New FCC RF Safety rules come into effect on May 3 - what you need to know

great information. maybe this why I've been getting bald all these years.

 

We have similar requirements in the UK. I keep dialling my 10 watts max permissible power into the calculator and keep getting no risk ! Am I doing something wrong ?

 

What's important--not to miss--is that NEW or CHANGED antenna installations need to be assessed UPFRONT, while in-place antennas have a later deadline.

The calculator makes a bass-ackwards attempt at figuring out how much power is actually at the antenna. What we all need are accurate insertion losses for the COAX. Manufacturer' values are seldom correct AND THE INSERTION LOSS CHANGES AS COAX GETS OLDER. There is no way that the manu's will take responsibility for those values.

We have to measure them. 'We' as in 'US'.

The ARRL needs to SHOW HAMS HOW TO MEASURE insertion loss for coax. That can only be done with a VNA doing a 'thru' measurement of S12 using a short piece of coax as a calibration. It can only be done at the frequencies of use. Not guessed. Not 'rule of thumbed'.

Expect this new reg to drive a passel of new VNA's for hams that emphasize insertion loss measurement ability.

ARRL--get crackin!

 

Yeh, complain as in: 'I am suing you for giving me leukemia because your ham antenna wasn't in compliance --because you didn't do your diligence.'

That is a really dumb position for the ARRL to take , let alone espouse. Greg certainly knows what he is talking about, but the 'complaint ' aspect needs to be vetted by Director K1VR...ask Fred.

Show hams HOW TO DO THE MEASUREMENTS for the calculator paperwork. Don't pussy-foot around it, please.

BTW, at HF/MF, the most likely bands for any RF exposure issues are 10 and 12 meters. Keep that in mind.

Thanks.

 

With that false reasoning, the 60 Hz power (50000o0 M wavelength RF) in your house would preclude its use. Ever.

Your stated NF approximation is not a standard BTW....please correct it. You know what that is.

Thanks,
Chip W1YW

 

PLEASE read that statement again and again.

Steve know what he is talking about.

RF compliance for hams is no longer a formality. If I understand it, your present antenna installation has three years to show evidence of compliance. A new antenna needs to be assessed upfront.

Do NOT ignore the power lost in the cable assembly--that is, coax.

 

Thanks Ria. Well done. Covers the basics in a clear way.

This will be a good reference to give to new hams as well as a primer for those who are already licensed but have sort of ignored the RF safety issue.

 

And meanwhile there are CB'ers out there running 10kW mobile setups. I doubt they'll strive to be compliant with exposure limits.

 

I CB as well. I regard the 4 watts I use as a clear and present danger ! I can understand the attraction of using large power but for me it holds no relevance. If I want to communicate reliably with people on the other side of the world then there are much better technologies available. Chasing conditions with just a few watts on the other hand takes a lot of time, patience, experimentation, refinement and (eventual) learning. I could short circuit the learning curve by researching the vast wealth of experience and knowledge already built up by others but I am having too much fun learning the hard way. As a newbie with only a few years left due to health conditions I will enjoy every stumble and success along the way, all without creating undue RFI. 73 and have a great day.

 

12 meters?

What-In-The-World is that?

 

What other governmental authority can make this determination?
Trying to understand the context here.
Would this be a case where some other body like an HOA saying no you cannot have the antenna because you have not done the evaluation?

 

WARC bands - Wikipedia

 

I don't want to see this point brushed aside.

At some point you will have a variety of different 'formal complaints' that , if decided against the radio amateur, may shut down much of U.S. ham radio as we know it.

These complaints will break into two categories:

1) RF interference;
2) alleged health issues

IF you do NOT have accurately documented evidence of RF exposure compliance with FCC regulations (and time frames), then YOUR LEGAL EXPOSURE to these lawsuits may be higher than you think, at least if you operate on MF/HF. IOW you will not be able to hide behind general actions of the past, where government law supported the radio amateur. As soon as you are out of compliance, or cannot demonstrate that you achieved compliance, all bets are off.

Please: do not diss me by saying I am being alarmist. These cautions are prudent, easy to implement, and for your benefit.

73
Chip W1YW

 

You usually hear them refer to just talking on their "driver" and not the "big boy" or something along those lines. That 10kW is probably just the driver.
RF exposure at 27Mhz? non-issue for those chaps. Plugging the values into the LWHC calculator is interesting.
You know it's really hot when you see this....

 

What they are using are 11m vertical beams. The gain is probably about 10 dB so the ERP will be--assume 10KW input --about 100KW.

I assume this was in the US, and thus obviously illegal. Having said that, there was obviously a fair bit of technical know how that went into these. I would hope they would consider-- legal-- ham radio instead.

The dielectric breakdown NORMALLY happens at a voltage max between the antenna and the coax or boom. It is not normally encountered. It indicates excessive power for the design used.

Yes, this is dangerous, for many reasons.