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

Fri May 20 14:31:53 EDT 2022

Duh...I already bought a TinySA and forgot I had it. Now only need an
active portable DF antenna.

On Fri, May 20, 2022, 11:14 AM Kenneth Bozarth <kwbozarth at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>
>