Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Good point. Ed, what does a plasma TV look like compared to BPL. Is the
multidomain signature quite different? I have not looked at a plasma TV, Chip, but I would make that diagnosis primarily on on the basis of the sphere of influence. In the BPL test areas, the interference was heard over the entire area that had the BPL couplers in place. There are other indicators, too. Knowing the involved BPL manufacturer would let one pretty easily compare what was heard on the air to the known characteristics of the BPL system involved. Interference from plasma TVs is not going to be "modulated" with digital signals, as would a BPL signal. Those OFDM carriers in the Ambient and Amperion BPL systems would be pretty hard to confuse with anything else. Another characteristic to look for is spectral occupancy. If the signal appears suddenly in spectrum, is heard over several MHz, then suddenly tapers off, that also matches the BPL characteristics, not that from other devices. If the signal is noiselike, but clearly digital in sound, one can also look for the bursts of the downloads, followed by the shorter, "keep alive" pulses that some of the systems do. If all of the above added up and started at the same time the BPL system was brought on line, I would feel comfortable with my diagnosis. 73, Ed Hare, W1RF Hi Ed, I think a general description of other RFI sources would be helpful for any radio amateur to make a 'first cut' assessment. It might also help you isolate the truly legitimate cases of BPL RFI--if and when they exist. I do have a concern that hams not make too many false alarms. Sounds like you are on top of the the problem and I wish you the best. 73, Chip N1IR |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think a general description of other RFI sources would be helpful for any
radio amateur to make a 'first cut' assessment. It might also help you isolate the truly legitimate cases of BPL RFI--if and when they exist. There are several RFI sources that would be the most common ones misidentified as BPL. The first is "conventional" power-line noise. It is usually characterized by having a *noisy* 120-Hz component, as the sparking takes place on the positive and negative peaks of the 60-Hz wave. Another is similar, occurring from things like lamp dimmers, motor controllers, flourescent lights, etc. Those sources usually have a 120- or 60-Hz component, but the noise on the peaks is usually quite a bit less noisy looking. Switch-mode power supplies can also be noisy, but they generally have noise that ranges from reasonably coherent (carrier-like) to broad, buzzy clumps of noise, spaced every N kHz, where N is the free-running rate of the switcher frequency. N is typically 10-50 kHz or so. Some switchers make noise that is fairly close to gaussian-distributed noise, with a pretty uniform distibribution of power vs frequency (power spectral density). One key diagnostic for a switcher is that the N kHz tends to drift around a bit. A series of noisy carriers or clumps of noise that are spaced every 15 kHz, for example, may drift up the band as the unit is turned on and warms up over an hour or so. If so, it is almost certainly a switcher. (I do, btw, suspect that the "plasma tv" problem is really a switch-mode problem, as some amateurs have reported no interference from plasma TVs. On my long list of things to do is to take the Lab's Icom R-3 receiver to the local big electronics store and see if I can get some estimates of the noise level from various equipments.) Probably the most diagnostic, however, it the distribution of noise signal vs frequency. BPL is designed to use specific spectrum, and as one tunes a general coverage receiver from 2 to 80 MHz, its onset will be rather sudden, it will persist for at least several MHz, then taper off just as abruptly. I do have a concern that hams not make too many false alarms. Sounds like you are on top of the the problem and I wish you the best. There are no guarantees, but I am hoping that by talking to each of the hams that report BPL interference, between them and me we can reach the correct conclusion. If things don't add up, I will suggest that it not be reported. Each report of actual interference is precious right now, and I would be willing to go to the trial area to verify a questionable case. Thanks for your interest. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Effective area question | Antenna |