[RFI] Grow light RFI

[Tom Thompson]

Scott,

I have not tested the Galaxy ballast, but all the ballasts I have 
encountered, which include the Lumatek LK1000, the Micromole 1000, and 
the Quantum Series, will not meet FCC specifications I am sure.  This 
probably will not help you since you are looking at specifications, but 
a commercial lamp filter ( https://www.hydrofarm.com/p/BAF2020 ) will 
probably bring most offending ballasts into compliance.  See 
http://tomthompson.com/radio/GrowLight/GrowLightBallastFilter.html for 
more information.

By the way, I applaud you for including FCC compliance in your city 
ordinance.

Tom Thompson


On 12/2/2016 6:30 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 at arrl.org> </div><div>Date:12/01/2016  4:14 PM  (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: nm8rmedic <nm8rmedic at rocketmail.com>, Tom Thompson <w0ivj at 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 at contesting.com] On Behalf Of nm8rmedic via RFI
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 4:09 PM
> To: Tom Thompson; rfi at 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 at tomthompson.com> </div><div>Date:12/01/2016  1:32 PM  (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: Roger D Johnson <n1rj at roadrunner.com>, RFI <rfi at 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 at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi