[RFI] Another Solar Panel RFI Victim

[James Gordon Beattie Jr]

Ed,
Two things to consider here:

As you pointed out the FCC can and does often address the effect of harmful interference and that was my point in saying, "quantified measurements and their effects".  Having measurements alone is insufficient as you pointed out and I agree.

The other is that the case for "RF quietness" is not an Amateur Radio issue, but an issue for a long list of services some of which I listed.  Collaboration with the users, manufacturers, and providers of the elements of these services is going to be key in getting critical mass of regulatory, political and financial interests to focus enough to address these types of problems.

Thoughts?


73,
J. Gordon "Gordie" Beattie, Jr., W2TTT
201.314.6964
W2TTT at ATT.NET
Gordon.BeattieJr at VIAVISolutions.com


Get On The Air!

________________________________
From: Hare, Ed, W1RFI <w1rfi at arrl.org>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 1:08:12 PM
To: James Gordon Beattie Jr <w2ttt at att.net>; Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr at gmail.com>; rfi at contesting.com <rfi at contesting.com>
Subject: RE: [RFI] Another Solar Panel RFI Victim


This sounds good in theory, Gordon, but in reality, it is never going to happen to a level good enough to truly protect amateur radio.  “Push back” would be too mild of a term and the US regulations are in line with what is done pretty much across the board internationally.

We are actually better off than most countries. In most of Europe, with emissions limits similar to ours, the emissions limits are the determining factor for “harmful interference.”   This means that if a device meets the limits, there is no recourse for interference.  This is bad in a number of ways.  The most obvious is that S6 to S9 interference is likely in close quarters.  An even bigger problem is that to deem something to be “harmful interference,” the complainant would have to demonstrate that the device exceeds the limits, and that is not practical in almost all circumstance.

In the US, we are able to make the case that a given noise is “harmful interference,” and the FCC can and does act without the need to make measurements of the offending device.

My fear is that if we squeezed a few dB out of “better” regulations, FCC would deem that to set the threshold for “harmful interference.”  ARRL has done all it can to NOT have the FCC draw any lines in the sand as to what constitutes harmful interference because I can guaran-darn-tee that we would not like the line.

Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Lab






From: James Gordon Beattie Jr <w2ttt at att.net>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 10:34 AM
To: Hare, Ed, W1RFI <w1rfi at arrl.org>; Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr at gmail.com>; rfi at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] Another Solar Panel RFI Victim



Ed,

I think you're raising the point that the current standards for radiated and conducted emissions are seemingly inadequate and need to be revisited.



Naturally, equipment vendors and manufacturers are going to "push back", but these emissions are blanketing the spectrum from DC to light (metaphorically).  We need quantified measurements and their effects documented in order to start making the case for improved standards in both FCC Part 15 and Part 18. It's not just an Amateur Radio issue.  It impacts AM and FM radio, OTA television, public safety and aviation, cellular and potentially other services.  The only way to proceed is to collect measurements and the impact on these and other services.







73,

J. Gordon "Gordie" Beattie, Jr., W2TTT

201.314.6964

W2TTT at ATT.NET<mailto:W2TTT at ATT.NET>

Gordon.BeattieJr at VIAVISolutions.com<mailto:Gordon.BeattieJr at VIAVISolutions.com>





Get On The Air!



________________________________

From: RFI <rfi-bounces+w2ttt=att.net at contesting.com<mailto:rfi-bounces+w2ttt=att.net at contesting.com>> on behalf of Hare, Ed, W1RFI <w1rfi at arrl.org<mailto:w1rfi at arrl.org>>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 9:57:18 AM
To: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr at gmail.com<mailto:pete.n4zr at gmail.com>>; rfi at contesting.com<mailto:rfi at contesting.com> <rfi at contesting.com<mailto:rfi at contesting.com>>
Subject: Re: [RFI] Another Solar Panel RFI Victim



On what basis do you believe that the SE equipment is in violation of the emissions limits, Pete? The FCC rules set limits on radiated emissions above 30 MHz and on emissions conducted onto the AC mains below 30 MHz.  There is no emissions limits on radiated or conducted emissions below 30 MHz on any wiring except the 120/240 volt AC mains.
________________________________
From: RFI <rfi-bounces+w1rfi=arrl.org at contesting.com<mailto:rfi-bounces+w1rfi=arrl.org at contesting.com>> on behalf of Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr at gmail.com<mailto:pete.n4zr at gmail.com>>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 9:35 AM
To: rfi at contesting.com<mailto:rfi at contesting.com> <rfi at contesting.com<mailto:rfi at contesting.com>>
Subject: Re: [RFI] Another Solar Panel RFI Victim

I'm just curious - have you contacted the FCC., or has the ARRL done so?
This seems like a clear case of SolarEdge violating emission limits,
which they are supposed to care about.

73, Pete N4ZR
One of the RBN team

On 12/10/2022 8:16 PM, Tony wrote:
> All:
>
> A few years ago, I posted a video on solar panel RFI and it's affect
> on HF. Since then, I've heard from many hams who've experienced the
> same issue. Most send emails but a few post comments on my Youtube
> channel like the one below received yesterday from MI5UTC in Ireland:
>
> "I see exactly the same here with my recently installed SolarEdge
> system. My IC7300 is pretty much unusable during the day until it gets
> dark."
>
> One of the saddest comments was received last year from a 15 year old
> SW listener Nick:
>
> "I'm only 15, and super into MW and SW radio, my parents installed
> solar panels only a few years ago, and I knew it would cause
> interference. At least by nightfall they shut off for dxing."
>
> The common denominator in nearly all of these solar panel RFI cases
> (including my own) are systems manufactured by SolarEdge. My case with
> this company is 6 years old and has yet to be resolved. See:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9awWs4mwC4
>
> Thankfully, the ARRL continues to work with SolarEdge to find a solution.
>
> Tony -K2MO
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com<mailto:RFI at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI at contesting.com<mailto:RFI at contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI at contesting.com<mailto:RFI at contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi