The Failure of Coaxial TEM Cells ASTM Standards Methods
In H.F. Range
Mihai Badic
HV/EMC Laboratory, Research Institute for Electrical
Engineering - ICPE
Bucharest, ROMANIA
mbadic@icpe.ro
Abstract
The paper deals with one of the most used and reliable
ways to characterize the shielding capability of materi-
als, based on the Schelkunoff isomorphism. This method
uses the physical-mathematical equivalence of equa-
tions describing SEdB in the case of infinite plane shield,
respectively in the case of material sample introduced in
the measuring coaxial TEM cell (IAdB), and it resulted
into the ASTM standards ES7-83 and D4935-89. The
paper shows that these standards (and Schelkunoff iso-
morphism) are not valid for electrically thick samples;
there is no identity between shielding effectiveness and
insertion attenuation/insertion loss in H.F. range.
Keywords
Shielding effectiveness, TEM cells, measuring standards.
INTRODUCTION
The goal of SEdB measurements - using coaxial TEM cells
or other methods - is the evaluation of shielding capability
of materials (homogeneous, composite, multilayer) in the
ideal case of infinite plane shield placed in free space il-
luminated by a plane electromagnetic wave. The theory of
Schelkunoff and the isomorphism between this case and
the one of the coaxial line was accurately demonstrated
[1], [2] for the configuration mentioned in ASTM ES7-83.
In certain situations, as shown in [3], [4], ASTM D4935-89
may be reduced to the one mentioned before. Results that
if isomorphism withstands to a theoretical analysis taking
into account all phenomena, the experimental method is
validated, at least theoretically, for both standards.
The paper demonstrates theoretical and experimental that
this is not possible: Schelkunoff isomorphism is affected
by a basic error that limits its applicability just in the area
of maximum interest: electrically thick samples, meaning
the H.F. range.
ANALYTIC BACKGROUND
As it is known, by performing two successive measure-
ments, one is able to determine:
U 1 T ref
IAdB = ≡ ≅ SE dB (1)
U 2 T load
Mihai-Jo Marinescu
HV/EMC Laboratory, Research Institute for Electrical
Engineering - ICPE
Bucharest, ROMANIA
mjm@icpe.ro
The two measurements are similar in the case of the two
standards mentioned above (being identical for surface
conducting materials), as follows:
- for ASTM ES7-83: U1 is the voltage measured at the out-
put of the cell without material sample and U2 is the volt-
age measured at the output of the cell with material sam-
ple.
- for ASTM D4935-89: Tref is the transmission coeffi-
cient when the reference sample is mounted inside the
TEM cell Tload is the transmission coefficient measured
with the load sample.
These measurements allow determining IAdB≅SEdB and the
comparison of the data with the theoretical curves plotted
according to:
(Z 0 +Z m )2
SE dB= 20 log10 + 20 log10 eád +
4Z0 Z m
2
Z - 
+ 20 log10 1- m Z 0  e- 2 ãd = R dB + AdB + B dB (2)
 Z m+ Z 0 
where RdB=reflection loss, AdB=absorption loss, BdB=re-
reflection correction, Z0=free space wave impedance,
Zm=wave impedance of material, γ=α+jβ=propagation
constant and d=shield thickness [5].
In order to obtain accurate results (errors less
then 2%) some technical conditions must be fulfilled:
• 50 Ω impedance matching for all devices (source,
TEM cell, receiver, cables, a/o.);
• measurement preformed below the limit frequency of
TEM cell (usually 1-1.5GHz);
• good contact between the sample and the cell.
The last condition, the most difficult to fulfil, was avoided
by applying ASTM D4935-89 standard (flanged version
developed by NBS). This holder uses flanges, rather then
continuous conductors, thus avoiding the influence of
contact resistance. Moreover, this standard allows the
measurement of surface insulated materials and multi-
layer shields.
If the plot of equation (2) in Fig.1 is considered, it may be
easily observed that there are two distinct areas: area A -
the flat part of the curve corresponding to electrically thin
samples (d<<δ), respectively area B - the fast rising part
of the curve corresponding to electrically thick samples
(d>>δ).
SEdB ≡ IAdB [dB]
where E1, E2 represent electric field in the absence of the
infinite plane shield in free space respectively in its pres-
ence, and H1 and H2 the same for magnetic field. Subscript
c refers to application of Z and γ equations to the trans-
mission line with dielectric, respectively with washer
shaped sample on a length equal to the shield thickness d.

AREA B Zm
γm
E1 E2
AREA A H1 H2
a)
Z0 , γ

d << δ d >> δ U1 U2

b
IN OUT
a
Frequency
Figure 1. Area A-verification of test equipment; Z 0c , γ d Zmc
Area B-verification of Schelkunoff isomorphism. γc b)

Measurements in Area A check the technical conditions Figure 2. Measuring method of ASTM ES7-83 based on
already mentioned. For most of the materials the curves Schelkunoff isomorphism: a) infinite plane shield in free
are flat in this area, being described by the approximate space; b) TEM cell with and without sample.
equation (characteristic to electrically thin samples,
d<<δ):
Z 0σd
SE dB ≅ 20 log 10 ; SE dB = F (σ , d ) (3) It is easy to demonstrate that γ ≡ γc, and the shape factor
2 (1/2π)ln(b/a) is reduced in expression (2) so that SEdB ≡
Conductivity σ may be easily measured using classical IAdB.
methods, (3) becoming calibration method for any TEM In [5], [6] is shown that for electrically thin samples (d<<δ
measuring coaxial cell [10]. On another hand, measure- ⇔ low frequency) with µr≅1 equation (2) becomes:
ments in Area B give information on behavior of mate-
A) THIN SAMPLE - P ROPAGATION INSIDE CELL (l ≅ λ0)
rials exposed to high frequency. This is the most im-
 
IAdB = 20 log  e d δ ⋅ 0 ⋅ (1 − e −2γ d ) ≅
portant area for experiments (usually the curve has a rap- Z
idly increasing shape). The main problem is that there
are no published results showing a good match be-  4Zm 
tween theory and measurements, in this area, using the  d  Z 
≅ 20 log 1 +  ⋅ 0 ⋅ 2γ d  ≅
 δ  4 Z m
methods promoted by the already mentioned standards.

This indicates a basic error regarding the validity of
Z γd Zσd Z
Schelkunoff isomorphism, the subject of this paper. ≅ 20 log 0 = 20 log 0 = 20 log 0 (5)
For ASTM ES7-83 equations (1) and (2) are valid, as well 2Zm 2 2 Rsq
as configuration in Fig.2. B) THIN SAMPLE - NO PROPAGATION INSIDE CELL (l << λ0)
For this configuration, the following relations express
 Z σd   Z0 
 = 20 log1 + 
isomorphism:
IAdB ≅ 20 log1 + 0 (6)
U1 ⇔ E1 ⇔ H1  2  2 R 
 sq 
U2 ⇔ E2 ⇔ H2 where l represents the total length of the measuring line
Z0 ⇔ Z0c (including cell), σ is material conductivity and Rsq is
Zm ⇔ Zmc (4) square resistance [7], meaning the resistance on a material
square having thickness d.
γ ⇔ γc
It may be observed that if we write the above equations as
SEdB ≡ IAdB function of characteristic impedance of line/cell, results
Z0 ≅ 377Ω; Z0c = 50Ω for the two cases:
 Z 0c According to this equivalent network (Fig.4), results:
IAdB ≅ 20 log (7)
2Z L  A
IAdB = 20 log 1 +  (9)
respectively  2 B
 Z  Z C (Z C + Z K ) + Z C (R + ZC )
IAdB ≅ 20 log 1 + 0c  (8) A = Z 0c + 2 R (10)
 2Z L  (ZC + Z K + R)2 − Z K2
where ZL is purely resistive impedance of the washer/disk R2 ZK
B = ZL + 2 (11)
shaped sample introduced in the measuring cell. R 2 + 2RZ K
For ASTM D 4935-89 is valid expression (1), but work-
ing equations are calculated with expressions characteris- Z 0c = 50Ω
tic to lumped constants circuits. The structure of measur- The above equations result from [3] for the case when
ing cell is shown in Fig.3, and the equivalent circuit is pre- contact resistance and capacitance in the equivalent net-
sented in Fig.4. work are equal towards transversal and longitudinal sym-
metry axis. If ZC are considered negligible, then A=Z0c. If
Annular shaped piece
also contact resistance are null (R=0), then equation (9)
becomes (6) because the shape factor in both expressions
(Z0c and ZL) is reduced in (8). So, it may be said, based on
the demonstrations accompanying the two ASTM, that in
the ideal (technically) case they offer the same solution. It
Disk
must be highlighted that this is valid for the case of elec-
a) trically thin samples (d<<δ) and cells without propagation
(l<<λ0). This observation is obvious because the working
equations are deduced based on a lumped constants circuit
Load
(Fig.4). ASTM D 4935-89 is not modeling the behavior
of electrically thick samples and there is no theoreti-
IN OUT
cal basis for region B of SEdB =F(ω ω ) in Fig.1.
On another hand, ASTM ES7-83 is modeling apparently
accurate the behavior of infinite plane shield in free space,
both in areas A and B, even if it involves difficulties in
d b) eliminating the influence of contact resistance. It may be
Figure 3.Measuring method in case of ASTM D4935-89: assumed that for certain materials with good surface con-
a) reference sample measurement;
ductivity (which may be checked by means of comple-
mentary methods) an identical characteristic or close to
b) load sample measurement.
the theoretical one (Fig.1) can be obtained. It will be
demonstrated further on that this is impossible both
ZC ZC in theory and practice.
ZK

R R INCONGRUITY OF METHODS
The maximum frequency condition of the TEM
Z0c ZL Z 0c cell, mentioned before, is deduced from the condition of
the lack of overmoding [8], [9]:
- for H11 (TE11) mode:
∼
π
R R λH 11 = (b + a ) ; λ ≥ λH 11 (12)
2
ZC ZK ZC - for E01 (TM01) mode:
λE 01 = (b − a ) ; λ ≥ λE 01 (13)
where b is the inner diameter of outer conductor and a is
Figure 4. Equivalent network for calculation of working the diameter of inner conductor. Conditions (12) and (13)
equations of a flanged coaxial transmission line holder
correspond, for usual dimensions of TEM cells, to the
(ASTM D4935-89).
values λH11≅20cm respectively λE01≅5cm. The most re-
strictive condition (12) leads to the maximum working
frequency (1.5GHz) mentioned before.
The basic error, giving the incongruity of the two meth-
ods, consists of neglecting the modification of wavelength
inside the conductor/semiconductor sample because of
conductivity σ, as it is shown in Fig.5. As consequence,
overmoding appears at much lower frequency then 1GHz.
λ<<λ0
Actually, the maximum frequency of using the
TEM cell for the sample's material is considerably higher
because there is another condition for the appearance of
higher modes (longitudinal fields), this being the propa-
gation condition inside the material sample having thick-
ness d:
1
f < (15)
π d 2σ µ 0
For this particular case considered, the two conditions are
fulfilled simultaneously at frequencies below 5.6MHz (for
d=3mm).
This phenomenon of waves with longitudinal fields that can
exist as higher modes in coaxial lines is presented in Fig.6.
The limit frequency depends on all macroscopic parame-
ters ε , µ , σ , but the most important is conductivity σ.

λ0/2 λ0/2
ε,µ,σ
d

Figure 5. The phenomenon of wavelength modification

when a far field electromagnetic radiation illuminates a
semiconductor shield with absorption.

Thus, supposing a material having a moderate conductivity

(5000Ω -1m-1, close to certain synthetic Graphite types),
results:
Table 1.Wavelength shift inside semiconductor sample
Frequency 1kHz 1MHz 100MHz 1GHz
Free space

λfree space = 300km 300m 3m 0.3m

λ0

λsample 1.4m 40mm 4mm 1.4mm

vf sample 1413m/s 54.7km/s 447km/s 1413
Material sample

km/s
critical
frequency ≅ 50kHz
for TEM
mode

a) b)
Data in Table 1 were calculated with the following equa- Figure 6. Higher modes in coaxial line:
tions (valid for conductors):
electric field magnetic field
ω f ; v0 c λ0 a)TE11 mode;b) TM01 mode.
v f = ≅ 3160 ≅ = (14)
β σ v sample v sample λsample
PRECISION AND ACCURACY After Schottky barrier breakdown (using a relatively high
Precision is linked to measuring errors leading to more or voltage), the flat part of characteristic has significantly
less reproducible measurements, while accuracy refers to increased (apparent σ increases). At higher frequency (107
systematic deviations due to basic or technical reasons. ÷ 108 Hz) IAdB is practically identical to the one obtained
In the case of the two standards brought into discussion, by calculation - equation (3) - using for σ the value deter-
both need to be analyzed. mined by the method of 4 points probe.
• ASTM ES7-83 150
IAdB [dB] :
PRECISION: very good for conductors and semicon-  teoretical
130
ductors when contact resistance is less important. °°° experimental

ACCURACY: very good for area A (d<<δ). 110

• ASTM D4935-89 90 72,7 dB; σ =4580

PRECISION: very good for any kind of sample (ho-
70
mogeneous, composite, multilayer), no matter of
contact resistance (such a reference measurement al- 50 d=5mm
lows one to cancel the effect of contact resistance f=2,2 MHz
30
between sample and metallic waveguide). f[KHz]
100 1000 10000 100000 1000000
ACCURACY: very good only for area A (d<<δ).
Figure 7. Insertion attenuation for Synthetic Graphite.
Experiments were performed for measuring IAdB=F(ω), on
different samples, having conductivity within the range 50
IAdB [dB] :
10Ω -1m-1 ÷ 106Ω -1m-1 and thickness of µm ÷ 5mm, with  teoretical
or without magnetic properties. None of these tests was 40
ο , × experimental
able to provide a shape similar to the one in Fig.1 - the
theoretical behavior of the infinite plane shield placed in
free space. Many other authors obtained this negative re- 30 34,3dB; σ=54
sult [10], [11], [12]. On another hand, it is always obtained
a correct value of IAdB≡SEdB in the region A (flat), demon- 20
strating that errors are not due to contact resistance. f=180 MHz
The accuracy of these results is checked by measuring
conductivity σ by means of complementary methods and 10

applying equation (3) to calculate IAdB. Also, from the way

of checking 50Ω impedance match for all devices (source, 0 f[kHz]
TEM cell, receiver, cables, a/o.) [12] is deduced that er- 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000
rors don't proceed either from an impedance mis-
Figure 8. IAdB for Si monocrystal p(B); same sample be-
match. Because tests were performed at frequency up to fore (x) and after (o) Schottky metal-semiconductor inter-
1GHz results that all technical conditions were fulfilled. face breakdown (d=5.1mm).
The only remaining cause of errors - analytically demon-
strated - is the appearance of higher modes inside the ma- 15
IAdB [dB] :
terial sample, because of severely reduced wavelength in  teoretical
conductive materials. ο , × experimental
The most significant tests are those performed on Syn-
thetic Graphite (Fig.7) and Si p(B) Monocrystal (Fig.8) 10 11,9dB; σ=4,2
respectively Polycrystal (Fig.9). Thus, Synthetic Graphite
has a moderate conductivity (103 ÷ 104 Ω -1m-1), leading to
appearance of region B starting from approximately
10MHz. Even so, experimental results do not match theo-
5
retical predictions, although in region A errors are of only
1% (Fig.7).
Experiments performed on Si p(B) and Si Polycrystal in-
tended to highlight how useful is the method in region A of
f[kHz]
shielding characteristic (relatively low frequency). It may 0
10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000
be observed a Schottky type phenomenon on the IAdB char-
acteristic, due to metal (Ag deposit) - semiconductor (Si). Figure 9. Same test for Si polycrystal (d=4.95mm).
CONCLUSIONS
In order to analyze the practical cases that occur in
shielding technique we must take into account a reference
model. This is the infinite plane shield in free space (ho-
mogeneous, composite or multilayer materials). For a
homogeneous material, the theoretical problem was solved
by Schelkunoff (1943) based on the wave impedance con-
cept and reflection and absorption phenomena. It is also
considered that inside conductors the plane wave con-
serves the TEM mode.
This theory undisputed up to present by anyone, shows that
the variation of SEdB versus frequency looks like Fig.1.
The fact that the shield is considered, initially, infinite, has
no special importance, because phenomena is conserved
also for a finite shield if it is illuminated by strait directive
patterns antennas, for example, with respect to the plane
waves (far field) condition.
The problem is that no experimental validation was ob-
tained up to present, except area A, where the most im-
portant phenomenon is reflection. The fact that in area B -
where absorption is decisive - there is no match between
theory end experiment leads to suspicion over the meas-
uring methods promoted by ASTM ES7-83 and ASTM
D4935-89, both based on the Schelkunoff isomorphism.
As consequence, this isomorphism must be re-analyzed
from theoretical point of view. It is the goal of this paper,
demonstrating both theoretical and experimental that these
methods are not valid in the H.F. range because of ne-
glecting a physical phenomenon: appearance of higher
modes in the coaxial line, phenomenon that does not
occur in the case of plane shield placed in free space
or in other cases met in practice. No theory may be
considered valid if is not experimentally checked. In order
to apply with good results the standards mentioned above
also in the H.F. range (area B of shielding characteristic),
should exist at least one sample made up by homogeneous
conductive material (for example Cu, Bismuth, etc.)
showing a IAdB=F(ω) characteristic identical/similar to the
theoretical one.
In conclusion, the paper demonstrates both theoretical and
experimental that the methods proposed by the two ASTM
standards discussed here are useful only in the electrically
thin samples area (having accuracy up to 1%), and result in
considerable errors in the thick samples area, for theo-
retical and not technical reasons, as considered up to
present. Measurements in this area should be avoided and
testing labs should propose new methods for determining
SEdB in d>>δ region.
REFERENCES
[1] Schelkunoff, S.A., Electromagnetic Waves, D. Van
Nostrand Company, Inc., (1943).
[2] Lauri Halme, "Screening Theory of Metallic Enclo-
sures", 1992 IEEE International Symposium on EMC,
Anaheim, California, USA, (1992).
[3] Wilson, P.F., Ma, M.T., A Study of Techniques for
Measuring The Electromagnetic Shielding Effec-
tiveness of Materials, NBS Technical Note 1095,
(1986).
[4] ASTM D4935-89, Standard Test Method for Meas-
uring the Electromagnetic Shielding Effectiveness of
Planar Materials (1989).
[5] White, D.R.J., Electromagnetic Shielding Materials
and Properties, Don White Consultants, Inc., (1980).
[6] Badic,M., Marinescu, M.-J., "On the Complete Theory
of Coaxial Tem Cells", Proceedings of 2000 IEEE
International Symposium On Electromagnetic Com-
patibility, Washington, DC, USA, (August 21-25,
2000).
[7] Nagao, H. a/o., "Approximation and Accuracy of
Shielding Effectiveness Calculated by Sheet Resistiv-
ity", Tokyo Institute of Technology.
[8] Harley, A.F., Microwave Engineering, Academic
Press, (1963).
[9] Neubauer, H., Huber, F.R., "Higher Modes in Coaxial
RF Lines", The Microwave Journal, (June 1969).
[10] Haitao,Y., Yming, L., "Calibration and Analysis of Co-
axial Holder for Measuring Shielding Effectiveness of
Materials", 1992 IEEE International Symposium on
EMC, Anaheim, California, USA, (1992).
[11] Sarto, Maria Sabrina, Di Michele, S., Leekerkamp, P.,
Thuis, H., "An Innovative Shielding Concept for EMI
Reduction", IEEE EMC Society Newsletter, Issue No.
190, (Summer 2001).
[12] Schwab, A., Benz, Th., Herold, J., "Messung der
Schirmdämpfung leitfähiger Kunststoffe - Eine neue
TEM-Meßzelle", Kongreß EMV in Karlsruhe, (13-15
März 1990).