Characterisation of electromagnetic
interference from LED
Fayu Wan✉, Huixia Cao, Sushen An, Chaochao Feng,
Guang Hu and Junxiang Ge
The electromagnetic interference (EMI) caused by alternating current
driven LEDs which are widely used as indicator lamps in power
strip is presented. The frequency-domain measurement results show
that the EMI will violate the MIL-461E/RE102 standard limit line in
the electromagnetic compatibility anechoic chamber. The time-
domain measurement results show that the breakdown of LEDs sud-
denly increase the current causing the interference. The colour light
of LED is determined by the energy bandgap of the semiconductor,
as they may influence the EMI level, red and yellow LEDs are
analysed.
Introduction: LEDs have many advantages over incandescent light
sources including lower-energy consumption, longer lifetime, and
smaller size [1]. One simple LED application is that it is used as indi-
cator lamp in power strip. The circuit diagram is shown in Fig. 1a, a
hundred kiloohm resistor is used in serial to limit the current. The
simple circuit works fine for decades. In electromagnetic compatibility
(EMC) anechoic chamber, as the place is pretty large, the power strips
are widely used for auxiliary equipment, the LED in the power strip is
reported to emit emission by technician and engineer. The interference
frequency band is around dozens MHz and the amplitude violates the
MIL-461E/RE102 requirement (18 dBu V/m in the frequency band)
on accredited EMC laboratory noise floor [2]. Some LED products
have been reported to emit noise, as most of the LEDs are driven by
the direct current (DC) and alternating current (AC)/DC converters are
thought to be the interference source, LEDs themselves would not
emit notable interference [3]. As the indicator lamp is in the power
strip, the LEDs are driven by AC, no AC/DC converters are used, and
the LEDs themselves emit interference. LED is a p–n junction diode,
which emits light when activated. The colour of the light is determined
by the energy bandgap of the semiconductor. As shown in Fig. 1a, at
negative half cycle, the reverse voltage will exceed the LED breakdown
voltage, and the reverse current is sufficiently limited by the large resis-
tor, the reverse-conducting LED will emit noise, and also Zener diode or
avalanche diode are used to generate RF noise utilising their avalanche
mode [1].
LISN
resistor
switch LED
L
LISN 220 V N
a
biconical antenna
DUT 1m
EMI
LNA receiver
1.2 m
0.8 m
b field (E–field) probe with an oscilloscope (MSO0904) is used to
Fig. 1 LED circuit diagram and emission test setup
a LED indicator circuit
b Radiated emission measurement setup
Though the reported interference magnitude (18 dBu V/m) is lower
than the outdoor noise level, it is still a serious problem in EMC
chamber. This Letter tries to characterise the electromagnetic interfer-
ence (EMI) from LED through experimental method.
Test setup and measurement result: To evaluate the interference of
LEDs, the standard RE102 measurement is conducted. In RE102
ELECTRONICS LETTERS 21st January 2016 Vol. 52 No. 2 pp. 143–144
measurement, the radiated emission frequency band and amplitude
would be obtained and compared with the limit line, and also be used
to determine the severity of the problem.
The RE102 measurement setup is shown in Fig. 1b, the power strip is
used as the device under test and placed on the test table. As the inter-
ference band is around dozens MHz, a biconical antenna is placed 1 m
away from the centre of the test table, an EMI receiver (Agilent
N9038A) is connected to the biconical antenna through a low-noise
amplifier to receive EMI. Within the antenna factor and the gain of
the amplifier, the measurement result is calibrated and compared with
the MIL-461E/RE102 limit line. The measured horizontal polarised
radiated emission from LED is shown in Fig. 2. With LED in the
power strip, the radiated emission at 42 MHz is about 18.4 dBu V/m.
The radiated emission from LED will cause the EMC laboratory noise
floor to be higher than the requirement of MIL-461E/RE102 standard.
At negative half cycle, the reverse voltage will exceed the LED break-
down voltage, and the reverse current is sufficiently limited by the
large resistor, the reverse-conducting LED will emit noise. The noise
radiates through the long power cord, the peak EMI comes from reson-
ance of the power cord, and the short power cord will shift the resonance
frequency to higher-frequency band. The impedance seen by LED could
be measured by a vector network analyser, and the power cord could be
modelled as the transmission line, where the characteristic impedance of
the transmission line could be calculated by (1)


2h
Z = 60 cosh−1 (1)
d
where h is the distance from the centre of the power cord to the metal
plane on the table and d is the diameter of the power cord, the electrical
length of the transmission line can be represented by a time delay [4],
and then the circuit could be modelled.
20
no diode
with diode
magnitude, dBu V/m
15
10
5
0
0 50 100 150 200
frequency, MHz
Fig. 2 Emission from LEDs comparison measurement result (horizontal
polarisation)
The noise is supposed from the LED breakdown mode, a diode is
connected in reverse parallel with the LED, at the negative half
period, the voltage is clamped to 0.7 V, the breakdown would not
happen, and no noise will be emitted. As shown in Fig. 2, the EMI is
decreased to the noise level.
To study the emission mechanism of the LED, a homemade electric-
measure the near-field signal and a current probe (Solar 9207, 20 Hz–
150 MHz) is used to measure the current flows in the LED. As shown
in Fig. 3a, narrow spikes are found where the breakdown happens,
the current increase quickly, and a small change in the current will
cause large voltage pulse. The E-field probe measurement result is
shown in Fig. 3b, the voltage spike is comparable with the AC power
signal, as the near-field signal is sensitive to the distance, and the
measured E-field signal is normalised to the measured maximum
value of the E-field signal. With a reverse parallel diode, the spikes dis-
appear, and as shown in Fig. 2, the EMI disappears too. The hypothesis
is verified by both the frequency-domain and time-domain
measurement.
 4 shown in Fig. 5, as the setup is kept same, both of the LEDs radiate
current across LED
at the same frequency (42 MHz), but the amplitude of the yellow
LED (24 dBuV) is much higher than that of the red LED, the value

current, mA
2
equals the limit value of RE102 on that frequency band. From the time-
domain and frequency-domain measurement results, the EMI is in pro-
0 portional to breakdown voltage and the breakdown voltage is related to
the LED material.

–2
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 25
time, s
red LED
a yellow LED
20
1.0

magnitude, dBu V/m

no diode
15
normalised E-field

0.5 with diode

0 10

–0.5
5
–1.0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0
time, s
b
–5
Fig. 3 LED current and E-field near field emission measurement results 0 50 100 150 200
frequency, MHz
a Current flows LED measurement result
b Near-field E-field signal measurement result
Fig. 5 Two LEDs radiated emission comparison measurement result
Discussion on different colour LEDs: As the colour light of LED is Conclusion: The measurement results show that the EMIs of AC driven
determined by the energy bandgap of the semiconductor, red and LEDs are caused by the breakdown of LED. Within a diode in reverse
yellow LEDs are compared through the breakdown voltage, near-field parallel of LED, the breakdown can be prevented and the EMI is
measurement, and radiated emission measurement. The voltage of red decreased. Different colour LEDs have different breakdown voltage,
and yellow LEDs are measured and shown in Fig. 4a, the forward the breakdown voltage of the yellow LED reaches 80 V. Both the time-
voltage of both LEDs are about 2 V, whereas the breakdown voltage domain and frequency-domain results show that the amplitude of the
of the red LED is about 32 V and the breakdown voltage of the LED EMI is in proportion to the breakdown voltage.
yellow LED is almost 80 V. The current could be calculated by (2) [5]
V − VF Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the PAPD, by the NSF
IF = (2) of Jiangsu under grant BK20150918, by the SRF for ROCS, SEM, and
R
by the NSF for Colleges and Universities in Jiangsu under grant
when calculated the current at negative period, the VBR is substituted for 14KJB510017.
VF. The near-field E-field signal of the two LEDs is shown in Fig. 4b, the
spike amplitude of the red LED is much smaller than that of the yellow
LED, and it is probably due to the difference of breakdown voltage. © The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2016
Submitted: 9 October 2015 E-first: 17 November 2015
doi: 10.1049/el.2015.3358
50 One or more of the Figures in this Letter are available in colour online.
voltage on LED, V

red LED
yellow LED Fayu Wan, Huixia Cao, Sushen An, Chaochao Feng, Guang Hu and
0
Junxiang Ge (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Meteorological Observation
and Information Processing, Nanjing University of Information
–50
Science and Technology, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China)
–100 ✉ E-mail: fayu.wan@nuist.edu.cn
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
time, s References
a
1.0 1 Light Emitting Diode. Available at https://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
red LED Light-emitting_diode
normalised E-field

0.5 yellow LED 2 MIL-461E/RE102: ‘Requirements for the control of electromagnetic

interference characteristics of subsystems and equipment’, U.S.
0
Department of Defence, Washington, DC, USA, 1999
–0.5 3 Kasuga, T., Yamada, S., and Inoue, H.: ‘Measurement of electromagnetic
noise radiated from various LED lamps’. IEICE Technical Report, 2011,
–1.0 EMCJ2011-66,111, (137), pp. 29–34
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 4 Li, G., Qian, W., Radchenko, A., He, J., Hess, G., Hoeckele, R., Van
time, s Doren, T., Pommerenke, D., and Beetner, D.: ‘Prediction of radiated
b emissions from cables over a metal plane using a SPICE model’, IEEE
Trans. Electromagn. Compat., 2015, 57, (1), pp. 61–68
Fig. 4 LED reverses breakdown voltage and E-field near field emission 5 Avago, Technologies: ‘LED Compatibility with Automotive EMC
measurement results Transients’, 2010
a Two LEDs voltage comparison result
b Near-field E-field signal comparison

With the same setup of the radiated emission measurement, the

yellow LED is substituted to the red LED, the comparison results are

ELECTRONICS LETTERS 21st January 2016 Vol. 52 No. 2 pp. 143–144