Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible - Page 4

Have a question or want to start a discussion? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible




Ergh, you're right!  Voltage vs. power...
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible





Not necessarily - you don't know what the amplitude of the
transmission is. It might not be 12 volts..Also the efficiency of the
transmitter.
The output of an Icom 2200 is 65 watts. It runs on 13.8 volts and
draws 15 amps during transmit and .8 on standby - so 14.2 amps at 13.8
volts - or 196 watts for about 30% efficiency......


Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible




Yup.  And because it's a serious and well-known issue, just about all cars
sold in the US go through aggressive EMI testing.  If only they would test
other consumer products as well.

Toyota is actually better about that than most manufacturers, although they
issue a whole lot of warnings about not installing high power radio equipment
in their cars and they won't provide support if you do.  Contrast that with
Ford, which has a whole support organization to help folks putting high power
radio gear into fleet vehicles (mostly due to the police market).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible



 kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


Go here to read about the FCC rules which might apply to the situation
you mentioned.  I don't believe there is such a rule regarding "three
orders of magnitude"

<http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_09/47cfr15_09.html

Check back when you find it and cite the paragraph so that I can learn
too.  

Cheers and good luck
--
 

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible




Nope, that's just part 15 which really just applies to unlicensed radiators
that aren't covered under any other service.  The old "Class D Citizens
Band" is licensed under Part 95 subpart D.

Take a look at section 95.410, and 95.411.  If you need more information,
take a look at Part 95 subart E regarding the power rules.

The friendly people at the FCC say four watts carrier power on AM,
or 12 watts PeP on SSB.  This means multi-kilowatt linears are not legal.
This means using modified 10M ham radio equipment on the CB band is not
legal (also due to the type acceptance requirements).  Oh yes, "freebanders"
transmitting on the broadcast auxiliary frequencies and in the amateur radio
band with modified high power CBs are also illegal.

Now, there was a time many years ago when the FCC was actually operated by
engineers, and they had people who would come to your home or your vehicle
and take your radio equipment away and leave you with a very large fine for
illegal operation.  However, we now live in an era when the FCC is run by
lawyers who are more interested in using radio services as a profit center
and they don't actually have many people who have the skills required for
enforcement.  But this does NOT mean it is legal.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible



 kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


You're wrong Scott, part fifteen covers intentional, unintentional and
incidental radiators, which includes everything.  

The FCC never came to your home and confiscated any equipment without
due process, (court action).  That includes monetary forfeiture.  It
still happens to this very day.  More so to small companies who operate
illegal transmitting equipment and those who import non certified crap
from the far East.  Go to the FCC web site, look up enforcement actions
and read.
--
 

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible




Part 15 is a catchall.  It coveres everything that isn't already covered
in some other section.

It also has some wording about how products are required to accept interference
from legal sources, which is where it becomes important when talking about
EMI issues.


Yup, there are a few here and there, mostly due to do with pirate
broadcasters and most of the rest of them are in cases where some third
party actually tracked the interfering source down.

There are actually fewer enforcement actions on the part of the radio
folks than there were in 1975.  Needless to say there is also a lot more
illegal activity today than there was back then also.

You'll notice that if you go to the FCC web site and look up enforcement
actions, you won't see a single illegal CB operator.  You'll notice also
that if you turn to the third harmonic of channel 19 any evening, you can
hear lots of folks talking with their clip-o-matic "linyers."  Welcome to
the wasteland.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible



 kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


To sum, p.15 deals with cable, power lines, motors, switching supplies,
TV's, wireless products, computers, industrial devices and related
interferences to licensed services.

I never mentioned legal or illegal CB operations of which I am not
involved with.
--
 

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible




I did, as did the person whom I was replying to in the message that you
flamed.  That was the whole point of the message you were replying to.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Re: Consultants say interference in vehicle electronics is possible



On 25 Mar 2010 21:06:13 -0400, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:


 Over 100 watts of output from the linear amps on a LOT of highway
rigs.

Site Timeline