RFI
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFI] Grow light RFI

To: "rfi@contesting.com" <rfi@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RFI] Grow light RFI
From: "Hare, Ed W1RFI" <w1rfi@arrl.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 17:56:26 +0000
List-post: <rfi@contesting.com">mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
As RF lighting devices, they fall under Part 18 of the rules.  These are 
somewhat lower than Part 15.  Neither Part 15 nor Part 18 levels are sufficient 
to protect against all interference, and in some cases, external filters may be 
needed.  The ones available from Hydrofarm filter both the AC mains and the 
lines leading from the controller to the lights.

I will point out, however, that the FCC has been very clear that it pre-empts 
any local ordinance on matters related to RFI.

http://www.arrl.org/federal-rfi-preemption

Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Lab



-----Original Message-----
From: RFI [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2016 12:48 PM
To: rfi@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] Grow light RFI

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-Rep
> ort.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
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>