BPL and Amateur Radio

1
BPL and Amateur Radio

• W4FALN4TABKN4AQ

2
BPL and Amateur Radio

• What well cover tonight
• What is BPL?
• How does it affect Amateur Radio?
• Where do we stand?
• Media Wars
• Progress Energy Trials
• What can we do about it?

3
What is BPL?

• Broadband over Power Lines
• High Speed Internet delivery
• Radio Frequency signals applied to power lines
  used to transport data
• more

4
What is BPL?

• Three flavors
• PLC (Power Line Carrier)
• In-Building (Home Plug)
• Access (neighborhood distribution)
• details

5
PLC (Power Line Carrier)

• Old news
• Low freq (below 500 kHz), used by utility
  companies for control of their own equipment.
• No threat to ham radio
• But, its why we didnt get spectrum around 130
  kHz.

6
In-Building (Home Plug)

• High Speed LAN in one building using AC power
  wiring
• Uses RF across much of the HF spectrum.
• Causes significant interference
• Ham bands notched out
• (but, not 5 MHz)
• Wi-Fi much more popular

7
Access BPL

• This is the big problem
• Neighborhood distribution
• from substation to home/business
• RF on power lines from 2 to 80 MHz
• Internet access from your AC wall plug
• Cheaper than Cable/DSL?
• More available, especially rural?
• Thats what they say

8
How does BPL affect Hams?

• Interference to HF, low VHF
• Internet service disruption from Ham transmitters
• details

9
BPL Interference

• Low power RF energy applied to unshielded AC
  wires
• AC wires act as antennas
• Signals radiate for hundreds of feet
• Can be strong S9
• more

10
BPL Interference

• Signals cover broad swaths of spectrum
• Different modulation schemes made different sound
• Geiger-counter clicks
• Hash
• Carriers
• more

11
BPL Interference

• BPL industry initially denied that there is
  interference
• Examination of field trials shows there
  substantial interference
• ARRLs Ed Hare W1RFI examined four areas with
  special mobile setup.

12
W1RFI Video

• Test site 1 Potomac, MD. July 27, 2003
• overhead
• Test Site 2 Manassas, VA. July 29, 2003
• underground
• Duke Power testing similar system
• Test site 3 Emmaus, PA, July 29, 2003
• underground and overhead
• Test site 4 Briarcliff Manor, NY, July
  27-28, 2003
• Overhead
• Progress Energy testing similar system

13
W1RFI Video
14
Notes on Video

• These signal levels will cause harmful
  interference to nearby HF stations
• The listening that ARRL did in the trial areas
  was extensive. The video shows only
  representative examples of what was heard.
• BPL signals heard from several blocks to as much
  as a half mile from the wires.

15
Interference goes both ways

• Ham signals can interfere with BPL, slowing or
  stopping data transfer.
• BPL signals are a few hundred milliwatts on the
  wire, but ham station can induce several watts.
• Overload amplifiers.
• AMRAD study

16
AMRAD Study

• AMRAD conducted an RF Susceptibility experiment
  at the Potomac BPL test site on November 9, 2003.
  
• A mobile amateur radio station equipped with an
  HF transmit capability was used..

17
AMRAD Results

• When transmitting at the street curb
• Data transfer ceased in all but one case at a
  transmitter power of 4 watts in the BPL operating
  band.
• 12 and 35 watts caused data transfer to cease in
  two of the bands tested even though they were
  above the BPL operating band.
• more

18
AMRAD Results

• Effect dropped with distance, but some data loss
  occurred at ¼ mile and more.

19
Where do we stand?

• Part 15 Rules
• Notice of Inquiry/NPRM
• FCC Commissioner statements
• Comments on NOI/NPRM
• NTIA
• FEMA
• Industry
• Hams
• details

20
Part 15

• Permits some unlicensed transmissions
• Intentional radiators
• Wi-fi
• Cordless phones
• Unintentional radiators
• Your computer, monitor
• Receivers, transceivers, TV sets
• BPL
• more

21
Part 15

• Specifies radiation limits
• Prohibits interference to licensed services
• Devices must accept interference from licensed
  services
• See the phone

22
Part 15
23
Notice of Inquiry ET Docket No. 03-104

• Issued by FCC April 2003
• Through this inquiry, we seek information and
  technical data so that we may evaluate the
  current state of BPL technology and determine
  whether changes to Part 15 of the Commissions
  rules are necessary to facilitate the deployment
  of this technology.

24
Notice of Inquiry ET Docket No. 03-104

• 18. Interference from BPL EmissionsMultiple
  carriers spread signals over a broad range of
  frequencies that are used by other services that
  must be protected from interference.
• Comments closed last fall.

25
Notice of Proposed RulemakingET Docket No. 04-37

• Highlights
• No increase in Part 15 emission limits
• Affirms that operations must cease if harmful
  interference to licensed services is caused.
• Requires adaptive interference mitigation
  techniques
• Incorporate a shut-down feature
• Notification requirements and database
• Sounds good, but

26
Dont Celebrate Yet!

• Time for some details.
• Progress EnergyTrial System Details

27
How much spectrum?

• 6 MHz per leg in two blocks
• Uplink block 2.5 MHz
• Downlink block 3.5 MHz
• Between 7 and 50 MHz
• Leg is about 2000 feet or less
• Cant re-use spectrum for several legs to avoid
  self-interference

28
How much interference?

• Home stations hear it
• Half mile to simple station with diplole
• 1.5 miles to powerhouse with beam
• (from overhead lines)

29
More Problems.

• Will it fit?
• Domino Effect
• We are mobile
• Customer Service

30
NPRM Note Turn your beam

• 35. We recognize that amateur operations are
  likely to present a difficult challenge in the
  deployment of Access BPL in cases where amateurs
  use high gain outdoor antennas that are located
  near power lines We therefore would expect
  that, in practice, many amateurs already orient
  their antennas to minimize the reception of
  emissions from nearby electric power lines.

31
What is Harmful Interference?

• 97.3(a)(23) Harmful interference
  Interference which seriously degrades,
  obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a
  radio-communication service operating in
  accordance with the Radio Regulations.

32
FCC Commissioner statements

• Initially very bullish on BPL, with no mention of
  interference in public
• More recent statements recognize our complaints
• Abernathy I recognize that amateur radio
  licensees have raised concerns about harmful
  interference, and that is something that will
  have to be addressed before any mass market
  deployment can occur.

33
FCC ChairmanPowell in Raleigh
34
NTIA Comments on NOI

• NTIA believes that Broadband over Power Line
  (BPL) holds great promise but the Commission
  must be certain to provide all communications
  stakeholders with adequate protections against
  BPL emissions that may cause unacceptable radio
  frequency interference.

35
FEMA Comments on NOI

• FEMA believes and recommends that Part 15 of the
  FCC rules and regulations should be strengthened
  to ensure that there will be no increase in
  interference levels to existing communications
  systems which are licensed by the FCC or
  authorized by the NTIA.
• but then

36
FEMA backpedals some
37
Comments on NOI

• Others opposed
• APCO (Public Safety radio)
• Shortwave Broadcasters (and listeners)
• ARINC (aviation radio)
• Radio Astronomers

38
Comments on NOI

• Industry Comments
• (Interference) just doesn't exist.
• Jay Birnbaum, VP, Current Technologies LLC
• We're entirely satisfied that there won't be any
  interference.
• Brett Kilbourne, United PowerLine Council

39
Comments on NOI

• Industry Comments
• No matter how loud opponents may shout, they
  cannot point to evidence in this country that BPL
  systems are causing, have caused, or will cause,
  harmful interference to other spectrum users or
  other third parties.
• REPLY COMMENTS OF THE POWER LINE COMMUNICATIONS
  ASSOCIATION

40
Comments on NOI

• More than 5000 comments total, most from hams
  opposing BPL.
• ARRL The rules must insure that BPL is not
  permitted to operate in or near any Amateur Radio
  allocation

41
Media WarsHearts and Minds
Hams always have been a quirky bunch. They haunt
a series of short-wave radio frequencies set
aside for them by the federal government in the
1930s
The Penn Yan Firestorm? What really happened?
42
Progress Energy

• Phase 1 Wakefield
• No Amateur Radio involvement
• Significant signals crossing 10 and 12 meter
  bands (and CB)
• Phase 2 southern Wake County
• Hams invited to observe
• Seriously interested in our concerns

43
Phase 2 Observations

• 1st observation January 15, 2004

44
Phase 2 Observation Team

• AA4NC
• N4TAB
• W4FAL
• (N9MN)
• (KN4AQ)

45
System Design

• Overhead feeder
• Underground Distribution
• Wi-Fi access

46
System Design

• Two spectrum blocks per BPL leg
• Downstream 3.5 MHz wide
• Upstream 2.5 MHz wide
• Anywhere from 2 to 50 MHz
• (Amperion prefers 8 to 30 MHz)
• Each leg runs up to 2000 feet
• Different spectrum blocks on adjacent legs

47
Interference Observed
48
Interference Observed

• Overhead feeder used 25 and 29 MHz
• mobile to 300
• Home station .7 mi
• Underground used10, 11, 15 MHz andmore
• mobile to 100
• No home stations

49
Interference Resolution?

• Equipment is frequency agile
• Move whole spectrum block
• Drop out segments
• Controlled remotely from Network Operation Center
• If you can get them on the phone!
• more

50
Interference Resolution?

• They have moved!
• Completely off ham bands on overhead lines
• But
• Can they do it in a full rollout?
• What about SWL, other HF users?

51
What can we do about it?

• Join ARRL
• Contribute to Spectrum Defense Fund
• Write your utility
• Write your congressman
• Write NC Utility Commission
• Send comments on NPRM
• more

52
What can we do about it?

• If it takes me more than 15 minutes, forget it

53
(No Transcript)