RFI
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFI] Grow light RFI

To: nm8rmedic <nm8rmedic@rocketmail.com>, jim@audiosystemsgroup.com, "rfi@contesting.com" <rfi@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RFI] Grow light RFI
From: Tom Thompson <w0ivj@tomthompson.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 20:53:22 -0700
List-post: <rfi@contesting.com">mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
Scott,

Does your ordinance apply just to marijuana grow light ballasts?

Tom


On 12/2/2016 2:57 PM, nm8rmedic via RFI wrote:
Jim,

Actually we are well beyond the formative period for this ordinance. It has 
been in place for about a year-and-a-half.

I did request advice from ARRL before I wrote the ordinance. Their's was 
basically: don't do it.   But we did not find inaction acceptable.  I had our 
attorneys vett it and it actually has held up quite well and already been 
successful in mitigating an RFI problem caused by a formerly illegal grow 
operation that sought licensing. The FCC was a participant in that process.

And we continue to invoke the ordinance, which includes both Part 15 and Part 
18 compliance, with any potential new grow operations.

So it has already mitigated one, and with newly passed legislation here 
legalizing grow operations, it is preventing future problems.  What's not to 
like about that?

Don't get too worried guys. We don't enforce the FCC regulations, nor do we add 
to them, we merely require that they be met.

We decided to act boldly and take chances, otherwise it is a certainty that 
we're going to live in an RFI polluted world.
Scott




Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® II, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone













<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com> 
</div><div>Date:12/02/2016  12:47 PM  (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: rfi@contesting.com </div><div>Subject: Re: [RFI] 
Grow light RFI </div><div>
</div>Hi Scott,

I suggest that you get advice from ARRL and W1RFI on the wording of your
ordinance. I suspect that they will advise you to avoid suggesting any
specific products, and also that they will advise you to require
compliance with Part 15 Class B for residential use. Or it may be that
these products fall within Part 18.

73, Jim K9YC

On Fri,12/2/2016 5:30 AM, nm8rmedic via RFI wrote:
Ed,

Understood, and thank you.  The metodology is not my question, though.

I still ask: what was the lowest frequency swept?  I infer from the tiny graph 
it was around 300 khz, but did not catch any numerical data at that point or 
outside of the points you mention.

I ask b/c as a city manager we adopted an ordinance regulating marijauna grow 
operations and included a provision of local license approval based upon also 
meeting FCC regulations regarding RFI emissions.  We recommend an outboard 
filter for noisy ballasts, but I would like to also be able to make a 
recommendation for an effective and clean ballast from LF to VHF.

Is this the one?

Scott



Scott


Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® II, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone



<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: "Hare, Ed  W1RFI" <w1rfi@arrl.org> </div><div>Date:12/01/2016  4:14 PM  
(GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: nm8rmedic <nm8rmedic@rocketmail.com>, Tom Thompson <w0ivj@tomthompson.com> </div><div>Subject: RE: [RFI] Grow 
light RFI </div><div>
</div>It looks like they swept the entire frequency range with a spectrum 
analyzer in peak-detection mode, obtained the 6 highest values and frequency, then 
went back and measured just those frequencies in quasi peak detector mode.  This is a 
common test practice.

Ed, W1RFI



-----Original Message-----
From: RFI [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of nm8rmedic via RFI
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 4:09 PM
To: Tom Thompson; rfi@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] Grow light RFI

Tom,

It looks like there were three test runs conducted. The tabular data shows the 
lowest frequency tested was 14 megahertz, in runs 1 and 2. The graphic data 
results show lower frequencies though. Can you verify the lowest frequency at 
which these were tested?  Scott


Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® II, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Tom Thompson <w0ivj@tomthompson.com> </div><div>Date:12/01/2016  1:32 PM  
(GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Roger D Johnson <n1rj@roadrunner.com>, RFI <rfi@contesting.com> </div><div>Subject: Re: [RFI] Grow light 
RFI </div><div> </div>Roger,

Here is an independent lab evaluation of a Galaxy ballast the may be a good bet.

http://tomthompson.com/radio/GrowLight/RFI_Tests_Galaxy_902220_FCC-Report.pdf

Tom   W0IVJ


On 12/1/2016 11:27 AM, Roger D Johnson wrote:
Is there a list of ballasts that Don't cause RFI?

73, Roger

_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi


_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>