Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
One of the simplest and most positive tests is to turn the BPL service on and
off and observe changes in interference, thus identifying if BPL is the source. But to my knowledge no BPL test site has done such tests. I have done just that in Emmaus, PA and in Potomac, MD. The correlation between the noise heard and the download of files by users was perfect. NTIA did testing in the same two cities, but working with the utility companies to do just that -- turn the system on and off. And even after working with NTIA in Potomac, a PPL representative had the gall to tell a local newspaper reporter that Carl and I had heard "neon signs" in the residential neighborhood. What about harmonics? The BPL signals on the video sounded like they had pretty fast risetimes. What sounds fast on a receiver will generate modulation sidebands up and down the band, but not harmonics. I have heard harmonics in the trail areas, perhaps down about 30-40 dB. Our 1500-watt stations can have 50 milliwatt harmonics, so we may not want to point our fingers in that direction. :-) Because different systems are being tried in different locations, proponents of each system will probably proclaim the *their* system doesn't have that problem - what you heard at the Podunk site is Brand X BPL. Yup, been tried. Ironically, the least cooperative BPL manufacturer's system was actually the most benign. Had they worked with me instead of turning it off when they knew I was coming, their marketing folks could have made hay. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Go to the ARRL site for the complete list of known test areas.
Actually they aren't there (yet). I do have a pretty good set of documentation, including streets in most cases, but am not posting it. Although cooperation has been slow, we are starting to see some cooperation from some electric utility companies. One of the promises I make to them is that ARRL will work with them to help them understand the interference potential, but we will do so in the least-destructive way possible. Having hordes of angry hams swarming around the trial areas would not meet that goal. Here are the known cities: Birmingham, AL area Cullman, AL (may be concluded) Bay area, CA (5 GHz-only system!) Atlanta, GA area Honolulu, HI Boise, ID Potomac, MD Cape Girardea, MO Raleigh, NC Briarcliff Manor/Ossining, NY (Westchester Cty) Dublin, OH Hyde Park, OH Bethlehem, PA (new - just getting started) Emmaus, PA Whitehall, PA Azle, TX (new, little data available) Manassas, VA If hams live in those areas and can help, contact me at . 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On 15 Oct 2003 22:30:17 -0700, Brian Kelly wrote: This means that the manufacturer is required to test them to ensure that they comply with the FCC regulations. Under the present rules, they must be tested at 3 typical locations. " What's the FCC definition of "typical locations"?? De facto: any place where the results support the stand that one is advocating. Oh golly, I would never have guessed that . . |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Opposing BPL | Antenna |