[GCARC] What has the ARRL done for you lately?

Thu May 19 22:02:49 EDT 2022

Chris,

First off, thanks a ton for passing along the letter from Ed Hare. It is
good to know that ARRL is working on this issue, which has the potential to
be one of the largest sources of RFI around us.  While there have been a
number of issues over the years where the League has left me disappointed,
this is not one of them. My gripes about Part 15 fall right on the
shoulders of the FCC, for their lack of enforcement.  Much of the cheap
Chinese junk that is causing us problems has blatant cheat features built
right in. Empty spaces on printed circuit boards where RFI chokes and
bypass capacitors are supposed to be installed, right there for all to see,
and no penalties!  Well of course they were there on the units that
underwent RFI testing, and maybe they are there on the board when it is
installed in a brand-name item, but for the cheap off-brand copy sold on
Amazon?  They just leave those parts off!

If the ARRL is working with a couple of solar manufacturers, I sincerely
hope that they are successful. I would hate to see those manufacturers cure
their RFI ills and then go out of business because they got undercut by the
competitors who did nothing to improve their RFI performance. If it can be
done, it should be done, and this is where the enforcement should come into
play. Unfortunately, I don't have much faith in the FCC any more, since
they have gone from a sleepy regulatory agency to one that frequently
samples the crack pipe of massive revenue enhancement through spectrum
auctions.  How many times will they auction off the TV channels again? And
how long before some of our spectrum goes with it?  It may only be a matter
of time. This is why I am glad we have the ARRL. They may not be big and
powerful, but they are a voice for us.  Maybe the only voice we have.

My relationship with the League over the past 45 years has been tenuous at
times, and I have even let my membership lapse a few times, I am sorry to
say, but in the end, I always wind up going back. I have to. I belong to
the League for the same reasons that I belong to the NRA and AARP. Not
because I always agree with what they do; in fact I often don't. But
because they represent my interests and protect the things that are
important to me from those who would like to deny me those things, and use
my government to do it. That is why I just renewed my ARRL membership for
another three years. Hey, they sent me a nice coffee mug!  Thanks again and
73!

Tony Starr, K3TS

On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 7:08 PM Christopher Wawak <chris at wawak.org> wrote:

> I often hear people complain the ARRL does little for the Amateur Radio
> community. I’m a supporter, but I don’t often have effective examples of
> how the ARRL is helping.
>
> I believe residential solar power to be the biggest risk to our hobby based
> on the interference I see and the growth that’s expected.
>
> Ed Hare’s work on RFI is rarely showy, but what he’s doing with the solar
> industry is probably our best shot at keeping noise levels at a place where
> our hobby is viable.
>
> This is a great example of how valuable the ARRL is for Amateur Radio
> operators, and yet another reason why membership is important.
>
> 73 Chris KC2IEB
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Hare, Ed, W1RFI <w1rfi at arrl.org>
> Date: Thu, May 19, 2022 at 6:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [RFI] Solar Panel RFI Awareness At Dayton
> To: Don Kirk <wd8dsb at gmail.com>, KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk at earthlink.net>
> CC: rfi at contesting.com <rfi at contesting.com>
>
>
> Sorry for the delay in getting back to this one.  Hopefully, folks are
> checking emails.
>
> To really understand this issue, we need to understand what rules these
> systems meet.
>
> Solar inverters and optimizers are regulated by CFR 47 Part 15 as
> unintentional emitters. They are classified as digital devices. As such,
> they must meet the Part 15 rules for emissions below 30 MHz that are
> conducted onto the AC mains and the radiated emissions limits above 30
> MHz.  There are no radiated emissions limits for any unintentional emitter
> except for carrier current devices such as BPL.  It will be hard sell to
> get the FCC to carve out radiated limits below 30 MHz for one type of
> emitter.  It will be a tough sell in any event, because only a small number
> of unintentional emitters that meet the rules are involved in harmful
> interference complaints.  Industry and the FCC will insist that the
> existing rules work, and, to a great degree, they are not wrong.  Many
> manufacturers that meet the limit respond positively to harmful
> interference complaints.
>
> If the FCC were to adopt radiated limits below 30 MHz, it would almost hang
> its hat on the limits for intentional emitters and carrier-current devices,
> which essentially result in S9+10 dB interference levels, typically.  We do
> NOT want this, and if the FCC extended the carrier-current limits to solar
> systems,  the first line of defense from manufacturers would be, "We meet
> the new rules."  ARRL already has a case where a new solar manufacturer is
> taking that very approach.
>
> Do not ignore the monkey-wrench effect.  If there were an open rulemaking,
> it is a certainty that every solar company would hire a communications
> attorney, who would then direct that every step in any interference case go
> through the attorney.  That would effectively end cooperation, and muddy
> the waters so badly the end result could be rather unpredictable.
>
> Right now, ARRL has 2-1/2 solar companies working on resolving cases and
> looking to improve the product.   The League is also looking to form an
> industry standards working group to develop an IEEE recommended practice on
> good design for EMC for solar systems and a reasonable program to respond
> effectively to complaints.   If there ever were to be a rules change, this
> is essentially the only way I could see the rules getting changed, if they
> can be changed to harmonize with an industry standard that has the support
> of a wide range of stakeholders.
>
> I will have to look in the program to see when this gathering is taking
> place and attend if I can.
>
> Ed Hare, W1RFI
> ARRL Lab
> IEEE EMC Society Vice President for Standards
> --
> -- Chris
> ______________________________________________________________
> GCARC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/gcarc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:GCARC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html