EMC precompliance testing setup - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 07:48:03 am
content: I have some budget to set up an EMC precompliance testing setup at work. We've been launching products at a rate that this makes sense rather than immediately sending it to the test lab. Which I've been saying only for years now.I wanted to get your idea about what equipment to add to this, or what's useless.While it would be nice to just get a R&S 26GHz analyzer, it's going to be out of budget. I'm also a lot more interested in emission testing than immunity testing. What am I testing for? There are some specific standards, and generic ones. I'm targeting IEC 61000, industrial environments as a baseline for everything.So far I'm looking into these parts:SA: I'd like to cover all LTE signal bands, and look at a harmonics for some of them. 5 GHz is probably a good target. I think -160 dBm/Hz is a minimal sensitivity for such measurements. This is probably the highest cost of all the things, because I cannot get an anechoic chamber into the office. And I likely have to test more than one devices to see which one works.Siglent SVA1075X, which has extra VNA functionalityRigol RSA5065 with EMC as default now. This one ahs RTSA and VNA both of this is useful otherwise in the labUni-t UTS3060A (very little experience with these as of now)R&S FPL1007, maybe FPL-EMI7Used equipment? There are too many to list. It should be supported and calibrated that limits the list.And Tekbox EMCView software.I'm not sure I understand if the EMCView is a replacement for the EMC software on the one on the SA.The SA should be equipped with EMI options.Antenna:For me it looks like a Log periodic antenna is needed for low frequencies, up to about 2GHz, and horn antenna for higher frequencies. I'm not sure at the moment what's the benefit of biconical antennas.TEM cell, to test the DUT with less environmental noiseLISN for DC voltages/currentsNear field probe set with Preamp for itI'm not exactly sure what Comb generators are used for. As I understand this is to calibrate the antenna setup quickly? Can the tracking generator of the SA be used for this?Cables to connect it allLab grade Adapter kits from N to SMA, BNCA 20dB attenuator and a DC blockAn EMC tent would be nice, if it fits the budget. But maybe I'll end up with also buying a Ecoflow or some other battery pack to be able to drive to the middle of nowhere to do the tests.What's not covered here are obviously ESD and surge immunity testing. I'm treating those topics separately, as it is out of scope for many devices that I make.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 09:38:46 am
content: Is pushing to 5 GHz really necessary for EMC ?FWIW a few comments on the Siglent analyzers.Preamp is a standard feature in all models.EMC Mode is available in SSA3000X Plus, SSA3000X-R and SVA1000X ranges but it is an option that times out after ~120hrs of analyzer use.Near field probes are available:https://www.siglenteu.com/accessory/srf5030t/Attached a few screenshots from my SVA1032X....unfortunately they didn't capture the mouse pointer I placed to show the next menu to be clicked.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 09:55:19 am
content: Quote from: tautech on August 14, 2025, 09:38:46 am5Ghz is, because I have radio devices that operate at these frequencies. LTE or 2.45GHz ISM. And not only radio modules.If I would do complete due diligence, I would need to look at maybe the first 5 harmonics on my 2.45GHz transceiver.Good point about the EMC mode timeout. I think I can do all the tests and worry about buying the license later. Though Rigol offers these as default now. After reading a lot about it, an RTSA might be lot better for EMC, if it supports these two at the same time. I'm trying to understand exactly how much, but from what I understand it reduces the testing time by an order of magnitude? Which can take hours.

author: Hawaka
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 09:57:22 am
content: To know what you need look at what exact standard you must conform. Each standard will tell you the exact required setup.A few comments based on experience:- For radiated emissions, you’ll need an anechoic chamber. You wouldn’t believe how much noise there is around. Technically you can just buy sheet metal and put it on the 6 side of a room and ground it. For a rough measurement it might be enough and it should be pretty cheap.- Near-field probe are nice to find the source of noise, and that’s it. They won’t help to quantify the impact on the spectrum during testing.- Definitively buy a calibrated noise source. That is the only way to confirm your entire measurement setup is correct.- For conducted emissions, you’ll need a LISN. No need for the extra clean source. If your device pass test with the standard grid, then I’ll will probably pass with a cleaner source.- I would definitively buy an ESD gun. It’s very easy to do the test in-house and also the most easy way to fail at the test lab.- I wouldn’t worry to much for radiated and conducted immunity. If your design is properly grounded, and you have some properly dimension protection (like surge protector, TVS diode, ..) it should be fine.- Plan from the start for automation, unless you only do a few measurement per year.- EMC software are far from easy to use and license are expensive. Make to sure try a few and that it works with your spectrum analyser / setup. See what you like before committing. You can do without special EMC software, but that’s a hassle. You’ll have to look in the standard for every setup, every limit and so on. Then you are never sure you did it all correct. I would plan for it in the budget.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 10:10:08 am
content: Quote from: Hawaka on August 14, 2025, 09:57:22 amI know how much noise is around, since I took some portable Anritsu around with some antenna. I saw for example -60dBm noise in the 8-900MHz region. Directional antenna helps a lot.LISN: DC only, and even that's rare. I have nothing with AC source, it's not very compatible with the ATEX directive.ESD I'm not worried at the moment. The devices that I'll be sending out for testing have interfaces that are tested already on similar devices. In fact I don't remember ever failing surge and ESD. I failed immunity few years ago on a device that had Ethernet port. It failed 100MHz immunity. Like, no surprises there, right, in band large noise signal?I wouldn't even start without software. I can only imagine that report generation for CE would take days to do. I have better things to do with my time than that.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 10:27:57 am
content: Quote from: Hawaka on August 14, 2025, 09:57:22 amI was thinking something like this:https://www.tekbox.com/product/tbcg1-radiating-comb-generatorSeems cheap enough to include. Especially since I'm looking at paying ~2000 EUR just for antennas. And then I'm still buying cheap antennas.

author: Hawaka
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 11:01:53 am
content: I have never heard of tekbox, so I cannot comment.I’ve used Teseq or Schwarzbeck accessories, pricey but they do the job.Measurement confidence is really important for EMC, IMO you can cheap out on the full measurement chain, and buy a good source to characterize your setup. Or you buy a good setup and you still get a good source to test it.PS:Schwarzbeck has a used equipment section on their website, might worth a look

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 11:31:08 am
content: I have Tekbox near field probe set with preamp.Works well and had no problem for years.I remember someone testing that Comb gen and they said it was OK. Certainly worth the money.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 11:57:28 am
content: Quote from: Hawaka on August 14, 2025, 11:01:53 amI didn't know about Schwarzbeck. I've checked the price of some of their antennas, it's a lot. I get it, quality.Teseq I know, I think I've seen that being used for compliance testing. Again, budget issues.Tekbox seems to have a good range of devices, and software that seems to geared towards Rigol, Siglent and low end RS SAs. I wouldn't be surprised to just buy everything from them.Right now I'm looking also at Aaronia. Some of their log-antilog antennas are only a few hundred EUR, very reasonably priced. They also seem to have some USB RTSA, that's well priced, except the software. Like the base device with 1RX / 1TX is 4200 EUR on their website, but the software option to use the TX as a tracking generator is 2500 EUR :'(

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 12:56:42 pm
content: Quote from: Hawaka on August 14, 2025, 09:57:22 amI have solved this with some Python scripting which controls the instruments and produces plots with the limit lines in them. Based on real EMC testing results I have devised some correction values for the TEM cell and antennas I'm using. IMHO having EMC options is overrated. A test setup somewhere in a lab has a lot of sources for error to begin with. Having the bandwidth at about the same setting as the official standard is good enough. Apply averaging of a measurement to see where the pain points (frequence peaks exceeding the limit) are. If a peak stays there with averaging, then it will remain there with a quasy peak measurement as well. Don't expect to get to within a few dB of the real / actual test. The anechoic chamber and antennas used in the real test will result in different measurement results.When testing radio devices, a 5GHz spectrum analyser isn't going to cut it. CE requires testing to around 13GHz (IIRC) and FCC to around 21GHz. 2.4GHz radio chips can produce a surprisingly large amount of harmonics at 7.2GHz.I also have a comb generator. Unfortunately it starts at 100MHz. Big antennas are typically pretty flat from 100MHz already. If I'd buy another one, I'd get one which starts at 10MHz because you'll want to measure radiated emissions from 30MHz and you'll need to have some reference at that frequency to determine the antenna response if you need to do an absolute measurement.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 01:09:17 pm
content: The low end Rigol SA with EMC software option and a 30MHz to 1GHz biconical antenna has been a popular low cost in-house pre-compliance setup for a long time now.The usual radiated emmision standards are that 30MHz to 1GHz range, but if you have something specific beyond that you might need more specialist advice. I think 6GHz is the next step-up in range.TekBox are a popular maker of low cost EMC testing gear, hard to go wrong there.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 01:45:06 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 14, 2025, 12:56:42 pmWhile I appreciate the effort to make this sort of testing as cheap as possible, I think I'll take the "Nobody got fired for buying HP" option. A full scan could take hours from what I see, and I just don't think I can afford spending days chasing bugs in a python script. Not to mention the standards. I see on a previous product I have, they used TS151.010-1 GSM as emissions limit. So I just downloaded the standard, it's 6127 pages long.FCC defined with their infinite wisdom, the upper limit of radio testing as 3000 GHz.You are right about the spurs in 2.4GHz radios. We had a 20 something GHz SA rented and made conducted emissions testing on our radio interface. Basically desoldered the antenna, and wired the SA directly into it. Passing that actually gives me quite a bit of confidence.Quote from: EEVblog on August 14, 2025, 01:09:17 pmBiconical seems to be the equipment of choice for low frequency measurements.While I am not trying to make my setup as cheap as possible, once I added everything together it's about 6-7000 EUR just for the accessories, and about the same for the SAs I listed. Which seems like a lot, but it's less than a FCC+RED certificate.Quote from: Hawaka on August 14, 2025, 09:57:22 amFor the "anechoic chamber", probably the best I can do it to use an intermodal container. Did anyone try to make a test in one of those? In my mind now, I'll get reflections, but reduced environment noise.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 03:04:44 pm
content: Grok 4Can a intermodal container be used as a makeshift anechoic chamber for RF measurements? How good isolation can we expect? How bad are the reflections?QuoteSo the container without RF absorber inside probably would act as an echo chamber, not an anechoic chamber. I somewhat expected that. I definitely cannot add ferrite tiles and cover every hole on it. Probably what I could do is test the noise in the container, compare it with outside to see the isolation.Next step, place the Comb generator in place of the DUT, and compare it with open field results, and with the comb generators calibration sheet, to see how bad reflections are. Without lining the entire container with foam absorbers, I'm guessing immediately behind the device looking at it with the antenna, and the parallel sections should be covered with absorber.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2025, 03:36:22 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on August 14, 2025, 01:45:06 pmI get that but having your own suite of tools gives a lot of flexibility. There will be a learning curve to use bought software as well with plenty of room for error. It also depends on what your goal is. I like to start doing checks during the design phase as part of testing prototypes. But I'm not going to wait hours to do a single measurement. Especially when trying components to see which one gives the best performance from an EMC perspective versus price. I just fire up the spectrum analyser, flip the prototype into the TEM cell and run a couple of sweeps. Sometimes over a limited frequency band. The (command line) script I've made supports doing quick measurements like that as well as doing more elaborate measurements. I only do a longer test once I'm sure the prototype behaves as it should. But still I'm not going to do extremely long measurement runs from every height / angle like they do during a real test. This may sound like not covering all possible problems but in my view it doesn't make sense to take a product to a test lab which barely passes pre-compliance testing at my own lab. If a product stays well under the limit when measured sitting normally, rotated over the X and Y axis in a TEM cell, there is no reason to fear a pre-compliance scan at a test lab.If you are going to buy software, I'd look at how easy it is to define measurements, influence the measurement speed (like by setting the number of averages, changing RBW), recall existing measurements and whether you can define your own tests (for example to do RED testing).QuoteWhere it comes to standards my approach is to either find a document or somebody to tell me which test to perform -exactly- and what the limits are. Then again, I'm not pursueing a career to know everything there is about EMC related standards.Either way, part of this journey will be about building your own confidence in your measurement results.

author: kmoonwalker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 07:41:49 am
content: if you are going to be at 5 GHz region I think that one needs to consider some new or preowned rohde as from personal experience some of companies asking you to manufacture or test something for them will specifically demand it to be Rohde or Keysight in some cases and I think it is good to seach for various options but it is also good to reach out to them and ask how they look at this cause I seen multiple times that customer after just seeing the logo or equipment name on test report called in to have the test equipment replaced due to being non conformant with their internal policy...

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 08:47:47 am
content: Quote from: kmoonwalker on August 15, 2025, 07:41:49 amWell, we'll have CE declaration in the end. Technically they rarely ask for test report, and even if they do it's none of their business how it was tested.If you would be a consultancy, where your end product is the design, and you have one customer it's a different story.But yes, there are some picky customers even in B2B, who want to have ie factory visits before buying stuff.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 09:29:50 am
content: I'm adding the following tools into the list:GND plane metal plane for LISNSet of ferrite cores, Würth 742711N connector transient limiterWith a Power amplifier and the tracking generator of the SA, and TEM cell, it's apparently possible to do some immunity testing. This would only need the power amplifier as the extra part.Well, and a coupler to monitor the RF output.

author: jusaca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 10:53:08 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on August 14, 2025, 09:55:19 amBut does such an RTSA offer the small RBW needed when using large spans?I think a common EMC standard RBW is 9 kHz. The Siglent / Rigol RTSAs can capture 40 MHz in one piece, but have only around ~1000 bin. At least thats how I understand their documents.And 40 MHz with 1k bins means a spacing of the measurement points around 40 kHz apart. Not sure if this is sufficient.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 11:13:40 am
content: Quote from: jusaca on August 15, 2025, 10:53:08 amI never used an RTSA. From what I see from Siglent's and Rigol's datasheet, their RTSA can operate in regular sweeped SA mode. And they also have, with the right option, the Quasy-peak filter that is required for the EMI tests.If you look at the block diagram of an RTSA and a regular SA, they only deviate quite late in the signal path. I'm guessing they might be doing some of the traditional analog processing digital. Both these companies have filters, RBW down to 1Hz.Here is some Tek appnote about this:https://www.tek.com/en/documents/application-note/real-time-spectrum-analysis-emi-diagnostics

author: jusaca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 11:46:15 am
content: Yeah sure, you can go down to really small RBW, I don't doubt the RTSA version can do the same and more than the non-RT version.But can you combine the fast real time update over wide bandwidths (like 40 MHz) with small RBW? That is the point I doubt, so I'm not sure if it will really offer faster measurement speed for EMC tests.At least I don't understand how. If they do really offer such vast improvements in speed with the needed resolution for standard-conform tests I would be interested in such a device as well

author: scottapotamas
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 12:24:18 pm
content: I don't have the pro version of EMCview to use the RTSA bits of the Rigol, but just be aware it's not a clear win over swept mode.The sensitivity isn't the same and there's somespurs and noise floor artifactsthat aren't in the marketing material.The integrated limit line and scan table libraries in the RSA's EMI app are fine, able to run sweep sequences with varing points/RBW across specified ranges pretty well. Loading the LISN's correction table isn't particularly hard either. I started that way but bought a EMCview licence for more consistent reporting/documentation.Quasi-peak is slow as hell, so normally just run peak and average scans (good to keep some margin) and use QP for the largest peaks if needed.You mentioned DC LISN over AC earlier in the thread - be aware of which inductance you're getting with the specific tests you'll be working against and the need to distinguish between CM/DM. The typical 5uH are useful enough for precomp but had larger variance from the test-house's results than I expected the first few times around, a 50uH may have been a better choice forme(or a mains one).

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 02:08:03 pm
content: Quote from: scottapotamas on August 15, 2025, 12:24:18 pmThanks, good to see that others have similar setups. I'm leaning towards the RSA5000N because of the EMC is included by default. On the other hand I can see the 3rd harmonic of the 2.4Ghz on the Siglent's 7.5GHz bandwidth. Decisions, decisions...I think I'm fine with some spurs in precompliance testing. If it goes above the line, I have to investigate it anyway. I'm reading that some of the QP measurement, the low frequency ones, could take 4 hours to perform. That's a problem because that's a whole day gone for one test, I might need to do it in two orientation of the DUT and Antenna... I would rather spend my time on better things.I'm trying the EMCview in demo mode. They have separate limit lines for average responding and peak filters? That sounds very useful.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 02:24:15 pm
content: Quote from: jusaca on August 15, 2025, 11:46:15 amTesting houses nowadays have a dedicated EMI receiver.From what I understand, those are faster by an order of magnitude. And have preselector filters for example, or you can set up your devices RF transmission time, so it samples when you transmit. If you don't have continuous wave available for a radio. It's also possible that these EMI receivers are nowadays built on the same principles, but then, it's super expensive equipment anyway.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 03:17:06 pm
content: Quote from: jusaca on August 15, 2025, 10:53:08 amIIRC the spacing between the steps (bins) may be halve the RBW at most. This is also why EMC measurements typically consist of multiple sweeps stitched together in order to satisfy the minimum frequency step size.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 03:23:48 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on August 15, 2025, 09:29:50 amFor immunity testing you'll also want AM modulation. An electric field probe to verify the electric field strength is also nice to have but in a TEM cell you can calculate the resulting field strength from the input power and geometry. Don't forget a load capable of dissipating the amplifiers power. I opted to buy a 5W 20dB attenuator (a good quality one!); the attenuator can also be used to measure the transfer characteristic of the amplifier itself.In my setup I measured the amplifier's frequency response at several power levels and created a calibration table. The table is used to control the power level of an RF generator (in my case an R&S SMIQ) to create the desired field strength through my script. There are also dwell time requirements for immunity testing (DUT response time to events). All in all I'm not sure a tracking generator on a spectrum analyser will do much good. You'll need software to run immunity tests because they are too tedious to do manually. From all the EMC tests, the immunity tests take most of the time. Count on at least 20 minutes per run.Personally I like to test products up to 30V/m. For consumer stuff the limit is 3V/m but that is too low for flawless operation in the real world in my experience.

author: kmoonwalker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 03:34:45 pm
content: from experience:product usually passes in traditional sweep approach (if no erratic occuring peaks will exist during given freq sweep stage to show up and this means it would most probalby pass in testing lab tooRTSA approach is very nice especially on prototype stage when you wanna see problems occuring when you simply touch and move some internal interconnect cable, etc but you have a good point there so it is being done in following way:you analyze some limited range not the whole range and then go range by range adjusting them as you need cause you may miss some things with wide bandafter some time spent on certain prototype you will know which areas of freq range you need to look at making corrections, adjustmentsand then after all done you still need to go back to multiple sweeps to be certain no one will later hunt for you

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 03:52:21 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 15, 2025, 03:23:48 pmTrue AM modulation is required, I'm looking the Tekbox TBMDA5, which is an AM modulated amplifier.They claim that about 200V/m can be reached in their TEM cells. And their software sets up the SA to do the tracking generator output, and the amplifier does the modulation. If it all works as plug and play, I would be really happy.Quote from: kmoonwalker on August 15, 2025, 03:34:45 pmHaving the RTSA is useful for the software guys for timing analysis, or to see individual messages.Or if we cannot set up CW, because it would kill the battery for example. I think that would be a real pain point, I'm not even sure I can transmit continuously on smaller devices, the secondary ESR of the built in battery would kill it.

author: kmoonwalker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 03:57:18 pm
content: for that especially but myself I was referring to probing with "wand" some problematic prototype PCB

author: kmoonwalker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 04:01:50 pm
content: I think you should reach out to Tekbox and check out their software, find out what suits your needs and then select the hardware compatible with it (or recommended for it) and within your budgetThere are also other options like Keysight or Rohde Electra but usually way more expensive

author: scottapotamas
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 04:10:22 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on August 15, 2025, 02:08:03 pmTo be clear, those spurs aren't in swept mode. I don't know how the pro version moves the real-time span but you'd get that spur/noise floor ineverywindow that it's sampling. It's quiet enough it'll likely be drowned out by ambient and DUT noise. Just making sure you're aware beforehand.On frequency, LISN's aren't useful above the low hundreds of MHz range. My RF current probe tapers off under a gig. TBTC2 is something like -15dB at 3G which is where my RSA stops. More bandwidth is something I'd want given my workloads intersect with relatively fast interconnects more often but that's the broader usability of the tool moreso than pre-compliance.Even the RSA's internal EMI app has QP and peak limit lines in the library, can draw 5? at once and so that's not unique to emcview or other test software. Slightly more tedious to setup but not a huge issue once you've done it a few times. For business use the look/feel of emcview's documentation is worth it over Rigol's exports, no experience with other paid options.It's rare for me to run a single scan longer than 10-15 minutes during prototyping but when I've done a 'last check' before testing some of those scans have taken most of an hour, diminishing returns etc. The test house uses a ESW26 and they can get similar feeling results in less than a minute.Happy to throw something in the TEM and give you access to the VM that runs the software to play around if you want.QuoteIMO pretty limiting on the Rigol you're probably better off with any SDR for that.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 05:56:03 pm
content: Quote from: kmoonwalker on August 15, 2025, 04:01:50 pmTheir software can be run without a license up to 10MHz or something. All the files for their equipment is there.There is a local store, Eleshop, who seems to carry their lineup. Also Batronix.Looking at their lineup, they seem to have a complete solution at low cost, including the software.My plan is, we buy the accessories, and get a loan of 2-3 different SAs from them, and buy the one that's the most suitable.Quote from: scottapotamas on August 15, 2025, 04:10:22 pmI don't even need a LISN right now. I throw it in the basket, because it's easier to buy it at the same time rather than to come back in a few months realizing that we need it. In the middle of a project.Quote from: scottapotamas on August 15, 2025, 04:10:22 pmInteresting

author: kmoonwalker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 08:52:52 pm
content: your plan is goodAlso as mentioned by others - you need to be careful in terms of noise levels suitable for youOften happened that some ancient Rohde had less noise than some new of shelve chinese options (they are generaly not bad nowadays but one needs to pay attention in some cases). if you were limited to 3 GHz I would say to try out FPC-COM2 + EMCVIEW PRO software (you also need the pro for real time analysis on Rigol etc but it is like 699USD or something). Rigol 5000 series also has good opinions but I had no possibility to test it myself. Next level of Rohde starts like 20-25k euro and it requires a lot of extra money to make it reasonably equipped so I would recommend to browse some offers with preowned not very old models (they are usually with options so lots of savings even on that aspect alone). Fast, good Siglent analyzers are also expensive. Cheap ones are not bad but same as with Rigol pay attention to noise.If you say that you do not have a problem with customers requirements I say lucky You that you can go on with whatever fits youSome are having orders with production quality tests on selected equipment from DMM (with cal and adjustment certificate valid) to other more fancy things with especially written procedures for their software that customers are providing and they demand reports for each production stage to asses the quality of adjustments, etc.Times of whatever goes are in the past in 90% of cases and those with low expectations are usually problematic with payments :/

author: jc101
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 08:59:04 pm
content: I wish they would incorporate support for the Signal Hound BB60C into EMCView.I asked them around a year ago, but they said they were too busy. The Signal Hound Spike software is excellent, but things would be easier with a dedicated front end like EMCView.

author: kmoonwalker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 09:08:24 pm
content: yep friends of mine also had that reply multple times about other analyzers :/

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 22, 2025, 06:00:41 pm
content: Looks like I've got the budget for the test setup, just wrote the email for the RFQ for the shop. I ended up with the Rigol RSA5065 in the end. It was significantly cheaper than the equivalent Siglent together with its options.