RFI

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Olesailorman

Member
Location
New Haven, CT
Occupation
landlord and property manager
I’m an FCC licensed ham radio operator who has experienced tremendous RFI (radio frequency interference) throughout
the medium wave (AM broadcast) thru the 2-30 MHz spectrum and to a lesser extent up into the VHF range.
I’m also worried about damage to the apparently non-RFI suppressed system since I transmit with RF power of
up to my legal limit of 1500 watts.

Apparently the supplier SolarEdge did get RFI certification from the FCC for its individual components such as the inverter and the “optimizers” which are the individual panel managers. However apparently the system was not tested in the real world as an integrated system.
It generates RFI that wipes out radio communication for up to a mile from a site.

With pressure from the FCC and the American Radio Relay League in Newington, SolarEdge responded by drop shipping 28 new optimizers to me and about 56 supression ferrite core assemblies. The new optimizers use spread spectrum technology so as to not concentrate the RFI at any given frequency.
Apparently Solaredge is aware of the problem as complaints are escalating nationwide. My system is still under warranty.
The local installation contractor was supposed to handle the this months ago but keeps stalling. In part I think his staff has no familiarity with RFI issues, especially after I mentioned that the ferrite cores have to spaced propwrly and the wires wound with the correct turns around the panel’s DC lines.
My’background is electrical engineering but at my age roof climbing is not my bag.

Any thoughts technical
or otherwise?
 
I think you've done about all you can do. Personally I wish the FCC would come down on these kind of companies that have known problems but refused to fix them..
 
Sounds like you need a new installation contractor.
Might also get some support from the engineering staff at local radio stations- if these devices are splattering over their signals, they might take an interest; maybe someone at WNYC or WYBC?
 
Olesailorman said:
... I’m also worried about damage to the apparently non-RFI suppressed system since I transmit with RF power of up to my legal limit of 1500 watts.

... Any thoughts technical or otherwise?
Click to expand...
At levels below that causing damage to the PV system, the transmitted RF might also interfere with the proper operation of the PV electronics, particularly if it has amplitude modulation components such as SSB, etc. That's because the P-N junctions in the electronics can rectify the modulated RF signal and produce internal voltages that vary with the envelope of the RF signal. Just like a detector in a crystal set.
 
Olesailorman said:
...
The local installation contractor was supposed to handle the this months ago but keeps stalling. In part I think his staff has no familiarity with RFI issues, especially after I mentioned that the ferrite cores have to spaced propwrly and the wires wound with the correct turns around the panel’s DC lines.
My’background is electrical engineering but at my age roof climbing is not my bag.

Any thoughts technical
or otherwise?
Click to expand...

Yeah for sure the installer didn't allow extra time for that. They basically have to redo a third of their work, only more difficult this time. Are you paying them any extra for this large addition to their labor cost on this project? Even if you don't feel obligated to, it might be a nice gesture and a reasonable way to speed up the process. It's not exactly a standard service call, and they are arguably not to blame.

From what I understand, optimizers are inherently more prone to this (compared to microinverters or straight strings) because they put a bunch of switched power supplies in one or more large loop antennas on the roof. I dealt with the issue twice. One time the homeowner was the ham operator and the possibility of problems was discussed beforehand, but the antenna was a couple dozen yards from the house and he didn't complain. Another time the ham operator was the neighbor and we made attempts to mitigate with ferrites and twisted wiring that didn't do much good. Solaredge did not provide new equipment so that's a bit different than when I dealt with this (a few years ago).
 
jaggedben said:
Yeah for sure the installer didn't allow extra time for that. They basically have to redo a third of their work, only more difficult this time. Are you paying them any extra for this large addition to their labor cost on this project? Even if you don't feel obligated to, it might be a nice gesture and a reasonable way to speed up the process. It's not exactly a standard service call, and they are arguably not to blame.

From what I understand, optimizers are inherently more prone to this (compared to microinverters or straight strings) because they put a bunch of switched power supplies in one or more large loop antennas on the roof. I dealt with the issue twice. One time the homeowner was the ham operator and the possibility of problems was discussed beforehand, but the antenna was a couple dozen yards from the house and he didn't complain. Another time the ham operator was the neighbor and we made attempts to mitigate with ferrites and twisted wiring that didn't do much good. Solaredge did not provide new equipment so that's a bit different than when I dealt with this (a few years ago).
Click to expand...
The installing contractor can bang on SolarEdge's door for the difference. The OP didn't put them in this spot, the equipment vendor did.
 
gadfly56 said:
The installing contractor can bang on SolarEdge's door for the difference. The OP didn't put them in this spot, the equipment vendor did.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's a good line for the customer to give the installer if his goal is to drag out the whole process and likely create more ill will between himself and the installer. He should at least align himself with the installer by putting the heat on Solaredge and conveying to the installer he's not trying to screw them. He has two organizations who don't want to help him do something that is somewhere between difficult or impossible. He's got to play his cards carefully.
 
While I agree that the customer should understand that the blame is on the manufacturer, the whole point (expressed over and over again on this forum) of 'overhead' on the materials that a contractor installs is that they are taking the responsibility of dealing with the supplier.

If I hire an electrician to come and install an outlet, I fully expect that they will charge for their time and also charge quite a bit more for the outlet hardware than I'd pay at a big box store. But if the outlet that they sell me fails because of a defect, I expect them to come and fix it, and then they deal with the manufacturer.

I am AF7TS and am about to press go on a solar project at my house. Professionally installed I expect it to cost on the order of $40K; DIY I am looking at less than $20K. For the difference in price I expect the installer to handle all of the warranty issues. And equipment that doesn't comply with part 15 is a warranty issue even if the equipment seems to be working. The FCC could come visit me and require me to shut the equipment down if it creates too much intereference.

-Jon
 
While the OP is certainly entitled to take such a hardball line, from my experience I think it may be more likely to ultimately lead to getting a solar system removed from his roof and all his money back than to a working solar system that does not interfere with his radio interest. So it depends what he wants more. My post was to confirm for him what it looks like from an installer's point of view and advise him on what might be prudent and productive, rather than what his legal rights are.
 
It might be worthwhile for the OP to have a convenient way to temporarily shut off the solar inverters and optimizers while he is operating his station, if that can be practically implemented. I think reducing the QRM from the solar system's actively switching electronic devices to a level where it's not noticeable at the ham station may be impractical (especially at the HF bands).
 
I think that is an approach that I learned during Dale Carnegie training.

I agree with post #9. The OP should know that it is the installers responsibility to fix this, and I stand by the statements I made in post #8.

However approaching the installer in a way that encourages them to realize that it really is their responsibility is a rather different matter. I think Jaggedben is right that if the OP barrels in with 'this is my right and you must deal with it' (no matter how true) won't actually help.

-Jon
 
jaggedben said:
Yeah that's a good line for the customer to give the installer if his goal is to drag out the whole process and likely create more ill will between himself and the installer. He should at least align himself with the installer by putting the heat on Solaredge and conveying to the installer he's not trying to screw them. He has two organizations who don't want to help him do something that is somewhere between difficult or impossible. He's got to play his cards carefully.
Click to expand...
I wasn't suggesting the OP come out breathing fire, but your suggestion that the installer is "not to blame" is a little thin. The next time someone decides to throw money at me to encourage me to do what I should be doing anyway will be the first time. It may be better for the OP and installer if they present a united front to SolarEdge, but the OP hired the installer to provide a system that works as expected and doesn't degrade his environment with respect to the FCC requirements.
 
Actually the above suggests what might be the most powerful approach.

OP to installer "we both know that Solaredge is to blame for providing a product with a known defect. I'd like to work with you so that they make things right for both of us."
 
FWIW, this is a problem for more operators than just the OP. For quite a while now the FCC has ignored ham radio operator's rights while giving permits to multi billion dollar corporations. A Google search of SolarEdge vs. ham radio garnishes over 97,000 hits.

In 2017 the FCC issued a notice of Violation to SolarEdge for RFI.

Yet, You Tube still has videos of RFI from SolarEdge panels.


Best of luck to the OP.
 
This is a sticky wicket the way the FCC laws are written. Us hams have protection from interference enforced by the US government. In a nutshell, the owner of any device that interferes with a legally licensed FCC operator must shut down that interfering device. I have worked with the FCC and a licensed operator on a case involving RFI generating telephone handsets. Anyway, since the OP is the owner of the interfering device, it is his own responsibility to turn it off. Or fix it, or just shut up about it. SolarEdge isn't the only company the FCC allows noisy products. The list is huge. Part 15 is a joke.

So if anyone is wondering why the FCC isn't doing anything about this, thousands of hams have been wondering the same thing for decades.

Again, best of luck to the OP.
 
synchro said:
It might be worthwhile for the OP to have a convenient way to temporarily shut off the solar inverters and optimizers while he is operating his station, if that can be practically implemented. I think reducing the QRM from the solar system's actively switching electronic devices to a level where it's not noticeable at the ham station may be impractical (especially at the HF bands).
Click to expand...
The problem with that is how ham radio works. Some areas of the planet are only available during the day. Others only at night. Radio propagation is an entire science in itself.
 
K8MHZ said:
The problem with that is how ham radio works. Some areas of the planet are only available during the day. Others only at night. Radio propagation is an entire science in itself.
Click to expand...
Yes, in this scenario the OP would have to choose one or the other (PV production or operating his rig) at any point in time. I was just suggesting an option to allow him to make that choice if measures to alleviate the interference were unsuccessful.
 
winnie said:
Actually the above suggests what might be the most powerful approach.

OP to installer "we both know that Solaredge is to blame for providing a product with a known defect. I'd like to work with you so that they make things right for both of us."
Click to expand...
In any business whoever receives money from the customer is the customer's contact point for any issues that come up. If a solar company installed SolarEdge equipment on my house and then just told me to go to SolarEdge for the resolution of a problem, I would be unlikely to give any referrals to that solar company.
 
synchro said:
Yes, in this scenario the OP would have to choose one or the other (PV production or operating his rig) at any point in time. I was just suggesting an option to allow him to make that choice if measures to alleviate the interference were unsuccessful.
Click to expand...
I have a feeling that is what he is doing right now. What other choice does he have right now? Suggesting that a ham radio operator just to not operate at any given time is not really a fair option. First and foremost, the law is on the operator's side. We have a license from the FCC to transmit on certain bands. SolarEdge does not. Many of us have some fairly nice stations that we put a lot of work and money into. No way should we have to ignore our right to use our frequencies.

Option 2 is to not use the solar system? Do they have on and off switches? Switches that will shut down the panels and optimizers? Lots of money going down the drain, too, with that option.

The OP is in a tough spot. Really the only way to fix this is for SolarEdge to remove the system, pay all the money back and also pay some amount of $$ to the OP for his inconvenience. It's not like SolarEdge hasn't known about this. They have and they have for years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top