[RFI] Update: Tesla's Response to Solar Panel RFI

[Jeff (W4DD)]

If EU's standards are the model for what we would like, should they be posted on web sites (like ARRL and our won) and be stated as "good engineering practice"?

I have found in the past vendors will generally follow guidelines if there are (generally accepted) guidelines to follow.  The FCC may have Part 15 but if Solar Panel companies ever hope to sell overseas, they should align themselves with international requirements also.

Just a thought,
Jeff, W4DD, PE



-----Original Message-----
From: RFI <rfi-bounces at contesting.com> On Behalf Of Hare, Ed W1RFI
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 3:10 PM
To: Kim Elmore <cw_de_n5op at sbcglobal.net>; KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk at earthlink.net>
Cc: Rfi List <rfi at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RFI] Update: Tesla's Response to Solar Panel RFI

Well, I was pretty clear that this is addressed primarily as harmful interference, irrespective of compliance with the emissions limits. The Part 15 rules do not require certification of ttis type of unintentional emitter, so there are no "certification rules."  Older systems were brought forward under the Verification authorization of the rules. Under rules changes from some time ago, these unintentional emitters can be authorized under either Certification or under a Suppliers Declaration of Conformity.  Most use the SDoC process.

Under the rules, the manufacturer must meet the authorization requirements, have a design that meets the emissions limits and meet certain marketing requirements.  The rules make the operator of any device regulated by the FCC responsible for correcting any harmful interference it may cause. 

It is generally much easier to establish harmful interference than it is to establish a violation of the emissions rules, so it is on this basis that most complaints originate.

Ed, W1RFI



-----Original Message-----
From: RFI <rfi-bounces at contesting.com> On Behalf Of Kim Elmore
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 7:59 PM
To: KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk at earthlink.net>
Cc: Rfi List <rfi at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RFI] Update: Tesla's Response to Solar Panel RFI

If there were, I’m certain Ed would have mentioned it. He’s on our side! 

Kim N5OP

"People that make music together cannot be enemies, at least as long as the music lasts." -- Paul Hindemith

> On Dec 17, 2019, at 6:01 PM, KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> "Let me see if I can put this into perspective. First, there are a number of factors here that are not usually made part of the discussions about solar arrays that are being installed. The first is the applicable FCC rules...
> 
> Interesting reference, and baseline, if the offense was purely a violation of Part 15 certification, and whether or not the qualifications were met, for sales purposes. And, for the average idiot (consumers, at the expense of those surrounding them that may be affected), this looks great on a sales leaflet.
> 
> Now, to address the  ACTUAL issue...
> 
> In compliance with Part 15, or not, the ___interference to licensed, and protected radio servi__ces_, as noted.
> 
> Certainly there is a valid Part that addresses THIS...
> 
> Kurt
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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