If I read between the lines and, in summary, the first contact should be
with the ARRL. They (still) have the capability of working on a technical
basis with the amateurs and, most importantly, still have the ear of the
FCC when required. We DO NOT,...N O T.... want to spoil that
relationship!!!
I've been at this (losing) battle as an EMC/RFI engineer professionally for
nearly 40-years. I've seen the changes and experienced the RF Fog caused
by the 'digital revolution'. No war stories here, but you might want to
read the last paragraph of my QRZ page, WØLEV.
FCC has set regulatory limits which should legally be honored. Yes, these
limits *do* precipitate problems for the typical amateur living in the
cities. Problem is, these days, China has shown by example that cheating
gains sales, legal or not (how many labels do you want?). Other upstanding
US suppliers have taken notice and are following suit. Per in-place FCC
rules, these offenders are not being pursued as they should. The burden of
proof falls on us EMC/RFI engineers. There aren't enough of us nor do we
have the clout with the FCC (and cheating lab tests- if any - from China)
that we should. FCC USED to do this function. No longer. All they're
left with is enforcement, which they do not accomplish in a responsible
manner (my editorial comment on the process).
But we amateurs need to recognize there are limits in place that should,
legally, be adhered to. The honor system (self declaration and Customs
inspections) is not working with the incursion of a multitude of electronic
'toys' and SMPS's from China and the precedents set by China (and others)
in ignoring the rules.
Dave - WØLEV
EMC Design & Test, LLC
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:03 PM KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > I think many need to carefully read what Ed writes here. Be extremely
> > careful of wanting hard-set limits because that's what we'll get.
>
> Awesome. Just make them very low. Nobody ever suggested striving for
> crap.
>
> Just off the top of my head, at "hobbyist level", based on some of my
> own experiments some twenty years ago... -126dB @ 3" (inches) from
> source, maximum, at all frequencies I can detect, is a fair start.
> Less, of course, is better, nobody is suggesting an even spew of -126
> from DC to daylight.
>
> One must wonder why the standards we have now seem to be, 'Produce
> something. Now, make it spew garbage. Perfect. Market it- globally.
> You're welcome.'
>
> How about...? NO! Clearly what we have now, has left us with what we
> have, which isn't working too well.
>
> Oh, one other thing... If none of the above flies, how about just
> reasonable active enforcement, retroactive to the 1980's? We could pay
> off the deficit with fines alone, and think of the hundreds of millions
> of non-compliant devices we could have fun scrapping out!
>
> Kurt
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>
--
*Dave - WØLEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|