
penetration. Figure A.1 illustrates such a diagram for a generic electrical system, showing
regions of different HEMP-induced electrical stresses (within the horizontal lines), together
with the various coupling paths and penetration mechanisms.
It should be noted in Figure A.1 that the HEMP interaction with the system has been divided
into two parts: one which deals with penetrations through the shielding barrier by diffusion
and apertures, and another part dealing with penetrations along deliberately made conducting
paths, such as signal lines, control lines, power lines, etc. This standard deals with testing
concepts for the first type of penetration, namely test methods for shielding enclosures.
IEC 61000-4-24 discusses the test methods for protective devices for HEMP-conducted
disturbances, which concentrate on test methods for appropriate signal injection onto the
signal and/or power leads of equipment, as indicated in Figure A.1.
Testing of the shielding of the system can be conducted at any one of the interface locations
denoted by the letters A through H, which move progressively into the system. These
interface locations are not actual "test points", as they do not refer to specific locations on
cables or components in the system. Rather, they denote generic locations of possible test
points within the system. The most straightforward testing is at interface point A at the
exterior of the system, where the excitation is due to the external E- and H-fields produced by
the HEMP. At this location, it is necessary to simulate the behaviour of the incident HEMP
fields over the entire system (plus any reflected fields from nearby objects, such as a ground
plane). If this simulation is carried out properly, the response of the system will be
comparable to that of the system under HEMP illumination.
Interface point B is still located on the exterior of the system, but it occurs after the incident
field has coupled to the system exterior and induced currents and charges on the exterior
shield. Thus, the system excitation at this point is one step removed from the incident field. As
noted in Figure A.1, HEMP stress at this level of the interaction diagram can penetrate into
the system through apertures, diffusion, or by conductive penetrations, often referred to as
points of entry (PoEs). In the field-illuminated case, all of these penetration mechanisms are
excited simultaneously by the incident field. In the testing at interface level B, however, each
penetration is usually tested separately, due to the size of the system. Consequently, testing
at this level gives rise to potential errors, not only because of a more complicated requirement
on the temporal behaviour of the excitation sources, but because PoEs are usually not all
tested at the same time.
– 64 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
External
sources
External E- and H-field External E- and H-field
A
Coupling to Coupling to external

external shield conductors
External charge and
current responses G
B
Primary shield Diffusive Aperture Conductive Primary shield
penetration penetration penetration penetration penetration
C
Internal E- and H-
field
Coupling to
internal shields
Internal charge and
current responses H
D
Secondary shield Diffusive Aperture Conductive Secondary shield

penetration penetration penetration penetration penetration
E
Internal E- and H-
field
Internal
coupling
Current and charge Current and charge
at the device F at the device
Equipment
responses
IEC
Figure A.1 – Sample HEMP interaction diagram illustrating penetration mechanisms,

system responses and generic test interface locations
The necessary test excitations at this location can be described in terms of an injected current
density and a corresponding charge density on the surface of the shield, or, if long conductors
are considered, the sources are external currents and voltages relative to a suitable reference
conductor (ground plane). Because the behaviour of these electrical responses depends on
the nature of the HEMP excitation and on the electrical nature of the exterior of the system,
these responses are more complicated than are the required simulation sources at location A.
Moving further into the system, interface point C is a field point at a location just inside the
penetration points of the primary EM barrier. At this location, the HEMP responses consist of
the local E- and H-fields within the shield. These fields propagate into the interior of the
system, and couple to the surfaces of secondary shields in the system. These shields usually
consist of the enclosures of individual boxes or equipment racks and the shields of cables.
This gives rise to local current and charge on the inner shielding surfaces, denoted by
interface D. The responses at D contain all of the effects of internal cavity resonances,
internal cable resonances, local field perturbations due to internal loading and a myriad of
other complications arising from a realistic system.
Finally, the currents and charges at D penetrate through the secondary shielding layer, again
by diffusive or aperture type penetrations, to create internal excitation E- and H-fields at
location E. These fields couple to internal cables or wires and eventually lead to test interface
F at the component or "black-box" level.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 65 –
HEMP testing can be performed at any one of the aforementioned interface locations.
However, the deeper the test interface is located within the system, the more difficult it is to
accurately describe the HEMP stress needed to apply to the test. Thus, there will be
considerable uncertainty in the test results for internal test interfaces. However, the closer the
test location is to the components, the more accurate is the knowledge as to the behaviour of
the components or black boxes due to the stress. Consequently, one trade-off that occurs in
HEMP testing is choosing between the ease of describing and simulating the desired stress
on the system, and the accuracy of knowing the response of the system to this stress.
As mentioned earlier, there is an additional coupling path arising from the conducting
penetrations through the shields, and these give rise to testing interface points G and H.
Although these are not discussed further in this standard, they are shown in Figure A.1 for
completeness.
A.4 Use of test data
A.4.1 General
Data acquired under test programs can have several different uses, depending on the nature
of the test and on the functional requirements of the system. Different uses of test data are
summarized below.
A.4.2 Acceptance of new systems
A new system which is designed to be hardened against the effects of HEMP will have one or
more hardness specifications for the design. At the end of the construction of the system and
just before formal delivery by the manufacturer, it is common to require an acceptance test to
demonstrate that the system meets the required HEMP specifications.
The data acquired in test programs can be used for acceptance purposes. Such tests can be
simple "proof" tests where the survivability of the system is validated, or they can amount to
detailed measurements of stress levels at the defined interfaces and a verification of safety
margins by determining the strength of critical components or critical inputs to subsystems.
A.4.3 System assessments
For a system that is not subject to HEMP survivability requirements, or which has not been
previously tested, a test program can provide data useful for assessing the current state of
HEMP hardness. This amounts to making detailed measurements of HEMP-induced stress at
the defined interface points and then comparing these stresses with the known (or estimated)
susceptibility of the components. This comparison of the stress/response characteristics
permits an estimation of the system behaviour.
A.4.4 Hardness surveillance monitoring
Once a system is determined as hardened against HEMP, periodic measurements of the

system can be made to ensure that the state of hardness remains intact. Frequently, such
measurements consist of CW transfer functions from an observation point outside the system
to one inside. Changes in this transfer function over a period of time indicate a degradation in
the hardness of the system or a reduction of the safety margin.
A.4.5 System design
Another use of test data is in the area of new system design. Experience in system testing
can lead to an understanding of how better to harden equipment and how to design, from the
ground up, a HEMP hardened system. In addition, component testing (or laboratory "bench"
testing) can provide information about component and subsystem responses to HEMP
transients that can ultimately be useful for system-level testing and assessments.
– 66 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
A.5 Testing uncertainties
In each of the testing concepts described above, there are uncertainties which add errors to
the final test results. Generally, these errors are difficult to know quantitatively, but a list of
the uncertainties will at least help the test personnel to be aware of potential difficulties with
the testing. Significant uncertainties can result from the following:
a) A lack of knowledge of the incident HEMP environment, as described by its angle of

incidence and polarization relative to the earth.
b) The variability of the HEMP waveform as a function of the system location on the earth,
and the inability to simulate this waveform precisely because of
1) non-ideal spatial variations of the simulated HEMP field;
2) an imprecise knowledge of the electrical properties of the ground;
3) errors in the calculations for extrapolating a low-level response to HEMP levels;
4) measurement errors;
5) lack of precise information of the failure levels of components;
6) unknown degradation of the system hardness over time.
c) A final source of uncertainty in the test process is often introduced by the desire to know
too much from a single limited test. Only a finite number of excitations can be considered
in a test, and consequently, any statistical inference about the probability of system
survival against HEMP will be incomplete. Furthermore, even if one system is thoroughly
tested and characterized, it is difficult to extrapolate the results to an ensemble of similar
systems. Each system can be (and usually is) electrically distinct from the others, and
consequently, the details of the HEMP responses can vary considerably from system to
system. This is why the use of a safety margin in hardening is useful.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 67 –
Annex B
(informative)
Characterization of shielded cables
B.1 Fundamentals of cable shielding
In its simplest configuration, a shielded transmission line system consists of a cable with the
shield connected to each of the enclosures. The enclosures and the cable are usually located
over a conducting ground plane with the cable at a height h. As shown in Figure B.1, the two
enclosures are connected to the ground plane by external impedances Z (e) so that either a
grounded or open-circuit configuration can be considered.
Incident E-field
^
k
Enclosure 1 Enclosure 2
I s (X) and Q s (X)
Ψ Internal load
(i) (i) responses
Z1 Z2
(i) (i)
I 2 and V 2
Internal conductor
(Radius a o ) V s (X) h
(e) (e)
Z1 Ground plane Z2
X
0 Cable shield L
(Inner radius a)
(Outer radius b)
IEC
Figure B.1 – Geometry of a shielded coaxial line with an internal circuit
For a shielded cable illuminated by an electromagnetic field, the external electric and
magnetic fields can penetrate through imperfections in the cable sheath and give rise to
disturbing currents and voltages on the internal conductors. Annex B does not cover
additional field penetration that may occur through the enclosures at either end of the line.
The coupling through the cable shield between the external electromagnetic field and the
inner conductors occurs through three basic phenomena:
– diffusion of the E- and H-fields through the sheath material;

– penetration of the fields through the small apertures of the braided shields;
– a more complicated induction phenomenon due to the overlapping of the individual strands
(or carriers) of the shield.
The last two phenomena occur only for braided shields.
The behaviour of the induced response on the inner conductors of a shielded cable can be
described in terms of a transfer impedance Z t and a transfer admittance Y t of the shield. To
understand the transfer impedance and admittance concepts, a time-varying external EM field
which induces both a cable sheath current I s and a sheath-to-ground voltage V s (or
equivalently, a sheath charge density) is considered. Portions of the external electric and
magnetic fields are able to penetrate through the shield, and these induce internal voltage
and current responses, V i and I i , respectively. These quantities and their assumed polarities
are shown in Figure B.1. For this conductor system, a return current I g flows in the ground;
this current is the sum of I s and I i .
– 68 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Internal voltage
and current responses
Total shield
current Is z
Inner conductor
radius a o
y
Ii x
Current
a density Js Return current
Vi Ig = Is + Ii
b
∆
Shield Vs
Wall voltage
thickness
Ground plane
IEC
Figure B.2 – Coaxial cable located over a conducting ground plane
The current flow in the cable sheath creates an axial electric field inside the sheath. Due to
the skin effect, the current distribution and the associated electric field distribution in the
sheath cross-section are not uniform. If I s is the total current flowing in the sheath, the electric
field E i on the inner surface of the shield is produced by an attenuated current density, with
the reduction being determined approximately by δ , the skin depth in the shield material,
given by
δ = 1/ (πfσm ) m (B.1)
where
σ is the conductivity of the sheath material;
f is the frequency of the induced current;
m is the permeability of the sheath material.
This axial electric field component on the inner surface of the sheath creates a voltage
between the internal conductors and the sheath, and, depending on the termination
impedances of the inner signal conductor, a current may flow. The protection capability of the
cable shield is determined by the amount of reduction of the electric field component due to
the skin depth attenuation. This reduction capability is determined more precisely in
Clause B.2 through the concept of a transfer impedance, which is defined as the ratio
between the inner electric field E i and the total shield current I s in the frequency domain.
The electrical dual of the transfer impedance is the transfer admittance, which describes the
process by which a portion of the induced charge on the cable sheath finds its way onto the
internal wire inside the shield. This induction of charge on the inner conductor amounts to an
injected current on the internal cable. This effect can be related to the external shield-to-
ground voltage V s by a transfer admittance.
B.2 Definitions of transfer impedance and transfer admittance
The cable sheath with its external return (generally a ground plane) and the internal conductor
form two coupled circuits, as shown in Figure B.2. Figure B.3 shows two per-unit-length
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 69 –
circuits formed by the sheath and its ground return, and the sheath and the internal
conductor. In this development it is assumed that the external circuit is independent of the
behaviour of the internal circuit, and that the internal circuit has both a voltage- and current-
controlled source providing the excitation from the external circuit. This circuit configuration
results from the assumption that the cable performs as a good shield.
′ = Z t′ I s
V si Ii
Inner Z′i
conductor
I si′ = –Yt′ Vs Internal circuit

Yi′ Vi
Interior of
cable shield
Exterior of ′
V ss Is
cable shield
Z s′
External circuit
′
I ss Y s′ Vs
Ground plane
IEC
Figure B.3 – Two per-unit-length circuits formed by the sheath and its ground return,
and the sheath and the internal conductor
For these two coupled lines, the current and voltage I s and V ss of the outer shield and the
current and voltage I i and V i of the inner conductor are described by the following set of
differential equations:
dVs
External circuit + Z s' I s = Vss
'
V/m (B.2)
dx
dI s
+ Ys'Vs = I ss
'
A/m (B.3)
dx
dVi
Internal circuit + Z i' I i = Vsi' V/m (B.4)
dx
dI i
+ Yi 'Vi = I si
'
A/m (B.5)
dx
In these expressions, the external transmission line is described by the per-unit-length

impedance and admittance parameters Z s' and Ys' , which for a lossless line are related to the
external per unit length line inductance and capacitance quantities by Z s' = jωL's and
Ys' = jωC s' . Similarly, for a lossless cable the internal line parameters Z i' and Yi ' are related
to the internal per unit length line inductance and capacitance by Z i' = jωL'i and Yi ' = jωC i' .
– 70 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
The primary excitation sources in this problem are the distributed voltage and current sources
' '
Vss and I ss on the external circuit. The excitation sources for the internal circuit are the
voltage and current sources shown in Figure B.1 and are denoted by Vsi' and I si
'
respectively.
These internal sources are related to the external line responses by
Vsi' = Z t' I s V/m (B.6)
I si' = Yt'Vs A/m (B.7)
where
Z t' and Yt' are the transfer impedance per unit length and transfer admittance per unit
length of the shield.
These quantities may be formally defined from Equations (B.4) and (B.5) by setting I i and V i to
zero, as
1 dVi
Z t' = Ω/m (B.8)
I s dx Ii =0
1 dI i
Yt' = S/m (B.9)
Vs dx Vi = 0
In the definition of the transfer impedance in Equation (B.8), the resulting parameter Z t'
depends only on the electrical and physical composition of the shielded cable. This is not true
for the transfer admittance in Equation (B.9), however, because the external shield voltage,
V s , depends on the geometry of the external conductor. More specifically, the transfer
impedance depends on the external capacitance of the cable shield to the reference ground
plane.
An alternative to evaluating the internal current excitation source as in Equation (B.7) is to

consider the pertinent external response to be the external charge density on the cable shield,
q′ e , instead of the external shield-to-ground voltage. In this manner, the internal current
source can be written as
I si' = − jωC i' S s q e' (B.10)
where
C′ i is the per-unit-length capacitance of the internal line;
S s is a shield leakage factor (measured in m/F) which depends only on the shield
characteristics.
Typically, the shield leakage factor S s is the more desirable indicator of cable shield
behaviour, as it is independent of the external line geometry. However, measurement
techniques frequently provide a direct knowledge of Yt' instead of S s . Once Yt' is known for a
particular test set-up, the actual cable shield parameter can be determined by the expression
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 71 –
1 Yt'
Ss = (B.11)
jωC i' C e'
B.3 Relative significance of Z′ t and Y′ t
The definitions of the transfer impedance and admittance of the cable shield in Equations
(B.8) and (B.9) as described above are valid for both solid tubular and braided cables. For a
solid tubular shield, the electrostatic shielding is much greater than the magnetostatic
shielding, and, as a result, the transfer impedance term dominates at low frequencies. This
fact has led some investigators to neglect the transfer admittance term in EMC coupling
problems.
For braided cables, the coupling mechanisms giving rise to the transfer impedance and
admittance are enhanced, due to the E- and H-field penetration through the shield apertures.
Again, at low frequencies, the electrostatic shielding of the braid is much better than the
magnetic field shielding, and Yt' is usually small compared with Z t' . However, as the
frequency increases, both the E- and H-fields are able to penetrate through the braid
apertures. In this case, the induced effects on the inner conductor from both field components
can be of the same order of magnitude. For shields that are not well designed to exclude the
E-field, neglecting the transfer admittance may lead to roughly factors of 2 error in the
estimated internal responses.
– 72 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Annex C
(informative)
Equipment for HEMP pulse measurements
C.1 General
Over the years, specialized equipment has evolved for performing fast transient
measurements on systems. This equipment falls into three broad categories:
1) sensors designed to measure a transient response;

2) data links to transmit the measured information from the test point to an analysis station;
3) transient recording device capable of storing the measured data.
For each of these components, considerable effort has gone into their design and
performance optimization. Considerations have included the following:
– sufficient bandwidth to accurately measure the fast HEMP-induced transients;

– minimal phase distortion to maintain the integrity of measured pulse shapes;
– minimal end-to-end loss in the measurement chain to provide a high signal-to-noise ratio;
– standard calibration of the measurement probes and sensors.
Annex C provides basic information on the key elements of a HEMP pulse measurement
system.
C.2 Sensors for HEMP measurements
C.2.1 B- and H-field sensors
Sensors for measuring the transient magnetic field are essentially small loops which may be
configured in such a way as to minimize any additional response that the E-field may induce
on the sensor. All of these sensors create a voltage across the loops that is proportional to
the time rate of change of the magnetic flux passing through the loops. Thus, they are often
referred to as B-dot sensors, as they actually respond to the derivative of the B-field.
Figure C.1 illustrates several common configurations for such measurement loops. The first
two (on the top of the figure) are configured to work in conjunction with a reference conductor
as a ground plane. Hence they can provide an indication of induced surface current flowing on
the conductor. The others are for operation away from a reference conductor, and thus they
measure the "free-field" response of the H-field.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 73 –
H P
l
Ae = π r
2
h Ae = h ⋅ l
2 2
R = 50 Ω
Z = 50 Ω
Ae = π r 2 Ae = π r 2
Unbalanced coils
n = 0,5 n = 0,5
Ae = π r
2
Ae = π r 2
2
Moebius coil
Balanced coils
IEC
Figure C.1 – Magnetic field sensors [23]
Other types of coil configurations are also found in H-field HEMP sensors. Figure C.2
illustrates a cylindrical coil sensor having a single slot across which the induced voltage is
measured with two shielded coaxial cables, providing a balanced output. Figure C.3 shows
two- and four-gap configurations for the cylindrical coil.
Ae = π r 2
2 × 50 Ω
IEC
Figure C.2 – Single-slot, cylindrical coil sensor [23]

– 74 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
50 Ω
100 Ω 100 Ω
Ae = π r 2 Ae = π r 2
2 2
50 Ω
50 Ω
Ae = π r 2 Ae = π r 2
4 4
100 Ω 100 Ω
100 Ω
100 Ω
50 Ω 100 Ω
50 Ω 50 Ω
100 Ω
IEC
Figure C.3 – Two- and four-slot cylindrical coil sensors [23]
The basic limiting factor of these types of sensors is their size, since the sensor should be
electrically small in order for it to function properly in HEMP tests. Large (~0,5 m diameter)
sensors are available for measuring the B-fields in a range of 10 kHz to 30 MHz. Smaller
sensors (approximately 10 cm diameter) are available for higher frequency measurements,
typically with an effective bandwidth of 9 kHz to 150 MHz.
C.2.2 D- and E-field sensors
The basic configuration for an E-field sensor is shown in Figure C.4. The two plates, when
immersed in a time-varying E-field, produce a short-circuit current that is proportional to the
time rate of change of the field. This signal is often integrated (either passively as shown, or
by an active integrator) to provide an indication of the actual E-field.
2a
Cp Rc
εr IEC
Figure C.4 – Electrical configuration of an E-field sensor [23]
E-field measurements made in free space usually use an antenna (or sensor) similar to that
illustrated in Figure C.5. This sensor responds to the E-field component that is parallel to the
long dimension of the antenna. This antenna can be relatively large (about 1,4 m in overall
length) and this size limits the practical upper frequency response of the antenna to about
30 MHz, if frequency dependent calibration curves are not provided. However, in the event
that the antenna manufacturer provides such a calibration factor relating the measured
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 75 –
voltage at its terminals to the incident E-field at a specified frequency, this type of antenna
can be used at frequencies up to about 200 MHz.
IEC
Figure C.5 – Biconical E-field sensor
Other types of smaller E-field sensors are possible. Figure C.6 illustrates a spherical dipole
sensor which is used to measure the E-field on a conducting surface. Larger sensors of this
type have a maximum frequency of about 45 MHz with a rise-time measurement capability of
about 7,4 ns. Smaller units of this type have a maximum frequency of 150 MHz and a rise
time of 2,3 ns.
Hemispherical cap
200 Ω stripline
Dielectric
Conductive plate 50 Ω
2r coaxial
Four 200 Ω striplines

Conductive hemispherical cap
50 Ω coaxial
IEC
Figure C.6 – E-field sensor mounted on a conducting ground plane [23]
Other types of E-field sensors have rather odd cross-sectional shapes, as shown in
Figure C.7. This is the asymptotic conical dipole (ACD) sensor which is designed to provide a
known response by simply measuring some geometrical factor. This is known as "calibration
by the ruler" and is only possible for a limited number of antenna shapes.
IEC
Figure C.7 – Equipotential shapes for an optimally designed E-field sensor [23]
– 76 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
C.2.3 Current sensors
Current sensors (or probes) are essentially small transformers which are clamped over a
cable carrying a current and provide a voltage which is proportional to the current flowing
through the cable. The operation of these devices is similar to that of a Rogowski coil, as
pictured in Figure C.8.
r2 I
50 Ω
r1
Is Rc V
IEC
Figure C.8 – Rogowski coil used for current measurements [23]
Usually, these coils are made of a single-turn loop of high permittivity material to increase the
measurement sensitivity. Figure C.9 illustrates this configuration, in which a voltage is
induced across the slot in the high permeability toroid by the current in a wire passing through
the hole in the sensor.
Typical realizations of these devices are the probes which use multiple voltage pick-up points
as shown in Figure C.10. Large versions of these probes have a bandwidth of 100 kHz to
100 MHz. The smaller versions of these probes are of the "clip-on" type and can operate
typically from 200 kHz to 300 MHz.
Slot
a
b
IEC
Figure C.9 – Toroidal current sensor made of magnetic material [23]
200 Ω stripline
Slot edge
100 Ω cables
100 Ω cables
50 Ω 50 Ω h
IEC IEC IEC
a) – Unbalanced at b) – Unbalanced at c) – Balanced

two points four points pick-up
Figure C.10 – Voltage pick-up points on the edges of the toroidal sensor [23]
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 77 –
C.3 Signal transmission
C.3.1 General
Measured responses from the sensors should be relayed from the sensor to the measurement
equipment. The preferred technique for doing this is to employ fibre optic links, because they
have a minimal influence on the EM environment surrounding the test equipment.
C.3.2 Fibre optic links
Many different methods are used to transmit information in HEMP tests, for example wires,
coaxial cables, waveguides and radio. For the highest quality signal transmission, hard-wired
electrical connections from the sensors to the transient digitizers should be used. However,
such wires can also pick up part of the HEMP signal and corrupt the responses of the
sensors. Furthermore, the presence of long electrical cables inside a facility can distort the
normal EM fields and may even introduce an inadvertent EM coupling path.
Weight is one of the main disadvantages of coaxial cables: the RG14 and RG19 cables weigh
350 kg/km and 1 100 kg/km respectively: a typical single-fibre cable weighs only 12 kg/km.
This difference may become much more drastic in multichannel cables. Noise immunity is also
a problem in coaxial cables. They are sensitive to the electric and magnetic fields generated
by machinery, lightning or EMP. Ground loops and oscillations are also severe potential
problems in coaxial cable systems.
As a result of these difficulties, the use of fibre optic links is often recommended for HEMP
testing. The use of such links eliminates filtering and grounding problems, and minimizes to a
few millimetres the aperture sizes for pass-through connectors in the shielding structure. An
additional benefit is that the fibres are practically free from crosstalk: even if light is radiated
by one fibre, it cannot be recaptured by other fibres.
Figure C.11 illustrates a single-channel fibre optic transmission system. Typically, there are
actually two fibre channels: one for transmitting the signal, and another for controlling the
settings of a signal attenuator located in the transmitter unit near the sensors.
LED Main optical fibre Photodiode

Attenuator AGC
Input Output
Measuring Measuring
amplifier amplifier
Sensitivity
remote
PIN Auxiliary optical fibre LED control
Amplifier
photodiode
Optoelectronic transmitter Optoelectronic receiver

IEC
Figure C.11 – Example of a single-channel fibre optic transmission system [23]
Figure C.12 compares the attenuation and bandwidth characteristics of two RG type cables
with those of typical fibres. The skin effect in a coaxial cable causes the attenuation to rise
with the square root of the frequency, typically starting below 1 MHz. As a result, for very long
coaxial lines, serious dispersion effects arise which should be corrected with filters.
– 78 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
RG14
coaxial RG19
coaxial
Attenuation (dB/km)
Graded index Graded index

50 mm core 50 mm core
λ = 0,85 mm λ = 1,3 mm
Monomode
λ = 1,3 mm
Frequency (MHz)
IEC
Figure C.12 – Attenuation of coaxial lines

and fibre optic cables as a function of frequency
C.3.3 Fibre optic transducers
Transducers should be located at each end of the fibre optic cable to convert the electrical
signals to modulated light beams, and to then convert the light back to electrical signals. Such
units can take many forms, but the more modern units consist of a microprocessor controller
and internal bus system which can house, power and control different modules. This permits
the system to be tailored for specific applications.
A typical plug-in system consists of a base module fitting into the main unit, a fibre optic cable
for signals, a fibre optic cable for control if necessary, one or two battery-powered, small-
sized, shielded (more than 200 V/m CW and 100 kV/m pulsed electromagnetic fields) modules
and one or two battery chargers. Each plug-in can be individually managed by the
microprocessor control system inside the mainframe. Most modules are remotely controllable
via a dedicated control optic link. These modules are powered by batteries which provide
more than 8 h continuous operation. The maximum optic link length for standard models is
1 km.
A wide range of fibre optic plug-ins is available, providing a large selection of working modes
(acquisition, telemetry, stimulation, EM field monitoring, audio and video transmissions),
frequency ranges (from d.c. up to 1 GHz) and variable gain attenuation.
C.4 Signal detection and processing
The detected signal from the fibre optic transducer is digitized, processed and then archived.
A number of different transient digitizers are currently available on the market. The one
selected should be capable of measuring the leading edge of the fastest HEMP waveform that
is to be measured. Typical rise-time requirements will be of the order of 1 ns. Furthermore,
the digitizer should have an adequate dynamic range (number of bits in the representation of
the digitized data) so as to avoid the digitization errors in the responses. Finally, the digitizer
should have sufficient memory to be capable of measuring the complete transient response,
from start to finish, without the requirement of having multiple digitizers sampling different
portions of the same waveform.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 79 –
The present-day capabilities of personal computers make it unnecessary to use the older,
larger and slower computers that have traditionally been used for data acquisition and
analysis purposes, both for pulse and CW testing. Similarly, the initial data processing
(plotting and correcting) of the raw data and the subsequent extrapolation analysis can be
performed on a PC using standard signal processing programs.
– 80 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Annex D
(informative)
Equipment for CW testing
D.1 General
Annex D discusses the equipment and calibration techniques needed for conducting a CW
test. Some of the equipment, such as the field sensors and the fibre optic links, is the same
as that used for transient tests. However, other items such as the CW network analyser and
the radiating antennas are different.
D.2 Antenna system
Several different types of radiating antennas are possible, depending on the desired
polarizations and the frequency range of operation. For frequencies between about 1 MHz to
100 MHz, the antenna shown in Figure D.1a) radiates an E-field in the direction broadside to
the antenna that is mainly horizontally polarized. At lower frequencies, the radiation efficiency
drops and at the high-frequency end, the radiation field contains side lobes due to the large
electrical size of the antenna.
The antenna is connected to the earth at both ends, through a resistance of the order of
400 Ω to 500 Ω. This electrical connection serves to enhance the low-frequency radiation
characteristics of the antenna. The antenna is fed at its apex by a power amplifier which is
connected via a coaxial cable. This unbalanced line should be matched to the balanced
antenna input at the top of the dielectric support tower by a balancing transformer, referred to
as a balun. Care should be exercised to ensure that during the testing the power level of the
amplifier does not exceed the rated operational power level of the balun.
If a vertical incident E-field is desired, a vertical antenna can be employed. This is illustrated
in Figure D.1b). A vertical conductor is fed by a voltage source between the antenna base and
the ground, producing a vertically polarized E-field. At low frequencies (i.e. frequencies such
that λ > antenna length), the radiation from this type of antenna is very poor.
Figure D.1c) illustrates another type of radiating antenna, known as the P × M antenna. It
appears as a simple end-fed transmission line, having a load at the end equal to the
characteristic impedance of the line. This line has the beneficial property of radiating an EM
field having a characteristic impedance of exactly 377 Ω – even at very low frequencies. This
radiation occurs in the "backward" direction, that is to say, to the right of the source in
Figure D.1c). This antenna is effective in this manner only for low frequencies, however. As
the frequency begins to increase so that λ > the line length, the beam of the radiation begins
to move to the forward direction and the antenna becomes the well-known Beverage antenna.
For both horizontal and vertical antennas, it is important to add resistive loading along the
wires. This resistance serves to damp out the natural antenna resonances, thereby creating a
smoother radiated field spectrum. In addition, by properly choosing the level of impedance
loading on the antenna, the E/H ratio of the fields near the antenna can be made more like
that of a plane wave in free space, namely 377 Ω.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 81 –
Dielectric mast
(16 m) Balun
CW antenna (resistively
loaded with 8 Ω to 50 Ω
resistors per leg)
15 m
Coaxial Antenna ends
cable connected to earth
To power
amplifier
60 m
IEC
a) Horizontally polarized antenna
Vertical antenna
Resistive loading
Antenna feed point
Earth
IEC
b) Vertically polarized antenna
Radius a Excitation source

Load
impedance
Z1 Vo (t)
Lossy ground σ h
L
IEC
c) P × M antenna
Figure D.1 – Various antennas for CW testing
As the presence of the antenna feed cable can perturb the radiated fields, care should be
used in locating the cable near the antenna. For optimal performance, the cable should run
directly down the support mast and then out from the antenna in a perpendicular direction to
the antenna broadside. Periodically placed ferrite beads on the exterior of the coaxial cable
can help to eliminate unwanted coupling effects to this cable.
CW antennas are used to provide an incident CW field on the system under test that
approximates a plane wave. As shown in Figure D.2, the angle of incidence of the simulated
HEMP field, denoted by the angle ψ, is defined by the angle from the top (apex) of the
antenna down to the facility under test. Thus, the location of the antenna relates to the angle
of incidence of the HEMP being simulated.
For the simulated EM field to appear as a plane wave, the antenna should be located as far
from the facility as possible. Specifically, the distance d in Figure D.2 should be larger than
the typical dimensions of the facility under test. In addition, the distance d should be larger
than the dimensions of the antenna. Often these requirements cannot be met, due to the large
– 82 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
size of the facility. It should be noted that this difficulty concerning antenna placement also
occurs in pulse testing.
If the facility being tested is very large and the antenna cannot be located so that d is larger
than the facility dimension, the CW test can be conducted using the PARTES concept
discussed in annex A. This involves determining the principal points of entry (PoEs) of the
facility and locating the antenna so that this part of the facility is suitably illuminated by the
simulated plane-wave excitation from the antenna.
To HEMP
burst location Incident plane
H inc wave field
E inc
^
k CW antenna
Ψ
Facility under test
IEC
Figure D.2 – Relationship between the CW antenna and the incident HEMP field
In addition to the proper placement of the antenna, there is a need to locate the antenna
power amplifier, the motor-generator unit and the measurement equipment (network
analyser). As discussed earlier, the location of this equipment should be chosen in such a
way that the EM fields produced by the antenna do not severely interact with the equipment
and cause perturbations in the measured results. This implies that all conducting cables
should be run closely to the ground and in such a direction that they are orthogonal to the E-
fields produced by the antenna. If possible, the measurement equipment should be located
away from the facility or in a separate shielded enclosure to minimize the effects of direct EM
interaction with the antenna fields.
D.3 Power amplifier
The power amplifier takes a low-level CW signal from the network analyser as an input,
amplifies it to a power level of the order of 50 W to 100 W, and then feeds the signal to the
CW antenna through a 50 Ω coaxial cable. A typical amplifier operates from a low frequency
of 10 kHz to a high frequency of 250 MHz. The frequency of the signal provided to the
amplifier is swept over a range of frequencies by the network analyser. The amplifier should
not be overdriven at its input by the analyser, and the output power should not overdrive the
antenna balun, which would result in possible damage to the balun coils.
The power amplifier is located near the base of the antenna so that the feed cable from the
amplifier to the antenna balun is as short as possible.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 83 –
D.4 Receiver (network analyser)
The receiver for this system is typically a network analyser. For this application, the network
analyser is swept from approximately 10 kHz to 200 MHz in a mode that is controlled by the
computer connected to the analyser through the IEEE bus. The network analyser provides a
low-level, 50 Ω sinusoidal output as it sweeps through the designated frequencies, which
serves to control the aforementioned power amplifier.
Two input channels to the network analyser are used: one is the reference channel from the
reference sensor located on the exterior of the facility and the other is the measurement
channel which is connected to a suitable measurement sensor or probe, normally located
inside the facility. As noted in Figure 22 in 5.2.3.2, these sensor connections should be made
with fibre optic transducers, so as to eliminate electrical coupling with the measurement
equipment.
The network analyser provides a transfer function for the measurement T(ω), which is a
complex valued quantity defined at each angular frequency ω by a magnitude and a phase.
The phase quantity provides information of the relative times of arrival of the responses at the
sensors and shall be retained for high-quality CW measurements. Frequently, when CW test
results are presented, only the magnitude of the response is plotted and discussed. The
phase is equally important, but it is often omitted in discussion.
D.5 Reference and response sensors
Many of the same sensors used for transient HEMP testing can be used for CW testing.
Annex C provides information about these sensors. An important aspect of the CW test
configuration is the proper location of the reference sensor. The purpose of having a
reference sensor measurement is to provide a way of relating the measured results in the
facility using the CW antenna to the response that would be obtained if the excitation were an
incident plane wave. Thus, it is necessary to understand how the reference sensor is excited.
As shown in Figure D.3, the response measured by the reference sensor consists of an
incident wave contribution plus a contribution reflected from the ground. This resulting field is
the total excitation field at the sensor. If the reference sensor is located far from the CW
antenna, it can be seen that the direct and ground-reflected rays from the antenna apex (i.e.
from the driving source on the antenna) will have about the same path length as will the
contributions for the equivalent incident HEMP plane wave. In this case, the response of the
sensor will be easily related to the response of a plane-wave excitation. However, if the
sensor is too close to the antenna, the sensor response for the CW case will be different from
that of the plane-wave excitation. A general rule of thumb is that the reference sensor should
be located at a distance equal to several antenna lengths away from the antenna.
– 84 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
To HEMP Incident plane

burst location H inc wave field
E inc
^
k
CW antenna
Incident field
Reference Facility under test

sensor
Ground reflected field
IEC
Figure D.3 – Incident and ground-reflected field contributions

to the reference sensor excitations
There is another important rule in locating the reference sensor: it should not be located close
to other conducting structures which can contaminate the local EM fields. This implies that the
reference sensor should not be located too close to the facility under test.
Figure D.4a) serves as an example of this, by illustrating the measured H-field reference
sensor spectrum taken in an actual CW test. This response was taken using equally spaced
sample points and exhibits a very rapid fall-off of the response at high frequencies due to the
sensor limitations. The resonances in the response are due to antenna resonances and
reflections from nearby objects. The first null in this total field response due to the reflection in
the groundplane occurs at about 200 MHz, and this also accounts for the high-frequency fall-
off of the spectrum.
Figure D.4b) illustrates the delta-function response of this spectrum, obtained by taking the
inverse Fourier transform of the spectrum. This transient response clearly illustrates the initial
response of the sensor, arriving with a time delay determined by the antenna and reference
sensor geometry and the details of the fibre optic cables. Later in time, smaller impulses
arrive at the sensor. These have been reflected from a nearby building and should be
eliminated if possible by moving the sensor further away from the building.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 85 –
dB A/m
Frequency (Hz)
IEC
a) Measured H-field spectrum
Initial response Building

reflections
H(t) A/m
Time (s)
IEC
b) Computed delta-function response from spectrum
Figure D.4 – Measured reference H-field spectrum and its inverse Fourier transform
D.6 Fibre optic system
As in the transient test case, a fibre optic system for extracting the reference and response
signals from the system and carrying them to the network analyser is needed. Characteristics
of this transmission system are provided in Annex C.
After the location of the reference sensor has been determined, it is necessary to calibrate the
measurement chain. This is important, as it corrects any differences in the sensor magnitude
responses, but it also removes any unwanted phase shifts in the responses. These phase
shifts amount to time shifts in the transient response and can cause errors in data
interpolation if they are present in the measured data.
The calibration is accomplished by locating the measurement sensor next to the reference
sensor and making a sweep of the spectrum. Figure D.5a) illustrates the results of such a
measurement. Denoting the reference spectrum for the calibration process as R o (ω) and the
calibration response spectrum as S o (ω), a transfer function between the two is defined as
S o (ω )
To (ω ) = (D.1)
Ro (ω )
This derived transfer function is illustrated in Figure D.5b). Because the two sensors are not
identical and because they are in slightly different locations, the transfer function T o (ω) is not
equal to unity. In addition, differences in the lengths and optical characteristics of fibre optic
cables can contribute to variations in T o (ω). If both sensors are of the same type, such
variations should be small, and large variations indicate the possible presence of standing
waves in the vicinity of the reference sensor, which is something to avoid.
– 86 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Once the calibration transfer function T o (ω) has been determined, a check of the calibration
process should be performed. This involves making a new measurement of the reference
sensor response, denoted by R 1 (ω), and a new response sensor measurement, S 1 (ω). With
these measurements, a new, and corrected, transfer function is defined as
S1 (ω )1
T (ω ) = (D.2)
R1 (ω )To (ω )
Ideally, this new transfer function should be unity. However, slight variations in the
measurements will cause it to be different. Figure D.6 illustrates this second transfer function
and shows that it is indeed close to unity. This calibration procedure and check of the
calibration should be used for each test and recalibrations should be performed routinely. The
calibration transfer function To (ω ) should be applied to all transfer function measurements
made using the calibrated sensors and the fixed system configuration.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 87 –
Response sensor
dB A/m
Reference sensor
Frequency (Hz)
IEC
a) Reference and response sensor spectra

dB
Frequency (Hz)
IEC
b) Derived calibration function
Figure D.5 – Measured sensor responses and calibration function

dB
Frequency (Hz)
IEC
Figure D.6 – Measured transfer function, corrected by calibration file

– 88 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
D.7 Limitations of measurements
In developing a calibration procedure for the measurement chain, there are several limiting
factors that should be remembered and taken into account. The dynamic range of the
measurements can be limited by the following:
– noise in the fibre optic transmission system;

– insufficient bandwidth of the network analyser;
– amplifier gain setting.
These limitations can be understood and partially alleviated by making noise floor
measurements with the amplifier turned off, changing the emission levels of the antenna by
changing the amplifier gain and by changing the network analyser bandwidth.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 89 –
Annex E
(informative)
Characterization of a planar shield for HEMP protection
E.1 General
The protection of equipment against the effects of HEMP is often accomplished by using the
principles of electromagnetic shielding. As denoted in Figure E.1, localized electric or
magnetic sources of EM energy create external E- and H-fields in the vicinity of a shielded
enclosure. Due to the reflection and attenuation of these fields at the enclosure boundary, the
internal E- and H-fields are reduced inside the shield.
Shielded enclosure
External E-
and H-field
Internal E-
Localized and H-field
sources
IEC
Figure E.1 – Example of a general shielding problem
The characterization of this problem is difficult in the most general case, because the
shielding depends not only on the electrical characteristics of the shield, but also on the
nature and location of the excitation sources. For example, if the external source is magnetic
in nature (caused by circulating electric currents in a loop), the fields near the source are
predominately magnetic. Similarly, if the source appears as a linear current flowing on a thin
wire, the fields are predominately electric in their composition. Of course, Maxwell’s equations
dictate that both E- and H-fields exist together (except at d.c.). This implies that there is a
different impedance level for the two sources – with the magnetic source producing EM fields
with a low E/H ratio, and the electric sources producing fields with a high E/H ratio.
Strictly speaking, the concept of the field impedance is valid only in the radiation zone (or
"far" field) where the E- and H-fields are mutually orthogonal and located in the plane
transverse to the direction of propagation. In this region, the wave impedance is defined as Z c
= |E|/|H|. In the near field, at distances closer than several wavelengths, the fields have
complicated spatial dependencies and such a transverse definition of impedance is not valid.
However, it is possible to consider the magnitudes of the E- and H-fields in the near field in
order to arrive at an "impedance level" for the fields, and this quantity will be different,
depending on whether the source is primarily electric or magnetic.
At large distances from the source (D >> λ), the distinction between the electric and magnetic
sources fades and the fields become radiating transverse electromagnetic (TEM) waves with
a characteristic impedance of E/H = 377 Ω. Locally, these fields appear like a plane wave.
Figure E.2 summarizes the behaviour of the fields from both magnetic and electric sources,
and illustrates that at far distances, they both produce the same type of field, namely the
plane wave.
– 90 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Electric field predominant

E ∝ 1/r 3 , H ∝ 1/r 2
Plane wave
Wave impedance (Ω) E ∝ 1/r, H ∝ 1/r
Z 0 377 Ω
Asymptote
Actual
Transition
region
Magnetic field predominant

E ∝ 1/r 3 , H ∝ 1/r 2
Near field Far field
Distance from normalized source to λ /2π

IEC
Figure E.2 – Behaviour of the impedance ratio | E |/| H | as a function

of distance from a source [29]
The penetration of EM fields into the enclosure also depends on the nature of the excitation
fields. Generally, for sources that are close to the shield (i.e. for D < λ, or conversely, at low
frequencies) the E-field is very strongly attenuated by the enclosure, but the H-field is able to
diffuse through the shield. Thus, the actual internal fields depend on the shield characteristics
and on the type of external source.
Frequently, this shielding problem is simplified by making the following assumptions:
– the source is very far from the shield (D >> λ), so that the external field is a plane wave;
– the shielding enclosure is an infinite planar slab.
Such infinite plane shields are often used in modelling and in trying to interpret measured
data from HEMP tests, primarily due to the simplicity of the resulting expressions for the
shielding effectiveness. It should be recognized that any values of shielding effectiveness for
such structures can, at times, vastly overstate the shielding actually obtained in a realistic
shield. This is because real structures are not infinite in two directions (as is the case of an
infinite slab) and because many interference sources are not really plane waves.
Nevertheless, an examination of the shielding of a flat plate is instructional, because it clearly

illustrates the connection between the resistivity of the shield material, the surface impedance
presented to the incident field and the transfer impedance on the shielded side. Annex E
provides a discussion of this background material for the purpose of better understanding
these shielding concepts.
E.2 Problem geometry
Figure E.3 illustrates the problem under discussion in Annex E. An infinitely large, finitely
conducting slab of thickness, d, is illuminated by an incident electromagnetic plane wave. This
field induces a volume current density, J, to flow in the material and this current re-radiates,
producing a reflected field propagating back towards the original source of the fields, plus a
transmitted field which enters into the "protected" region on the opposite side of the slab. If
the slab were to be perfectly conducting, the entire incident field would be reflected, with no
penetrating field. In reality, however, as a slab of finite conductivity is involved, some
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 91 –
penetrating field will occur, and it is desired to develop expressions for calculating this
penetrated field in terms of shield thickness, electrical conductivity and other pertinent
parameters.
In this problem, the amount of field that penetrates into the protected region depends on the
polarization and the angle of incidence, ψ, of the incident field. To simplify the discussion, it is
assumed that the incident field is normally incident on the slab (i.e. ψ = 0), so that the
shielding factors become independent of the incidence angles.
The goal of the analysis presented here, therefore, is to summarize the analytical expressions
that may be used to predict the EM fields that penetrate into the shielded region.
Induced current
density J
Unprotected region Protected region
Incident field
E inc x
k
H inc
Transmitted field
E tan
1 E tan
2
Ψ
z E tr
Ψ H1tan
H2tan
Reflected field y k
H tr
k
E ref
H ref
Infinite slab of
conductivity σ
d
IEC
Figure E.3 – Conducting slab of thickness, d, and infinite extent serving

as an electromagnetic barrier
E.3 Equivalent circuit representation
E.3.1 General
The behaviour of the EM fields illustrated in Figure E.4 can be described using an equivalent
two-port circuit (see Figure E.4). The conducting slab in the problem is represented by a
linear two-port circuit, in which the tangential E- and H-fields on the unshielded side are
linearly related to the corresponding field quantities on the shielded side through a matrix
equation. In Figure E.4a), the excitation is provided by a series voltage source, given by the
incident E-field E inc , and by a shunt current source given by the incident magnetic field, H inc .
The impedances of these sources (i.e. the relationship between E and H) is the characteristic
impedance of free space, Z c , and this is represented by the impedance element in the source
circuit.
Figure E.4b) illustrates an equivalent representation for the excitation of this circuit. The shunt
current source can be transformed into a voltage source using a Norton-to-Thevenin
transformation, and the relationship E inc = Z c ·H inc can be used to arrive at the equivalent
– 92 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
source voltage of 2 E inc . A similar transformation can be used to obtain the electrically dual
source: a current source of 2 H inc in shunt with the impedance Z c .
On the shielded side of the slab, the model contains a load impedance Z c , which is equal to
the characteristic impedance of free space. With either of the equivalent sources shown in
exciting the slab, suitable expressions for determining the tangential E2tan and H 2tan fields on
the shielded side can be developed.
E inc H1tan H2tan
H inc Zc Conducting Zc
E tan E tan
1 slab 2
IEC
a) Circuit representation of the conducting slab
H1tan H2tan
Zc
2 E inc Conducting Zc
E tan E tan
1 slab 2
IEC
b) Alternate circuit representation of the conducting slab
Figure E.4 – Equivalent circuit representation of the shielding problem
E.3.2 Chain parameter representation of the shield
A general two-port circuit as shown in Figure E.5 can be represented by a number of different
matrix relationships:
– open-circuit impedance parameters (Z);

– short-circuit admittance parameters (Y);
– chain (or ABCD) parameters;
– scattering parameters (S);
– hybrid parameters (h).
In the present case, the chain parameters are the most useful as they provide a relationship
between the voltage and current quantities on one port of the circuit and those at the other
port. With reference to Figure E.5, the chain parameter relationship can be expressed as
(see [35])
V1   A B  V2 
 =   (E.1)
 I 1  C D   I 2 
or, by its inverse

IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 93 –
V2   D − B  V1 
 =   (E.2)
 I 2   − C A  I1 
It should be noted that in these expressions, there is a requirement that the ABCD parameters
shall satisfy the relationship AD-BC = 1 for a linear, bilateral system.
I1 I2
(ABCD)
V1 Parameters V2
IEC
Figure E.5 – Two-port representation of a circuit
Letting the variables V 1 and I 1 represent the tangential E- and H-fields on the illuminated side
of the slab ( E1tan and H 1tan ) and V 2 and I 2 denote the fields E 2tan and H 2tan on the shielded
side, reference [8] has developed the following chain parameter representation for the slab:
 E tan   A B   E tan 
 1tan  =  2
  tan 
 H1   C D   H 2 
=
 (
cosh jωt d ) R jωt d sinh ( )
jωt d   E tan 
 2 
(E.3)
( ) −1
 R jωt d sinh jωt d ( ) cosh ( jωt d )   H 2tan 

where τ d is a diffusion time and R is the d.c. slab surface resistance (in Ω), given by
1
τ d = µσd 2 and R = (E.4)
σd
In these expressions, d is the slab thickness, σ = 1/ρ is the electrical conductivity of the
material and m is the permeability of the sample.
E.3.3 Circuit responses
E.3.3.1 Expression for the surface fields
Using standard circuit analysis techniques, the responses for E and H anywhere in the
problem can be determined. Specifically, the surface fields on the illuminated side of the slab
can be evaluated as
( AZ c + B )
E1tan = 2E inc (E.5)
Z c ( A + Z c C ) + (B + Z c D )
and
(CZ c + D )
H 1tan = 2E inc (E.6)
Z c ( A + Z c C ) + (B + Z c D )
– 94 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
where A, B, C and D are the slab chain parameters defined in equation (E.3).
The limiting cases of Equations (E.5) and (E.6) are instructive. When the conductivity of the
slab vanishes, or equivalently, when d = 0, the chain parameters become A = 1, B = 0, C = 0,
D = 1, and these equations are reduced to the free-space case where
1 inc
E1tan = E inc and H1tan = E (E.7)
Zc
Another case of interest is when the slab becomes perfectly conducting (i.e. σ → ∞). For this
case, the chain parameters are A = 1, B = 0, C = ∞, D = 1, and the fields in Equations (E.5)
and (E.6) take on the required values
2 inc
E1tan = 0 and H1tan = E = 2 H inc (E.8)
Zc
on the surface of the conductor.
E.3.3.2 Expression for the penetrating fields
In a similar manner, the fields penetrating into the shield region, E 2tan and H 2tan , can be
determined by circuit analysis. These fields have the form
Zc
E 2tan = 2E inc (E.9)
Z c ( A + Z c C ) + (B + Z c D )
and
1
H 2tan = 2 E inc (E.10)
Z c ( A + Z c C ) + (B + Z c D )
Checks of these fields for the limiting cases described in E.3.3.1 indicate that for no slab
present the fields become the free-space incident fields, and for a perfectly conducting slab,
the fields are zero, indicating perfect shielding.
E.3.3.3 The surface impedance
Using the general field expressions in Equations (E.5) and (E.6), it is possible to develop an
expression for the surface impedance on the illuminated side of the slab. This quantity is
useful, in that it permits the analysis of problems on the illuminated side of the slab without
requiring a further analysis of fields inside the slab or in the shielded region beyond. This
impedance is defined as the ratio of E and H on the surface as:
Zs =
E1tan
=
(AZ c + B ) (Ω) (E.11)
H 1tan (Z c C + D )
For a thin slab of finite conductivity at low frequencies, the chain parameters become A = 1,
B = 0, C = 1/R and D = 1. In this case, the surface impedance becomes:
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 95 –
1
Zs = ≈R Ω( ) (E.12)
1 
 + 1 
R Z 
 c 
for cases where the surface resistance of the material is much less than the impedance of
free space (377 Ω).
At higher frequencies, the chain parameters in Equation (E.11) should be evaluated using
Equation (E.3). The general expression for Z s becomes:
Zs =
(Z c cosh jωτ d + R jωτ d sinh jωτ d ) (Ω) (E.13)
 Z c (R jωτ d ) sinh jωτ d + cosh jωτ d 
 −1 
 
For many types of conducting materials in the HEMP frequency range, it is possible to use a
low-frequency simplification to Equation (E.13):
ωµ
Z s ≈ R jωτ d = (1 + j ) ≡ R s + j ωL s (E.14)
s
where the surface resistance R s and the surface inductance L s are given in terms of the
frequency f = ω/2 π as:
2πfµ Rσ
Rσ = and Lσ = (E.15)
σ 2πf
Table E.1 presents the surface resistance for several materials.
Table E.1 – Surface resistance and electrical parameters for selected materials
Material Conductivity σ Permeability m Skin depth δ Surface resistivity R s

S/m H/m m Ω
Silver 6,17 × 10 7 4π × 10 -7
0,0642 / f 2,52 × 10 -7 f
Copper 5,80 × 10 7 4π × 10 -7
0,066 / f 2,61 × 10 -7 f
Aluminimum 3,72 × 10 7 4π × 10 -7
0,826 / f 3,26 × 10 -7 f
Brass 1,57 × 10 7 4π × 10 -7
0,127 / f 5,01 × 10 -7 f
Tin 0,90 × 10 7 4π × 10 -7
0,168 / f 6,62 × 10 -7 f
Solder 0,71 × 10 7 4π × 10 -7
0,185 / f 7,73 × 10 -7 f
– 96 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Material Conductivity σ Permeability m Skin depth δ Surface resistivity R s

S/m H/m m Ω
Graphite 3,0 × 10 4 4π × 10 -7
2,91 / f 1,15 × 10 -5 f
Plexiglas 5,1 × 10 -3 4π × 10 -7
7,05 × 10 3 / f 0,028 f
E.3.3.4 Shield transfer impedance
The transfer impedance of the plate is defined as the ratio of E 2tan / H 2tan , or equivalently, the
ratio of the internal E-field to the external surface current density. This is slightly different
from the transfer impedance of a cable in which the impedance is defined as the ratio of the
internal E-field (a distributed voltage source) to the total shield current. In this case, the
transfer impedance has the units of Ω/m. Its units are in Ω. A circuit analysis of provides the
following expression for the transfer impedance of the plate:
E2tan
(Z c C + D ) (Ω)
Zc
Zt = = (E.16)
H 1tan
or, equivalently:
Zt =
Zc
(Ω) (E.17)

(
 Z c R jωt d

)
−1
sinh jωt d

+ cosh jωt d 

and for good conductors in the HEMP frequency range, this is approximated as:
R jωt d
Zt ≈ (Ω) (E.18)
sinh jωt d
It should be noted that at low frequencies, the transfer impedance is Z t ≈ R, which is the d.c.
surface resistance of the slab. It is interesting to note that this is the same value as the
surface impedance in Equation (E.12). Thus, a low-frequency measurement of the surface
impedance on the front side of the plate can serve to characterize the transfer impedance of
the plate at low frequencies.
E.3.3.5 Transfer admittance
The transfer admittance of the planar sheet is defined as
H 2tan 1
Yt =
E1tan
=
(
Zc A + B
S
)( )
(E.19)
1
=
(Z c cosh jωt d + R jωt d sinh jωt d )
For a thin slab of finite conductivity at low frequencies, the chain parameters are A = 1, B = 0,
C = 1/R and D = 1and in this transfer admittance impedance becomes Y t ≈ 1/Z c = 0,002 7 (S).
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 97 –
Annex F
(informative)
Inside-to-out measurement method
F.1 Purpose
Some HEMP protection facilities in practical use do not have enough space available outside
the electromagnetic barrier (due to physical constraints such as concrete walls or soil) to
allow for the correct application of the measurement method described within the main body
of this document (outside-to-in); practical experience has shown that many facilities have up
to 1 m of available separation space. Territorial regulatory constraints can also be a
prohibiting factor for conducting outside-to-in measurements.
Therefore, in many practical cases it is not possible to measure shielding effectiveness

according to the standard outside-to-in test method. The constructors for HEMP protection
facilities are also unwilling to build facilities with extra space for this measurement outside of
the barrier due to the great expense and inefficiency of the operational working area for the
existing building.
Annex F provides some experimental data that demonstrates the feasibility of placing the
transmitting antenna inside the enclosure and the receiving antenna placed a short distance
outside (‘inside-to-out’ method).
It is important to note that there is a risk to equipment and other materials inside the facility
using this method; therefore, removal of equipment is recommended.
With this method, it may be difficult to determine whether the transmitter is actually
transmitting; therefore, it is recommended that a field measurement probe with a read-out
outside the chamber is utilized to confirm a field is actually present inside.
F.2 Comparison of existing SE test methods
Table F.1 provides a comparison of existing SE test methods from a variety of standards
including the previous edition (Edition 1.0) of this standard.
– 98 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Table F.1 – Comparison with other standards
IEC 61000-4-23:2000
Standard IEEE-STD-299 MIL-STD-188-125-1
(Edition 1.0)
Publication 2000 2006 2005
9 kHz to 16 kHz: 1 point
140 kHz to 160 kHz: 1 point
14 MHz to 16 MHz: 1 point
10 kHz to 100 kHz:
20 MHz to 100 MHz: 1 point
20 points
15 kHz to 30 kHz: 1 point 100 MHz to 300 MHz:
100 kHz to 1 MHz: 20 points
300 kHz to 500 kHz: 1 point 1 point
1 MHz to 10 MHz: 40 points
Test frequency 1 MHz to 20 MHz: 1 point 300 MHz to 600 MHz:
1 point 10 MHz to 100 MHz:
50 MHz to 200 MHz: 150 points
3 points 600 MHz to 1 GHz: 1 point
100 MHz to 1 GHz:
1 GHz to 2 GHz: 1 point
150 points
Loop antenna
Loop antenna
Loop antenna Biconical antenna
Antenna type Biconical antenna
Dipole antenna Dipole antenna
Log periodic antenna
Horn antenna
TX/RX antenna TX: ≥ 5 m (outside) TX: ≥ 1,7 m (outside) TX: 2,05 m (outside)
distance/location RX: 5 cm to 60 cm RX: 0,3 m RX: 1,0 m
Unit test area 2,5 m × 2,5 m 2,6 m × 2,0 m 3,05 m × 3,05 m

10 kHz to 10 MHz
: ≥ 20log 10 f -60 dB
Pass/fail criteria - By owner
10 MHz to 1 GHz
: ≥ 80 dB
F.3 Inside-to-out SE test of shielded rooms
F.3.1 Measurements of the inside-to-out SE
The conditions of testing real examples of HEMP protected facilities are shown in Table F.2.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 99 –
Table F.2 – Test shielded rooms
Shielded room #1 Shielded room #2 Shielded room #3
IEC IEC IEC
Chamber 3,6 m × 5,9 m × 3,0 m 9,0 m × 6,0 m × 3,0 m

2,9 m × 3,9 m × 2,4 m
size 1,1 m × 2,4 m × 2,3 m 2,0 m × 3,0 m × 3,0 m
Door, waveguide, honeycomb, Door, waveguide, honeycomb, Door, waveguide, honeycomb,
PoE
filter, connector panel filter filter
SE Approximately 60 dB to 70 dB Approximately 60 dB to 70 dB 80 dB
Door type Single Interlocks Interlocks
Filter type EMI EMI EMP
a) Test set-up for the inside-to-out SE measurement
In the outside-to-in case, the transmitting antenna was placed outside the electromagnetic
barrier and the receiving antenna was placed inside. In contrast, for the inside-to-out, the
transmitting antenna was placed inside the electromagnetic barrier and the TX equipment was
placed in another shielded room to protect from EM disturbances. The receiving antenna was
placed outside the barrier. It was then retested under the equal separation distance placing
the transmitting antenna outside. The results were then compared.
Using the basic test method of MIL-STD-188-125-1 to measure the shielding effectiveness,
the nominal distance from the transmitting antenna reference point to the test area surface is
2,05 m, and the nominal distance from the receiving antenna reference point to the test area
surface is 1 m.
Test points for the shielded room #1 and #2 are selected at the door, and the test point of the
shielded room #3 is selected at the wall. Regarding frequencies of 200 kHz, 50 MHz,
200 MHz, 400 MHz, and 1 GHz, outside-to-in measurement results were compared with
inside-to-out measurement results. The shielded RF cables of 10 m were used both for
calibration and measurement.
The test set-up for outside-to-in and inside-to-out SE measurement is shown in Figure F.1.
– 100 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
IEC
a) Shielded room #1
IEC
b) Shielded room #2
IEC
c) Shielded room #3
Figure F.1 – Test set-up for the outside-to-in and inside-to-out SE measurement
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 101 –
b) Test results for the inside-to-out SE measurement
The measurement results are shown in Table F.3.
Table F.3 – Comparison of the SE measurement results

(Unit: dB)
Freq. 200 kHz 50 MHz 200 MHz 400 MHz 1 GHz
Shielded Outside-to-in SE 42 83 46 54 52
room #1 Inside-to-out SE 42 84 47 51 52
- Door - Difference 0 +1 +1 -3 0
Shielded Outside-to-in SE 37 81 56 52 45
room #2 Inside-to-out SE 46 79 57 50 42
- Door - Difference +9 -2 +1 -2 -3
Shielded Outside-to-in SE > DR > DR 92 82 93

room #3 Inside-to-out SE > DR > DR 95 77 89
- Wall -
Difference ? ? +3 -5 -4
NOTE "> DR" means the shielding effectiveness is superior to the DR (dynamic range) value. DR is the range
in which the test system is able to measure the SE.
The actual measurement results of outside-to-in and inside-to-out shielding effectiveness for
each shielded room are not identical. This is probably due to the different shielded room
conditions. Care should be taken to ensure that sufficient dynamic range above the noise floor
is available for the inside-to-out method or, at test frequencies where this is not possible, an
alternative test frequency should be specifically selected to avoid this issue.
F.3.2 Summary
The inside-to-out method produces very comparable results to the traditional outside-to-in
method, particularly where the shielding effectiveness of the installation is anticipated to be
lower than a high quality shielded room (> 80 dB).
For cases where radiated HEMP protection is required to be much less than 80 dB, the inside-
to-out method clearly has merit. This does not preclude the method being applied to high
quality shielded rooms; however, dynamic range may be a limiting factor.
– 102 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
Bibliography
[1] IEC 61000-4-20, Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) – Part 4-20: Testing and
measurement techniques – Emission and immunity testing in transverse
electromagnetic (TEM) waveguides
measurement techniques – HEMP immunity test methods for equipment and systems
[3] IEC 61000-2-10, Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) – Part 2-10: Environment –

Description of HEMP environment – Conducted disturbance
measurement techniques –Test methods for protective devices for HEMP conducted
disturbance
[5] IEC TR 61000-2-5, Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) – Part 2-25: Environment –

Description and classification of electromagnetic environments
General EMP references:
[6] Baum, C.E., "EMP Simulators for Various Types of Nuclear EMP Environments: An
Interim Categorization," IEEE TRANS. EMC, Vol. EMC-20, No. 1, Feb. 1978.
[7] Bell Laboratories, "EMP Engineering and Design Principles", Technical Publications
Department, Bell Laboratories, Whippany, N.J., 1975.
[8] EMP Interaction: "Principles, Techniques and Reference Data", K.S.H. Lee, editor,
Hemisphere Publishing Co. New York, 1989.
[9] Ghose, R., "EMP Environment and System Hardness Design", DWCI Publication,
Gainesville, VA, 1984.
[10] Joehl, W., "A General and Systematic Survey of NEMP Protection Measures",
Research Institute for Protective Construction (FMB), Zurich, Rep. FMB 78-1, Jan.
1978.
[11] Joint Special Issue of the Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse, IEEE Trans EMC, Vol. EMC-
20, No. 1, Feb. 1978.
[12] Vance, E.F., "Electromagnetic-Pulse Handbook for Electric Power Systems," Report
DNA 3466F, Defense Nuclear Agency, Washington, D.C., Feb. 4, 1975.
Electromagnetic topology:
[13] Baum, C.E., "Electromagnetic Topology for the Analysis and Design of Complex
Electromagnetic Systems," pp. 467-547 in Fast Electrical and Optical Measurements,
Vol. I, eds. I.E. Thompson and L.H. Luessem, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, 1986.
[14] Baum, C.E., "Electromagnetic Topology: A Formal Approach to the Analysis and
Design of Complex Electronic Systems", of the 4th Symposium and Technical
Exhibition on EMC Zurich, pp. 209-214, March 1981.
[15] Baum, C.E., "The Role of Scattering Theory in Electromagnetic Interference

Problems", in Electromagnetic Scattering, P.L.E. Uslenghi, editor, Academic Press,
1978.
[16] Karlsson, T., "The Topological Concept of a Generalized Shield," AFWL Interaction
Note 461, Kirtland AFB NM, Jan. 1988.
[17] Karlsson, T., "On Grounding – Practical Procedures Based on Electromagnetic

Theory", Proceedings of the 9th International Zurich Technical Exhibition on EMC, 3-5
March 1987.
IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016 – 103 –
[18] Tesche, F.M., "Topological Concepts for Internal EMP Interaction," IEEE Trans. EMC,
20 (1), Feb. 1978.
[19] Tesche, F.M., "Introduction to Concepts of Electromagnetic Topology as Applied to

EMP Interaction With Systems", NATO/AGARD Lecture Series Publication 144,
Interaction Between EMP, Lightning and Static Electricity with Aircraft and Missile
Avionics Systems, May 1986.
[20] Vance, E.F., "EMP Hardening of Systems," Proceeding of the 4th Symposium and
Technical Exhibition on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Zurich, 10-12 March 1981.
[21] Vance, E.F., and W. Graf, "The Role of Shielding in Interference Control", IEEE Trans.
EMC, Vol. 30, No. 3, August 1988, pp. 294-297.
Electromagnetic compatibility references:
[22] Christopoulos, C., "Principles and Techniques of Electromagnetic Compatibility", CRC

Press, Boca Raton, 1995.
[23] Degauque, P. and J. Hamelin, eds., "Electromagnetic Compatibility", Oxford University

Press, Oxford, 1993 (also in French).
[24] Goedbloed, J.J., "Electromagnetic Compatibility", Prentice Hall, New York, 1992.
[25] Gravelle, L.B., and P.F. Wilson, "EMI/EMC in Printed Circuit Boards – A Literature
Review", IEEE Trans. EMC, Vol. 34, No. 2, May 1992, pp. 109-116.
[26] Ianovici, (Ianoz) M. and J.J Morf, eds., "Compatibilité Électromagnétique", Presses
Polytechniques Romandes, Lausanne, 1983.
[27] Keiser, B.E., "Principles of Electromagnetic Compatibility", Artech House, Inc.

Dedham, Mass. 1979.
[28] Morgan, D., "A Handbook for EMC Testing and Measurement", Peter Peregrinus Ltd.,
IEE Electrical Measurement Series 8, London, 1994.
[29] Ott, H.W., "Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems", John Wiley & Sons,
New York, 1988.
[30] Paul, C.R., "Prediction of Crosstalk in Ribbon Cables: Comparison of Model

Predictions and Experimental Results", IEEE Trans. EMC, Vol. EMC-20, No. 3, Aug.
1978, pp. 394-406.
[31] Paul, C.R., "Transmission-Line Modeling of Shielded Wires for Crosstalk Prediction",
IEEE Trans. EMC, Vol. EMC-23, No. 4, Nov. 1981, pp. 345-351.
[32] Paul, C.R., "Introduction to Electromagnetic Compatibility", John Wiley & Sons, New
York, 1992.
[33] Perez, R., ed., "Handbook of Electromagnetic Compatibility", Academic Press, 1995.
[34] Ryser, H., "Electromagnetic Compatibility," Hasler Review, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1984, pp.
33-40.
[35] Tesche, F.M., M.V. Ianoz and T. Karlsson, "EMC Analysis Methods and Computational
Models", John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1996.
Electromagnetic shielding:
[36] Casey, K.F., "Electromagnetic Shielding Behaviour of Wire-Mesh Screens", IEEE

Trans. EMC, Vol. 30, No. 3, Aug. 1988, pp. 298-311.
– 104 – IEC 61000-4-23:2016 © IEC 2016
[37] Dahlberg, E., Electromagnetic Shielding, "Some Simple Formulæ for Closed Uniform
Shields", TRITA–EPP–75–27, KTH Stockholm, Dec. 1975.
[38] Kaden, H., "Wirbelstroeme und Schirmung in der Nachrichtentechnik", Springer-Verlag,

Berlin, 1959.
[39] King, L.V., "Electromagnetic Shielding at Radio Frequencies", Phil. Mag. and J. Sci.,
Vol. 15, No. 97, Feb. 1933, pp. 201-223.
[40] Lee, K.S.H., "Electromagnetic Shielding", Ch. 11 in Recent Advances in

Electromagnetic Theory, H.N. Kritikos and D.L. Jagard, eds., Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1990.
[41] Schelkunoff, S.A., "Theory of Lines and Shields," Bell System Technical Journal,
13(1934)4, pp. 522-579.
[42] Vance, E.F., "Coupling to Shielded Cables", Krieger Publishing, 1987.
[43] Savage, E. B., J. L. Gilbert and W. A. Radasky, “Expedient Building Shielding

Measurement Method for HEMP Assessments,” IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic
Compatibility, Vol. 55, No. 3, June 2013, pp. 508-517.
Related specifications and standards:
[44] MIL-STD-188-125-1:2005, High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) Protection for

Ground-Based C4I Facilities Performing Critical, Time-Urgent Missions – Part 1: Fixed
Facilities
[45] IEC 62153-4-x (all parts), Metallic communication cable test methods – Part 4-x:
Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC)
[46] IEC TR 61000-5-4, Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) – Part 5: Installation and

mitigation guidelines – Section 4: Immunity to HEMP – Specifications for protective
devices against HEMP radiated disturbance
[47] IEEE-Std-299:2006, IEEE Standard Method for Measuring the Effectiveness of

Electromagnetic Shielding Enclosures
[48] ANSI/IEEE Std 488.1:1987, Standard IEEE Standard Digital Interface for
Programmable Instrumentation
___________
INTERNATIONAL
ELECTROTECHNICAL
COMMISSION
3, rue de Varembé
PO Box 131
CH-1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland
Tel: + 41 22 919 02 11
Fax: + 41 22 919 03 00
info@iec.ch
www.iec.ch

Iec 61000-4-23-2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Iec 61000-4-23-2016

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Iec 61000-4-23-2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEC 61000-4-23

BASIC EMC PUBLICATION

Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) –

IEC Central Office Tel.: +41 22 919 02 11

About the IEC

IEC Catalogue - webstore.iec.ch/catalogue Electropedia - www.electropedia.org

IEC publications search - www.iec.ch/searchpub IEC Glossary - std.iec.ch/glossary

BASIC EMC PUBLICATION

Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) –

ICS 33.100.99 ISBN 978-2-8322-3687-1

® Registered trademark of the International Electrotechnical Commission

A.4.2 Acceptance of new systems ........................................................................... 65

Figure 1 – Example of measured magnitude and phase of the transfer function

Figure 4 – Conceptual illustration of the HEMP test of a building .......................................... 19

Figure C.1 – Magnetic field sensors [23] ............................................................................... 73

Table 1 – Recommended test procedure for different test objects ......................................... 34

INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION

ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY (EMC) –

Part 4-23: Testing and measurement techniques –

a) updates to the shielding effectiveness (SE) test method in Clause 5;

The text of this standard is based on the following documents:

CDV Report on voting

A bilingual version of this publication may be issued at a later date.

IEC 61000 is published in separate parts, according to the following structure:

Part 4: Testing and measurement techniques

Part 5: Installation and mitigation guidelines

Part 6: Generic Standards

ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY (EMC) –

Part 4-23: Testing and measurement techniques –

– theoretical foundation of the test (the test concepts);

Therefore, in many practical cases it is not possible to measure shielding effectiveness

IEC 60050-161, International Electrotechnical Vocabulary (IEV) – Part 161: Electromagnetic

IEC 61000-2-9, Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) – Part 2: Environment – Section 9:

3 Terms and definitions

[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-06-10]

Note 1 to entry: Such boxes usually contain modules of subsystems.

[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-06-12]

Note 1 to entry: See current injection test (3.12).

[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-01-05]

[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-02-02]

[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-04-37]

[SOURCE: IEC 60050-161:1990, 161-02-01]

4 HEMP test concepts

As an example, a hypothetical case of a building containing a highly shielded screen room is

4.2 Testing of shielding enclosures

Field transfer functions

Figure 1 – Example of measured magnitude and phase of the transfer function

Figure 2 – Electric field and magnetic field shielding effectiveness

As a further example of the measured magnetic field shielding effectiveness of a real

Figure 3 – Measured magnetic field shielding effectiveness SE H for a building

Incident HEMP field

Figure 4 – Conceptual illustration of the HEMP test of a building

4.2.3 Shelters and shielded rooms

– a complex-valued field transfer function, or

Excitation E-field and H-field

Figure 5 – Illustration of a shielded room or enclosure excited by HEMP fields

4.2.4 Cabinets, racks and boxes

Incident HEMP field

Figure 6 – Illustration of equipment racks, cabinets and box excited