> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <

1

AbstractProbes used for contactless electromagnetic field
capture or injection are characterized. Depending on the probe
structure, they interact preferentially with the electric or
magnetic field. The optimal size of the probes for broad
frequency band measurements is investigated. However, it is
shown particularly for the magnetic field probe that
considerations about size as well as the structures presented in
this paper are not sufficient for a good discrimination between
electric and magnetic fields. Then space resolution of near-field
measurements is discussed, with application to field capture of a
microstrip line under operation.

Index TermsProbe antennas, Electromagnetic analysis,
Electric Field, Magnetic Field, Reflection, Simulation

I. INTRODUCTION
lectromagnetic analysis of electronic circuits have been
lately of great interest, as size reduction and increase in
operation frequency impact the radiation and
electromagnetic vulnerability. Attention has been paid to
possible probes for contactless electromagnetic compatibility
(EMC) or circuit susceptibility measurements
[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. The goal of this paper is to
propose mainly experimental characterizations of very simple
probes. These characterizations should permit to perform the
most reliable measurements with home-made apparatus. A
brief presentation of the test bench and probes is done in
section II and III. In section IV the electric field probe is
characterised versus geometry, filed discrimination and spatial
resolution. Section V is devoted to the characterisation of the
magnetic field probe. Conclusion is given in section VI.
II. TEST BENCH AND PURPOSE OF THE EXPERIENCES
For the purpose of electromagnetic (EM) studies of active
electronic devices, a test bench has been developed around the
coupling phenomenon of near field waves with electronic
circuits. This bench allows a two way analysis. First the
mapping of near-EM fields issued from circuits under normal
operation can be performed. Second, for the purpose of

Manuscript received July, 2008.
S. Jarrix, T. Dubois, R. Adam, P. Nouvel and D. Gasquet are with the
Institut d'Electronique du Sud, cc. 084, UMR CNRS UM2 5214, Universit
Montpellier 2, Place E. Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier cedex 5, France (phone:
33-4-67-14-38-85, fax: 33-4-67-14-37-18; e-mail: sylvie.jarrix@ies.univ-
montp2.fr).
B. Azas is with the Dlgation Gnrale de l'Armement, Centre d'Etudes
de Gramat, 46500 Gramat (e-mail: bruno.azais@dga.defense.gouv.fr).
susceptibility measurements, the bench permits the injection
of an electromagnetic interference in a chosen near field zone
(EMI). The details of this test bench are given in [10]. The
EM near field is captured from or injected towards the device
under test (DUT) without contact, by means of a probe.
Therefore the probes are the crucial elements around which
the test bench is conceived. They need to be carefully
characterized. This paper focuses on experimental
characterizations of simple hand-made probes, without
considering any calibration or compensation. The aim is to
choose the best possible probe for quick measurements in a
first-step process of circuit analysis. Though these kinds of
probes are not necessarily the best for all electromagnetic
device analysis, they permit quick pre-studies of circuits.
III. PROBE AND MICROSTRIP LINE GEOMETRIES
The probes are based on coaxial cables (Fig. 1(a), Fig. 1 (b)
and Fig. 1 (c)) comprising an inner conductor made of copper-
plated silver (cable S) or gold (cable G). The outer diameter of
the cables is
ext
= 2,2 mm. The diameter of the inner
conductor is:
intS
= 500 m for cable S and
intG
= 50 m for
cable G. For interacting with the z-component of the electric
field, the inner conductor can protrude on a length L, as
shown in Fig. 1(a) or the cable can be cut straight Fig. 1(b).
To interact with the z-component of the magnetic field the
inner conductor is bent into a loop [11][12] as seen in
Fig. 1(c). A small straight length d' is necessary before the
bending of the loop. After the loop it continues straight
forward on a length d''. The portion of conductor d'' is
grounded back onto the outer conductor. In the following
sections we will refer to the diameter of the loop as
loop
and
total length d = d' + d'' +
loop
.

(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 1 : Probes: (a): Electric-field probe with inner conductor protruding on a
length L; (b) Electric-field probe with inner conductor L = 0. (c) Magnetic
field probe grounded on the outer conductor.
All probes have been characterized via a network analyzer in
the 40 MHz to 20 GHz and by means of simulations with a 3-
D commercial EM simulator Computer Simulation
Technology Microwave Studio (CST MWS). Some studies
were led with the probe in an emitting configuration.
However, the probe being passive, its behavior should be the
same in the capturing configuration by means of reciprocity.
Probe Characterization for Electromagnetic
Near - Field Studies
S. Jarrix
1
, T. Dubois
1
, R. Adam
1
, P. Nouvel
1
, B. Azas
2
, D. Gasquet
1

E
y
z
x
d

loop
d
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <

2
Studies were conducted using interactions with a microstrip
line 50 matched for f = 10 GHz frequency. The substrate of
the line has an effective dielectric parameter
r
= 2,5 and
thickness t = 1,693 mm; metallization width is w = 5 mm.
IV. ELECTRIC FIELD PROBE CHARACTERIZATION
The test-bench is meant for passive and active device
characterizations. When an active device is analysed, the non-
linear behaviour of this device under test may lead to a signal
comprising many harmonics. The output signal may comprise
numerous different frequencies. Hence we do not want to
favor a particular frequency. For the purpose of EM studies, it
would be best to have broadband probes in order not to
enhance a particular frequency.
A. Characterization by means of S parameters
The probe is connected to one entry of a vector network
analyzer (VNA). The amplitude of the reflection coefficient
S11 of probes with different lengths L is measured and
simulated Examples are given in Fig. 2 and in [10]. Resonance
peaks are achieved when L approaches a /4 value.
Frequency (GHz)
0 5 10 15 20
I
S
1
1
I

(
d
B
)
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
6.15mm
4.3mm
2mm
0mm

Fig. 2 : |S11| vs frequency measured for the electric-field probe G with various
lengths L.
Because we want a broad-band probe, the peaks seen on |S11|
are usually impeding. For L 3mm, |S11| is above -10dB on
the whole frequency band. It can be considered that L = 3mm
is the maximum value to be used for future applications. For
susceptibility studies the injection of an EM aggression is
done through probes. The line is matched on both ends. The
probe is connected to one entry of the VNA. One end of the
line is connected to the other entry of the VNA, the other end
of the line being connected to a 50 load. The distance
between the probe and the microstrip line is 1mm. The
amplitude of the transmission coefficient S21 between probe
and line is measured in Fig. 3.
Frequency (GHz)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
I
S
2
1
I

(
d
B
)
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
Ez 0mm
Ez 3mm

Fig. 3 : |S21| vs frequency measured for the electric-field probe G with various
lengths L.
One can see that |S21| is better for probe with L = 3mm.
Hence it is best for field mappings to keep L = 0, but for EMI,
a probe with L = 3 mm is a good compromise between
broadband characteristics and enough transmission capability.

B. Electric and magnetic field discrimination
One has to be sure that the probe dedicated to a particular type
of field interacts specifically with it. Hence simulations of the
electric field E
r
and magnetic field H
r
emitted from a distance
h at the tip of the probe are undergone. Quantities | E
r
| and | H
r
|
are related to the magnitude of the whole fields emitted by the
probes.
For the electric-field probes, it was shown elsewhere [10] that
the | E
r
|/| H
r
| ratio is higher than the value of the vacuum
impedance Z
0
= 377 for frequencies up to 20 GHz. This
confirms good overall field discrimination over a broad
frequency band.
C. Spatial resolution
Two aspects must be considered concerning the spatial
resolution of probes. First the smaller the probe is, the better
the resolution should be, because it can interact with smaller
objects. However, if the probe, though as small as wanted, is
not in the vicinity of the object, the resolution will not be
optimal. The maximum distance h between probe and DUT of
size should be kept such as [13]:
h << /2 (eq.1)
These two constraints must therefore be kept in mind.
Studies were conducted with the help of the microstrip line
[14][15]. The line was excited at one end by a sinusoidal
signal and left open-circuited at the end of the y axis.
Mappings of the electric field were undergone for probes with
L = 0 mm and L = 3 mm (cf. Fig. 4 (a) and 4 (b) respectively).
Eua is the voltage normalized to its maximum and associated
with the variation of the measured Ez component. Height h of
the probe is kept to h = 0,5 mm so as to be in the near-field
zone.
y axis (mm)
10 20 30 40 50 60
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
10
20
30
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Eua
y axis (mm)
10 20 30 40 50 60
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
10
20
30
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Eua

(a) (b)
Fig. 4 : Mapping of the normalized voltage Eua associated to |E
z
| with probe S
at h = 0.5 mm for microstrip line at f = 10 GHz (a) L = 0 mm, (b) L = 3 mm.
The line being open-circuited, standing waves establish
themselves. This is put in evidence with the presence of
maxima and minima along the y axis. However it is obvious
that different phenomena occur depending on the probe
geometry. For L = 0 for example the first maximum on the
right is split in two. This is not the case for probe with
L = 3 mm, but in return there seems to be a small maximum in
the middle of the line. Fig. 5 (a) and Fig. 5 (b) show the
mappings on a 3-D scale. The line is left open-ended, the
other input is fed by the excitation signal, the probe scans the
line and results are measured on the spectrum analyzer
connected to the probe. Fig. 6 shows the simulation of the IE
z
I
component of the field emitted by the microstrip line along the
y axis. In this case the probe doesnt interfere. The magnitude
has been normalized with respect to its own maximum.
x
y
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <

3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5
10
15
20
25
E
u
a
y axis (m
m
)
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5
10
15
20
25
E
u
a
y axis (m
m
)
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)

(a) (b)
Fig 5: 3-D Mapping of the normalized voltage Eua associated to |E
z
| with
probe S at h = 0.5 mm for microstrip line at f = 10 GHz, (a) L = 0 mm, (b)
L = 3 mm.
It is clear in Fig. 5 (a) that for L = 0 field maxima and minima
follow the simulation pattern shown in Fig. 6. This is not the
case for Fig. 5 (b).
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
60 50 40 30 20 10 0
I
E
z
I
y axis (mm)

Fig. 6 : Simulated 2D mapping of |E
z
| emitted by the microstrip at f = 10 GH.
For a further analysis a schematic of the field maximum along
the x axis is drawn in Fig. 7. The amplitudes of the field are
normalized with respect to the maximum value of the curve at
h = 0.2 mm.
x axis (mm)
0 5 10 15 20
E
u
a
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0 h=0.2mm
h=0.5mm
h=1mm
x axis (mm)
0 5 10 15 20
E
u
a
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0 h=0.2mm
h=0.5mm
h=1mm

(a) (b)
Fig. 7: Maximum Eua vs x axis for probe S placed at various heights h with in
the vicinity of microstrip line at f = 10 GHz. (a) L = 0 mm and (b) L = 3 mm
For probes with L = 0, the notch in the maximum is more
pronounced as the probe is close to the line. For L = 3 mm,
whatever height h, no such phenomenon is measured.
Simulations of the z component of the electric field that can be
captured in the near-field zone of a microstrip line in
operation are undertaken to serve as a reference for
comparisons.

x axis (mm)
0 5 10 15 20
I
E
z
I

m
a
x
i
m
u
m

n
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
Probe G; L = 0
Probe S; L = 0
Si mulation
x axis (mm)
4 6 8 10 12 14 16
I
E
z
I

m
a
x
i
m
u
m

n
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
With probe
Without probe

(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 8 : (a) Comparison of the measured Eua and simulated Ez component
along the x axis for probe S and G with L = 0 mm at f = 10 GHz. (b) Scheme
of the simulation procedure in the presence of the probe. (c) Comparison of
the simulation of the Ez component emitted by the micro-strip line in
presence or absence of the probe.
In Fig. 8 (a) the simulated shape of E
z
emitted by the line
shows a notch in the field maximum. Measurement results of
Fig. 7(a) approach simulation results of Fig. 8 (a). However,
probes G and S with L = 0 modify the field lines, because
even if the shape of E
z
is identical for both probes and
simulation, a difference in the amplitude of the notch is
observed. Several conclusions can be drawn here. These
results confirm the fact of section IV.A about mappings to be
done preferentially with a non-protruding inner conductor
probe. With this condition in mind, the closer the probe is, the
better the resolution of near-field mappings is. A trend is seen
in which probe G gives results for the secondary lobes more in
agreement with those obtained by simulation than probe S
does. However it is not in any case the unique criteria to say
that one probe is better than the other.
The effect of the probe on the field emitted from the
microstrip line is studied by simulation. Fig. 8 (b) shows how
such simulations are performed. The probe is above the line at
a distance h = 200 m and the E
z
component is measured
right under the probe. The probe is then moved to the next
point of simulation. In Fig. 8 (c), the E
z
component
obtained this way is shown when the probe is present or not.
Considering the main lobe, the difference in shape of the two
curves is similar to the difference between the experimental
Eua associated to the E
z
component and the simulated
E
z
component in Fig. 8 (a).
To put more in evidence the influence of geometry, four
probes are characterized by simulations: one gold probe G,
and three copper-plated silver probes noted S, A and B. All
have L = 0. External and internal diameters of the cables are
given in Table 1.
Probe G Probe S Probe A Probe B

ext
(mm) 2,2 2,2 1,1 0,22

int
(m) 50 500 250 50
Table 1 : External and internal diameters of the cables used in simulation
The z-component of the electric field emitted at f =10 GHz by
the probes is simulated for different distances h from the tip of
the probe, as indicated in Fig. 9.

Fig. 9: Distance at which the field is considered.
Results for E
z
are presented for amplitudes normalized
with respect to their maximum in Fig. 10.
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
I
E
z
I
x axis (cm
)
h

(
m
m
)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
I
E
z
I
x axis (cm
)
h

(
m
m
)

(a) (b)
Excitation
point
of
measurement
Probe
h
x axis
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <

4
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
I
E
z
I
x axis (cm
)
h

(
m
m
)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
I
E
z
I
x axis (cm
)
h

(
m
m
)

(c) (d)
Fig. 10: Normalized IE
z
I versus distance h and distance x (a) for probe G, (b)
for probe S, (c) for probe A, (d) for probe B.
If we compare for h < 0,5 mm Fig. 10 (a) and Fig. 10 (b) i.e.
probes G and S with the same outer conductor diameter and
different inner conductor diameters, the smallest probe shows
the thinnest |E
z
| primary lobe. The overall amplitude
comprising primary and secondary lobes are spread on the
same length x. In the same way, if we compare Fig. 10 (a) and
Fig. 10 (d), i.e. probes G and B with the same inner conductor
diameter and different outer conductor diameters, E
z
with
primary and secondary lobes less spread for the smaller probe.
Between S and A (Fig. 10 (b) and Fig. 10 (c)), all geometries
have been divided by two, lobes are less spread and primary
lobe is thinner for the smallest probe. In all cases, the
amplitude comprising principle and secondary lobes is
concentrated on a length x equal to the diameter of the outer
conductor. For distances h above 1 mm the primary lobes are
nearly the same for all probes. In Fig. 11 the amplitudes of
E
z
at mid-height taken from Fig. 10 are reported versus h
for all probes.
h (mm)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

a
t

h
a
l
f

h
e
i
g
h
t

(
m
m
)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Probe S, L = 0mm
Probe G
Probe A
Probe B
Probe S, L = 3mm

Fig. 11: Normalized IE
z
I at mid height for different probes versus h.
For probes with L = 0 we observe that amplitudes tend toward
the same value when h increases. For probe with L = 3mm
values in the not-so-near zone quickly diverge. This goes in
the sense of what is observed between Fig. 4 (a) and Fig. 4 (b)
or between Fig. 5 (a) and Fig. 5 (b). Once again all these
results confirm that probes must be kept in the vicinity of the
DUT, and shows that both inner and outer conductors play a
role in the spatial resolution.
For a more in-depth analysis one should perhaps study the
current displacements on the probe. This is far from simple
and should be the subject of another thorough analysis.
V. MAGNETIC FIELD PROBE CHARACTERIZATION
The same type of study process has been conducted for the
magnetic field probe.
A. Characterization by means of |S11|
The reflection coefficient is measured and simulated for the
magnetic field loop. In this case peaks appear if the total
active length d approaches /2. An example is given in Fig. 12
for a f = 10 GHz matched probe.
Frequency (GHz)
0 5 10 15 20
I
S
1
1
I

(
d
B
)
-12.5
-10.0
-7.5
-5.0
-2.5
0.0

Fig. 12: measured |S11| vs frequency for the magnetic-field probe MA
matched for f = 10 GHz.
For broad-band measurements in the 40 MHz 20 GHz
frequency band a loop matched for 30 GHz was first chosen
[16]. This probe noted MB has a loop diameter of

loopMB
= 2,5 mm. The probe matched for 10 GHz will be
noted MA. Its diameter is
loopMA
= 5 mm.
B. Electric and Magnetic field discrimination
The | E
r
|/| H
r
| ratio issued from the simulation of the amplitude
of the whole electric and magnetic fields emitted by the probe
is again considered. For the magnetic probe the | E
r
|/| H
r
| ratio
should be lower than Z
0
. Such ratios are given in Fig. 13 and
Fig. 14 for probe MA and MB respectively. Distance h is the
distance between the center of the loop and the point of
measurement, as shown in Fig. 9.
h (cm)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
I
E
I

/

I
H
I

(

)
0
100
200
300
400
500
1GHz
5GHz
7GHz
10GHz
11GHz
13GHz
15GHz
Z
0

Fig. 13: | E
r
|/| H
r
| ratio vs distance h and comparison with Z
0
for the magnetic-
field probe MA.
h (cm)
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4
I
E
I

/

I
H
I

(

)
0
200
400
600
800
f = 1GHz
f = 5GHz
f = 25GHz
f = 33GHz
f = 50GHz
Z
0

Fig. 14 : |
E
r
|/|
H
r
| ratio vs distance h and comparison with Z0 for the magnetic-
field probe MB.
For the lower frequencies up to 1 GHz the | E
r
|/| H
r
| ratio is
smaller than Z
0
values, hence the magnetic field is
predominant, and this is true for all h distances considered.
For frequencies in the 1 GHz 5 GHz, in the near zone where
h < 0,2 cm, the ratio is correct because value are far under Z
0
.
By keeping in the near-field zone appropriate to the matching
frequency, the | E
r
|/| H
r
| ratio is also correct. In conclusion, the
ratio is correct for frequencies under 1 GHz, for frequencies
around the matching frequency, for a small frequency band up
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <

5
to 5 GHz in the vicinity of the probe. Outside these zones the
electric field will have a non-negligible influence.
Mappings of the magnetic z-component are performed. The
line is excited by a sinusoidal signal and left open-circuited. In
Fig. 15 the line is excited at 10 GHz. Mapping is performed
with probe MA. In Fig. 16 mappings are performed with
probe MB for a line excited for two different frequencies.
y axis (mm)
10 20 30 40 50
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
5
10
15
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0 Eua

Fig. 15: Mapping of the normalized voltage Eua associated to |Hz| of a
microstrip line with probe MA at h = 0.5 mm at f = 10 GHz.
y axis (mm)
10 20 30 40 50 60
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
5
10
15
0.6
0.8
1.0 Eua
y axis (mm)
10 20 30 40 50 60
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
5
10
15
0.6
0.8
1.0
Eua

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 16 : Mapping of the normalized voltage Eua associated to |Hz| of a
microstrip line (a) by simulation of the emitted field and by experimental
capture of the field with probe MB at h = 0.5 mm (b) for f = 4 GHz, (c) for
f = 6 GHz.
Fig. 16 (a) shows the H
z
component emitted from the line.
The field is simulated emitted from the line alone, hence it is
really representative of the field. Maxima and minima are
perfectly symmetric with respect to the middle of the line.
Fig. 16 (b) shows the H
z
component of captured from the
microstrip line excited at 4 GHz. A dissymmetry between the
maxima on each side of the line can be seen. The major
distortions seen in Fig. 16 (c) come from the electric field
components. Therefore probes should be used around their
matching frequency.
The dissymmetry in Fig. 16 (b) can be caused by two
parameters. Firstly, the probe is handmade and the main loop
is not perfectly parallel to the line. Secondly, the probe is
composed of a main loop in the Oxy plane and a secondary
loop in the Oxz plane. This secondary loop brings a H
y
and a
H
x
component in the measurement results. In Fig. 17 the x, y,
z components of the magnetic field emitted by the probe MB
are simulated along two lines in the plan of the main loop. The
fields are sketched for h = 0.5mm from the loop.

positon on line (cm)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
H

f
i
e
l
d

(
A
/
m
)
0
10
20
30
40
Hx
Hy
Hz

Position on line (cm)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
H

f
i
e
l
d

(
A
/
m
)
0
10
20
30
40
Hx
Hy
Hz

Fig. 17 : H
x
, H
y
, H
z
components emitted by the probe MB, simulated at
f = 4 GHz for different orientations of the probe.
Whatever the probe orientation, H
z
has an amplitude larger
than the other components. So even with the double loop
structure, the Hz component is preferentially measured. A
strong dissymmetry can be seen on H
x
and H
y,
depending on
the placement of the probe.
The test bench can to be used for frequencies over 4 GHz. As
seen previously, only a matched probe can operate for correct
results. However, even for a frequency of 10 GHz for
example, the loop diameter must be
loop
5 mm. This value is
rather large compared to the line width. Hence a discussion
will be given further in order to find a compromise between
matching and spatial resolution on a simple-geometry coaxial
probe.

C. Spatial resolution
As shown above matched magnetic probes might present not
so good spatial resolutions. A possible concept is to consider
high impedance probes. Instead of grounding the loop back on
the outer conductor, it is left open-circuited, as shown in
Fig. 18.

Fig. 18: Structure of the high-impedance probe.
Length d is such that the magnetic maximum is localized only
on the loop itself. For this the perimeter of the loop must be
such that
loop
= /4 and d'' = /8. This can be seen in
Fig. 19 were the field along an open-circuited line is sketched.

Fig. 19 : Functionality of the high-impedance probe.
A probe was first calculated for a f = 10 GHz operation, hence

loop
= 2,3mm and d = 3.6mm. A considerable decrease in
geometry is thus achieved if compared with the other probes
studied in this paper.
This probe was first characterised by its reflection coefficient,
such as presented in Fig. 20.
Frequency (GHz)
0 5 10 15 20
I
S
1
1
I

(
d
B
)
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
Measurement
Simulation

Fig. 20 : Measured and simulated |S11| versus frequency for the high-
impedance probe.
Values of |S11| vary between 0 and -3 dB. Therefore the probe
can be considered broad-band on the frequency band of

loop

d
Emitted
H field
Emitted
E field
Emitted
E field

loop
d
x
y
x
y
x
y
x
y
> REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR PAPER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DOUBLE-CLICK HERE TO EDIT) <

6
interest. The | E
r
|/| H
r
| ratio of fields emitted from the probe is
reported in Fig. 21.
h (cm)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
I
E
I
/
I
H
I

(

)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1GHz
3GHz
5GHz
7GHz
10GHz
15GHz
Z
0

Fig. 21: |
E
r
|/|
H
r
| ratio vs distance h and comparison with Z
0
for the magnetic-
field high-impedance probe.
Though the probe was thought to be broad-band, it shows
however a poor discrimination of fields in the low-frequency
band, in contrast for example for the grounded probe matched
for f =10 GHz. Again it will be used around the frequency of
matching.
Mappings were then performed with this high-impedance
probe on the microstrip line as shown in Fig. 22. Again the
line is left open-ended at the end of the y-axis.
y axis (mm)
10 20 30 40 50
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
5
10
15
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Eua

y axis (mm)
10 20 30 40 50
x

a
x
i
s

(
m
m
)
5
10
15
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0 Eua

(a) (b)
Fig. 22: Mapping of the normalized voltage Eua associated to |Hz| with the
high-impedance probe S at h = 0.5 mm for a microstrip line at f = 10 GHz, (a)
d = 3.6mm and (b) d = 7 mm.
Between Fig. 22 (a) and Fig. 22 (b), the spatial resolution is
better for the smallest probe, that is with for a length
d=3,6mm. A comparison between Fig. 22 (a) and Fig. 15
highlights the fact that maxima are better defined and less
spread for mappings with the open-ended probe. Hence its
resolution is better.

VI. CONCLUSION
Simple coaxial-cable based probes are under investigation.
Their purpose is double: to measure the electromagnetic field
in the near-field zone of passive and active devices or to inject
an electromagnetic interference. Their structure is such that
they interact preferentially with the z-component of the
electric or magnetic field. Network analyzer measurements of
the reflection coefficient allow choosing the appropriate size
for broad frequency band applications. Hence for the electric
field probe, no protruding inner conductor is required. For
these probes the electric to magnetic field discrimination is
shown to be correct. For a proper resolution of electric fields
emitted by devices, simulations of the shape of the field are
compared to measurements obtained for different electric field
probes of various geometries and placed at different heights.
Both probe size and probe-device distance must be taken into
account. They must be as small as possible. The same
investigations are then led on the magnetic probe. Simulations
of the electric to magnetic field amplitude ratio show that the
discrimination is not sufficient for correct magnetic field
mappings. A particular high-impedance magnetic probe is then
proposed. Field mappings of a line show that the resolution is
indeed increased with the latter geometry. However this kind
of probe is matched for a particular frequency and moreover
doesnt operate for frequencies under a few GHz. Indeed it has
a poor electric to magnetic field discrimination for low
frequencies. Altogether these analyses should help one to
choose the appropriate size and geometry of simple hand-made
coaxial probes for electromagnetic measurements.
REFERENCES
[1] Y. Gao, I. Wolff, "A new miniature magnetic field probe for measuring
3-dimensional fields in planar high frequency circuits", IEEE Trans.
Microwave Theory Tech, vol. 44 n6, pp. 911-918, June 1996.
[2] Y. Gao, I. Wolff, Miniature electric near-field probes for measuring 3-
D fields in planar microwave circuits, IEEE Trans. Microwave Tech., vol.46,
n7, pp. 907 913, July 1998.
[3] S. Osofsky, S. E. Schwarz, "Design and performance of a non-
contacting probe for measurements on high-frequency planar circuits", IEEE
Trans. Microwave Theory Tech., vol. 40, n 8, pp. 1701-1708, Aug. 1992.
[4] B. Yordanov, K. Doughty, R. Yordanov, Near-field probes for EMC
applications, EMC test and design, pp; 18-26, May 1994.
[5] A. Tankielun, U. Keller, E. Sicard, P. Kralicek, B. Vrignon,
Electromagnetic near-field scanning for microelectronic test chip
investigation, IEEE EMC Society Newsletter, pp. 68 72, Oct. 2006.
[6] H. Whiteside, R.W.P. King, The loop antenna as a probe, IEEE
Trans. Antennas and Propagat., vol. 12, pp. 291-297, may 1964.
[7] D. Baudry, A. Louis, B. Mazari, "Characterization of the open-ended
coaxial probe used for near-field measurements in EMC applications",
Progress in Electromagnetics Research PIER60, p311-333, 2006.
[8] T. P. Budka, S. D. Wavlawik, G. M. Rebeiz, A coaxial 0,5 18 GHz
near electric field measurement system for planar microwave circuits using
integrated probes, IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech, vol. 44, n12, 1996
[9] J. Shi, M. A. Cracraft, K. P. Slattery, M. Yamaguchi, R. E. DuBroff,
Calibration and compensation of near-field scan measurements, IEEE
Trans. on Electromagnetic Compatibility, vol. 47, n 3, pp. 642-650, 2005.
[10] T. Dubois, S. Jarrix, A. Penarier, P. Nouvel, D. Gasquet, L. Chusseau,
B. Azas, Near-field electromagnetic characterization and perturbation of
logic circuits, IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement, vol.57, n11, p.2398,
2008.
[11] D. C. Smith, Signal and noise measurement techniques using magnetic
field probes, EMC Symposium proceedings, pp. 559-563, 1999.
[12] C. F. M. Carobbi, L. M. Millanta, L. Chiosi, The high-frequency
behavior of the shield in the magnetic-field probes, IEEE International
Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility, vol. 1, pp.35 40, 2000.
[13] D. Van Labeke, Microscopie optique en champ proche, Techniques
de lIngnieur, chapter 862.
[14] Y. Gao, A. Lauer, Q. Ren, I. Wolff, Calibration of electric near-field
probes and application, IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech., vol. 46, n11,
1998.
[15] J. S. Dahele, A. L. Culle, "Electric probe measurements on microstrip",
IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech., vol. MTT-28, n7, pp. 463-467, Apr.
1986.
[16] T. Dubois, S. Jarrix, A. Penarier, P. Nouvel, D. Gasquet, L. Chusseau,
"Near-field electromagnetic characterization and perturbation of logic gates,"
in Proc. ICONIC, Saint Louis, June 2007.
x
y