[RFI] Update: LG washer WT1501CW - EMI

[Hare, Ed W1RFI]

Now, I am looking at the rules for categorical exemptions, and not every device that is an "industrial plant" would be categorically exempt.

"A digital device used exclusively as an electronic control or power system utilized by a public utility or in an industrial plant."

Now, just what constitutes and "electronic control or power system" would be up to the FCC, and I suspect it would interpret it loosely. Does a pulse-wide motor controller constitute and "electronic control?"  Would it be considered to be a "power system," providing power to a motor? Probably.  To really get the interpretation would probably necessitate looking at the Report and Order and related releases that were issued by the FCC when the rule was implemented.

It could also be that the noise is being generated by an incidental emitter, also categorically exempt.

In most cases, hams are better off addressing interference on the basis of "harmful interference," because if we try too hard to pin it on emissions violations, we may end up in a situation where devices that meet the limits are presumed to not interfere, or, worse, we have to demonstrate that devices do not meet the limits, impractical in most cases.

Ed



-----Original Message-----
From: RFI <rfi-bounces at contesting.com> On Behalf Of Kim Elmore
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 3:42 PM
To: rfi at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] Update: LG washer WT1501CW - EMI

Yes. Consider an industrial plant near an airport that wipes out the ILS system or inhibits ATC or law enforcement comms. The section of Part 15 that says no harmful interference will most certainly come into play as the affected users are licensed operations. The exemption lies in the radiated field strength (they're neither Class B or Class A devices that have field strength limits) but they still may not cause interference to licensed operations.

Kim N5OP


On 11/20/2018 12:07 PM, Lee STRAHAN wrote:
>    So industrial plants are also exempt from the part 15 requirements but does this also mean that they still cannot cause harmful interference?
>
> Lee   K7TJR   OR
>
> The FCC has not generally tried to interpret things as appliances that are not. The devices are still subject to the requirement that the operator of the device not cause harmful interference.
>
> Ed, W1RFI
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>

-- 

Kim Elmore, Ph.D. (Adj. Assoc. Prof., OU School of Meteorology, CCM, PP SEL/MEL/Glider, N5OP, 2nd Class Radiotelegraph, GROL)

/"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is." //– Attributed to many people; it’s so true that it doesn’t matter who said it./

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