2011 IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility 2011
DOI: 10.1109/isemc.2011.6038275
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electric field coupling suppression using via fences for magnetic near-field shielded-loop coil probes in low temperature co-fired ceramics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A lead section is located between the loop and the following flip-chip bonding transition area. Similar structure was presented in [16]. The diameter of via is 75 m. The distance between the centers of two metal layers is 52 m and the thickness of the metal conductor is 13 m. At 3 GHz, the LTCC substrate has a relative permittivity and loss tangent of 7.5 and 0.005, respectively.…”
Section: B Probe Structurementioning
confidence: 87%
“…A lead section is located between the loop and the following flip-chip bonding transition area. Similar structure was presented in [16]. The diameter of via is 75 m. The distance between the centers of two metal layers is 52 m and the thickness of the metal conductor is 13 m. At 3 GHz, the LTCC substrate has a relative permittivity and loss tangent of 7.5 and 0.005, respectively.…”
Section: B Probe Structurementioning
confidence: 87%
“…Besides, those based on stripline have higher EFSR than CPW because stripline has two layers of ground, which can shield electric-field noise. 10 In addition, lots of methods to improve probe performance were proposed. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] In order to improve sensitivity, the adjustable resonant probe was made using a variable capacitor 11 and ferrite sheets were introduced to enhance electromagnetic induction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Those based on stripline and CPW usually have higher spatial resolution than those based on coaxial line 6‐9 due to the smaller size. Besides, those based on stripline have higher EFSR than CPW because stripline has two layers of ground, which can shield electric‐field noise 10 . In addition, lots of methods to improve probe performance were proposed 11‐18 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The disadvantage is that this type of probe cannot isolate unwanted electric field coupling . In contrast, the magnetic probes with electric shielding offer better suppression of unwanted electric field and provide a better spatial resolution when they are fabricated with multilayer thick film on silicon and glass substrates, thin film on a glass substrate and multilayer low‐temperature co‐fired ceramics . The thick film and thin‐film sensors on the glass are fragile and can easily be damaged during the measurement while providing a major advantage in less side electric field coupling .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, the magnetic probes with electric shielding offer better suppression of unwanted electric field and provide a better spatial resolution when they are fabricated with multilayer thick film on silicon and glass substrates, thin film on a glass substrate and multilayer low‐temperature co‐fired ceramics . The thick film and thin‐film sensors on the glass are fragile and can easily be damaged during the measurement while providing a major advantage in less side electric field coupling . Fabricating the shielded probe on LTCC is simpler and the probe is more robust, but its spatial resolution is larger than that of the probes made by the thin‐film technic.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%