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

Fri May 20 11:14:44 EDT 2022

Love that call! Are you an SDR enthusiast?

I would like to join this RFI team. I have been plagued from time to time
with high noise levels, I gear up to go searching and then they disappear.
I even bought a Tiny SDR to use, was considering portable DF loops but did
not pursue them. At home I have a decent spec ana. I'd like to have a Tiny
spec ana, which I know they sell. Any recommendations for a hand held
wideband DF loop I can hold out my car window.
Ken, KN2U

On Fri, May 20, 2022, 9:47 AM Frank Mayer <franksmayer28 at gmail.com> wrote:

> All of this HF noise business will get nothing but worse.  We are in a
> dying hobby with less and less clout with the FCC.  With the virtual demise
> of AM radio,  both medium wave and shortwave, the average person is not
> affected by all of this RFI.  The only way to truly get relief is to have a
> QTH far from any neighbors which have become the major source of all this
> noise.
> My two cents.
> Frank, W2SDR
>
> > On May 20, 2022, at 9:32 AM, Tony Starr <tstarr1450 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > This is all good to know, and I again thank you for bringing this to our
> > attention.  I too have been bothered  by crippling RFI at times over the
> > past couple of years, and it is one of the reasons I have been building a
> > mobile HF station, so I could go out and drive around my area listening
> > for a source.  One power line noise that was bothering me turned out not
> to
> > be in my immediate neighborhood, as I initially suspected, but about a
> mile
> > and a half down the road.  In that case, I was lucky to have a
> directional
> > antenna to find the exact direction, using the null off the end of the
> > elements of my tri-bander.  I still have not gotten that one corrected,
> but
> > I at least know where it is coming from, within two or three poles
> anyway.
> >
> > I would be very interested in forming a GCARC RFI task force team.  I
> > figure that with the direction-finding expertise of our fox hunting
> > enthusiasts, and the technical prowess of our Skunk Works participants,
> we
> > should be able to track down just about any RFI source, especially the
> > stealthy ones that seem to evade the efforts of individuals like you or I
> > to track down.  Our club has proven very capable of meeting technical
> > challenges when we work together, and I think this would be a great asset
> > to the membership.  If anyone is interested in signing up for this,
> please
> > contact me via email directly. I know that I have had some annoying RFI
> > issues that I have not been able to figure out on my own, that I know I
> > could have solved with a few associates to bounce ideas and observations
> > off of.  What do you think, folks?  Is this a worthwhile effort for us to
> > pursue?  I think it is! Let me hear from you.
> >
> > Tony K3TS
> >
> >> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 7:11 AM Christopher Wawak <chris at wawak.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> What's exciting isn't that they're working on the problem or that
> >> they're working with individual manufacturers, but they're working
> >> with IEEE and industry leaders to set an industry standard for good
> >> design practices for residential solar systems. That means that not
> >> only will new systems built to standard be quieter, but if systems
> >> AREN'T built to standard, you now have an unbiased, industry group
> >> document to show they're not using good engineering practices.
> >>
> >> Right now with those 2 1/2 companies, if you can DF the solar noise
> >> and point it out to Ed and his team, he can work with the different
> >> solar companies to *turn off the solar system in question*, and verify
> >> it's the culprit. If so, they leave the system off until it's able to
> >> be remedied. Super cool!
> >>
> >> I've had the displeasure of talking to the single FCC person who
> >> handles all of amateur radio about an RFI complaint, and was told the
> >> FCC doesn't have the resources to do anything. This is not a problem
> >> that petitions will solve, and Ed's a smart dude doing what I think is
> >> the best.
> >>
> >> I honestly get very discouraged when I try to do some HF phone, and
> >> see solar systems get louder and quieter during the day. Also my
> >> jackass neighbor with his noisy-ass LED light that is on 24/7 directly
> >> in line with my main antenna!
> >>
> >> (He used no weather sealing when he drilled the hole into his house,
> >> and you can see insulation coming out! He refused my offer of some
> >> rectorseal until he could fix it properly. Hopefully he'll figure that
> >> one out before his walls rot out!)
> >>
> >> Mostly I stick to FT8, RTTY, and the true pinnacle of amateur radio
> >> communication, SSTV these days unless the bands of noise are just
> >> right.
> >>
> >> This offer always stands: anyone who wants to take a field trip to
> >> KC2IEB central and help me DF my noise can take a blind grab through
> >> my junk bin. :)
> >>
> >> 73 Chris KC2IEB
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:04 PM Tony Starr <tstarr1450 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> -- 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
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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