RFI/TVI Trends Pt 2

[rkaufmn at CC.UManitoba.CA]

Regarding RFI TVI problems:

>Jari OH2BVE wrote:

>I could solve all problems with filters installed outside the neighbors 
>electronic equipment TV, stereos, telephones etc. I was running a A3 and 
>variety of wire antennas with a 1 kW transmit power.
>We are obliged to co-operate with neighbors when there exist a TVI problem. 
>This comes from the rules for operating ham radio. The government may force 
>you to use less power in difficult cases, but usually the problems can be 
>solved.

This is great when you can get INTO someone's house to try to solve the
problem. Many times you only have one chance to solve the problem. I live 
in the kind of neighborhood where many professional people live. (
Doctors, lawyers etc) These people GIVE orders all day long and are VERY
reluctant to have "amateurs" poking around all parts of their
homes, telling them that they need certain devices improved through
filtration, chokes, grounds etc. Even if you tell them that this is part of
solving "the problem" (read "their problem"). The attitude often is that
they were here first. You arrived and with it the problem. If you "just stop
what you are doing", the problem will go away. Moral of the story : Don't
buy a house in this kind of neighborhood.

>In this case the 3 V/m meters means the field strength around the unit. not
>outside the building or at the property lines.

We also questioned the use of the property line in field strength
measurements. The answer was that the unit can always be moved from place
to place and room to room. What is immune in one location, may not be in
another. IC's attitude seems to be that the best way to solve this is
taking the measurement at the property line. We do not agree.

Dave W6QHS writes:
>It seems that the EU idea of field strength at the device rather than at your
>property boundary is much more reasonable...this would take advantage of
>natural structure attenuation.

>Because near-field signal strengths decrease as the cube of
>distance, a higher antenna would result in less interference potential
>(and less rf exposure, too, should evidence be found that indicates a
>problem in this area)...so perhaps the existence of local regulations
>prohibiting putting the antenna up high enough to reduce to 3 v/m would
>void the consumer's right to insist on power reduction.
I raised that exact point with government officials. I asked " Will you now
support efforts to raise antenna heights as a possible solution to this
type of problem ?"
You should have seen the look on their faces. They thought I was crazy.

Dave made several other suggestions which I will forward to RAC legal
counsel Tim VE6SH. Thanks for your input guys.

I am constantly amazed at the incredible helpfullness of those on the
Contest reflector. Where else can you get this kind of amateur expertise and
feedback from around the world at no cost within 24 hrs ! The Canadian
contesting community thanks you .
 73 Rob VE4GV 
rkaufmn at cc.Umanitoba.ca