Ham radio Interference

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 18:11:21 -0000, "Graham." wrote:


Cross posted to uk.radio.amateur.

Thanks a bundle.
Frankly I would rather have more Air-Max Shoes spam!

Air-max spam, sausage, egg and spam?

How do you feel about uk.legal?

"Len GM0ONX" wrote in message
...
Jeff wrote:
The truth is harsh but Jeff is right. Its almost certain that your
equipment is at fault. OFCOM can help with the TV by fitting high pass
filters but you may be on your own with the electric keyboard as it should
designed not to pick up radio signals.

Hams will always take this view. I dare they are 90% right. But in my
experience anyone living in the sort of field strength generated by 100s of
Watts multipled by the gain of a long beam is inevitably going to have
problems. Every piece of electonic equipment they buy might suffer
interference, and how can Joe Bloggs be expected to fit caps across all the
transistor junctions in his new bit of kit?

I think it's time that the law was changed. When the present regulations
were made home electronics amounted to much less than they do now. It is
just plain antisocial to generate that sort of field strength if you live on
in high density housing area. Anyone wanting to pursue their hobby with that
sort of power should move house, to somewhere where there are no neighbours.
The law should be altered so that no amateur can put more than a certain
field strength into any residential property except his own.

Bill

The message
from "Bill Wright" contains these words:


"Len GM0ONX" wrote in message
...
Jeff wrote:
The truth is harsh but Jeff is right. Its almost certain that your
equipment is at fault. OFCOM can help with the TV by fitting high pass
filters but you may be on your own with the electric keyboard as it
should
designed not to pick up radio signals.

Hams will always take this view. I dare they are 90% right. But in my
experience anyone living in the sort of field strength generated by 100s of
Watts multipled by the gain of a long beam is inevitably going to have
problems. Every piece of electonic equipment they buy might suffer
interference, and how can Joe Bloggs be expected to fit caps across all the
transistor junctions in his new bit of kit?

I think it's time that the law was changed. When the present regulations
were made home electronics amounted to much less than they do now. It is
just plain antisocial to generate that sort of field strength if you
live on
in high density housing area. Anyone wanting to pursue their hobby
with that
sort of power should move house, to somewhere where there are no
neighbours.
The law should be altered so that no amateur can put more than a certain
field strength into any residential property except his own.

I'll leave it to others to point out why just about everything you've
just said here is so wrong. ;-)

--
Regards, John.

Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.

Bill Wright wrote:

When the present regulations
were made home electronics amounted to much less than they do now. It is
just plain antisocial to generate that sort of field strength if you live on
in high density housing area. Anyone wanting to pursue their hobby with that
sort of power should move house, to somewhere where there are no neighbours.
The law should be altered so that no amateur can put more than a certain
field strength into any residential property except his own.

The OP might like to ask the Amateur concerned if he has performed the
field-strength calculations to determine whether he is exceeding the
limits put forward in the appropriate guidelines, and could he have a
copy to show to OFCOM.

There was a discussion of this on ukra a couple or so years ago.

Some RSGB info he

http://www.rsgb.org/emc/pdfs/leaflets/emc11ofcom.pdf

and he

http://www.rsgb.org/emc/pdfs/leaflets/emc10avoid.pdf

There's a fairly simple calculation on page 3 of this url, and on page
4 there's some figures for the immunity standards, which might be of
interest to the OP:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/3639693/...embers-Leaflet

HTH

--

from
Aero Spike
Not a member of the RSGB for 50 years 1959 - 2009

In message , Bill Wright
writes

"Len GM0ONX" wrote in message
...
Jeff wrote:
The truth is harsh but Jeff is right. Its almost certain that your
equipment is at fault. OFCOM can help with the TV by fitting high pass
filters but you may be on your own with the electric keyboard as it should
designed not to pick up radio signals.

Hams will always take this view. I dare they are 90% right. But in my
experience anyone living in the sort of field strength generated by 100s of
Watts multipled by the gain of a long beam is inevitably going to have
problems.

From my own experiences (quite a long time ago), most equipment which
suffered from breakthrough problems had been designed without any
anticipation of the possibility of it having to work in the presence of
any RF field.

Every piece of electonic equipment they buy might suffer
interference, and how can Joe Bloggs be expected to fit caps across all the
transistor junctions in his new bit of kit?

Joe Bloggs himself should not be expected to fit caps etc. Protection
against interference from reasonable RF fields should have been designed
into the equipment.

I think it's time that the law was changed. When the present regulations
were made home electronics amounted to much less than they do now.

Think of it another way. Because we have so much more electronic
equipment in the home, should it not be designed with higher immunity to
RF signals, bearing in mind that we also have a lot more 'RF stuff' than
we used to?

It is
just plain antisocial to generate that sort of field strength if you live on
in high density housing area. Anyone wanting to pursue their hobby with that
sort of power should move house, to somewhere where there are no neighbours.
The law should be altered so that no amateur can put more than a certain
field strength into any residential property except his own.

Many years ago, I believe that this was indeed considered. If I remember
correctly, the proposed field strength level was ridiculously low, and
well below that in which most reasonably well-designed domestic
equipment seemed to happy to operate.

While there is no hard-and-fast rule as to how much RF you can inflict
upon your neighbours, in cases where all reasonable precautions have
been taken (both by the amateur and the complainant), and the amateur is
running really high (but legal) power, the licensing authorities have
been known to step in and 'persuade' the amateur to use less power and
impose other restrictions. However, I believe that this has only
happened on one or two occasions.

One thing which must be pointed out again and again. No radio amateur
'wants' to cause interference to a neighbour's equipment, and most will
bend over backwards to prevent this from happening, if only they are
given the chance to do so. Unfortunately, this becomes difficult when
the attitude of the neighbour is immediately "It's all your fault, and I
want you to stop it". Advice (as was given by one poster) to the effect
that Ofcom will step in, close the amateur down, confiscate his
equipment etc isn't true, and certainly doesn't help resolve the matter.
In the end, these problems can only be resolved by mutual co-operation -
and probably a certain amount of give-and-take - by both sides.
--
Ian

Hams will always take this view. I dare they are 90% right. But in my
experience anyone living in the sort of field strength generated by 100s
of Watts multipled by the gain of a long beam is inevitably going to have
problems. Every piece of electonic equipment they buy might suffer
interference, and how can Joe Bloggs be expected to fit caps across all
the transistor junctions in his new bit of kit?

I think it's time that the law was changed. When the present regulations
were made home electronics amounted to much less than they do now. It is
just plain antisocial to generate that sort of field strength if you live
on in high density housing area. Anyone wanting to pursue their hobby with
that sort of power should move house, to somewhere where there are no
neighbours. The law should be altered so that no amateur can put more than
a certain field strength into any residential property except his own.


I agree that it was time that the law was changed, but it should be the
regulations regarding the susceptibility of electronic equipment that need
improving, or in many cases just enforcing. I know that there is a lot of
equipment on the market that is CE marked that comes nowhere near the
required standard. It is cheaper for manufacturers to address problem as
they surface, rather than spend a little more money and have the required
immunity. It is not just radio amateurs out there, you have a myriad of
radio users from the Police to taxis and mobile phones, all of these have to
co-exist in our towns and cities.

Regarding the case in point, the distance quoted way 200 Yards! Hardly a
near neighbour, or high density housing!.

Spike wrote:

There's a fairly simple calculation on page 3 of this url, and on page
4 there's some figures for the immunity standards, which might be of
interest to the OP:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/3639693/...embers-Leaflet

Bad form, etc

A quick calculation shows that 4kW into a 6dB beam on say 20m will
give field strengths 10V/m at that distance, and rather less than a
kW for a 15 dB gain yagi on 2m. These set-ups are feasible with
commonly-available Amateur equipment.

--

from
Aero Spike
Not a member of the RSGB for 50 years 1959 - 2009

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
Joe Bloggs himself should not be expected to fit caps etc. Protection
against interference from reasonable RF fields should have been designed
into the equipment.

Should have, yes.But we live in the real world.


I think it's time that the law was changed. When the present regulations
were made home electronics amounted to much less than they do now.

Think of it another way. Because we have so much more electronic equipment
in the home, should it not be designed with higher immunity to RF signals,
bearing in mind that we also have a lot more 'RF stuff' than we used to?
Of course it should. But it isn't.

Bill

On Mar 2, 12:06*pm, "Bill Wright"
wrote:
"Ian Jackson" wrote in message

...

Joe Bloggs himself should not be expected to fit caps etc. Protection
against interference from reasonable RF fields should have been designed
into the equipment.

Should have, yes.But we live in the real world.



I think it's time that the law was changed. When the present regulations
were made home electronics amounted to much less than they do now.

Think of it another way. Because we have so much more electronic equipment
in the home, should it not be designed with higher immunity to RF signals,
bearing in mind that we also have a lot more 'RF stuff' than we used to?

Of course it should. But it isn't.

Bill

I think that the health hazards associated with high power amateur
radio operation in built up urban areas also nees to be taken into
account.

The FCC has introduced and assessment programme (FCC form 610)
http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/~veillet/rfsaf610.html which requires
compliance with various power limits and field strengths.

It would be useful if this also aligned with EMI susceptability limits
(but I bet it doesn't).

Which is the worst case senario for UK amateurs, having a complaint
from you neighbour that their TV is playing up, or a legal case based
on aligations of exposure to high intensity RF fields from amateur
radio causing cancer or some other equally emotive illness.

The mobile phone operators are increasingly haing to deal with this
sort of thing, sometimes because there is a genuine belief that there
is a link between rf 'radiation' and an illness, or sometimes simply
because folks can't object to having a cell phone tower placed at the
bottom of their garden, so stir up opposition by raising health
issues.

How long before neighbours of amateur radio operators with large
antenna arrays (or those experiencing EMI problems) start to use this
tactic.

UKM

In article
,


I think that the health hazards associated with high power amateur
radio operation in built up urban areas also nees to be taken into
account.

The FCC has introduced and assessment programme (FCC form 610)
http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/~veillet/rfsaf610.html which requires
compliance with various power limits and field strengths.


The UK has had radiation limits for many years; now, I believe,
incorporated into EU requirements.

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11